Soldiers walk "point " daily all over Afghanistan and Iraq, accepting their share of the risk inherent in the life their unit is assigned.
Today, the talking heads and the television newsies spent the morning (on all channels) seeking to torture from the language an assurance that air travel for the public (read themselves) could be made 100% safe from ANY sort of attack devised by devised by "fiendish" jihadi minds. This goal was never quite reached. John Brennan, the president's terrorism man, was not so foolish as to give an assurance like that.
No security system devised by the mind of man can be 100% secure against the minds of other men. There will always be some chance, however slight, that your perfumed hindquarters may be in a first class seat when the cry goes up, "Allahu !Akbar!" and that could be the last thing you ever hear. Polticians can fuss and slander each other. Consultants can continue to make seas of money working on airline security, but the possibility will always be there.... "Allahu Ak..." (Apparent silence, perhaps replaced by a rushing sound on the way from 30,000 feet to the surface)
Sooo, do you really want to travel by air? Bin Laden reckons that you don't, really... but that greed or circumstance will force you to continue and that being the case he has gotten a tremendous "bang for the buck" in this operation. He will continue with this line of endeavor, and hopes that you deploy a few hundred thousand more troops to places like Yemen. pl
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/middleeast/04yemen.html?hp
If the U.S. closes its embassy in in every place where "al Qaida" waves a flag or "issues a threat" how long 'til you close down the state department?
Isn't the U.S. is again acting EXACTLY the way the supposed Osama Bin Laden wants it to act?
Posted by: b | 03 January 2010 at 01:46 PM
Crossing the boarder before 9/11/2001
I with wife drive down to the North Dakota/Canadian boarder. Time 1:00 PM.
Officer: Hello sir, where are you headed?
Me: Just a few miles across the boarder for a going away party.
Officer: Who are you planning to visit?
Mike Wannel's daughter is leaving for university in Toronto, and they are having a going away party.
Officer: You're late!
Me: I'm late?
Officer: Yes her aunty came through here an hour ago with a bunch of food so I'm guessing you're late for lunch.
Me: Ya, I guess we should hurry there.
Officer: It's too bad Julie is moving away.
Me: Yes she's a very nice girl.
Officer: And her mom's real nice too.
Me: Ya, Wendy's real nice.
Officer: But her uncle is a bit of a character
Me: Ya, I think he went a little off in the Vietnam war.
(This conversation continues for good 10 min.)
My Wife (whispering to me): We have to get going!!!
Me to Officer: Well I better be getting along
Officer: Must be a great meal at the Wannel's
Me to Officer while putting car in drive but pressing the brake: Yup, I guess I better get there.
Officer: That Wendy sure knows how to cook.
Me: Yup, guess I'll just be going now.
Then I gently take pressure off the brake, waiting for the officer to say some thing like "OK you're free to go", or "Have a good meal sir, drive carefully", or "Sir, don't move your car until I instruct you to!" but he never does, and I just slowly drive away.
He's still standing there as I check the rear view mirror.
Those were the days.
Posted by: Farmer Don | 03 January 2010 at 02:02 PM
A lone gunman terrorized Washington, DC, a lone ineffectual bomber has terrorized the USA air industry -- is this a sign of great unsecurity within the populance?
As 30 000+ die on the roads yearly, perhapws it is only the regularly flying elite which is trembling. Whatever the case, a $1000 expense can disrupt a once great society. Sad!
Posted by: N. M. Salamon | 03 January 2010 at 02:05 PM
"On Fox News Saturday, guest Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney (retired) offered a radical solution for improving national security. "We have to use profiling," he said, "And I mean be very serious and harsh about the profiling." Then McInerney proposed the United States should strip search all 18-28 year old Muslim men at airports."
I WONDER: HOW's Mc. and his ilk going to identify us Muslims? Unless he proposes we start carrying an ID that spells our religious affiliation just like in ..........LEBANON!?!
Posted by: F | 03 January 2010 at 02:07 PM
b,
Yes, our current elites seem to make a mockery of "Home of the Brave".
Posted by: Thomas | 03 January 2010 at 02:16 PM
Given all the fearful quivering about those "fiendish jihadis" on display today, I think the only way I'll be brave enough to endure the TSA and a jam packed airliner is if a sacrificial government bureaucrat meets a timely end and gets fired. I nominate our ever courageous anti-terrorism tzar, John Brennan.
