Where does the Times find these goobers?

The Times will apparently print any uninformative, ill-researched and plain wrong article that grabs attention. Case in point: a travel article advising people to stay away from the U.S. because gaining entry is too tough. Really? Turns out the writer means that it's not really tough to get in, but rather going through security and immigration is a pain in the ass. He then fails to really explain any of these new difficulties in detail or list anything that sounds significantly different from what it's like getting into the UK, and the only things that sound bad are the things that he imagines are the thoughts going on in some official's head, or things that could maybe sorta happen.

He mentions "A preflight e-interrogation," which he fails to explain and, based on his attitude, probably is an out-of-proportion way of describing answering a couple of questions online. He also dreams up "an outside chance of a rubber-gloved rectal rummage." Believe me, the guards don't want to give a booty check anymore than you want to get one, and that kind of thing isn't done randomly like a bag check. Then the writer suggests other places people can go instead, which he presumably thinks have more lax security. Because you'd rather get through the airport fast than feel safe? Good luck with that.

I personally don't have a stake in where the lamo travel writer or anywhere else chooses to go on holiday. Go where it seems fun; go where you can afford; go where you can indulge in the things that relax you, be it shopping or skiing. I'm not saying you should go to America, though I think a weekend shopping in New York when you're getting 2-for-1 on your pounds sounds divine. But wherever you go, it's going to be a hassle getting through the airport. If it's not, that's the time to worry.