All security systems–including those considered the best–are manned by humans. And humans are and will always be imperfect creatures.
So there will inevitably be times when security agents will miss the assassin or terrorist intent on mayhem. For example:
- In September, 1975, two women–Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme and Sara Jane Moore–tried to assassinate President Gerald Ford.
- Fromme was tackled by a Secret Service agent. Moore’s aim was deflected by Oliver Sipple, a Marine and Vietnam veteran, thus saving Ford’s life.
Gerald Ford being hustled from danger by Secret Service agents
Until these incidents, the Secret Service profile of a potential assassin didn’t include a woman.
- On March 30, 1981, John W. Hinckley, a psychotic obsessed with actress Jodie Foster, gained access to a line of reporters waiting to throw questions at President Ronald Reagan.
- As Reagan got into the Presidential limousine, Hinckley opened fire. Wounded, Reagan escaped death by inches.
The Reagan assassination attempt
The Secret Service had failed to prevent the attack because no one–until that moment–had attacked a President from the section reserved for newsmen.
- On September 11, 2001, Islamic terrorists armed with boxcutters highjacked four American jetliners and turned them into fuel-bombs.
- Two of the airliners struck the North and South towers of the World Trade Center, destroying both structures.
- A third hit the Pentagon.
- The fourth–United Airlines Flight 93–crashed when it was diverted from its intended target (the White House or Congress) by passengers who resolved to fight back.
- Three thousand Americans died that day–in New York City, Washington, D.C. and Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
Until this day of catastrophes, no highjacker had turned a jumbo-jet into a fuel-bomb. Passengers had been advised to cooperate with highjackers, not resist them.
As terrorists say, referring to anti-terrorism security services: “You have to be lucky all the time. We have to be lucky only once.”
So how will the next 9/11 happen?
In all likelihood, like this:
A terrorist–or, more likely, several terrorists–will sign up for one or more of these “VIP screening” programs.
They will be completely clean–no arrests, no convictions. They may well be respectable citizens in their communities.
They will probably have amassed enough “frequent flier miles” to ingratiate themselves with the airlines and convince the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) of their integrity.
They will breeze through their selected airports
- Without removing shoes and belts;
- Without undergoing pat-downs;
- Without being required to remove laptops and other electronic devices from their carry-ons;
- Without exposing their electronic devices to x-ray technology.
Then they will board planes–either as part of an individual terrorist effort or a coordinated one, a la 9/11.
And then it will be too late.
Memorial to the passengers and crew of United Flight 93
The TSA/airlines’ VIP programs are based on the assumption that someone who has completed a security check in the past need not be checked in the future.
This assumption has proven false for American Intelligence agencies such as the FBI and CIA.
- Robert Hanssen, a former FBI agent, spied for Soviet and Russian intelligence services for 22 years (1979 – 2001). He’s now serving a life prison term in Florence, Colorado.
- Aldrich Ames, a former CIA agent, betrayed American secrets to Soviet and Russian espionage agencies from 1985 to 1994. He is likewise serving a life sentence.
Even requiring an agent to undergo repeated security checks is no guarantee of trustworthiness.
When asked about how he repeatedly passed CIA polygraph tests, Ames said, “There’s no special magic. Confidence is what does it. Confidence and a friendly relationship with the examiner. Rapport, where you smile and you make him think that you like him.”
Now think about that–and then consider this:
The TSA introduced its Pre-Check program during the fall of 2011. By May, 2012, more than 820,000 travelers had received expedited security since the start of the program.
In early September, 2013, TSA announced that it would more than double its expedited screening program, PreCheck, from 40 to 100 airports by the end of the year.
Nor is TSA the only organization giving big-spending fliers special treatment at potential risk to their country. For example:
- Delta Air Lines offers Sky Priority, described as providing “privileged access through security checkpoints” at select airports.
- Another private security program, Clear, collects several pieces of biometric data on well-heeled passengers as a screening measure at the airport. Once verified by a kiosk local to the security checkpoint, the passengers are allowed to skirt the security barriers that poor and middle-class folks must pass through.
- Then there is Priority Access, set up by TSA and the airlines. This provides expedited service to first-class and business passengers. To qualify, you need only possess certain credit cards–such as the United Mileage Plus Club Card.
Some critics blast this two-tier passenger check-in system as an affront to democratic principles.
“It’s stratifying consumers by class and wealth, because the people who travel a lot usually have higher incomes,” says Ralph Nader, consumer advocate and frequent business traveler.
