arewereallysafer

Are we really safer? Back

Security News since Bush Won Re-election

First let me say, I'm a realist. Then let's face facts, George Bush was right when he said we couldn't defeat Terrorism. We can't. In a world as large as ours there will always be people with enough hate to kill innocent people and they will find each other, form groups and attack. We have only to look at history to see many examples. From the time Christians were taken to the Colosseum to face lions till today, terror has been with us, just ask the people of Northern Ireland or Israel, the Philippines or South America, Sri Lanka or East Timor. We can't win, we can only fight and fight we must. The problem, I have, is that I don't feel that we are fighting the most intelligent battles against terrorism that we can. Creating the kind of hate in the Arab world that we created by attacking Iraq is not an intelligent way to fight terrorism. especially since we have not fortified the home front. The Bush administration says it's a war not a criminal act. It's both. We have to protect ourselves, below you'll find out what we haven't done. When you do ask yourself, why not?

A few months before I started this section of my web site, President Bush's cabinet stated that, because of our war on it, terrorism had gone down around the world in the past year. A statement that they had to retract a few days later as their calculations had been wrong. So let's look at some facts.

Terror attacks since 9/11

I can't believe it. In a Gallup poll released on 9/16/06 Pa. voters gave George Bush a 83% higher rating then John Kerry on fighting Terrorism. For those fools, (sorry but you are) and those of you who are just misinformed or under informed please read below for the information you so dearly need.

Are we going to be next?

I keep hearing that we are safer, since there haven't been any attacks since 9/11. Let me point out that there wasn't an attack in the U.S. from Feb. 26th. 1993 (The first World Trade Center bombing) until the Attack on 9/11/01 over 8 years later. Did Bill Clinton take credit for that? No. Should he have? definitely not, & George Bush shouldn't get credit for the present lack of an attack. Oh! I know your going to bring up the U.S.S. Cole but I'm talking about on the homeland and there have been attacks on us in both Iraq & Afghanistan.

I firmly believe that they will attack but that they will choose the time and we had better be ready.

Ask yourself one question. How come so many Top People in the Intelligence Community resigned in disgust? Joeseph Wilson, who George Bush Sr. called an American hero in 1991. Richard Clarke, "anti-terrorism czar." serving in the White House under three presidents George Bush Sr., Bill Clinton & George Bush. Sandy Burger National Security Advisor for the White House since 1996. Randy Beers President Bush's special assistant for combating terrorism he had worked on foreign policy for four presidents. Amit Yoran cybersecurity chief with the Department of Homeland Security resigned after only one year. George Tenet I'm not positive why he resigned probably over bad information on WMDs in Iraq. There must be a reason So many of these people quite.

11/12/04 WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Senior CIA anti-terrorism officer Michael Scheuer, who publicly criticized the agency's handling of the war on terrorism, resigned Thursday but said he wasn't forced out despite the fact the CIA was considering disciplinary action against him. The 22-year CIA veteran who once headed the Osama bin Laden unit, resigned effective Friday, according to Christina Davidson, the editor of his book, "Imperial Hubris."

11-13-04 (CNN) WASHINGTON (AP) -- John McLaughlin, who took temporary command of the CIA for three months this year during a wave of criticism of the spy agency, is retiring amid internal conflicts. Former intelligence officials in touch with current agency personnel say there has been turmoil in recent weeks as new CIA Director Porter Goss tried to make changes and get settled in Two more down, soon we won't have a C.I.A. The Washington Post reported in Saturday editions that Deputy Director of Operations Stephen Kappes turned in his resignation Friday following a tense meeting at CIA headquarters in suburban Virginia. Ops! make that three.

What are the risks: Our railroads, (Which have been dangerously under funded) Our bridges & infrastructure, Our Chemical, Power & Nuclear Plants, Our Ports, Our Borders, not counting soft targets, such as malls, shopping centers, amusement Parks and now after the last attack in Russia, our schools, etc.

1. Our ports: only 5% of all cargo containers coming into our ports are inspected. The administration has recently (to some extent) addressed this problem but why did it take three years? The Bush administration cut port security grants to just 46 million, 63% less then last year. According to the Coast Guard estimates, the Bush budget will leave us $500 million shy of what is needed next year to protect our ports.

