Airport Screening Did Not Enable the 9/11 Attacks

A good article from Reason that refutes the lie being promoted by TSA that the private screeners were to blame for 9/11.

http://reason.org/blog/show/airport-screening-9-11-attacks

 

I like Robert Poole and the gang at Reason, but his views on Commercial and General Aviation have me scratching my head.

The FAA has plenty of "unfunded mandates". Should the taxpayers pay for the inspection and replacement of an ELT battery on a DL B767? My buddy's Cessna? More on Poole's proposed General Aviation user fees here.

James May, the past president of the Air Transport Association, has been quoted with smug glee that he was happy that the cost of security screening was transferred to the government. Well sure, do you think the airlines would stand by with an over ten times increase in screening costs? More to the point, would Jeff Smisek at United Continental, whose been quite candid at his displeasure with the TSA at frequent flyer events, just quietly foot the bill directly while his airline's customers pass through the Nude-O-Scopes and Petting Zoos?

 

Everytime I touch your article thread, N965VJ, (More on Poole), I get a security warning and am bounced off this site.

There are costs the airlines might share, and then there is a shake-down. Let's not confuse the two:

ALL of this is a diversion from the point of Fisher1949's post.
There might be more to say about Point 3, but Points 1&2 should be repeated at every chance.