So it’s approaching seven years of the anniversary of 9/11, and one can argue that progress has been made to better secure our country against the threats of low intensity, asymmetrical conflict (for those not familiar with those terms, read that as terrorism, though really that term is nearly meaningless now with all the ways it is abused). But for as much security and security theater as we have, there is still a notable opportunity for pork barrel spending, cases of misuse after misuse after misuse, and heck even lots of just plain incompetence to go around.
Business Week shows that many Department of Homeland Security (DHS) projects are plagued by trouble and their own IT Systems might not be secure. And with all of the focus on airports, we might just be missing out on the bigger threats like our borders. (This isn’t meant to extend to the immigration debate, only in so far as terrorists can in fact cross the border in many ways not guarded today). Heck even MI5 has come out and stated there is no profile for a terrorist candidates or potential recruits and Malcom Gladwell states profiling doesn’t really amount to much.
So how do we do this? What’s the right answer?
I’d suggest to start with the basics, and that is that a cost benefit analysis and some rational thinking, which would go a long way to resolving this. Oh yeah, and remembering that life isn’t safe. Ever. Terrorism is nasty, no doubt, but it’s not likely going to be the thing that kills you.