Do You Fly on Commercial Airliners?

If you do, you might want to make your voice heard to the airlines directly. As most of us know by now, last Saturday at O'Hare Airport in Chicago, a man with seven knives, some with very long blades, and a can of mace got through airport security. I have to fly to BWI in a couple of days to get to Washington, DC. I can tell you that I'm looking forward to getting on that plane like I would triple by-pass surgery.

Duplicitous dogs like Dick Gephart, a new world order lackey to be sure, has been grabbing the camera the past weeks chanting that airline security should be federalized. Others equally as stupid as tricky Dicky, suggest that the reason the hijackers got on the planes 9-11 was because airport security personnel are underpaid.

Oh, that's very good. Bull. This was an inside job and those terrorists were assisted in their diabolical mission by ground personnel. Should a person working for lower wages, such as an x-ray technician, do a crummy job because the pay scale is lower than they would like, or should they do the best job they can and work for advancement? Should that lower wage x-ray tech slouch on the job, make mistakes and then have someone come along and excuse their ineptness because they make minimum wage? Oh, I know - - call 1-800-Congress!

Federalize airport screening personnel? Absolutely not! This govmint is already too big, too clumsy and thoroughly corrupt. Federalizing 28,000 airline security personnel will only create another huge load of federal employees who will be just as inept as before they went on the federal payroll. There are some top-notch security consulting firms in this country and they should be used by the counties to strengthen security at their airports and tell the feds to get their nose out of where it doesn't belong.

The other thing that needs to be looked at is whether or not these security personnel are Amreican citizens. To the politically correct crowd about to crow "discrimination," take a gander at this:

MOHAMMAD Junaid's mother was led to safety from the blazing World Trade Centre by New York's brave firefighters and policemen.

In return for saving his mum's life, the Islamic-American has turned traitor and bought a one-way ticket to Pakistan to sign up for the Taliban and kill Americans.

Junaid left on what could be a suicide mission one week after his mother an office worker on the ninth floor of the north tower was among the survivors.

About 4500 others were not so lucky, and lost their lives in the terror strikes on September 11.

"My mother was in the north tower of the World Trade Centre but I still feel absolutely no remorse about what happened on September 11," Junaid said.

"I saw the towers collapse but felt nothing for the Americans inside. I may hold an American passport, but I am not an American I am a Muslim."

"Junaid offered his own personal jihad against his own country when in Islamabad, Pakistan, as he waited to cross the border into Afghanistan to join the Taliban.

"I did not feel any remorse for the Americans who died," Junaid told Britain's ITN television network.

"I'm willing to kill the Americans. I will kill every American that I see in Afghanistan. And I'll kill every American soldier that I see in Pakistan."

Does that make you sick or what? Think this guy is alone in his hatred of US? Remember: These terrorists were here on our soil, they blended in with the general population and they were killers. The Taliban and Ussamah have made this a "holy war," and fools like the guy above, have been manipulated into believing it's their obligation to kill the Great Satan - that's US. This is cold, raw, hard reality.

The FAA is and always has been a joke in the aviation industry. Along with many others, I have always felt the FAA should be abolished. Airports should be run by counties since they own them and all responsibility then lies at their doorstep. Accountability is best eaten locally. The FAA is too political and all they do is fine these big airlines, which in the end, means nothing.

You can go to the FAA's web site and see for yourself how many airlines get fined and how much, for things like getting caught with contraband on commercial flights. Big deal. They turn right around and do the same things again - go see for yourself. Then the airlines just turn around and get federal subsidies to make up for their losses. It's a big game. In the meantime, people die from these rotten political games.

Norm Mineta is the current Secretary of Transportation and another idiot placed in a cabinet position to satisfy racial quotas. I'm sorry, but America has the most racist politics on this earth. I'm working on a very comprehensive piece about this in the most fair and balanced way I can. Hopefully I'll get it done when I get back....after I do Klamath Falls.

"Prior to joining President Bush's administration as Secretary of Transportation, Mineta served as U.S. Secretary of Commerce under President Clinton, becoming the first Asian Pacific American to serve in the cabinet."

Why is it always necessary to point out someone's race? Because this is how the race game is played in this country. It shouldn't matter what race Mr. Mineta is, but rather how qualified he is for the job. Mineta is an old Clinton beaurat and you can expect nothing from him while at the helm.