2. Our chemical plants: Terror attacks at these plants could kill millions. N. J. has a large number of major plants, mostly in areas that are highly populated. Scientists estimate that if one railroad tanker car, fully loaded with chlorine, released it's cargo within a ten minute period, the resulting cloud of chlorine vapor would be immediately dangerous to both the life & health of anyone within a fourteen mile radius. In New Jersey that could be hundreds of thousands of people. These plants have had no new regulations imposed on them since 9/11. They are expected to maintain good security, but they are not inspected. They are allowed to maintain a six month supple of chemicals on their property.

12/3/04: (CNN) Houston, Texas (AP) -- An explosion at a chemical plant Friday that could be heard 20 miles away caused a large fire and sent up massive clouds of smoke. No injuries were reported. What if that were one of the plants with dangerous chemicals in North Jersey, just across the river from New York City? It could have been another Bhopal, India. see below.

12/3/04: (CNN) BHOPAL, India (CNN) -- People in the Indian city of Bhopal are mourning the victims of a deadly chemical leak in 1984 that killed tens of thousands

3. Our Nuclear power plants are also a problem. They have been notorious in the past (Remember Three Mile Island) that wasn't terror but it does give us a example of their venerability. We worry about terrorist getting nuclear material from Iraq, yet there is a large supply right here in the U.S. and the energy companies are the ones who are responsible for guarding it. The government should be in charge of guarding that material. Didn't one plant, somewhere out west, recently have some material that they couldn't account for?

The Bush administration is spending way to little to help the former Soviet Union protect their Nuclear waste or weapons. Some of our universities are still using weapons-grade radioactive material in their poorly guarded research labs because they can't afford to convert to something safer.

9/19/04 Russian President Vladimir Putin fearing terrorist attacks on Russia's far flung & under secured nuclear facilities dispatched troops to guard them. George Bush after 9/11, before he told us "al-Qaeda was trying to get nuclear material," had frozen all the (Nunn-Lugar cooperative threat reduction act) funding. The cooperative was purchasing Soviet nuclear material and exporting it to the U. S. to use in our nuclear power plants or destroying it, thus getting it off the international black market. This act, done because of a technicality, set back nuclear safety for years. Now do you feel safer under George Bush? Thanks to the Scripps Howard News Service for the information.

9/12/04: CNN - I watched a homemade video, from a private helicopter, of the top of Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant. The family flew right over the plant just 24 miles north of New York City on the Hudson River. Don't you think that at the very least that there should be a no fly zone around our Nuclear power plants.

You can find information on Nuclear Terrorism at nuclear power plants including Three Mile Island Here.

1/30/02 Washington, D.C.---Last night, President Bush disclosed that "diagrams of American nuclear power plants" have been found among the items left by terrorists in Afghanistan, but he failed to announce what measures he will take to prevent these and other plants from being successfully hit, said Paul Leventhal, president of the Nuclear Control Institute. It's now 9/12/04 & still nothing has been done to protect these plants.

10/12/04: UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- Equipment and materials that could be used to make nuclear weapons have disappeared from Iraq, the chief of the U.N.'s atomic watchdog agency has warned. Also see follow up.

How safe does that make you feel? Do you still think we have enough troops in Iraq? We didn't secure the ammo dumps & now this.

10/19/04: WASHINGTON (CNN) -- When David Lochbaum perused a government Web site one day last summer, he came across documents he thought would be of limited value to the public -- but a potential bonanza for terrorists. Included in a Nuclear Regulatory Commission report on Waterford III Nuclear Power Station near New Orleans, Louisiana, were diagrams showing all the toxic chemicals and pipelines near Waterford III -- including the natural gas pipelines that lace through the complex. Explicit in detail, the maps even showed gas line valves, the amount of pressure in the lines, and the proximity of gas lines to air intakes for the nuclear plant's control room. People this happened almost three years after 9/11. Doesn't the administration think of national security? Well they wouldn't meet with our countries top anti terrorist expert before 9/11 even though he was begging a meeting. Oh! by the way even though the plans were taken off the internet that doesn't mean that someone hadn't already downloaded them. They could already be in terrorists hands.

