After nine years of funneling travelers into ever longer lines with orders to have shoes off, sippy cups empty and laptops out for inspection, the most surprising thing about increasingly heated frustration with the federal Transportation Security Administration may be that it took so long to boil over.
What I don't get is why these new procedure must be done 24/7, everywhere? Why can't we have this procedure done against persons on traveler watch lists or from countries we are particularly worried about?
Extreme security measures are not appropriate all the time and everywhere. Just after 9/11, I wrote:
Selective enhanced security measures localized by geography and time to respond to reasonable suspicions or actual threats may be more appropriate than a constant uniformly maintained bunker mentality that cannot in any case be maintained indefinitely. We do not expect our entire military to maintain Threat Condition Delta indefinitely and still remain effective, and civilian society cannot do that either and still function.
I think this observation still holds true. Save the enhanced routine measures to places of concern at times of concern. If our government does that, the public will more broadly accept enhanced security when it is implemented.
UPDATE: While I think that a Thanksgiving protest at airports that could disrupt security is unwise, the process needs to be rethought. A full court press on extreme security measures will falter from fatigue alone, over time.
I think having the scanning machines and search procedures in place but used only for intelligence (watch lists or passengers from particular countries) and behavior-based use on a daily basis is suffiicient. A full security alert at specific airports or regionally or even nationally could be put in place temporarily based on intelligence warnings. I understand the need for security. But this is ridiculous.
Actually, I'm sure the current security procedures will be modified--the first time a woman in a burkha refuses to be scanned or groped. When victim status challenges security, you know who will win that battle in this day and age.
UPDATE: So, demoralizing our line security officers with this policy is a good idea? I'll ask again, why can't we save this extreme measure for localized areas for finite periods of time in response to intelligence indications of threats?
UPDATE: Are you kidding me?
As the U.S. government retaliates against an American for refusing to allow airport security to grope his genitals, the nation’s Homeland Security secretary considers waving the intrusive “pat-downs” for Muslim women who consider them offensive.
We are not at war with all--or even most--Moslems, but the terrorists trying to kill us are undeniably Islamic. To avoid offending all Moslems, we search everyone to find the terrorists who are Moslem. Except now we may exempt some Moslems from the search! I did call this, but I'm still shocked.
Is it any wonder the terrorists believe God is on their side when their enemies fights them like this?
