How Is It That The Security Is Being Laxed Today?

Tweet

I am sure all of you would have already read about the recent "Syringe Bomber" appearing on the flight from Amsterdam to Detroit. On how this Nigerian Abdulmutallab was thought to have boarded KLM Flight 588 in Lagos, transferring on to Northwest Airlines Flight 253 at Schiphol airport in Amsterdam, which departed with 278 passengers on board on Christmas Day for Detroit nearly succeeded igniting himself and exploding the plane. In the first place, how did he manage to bring so much explosives with him on board? It is really beyond my expectation that security could take a backseat here. The explosive strapped to his leg which was pentaerythritol tetranitrate, an unstable explosive related to nitrogylcerin, that is both colourless and odourless were not detected in any of the security checks before boarding is just appalling. Whatever happened to the state of the art x-ray machines? Then, I am wondering how a man 'known’to international security officials got to get on board with "minimal" security checks? How would he have gone through airport security in Lagos airport – which cleared a US security audit only last month – and faced minimal further checks in the transit lounge in Holland? Why should checks be minimal for passengers in transit when it should be full and comprehensive? Most of all, why this Abdulmutallab was not put on the “no fly” list? From this incident, I felt that there is still a gaping loophole in the measures to stop air terrorism and that there is really a need to standardize measures, procedures and protocols. It is really telling that government security agencies are not clicking or rather looking at each other eye to eye and connecting at vital issues. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1238574/Syringe-bomber-flight-253-detonates-explosives-strapped-leg-hypodermic-needle.html