4. Our Railroads: I just, three years after 9/11 and after the train bombings in Spain, found out they are upgrading security on the nations railroads. I don't know by how much, I do know that as of last year the Railroads had gotten something like ninety million, while during the same period the airlines had received nine billion. Hay! aren't there more people riding the rails? For information on rail security read This

9/6/04: William Milar, head of the American Public Transportation Association states that the Trains, ferries, subways, commuter rails, & buses that the American public uses every day need $6 billion dollars worth of security upgrades. George Bush has given them only $115 million since 2001.

5. Are you sitting over a bomb? an estimated 2.5 million tons of commercial cargo gets loaded in passengers planes every year without being inspected. The Bush administration says it doesn't have the money to fund screening.

6. We have also dangerously under funded our first line defenders. Police, Fire departments, hospitals, etc. and now because of the war in Iraq even our National Guard (Which is the State's Military) won't be up to full strength.

7. The Government Accountability Office stated in testimony before Congress that the United States had made little progress in cutting off al-Qaida funding.

8. Our electrical grid is still vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Remember what happened in the northeast just a year ago & think of how dependent our large cities are. A prolonged outing would cause food to rot in freezers, shut down any business that didn't have a generator, play havoc with communications. Traffic would be insane with out red lights, and the list goes on & on.

9. In the case of a major or even a medium size attack our hospital's emergency rooms wouldn't be able to handle the influx of patients. We have to allocate the money needed for to upgrade our defenses & we can't make our local governments bear the burden alone. We have to fund the upgrades nationally.

10. I just found out that our largest port doesn't have a screen for nuclear material. We are screened at airports for normal weapons and the port authority isn't capable of screening for nuclear Material. What's wrong with this picture?

11. Cyber Terror: Looking first at vulnerabilities, several studies have shown that critical infrastructures are potentially vulnerable to a cyber terrorist attack. (Dorothy E Denning Professor of Computer Science at Georgetown University.)

You can find information about the funding for port security Here and the risks Here. The last I heard was that about five percent of all containers coming into the country were inspected. If you ask me that is disgraceful almost 4 years after 9/11.

Go to your library or bookstore and read pgs. 112 - 115 of Losing America by Senator Robert C. Byrd to see just how little money the Bush Administration is spending to protect the home front.

Here's some of what you'll find. Robert Byrd talking about amendments he added to the homeland security appropriations bill. "On Jan 16th.2003, Senate Republicans, "whipped into line by George Bush," voted to defeat an amendment I offered to add $5 billion for security activities at ports, airports, borders, and nuclear plants, and for implementing a smallpox vaccine plan. When I reduced the amount of the amendment by $2 billion hoping to get at least some help for homeland security, the amendment was again defeated." People we've already spent over $200 Billion for the War in Iraq, isn't homeland security even more important? Al Oh! I'm sorry I just heard on CNN that the figure for the war itself was $125 million but I was counting some of the money that we are spending for reconstruction because I thought that if it wasn't for the war we wouldn't have to spend that either.

Now do you really feel that taking the war to the terrorists overseas, when they are dispersed throughout the world, and not spending the money we should here at home has made us safer?

July 31st. 2003: (CBS/AP) A Bush administration plan to cut back the air marshal program that mushroomed after the Sept. 11 attacks was rejected by Republicans and Democrats in Congress. However I heard on Nightline 7/8/04 that they (The Bush Administration) have gotten around that by attrition. Read this. This in an area where we have never been up to the level we should have been. George Bush claims he is the best man to fight terrorism in the homeland. Where is the proof?

July 31st. 2004: We got lucky, this time! An al-Qa'ida operative was captured in Pakistan with information which included: Information on Security in and around buildings in New York City, Newark, N. J. & Washington D. C.; the flow of pedestrians; the best places for reconnaissance; how to make contact with employees who work in the buildings; the construction of the buildings; traffic patterns; locations of hospitals and police departments; and which days of the week present less security at these buildings. The documents included: Photos, drawings & the information mentioned above. (A U.S. counterterrorism official said Sunday's warning stems in large part from Pakistan's capture several weeks ago of an al-Qaeda operative. An intelligence official said the man was a computer engineer who would send messages using code words to al-Qaeda suspects.)

