The Pentagon, possibly. Spend the $7, buy the report and READ IT. Come back when you're done.

I read the entire report within a week after it made it to B&N. Thanks for your concern though.

From the 9/11 Commission Report:
"This immeasurable pain was inflicted by 19 young Arabs acting at the behest of Islamist extremists headquartered in distant Afghanistan. Some had been in the United States for more than a year, mixing with the rest of the population. Though four had training as pilots, most were not well-educated. Most spoke English poorly, some hardly at all. In groups of four or five, carrying with them only small knives, box cutters, and cans of Mace or pepper spray, they had hijacked the four planes and turned them into deadly guided missiles."

Save the 7 bucks and go to this website and come back when you have read it: http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm

"Guns don't kill people; people kill people."

A box cutter did not take down the WTC; a bunch of criminals took WTC 1 & 2 down (something that was probably unimaginable to most of the 9/11 hijackers).

Something tells me, DMorris, that you are less concerned with airline security than with spreading/creating hate, as you seldom miss an opportunity to mention Arabs and Islamic extremists.

Under the policies in place that morning, a teddy bear would have had a chance to take down the WTC.

Pilots and FAs and LEOs and even pax had been conditioned to cooperate with hijackers to get the plane on the ground. A hijacker waving a teddy bear and falsely claiming there was a bomb in the bear would have had a high probability of gaining cockpit access. The terrorists went a bit further by slashing people, but that mainly increased what were already high odds of success. The terrorists could have been just as successful using books as blunt objects and shoelaces to strangle people.

9/11 was a success for the islamofascist wackos because of the idea of exploiting this weakness in the hijacking response, not weapons and not failures in airline screening.

Taking away nail scissors, 1" pen knives, etc. won't prevent another 9/11. No screening technology can prevent ideas from making it past a checkpoint. Letting the military kill terrorists and destroy their culture, however, can make them think twice about taking those ideas onto our soil.

I firmly believe that better screening methods would almost eliminate the risk of airplane hijackings. The focus should be on people, not things, and would employ methods similar to those used by El Al. TSA's screening of Americans is not the answer to airline security, and is another step in the national government curtailing our rights.

You'd rather have security like El Al? That makes absolutely no sense given your next sentence which suggests that the TSA somehow abridges your rights. Just because you may not fit the profile of a terrorist as specified by El Al doesn't mean that their obtrusive, albeit effective security measures are appropriate for the US. No one in their right minds is going to suggest that the TSA is the correct agency for airline security, but likewise no one would suggest that full lockdown status is necessary. I for one would rather the mindless process of removing shoes, etc instead of being isolated and questioned under extreme duress. Maybe that's just me...

I have not heard that El Al isolates and questions the regular traveler under extreme duress. I know that if one stumbles in answering questions designed to allow the screener a chance to observe the prospective traveler, one can be questioned more thoroughly. Other than the implication that El Al isolates and questions an ordinary passenger under extreme duress, everything that I have read and heard about El Al compares very favorably to TSA. My reasoning about this comparison cuts to the most important issue: how effective should our security be? The inane procedures that TSA applies across the board do not protect against determined terrorists. If TSA is going to abridge our rights, which most of us agree it does, then it may as well adopt methods that will stop terrorists. That is why I think TSA should study El Al procedures, which although more overt have apparently prevented any on-board incidents. Of course, this observation is subject to post hac, propter hac in that we cannot be certain that El Al has prevented on-board incidents. Of course, the same limitation applies to TSA regarding its laughable procedures.

Not disagreeing entirely with your post, just pointing out that:
A. Terrorists cold be trained to answer the questions correctly "Are you carrying a bomb? No. Are you a terrorists? No." (of course, hopefully the questions are smarter than that; but whatever they are, a conditioned terrorist would answer then correctly)
B. TSA Management would love an extended boondoggle trip to Israel to "study" security.

There is little that can be done to prevent another 9-11 scale attack. The fact that one has not happened yet should not be construed as evidence of TSA's success, but possibly rather the fact that those inclined to attack us are busy attackig soldiers in Iraq instead (where the soldiers are doing a good job of attacking back).

There are two lists...No-Fly and Selectee. No-Fly matches require LE contact. Selectee (or old school CAPPS hits) matches just spit out the SSSS.

"SSSS" on the ticket means many things. Most of all, it's just fair warning.

--Paul

From chapter 1: Unlike the earlier flights, the Flight 77 hijackers were reported by a passenger to have box cutters.

hth

I just tried to check in online for my flight tomorrow and got the dreaded:

Your request could not be processed. Check with an agent at airport.

I suppose this means I'll get the SSSS treatment tomorrow. At least I know not to try to smuggle a lighter in my carry on.

1) Please let us know what happens and why you got kicked out of the inline check-in!

2) Wash well when you shower tomorrow lest an overzealous inspector get offended

OR

2) Defer your morning shower until you get to your hotel room so you can give the inspector a search to remember!

We'll be waiting to hear!

--Paul

Yes, got the Super Stupid Secondary Screening. Since this was my home airport, and a small one, and I know most of the TSA there and they are pretty decent (no screaming, no power trips), I didn't put up as much of a fuss as I would have in a bigger airport. I did make the screener change gloves before going thru my carryon.

When I gave my boarding pass to the gate agent, she just looked at me and said "YOU????". She couldn't believe it either since I travel every week thru MLB. I said to her at least I was warned 24 hours in advance, and she said that something has to be done about this system. She said "but it's the government"....