Under Mineta's stewardship, new regs went into play immediately following 9-11. Mineta has been on the job since January 25, 2001. What the heck was he doing before 9-11 to make airline security a priority as he's so fond of blustering about? Apparently nothing.

Following 9-11, we immediately had a no fingernail clippers, no nail files or anything else being brought on board commercial flights. This didn't set too well with one airline pilot:

"Northwest Airlines is investigating a report that one of its pilots apparently became furious when his fingernail clippers and scissors were confiscated at Rapid City Regional Airport in South Dakota.

"``We are concerned by the reports that we've heard,'' said Northwest spokesman Curt Ebenhoch. ``We will fully investigate the matter and follow up with appropriate action.''

"Airport officials, police and witnesses confirmed the confrontation with the pilot, which occurred about 7:10 a.m. Wednesday.

"Torrance Richardson, operations officer for the airport, said the pilot and a few passengers were going through the security checkpoint to board a Northwest flight to Minneapolis. Baggage screeners would not let the pilot take the clippers and scissors through, making him angry.

"The FAA has ordered strict security measures put in place since the deadly terrorist attacks on the East Coast on Sept. 11. Among them is a rule that no one - including flight crew members - can pass through security checkpoints with box-cutters, fingernail files and other items that could be used as weapons.

"Hal Myers, a pilot and spokesman for the Air Line Pilots Association, said the security directives are being interpreted differently at various airports, which has been frustrating for pilots and other crew members.

"Security operations in some airports may decide nail clippers are OK, while other airports may ban them, Myers said. The same thing has happened with safety razors, he said.

"Myers said President Bush's federalization of airport security should eliminate disparities from airport to airport.

"``One of the absurdities of this is that the pilot who had his nail clippers removed probably could have walked through security after he had them confiscated and he probably could have gone to a gift shop and bought another pair,'' he said.

"``It's a real overreaction,'' Myers added. ``We're in favor of anything that truly enhances security and reduces real threats, but taking people's nail clippers away is not it.''

"``The same pilot who had his nail clippers confiscated is going to go into the cockpit where he has access to the crash ax. How much sense does that make?''

Nail clippers are a weapon? Little tiny scissors that one would use to trim their moustache is a weapon? I guess it would be against a 1-year old. Come on.

No more meals on flights. Plastic knives are okay if some airline does provide some sustenance, if you can call the gruel they serve on these flights "food." One carry on. Armed national guard personnel standing by for God knows what. Here in Sacramento 1/3 of the close-in parking is gone, replaced with those big, concrete barriers. For what? Sacramento International is a dinky, country airport out in the middle of agricultural fields.

Here in Sacramento at the airport immediately following 9-11 and after air travel resumed, no one other than ticketed passengers can go upstairs where the concessions are located. Within a week 50% of those businesses were ready to close their doors and eventually, many did. All this is going to stop terrorism?

Hardly. The hijackers had first class, one way cash tickets. They went through the metal detectors. It didn't matter if they ate at the McDonald's upstairs at an airport. Your husband or mom seeing you off at the airport - this is a threat when they aren't even flying? They can no longer go through the metal detectors and get close to the departing gates? This is going to stop terrorism?

One way tickets with cash - - - that alone should have caused the desk personnel at United and American Airlines to immediately bar them from getting on a flight until someone questioned them about their plans -- especially if the individual was not a U.S. citizen. And, please, no whining about racial profiling. I don't care if their skin is white as an egg shell, buying a first class ticket one way with cash has to make you wonder why there's no return?

Have I purchased a one-way ticket before? Yes, I did because I was driving back from my destination. Would I have been unduly upset at the airport if the person at the desk questioned my itinerary? No because there was nothing to hide and I would be suspicious of this myself.

"Commercial air travel is struggling to get back in business with the country on high alert. One solution: undercover air marshals now patrol some passenger flights. But how can the feds train enough officers to staff those planes? Our investigative reporter Hank Phillippi Ryan reveals just who is "Armed and On Board."

"They're sharpshooters, crime fighters, special agents, in the front lines of federal law enforcement targeting gun runners, drug dealers, and America's most wanted. But now, they're being ordered into the air.

"The FAA needs hundreds of air marshals to police commercial flights. The problem is they can't train new recruits fast enough. The instant solution- call in the experts.

