However, I don't believe your source anyway. The Times probably just grabbed a number out of thin air just as they do any time there is a chance of slandering Bush. Commie rag or not, the NYT is a reputable source. If you choose to discount it, then find a source of your own that proves what you say. Failure to do so will be taken as further evidence that you are just a loud-mouthed blowhard.
I will repeat:
The 911 attacks did not occur because Americans have too much freedom and too few airport screeners.
They occurred because terrorists were able to gain access to the cockpits of hijacked aircraft.
Instead of retrofitting all commercial aircraft with doors which could actually be used to keep terrorists out of cockpits, Washington created an Orwellian monster named the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and hired tens of thousands of minimum-wage Gestapo to root through the underwear of airline passengers.
Simply setting foot in an airport is now considered to be a terrorist act.
The fact that the TSA created a national airport police force without ever addressing the cockpit door scandal is damning evidence that their mandate has nothing to do with protecting anyone.
Their true purpose is to turn America into a police state.
And airports are their incubators.
The statists want to condition us to accept the idea that probable cause is dead and they can search our houses, our hard drives and our persons and demand to see our papers at any time.
Airport screeners are the Brown Shirts of our day.
They are the enemy.
I have no interest in finding a source to counter the NYTs. Believe it if you want but don't expect me to.
You have no information that the cockpit doors were not opened by the pilots or that stronger doors would have mattered. From the information that is available it appears the hijackers gained access by killing passengers until the pilots opened the doors. Since previous hijackers merely wanted the planes to go to Cuba or some other place there was no belief that they would use the planes as weapons. Thus, the result would have likely been the same had the doors been as secure as bank vaults. In other words, you are proposing a false dichotomy.
Tell it to the terrorist in L.A. who killed two people in the airport. However, to the thinking portion of the population there is no doubt that some type of screening is now necessary to prevent further attacks.
With no screening even your beloved doors could not stop a nutcase from getting on the plane with a bomb or a exploding shoe. You are proposing no screening? It is obvious to those without an anti-State agenda that the terrorists on 9/11 would not have been stopped by stronger doors if the pilots would have just opened them believing that would stop passengers from being killed. Now is a different matter.
However, I support the Israeli method of airport security which uses screeners and air marshalls. Many of those you are libelling who work for TSA are air marshalls not screeners.
Apparently you are unaware of what the Brown Shirts were if you believe the TSA employees are their equivalents. It is just silly rhetoric which convinces no one.