Originally Posted by Djlawman
Absolutely not what he has said. He apparently said (in a closed congressional briefing, repeated then by one of the Congressmen, Peter King) that, in connection with the current plot, there was no evidence that there were any other participants in the U.S. Does that mean we should throw the gates wide open? Are these the only 23 people in the world capable of, or interested in, doing this? Of course not. It is ludicrous to take a statement like this as justification for a position that we don't need reasonable security screening in the U.S.
How about this. Let's just announce to the terrorists -- "Hey, we are not planning on checking liquids you bring onto the plane. Which one of you can get a plane to blow up first?"
What a inane argument!
If you're going to make us choose between two courses of action, don't make at least one of them wrong.
When you say things like "Should we do X or just eliminate security?" you are making a really silly argument.
In this case, X is the Shoe Carnival. It does
nothing for the detection of explosives. Eliminating it does not eliminate all security.
The Shoe Carnival should be abolished, its creators and supporters fired and punished, and ETD/the "puffers" should be used to detect explosives. This course of action is definitely not 'throwing the gates wide open' to paraphrase you.
Next time you make an argument, try to make a vaild one. @:-)