To be clear, I believe it would have been amazing for "authorities" to have been able to avert this act by the Gentleman Jihadist, so I am restrained about casting blame for what might have happened. (I'm also henceforth restrained from whining about not being able to take my 3.5 oz tube of toothpaste in my carry-on). That being said, those dismissive of the dangers we face and shrilly opposed to almost any preemptive security measures need to own certain aspects of this threat.
For example, in a NYTimes report we read:("Security System Failed, Napolitano Acknowledges" - NYTimes.com):
Privacy advocates, for example, have tried to stop or at least slow the introduction of advanced checkpoint screening devices that use so-called millimeter waves to create an image of a passenger’s body, so officers can see under clothing to determine if a weapon or explosive has been hidden. Security officers, in a private area, review the images, which are not stored. Legislation is pending in the House that would prohibit the use of this equipment for routine passenger screening.And I guess this is the rub in wanting to treat Jihadism as a criminal matter. Innocent until proven guilty falls short in a war context. But it surely fits the squishy, soft-headed mindset of today's Left. Not to mention it's an awfully easy pose to strike for the party who is not sitting in the Oval Office. But let's be clear that we dodged a bullet in this instance.
To date, only 40 of these machines have been installed at 19 airports across the United States — meaning only a tiny fraction of passengers pass through them. Amsterdam’s airport has 15 of these machines — more than just about any airport in the world — but an official there said Sunday that they were prohibited from using them on passengers bound for the United States, for a reason she did not explain. (emphasis added)
*President Obama--who is on vacation, hasn't said much, and that's okay from my perspective; though I don't recall a parenthetical statement such as "the White House Press office traveling with the President" in reports about Bush. Correct me if I'm wrong. Gosh, does this guy ever stop working on behalf of the American people?
2 comments:
I don't really see what the complaint is here...how is this the fault of liberalism or not shouting to the rafters about a GWOT?
Are you saying we should employ military personnel at airports? Maybe the US Air Force should nationalize all airlines and place PFCs as flight attendants?
Read the whole article.
And come to think of it, nationalizing all airlines seems to be a clever proposal to reduce costs, increase access and put profiteering BigAir in its place. Or at least we could have at least one dirt-cheap (for the consumer) airline that was owned by the gov't. But I digress.
Post a Comment