The following are excerpts of recent editorials taken from US newspapers.The Herald, Everett, Washington on Operation TIPS.<$>

It was a bad idea from the start. And thanks to the U.S. Postal Service official rejection of Operation TIPS, the Homeland Security Official program will hopefully get some much-needed revamping.Here’s how the government program is apparently supposed to work: people with jobs that put them in others’ homes, neighbourhoods, on the highways and in other businesses are asked to report suspicious activity to the government. So, the cable guy at your house could be checking out things and reporting anything he thinks is amiss.

The Justice Department had to know this would not go over well with the public, let alone the slew of liabilities it could bring. It creates an unfortunate situation for everyone, especially those hard-working people just trying to deliver the mail or packages or get through the workday. What if their “spying” put them in a dangerous situation? Would they be compensated for this extra work? How would it impact their jobs? So much for customer service. The impact on businesses likely would be negative.

The Justice Department should focus its coordination and communication efforts on making sure all law enforcement agencies are working together to sort information. Homeland security will be most successful if the people paid to protect us know what’s going on in their towns and across the country.Daily Herald, Arlington Heights, Illonis, on Pledge of Allegiance.<$>

When Michael Newdow’s effort to ban the Pledge of Allegiance from his daughter’s school failed at the trial court level, he appealed — and won.But that should not give him a false sense of confidence in another legal manoeuvre to strike mention of God from a government-related event.

He is appealing dismissal of a lawsuit that claims inclusion of a prayer at President Bush’s 2001 inauguration violated the Constitution.

The district court made the right decision in dismissing the inauguration prayer case — just as it did in dismissing the pledge case, no matter what the three-judge appellate panel said.

Courts have upheld the constitutionality of prayers to open sessions of Congress and state legislatures. Surely, the “opening” of a presidential administration is entitled to the same ceremonial consideration.

Just as astronauts travelling between Earth and the moon were permitted to read from the Bible — even while riding on a taxpayer-funded spaceship and talking over public radio waves — the president is permitted to have a prayer during inauguration ceremonies.

The lower court’s dismissal of Newdow’s lawsuit should stand.Houston Chronicle, on the arming of airline pilots.

The US House recently passed legislation that would allow airline pilots who receive weapons training to have guns in the cockpit. Such a tactic, allowed on some airlines prior to September 11, probably would neither increase nor decrease flight safety.However, the issue of guns for pilots is showing signs of overshadowing and interfering with more important efforts to ensure safe air travel for Americans.

Many US airports will not meet the year-end deadline for bolstering security, including the scanning of all bags for explosives. An added requirement that airport officials devise ways to ensure that armed pilots are genuine would only delay implementation of more important security measures.

An official with the airline pilots union told the Chronicle that it would be years before cockpit doors are armoured enough to thwart the entry of a fanatical terrorist. Bush administration officials say pilots should concentrate on flying the plane, but the union official reasonably asked, “What if the terrorists don’t get the memo?”

If the Senate takes up the House bill, it should reject the broad release of airlines from liability and retain provisions to train flight attendants in self-defence. This, coupled with passengers’ willingness to resist hijackers, might prove to be the best defence against suicide terrorists.