Flying By the Seat of Your Pants

It's wondrous how quickly the Transportation Security Administration leaps to the task of preventing an attempted act of terror that's already happened. First, the Shoe Bomber assured that the flying public would forever tiptoe through security in their stockinged feet, and then a couple of half-assed, bathtub chemists made certain you're not allowed  a bottle of water on a plane. Since the attempted destruction of a American  Northwest Airlines flight over Detroit, the press has dubbed the latest perp the "Underwear Bomber," though I much prefer the more accurately descriptive, "Taint Bomber." Following the TSA's logic, the next step is for everyone to fly naked. If these guys are always a step behind the terrorists, why do they call it "intelligence?" Now, before my octogenarian mother can pass through a security checkpoint, she first has to be patted down by an overly empowered high school dropout in a uniform.

The Taint Bomber, of course, hid explosives in his briefs, which malfunctioned, giving new meaning to the term Great Balls of Fire. Now, the cry is for the installation of full-body X-ray devices, which leave nothing unrevealed to the observer and fulfill every young boy's fantasy of being Superman. I could give a damn if some "professional screener" saw me in my underwear, but if I were a woman, I might be concerned that the man behind the curtain may be enjoying his job a little too much, especially if he is entrusted with the saved images that would be needed to provide any evidence to the authorities. The American public sheepishly goes along, tolerating any abuse for the illusion of safety. The new rule about not going to the bathroom during the last hour of a flight will certainly need to be revisited after passengers start peeing on the floor. And, no books? What the hell are you supposed to do on one of these flying disease incubators; meditate? If you did that, someone might mistake you for a religious extremist and the next thing you know, you're experiencing a full cavity search by a zealous teenager on a summer internship.

As terrible as the potential disaster on Christmas day may have been, the shameless exploitation of the terrorist action by the GOP, not to merely politicize the event, but attempt to fund-raise because of it, is repugnant. Say the word "hijacker" to a Republican, and like a Pavlovian response, they begin to salivate over the possibility of bashing the president over national security, especially the disgraced, future convicted felon, Dick Cheney. The now worst former vice president in American history issues missives from his cave that seem more intent in harming the president rather than preventing future attacks. In fact, Cheney and a handful of hawks almost seem to be wishing for a domestic cataclysm on Obama's watch so they can say, "See? We're not the only ones who allowed  an egregious lapse of security to cost American lives." I have come to the opinion, expressed frequently by commenters to these posts, that the Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are a bunch of whores (my Representative excepted). The difference is that the Republicans are particularly nasty and syphilitic whores, and thus a danger to the common good. The torture party's credibility on national security is shot and can't be restored by a "Democratic" airline disaster.

Who wants to endure the humiliation involved with airline travel anymore? This is why programs like high-speed rail are so important, not just to offer an alternative to the airline monopoly, but to ease the chaos at the airport and lesson the traffic on the highways. Want to know why we are light years behind the Europeans and Asians in the development of high-speed rail?: 50 years worth of congressional cash from the airlines, muscle from a corrupted Teamsters Union, and cheap gas, which strangled the railroads in their tracks, so to speak. I would much prefer riding in a 300 mph bullet train than spending the extra two hours of useless screening before being herded onto another austere and tension filled flight. The Madrid bombings proved that trains are as equally vulnerable to terrorist attack as planes, but if an explosive device detonates on my mode of transport, I'd rather already be on the ground than blown out of the sky.

The system in place should have prevented the latest violent Islamic extremist from boarding a flight in Amsterdam, but the system failed. The Obama administration, clearly flustered, attempted to explain that he was not on the "no fly list," but rather the "watch list" which contains half a million names. Bulletin: We have computers now, so rather than harassing millions of passengers at their point of origin, wouldn't it be wiser to invest more in computerized file sharing between the airlines, in conjunction with governmental security agencies? As it now exists, the TSA merely reacts, rather than project or predict, and the hands-on approach is only succeeding in infuriating passengers and disrupting air travel; exactly Al Qaeda's intentions. How difficult is it to punch up a prospective ticket buyer's name in a security database and insist on photo identification, rather than accept cash for a one-way ticket? The Taint Bomber made it through security undetected and someone must accept responsibility, but the real question is why was this known suspected jihadist, whose own father warned of his radical intentions, allowed to purchase a ticket on a domestic airliner in the first place?