Terrorism Suspects Lost in Limbo

One thing that I don't understand is why the government thinks it's necessary to publicize decisions that they make regarding national security. Isn't that the opposite of what national security means? I don't think a soccer mom in Tulsa is qualified to make decisions regarding our safety more than the 5-star generals that advise the presidents. Why is it so hard for the government to say that? You as an American citizen have a write to vote for politicians to represent you and to vote on laws that directly affect your community. But all of these protests about issues that they government doesn't need your approval to do is just ridiculous.

People don't want terrorism suspects living in the jails in their communities. I don't think that any of us would choose to live near rapists, murderers, drug dealers, child molesters, etc. but if you live near a jail you already live near these people and worse. I don't understand what the difference is. If the security at the prison is so bad that you're worried about people escaping then that's what you should worry about. But the types of people that are in prison are never the type of people that you want in your neighborhood. But you shouldn't have any say in what kind of people are held in the jails in your community. The fact that the government is allowing citizens to dictate what type of prisoners are housed in the maximum security prisons that they have willingly moved next to is ridiculous. But these same people are complaining that there are no jobs in their communities because the multi-million dollar prisons that were built are sitting empty.

The same goes for the 9/11 trials. Why doesn't the government just hold the trials at an undisclosed location and at an undisclosed time? It seems like all of our major decisions are broadcast on the 10 o'clock news and summarized in Time Magazine. The fact that all of these issues are put up for a public opinion vote is not democracy, it is lunacy.

New Airline Restrictions

I'm getting pretty aggravated with all the changes that have taken place over the past few years and the ones that are being proposed for air travel. It would be one thing if all these restrictions prevented a terrorist attack but they don't.

Let's see, you can't bring deodorant and bottle of water on a plane any more because any liquid or gel bigger than 4 oz might be an explosive. Ok, so I have to put all that in my checked baggage which I now have to pay $25 to check. And I of course have the option of buying snacks from any one of the airport restaurants that are waiting for me past the security gate. Never mind that everything is at least 30% more expensive that it would be at your local grocery store. It just seems like a racket to me.

Now they are proposing to limit usage of portable electronic devices on flights. Did I miss the news report where the terrorist set off a bomb with his IPhone, laptop or mp3 player? The other proposal that I've heard is that passengers aren't going to be able to walk around the cabin during the last hour of an international flight. Well that's fine. They can just blow up the plane earlier. Is it me or do these restrictions have nothing to do with the incidents that have happened?

The U.S. Embassy in Nigeria had been notified that this guy was a potential threat and they didn't put them on a watch list or suspend his Visa. So he hopped on a plane and tried to blow it up. Why isn't anyone focusing on what's wrong with our intelligence system instead of enacting more restrictions which wouldn't have prevented this incident?

This guy had the explosives sewn into the waistband of his underwear and a syringe with the igniting chemical taped to his thigh. None of these things were detected with our existing security infrastucture or with any of the ones that have been proposed. Now if this guy would have flown out of Seattle where they have a full body scanner at the check in, he would have been caught. The scanner would have noticed an anomaly on the scan and he would have been taken away for a strip search.

But he didn't fly out of Seattle because he probably made sure that the he flew out of an airport with limited security restrictions. Only a handful of airports have the body scanning technology because it is expensive and because civil liberties groups have protested that it would be an invasion of privacy. First of all, these scanners are not x-ray vision. You do not see a nude image of the person in front of you on the screen. A generic human body shows up with indicators of where any anomalies exist. Second of all, if a TSA gets to look at every one's business all day but catches the next idiot who tries to blow up a plane, I'm okay with that. My life is a lot more important to me than my modesty. I would think the cost of human lives would outweigh the cost of these scanners in the minds of airlines, civil liberties groups and the government.