Category: Terrorism, Security, and Defense Reform
Thursday, July 22, 2004
BIG story from the Associated Press today -- they've obtained security camera footage from Dulles Airport on the morning of September 11, 2001, that shows four of the five hijackers who departed from Dulles that morning being pulled aside at the security checkpoint for additional inspection -- and then being waved on through.
(The AP has a video report on the story as well, where you can see parts of the footage.)
The four hijackers all set off the metal detector, and one had his luggage hand-inspected with an explosives detector, but all of them were cleared to board the plane. Only one of the five made it through without attracting any scrutiny whatsoever.
Of course, all the holes in airport security have been closed since 9/11 (heh), so a huge lapse like this could never happen again. Right?
Thanks to The Agonist for the pointer.
Except where otherwise noted, all content on this site is provided under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license.
If you think anything I write here represents the opinions of anybody but myself, you need more help than I can give you. The opinions are all mine, folks. Nobody else's.
If that's too hard to understand... well, I'm sorry. There's only so much I can do. I'm not a therapist, and I'm not a miracle worker. I wish I could help you work through your delusional belief that I'm speaking for anyone else but myself. Honestly, I do. But in the end, that's a monkey you'll have to get off your back on your own. Sorry.
Web feed
One point: on 9/11/01 box cutters were legal to have on board (as were nail files, clippers, and safety razors). So even if they triggered the metal detector, if they didn't have enough metal for a gun (which is what they were being searched for), they would have to be let on board.
Ironically, their being of Arab descent probably got them an additional pass for fear of a discrimination lawsuit, after the experience with misidentifying Tim McVeigh as an Arab.
your comment about joe trippi was almost on the money. most campaign managers are not the ad buyers. all ad buyers take a take. that is a conflict of interest by itself, pair that with with being a campaign manager, and you have a huge conflict. joe's excuse was that he didn't sign the checks, well that is a bullshit excuse, as nothing was done on the campaign without him. whether intentional or not, he insulated himself from checks and balances. i honestly don't think he was trying for self promotion, but once he ended up there and got in the limelight, i think he got a little liking for it (i think he wanted to be something of a che rivera). with all his faults, i actually still like him, but i must say this for him, he was a big fan of technology, he was a true fan of dean, and the transparency of the campaign was real. he has vision, but that is often clouded by skeletons and ego.
-- n. r. purspectiv
p.s. and articles by one paul maslin trying to distance himself from trippi's and dean's fall is just crap. as the pollster don't you think you should be honest to the canidate?