Just after I heard the news about the Christmas bombing, I saw this journal. This is not an article that contests the terrorist but an article that conveys the author’s thinking about the new rules the US government put up for the security service every time after being attacked.
It’s the author’s opinion that the truth about airplane security measure is that the US government did so bad at detecting the guilty and so good at collective punishment at innocence.
For one thing, passengers were prohibited to use restroom on the Washington-New York shuttle few years after the 9/11. The author expressed his idea that this rule would never deter a person who was willing to die but caused trouble and intolerance for innocent people. The result of this rule finally was scrapped as people never felt safe underneath the rule.
For another, the author thinks that the endlessly ineffectual security service is ridiculous and just supposes to give a feeling of safe. The fail of detecting the guilty leaded to the rule or trouble put on the innocence.
As to me, I extremely agree with his opinion that the US government should pay more attention on detecting the guilty than adding the seeming endless rules. In my opinion, All the new and revised security measure since 9/11 are more about convincing passengers of the feeling of safe in the knowledge that the government is doing “something” to avoid another occurrence than about actually stopping another incident. Every time after the attack, the flight becomes a hassle and suffering. Some security measures are really unnecessary in my eyes. Will the terrorist answer the truth when you are asking questions? That only caused hassle on the innocence.