"Our investigation found the feds, now scrambling to staff the skies, are tapping the IRS, DEA, U.S. Customs, ATF, and U.S. Marshals, pulling agents off the job and putting them armed and undercover onto passenger flights.

"Here at ATF's Boston headquarters, the agent in charge knows some of his team members may be gone for more than a year.

"Spl. Agent J. Dewey Webb, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms "Yes this is one of our top priorities."

"Number and details of the reassignments are not public, but this internal memo obtained by 7News reveals the nuts and bolts: on loan marshals will still paid by their employing agencies deputized by the FAA and issued special credentials they'll be on the job 6-18 months and get a 4 day training session

Spl. Agent J. Dewey Webb: "We are sending senior special agents and we are sending some of our best."

Larry Johnson, Security Expert: "What they are doing is putting them on a plane to let people feel better about flying, that they are going to be safer."

"One question- what happens to ongoing investigations, this internal memo admits resources will be stretched to the maximum. But the ATF shows off this handgun stash from a sting operation after agents were reassigned.

Spl. Agent J. Dewey Webb: "People are working a little bit harder people are working a little bit longer but that's what we get paid to do."

"And our investigation found agencies may soon get some backup because the hiring call is also on for former employees. This man, a retired special agent, says if the government needs him back, sign him up.

"I had thirty years in the law enforcement field and I bet its not going to be any more dangerous than it was in that time period."

"In fact, he's just part of what officials call an astonishing response to a new federal reemployment readiness program. We have learned almost 3000 federal pensioners have already sent applications into federal hiring offices.

Larry Johnson: "It's just bringing in reinforcements because people are going 24 hours a day 7 days a week and you reach up against human limits you get tired you get sloppy this is to give people some breathing space."

"Problem is how to pay for it. This in-house memo from the government's personnel agency reveals emergency hiring rules in effect and even special salary exceptions. No one can predict the financial bottom line, but for now it's a call for all hands whether back at their desks or at 35,000 feet.

Former Federal Agent: "I think they're happy and privileged to come back and serve their country." "The program was ramped up so quickly some borrowed air marshals are already on the job. While they fly, hundreds of permanent air marshals are being selected and trained.

But, as is typical with the phony "war hero," John McCain, he would rather passengers and pilots continue to be sitting ducks:

ACTION: Please contact your senators and demand that they oppose the anti-gun amendment that Senator John McCain (R-AZ) will offer to the Aviation Security Act as early as Tuesday. Ask them instead to support Bob Smith's "Passenger Safety" amendment that will arm pilots, thus protecting the lives of airline passengers and crew members.

(Friday, September 5, 2001) -- Anti-gun zealot Senator John McCain is, once again, preparing to offer an amendment to disarm Americans.

This particular "Dead Pilots" amendment, proposed for the Aviation Security Act, would prohibit guns for airline pilots and instead arm them with "stun guns."

Thus, if a ground crew in a U.S. or foreign airport smuggled a gun aboard an aircraft and planted it under a seat, the hijacker would have a real gun. But the pilots would only have a toy gun by comparison.

This same result would occur if a terrorist smuggled a firearm through a metal detector, as Charles Hildreth, 63, unwittingly did at Atlanta's Hartsfield Airport on September 25, 2001.

This would put the pilots and the plane at greater risk than if they had no gun at all.

First, there is the hand-held stun gun which works only when the pilot makes physical contact with the attacker. On its web site, D&D Security Products, which sells this stun gun, states: "They should not be used to defend yourself against an attacker with a firearm or knife." In other words, sun guns are designed specifically for unarmed attackers. They would be useless against armed terrorists.

Second, there is the type of stun gun (a taser) that "launches remote probes up to 15 feet." This type of stun gun can be thwarted by heavy clothing. And, if the pilot misses on the first shot at a distance of 15 feet, the pilot is dead.

Either way, McCain's "stun gun" approach would do very little to enhance pilot or passenger safety against a terrorist. Even worse, the McCain amendment would leave pilots defenseless by supplanting the Smith amendment, which will take real strides towards stopping future skyjackings.

So please urge your Senators to oppose the anti-gun McCain amendment, and be sure to reinforce your support for the Smith "Passenger Safety" amendment.