From USA Today 8/2/04: The Department of Homeland Security upgraded the alert level in these cities to level Orange (high). Note: the man was captured several weeks ago & the warning wasn't given till two days ago, The attacks could have already been pulled off. I'm sure that with today's rapid communications we could have (should have) gotten the information sooner.

We have to adopt the 9/11 commission's recommendations & we have to do it NOW. We just can't keep trusting on luck.

No! don't tell me that. During the Orange Alert in August the administration gave the name of the operative being held by Pakistan. (This in order to give credence to their warning.) However this was an ongoing investigation. Now just say that you were in a sleeper cell somewhere in New York City & you see on the news that an operative, who knew where you were because he had to contact you to put an attack into effect, had been taken in custody. Would you stay where you were? I know I'd go underground real fast. We can't allow that kind of information out, even without giving names, you risk giving the enemy information. (An al-Qaeda operative was recently caught in Pakistan, he's believed to be a go between with the leaders & sleeper cells in the U.S.) That's all I'd have to hear & I'd immediately be trying to get in touch with my contact. If I couldn't I'd be underground. Earlier in the war on terror the administration had another devastating leak. The intelligence agencies had broken an al-Qaeda code, you have to remember that. The administration made a big deal out of how well we were doing in the fight against terror. The release of that information was great politically but was devastating to the intelligence community. The enemy could either stop using that code or feed us faulty information. Prior to the release of the information they had no idea that we had broken that code & were in fact still using it. We have to use common sense.

I heard John Kerry say that he feels George Bush's policies are helping al-Qaeda recruit more terrorists, I also heard George Bush say that that was a crazy idea. Now who do you really think is right? Let's take a common sense look. If you remember after 9/11 when we attacked Afghanistan the whole world including most of the Arab countries were behind us & that included most of the people in the streets. They could understand the evil that was al-Qaeda.

We didn't see terrorists attacking in Afghanistan then, as they are now in Iraq, Afghanistan, & Pakistan.

When you attack an Arab country, you attack all Arab countries, at least in the mind of the people in the streets. So when we attacked Saddam Hussein, even though he was hated by most of the Arabs, he was an Arab. That plus the death of innocent Iraqis & the damage to holy places & mosques infuriated most of the Arab populations. In a world where there is great poverty and a strong religious belief that if you die in a Jihad you go directly to Mecca, they had a reason to join in the fight against us & did. They poured across the borders from Syria & Iran to join the fight & in doing so met & closed ranks with the fighters of al-Qaeda. I'm sure that most of them will eventually become al-Qaeda operatives. Is the administration so full of idiots that they can't see the problem? Are we a ship of fools?

Aug. 5th. 2004 Almost 3 years after the attack: I was surprised (No alarmed) to hear on Nightline, from an Israeli Terror expert, that Israel had ran some tests in both Israel & the U. S. on the terror alertness of the population. They placed both suitcases & backpacks in public areas and walked away. places like discothèques, restaurants, and train stations. In Israel people immediately warned the people around them to clear the area, then contacted the authorities. In the U.S. (Some of the cities mentioned were Chicago, L.A., & New York City) the people just went about their business and paid no attention to the bags. I imagine that some of the bags were picked up by people who thought that they had found a gift horse. Israel has been dealing with terror for many years, we haven't but don't you think we should, after 9/11, be a little more aware?

Why hasn't the government spent more time making us aware of what to do if we notice something unusual? They keep changing the alert levels but what do we do when the levels are raised?, do you know?, I don't, or at least I haven't been told and I feel that that lack of information is risking the safety of all of us. Where is the leadership?

