| From this week's House
Homeland Security Committee hearing on airline security
(Wednesday):
Chairman Christopher Cox (R-CA): The gentleman from
Georgia
Rep. John Linder (R-GA): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Umm.
We could probably spend, the entire budget of the United
States, on the airline industry. And still be missing
some pieces. Now, most of us don't believe that we will
ever see an airline hit a building, because the passengers
won't allow it. And if an airline is blown up in the
air, that is a very bad circumstance for 200 or 300
people. But it is not a catastrophe. Rep. Linder: I
would rather spend these fortunes looking for a catastrophe
. . . for nuclear weapons. (mumbling and inaudible)
Chairman Cox: Is the gentleman's microphone turned
on?
Rep. Linder: Yes.
Rep. Linder: We could spend everything we have protecting
airplanes, and still not protect everything. Umm. It
is my view that no airplane will ever hit a commercial
building -- which is the only value they have in taking
out large numbers of people. It is my view that passengers
won't allow that to happen. But it is entirely possible
that an airplane will blow up in the air, with some
(inaudible) or warning today, or some other technique.
But that is a very bad circumstance for about 200, 300
people. But it is not a catastrophe.
Rep. Linder: And if we are going to spend all this
money, we ought to be thinking about the 1 million,
or 2 million-person catastrophe that could be caused
by a nuclear device, or a biological device. I think
. . . we are doing an awful lot, and maybe too much,
on airlines right now. Spending $5 billion dollars a
year looking for toenail clippers and box cutters. We
should be looking for nuclear devices and I think we
should not spend all of our money on the airline industry
. . .
RAW STORY HOPES TO POST AN AUDIO
CLIP LATER TODAY... DEVELOPING....
Article originally published Apr. 29, 2005. |