CONTACT INFORMATION: Please use the pre-written text below to help direct your comments to the U.S. Senate. You can call your Senators at 202-224-3121. To identify your Senators, as well as to send a message via e-mail, plug in your zip code under Elected Officials at:

"Everyone knows it is a bad idea to try and board a plane carrying a box cutter, a flight manual written in Arabic, or a sack full of mysterious white powder. But with ultra-tightened airport security, a book could also prevent you from boarding that plane.

"Neil Godfrey arrived at Philadelphia International Airport around 9:30 a.m. on Wed., Oct. 10. His brother's girlfriend dropped him off with plenty of time to spare before his 11:40 a.m. United Airlines flight. Godfrey was on his way to Phoenix, where his parents live. From there, the family was planning to head out for a vacation at Disneyland.

""It is fair to say that Godfrey brother of City Paper webmaster Ryan Godfrey doesn't look unusual for a 22-year-old kid living in Center City.

"His outfit that day was typical: black Dockers, a T-shirt with a logo for the now-defunct Phoenix Gazette newspaper and New Balance running shoes. He has a medium build, recently dyed jet-black hair and a quiet demeanor.

"When Godfrey stepped up to the ticket counter, the United clerk informed him he had been selected for a random baggage search.

""No problem," he replied, going through the usual motions of checking his bag and getting a boarding pass. Now toting nothing but a novel and the most recent copy of The Nation magazine, Godfrey hiked through the concourse toward his boarding gate.

"As he passed through the metal detector, an airport security guard furrowed his brow at Godfrey's reading selections as they disappeared through the conveyor belt.

"On the cover of the book, Hayduke Lives! by Edward Abbey, is an illustration of a man's hand holding several sticks of dynamite. The 1991 novel is about a radical environmentalist, George Washington Hayduke III, who blows up bridges, burns tractors and sabotages other projects he believes are destroying the beautiful Southwest landscape.

""For the first time, it occurred to me the book may be a problem," Godfrey recalls.

"He proceeded through the security checkpoint and sat down to read near his boarding gate. About 10 minutes had passed when a National Guardsman approached Godfrey.

""He told me to step aside," Godfrey says. "Then he took my book and asked me why I was reading it."

"Within minutes, Godfrey says, Philadelphia Police officers, Pennsylvania State Troopers and airport security officials joined the National Guardsman. About 10 to 12 people examined the novel for 45 minutes, scratching out notes the entire time. They also questioned Godfrey about the purpose of his trip to Phoenix.

"Eventually, one of the law enforcement officials told Godfrey his book was "innocuous" and he would be allowed to board the plane.

""I was pretty shaken up," he says. "But I also felt guilty that I hadn't realized bringing this book to the airport may cause a problem."

"Another 10 minutes or so passed while he sat in the waiting area. A female United employee Godfrey failed to jot down her name came over and informed him that he wouldn't be allowed to fly, "for three reasons."

"The first reason, she said, was that Godfrey was reading a book with an illustration of a bomb on the cover. Secondly, she said, he purchased his ticket on Sept. 11. (Godfrey bought the ticket on Priceline.com shortly after midnight, at least eight hours before the World Trade Center was attacked).

"And the final reason cited by the United employee was that Godfrey's Arizona driver's license had expired. The employee pointed to a date to substantiate this allegation.

"The woman then pointed to another date on the card, Feb. 17, 2000, contending it was the expiration date. Godfrey countered that the date identified him as "under 21" until then.

"A defeated and disappointed Godfrey reclaimed his luggage and was escorted out of the airport.

"When he got home, Godfrey did what a lot of guys do when they need consoling he phoned his mom.

"Godfrey's mother offered to call United and attempt to straighten things out. A central reservation clerk assured her that her son was not banned from ever flying United again. She booked him on a different flight to Phoenix, this one departing Philadelphia at 3:04 p.m. that same afternoon.

"Godfrey scurried back to the airport, leaving the Abbey novel at home. He exchanged it for a seemingly benign novel, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.

"When Godfrey arrived at the airport around 1:15 p.m., his luggage was again searched. But as Godfrey passed through the metal detector, a police officer recognized him from the commotion just a few hours earlier. The cop pulled Godfrey aside and made a few phone calls. Ultimately, he declared that everything checked out fine. But a National Guardsman standing nearby vetoed that decision.

""This time, they took my Harry Potter book and about four people studied it for 20 minutes," Godfrey says.

