A system that allows a man identified to U.S. officials as a potential threat -- by his own concerned father -- to board a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit with powerful explosives sewn into his underwear? That lets this man detonate his bomb as the plane prepares to land, igniting a potentially catastrophic fire? That depends on a young, athletic passenger to be seated nearby? That counts on this accidental hero to react quickly enough to thwart the terrorist's plans?
If that's how the system works, we need a new system.
[SNIP]
One solution -- expensive and intrusive, but effective -- would be to make use of new airport screening technology mandatory. Either a "whole-body imaging" scanner, which gives a much more detailed picture than a regular metal detector, or a "sniffer" machine, which analyzes trace chemicals, would have been likely to detect the explosives that Abdulmutallab allegedly was carrying.
[SNIP]
It is an ordeal for anyone from the developing world to obtain a visa to enter the United States. We already turn away multitudes. It will be no small task, but the system needs to be re-engineered to let the right people in and keep the dangerous people out.
When Abdulmutallab allegedly set his lap on fire, there were no air marshals on board to handle the situation. I realize it is not possible to provide an armed federal escort for every flight. But whatever algorithm officials use to determine which flights get marshals evidently needs improvement.
[SNIP]
Our enemy apparently sees its future in places such as Yemen -- or perhaps Somalia, a failed state for almost two decades, where militant fundamentalist Islam is on the march. The enemy's leadership is believed to be ensconced in remote areas of Pakistan, beyond the government's reach. Yet the United States will soon have about 100,000 troops chasing shadows in Afghanistan, where al-Qaeda's presence is now minimal.
I understand and appreciate the fear that if the Taliban were to take power again, it could invite al-Qaeda back into Afghanistan to set up shop. But I can't escape the uneasy feeling that we're fighting, and escalating, the last war -- while the enemy fights the next one.
Good article, Sanders. I saw a few minutes of FOX news earlier, and they were reporting that POTUS was talking tough about the whole situation. Apparently, his rhetoric was much more irate than was Janet's. Of course, the Dem strategist on the news program referenced Bush's administration - stating that the same thing could have easily happened under Bush. I often disagree with the FOX reporter, but tonight, he made a good point - stating that had this happened to Bush, the 24 hour news outlets would be spinning this as Bush's fault, every hour for the next two days. I tend to agree. Bush would have gotten the criticism for this. I haven't watched CNN, of course, but I gathered that they are not playing this as a failing of the Obama WH. No surprise there.
__________________
It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union.... Men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights and nothing less. ~Susan B. Anthony
Maybe it could have or maybe it couldn't have happenend under the Bush or Clinton administration , but the fact remains it didn't - that does seem to indicate that Obama's laxer policy toward the gWoT isn't deterring the terrorists at least. They seem to be more "empowered" now than ever.
The system did fail here, because there was no reason to have let somebody with that background board an airplane unchecked and unmonitored. The Dutch dude that intervened is the real hero of this story, think I'll post a picture of the underwear bomb:
Nothing left to say about this right now . . .
__________________
TBA
Page 1 of 1 sorted by
Hillarysworld -> National News -> "Air terrorism attempt reveals bigger 'system' failure" (Washington Post - Op Ed 12/29/09)