OK, snark off. But I mean it about Brennan. Instead of talking today, he should be taking the fall. After all, isn't he the guy who helped dream up the "vaunted" CTC? And advocate data mining and profiling techniques to identify those fiendish jihadis? And extraterritorial assassination programs to blot them out before they fought us here? Seems to me he should return to the world of contracted intelligence services (and passport checking scandals).
SP
Posted by: ServingPatriot | 03 January 2010 at 03:06 PM
Ron Paul was labelled an anti-semite the other evening on the Larry King show by Ben Stein, his crime was to say we are being attacked because we occupy their lands - the same conclusion reached by the 911 Commission. I don't suppose Ben Stein will be happy till every single person over there gets killed by us. I want a draft back.
We had a terrorist attack that didn't work but it did work, next stop - Yemen!!!
Posted by: Bill Wade, NH | 03 January 2010 at 03:21 PM
Col Lang,
Forgive me if I sound conspiratorial, but a week or so before Christmas, US involvement in Yemen's civil war(s) became public. Then, the terrorist incident.
Now, its not as if there are no Muslims that would ahppily blow up a plane. But at the same time, the Gulf of Tonken incident never actually happened, Iraq didn't have WMD, the Spanish didn't blow up the Maine, and Iraqi soldiers didn't toss babies out of incubators.
Yet we were told with straight face that all those things did happen.
Of course this does not mean the same about this incident, but I'm way past believing everything I hear from the government.
Posted by: Lysander | 03 January 2010 at 03:28 PM
Lysander,
Yes. I can understand that. Pl
Sent wirelessly via BlackBerry from T-Mobile.
Posted by: turcopolier | 03 January 2010 at 03:32 PM
SP. I first knew him in SA when he was dog-robbing for Alan Fiers. Nothing much has changed. Pl
Sent wirelessly via BlackBerry from T-Mobile.
Posted by: turcopolier | 03 January 2010 at 03:35 PM
Pat,
Wishing to achieve 100% security at the airport is much like the flawed French belief that the Maginot Line would protect them from another German invasion. Those crafty Germans failed to follow the game plan of the French and attacked through the Ardennes. I suspect UBL and AQ will merely do the same. Nothing is assured in this world except birth, death, and taxes!
Hank Foresman
Posted by: HJFJR | 03 January 2010 at 03:40 PM
The threat from AQAP plus the Somalis are symbolically sending reinforcements, so symbolically we are closing our embassy?
I wonder how this looks in Riyadh, Cairo, Tel-Aviv, and Tehran.
UBL is showing us how foolish we are in surging in AfPak when we are so venerable everywhere else.
Surge in Yemen? Somalia? Hit Iran?
UBL must be smiling so must Ahmadinejad, Hu, et al
Posted by: Jose | 03 January 2010 at 03:49 PM
First of all, this Farouk guy is obviously not the brightest bulb in the box. I don't understand how using liquid detonator will ever work. Of course all he ever gonna get is a big fizzle plus smoke no matter at most. So this scheme should be encouraged because it's cheaper than actually capturing a terrorist. The guy with his wee-wee burned in the middle of smoke is the terrorist. Get the state dept. a free airplane ticket program for all terrorists who want to burn their wee-wee in public. I for one think this should be incorporated into FBI trick book for capturing terrorist.
Everybody here should chuckle in glee. This is the type of thing you smack your high school chemistry lab partner upside the head because he didn't read class note before making big smoke in the room.
------
on to more serious item:
Where did he get the PETN? This is very serious if al qaeda can manufacture high quality PETN on their own. This part should be taken seriously because a capable terrorist group will then be able to make things like semtex and plastic explosive. combined with shaped charge and soft plastic, we are talking about never before terrorism capability. Think IRA level of destruction here. But they don't do suicide bombing. So, ... do the math.
One thing that the Pakistani has yet to realize about their taliban buddy. The Iraq invasion has given af-pak taliban IED capability not on ISI trick book. And Pakistan has no way stopping well made IED/explosive. So the Pakistani better get serious about fighting al qaeda, instead of joking around and keeping it as puppy for controlling US involvement/scaring India.
------
I for one personally think, it is time to rethink international air travel. How people move. The hub and spokes/giant airports, moving people around like cattle over 20-30,000 miles...
Air travel system has to be redesigned.
Nevermind terrorism. Things like epidemic spread is far more dangerous for everybody.
Time for more sensible solution, instead of throwing even more silly security theater that does nothing to improve travel security.
Posted by: curious | 03 January 2010 at 05:20 PM
What does 'dog-robbing' mean? I can't find a translation anywhere ...
