That Nigerian man who allegedly tried to set off his explosive underwear has thrown the whole airport security screening system into a tizzy.
He was on a watch list, along with more than a half-million other people, but he was not on the no-fly list of about 4,000 people, evidently because there wasn't enough information to justify grounding him.
Even without that information, this man had paid cash for a one-way ticket to the U.S. and hadn't checked any luggage. How many red flags did someone need to put out an arm and say, ''Whoa there, you -- not so fast''? Five weeks before the 9/11 attacks, ringleader Mohamed Atta went to pick up a co-conspirator who was flying into the Orlando airport -- but the man wasn't allowed into the country. He couldn't speak English, much less explain what he was doing in the U.S. -- and he had bought a one-way ticket.
Once the Nigerian suspect was on the plane, the fact that he stayed in the lavatory for a reported 20 minutes should have triggered some concern -- maybe even another red flag. If I'm in the in-flight loo for more than three minutes, there's a line forming outside, and after five minutes, someone usually starts hammering on the door to get me out.
So henceforth, travelers flying here from abroad have to suck it up, in the words of a Michigan congressman. New rules restrict even more what passengers can and cannot do on a plane. Is this really an appropriate response, given that the real problem here was a man who should never have been allowed to get on a plane in the first place?
If you're flying here from abroad, you cannot, in the last hour of the flight, have anything on your lap, not even a blanket. No getting into your carry-on and no trips to the toilet. [See, your mother was right: she told you to go to the bathroom before you left Europe.]
On the upside, the struggling airlines, always looking for new revenue, may be able to install pay toilets right there in the seats.
Follow Patt Morrison on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Op-ed columnist
Boycott and let's see how fast they review these new rules.
So what's to prevent the next terrorist from trying to blow up the plane in the FIRST hour? OR the Second hour?
These "security" measures are a joke.
To paraphrase Condi Rice, "Who could have anticipated exploding underpants?"
The only area of blame the US has is in its failure to communicate any intelligence it received to Dutch authorities.
I'm sick to death of people NOT paying attention to the Emergency Instructions....thyey're too busy chatting,reading or whatever......they should be MADE TOO LISTEN to it EVERYTIME! They are the people that will panic,and stampede in an emergency!
2) hate the inconvienence of flying
3) hate the fact that you have to be there 2/3hrs b4 your flight
4) hate the fact that the "terrorists" have already won....Our freedom has been curtailed indefinitely.
5) we should have had Isreal type security for years now!
6) flying was barely enjoyable b4 all this, now its barely tolerable
7) and its MORE expensive then ever
Whats that youre saying? Flying is the fastest way?? Then suck it up, sparky, and quit being such a whiny baby!
Terrorism is the least of my worries when my life is entrusted to a company that feels it's acceptable to pay my next of kin a million dollars rather than install every available safety device on the plane.
There are over 14,000,000 flights per year in US alone, and after nine years we have had less than five real incidents involving attempts to disrupt or endanger safety of flights. You had a better chance of winning a lottery, while being struck by lightning in the back seat of a bus going over a cliff, than being on a flight that had more than a drunk passenger. Now the tsa is going to make a bigger mess while they try to calm you nillys down. Safety is good and all, getting agencies to make use of what they rules they should be enforcing but what is going to happen is more nonsense that wont be administered correctly yet again.
We have spent trillions on security and we only have a marginally better system today, what a waste of time money, resources and the downfall of commercial travel. Take 1000mg of Valium before boarding if this sort of nonsense bothers you or don't fly.
Haven't been on a plane since before 911 and never will again.
1. Employing truly meticulous security personnel at the airports who actually realize that lives of hundreds and thousands of people depend on how well they do their job. They have to be efficient and thorough, yet professional and respectful.
2. Increasing the number of security checkpoints so that each passenger gets checked thoroughly without creating a long hold-up. Even if it requires increasing the security checkpoints by 10 times so be it. Especially in bigger airports. If this requires some new construction to add more space, then so be it too. Or get rid of some retail stores and make that area a security checkpoint.
3. Being dedicated in investing in more high-tech equipment that would detect any offensive material both on the outside and inside of a person, as well as in their luggage (both carry-on and non-carry-on). Yes this will require lots of money, but the technology is certainly available. And yes, the money will be well-spent.
Thanks HPR10000
Well said, and I agree with MNKen - want a job? Just tell DeMint you're anti-union. Their side lies all the times to get what they want....