Aug. 11th. 2004: Iran tested a missile that is capable of reaching Tel Aviv or beyond, they are also working on a nuclear war head and other W.M.D.s So tell me again why did we attack Iraq? Wouldn't Iran have a better & even more important target? They had tested missiles in the past (Read this article by CNN that is dated 6/2/00.) They are also a theocratic republic who has hated the U. S. for many years. (Since the fall of Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran in 1979) In fact they paint anti-western slogans on their missiles. 8 to 10 of the hijackers on 9/11 passed through Iran without having their passports stamped. Believe me as a tourist I know how hard, No! impossible, that is. They had to have the help of government officials. The reason could only have been to keep their activities secret. So the ties between al-Qu'ida and Iran are clearly known. Oh! by the way isn't that's another reason to doubt al-Qaeda's connection to Iraq? If they were friends with the theocratic government of Iran (Who was attacked by & fought an eight year war with Iraq.) could they be involved with Iraq? You must also remember that Iran was a close ally of the Taliban.

So now when we need France, Germany & Russia in order to put international pressure on (or God forbid go to war) to keep them from going down the road to WMDs. Do we have any cards left to play or did we take our last draw when we said. "They are old Europe, & have no relevance in the New Europe." Maybe Kerry is right & we need a new leader who hasn't offended so many countries. How often do you help someone who has offended you? Do you do it graciously?

8/14/04: President Bush has decided to redeploy ten of thousands of U.S. Troops back to the United States. These troops will come mostly from Europe & Asia. He claims that it will make it easier to protect America & our allies. The questions I have are. Why now? He's has been in office for almost four years. In my opinion, since the major threat in Europe ended with the fall of the Soviet Union over a decade ago, the troops in Europe should have been redeployed years ago, as for the Asian front, with the terrorist bases in Indonesia & the Philippines & the extreme threat that is posed by North Korea can we afford to withdraw form that area of the world?

Could it be, that again, He's making this move for political advantage. It will be a very popular decision & right before the Republican National Convention, but as with Asia, is it the right one?

Or is it a way to punish Germany for not falling into line with his thinking in the war in Iraq? Germany receives many economical benefits from our bases there. Our troops are permanent tourists, on leave they eat at local restaurants, stay in local hotels, buy local products & produce, drink local beer & wines, etc, this doesn't count the money we pay the government for the use of the bases. I hope it's not that, (punishment) this would be a dreadful time for an act like that.

Now more then ever we need the corporation that comes with close ties with our allies.

9/04/04 Saghand, Iran: Iran will begin extracting uranium from deep under it's central desert in less then two years, an official told The Associated Press yesterday during an unprecedented tour of the countries uranium mine. George bush says Iraq was a danger!

9/04/04: Washington Post: Gregory R Valliere, chief political strategist for the nonpartisan Charles Schwab Washington Research Group talking about how the presidential race might effect the stock market "Kerry has also said he would spend more money to secure seaports, airports, and the border, which could boost the stocks of construction & engineering firms that work in those areas.

It's not the stock market that I'm worried about but I like the fact that if Kerry gets in our ports & borders will, after five years, finally be strengthened.

9/09/04 CNN: Osama bin Laden's top lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri, appeared in a videotape message Thursday on the Arabic-language TV news network Al-Jazeera, saying southern and eastern Afghanistan is control of the mujahedeen.

Although the statement isn't true, (They have increased in numbers & strength in both the south & north they don't have the power that he claims.) it's still a good recruiting tool. It's one they shouldn't have, we should have finished them off when we had them under the gun in Northern Iraq. Another mistake by the Bush Administration, A man in prison or dead wouldn't have be able to create that tape.

9/10/04: The ban on assault weapons will expire next week. Guess what? Now any terrorist will be able to get these weapons, a lot easier. Since cops don't carry them & most sportsmen that I know don't have them or even want them. (They're not legal to hunt with & they are very expensive so target shoot.) They are a very good weapon with which to kill large amounts of people. So now we are even less safe because George Bush didn't keep his promise that he would press to renew the ban. See Social Issues: to find our more.

All you have do is turn on your television to see assault weapons being fired in the air on the streets of Baghdad or in the West Bank, anywhere in the Middle East is that what we want here?