Posted by: confusedponderer | 03 January 2010 at 05:29 PM
COL,
Well, I cannot say I am surprised. One wonders how close Cliff and John remain these days? I wonder if they keep up with Ollie too?
And to Lysander, I too have some questions about this breakdown. Of course, the Yemeni civil war has more to do with the Houthis up in Sa'ada (and involves Saudi Arabia) than it ever had to do with AQ or even AQAP. And that fighting started during the summer. So, it is amazing how all of a sudden we have another PETN clothing bomber (who fails)...
SP
Posted by: ServingPatriot | 03 January 2010 at 05:35 PM
Speaking as a disgruntled and grumpy frequent traveler, TSA's charter is little more than to make life difficult for all passengers. Every time there's an incident or near-incident, passengers start getting more patdowns, the lines are longer and the TSA employees look at you grimly. It's interesting how this always happens after, but somehow never before. This here
( http://www.satirewire.com/news/march02/screeners.shtml ) rather sums it up rather nicely.
Posted by: Byron Raum | 03 January 2010 at 06:18 PM
Unfortunately having had to travel this past week, greed factor, I saw some minor but welcome changes. At my first terminal there was a Chatty Cathy checking id's and after going through my bag check I was again told that my 2 quart zip lock bag should not have been used to store my toiletries but to use a 1 quart bag, will have to tell the wife to buy some but I know she will object cause they store little. At the connection terminal I noticed a lot of ICE officers running around in golf carts. On the return flight the guy checking id's seemed to have a superior attitude and was useless. On the bag check the x-ray girl flagged my briefcase and a TSA guy stopped the line and methodically dumped all the contents in grey buckets and put them through the x-ray again passing muster. Guess the laptop charger cords was the culprit. Again the ICE boys in their golf carts at the connection terminal.
If I was running TSA I would put only Chatty Chathy's checking id's cause at least they will know if they get a poor response to their dialog that an individual gets a good checking.
Now more importantly, when they start checking groins I know it will be time to turn in my frequent flyer cards and call it quits.
Underwear Bombs, wow, we are in for a long fight.
Posted by: Bobo | 03 January 2010 at 06:41 PM
I'm totally over the junk we hear from the government on this incident. If it is such a damn big deal, why don't the authorities just ban all air travel? I'd rather ride first class in the smoking section of my own car.
I'm really tired of the US govt trying to make me afraid. Screw it, the roads in this country are more dangerous. Treat us like adults. This guy couldn't even set his gonads on fire and if he did, too bad for him.
Happy New Year and may this year be full of more sanity.
Posted by: Jackie | 03 January 2010 at 08:27 PM
You know Colonel. Your not being officially involved with this administration or the last regarding terrorism and the ME is both a loss for the American public and a blessing...especially for you....
Posted by: JAC | 03 January 2010 at 09:31 PM
What surprised me is that a terrorist got caught just AFTER the defense budget got approved!
Posted by: JohnH | 03 January 2010 at 09:48 PM
... found it:
Posted by: confusedponderer | 04 January 2010 at 12:28 AM
As the list of "failed" states housing AQ grows and grows, what does this proliferation say about the US strategy post 9/11 forgetting the tactics?
Maybe I should say is there a strategy? Could that be documented or is it every executive branch agency or member of Congress or their staffs for themselves? Was the basic delusion that like Marshall and FDR choosing Europe first after December 7th, 1941, choosing Iraq first was the equivalent of that strategy?
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 04 January 2010 at 02:10 AM
There simply is no such thing as "perfect" security or being "perfectly" secure; a fact that is never confronted by the beltway jawbones.
I wonder why not?
Personally I think that this question is never asked because it encourages one to think of how to manage risks rather than defeat enemies or secure territory -- home territory or foreign. You can't endlessly escalate or kick the can down the road while managing risks...
Posted by: Medicine Man | 04 January 2010 at 04:14 AM
"Over the past decade, according to BTS, there have been 99,320,309 commercial airline departures that either originated or landed within the United States. Dividing by six, we get one terrorist incident per 16,553,385 departures."
It might be interesting to see the pre-TSA statistics. As one of the commentators to this article said, "you have a greater chance of your refrigerator killing you than a terrorist killing you".
source: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/odds-of-airborne-terror.html
Posted by: Bill Wade, NH | 04 January 2010 at 08:04 AM
Pat,
I found a blog about Yemen, Waq al Waq. It's run by two guys who have studied Yemen.
Here is the link: http://islamandinsurgencyinyemen.blogspot.com/
I found the link at http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/.
Mark
Posted by: Mark Gaughan | 04 January 2010 at 09:24 AM