Business as usual is what the terrorists used on September 11th, 2001. It's really quite simple. A poor structure, engrained by custom, becomes immovable practice, blindly assumed by everyone to be correct and safe. Yet, an enemy looks at such business as usual, customary practices and quickly spots a pattern and uses it for destructive ends. Such business as usual, customary practices would be especially easy for an outsider (someone not from America) to see. In the case of 9-11, the customary practice was to surrender a hundred-million dollar airliner to hijackers on the grounds that behaving as sheep guarantees survival. How silly. Especially knowing that private think tanks had presented 9-11 scenarios to the government several times in the previous decades.

Most people have forgotten, or never knew, that 15 years ago in response to a flurry of hijacks we implemented a Sky Marshal program only to eviscerate it because it was "expensive". 9-11, in direct and indirect costs, amounts to at least $500 billion dollars. Thus, we have business as usual, customary practice as our modus operandi. I sometimes like to imagine what could have been.........

Once you understand business as usual, customary practice, the question becomes what can be done to frustrate the enemy -- be they terrorists or anyone else. The answer is: A lot. But, it demands dropping customary practice as a way of life. It means adopting open-ended competition and open-ended technological advances. Open up security to full competition in all manners of industry.

Can you imagine an airline advertisement like: Fly Competition Airways. Our "Shots Fired" technology automatically takes control of the plane for an emergency landing - no matter what the pilot or hijacker tries to do. Our titanium-reinforced cockpit doors, and fifty-five other security measures, make Competition Airways the safest airline bar-none. We are so safe, MegaInsurance Corp. insures every passenger for One Million Dollars if one of our planes is hijacked. Sadly, this will never be done when the highest standard of security is limited by business as usual, customary practice FAA requirement[1]. Or, imagine another advertisement for a slightly lower rung airline: WonderDog: Our trained canines detect all bombs. During every test our dogs sniffed-out every single bomb they encountered. Shouldn't you be flying with the big dogs? Or, this one: 2nd Amendment Airlines welcomes all; come to the airport 4 hours early and take our 2-hour Learn-To-Shoot class with complimentary gun and frangible munitions. You will be packing for your flight like never before! Of course such things can't be done when an Act of Congress mandates neutron/x-ray scanners for all baggage, and not when the Feds openly espouse gun control.

What is the current fuss about arming pilots? Trust me, if a pilot wanted to destroy the plane he could do so easily without being armed. Give me a break. Yet, some low-effort, ride-the-wave of public fear bureaucrats in Washington exploit that fear by fingering pilots! We could ask, why do such people have this decision-making authority in the first place?

Remember when air travel was regulated and it cost a fortune? The bureaucrats thought chaos would ensue if deregulation of routes and carriers were allowed. Obviously, deregulation worked and no chaos ensued. So, exactly what objection is raised to arming pilots? "They should be worrying about landing the plane." says the politico civil servant. Well, what if the cockpit door is breached, is the pilot expected to use harsh language and bare fists to protect himself, his passengers, and his plane? Why does Washington think it should micromanage the cockpit and air travel? Shouldn't being armed be a decision of the pilot and the airline? As we go to publication public pressure from citizens full of common sense has forced the government to potentially reverse its stand.

Rather than setting up a structure of ever-advancing security, the FAA and the alleged counter-terrorism experts create a bigger, more monolithic, business as usual, customary practice safety system. They wouldn't know thinking "out-of the-box" if they were hit over the head with a box, or a bomb.

It's all business as usual, customary practice; thanks to the New Deal and the run-to-Washington business quisling crowd. It is now expected that Washington should have its finger in every pie and we citizens get pissed off if they don't (alas, could we have a wee bit of the lazy, blaming -- path-of-least-resistance character trait?). With the exception of President Bush pursuing an aggressive foreign policy to destroy terrorist nests, everything else in Washington is moving in the business as usual, customary practice mode. It is so predictable it is beyond boredom -- ala the Patriot Act. Unfortunately, putting controls on 240 million mostly-law-abiding citizens is hardly a defense against terrorism. And, turning neighbour against neighbour via TIPS makes even less sense. I guess we just ignore Ben Franklin's prescient warning "They that can give up Essential Liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

The solution is, as it always has been, to bring the market and freedom of choice into the equation and aim it squarely at the goal. In this case the goal is safety and security. With market pressures at work, untold control points would be rapidly put in place to stop terrorist acts. With the best and brightest minds thinking "outside-the-box" or "outside-the-bubble", safety would increase week by week, month by month, until it would be suicidal for terrorists to try anything. …Fly Competition Airways for a Guaranteed Safe Trip.

Thanks to MR for edits.

Robert Da Roma

-------------------------------
(1)Of course today, the FAA does not prohibit such practices -- well we really don't know for sure -- but they certainly claim to the world and the consumers that "they" are the best for public safety.