In the first exciting days after the September 11 attacks five years ago, the administration rushed to create the Dept of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration. But even in those early days, the neocons and the taxpayers who support them didn't want to create costly Federal bureaucracies, so they did it as "cheaply" as they could.
They spent just enough money on window dressing so that to the travelling public it would look like they were doing something. They refuse to invest enough money in technology that would close some gaping holes in air transportation security.
You would be shocked (maybe not) if you knew just how much money has been cut from the already inadequate budgets of these agencies in recent years.
You may also be shocked (maybe not) if I were to share with you stories about the security holes in the domestic transportation system. Some of the things I've seen over the last five years in dealing with airline security issues have left me shaking my head in anger and frustration.
Meanwhile, as a pilot in uniform I get singled out for special attention when I go through security checkpoints. We call it the "perp walk". Strip down, shoes off, belt open, etc. just to make sure I don't have anything on my person that I could use to hijack an airliner (other than my bare hands which rest firmly on the controls on a daily basis).
I wouldn't mind all this if I wasn't aware of how little is being done in areas that the travelling public doesn't see.
Of course, spending hundreds of billions of dollars (the bill just keeps getting bigger) on invading Iraq and maintaining a standing army there until the Iraqis can defend themselves against themselves (can you say "civil war"?) made more sense to the Bush administration than spending a fraction of that on making our transportation system more secure.
For those who like things simple, here is a simple truth: while programs that could make a real difference in security go underfunded, the administration continues to pour hundreds of billions of dollars into a mess in Iraq that they created themselves while pursuing objectives that had nothing to do with terrorism.
Pardon me if I don't stand up and cheer when that imbecile in the Oval Office appears for another "War on Terror" photo op.
Yeah, problems stemming from having no money for training, equipment or high enough wages to retain experienced screeners - apparently we'd rather spend our money on an expensive Iraq war.Banned items fly past security
Liquids, gels getting past airport screeners
By Del Quentin Wilber
The Washington Post
Updated: 5:35 a.m. ET Sept. 13, 2006
Wendy Shanker was passing through security at the St. Louis airport Friday when the X-ray machine detected a potential weapon inside her carry-on bag. A screener dug into the satchel and found a pair of scissors that Shanker used for knitting. The scissors' blades were shorter than the 4-inch federal limit so the screener plopped them back into the bag.
But he missed something else: Shanker's two-ounce container of Neutrogena hand cream, a substance banned since federal authorities clamped down last month on allowing liquids and gels into airline passenger cabins. . .
. . . Security experts said the experiences of travelers interviewed at Reagan National and Dulles airports highlighted what they say are security gaps in the current product bans. A well-trained screener must notice the sometimes-subtle signatures of containers of gels and liquids on X-ray machines. The devices are much better at picking up the shapes of dense and metal objects, such as knives, guns or bomb components, security experts said.
Metal detectors at security checkpoints cannot sense plastic items that may contain liquids or gels.
"There are obviously limitations to this ban," said Clark Kent Ervin, a former inspector general at the Department of Homeland Security.
Ervin supports the restrictions but thinks they are flawed because authorities rely heavily on screeners' interpretations of X-ray images.
"It depends entirely on screeners' alertness and training," he said, "and there are problems with both."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14807713/
