I hate to be repetitive, but reading things like the new TSA regulations really burns me up:

1. During flight, the aircraft operator must ensure that the following procedures are followed:
1. Passengers must remain in seats beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.
2. Passenger access to carry-on baggage is prohibited beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.
3. Disable aircraft-integrated passenger communications systems and services (phone, internet access services, live television programming, global positioning systems) prior to boarding and during all phases of flight.
4. While over U.S. airspace, flight crew may not make any announcement to passengers concerning flight path or position over cities or landmarks.
5. Passengers may not have any blankets, pillows, or personal belongings on the lap beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.

(Via Glenn Reynolds.)
In other words, the idea is to punish the passengers.
Excuse me, but the passengers are the ones who stop the terrorists!
So why punish them? Unless the goal is…
Oh, I get it. At least, I’m almost tempted to get it.
(Except I should probably remember Hanlon’s Razor. These days it’s tough.)
MORE: Glenn Reynolds links Rand Simberg

Once again, airline passengers 1, Transportation Security Administration (TSA) 0.

And Professor Bainbridge wants to know when we’ll rebel:

Maybe the terrorists figure they win everytime we in the West spend millions of man-hours being hassled, inconvenienced, and generally put upon by a myriad of stupid security measures.
So here’s my question: When are we going to rebel and demand a sensible set of precautions?

This does call for rebellion. But how? Tea Parties at your local TSA?
I also see that some local Detroit area residents claim they witnessed the terrorist being boarded without a passport.
But that’s no fair! They won’t let me board international flights without a passport!
Hmmph!
You’d think the restrictions they apply to us regular passengers could at least be applied to terrorists.
MORE: According to Reuters, the Dutch police are checking out the claim that Abdulmuttallab was allowed to board without a passport.

A U.S. couple on the flight, Kurt and Lori Haskell, told Reuters and other news agencies that they saw a tall, well-dressed man aged about 50 with the suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab on Friday morning at Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport.
The Haskells have claimed the man spoke for Abdulmutallab and attempted to get him aboard Northwest flight 253 without a passport.
“At this moment we have no information on whether there was another guy,” the military police spokesman said. “We are checking all clues and information we get.”
The spokesman added that the military police and the counter-terrorism agency NCTb were reviewing CCTV video and other evidence to see if the accomplice story bears out.
The military police have already said Abdulmutallab did not go through passport control at Schiphol when he arrived from Lagos.
But the spokesman said it would be unlikely the man could board the plane without showing his passport at some point in the boarding process.

Unlikely? Why? Because Lagos officials are reliable?
I think that if he had a passport, it would have been found by now. But if he had a passport and didn’t want to show it, that might explain the attempt to escort him through.