Thank you, Doppy. I agree with you 100%.

The airlines know that neglecting security is a tried-and-true short-term method of increasing customer traffic. Prior to 9/11, the airline trade group lobbied Congress very hard NOT to adopt higher security standards (it will cost too much, will chase away time-pressed customers, etc.), despite news report after news report that security was not tight enough, and they won that battle. What we got was more flying convenience and more revenue for airlines, but that lack of security contributed to 9/11.

Now, there are some flyers clamoring for less security, and the airlines are going to give it to them. So the airlines have coined this stupid pseudo-scientific phrase, "hassle factor," to which they refer in every press release concerning poor revenue, as though onerous fees and penalties, rigid union work rules and excessive executive compensation are irrelevant to the bottom line. I've heard others refer to the "vast majority" of the flying public as "moronic idiots," and I feel certain that the airlines feel likewise, that they can throw around this rhetorical nonsense (like Bethune's "dumping underwear") and convince enough of the "moronic idiots" that everything's fine, and we no longer need to be doing all this.

I'm all for increasing air traffic but not at the expense of security, and I am not a moronic idiot. I am an idiot savant, thank you very much...

When I want to do something effective, I write letters to my representatives and let them know that castrating our security apparatus is not the way to go, but rather that there's a lot of room for improvement.