Anne Applebaum wrote a very insightful op-ed piece in the Washington Post today, basically about how different events influence our policies post factum. We fully agree with the notion that such knee-jerk reactions, which are usually implemented way after the fact are too often bound to fail.

Here’s Anne Applebaum’s article:

___________________________________________________________________________________

All of you frequent fliers out there, you know the drill. Take off your shoes, because of Richard Reid, the “shoe bomber.” Remove your hair gel from your backpack because of the bombers who targeted Heathrow using liquid hydrogen peroxide. When you get on a plane, you must also, from now on, be prepared to remove any blankets from your lap before landing – too bad if you’re asleep! – because of the Christmas Day underwear bomber.

When someone invents a way to hide explosive powder inside a toothbrush case, prepare to remove your toothbrush. And while you’re at it, throw a pinch of salt over your left shoulder as you board the plane. But never, at any moment, imagine that the rigamarole of airport security is guaranteed to make you safer – for no one knows which of these measures, if any, is actually necessary.

Worse, no one has any financial or political incentive to find out. The fact is, since the hurried and heavily politicized creation of the Department of Homeland Security and its junior partner, the Transportation Security Administration, neither their priorities nor their spending patterns has been subject to serious scrutiny. They have never been forced to make hard choices. On the contrary, both have been encouraged by their congressional funders to spend money in reaction to every perceived new threat, real or otherwise: Thus full-body scanners, unacceptable as recently as last summer, will now be rushed into use. In just a few years – under a Republican administration and mostly Republican Congresses – these institutions thus grew into vast, unruly bureaucracies, some of whose activities bear only a distant relationship to public safety.

So customary has it become to repeat old, familiar lists of ludicrous public projects that readers who cannot bear to read the litany one more time might want to skip to the next paragraph. For yes, it is true: Having started with 13 employees in January 2002, the TSA now employs 60,000, and in the process of its expansion the organization found it had money for all kinds of extras. As I wrote in 2005, some $350,000 of its $6 billion budget once was spent on a gym; $500,000 was spent on artwork and silk plants, and untold millions are annually spent in overhiring, since determining when there will be long security lines at an airport has never been the sort of thing at which the federal government excels.

As for the DHS, its 2010 budget came in at $55 billion, some of which (according to the economist Veronique de Rugy, writing in 2006) will invariably be spent on things like the $63,000 decontamination unit in rural Washington, where no one was trained to use it, more biochemical suits for Grand Forks, Nev., than the town has police officers to wear them and $557,400 worth of rescue and communications equipment for some 1,500 residents of the town of North Pole, Alaska. Not to mention what is spent on the “needs” of the constituents of other important members of Congress.

It is not actually DHS or TSA employees who are at fault for these kinds of decisions. From the very beginning, security experts and even the agencies’ own inspectors general have pointed to the absurdity of TSA and DHS spending patterns, many of which are driven by the latest scare story (I wish I’d been at the celebratory New Year’s Eve party undoubtedly thrown by the manufacturers of those full-body scanners). And from the very beginning, Congress has fought back against critics, repeatedly allocating funds to unnecessary local projects, reacting to sensational news stories, spending money in ways that suit its members and then declaring itself shocked – shocked! – to discover that our multibillion-dollar homeland security apparatus was unable to stop a clearly disturbed Nigerian from boarding a Detroit-bound plane.

Imagine if the TSA’s vast budget were dedicated to the creation of a cutting-edge computer network that could have made security officers in Amsterdam instantly aware of the warning from the Detroit bombing suspect’s father. Imagine that, instead of relying on full-body X-ray scanners or long-haul flight-blanket deprivation, we had highly paid and trained consular officers in places such as Nigeria. Even then security would not be perfect (and I’m not sure that airborne terrorism is even the worst thing we have to worry about). But it would make sense to have a smaller, less expensive and less wasteful system. It would make sense to have a system based on real risks and priorities, instead of the stories featured on cable news. It would make sense to fight the next battle, for once, instead of the last one. “Sense,” though, is not the criterion by which public money is spent in this country – and hasn’t been for a long time.

Technorati Tags: airline security, Anne Applebaum, knee jerk reactions

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab

The latest – fortunately failed – attempt to bring down an airliner has been on top of the news for about a week now.

We do know that a Nigerian, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who has joined al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, has tried to detonate an explosive charge, hidden in his underwear.

We also know that a quick reaction by a passenger and by the cabin crew prevented the creep from successfully completing his mission.

There have been all kinds of talk about deploying more body scanners at the airports. There is no doubt that these expensive and at least partly effective devices might help to a degree, but it this the Holy Grail as far as security is concerned?

If the U.S. authorities have connected the warning that the terrorist’s own father has voiced, to the fact that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had multiple U.S. entry visas, the little creep should have never even been on a flight bound for the United States.

At the same time, we had the opportunity to fly between two U.S. cities, both before and after the thwarted terrorist event.

The strange thing is that on the flight before Christmas and before the burning of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s crotch, the airport security appeared to be stricter than after his cojones got singed.

As a matter of fact, on the way back, I realized after checking in my bag that I have forgotten to pack away my old, but perfectly serviceable brass Zippo lighter. Not wanting to lose the item, to which I am quite attached and not really having another alternative, since my suitcase has long disappeared into the baggage system – and I assure you that I had no evil intentions whatsoever – I simply packed it the best way I could think of into my camera bag. The Zippo got nestled next to the battery charger and put through the x-ray machine, emerging from the other end with no problems.

The bag also contained a perfectly harmless, stainless steel pill container, the size and shape of an average rifle cartridge…

As most of you know, lighters are not allowed in the cabins of airliners, after Richard Reid has failed to light his fuse/shoe laces with matches in 2001.

