Mr.President, Fire Somebody. Anybody

In response to the Christmas "underpants bomber," an outraged President Obama called his security and intelligence people together. The headline on the front page of the Los Angeles Times the next day read, "Obama gives his team earful over foiled plot." Our intelligence and security measures failed and almost led to a disaster, and his response was to give the security people "an earful?" I guess he rejected the more severe punishment of giving them a timeout and making them sit in the corner. Mr. President, make it seem like you're taking some kind of strong action. Fire somebody.

It doesn't even matter to me which official he fires. I realize that might just be a symbolic act, but maybe we need that kind of symbolism now. Besides, we all know people who've gotten fired for doing far less than almost letting somebody blow up an airplane. Maybe we had a new boss who wanted to "clean house." Maybe there was some kind of misunderstanding. Maybe the job just wasn't right for us. But I doubt that we know anyone other than a government official who let someone on an airplane who had a bomb in his underwear.

When I was flying home from Chicago with my wife and son after Thanksgiving, we were stopped at the security conveyor belt and the screener confiscated something of ours. What was this dangerous item? It was a container of cream cheese. We had bought bagels and cream cheese to eat on the plane. So why did they take it from us? Was it a case of "possession of cream cheese with intent to schmeer?" Apparently it was in a container that they considered a couple of ounces too large. My point is, we couldn't take cream cheese on a plane, but this guy could get through wearing a bomb? And the president's response is just to give his people "an earful?" Fire somebody.

It just feels like a bad case of déjà vu. After 9/11, we were told that security was going to be beefed up, that the safety of the American people was the number one priority of the President, etc. Then we learned that our government had information prior to the 9/11 attacks that could have been used to possibly prevent the attacks. And now, after the almost-tragedy on Christmas, we've learned that governmental departments had enough information that could have -- and should have -- prevented the guy from getting on that plane.

The difference is that this time our president actually admitted that there was a failure in our "intelligence community." I guess that kind of honesty, that "transparency," is progress, but that doesn't make us safer. Maybe firing and replacing some people wouldn't really make us safer, either. But maybe it would.

Based on the past, what we'll probably see are changes at the airport security stations. There may be longer lines. Screeners will probably go through our luggage more thoroughly. They might install those machines that reveal vague images of our bodies to a screener. Maybe there will be something dramatic. It happened after the "shoe bomber." Because of that one guy, everyone had to take off their shoes at the airport, and then the government could point to our shoelessness as proof that they were taking terrorism seriously. I'm sure you can imagine what they might make us take off because of the "underpants bomber."

Obviously, I'm not against better screening at the airport. However, we need to stop terrorists before they get to the airport, before they fill up their shoes or their underwear with explosives. And it's possible for us to do that. The president agrees. He said, "The U.S. government had sufficient information to have uncovered the plot and potentially disrupt the Christmas Day attack, but our intelligence community failed to connect those dots."

They didn't "connect those dots?" So, fire somebody and get someone who's better at connecting dots. I know that might not improve things, but it has a better chance of being effective than taking away our cream cheese.

What Friendly Skies?

Here I go again, complaining about airline travel. But I'm not writing about my most recent experience because it was so horrible and unlike what happens to most people when they fly. I'm writing it because it seems to be more and more typical. These days, airline travel is like when you start to eat a terrible meal at someone's house when you're there for the first time. It's hard to believe, but it just keeps getting worse and worse.

Recently, I was going from Los Angeles to Minneapolis with a stop in Denver. Soon after I got to the gate in L.A., I learned that my flight had been cancelled. A fairly impolite agent sent me to what might justifiably be called, "the ninth circle of hell" -- customer service. Eventually, someone helped me and changed my flight. Unfortunately, that flight was soon cancelled, too.

This time, I called the airline from my cell phone and the person I spoke to changed my flights. I asked him if I needed a paper ticket. He said that I didn't, because now I had "an e-ticket." Since my bag hadn't left L.A. yet, he suggested that I go back out through security and down to the baggage desk to let them know about the flight change so my luggage would be on the flight with me. I did so, and the baggage people made the change.

Next I went to security, where they stopped me because I didn't have a paper ticket. So I raced to another line where I got a paper ticket, went through security once again (where they confiscated the overpriced bottle of water I had purchased earlier when I had been on "the other side"), and went to my new gate.

Finally, I got on the plane, breathed a sigh of relief, and put on my seatbelt. A few minutes later, a passenger ran off the plane. A flight attendant went after him, then came back to explain that he had accidentally gotten onto the wrong plane. Gotten onto the wrong plane? How? I couldn't bring my water through security but this guy was able to get on the wrong plane?

A week later I was back at the Minneapolis airport, heading for home. I quickly learned that my flight from Minneapolis to Denver was cancelled. The gate agent was too tired and too rude to help me. I certainly didn't want to go to that place whose name still makes me shudder – "customer service."

Desperate, I dragged myself to the "Red Carpet Club," took out a credit card, and asked, "How much does it cost to join? I know if I join, you'll help me." The person at the counter completely threw me off base -- she was helpful and nice.

Her name was Carol Babel, and I hope mentioning that will get her a commendation rather than a condemnation. She took one look at the bedraggled passenger in front of her and said, "You don't have to join for me to give you a little help." She quickly changed my flights. I thanked her profusely and went to my gate.

After waiting there for about twenty minutes, I heard someone call my name. It was Carol. She had a boarding pass in her hand and said that she had come up with a better plane for me. Unbelievable, right? Give her a first class ticket to Europe. Give her a private plane. Or at least, give her next Thursday off.

It seemed doubly special that she had acted so nicely because nobody else had. I know, I know. I hadn't been tortured. And as I said, I'm aware that it's the kind of thing that happens to millions of people every day. But does that make it okay?

Several friends think the airline should do something to make up for my bad experience. What do you think?

A year's membership in that Red Carpet Club would be a good gift. A letter of apology seems appropriate. And some friends said the airline should give me a free flight somewhere. They all seem like fine ideas, but there's a problem with that free flight thing. If they give it to me, that means I actually have to try to fly somewhere again.