9/14/04 Bill Maher, on Larry King said something that I realized but hadn't thought about. George Bush is constantly saying that terrorist hate us because of our freedom & if we can only form democracies it will stop the hate. If we give people freedom they will help stop terrorism. Sorry, George but it isn't freedom they want, it's religion. The Islamic terrorists want only one thing, a theocratic world. People who will kill their own daughters. sisters, mothers, or wives for committing adultery or for having sex out of marriage (even if they are raped) Cut off the hand or hands of a father who steals an apple to feed his starving child. Don't care about freedom they are only worrying about their next life.

They have formed a sick believe that God wants our total obedience. Maybe God wants our love. The Koran like all Holy Books was written by men, to be interpreted by men. I can't believe that the God I love is cruel but they do. Giving them freedom will do no good . They want to be dominated, & they want everybody else to be dominated, by the Mullahs.

So when George Bush says they will respond to freedom, he either doesn't understand our enemy or he's misleading us. He's either Stupid or a liar. Is that what you want in a leader?

9/28/04: I just heard on CNN that 24% of all intercepted messages from al-Qaeda aren't getting interpreted and more then 36% are getting interpreted late. People it's been over three years since 9/11. You may say it's not the presidents fault it happened at the F.B.I. but who has the Bully Pulpit? We need leadership.

Where the hell is our leadership?

10/2/04: CNN WASHINGTON (AP) -- confiding to industry colleagues his frustration over what he considers a lack of attention paid to computer security issues within the agency. How many top security people have to resign, in frustration, over the lack of attention given to security by this administration, before we start to notice that we are definitely not safer with this administration. Not one security agent resigned during the Clinton administration. He paid attention to them.

10/25/04: (CNN) VIENNA, Austria (CNN) -- Some 380 tons of explosives, powerful enough to be used to detonate nuclear warheads, are missing from a former Iraqi military facility that was supposed to be under American control, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog says. Didn't George Bush tell us that Saddam Hussein was a threat because he may give weapons to al-Qaida? Well, it looks like we have probably given his weapons to them. If they weren't the people who stole the materials then they will probably get their hands on some of them. Do you still think George Bush is a great leader in the fight against terror? I've explained earlier, why a paranoid man wouldn't arm his enemies, so I guess we are not paranoid. George Bush isn't or he would start to protect our homeland. Update reporter on site says she saw no sign of a search and "But as far as we could tell, there was no move to secure the weapons, nothing to keep looters away."

People, it took less then 1 pound (10 to 14 ounces) of these explosives to bring down Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie Scotland.

I guess I'm going to hear that the loss of the materials wasn't the presidents fault, that it was the army that didn't protect the facilities. Wrong, as the Commander-in-Chief it was George Bush's responsibility to make sure that all contingencies in the war were accounted for. He know, or should have, that the U.N. had these facilities under guard. When we went in we should have immediately deployed around them, or maybe if we used a little imagination kept them under surveillance from within striking distance, using them as bait. Either way, we shouldn't have let the materials just disappear. The war in Iraq was poorly planed. How many more mistakes are we going to allow our C.E.O. to make before we fire him?

Lou Dobbs in an article for U.S. News & World Report 10/11/04

Lou Dobbs talking about the economics of war outlined some of the things that we haven't protected because of the amount of money we are spending on the war in Iraq. Some of the more important things I've listed below. Most of them I have already mentioned above but I thought you might like to read them yourself.

I. while we are spending over $200 Million for the war in Iraq, we will spend just over $30 million for homeland security.

1. More then three years after Sept. 11th. as many as 3 million illegal aliens will enter the United States this year. Yet outlays for border & Transportation security are about $5 billion less this year then last, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

2. Only 5% of 7 million cargo containers that annually come through our ports are inspected for dirty bombs & weapons of mass destruction. The Bush administration has proposed only $46 million for port security grants for 2005, a 63% decrease from this year. The Coast Guard estimated that it would take $7.5 Billion over 10 years to meet the requirements of the 2002 Maritime Transportation Act.

3. To protect our railways, the government has so far provided only one-half cent per passenger. The American Public Transportation Association says that $6 billion is needed for transit security.

We still aren't safe:

Aug. 25 2006: Dynamite found in luggage: People this was after the plane landed in Houston after a flight from Argentina.

*** **