"Finally, at about 1:45 p.m., officials apparently felt reassured that Godfrey was not a security threat. They told Godfrey he would be permitted on the plane, but that he couldn't pass through security until 2:30 p.m.

"At the appointed time, an escort took Godfrey through security, while at least 15 law enforcement officials looked on. Rather than taking Godfrey directly to his gate, however, he was ushered into a private interrogation room.

""They patted me down and found nothing," Godfrey says. But when he emerged from this room, Burt Zastera, supervisor of airport operations for United, told him he would not be allowed to fly.

""He told me he didn't know the reason why, that he was 'just conveying the information,'" Godfrey recalls. Zastera gave Godfrey a contact number he could call for a full explanation.

"Godfrey's father called that number and was told his son was banned from flying United because he cracked "a joke about bombs."

"That is totally false," Godfrey says, pointing out that no one at the airport ever mentioned this to him. Plus, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations stipulate that any passenger who jokes about explosives be arrested on the spot. By contrast, Godfrey was never charged or even accused of breaking the law. In fact, Philadelphia Police officers didn't even file an incident report, according to department spokesman Cpl. Jim Pauley.

"Little Kristin's hazel eyes were as big as saucers and began to fill with tears as she stood there, spread-eagle, while some stranger frisked up and down her little body. I hovered close by with a weak, forced smile, in a lousy attempt to reassure my daughter while at the same time trying to hold back my anger over the absurd situation. I could do nothing to stop this groping of my little nine-year-old girl we were in the Atlanta airport trying to catch a plane to my grandmother's funeral.

"Kristin and I had passed through the metal detector with no beeps, no delays. Yet, we were ordered to step aside and endured the electronic wand rubbing across our bodies as "security" looked for weapons. No alarms went off again no beeps. Still, another "security" officer said we had to be patted down. I gently pushed Kristin aside and told the officer that I needed to go first so that my daughter would know what to expect. I remained calm as I was thoroughly and I mean thoroughly frisked by the female officer. As she ran her hands across my breasts and up my thighs, Kristin was, understandably, nervous. And, then, it was her turn.

"Now, mind you, I have no problem with added security in the wake of the dreadful terror of Sept. 11 I even welcome it. But what really bugs me, and should worry every American, is the inconsistency, the stupidity, and the invasion into our personal lives that is taking place at airports around the country. I have flown four separate flight segments since Sept. 11, and every single time the security measures are different. For all the flights, an airline employee has stared at my driver's license picture, then me, then back at my license. Now I don't know how that adds security remember, the murderous thugs who hijacked the planes all had tickets and licenses in their names.

"At every gate and security check point, I have been asked the typical numskull questions, "Have you had your bags with you at all times?" "Has anyone you don't know given you anything to take on the plane?" With the "increased security" I'm now asked, "Do you have any sharp items like knives, nail clippers, scissors or box-cutters on your person or in your carry-on luggage?" I'm absolutely certain that several hijackings have been prevented with this question because we all know that murderous suicidal terrorist thugs are really honest people at heart and will always answer "yes" if someone just bothers to ask them if they are carrying concealed weapons.

"What's going on here folks is the appearance of added security. That's right, almost every move undertaken thus far since Sept. 11 has been done to make us feel better. So why do I fly? Because I know that many of the flights now carry plain-clothes U.S. Marshals packing loaded guns. That's it. Put a cop on a plane with a loaded gun that he knows how to use and I'm ready to go."

And, of course, the mentally challenged in the government's media apparatus also feel it's their duty to practice censorship (just like USA Today did over Bob Schulz'ads) by refusing to run a commercial about arming pilots:

Major media networks have refused to air a 60 second commercial calling for President Bush, the FAA, and the airlines to arm commercial pilots. The commercial, to run on prime time slots was produced and sponsored by Front Sight Founder's Society.

Front Sight Firearm Training Institute's Founder and Director, Dr. Ignatius Piazza was surprised that major networks refused to air a commercial in which Front Sight encourages Americans to contact President Bush, the FAA, and the airlines to demand that our commercial pilots be armed.

In the commercial Front Sight also offers to immediately train all commercial pilots and co-pilots FREE OF CHARGE that are authorized to carry a gun to defend the cockpit against terrorists.

Piazza states, "It is unfortunate that the major networks would not air our 60 second commercials aimed at spreading the truth that the only solution to forever preventing another World Trade Center attack is to give pilots the ability and authority to defend the cockpit with a gun.

