Who Gave The Order?

[FOTD]

Let me make sure I've got this straight. (a) The U.S. Secret Service, which takes its marching orders from the Executive Branch, gets an order from higher-up to stop security screening an hour before Obama enters the room; (b) Based upon most polling results, Hillary cannot beat McCain in the general election, but Obama can. Alright, I think I've got it straight now.

Police concerned about order to stop weapons screening at Obama rally
http://www.star-telegram.com/dallas_news/story/486413.html
By JACK DOUGLAS Jr.Star-Telegram Staff Writer
DALLAS -- Security details at Barack Obama's rally Wednesday stopped screening people for weapons at the front gates more than an hour before the Democratic presidential candidate took the stage at Reunion Arena.

The order to put down the metal detectors and stop checking purses and laptop bags came as a surprise to several Dallas police officers who said they believed it was a lapse in security.

Dallas Deputy Police Chief T.W. Lawrence, head of the Police Department's homeland security and special operations divisions, said the order -- apparently made by the U.S. Secret Service -- was meant to speed up the long lines outside and fill the arena's vacant seats before Obama came on.

"Sure," said Lawrence, when asked if he was concerned by the great number of people who had gotten into the building without being checked. But, he added, the turnout of more than 17,000 people seemed to be a "friendly crowd."

The Secret Service did not return a call from the Star-Telegram seeking comment.

Doors opened to the public at 10 a.m., and for the first hour security officers scanned each person who came in and checked their belongings in a process that kept movement of the long lines at a crawl. Then, about 11 a.m., an order came down to allow the people in without being checked.

Several Dallas police officers said it worried them that the arena was packed with people who got in without even a cursory inspection.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because, they said, the order was made by federal officials who were in charge of security at the event.

"How can you not be concerned in this day and age," said one policeman.



Their excuse: It seemed to be a friendly crowd. This is a setup for assassination. Let's find out who gave the order and take it from there.

[NellieBly]

Gawd -- you can't even get into a Driller's game without a search.

[Hometown]

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.  It's amazing what escapes media focus and attention.  I just saw a reference to Gerald Ford's published remarks before his death that the CIA had withheld (and continues to withhold) significant information from the Warren Commission regarding Kennedy's assassination.  Wonder what nonsense about Jennifer Lopez or Britney Spears ran on Page 1 the day that story came out?

[Conan71]

Just stay away from down-range of the grassy knoll and everything will be okay.

[Breadburner]

quote:Originally posted by NellieBly

Gawd -- you can't even get into a Driller's game without a search.

Lol...What a joke....I have never been searched at any event..

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Breadburner

quote:Originally posted by NellieBly

Gawd -- you can't even get into a Driller's game without a search.

Lol...What a joke....I have never been searched at any event..

You can't even get into an OU football game without some sort of detection device or cursory visual inspection. This was a mistake in judgement.

[FOTD]

http://mediabloodhound.typepad.com/weblog/2008/02/special-report.html

Special Report:
Secret Service Denies Obama Security Lapse
While MSM Plays Dumb and NBC Plays Dumber;
Plus, A Reminder of Who Controls the SS


exerpt:


"Entrenched Incompetence Is Entrenched Incompetence

It's important to remember that the Secret Service is not some agency operating separately from the administration that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are still running.

In fact, on March 1, 2003, this administration officially made the U.S. Secret Service part of the United States Department of Homeland Security. (You might have heard of that crack federal department, the same one that seven years after 9/11 still can't ensure our airline cargo is checked.) Before that change, since its inception in 1865, the Secret Service had been part of the United States Department of Treasury, operating as a distinct organization within that department beginning in 1883. So what's your guess? That Secret Service improved or worsened under this administration after it was subsumed by the Department of Homeland Security? I would take odds on the latter, but I'm not a betting man.

So here's the bottom line: without detailing all of this administration's constitutional law-breaking (torture, secret prisons, wiretapping, etc.), its long record of criminal negligence alone - from the security breakdown on 9/11 to the invasion of Iraq ("You go with the army you have, not the army you want") to Katrina ("Heckuva job, Brownie!") to the recently revealed diseased beef supply - is reason enough to be deeply troubled by Secret Service claims that its protection is sufficient when only some participants at presidential candidate events are being checked for weapons.

Clearly something is not quite right here. Hopefully enough light will shine on this matter before a preventable tragedy occurs as a consequence of our media, our leaders and our citizens paying too little attention.

One last thing: We don't need conspiracy theories to muddy this picture. They would only result in making people take this viable security concern less seriously. We need to get to the bottom of this now. We have plenty of facts to go on already. And as the subhead says above: entrenched incompetence is entrenched incompetence. This administration's pitiful record of protecting its own citizens and innocent people around the world should make us all concerned that these are the same people charged with safeguarding someone who's as big a target as Barack Obama.

UPDATE: Mimicking the extraordinary cognitive dissonance of Friday's Associated Press article, The New York Times today published a 1,314-word story titled "In Painful Past, Hushed Worry About Obama," in which it discusses people's fears of his assassination but manages to omit any mention of the reported security lapse during Obama's rally in Dallas last Wednesday (or any eyewitness accounts of similar lax security at Obama events across the country). Not. One. Word. Very strange. There's simply no excuse for this.

UPDATE II: From the latest Star-Telegram article on this incident:

Danny Defenbaugh, former head of the FBI in Dallas who was in charge of the agency's investigation of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, questioned why guards would suddenly stop searching for weapons at the front gates of a place like Reunion Arena, with a presidential candidate about to walk on stage.

"Why were they doing it in the first place," said Defenbaugh, now a security consultant, adding that "of course" the screening for weapons should have continued.

At Wednesday's rally, several Dallas police officers who were uneasy about the change in security said they thought it was made to speed up the long lines of people. The Secret Service has since said that was not a consideration.

There is no good reason to change procedures during an event, Defenbaugh said.

"If you change your security procedures, someone's going to have to justify, if there is an incident, that that change was proper," he said.

The article actually leads with Obama saying his personal safety on the campaign trail is not a focus for him. And can you blame him? Imagine going from venue to venue, making speeches before massive crowds, with your opponent and the media ready to pounce on every word you say. There's just no way to be effective while carrying around such fears. And he shouldn't have to, anyway: it's the Secret Service's job to protect him.

As for the Secret Service's performance, Obama praises them in the piece, calling them "the best in the business" and the detail assigned to him "outstanding," adding, "I can't say enough about them and how much I appreciate the work that they've done."

Now ask yourself this: Wouldn't you say the same if you were in his shoes? How does it benefit Obama's safety in anyway to knock those protecting him? It doesn't. There is nothing Obama himself can do. It must come from others, making sure all that can be done, is being done."

[waterboy]

One good reason for an Obama/Clinton ticket? Its a bit of protection. If they eliminate the big "O", they'd have to take them both or suffer through another Clinton. []

[FOTD]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4350538&page=1

"Secret Service spokesman Donovan adds: "We develop security plans and implement them in close cooperation with local law enforcement. And we don't deviate from those plans or change them in midstream because of crowd access issues."

Define local law enforcement.

"I remain concerned that the enormity of the 2008 election provides a terrorist — domestic or foreign — with a potent, high-profile target to make a statement," Thompson added. "We must be better prepared."

Let's hope there are no "domestic" terrorists in local law enforcement ranks. They seem to have more of their focus on "foreign" terrorists...