Still no answer:

I mean, seriously: If the threat is real then why are we not doing the more invasive search at those airports where the scanners are not yet implemented?

For some reason, no one is asking this question. Why not?

If there is a real, valid threat, one worth spending $165 MILLION on, and worth having to deal with a very pissed off flying public, then why screen only at the major airports, and why only recently? Why not since the threat was recognized?  Why do we not have everyone at any airport where the scanners are not yet available be subject to the pat-down?

Otherwise, this is merely playing at security.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *