Drudge surrenders

I'm not quite sure what to make of Matt Drudge's decision to throw in the towel at this point (except for the likelihood that the Times will feel obliged to run a column about it pretty soon). What's the tipping point here: People in modest clothing dictated by their faith being subjected to patdown searches? The possible association of the religious with substate political violence? As terrorist victories go, this looks pretty small-scale compared with, say, convincing the media system and a large chunk of the civil power structure to let the executive branch get away with the destructive, tangential and almost certainly illegal invasion of Iraq. But perhaps that's just me.

It's been true for some time that if we wanted Israeli-level airline security, we could have it. I don't think we want it.* For some reason, I also don't think Drudge's goal here is to help people make rational interpretations about the relationship between risk and the level of intrusiveness they're willing to accept. Editors are free to accept his instructions at face value. Or they may laugh them out of the building.

* I don't know. Get a seat behind a Baptist tour group from North Carolina on a flight to Ben-Gurion sometime and tell me what you think.