Air Marshalls-Undercover or Well-dressed?

December 8, 2004

I know I've written ad nauseam about the problems with homeland security. With Tom Ridge now put out to pasture, hopefully, some of this nonsense will be taken care of. And not a moment too soon. While the Congress was debating a new intelligence-overhaul bill, the air marshal chief was giving his subordinates a dressing down about dressing up.

 

Thomas Quinn, director of the Federal Air Marshall Service decided to give his troops a little morale boost by making a surprise visit to Reagan National Airport on Thanksgiving Day. He reportedly blew a gasket when 30 of his undercover air marshals deplaned and only one was dressed to his satisfaction. Now, Quinn is assigning supervisors to airports nationwide to ensure air marshals are wearing business suits or sport coats.

 

Now let me get this straight. These air marshals are supposed to be undercover. That means blending in. Unless you're a business traveler, most people don't wear business attire on airplanes any longer. So, now the terrorists may not know exactly who is an air marshal on any given flight but they know for sure it's one of the 3 or 4 guys with a coat on! This is maddening! What possible difference could it make if these air marshals are dressed like slobs? They're not going to make Quinn look bad because we don't know who they are. If we do, they're not doing their jobs. Are we to expect an air marshal spread in the next GQ?

 

While the head of FAMS was fretting over travel fashion, Congress was busy putting window dressing on a so-called intelligence-overhaul bill. Congressmen like Jim Sensenbrenner wanted true immigration reform included in the bill. After all, that's where the real problem is. Any bill that doesn't address the humongous whole in our borders is akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. “These provisions [immigration reform] are not too controversial -- they are vital,” said Sensenbrenner, who led the opposition to the watered-down intelligence bill. “How could we face grieving families in the future and tell them that while we might have done more, the legislative hurdles were just too high? I, for one, cannot, and I, therefore, oppose this bill.”

 

President Bush has promised to tackle immigration reform when Congress meets again in January. Will it be too late? Let's hope not, but one strategically-placed nuclear suitcase bomb could drastically alter the dynamics of our anti-terror strategy. If there's one lesson we learned from September 11 th it's this: We cannot wait for another attack. We must be pro-active in thwarting any future attempts to hit us within our borders. Fighting terror abroad is all fine and good and necessary in the broad sense of the war on terrorism. But fighting terrorists in Iraq while other terrorists tip-toe across our back yard is bad policy. It's much like setting up a neighborhood crime watch while leaving your own house unlocked.

 

I'm a big fan of George W. Bush. I voted for him both times and I believe he's infinitely more effective on homeland security than either Al Gore or John Kerry would ever be. However, the illegal immigration issue might prove to be his Achilles' heel. Imagine all of his hard work in Afghanistan and Iraq suddenly going up in a mushroom cloud because a terrorist was able to sneak across our porous borders and zap us with a nuke. What a shame that would be.