We do hope that our airline security administration people are reading this; simply as proof that pre-flight passenger screening needs to be done more carefully. Once again, I would like to emphasize that I obviously had no evil, or terrorist intentions, but that there seem to be numerous holes in our security arrangements, which are in need of improvement.

Although the full-body scanner machines might help, there is no substitute for human intelligence, known in the business as HUMINT. Let’s just hope that the terrorists will not force us to fly butt-naked and with no carry-on baggage whatsoever. Wait! Come to think of it, such nudist camps in the sky might be kind of fun 

Technorati Tags: air travel, security, Terrorism

We finally have the first, concrete step in the direction of closing the now infamous Guantanamo Bay prison.

The news reports say, “President Barack Obama has ordered the federal government to acquire an underused state prison”, the Thomson Correctional Center in rural Illinois.

According to the Illinois Department of Corrections’ website, Thomson is not so much “underused”, as empty.

According to a letter to Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Attorney General Eric Holder and Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair Thomson will be upgraded and transformed into a facility that exceeds “supermax standards.”

The real question is whether the Guantanamo inmates will actually be charged with crimes and whether they will be properly tried, according to our law, or will Thomson simply become an extension of Gitmo, this time on U.S. territory?

U.S. officials said military tribunals for potential detainees would be held at Thomson. They also said that the facility could house detainees whom the president determines must be held indefinitely but can’t be tried.

Thomson will not solve all the administration’s Guantanamo-related problems. There still will be dozens of detainees not relocated to Thomson, myriad legal issues and potential resistance from Congress.

Technorati Tags: congress, guantanamo, military tribunals, obama, Prison, Thompson

It’s been many years since the 9/11 attacks and America’s favorite boogieman Osama bin Laden is apparently still out there…Or is he? Nobody seems to know for sure, it seems.

U.S. National Security Adviser, James Jones, says bin Laden, believed hiding mainly in a rugged area of western Pakistan, may be periodically slipping back into Afghanistan as well. At the same time, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, says the U.S. has lacked good intelligence on bin Laden for a long time – “I think it has been years” – and did not confirm that he’d slipped into Afghanistan.

The failed hunt for bin Laden has been one of the signature elements of the global “war on terror” that George W. Bush launched after the Sept. 11 attacks. The principal explanations given by both the Bush and Obama administrations for not getting bin Laden is that they simply don’t know where he is.
“If we did, we’d go get him,” Gates said.

Jones, a retired Marine general, stressed the urgency of targeting bin Laden, and spoke of a renewed campaign to capture or kill him. Bin Laden had been allowed to operate in Afghanistan by his Taliban allies while allegedly plotting the Sept. 11 attacks. When U.S. forces ousted the Taliban from power in late 2001, bin Laden reportedly fled into Pakistan from what was generally described as a complex of caves in the Tora Bora area.

Asked whether the administration has reliable intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, James Jones replied, “The best estimate is that he is somewhere in North Waziristan, sometimes on the Pakistani side of the border, sometimes on the Afghan side of the border.” He did not elaborate on the intelligence behind that estimate, nor did he cite a time period or describe more specifically bin Laden’s apparent border crossings.

Robert Gates in turn, said: that “we don’t know for a fact where Osama bin Laden is,” although he agreed that his likely hideout is in North Waziristan.

The U.S. has targeted North Waziristan and other areas on the Pakistani side of the border with drone-launched missile strikes, killing a number of militants as well as Pakistani civilians. The Pakistani army has undertaken an offensive against the Taliban in South Waziristan but it has not expanded it into North Waziristan.

Obama administration officials have often asserted, as did the Bush administration, that they believe bin Laden is being sheltered on the Pakistani side of the border, along with other senior al-Qaida leaders. But Jones’s assertion that al-Qaida chief may have slipped back into Afghanistan puts a new twist on the issue.

Senator John McCain said: “that knowledgeable people have told him that bin Laden ‘moves back and forth.’”
McCain did not elaborate, except to say that although bin Laden is not currently able to establish bases for training and equipping terrorists who would attack the United States, “I think it’s important to get him.”

Gates said he does not blame a lack of Pakistani cooperation for the absence of intelligence on bin Laden. “No, I think it’s because if, as we suspect, he is in North Waziristan, it is an area that the Pakistani government has not had a presence in, in quite some time,” he said.

During a visit to Pakistan in October, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton caused a stir by chiding Pakistani officials for failing to press the hunt for al-Qaida inside their borders. She said she found it “hard to believe” that no one in Islamabad knows where the al-Qaida leaders are hiding and couldn’t get them “if they really wanted to.”

A recent Senate report said bin Laden was unquestionably within reach of U.S. troops in the mountains of Tora Bora only three months after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, when American military leaders made the crucial decision not to pursue him with massive force.

Some Pakistanis believe that Osama bin Laden is actually a CIA agent.

Take a look at this video:

So, it appears that we are as much in the dark about bin Laden’s whereabouts, as we seem to be about what really and truly transpired on September 11, 2001. Lets just hope that our intelligence regarding both Afghan and Pakistani Taliban is more accurate, since nobody in his right mind wants the Afghan war to drag on forever.

Technorati Tags: afghanistan, al-qaida, bin laden, cia, clinton, gates, jones, Pakistan, Terrorism, US

President Barack Obama has declared the anniversary of the 9/11 events a national day of “service and remembrance“.

Critics say making the anniversary a day of service may distract people from remembering the victims of the attacks.

By all means lets not forget, lets remember and lets get all of the facts, concerning that tragedy.

Our warmest regards to those who have died, to their families and friends and to all of those who have lost so much during and after that day, including those who have lost their health in the process.

Lets not forget the other victims of 9/11, including the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan people, thousands of U.S. troops, the standing of the United States in the world and our economy.

Technorati Tags: 9/11, anniversary