HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Jan 30, 2004 The one, major, oft repeated criticism against the Department of Homeland Security is that it is not doing enough to “guarantee” the safety of America (sort of like the entire 8 years of the Clinton administration). When “privacy and consumer advocates” criticize the department’s plans to begin a higher level of scrutiny of airline passengers in and out of America, I have to wonder, who’s side of the war against terrorism are they supporting? As a “frequent flyer” (I have almost enough miles now for my trip to Tahiti), I am never fully relaxed in any aircraft. This is not because I am afraid to fly. It is more because I am concerned about how I would personally react in a hijack situation. There is a time and a place for heroism. I would prefer no hijacker have a chance to force a “Let’s roll!” in my direction. We heard so many stories about the TSA’s random search procedures. They weren’t allowed to “profile” so the TSA took the heat every time the bags of an 80-year-old grandmother or a 10- year-old boy were part of the “random” search. Then there were the deliberate attempts to thwart the TSA by media pukes who deliberately put contraband items in their carry-on luggage, then wrote about how they craftily got past the airport screeners and onto aircraft. I bet our terrorist enemies still use these stories in their training manuals. I say, fingerprint us all! Make us wear specially color coded hats and shoes! Better yet, make us pack our shoes at check-in and give us a pair of flip-flops! Finally, nobody gets to carry on any piece of luggage larger than an easily searched handbag or fanny-pack. It cannot be unfair to profile and to scrutinize 100 percent at the same time, but that is the argument of these “privacy” advocates. Tim McVeigh alone speaks against profiling. You have to develop and execute plans no matter how seemingly intrusive, to keep the public, the whole public, safe. The attack of 9/11 came from the air, but the targets of those planes were people planted firmly on the ground! The TSA’s plan could eventually categorize the entire flying public. It will certainly categorize the frequent flying public. That is a good thing. For those of us that go from standing in a line at check-in, to standing in a line at the security checkpoint, why not have an “express lane” for the frequent flyers categorized as non- hostile? “Privacy experts” are concerned about creating “two classes of airline travelers.” HUH? There are already three or more classes that have been created by the airlines themselves. First Class, Business Class and Economy Class have been with us for some time now. The ACLU (you just knew they were involved in this) is concerned that a terrorist will find some way to thwart the system. Well, I believe it is the nature of the terrorist to find ways to terrorize, just as it is the nature of counterfeiters to beat the constant changes being made to America’s twenty-dollar bill. All I am saying is all I have ever said. I do not care how much money must be spent. I do not care how many plans have to be initiated and implemented. I do not care how many more police and soldiers must be trained and deployed. I do care that I never see another 9/11, type event on American soil. If that means using hundreds of rolls of film, photographing every face of the flying public; millions of gallons of ink for fingerprinting them and billions of computer data bits stored in state-of-the-art TSA computer systems to categorize threats to America; I say, “Let’s roll!” ------------ About the Author: Independent, Conservative, Christian. Married 29 years with 5 children raised and one grandson being raised. 30 year Army Veteran and published poet with www.poetry.com since Y2K. Email Michael John McCrae: michael.mccrae@us.army.mil Comment on this column in the forum. Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