But there is an even more important reason to disband these programs and require everyone–rich and middle-class alike–to undergo the same level of security screening:
The three thousand men and women who died horifically on September 11, 2001, at the hands of airline passengers whom authorities thought could be trusted to board a plane.



9/11, ABC NEWS, BARACK OBAMA, BENGHAZI TERROR ATTACK, BIRTH CERTIFICATE, CBS NEWS, CHARLES KOCH, CNN, DAVID KOCH, DR. STANTON GLANTZ, FACEBOOK, FBI, GEORGE W. BUSH, IMPEACHMENT, IRS, NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NAVY SEALS, NBC NEWS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, TEA PARTY, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TOBACCO INDUSTRY, TWITTER
T(OBACCO) PARTY UNVEILED: PART ONE (OF TWO)
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on September 17, 2014 at 12:07 am“Should Barack Obama Be Impeached?” shouts the headline on the Right-wing website of TeaParty.org.
“A fake birth certificate, the Benghazi attack, the IRS scandal, National Security invasions on privacy….Many are questioning Obama’s competence. Should Congress initiate impeachment proceedings?
“What do you think?”
Click here: Teaparty.org — Should Barack Obama be Impeached?
Then the site offers this in tribute to its sponsor:
“TeaParty.org, one of America’s leading websites and top online news sources is conducting a poll about an important issue.
“The results of these polls will be published online and are shared with major news networks and policymakers.
“Don’t miss this opportunity to let your voice be heard!
“Vote today!”
The viewer is then given two questions to answer.
The first is: “Should Barack Obama be impeached?”
The website offers three possible answers for the visitor to choose:
The second question is: “Whom do you believe has better solutions for the nation’s problems?”
It, too, provides three possible answers:
The website omits a number of truths–about both President Barack Obama and the Tea Party itself.
Let’s start with its first charge against Obama: “A false birth certificate.”
The election of Barack Obama pushed the Right to new heights of infamy. With no political scandal (such as Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky) to fasten on, the Republican Party deliberately promoted the slander that Obama was not an American citizen.
From this there could be only one conclusion: That he was an illegitimate President, and should be removed from office.
President Barack Obama
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Republicans charged that Obama was really a Muslim non-citizen who intended to sell out America’s security to his Muslim “masters.”
And this smear campaign continued throughout his Presidency.
To the dismay of his enemies, Obama–in the course of a single week–dramatically proved the falsity of both charges.
On April 27, 2011, he released the long-form of his Hawaii birth certificate.
The long-form version of President Obama’s birth certificate
“We do not have time for this kind of silliness,” said Obama at a press conference, speaking as a father might to a roomful of spiteful children. “We have better stuff to do. I have got better stuff to do. We have got big problems to solve.
“We are not going to be able to do it if we are distracted, we are not going to be able to do it if we spend time vilifying each other…if we just make stuff up and pretend that facts are not facts, we are not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by side shows and carnival barkers.”
And on May 1, he announced the solving of one of those “big problems”: Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, had been tracked down and shot dead by elite U.S. Navy SEALS in Pakistan.
Then there’s the second Tea Party charge: “The Benghazi attack.”
A total of four Americans died in a terrorist attack on the American diplomatic consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012.
Whereas a total of 3,000 Americans died in the Al Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001. But those occurred on the watch of a white Republican President, so naturally no treason charges were invoked by the Right.
The third accusation: “The IRS scandal.”
In 2013, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) disclosed that it had selected political groups applying for tax-exempt status for intensive scrutiny based on their names or political themes.
Although Right-wingers have claimed that their political organizations were exclusively targeted by the IRS, the agency opened investigations based on such trigger-words as:
“While some of the IRS questions may have been overbroad, you can look at some of these groups and understand why these questions were being asked,” said Ohio State University law professor Donald Tobin.
In January, 2014, the FBI announced that it had found no evidence warranting the filing of federal criminal charges in connection with the scandal.
No evidence has come to light suggesting that President Obama was responsible for the IRS’s actions.
Finally, there is the Tea Party charge that Obama is guilty of “National Security Agency (NSA) invasions on privacy.”
This totally ignores that it was former President George W. Bush who, after 9/11, ordered the NSA to vastly increase its electronic-interception capabilities.
No longer would the agency be confined to spying on calls outside the United States. From now on, it would target Americans who might be linked to international terror cells.
As for the website’s claim: “Many are questioning Obama’s competence”:
While this is true–among those on the Right and Left–it misses the essential legal point: Even if true, “incompetence” is not a legitimate impeachable offense.
And no evidence has come forth to indict the President for “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Share this: