There has been much controversy in recent years over airport security. Is it simply to keep the public safe, or is it compromising the average person's privacy?
The drastic security measures that airlines have enacted since the September 11, 2001 incidents have turned airports into some of the most heavily guarded and monitored areas in the world. To read about some of the safety measures taken at airports, take a look at this link.
Stunningly, air travel is actually the safest transportation method in the country, at only 200 deaths per year in the United States. You would think, based on the security measures at airports, that traveling by plane were extremely risky. On the contrary; 40,000 people in the U.S. die in automobile accidents per year, yet no one is clamoring for car companies to build safer cars, or for road contractors to build safer roads. At the same time, most people view airport security as a necessary measure to prevent terrorism.
Terrorism is cited as the main reason for heightened security, but I have some questions about whether terrorism is as much of a threat as it is perceived to be. For one thing, we have known for years that the military has staged false flag attacks in the past (attacks carried out by the military but blamed on other entities) for agenda purposes. (Osama bin Laden had been a CIA asset for years before 9/11, by the way.) Additionally, over the years, we have learned more and more reasons to doubt the official story of 9/11. If 9/11 didn't occur as a result of terrorism, then there is less reason to have heavy security. As some food for thought, I will list my top five reasons to question 9/11, although there are many, many more.
1. According to official flight records kept by the Federal Aviation Administration, American Airlines Flights 11 and 77 (the planes that allegedly hit the north tower and Pentagon, respectively), never took off that day.
2. I have major questions about World Trade Center Building 7. How did this building collapse into its own footprint at free-fall speed without being struck by a plane?
3. How were the passengers of the jets able to make cell phone calls? Here is a USAToday article from 2004 that says new technology was being developed to allow people to have cellular reception on American Airlines planes. According to the official story, people were able to make calls from AA jets three years before the technology to do so was installed.
4. According to the official story, one hijacker's passport was found in a pile of rubble minutes after the towers fell. The buildings were completely turned to dust so that not a single human body part, piece of office equipment from the towers, or frame of steel remained; yet, a small booklet survived unscathed? It is unthinkable that a small paper book could have survived such a massive explosion, especially in near-mint condition.
5. How did everyone in the major media know that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks within minutes?
According to this evidence, it appears that the media covered up the facts about 9/11 to push the government agenda across. If there were real terrorists intent on killing Americans because they "hate our freedom," there are plenty of other ways to do damage other than hijack airplanes. The government can't keep us safe from everything, and the hyperactive security at airports, in my opinion, does not make us any safer. Why aren't there similar security measures for people boarding buses and trains?
Just say "no" to heavy airport security. As the old saying goes, "those who give up their freedom for security deserve neither."
Just say "no" to heavy airport security. As the old saying goes, "those who give up their freedom for security deserve neither."
