Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] airport security

["Vern Green" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Thanks for the reply, these are all good points that are supported by the facts. So Bush's administration is clearly guilty about knowing about the attacks. Now what should he had done had he known?

 

Unless I am unaware of anything, Clarke's warning was general in nature. Everyone claimed that attacks were coming and that the weapon might be planes. But there was no intellegence at the time that said these planes, or these people were going to perform the attack. So the question comes down, with a general threat of attack, that attack involving planes, what should the president have done to act on those vague warnings?

 

I would argue now that thanks to changes like the patriot act and the office of homeland security, we are more on top of things. Is it perfect? No, but at least now people are acting on the oddness that occurs like you described. The question still stands, would the American people dealt with the creation of Homeland Security office, the long airport lines, the Patriot Act passage, the monitoring of phone calls BEFORE the attacks? The battles are being fought now against these things AFTER the attack.

 

On 9/19/07, Jonathan King <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:

On 9/19/07, Vern Green <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> You know the other interesting thing in all of this is how I hear people
> saying Bush could have done more to prevent 9-11. I am still befuddled as to
> what people think he could have done.

No time today to chat, but in brief:

He was told coming in that Al Qaeda, who had just bombed the USS Cole,
would be a major threat. Richard A. Clarke, Clinton's
counter-terrorism coordinator who was explicitly held over in the Bush
administration, repeatedly warned of the grave possibility of pending
attacks. But the official policy was that drug interdiction, not
counter-terrorism, would be the leading policy in this sphere. That's
why we gave millions to the Taliban in 2001 before 9/11.

> Just look at the complaints lodged now
> about airport security and think about how those complaints would have been
> amplified if these measures had been put into place before the attacks.

It honestly would have taken less than that to notice a bunch of guys
with expired visas were taking flying lessons where they considered
the landing lesson optional. It's true that US intelligence made an
uncoordinated response to the (now very obviously) suspicious events
before 9/11, but there would have been a lot more done if real
attention had been paid to reports, like (say) the top-secret security
briefing of August 6, 2001 that was entitled "Bin Laden detemined to
stike in U.S."

The idea is to be on top of things before it gets to the airport
screening stage. That is mostly theater.

jking

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion

-- 
Thanks
F Vernon Green 
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion