…and then go ballistic in demanding to know why that same guy was allowed to have a gun in the cockpit.

Boy that 9/11 sure made us a serious nation.

/sarc

Not ta mention Obama’s AG Holder saying he will releases terror suspects in side the USA

Sterling Payne, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration, denied the report and said the program that oversees a reported 12,000 federal flight deck officers (FFDO) is actually expanding.

“It’s inaccurate, this program continues to grow,” Payne told FOXNews.com of the editorial. “TSA continues to recruit and put new FFDOs on planes, and we continue to train them and do recurring training.”

[...]

“ALPA representatives met with TSA executives this afternoon and were told in no uncertain terms that TSA embraces the FFDO program, that there are no plans to reduce or restrict its growth, and that in fact the agency fully intends to grow and expand the program,” the statement read. “Government representatives acknowledged that the program needs additional funding to achieve these goals, and that they are actively seeking same.”

However, it is worth noting that the original editorial did not claim that it was an official policy, but just that funds are being diverted and the approval process is “slowing down”. Sounds to me more like bureaucratic bass-ackwardness, but I suppose it could be a nefarious plot.

and during all of those searches (which i gleefully complied)

I never saw one
Arab
Muslim
pakastani being searched

and i was always searched by either a minority (read a big black broad) or a muslim…

and i am ex military????

I need to start carrying
a BIG CARD stating

ARAB REPORTER..
LIBERAL
TERRORIST

hell then i might actually make my flight on time..

The TSA bureaucrats never liked the program. A new anti-gun administration will be a perfect excuse for them to let it quietly die.

Problem solved.

Just imagine how embarrassed a terrorist would be when he takes a bullet between the eyes by a blonde named Buffy. He’d be the laughingstock of Terrorist Hell.
AaronGuzman on March 18, 2009 at 1:34 PM

LOL!!

Buffy the Terrorist Slayer!!!

Not saying I don’t want pilots armed, because I do. But isn’t it extremely unsafe to unload a firearm on a plane and miss? As in if a wall or a window were punctured.

Terry Silver on March 18, 2009 at 11:26 AM

If you hit vital wiring, pneumatic or hydraulic tubing or rigid flight-controls it could be very bad. But the rapid decompression like from Goldfinger is a myth and a simple hole in the fuselage wouldn’t be any more dangerous than say riding in a Kennedy’s car.

Scratch that, less dangerous than riding with a Kennedy.

As a matter of fact, I’d rather be shooting the sh@t out of a presurrized jet cabin with my pistol than being within a ten foot cattle prod of a Kennedy and his car.

Knowing the democrats and obama / peloiz / murtha and the rest of these TERRORIST SUPPORTING DEMOCRATS..
I wouldn’t be surprised if they passed a new law
REQUIRING THE PILOTS TO HAND OVER AL THEIR WEAPONS
to the first Muslims they find on the aircraft..
and if there aren’t any then to throw the weapons out the window..
Morons..
jcila on March 18, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Only After they apologize to the moose limbs for having them in the first place!!!!

In any case, a secure cabin door is a far more effective deterrent.

starfleet_dude on March 18, 2009 at 11:55 AM

Just curious, do you have a cite for that 2% figure?

Even if it is that low, it would still be a deterrent, as the average terrorist wouldn’t know whether he was on one of the 2% of the planes with an armed flight crew or not.

I wouldnt be surpirsed if they passed a new lkaw
REQUIRING THE PILOTS TO HAND OVER AL THEIR WEAPONS
to the first muslims they find on the aircraft..

and if there arent any then to throw the weapons out the window..

Morons..

A reinforced door might slow down a committed individual but it won’t stop them. Further, they don’t hermetically seal the crew in the cockpit Even if you think a door is the answer – that doesn’t argue why the redundancy of an armed pilot is a bad idea. Armed pilots (no matter the number) are an inexpensive deterrent – actually and psychologically.

The most important factor for a hijacker is not his own death – it accomplishing the mission. Shouldn’t we do everything in our power to be at least as committed to their failure?

Add president Obama’s national intelligence czar, Dennis Blair, to the list of embattled top-level appointees. Blair, a retired four-star Navy admiral who attended Oxford with Bill Clinton, courted controversy among pro-Israel and anti-China activists this month when he named Charles (Chas) Freeman, an outspoken former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, to chair the National Intelligence Council, a committee of the government’s top intel analysts. After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other pols complained to the White House, Freeman abruptly withdrew. Now both Republican and Democratic intel experts are raising questions about another Blair pick: John Deutch, a former CIA director once accused of major security lapses, who’s been appointed to a temporary panel reviewing troubled, top-secret spy-satellite programs.

After Deutch resigned as CIA director in 1996, agency officials discovered he had stored hundreds of pages of classified files on his home computers, despite repeated warnings that they could be intercepted via the Internet. Because of the incident, Deutch was stripped of his high-level security clearances, and a criminal probe into the matter culminated in January 2001, when the ex-spy chief agreed to plead guilty to misdemeanor charges of mishandling classified material. (The next day, Clinton, in one of his final acts as president, pardoned him.) Given Deutch’s history, congressional officials want to know why Blair placed him on a panel so sensitive that its work should require an ultra-top-secret security clearance known as SI/TK (Special Intelligence/Talent-Keyhole). “The decision to grant [Deutch] a security clearance again is an affront,” GOP Sen. Kit Bond, the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told NEWSWEEK, adding that it “should be reversed immediately.” An agency spokesman acknowledged that former CIA director Michael Hayden restored Deutch’s security clearance a couple of years ago so Hayden could consult with him and other ex-spy chiefs on “classified CIA matters.” But Blair also has broad power to grant security clearances. (Deutch did not respond to requests for comment.)

Congressional critics, including some Democrats, say the two appointments illustrate Blair’s tin ear. As he vigorously defended Freeman, Blair also underplayed evidence of substantial financial ties between the Middle East Policy Council, a think tank Freeman used to run, and Saudi interests. Blair had told Congress that “no more than one 12th” of the council’s $600,000 budget came from the Saudi government. But Freeman told NEWSWEEK that the council had also received a $1 million endowment from Saudi King Abdullah in 2005, plus another $1 million pledge for operating support from Saudi Prince Alwaleed. “Director Blair was asked by the president to … seek the best expertise, and to provide the best intelligence,” says Wendy Morigi, a spokesperson for the intel czar. “That’s exactly what he’s doing.”

http://www.newsweek.com/id/189282

The only people wanting to disarm pilots, as the Times notes in its editorial, are anti-gun extremists … and terrorists.

Is there a difference between the two?

Both want power without giving a flying fornication about the safety and security of law-abiding citizens..

Okay, maybe that’s wrong…..at least the terrorists would care about the citizens if they were abiding Sharia law.