Brillaint dialog

I won't ask what authority that is, although I find it interesting that the TSA has changed it's policy to allow small, sharp pointy objects on airliners. The same implements used to murder 8 pilots just over 4 years ago on 9/11. Monday, the former 9//1 commission will release a progress report and the Charmain has this to say about aviation security: "...It's not a priority for the government right now,..."

True, there are now additional layers of security, but there is also strong evidence of bureaucratic bungling (to be polite) at it's finest within our government. Put that ineptitude against the backdrop of an Administration that doesn't support real security IMO (only the illusion of security), and I don't get a warm fuzzy when I go to work.

Isn't it strange how "passenger rights" lobbyist have pushed the "trusted passenger" program that will allow frequent flyer's the convenience of bypassing long security checkpoint line based on past travel habits and a brief background check. Contrast that to average pilot who has had exhaustive background checks, years of work history, and it seems like everything but a TSA mandated rectal exam...and you can't even take a Leatherman tool to work! IF a pilot were a threat, wouldn't a few hundred tons of high speed aluminum be more of a threat? (it's a rhetorical question, don't answer that). My point is current TSA policy defies logic.

I think the FFDO program has enormous deterrent and protective potential, although I don't support the FFDO program in it's current form. The policies are simply to regressive IMO to provide any real benefit to the national aviation infrastructure.

Finally, I didn't start this thread to discuss specifics, as the butt you save by not talking about them could be mine. Although I refuse to ignore the bureaucratic bungling of a program that has enormous potential to actually provide in flight security. Until EVERY flight has an armed cockpit, I'd say the program is a failure.

<puts flame proof suit on> OK, let's hear it.