The panel said airplane passenger screening methods are disjointed. That’s an understatement. Luggage is rarely screened at all (the panel gave government agencies a “D” for their efforts there), and contract employees have easy access to planes, while uniformed professional pilots tell us the federal government now absurdly takes away the “Leatherman” tools that these pilots once carried in order to be able to free passengers from snagged seatbelts -- takes these common pocket tools away from pilots, mind you, who could easily crash their planes into mountainsides if they wanted to do harm.

What does the TSA think the pilots might do with these pocket tools, pull out their own jugular veins with the plier blades?

Instead of taking most of the steps initially recommended by the Sept. 11 panel, Congress and the shambling Frankenstein monster known as “Homeland Security” have done their best imitation of Nero fiddling while Rome burned, showering favored constituencies in a stinking but evenly distributed bath of porkfat, panel members said Monday.

“We’re frustrated, all of us -- frustrated at the lack of urgency in addressing these various problems,” said Thomas Kean, a Republican and former New Jersey governor who chairs the commission.

Rather than disbanding like most federally appointed commissions when their terms expired, Gov. Kean and the other nine commissioners have continued their work as a privately funded entity called the 9/11 Public Discourse Project.

Issuing their final assessment of the government’s performance, commissioners Monday gave failing grades in five areas, and issued only one “A” -- actually an A-minus -- for the administration’s efforts to curb terrorist financing. (Since benefits should always be weighed against costs, it’s unfortunate that commissioners were silent on how those efforts have impacted Americans’ own financial privacy, and how much of this initiative was really driven by the pursuit of IRS “compliance.”)

Most significant among the five “F”s awarded Monday was the one for distributing federal homeland security funding to states on a “pork-barrel” basis instead of based on a realistic ranking of risk.

The commission endorsed a House plan which would distribute money by risk, as opposed to the current Senate proposal -- approved by 71 senators -- which allocates money by risk only after all states are ensured funds.

That would be a start, though it’s unclear anything could make Homeland Security, as currently organized, quick-footed and effective.

It’s also curious that the commission has never asked why we need a separate “Department of Homeland Security,” when we already have a huge Department of “Defense.” Could it be the Department of “Defense” is really up to something other than “defending” us?

The Homeland Security Department awarded $2.5 billion in security grants to states last year. It appears that didn’t buy much security for anything but bureaucratic jobs.

Perhaps the cows of Iowa feel safer. Though even Bossie is starting to look nervous. She wants to know why those large women in the white shirts are pulling on their blue latex gloves ...