Front Sight's solution is simple, efficient, effective and will not cost the taxpayers, air passengers, or airlines a dime. Our commercial demonstrated how easy and safe it is to stop cold a terrorist attempting to invade the doorway of the cockpit or take a hostage. Front Sight has the absolute solution. We are willing to provide our gift of up to $150 million dollars in training free of charge and Front Sight Founder's Society is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to spread the truth of our solution."

To view the commercial that major media networks refused to air visit Front Sight's web site at

Front Sight Founder's Society is now producing a new 60 second commercial to be ready by next week. Says Piazza, "The next commercial, unfortunately must be more politically correct to get it aired, but will have the same message to arm our pilots and take back control of the skies. Watch for it and support Front Sight's Founder's Society."

Let's go back and look at 9-11. On three of the flights there were five hijackers. On Flight 93 which crashed in Pennsylvania there were four. I have read some e-mails that cruelly suggest that the passengers on all four flights were cowards for letting these hijackers take over the passengers and get into the cockpits with nothing more than box cutters and knives.

Let's face it, folks. Most of us have been on airplanes. We know how narrow the isles are and how the plane interiors are laid out. We must also remember that the element of surprise heavily favors the one about to attack.

Just take a look around you the next time you fly. You've got babies, teens who are walking around in pants big enough to fit four people, elderly and those of us in between. Most people, unless they have military or self-defense training, caught in a sudden situation in a small area where flight attendants have their throats slit right in front of them, are not going to respond as well as someone who has completed special forces training at Ft. Bragg. Most people are going to freeze and are too scared to help. That's just the way it is in real life sometimes.

But, let's just say that for the sake of argument, that each and every flight attendant was carrying a can of pepper spray in their pockets. These guys with wire cutters and relatively small blade knives (which do slice through skin and bone effectively) make their move, but so do the flight attendants and/or passengers armed with something more than "tea or coffee."

Pepper spray is very, very effective in stopping an aggressor and you don't have to get too close. These hijackers did not have guns. They were outnumbered by the passengers. Even if only a few of the attendants or the attendants handing the spray off to bigger male passengers, had had the option of this self-defense tool, I firmly believe the outcome of 9-11 would have been very different.

How about passengers who have concealed weapons permits? All legal. Are they allowed to board the planes with guns that are checked at the counter to ensure their guns are loaded only with bullets that will not penetrate the inside structure of the aircraft? Nope.

Are pilots, so many who are retired military and know how to use guns, allowed to have them in the cockpit? Nope.

So in other words, America's planes are still sitting ducks for terrorists and the incident last Saturday at O'Hare should be a wake up call to everyone who flies that it's time to put a stop to all this nonsense. The airlines want you back. Fine, now it's time to tell them to tell the FAA to stick it and immediately implement some changes:

First, let those pilots who own hand guns and know how to use them, carry them on their flights - now, not a year from now. What is the FAA so worried about? That the pilots of these big birds are going to suddenly jump up from their seats, run to the back of the plane, shoot someone or hijack their own flight? How stupid.

Second, arm the flight attendants with pepper spray and concealed self-defense weapons located in various places on the plane where only they know where they are in case, God forbid, they are needed. What is the FAA so worried about? That some flight attendant is going to take out her/his pepper spray and use it on some passenger whose just sitting there or perhaps hijack their own flight? How stupid.

Third, allow Americans who have valid concealed weapons permits to fly with their guns as long as they are checked at the desk for proper ammunition. What's the FAA so worried about? That someone who has a CWP is going to suddenly sit up and shoot all the passengers? Come on, use a little common sense. The people of this country have been stripped of their ability to have self- defense weapons by cowardly politicians who are surrounded by armed body guards and ride around in limousines, not to mention the anti-gun crowd in this country who don't have a clue about freedom, liberty or deterence through superior fire power.

Sure, the planes themselves need to have the cockpits secured with doors that cannot be opened from the passenger side and things like that, but those things take time. Right now, potential hijackers out there know that the people and flight crews are still unarmed, have no self-defense weapons to use against them and could strike again any time. Hell, it doesn't even have to be one of these religious wackos like 9-11, it could just be someone who wants a free ride to Australia or something. The danger is still there no matter what the motives of the hijacker.

