As a frequent traveller, I often find myself going through airport security. To me, and just about every frequent traveller, find the security a little too much and misdirected. The no liquids rule; although, yes, one can make an explosive through household liquids etc. (or shoes for that matter) not allowing liquids only serves to inconvinience the traveller, and to me does not seem to increaser the security. Airports used to be a gateway to the world filled with adventure. Now they are places of harrowed travellers forced to undress in public. Recently I've taken to leaving on my clothing and being forced to be "wanded," it actually is quicker than getting undressed and redressed, and less embarrasing. This type of security is called reactionary. Someone figure dhow to put a bomb in a shoe; now we have to take off our shoes at security. Someone figured out how to make a liquid explosive; now we cannot carry liquids. What is needed is a more preemtive security, not one to make one "feel secure." The only people I know that "feel secure" with these measures are the ones that don't fly.
October 21, 2007 10:01 PM
M. Jones said...
Excellent speech and post. At the end of your post you stated, "Of course, an alert and informed public is a key part of our nation’s defense".
I completely agree however; there needs to be a simplified method that an "alert public" can and will use to report suspicious activity. Something similar to the local 911 emergency systems.
I can speak firsthand, many people, from all age groups, simply do not report suspicious activity because they're not sure where or who to call.
A test of such a system in a few key cities would easily determine it's viability and potential impact on your agency's information gathering processes.
I hope you will consider this.
Respectfully,
M.Jones www.nationalterroralert.com
October 22, 2007 4:04 AM
Anonymous said...
Now why would I waste my time commenting on your post. In a short time you and all like you will be gone from public view and I hope and pray that the next government doesn't let up on investigating each and everyone of you crooks. I hope you have a good law firm lined up, you're going to need one.
I have to say I am totally disappointed as a disabled vet that our Military could watch the Israeli Army use armoured vechiles for years and not have at least 2,000 armoured vechiles on hand to would protect our soldiers from IED'S. How many years have we watched the SO-CALLED military planners works on T.V. about furture wars being in towns and cities where house to house fighting would be the war. Isn't it time we kicked out all the political appointee's and give real soldiers the jobs of planning for the military?
October 22, 2007 11:00 AM
Anonymous said...
I appreciate the scope of the ongoing struggles to prevent a variety of 'bad things' happening throughout the country, but having some knowledge of the situation I often wonder why DHS is not more aggressive in its approach to strengthen the states and their ability at the 'grass roots' level to organize intelligence activities that actually can be acted upon. This might go along way to allieve the very public 'brain drain' out of DHS that we hear so much about and allow a steady cadre of professionals to develop the information you need to make more informed and better decisions.
October 22, 2007 11:25 AM
Frank said...
I think it's awesome that some of our leaders are beginning to write blogs. I think that sometimes newspapers don't always give an accurate representation of the news, or they tend to leave out critical things. Keep up the good work! It's nice to have more sources available on any given topic.
October 22, 2007 11:42 AM
JustSayNo said...
There is but one infallible way to prevent casualties from IEDs: Withdraw the troops from the theater wherein they are exposed to them. It's the same principle by which you prevent want to prevent teen pregnancy by abstinence: so too to prevent deaths befalling your soldiers, you get 'em the hell out of harm's way. Chuy!
I think it's great that you are using this blog to communicate with the public. I comment on this fact here on my own blog: "Potential Applications of Social Media and Social Networking in Local Disaster Response" (http://www.ddmcd.com/potential.html).
October 22, 2007 4:11 PM
[Photo]Earlier today I gave a speech to the Center for Strategic and International Studies on the Department’s efforts to prevent the use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) against our country. All of us have seen the horrible images of our soldiers being attacked overseas by roadside bombs and other forms of IEDs. Over the past two decades, IEDs have been used by terrorists in attacks ranging from the U.S.S. Cole to the London and Madrid bombings to the Oklahoma City attack in 1995. IEDs remain a terrorist weapon of choice: they are easy to make, difficult to defend against, and cause untold death and destruction.
Our Department is 100 percent committed to protecting the people of the United States from IEDs. All of our counterterrorism efforts focus directly or indirectly on bombing prevention--whether that involves screening passengers for explosives at airports, checking cargo for radiological materials that can be used to make “dirty bombs,” protecting dangerous chemicals from theft, hardening critical infrastructure, advancing research and technology to defeat IEDs, or sharing information and intelligence with state and local partners.
These efforts are not scattershot or uncoordinated. Within the Department, we established an Office for Bombing Prevention specifically to work with other federal, state, and local agencies, as well as members of the private sector, to implement a national strategy to address IED threats. This office also sponsors TRIPWire, an information sharing portal that brings together bomb squad technicians, intelligence analysts, and state and local law enforcement to share expertise on the latest terrorist IED tactics, techniques, and procedures.
