Snow globes?? You’re kiddin’ right?

Well obvious not, considering this picture was  just recently posted on a national blog. I am never amazed with what bureaucracies do, so I am not surprised. I am quite certain that the official(s) who identified “snow globes” as a potential threat to air passenger safety has his or her reasons for doing so. In fact I am quite certain if questioned on the matter they could relate several well researched and compelling reasons for not wanting air travelers to have access these mesmerizing plastic snow and water filled orbs. However, none of them will in any manner stop the next mutation of the “shoe” or “underwear” bomber from getting on an aircraft. And that is the problem of the day, isn’t it?

Having been in a government bureaucracy for nearly 20 years, I know the way they work. Since the majority of Federal agencies have nothing to sell, there is no profit motive holding them responsible. SO the result is an entity with very little “real” accountability until something embarrassing or terrible happens. Then comes the “investigation”. A process whose objective is to “identify” and “fix” what went wrong. And is much akin to fixing the plane’s engine after it has taken off.

Of course having survived a few of these, I know what it really is, a “witch hunt”. And if you have ever viewed an “investigation” in close quarters its difficult not to draw the comparison to 17th century Salem.

Rather than making the primary focus stopping these evil people “before” they get anywhere close to an airport, let alone an aircraft… we force a Dad to put his fragile gift for his daughter in a bag to be mauled by the Samsonite gorillas. A typical  bureaucratic response, not so much designed to solve the problem as it is to save face. A response focused upon what they have done, we we need to focus upon what they will do next.

If there is one thing we should have learned from terrorists by now is that they seldom change targets, but often change tactics. In 1993 they detonated a van in the parking garage the WTC North Tower, it didn’t work. 8 years later the tactics were different and so was the result.

Adding a few more liquids to the banned substance list will not prevent committed radicals from inventing a new way to hit us. In fact it emboldens them. The response has been to institute policies that encroach upon personal freedom. We may reason it is necessary for the safety of the public, but every freedom we feel compelled to sacrifice, no matter how small, is a victory for them.  We need to understand that killing us is not there ultimate goal, killing our beliefs are. Every surrender of liberty for us, is a gain for them.

We must also understand that no matter what we do, they are not going to stop. This is a war and must be viewed as such, not because of politics or agendas, but because “they” view it as Jihad, and have long before American Flight 11 hit the North Tower on 9/11. If we ignore this basic point we do so at our own peril.

Marginalizing your foe may be a useful tactic for people that follow Saul Alinsky. But such a tactic will not work with these enemies. We marginalized their declared Jihad against us for 10 years previous to 9/11 and the result was a foe that struck us harder than we previously believed to be possible. Going back to those types of tactics will only yield similiar results.

The only certain way to protect from a repeat of Flight 253, or another attack like 9/11 is to stop those that would commit the act before they have a chance. Unfortunately, we won’t. We will continue battle these this evil in the same “one arm tied behind our back” bureaucratic manner as we have fought the “war on poverty” and the “war on drugs”, so therefore we need not be surprised when get similar results.