(This column was published in the North Shore News on Sept. 29, 2004)
Sept. 10 thinking drives Canada's security
By Leo Knight
SECURITY experts from around the world and I have gathered here in Dallas, Texas to meet and discuss new and better ways to do their jobs.
Leading edge technology companies are showing the latest and greatest new gizmos. Seminars to enhance the scope and knowledge of industry professionals are daily features. America's mayor, Rudy Giuliani, is set to deliver the keynote speech.
But underlined in all of this are the discussions concerning the global terror threat and dealing with the frustration inherent in protecting ourselves from an enemy that is hidden among us. Late last week, the FBI alerted all law enforcement and federal agencies to be on high alert for an attack by al-Qaida "similar in scope to 9/11" in the five weeks prior to the U.S. election in early November. What type of attack, they didn't say. If they have specific intelligence they certainly weren't sharing. Most likely, it is because they simply do not know. And that in itself is even more frightening. The potential attack could come from anywhere.
The world, post 9/11, is truly a much more dangerous and frightening place. Unfortunately, we are still being held back from doing many of the most basic things to protect ourselves because of political correctness driven by Sept. 10 thinking.
On Sunday, the Halifax airport was shut down because one man passed through the passenger screening checkpoint without having his laptop properly checked. Nine hundred passengers, already checked, were herded back into the main terminal and forced to go through the security pre-board screening again.
The departures lounge, plane and all the loaded baggage were searched by the RCMP with bomb-sniffing dogs.
Sixteen flights were delayed and three cancelled outright because of the delay. A spokesperson for the airport, Karen Sinclair, said the evacuation and police response were necessary. She said that any time there is a security incident or a potential security incident that they take every precaution and they take the incident seriously. I wish that she were correct, you see, but we don't actually take it as seriously as we should.
I have long complained about the superficial nature of airport security. It is not a problem with the people charged with putting in place the procedures. Rather, it is the fault of the political leaders who are cowed by the liberal intelligentsia who wring their hands moaning about offending someone.
Better someone get offended than seeing a mushroom cloud over Manhattan.
So what we are left with is more accurately described as a show to convince the public that our government is actually doing something.
On Sunday, at a reception for the security conference, I was speaking to an international anti-terror expert from Asia. He asked me why Canada was so resistant to getting on board with the counter-terrorism efforts of the United States and Great Britain. What a great question. Why indeed?
Let's be realistic. We may not be as significant a target as our neighbours to the south, but we are a target. Notwithstanding the direct threats already made by al-Qaida leadership, if the United States can harden themselves as a target sufficiently, then the terror groups will simply look to a softer target. What softer target could they possibly find than Canada? Especially with our proximity to the United States.
We have a refugee system that is second to none in the world for its inherent naiveté. We take people at their word when they show up without the documents they needed to board the plane they came on. Even if they are ultimately ordered deported, they are free to roam around until an appointed time when they are told to present themselves for deportation. Oddly enough, thousands and thousands simply don't turn up and our government hasn't a clue where they went.
Or if they do, the system allows appeal after appeal so it may take years to actually force them out.
The political correctness that seems to drive every political decision for fear of offending someone or some identifiable group is Sept. 10 thinking. On Sept. 11, 2001, that thinking should have been put to rest forever.
But it hasn't.
-30-