Our Science and Technology Directorate is also leveraging the vast knowledge and expertise of our nation’s science and research community to develop next generation IED screening tools and countermeasures. This includes technology to identify and alert authorities to suspicious behaviors that precede an IED attack, and developing bomb-resistant materials and barriers to minimize damage after an explosion.
At our airports, we’ve deployed a full complement of screening tools and procedures, from bomb-sniffing “puffer” machines to explosives detection canine teams to Bomb Appraisal Officers trained to look at a person’s behavior for signs of malicious intent. We’re also stepping up security requirements for chemical sites and facilities, small planes, and small boats operating in U.S. waters.
In all of this, we are making it harder for terrorists to acquire materials to make IEDs. We are educating state and local partners on the latest IED threats and techniques. We are working with the private sector to elevate security in and around critical infrastructure. And we are providing substantial resources, including $1.7 billion to date in grants for IED prevention, detection, protection, and response.
There is no guarantee against an IED attack, but we are raising our barrier against the use of this deadly terrorist weapon. Of course, an alert and informed public is a key part of our nation’s defense. We appreciate your continued vigilance and your support.
8 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formAs a frequent traveller, I often find myself going through airport security. To me, and just about every frequent traveller, find the security a little too much and misdirected.
The no liquids rule; although, yes, one can make an explosive through household liquids etc. (or shoes for that matter) not allowing liquids only serves to inconvinience the traveller, and to me does not seem to increaser the security. Airports used to be a gateway to the world filled with adventure. Now they are places of harrowed travellers forced to undress in public. Recently I've taken to leaving on my clothing and being forced to be "wanded," it actually is quicker than getting undressed and redressed, and less embarrasing.
This type of security is called reactionary. Someone figure dhow to put a bomb in a shoe; now we have to take off our shoes at security. Someone figured out how to make a liquid explosive; now we cannot carry liquids. What is needed is a more preemtive security, not one to make one "feel secure." The only people I know that "feel secure" with these measures are the ones that don't fly.
October 21, 2007 10:01 PM
Excellent speech and post. At the end of your post you stated, "Of course, an alert and informed public is a key part of our nation’s defense".
I completely agree however; there needs to be a simplified method that an "alert public" can and will use to report suspicious activity. Something similar to the local 911 emergency systems.
I can speak firsthand, many people, from all age groups, simply do not report suspicious activity because they're not sure where or who to call.
A test of such a system in a few key cities would easily determine it's viability and potential impact on your agency's information gathering processes.
I hope you will consider this.
Respectfully,
M.Jones
www.nationalterroralert.com
October 22, 2007 4:04 AM
Now why would I waste my time commenting on your post.
In a short time you and all like you will be gone from public view and I hope and pray that the next government doesn't let up on investigating each and everyone of you crooks. I hope you have a good law firm lined up, you're going to need one.
October 22, 2007 9:41 AM
I have to say I am totally disappointed as a disabled vet that our Military could watch the Israeli Army use armoured vechiles for years and not have at least 2,000 armoured vechiles on hand to would protect our soldiers from IED'S.
How many years have we watched the SO-CALLED military planners works on T.V. about furture wars being in towns and cities where house to house fighting would be the war.
Isn't it time we kicked out all the political appointee's and give real soldiers the jobs of planning for the military?
October 22, 2007 11:00 AM
I appreciate the scope of the ongoing struggles to prevent a variety of 'bad things' happening throughout the country, but having some knowledge of the situation I often wonder why DHS is not more aggressive in its approach to strengthen the states and their ability at the 'grass roots' level to organize intelligence activities that actually can be acted upon. This might go along way to allieve the very public 'brain drain' out of DHS that we hear so much about and allow a steady cadre of professionals to develop the information you need to make more informed and better decisions.
October 22, 2007 11:25 AM
I think it's awesome that some of our leaders are beginning to write blogs. I think that sometimes newspapers don't always give an accurate representation of the news, or they tend to leave out critical things. Keep up the good work! It's nice to have more sources available on any given topic.
October 22, 2007 11:42 AM
There is but one infallible way to prevent casualties from IEDs: Withdraw the troops from the theater wherein they are exposed to them. It's the same principle by which you prevent want to prevent teen pregnancy by abstinence: so too to prevent deaths befalling your soldiers, you get 'em the hell out of harm's way.
Chuy!
October 22, 2007 3:58 PM
I think it's great that you are using this blog to communicate with the public. I comment on this fact here on my own blog: "Potential Applications of Social Media and Social Networking in Local Disaster Response" (http://www.ddmcd.com/potential.html).
October 22, 2007 4:11 PM