Following the preemptive attack against Iraq, I wrote that while preemptive attacks - 
based upon established need - are a good thing, it's important to make sure that 
following a successful initial operation, we have to make sure that we're not leaving 
behind any "broken windows". In other words,
we have to make sure that all controls are operational and in place, so that we don't 
find ourselves with more of a security problem than we attempted to remove. Apparently,
our government didn't take this step following the invasion of Iraq, at least not to 
the fullest extent it should or could have.

In connection with this, and as brought out by the recent 9/11 Commision hearings, good security procedures were not followed by our government concenring potential and real threats 
against the United States, whether those threats were immediate or future ones. The Iraq war was one step in removing a 
potential problem, but, as I said before, all the threat(s) posed have not been removed, and, as per the daily news reports, 
seem to be manifested in new forms. And, according to what 
information is available in the newspapers and in television news reports, too much previous information was not 
followed up by our government's security organizations. <p>
Excuses don't help.  Not giving credence to bonafide reports, government agencies not following up on gathered intelligence, 
and the various inter-government braches not cooperating with each other,
all demonstrate an ineffective security awareness and response attitude.<p>
Apparently, what our government needs are some good private/business security people doing what good private/business security 
people do!  
 Have a good day!
Joe Chernicoff