Fourth is the vulnerability of the cargo areas of the planes. This is an area that must have closer supervision or the next time it won't be hijackers, it will be another Pan Am Flight 103 where the bomb makes it onboard the plane via the cargo area. I don't mind waiting for these planes to re-gear when one comes in and then is scheduled to take off again for someplace else. I would rather wait that extra 20-30 minutes if it means that all baggage going into the belly of the plane is closely scrutinized. Use bomb sniffing dogs for every flight.

Will some of these security measures cost the airlines big bucks? Pepper spray? Other defensive weapons carefully concealed on the plane? Bomb sniffing dogs with a handler? Not as much as the four airliners that crashed on 9-11, that much I know for sure. If you feel the government should not federalize the security personnel at airports, but rather let the counties who own them have control, call your congress whimp and let them know:

Call your Mayor and the county board of stupidvisors and tell them to stand up to the feds or you'll go after them in a recall.

Let them know how you feel about the continued lack of security and if you think some of the ideas above are good, tell them that you will not fly until they are implemented. As long as potential hijackers know we're sitting ducks, they will find a way on these planes.

I can tell you this: I've had my non-refundable ticket since August, otherwise I'd already be on Amtrak on my way to the East coast. I would not fly and I won't after this, period, until the airlines get tough with the feds and implement real safety procedures and issue weapons.

As most of us know by now, last Saturday at O'Hare Airport in Chicago, a man with seven knives, some with very long blades, and a can of mace got through airport security...... .

This was an inside job and those terrorists were assisted in their diabolical mission by ground personnel

If a guy in O'Hare just walked on to a plane with seven knives, why is he so sure that the 9/11 hijackers didn't just walk on with box-cutters?

Just take all this stuff you've printed here with you to read on the plane--you'll be in Baltimore before you know it--LOL!

Just kidding! I think all of us are a bit shaky when getting on a plane these days. I just keep reminding myself that thousands of planes are taking off each day, so the possibility of the plane I am on having an incident is not very great.

After all I've read...I think flying is perfecty safe now.
However, I sure don't like the idea of taking a cruise ship. (even if I could afford something pleasant like that) (nope, no cruise ships or tall building for me - won't happen for a long, long time...if at all)

Please don't let it be a BATF (always include the "B") agent that is the sky marshall on any flight I or my family members might take anytime soon. They are the bottom of the barrel in federal law enforcement. They would probably empty their guns and reload, killing and wounding several passengers and cabin crewmembers, but missing the "hijacker", who probably only had a bad case of "Montezuma's revenge" any way, cleanly. I'll even take an armed IRS agent (cringe) instead.

Wake up! Letting a high-school dropout airport screener pat you down is your mistake. You do not have to allow this to happen. Rather, make them call a cop who has arrest powers to do the patdown. My colleagues and I are insisting on this every time, as we are airline employees who go through the checkpoints every day seeing the same inane, stupid screeners. IDIOTS. Nothing has really changed, other than the number of TV vans outside the building, and the unloaded M-16s carried by the Natl. Guard. We still have ILLEGAL ALIENS with airport-issued ramp access ID badges cleaning the toilets and taking out the trash AT RAMP LEVEL NEAR THE AIRCRAFT. Mention this to the airport board and see them shrug. "Duh". - Every time @IAH

Do You Fly on Commercial Airliners?

I just flew this weekend, Sacramento to Chicago and back. In Sacto, we got through security pretty quickly. In Chicago (Midway), the security seemed a lot more thorough and (a big improvement) we were NOT asked the stupid questions. My hubby just HAD to leave a couple of coins and a key in his pocket and set off the metal detector, which meant he had to be frisked with the metal detector wands. Troublemaker. There's one in every crowd.

Do You Fly on Commercial Airliners?

---------------------------------

Do You Fly on NON-Commercial Airliners?
If so, tell us your secret on how to hitch a ride.

BTW, who's 'genuis'?

While I haven't done so recently, I used to fly all the time, and as I recall you are more likely ( statistically ) to get killed going to the airport in your car than on the flight.

I also think that if this "airplane as a flying bomb" stunt is tried again, the hijacker will get ripped apart by the passengers- nobody will believe "just co-operate & you won't be harmed...."

But still, with all these airplanes falling out of the sky, I'd be inclined to travel some other way if possible!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.