I find the entire concept of "additional" screening on a "random" basis to be deeply flawed. For example, how can show screening be justified on a random basis? If there was a real and credible threat from shoes, then every shoe should be screened every day. But we all know that this is a fictitious method. Likewise, conducting "additional" screening implies that "normal" screening is not good enough.

And did anyone catch that the "pat-downs" will be more thorough?