Does this make you feel safer?:

A U.S. consular official originally denied terrorism suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab a visa to enter the United States in 2004 after finding false information on his application, but that official was overruled by a supervisor, according to senior government sources.
Because the 2004 situation was considered resolved, it was not revisited in 2008, when Abdulmutallab received a second U.S. visa, which allowed him to board a Detroit-bound airliner on Dec. 25, officials acknowledged. A senior Republican lawmaker said the reversal of the 2004 decision was a missed opportunity to keep him out of the country.

One more example of how a tougher approach to normal immigration enforcement can yield security benefits. NRO wrote about the visa applications of some of the 9/11 hijackers (along with scans of the actual documents), and they too contained lots of false information, blanks fields, and red flags that should have resulted in at least closer scrutiny if not outright refusals — on ordinary, non-security-related grounds.

And the solution is not just “far more visa security officers at embassies and missions around the world to screen applicants using a law enforcement mind-set,” as lawmakers told the Post regarding the panty-bomber case, but rather removing the entire visa function from the State Department’s control.