The rest of the world has not waited. Today, AT systems have been certified for liquid threat detection and are deployed at many European airports.

5 Comments

1. 1. julianpenrod 09:22 PM 6/29/12

   It's all a fraud. September 11, the "people who died", "al Qaeda", all of it.
   Why do they all have ostensible Muslim names? If they wanted to avoid "no fly" lists, one of the first things they would do would be to take Western style names.
   If there was a genuine fear of jets being used again, why are small jet carriers, using planes like Learjets, not subject to screening? Becuase they know the rich, who are about the only users of the airlines, won't engage in a protest against the abuse of the Palestinians? Or because they know "terrorism" is a lie?
   But, then, there may be something to the idea of not ex[pecting the rich to take up jihad. J.K. Rowling was allowed to carry an unbinspected pouch on board a flight to New York because she said she had the last chapter of "Harry Potter" in it and she didn't want anyone to see any part of it. And because the "reasoning" seems to go, first, big corporate money gets all the privileges, and, second, big corporate money won't suddenly strike out against the system. Not because they see the system as unfair, but because they see it as eminently fair, for them, and they are their only interest. Not the mistreatment of others!

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. julianpenrod 09:22 PM 6/29/12

   
   But consider, there was never an attack the magnitidue of September 11 before, and for good reason. It would bring down more of a miltiary reprisal than any "terrorist" organization would want! No genuine, ragtag, dissident "terroist" organization launched September 11. Which means al Qaeda wa not behind it. Consider, too, the technology and supposedly the animosity displayed in staccato high level attacks and plots across the world in the years since September 11 presumably exisated before then, and yet, there were no attacks. The London Underground, Rafik Hariri, Mumbai, Ft. Hood, the "underwear bomber", the "shoe bomber", the Sear Tower plot, Benazir Bhutto, the "Times Square Bomber", the Ft. Dix plot, the plot to mail explosives in printer cartridges to the U.S. A century's worth of major, high profile "terroris" incidents in ten years. Why is everything happening now?
   And, if the TSA was so poor in discharging their duty for security, why didn't a "terrorist" get through?
   Because there are no "terrorists".
   The New World Order had enough of the gullible swindled and they didn't need to enact any more "attacks" on American soil.
   Which doesn't mean the U.S. is safe. Whenb enough peoiple start to openly question the "war on 'terror'" and the corporate/governm,ent thugs involved are in danger of being identified and brought to justice for crimes against the people, they'll stage another "attack" to scare enough people silly that whatever good was gained will be in danger of being lost!
   The "war on 'terror'" is nothing more than a ploy by the New World Order to mobilize not even everyone, since con jobs don't look to convince everbody, just those too shallow, superifical, feeble minded and insipid to realize they are being played for saps.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. jimmywat 12:09 AM 6/30/12

   You call this a science article? This is just propaganda

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. selrachj 03:01 PM 7/2/12

   In response to the above comments - what the heck is wrong with you folks? This is a informative story told by the guy who ran the agency. The "new world order" conspiracy stuff is just sad. We live in a complex world defined by the intersection of many interests, from powerful lawyers to imams reaching for their own kind of power in their particular circumstances. This excerpt sheds some fascinating light on a part of those complexities.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. thinkitthrough 11:22 PM 8/8/12

   The guy shows us how shoot-yourself-in-the-foot stupid our government is being about security and you call it propaganda?
   This is a book excerpt, not an article. Take it up with the author.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this