Is the credibility/patriotism of the "security experts" up for review?

[noise]

I know we are supposed to go along with the comforting notion that the TSA measures are overkill, an overreaction by government officials who are afraid of being labeled soft on terror or blamed if an attack happens.

Why should anyone believe this? What would it take for more people to question not just the security measures but also the motivation of the advocates of these measures?

For example since when is torture a good faith interrogation method? Answer: Never. The whole thing was garbage, most likely implemented for ulterior reasons. Yet we have been sold on the notion that panicked officials acted with good intent, motivated solely by their concern for the public.

Now we are hearing similar talking points about the TSA measures. We shouldn't complain because they are for our own good. The fact that former government officials like Chertoff are making good on the revolving door to turn their government work into a profit scheme is incidental.

[ixion]

1. The credibility of anyone who believes in a 'war' on terror

is suspect, in my opinion, since such a thing is entirely ludicrous.

[hobbit709]

2. "Expert"-a visiting S.O.B. from out of town.