Christopher Ruddy
Wednesday, Sept. 10, 2003

"A growing body of credible intelligence indicates al Qaeda continues to develop plans for multiple attacks against targets in the US involving commercial aircraft, with some plans calling for hijacking airliners transiting near or flying over the continental United States – but not destined to land at US airports."

Comforting?

Why would terrorists – who might well think "been there, done that" – still be plotting to hijack civilian jets?

One reason may be that it creates real terror.

“We can strike and strike again, the way we struck before,” they may think. Another reason is that the terrorists see civilian airlines as still extremely vulnerable.

How could they accomplish a hijacking two years after Sept. 11, and after billions of dollars spent on homeland defense?

Easier than you might think, because the U.S. government has still not armed airline pilots.

Sure, Congress passed a law allowing pilots to carry guns.

But as Jeff Louderback writes on NewsMax today, the feds, true to form, have done everything to prevent the law's implementation.

The Transportation Security Administration even moved the pilots' firearms training center to a desert in rural New Mexico.

They might have tried New Zealand, but that would have been too obvious. So, two years after 9/11, we have 10,000 able and willing pilots, yet only a handful are armed.

The terrorists must be laughing.

In fact, so-called security measures may actually help an armed terrorist hijack a plane.

Most experts agree that this time hijackers won't rely on box cutters. They'll have guns that likely will be smuggled on board by fifth columnists at an airport.

When a pilot exits the cabin for a restroom visit, that cockpit is vulnerable. Three shots later and the cockpit crew is dead.

The cockpit is entered and the door shut. The “secure cockpit” now protects the hijackers as the unarmed passengers and attendants await their fate.

Under this plausible scenario, even the current rules for arming pilots would be of no avail. The pilots have to keep their guns in the cockpit in a lockbox.

“Excuse me, Mr. Terrorist, as I unlock my lockbox as required by the Transportation Safety Administration and rule #45610(d)."

Sorry, Charlie, you're dead and the plane is lost.

One of the most disturbing and telling responses after 9/11 was the failure to immediately authorize, deputize and arm every commercial airline pilot in the country.

This action not only would have restored confidence in flight almost immediately, but it also would have sent a message to the terrorists: Don't play with us.

But no. The liberals don't want guns in the hands of pilots. They may be unstable. (This is why I love liberals so much; they are so rational.)

Meanwhile, the public, two years later, still has little confidence in flying.

And Homeland Security has just put out an advisory.

A veteran American Airlines pilot and former Air Force officer recently told me the pilots don’t believe their planes are secure.

“They tell us we must protect the cockpit at all costs,” he said. “With what? I'm no Schwarzenegger. I'm dead,” he said with some resignation.

The pilot says the federal rules to arm himself are so onerous that few are applying for the permit.

Then there is the worry of shoulder-fired missiles. Such an attack on a U.S. plane is inevitable.

Estimates say it would cost $20 billion to arm every U.S. jet with the same decoy flares El Al uses to protect its jets from such missiles.

This is indeed a significant bill. But, as the AA pilot noted, the minute one plane goes down from such an attack, all the major airlines will go bankrupt, costing the public billions if not trillions of dollars.

Remember that old saying about an ounce of prevention?

Editor's note:
Have an Opinion About This? Click Here to Send an URGENT PriorityGram Today

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Homeland/Civil Defense