Who could have anticipated the attack?

[tw]

Originally posted by Nic Name
Would civilian airports be more or less secure if the National Guard were armed and dangerous?

Civilian airports never were a particularly dangerous place. Planes, however, were always at risk because there was no security due to the FAAs graveyard mentality. Now that enough people are dead, planes have been substantially safer, due to 11 Sept. Yet you can not tell that to an emotional person who has feared to fly for the last 6 months - facts be damned.

Planes and airports had been at greater risk for 10 years before 11 Sept. Cited is Yousaf Ramsey (I think it was) who was finishing a plan to bomb something like 14 jumbo jets simultaneously over the Pacific when he set his Phillippine room on fire. Other bombings simply went mostly unknown such as the Air France jumbo over Africa and an Air India jumbo off the east coast of Africa.

Security, exposed by the press as non-existent in so many airports and cited expressly by the FAA's own Inspector General as all but non-existent, is now being upgraded to status equal or exceeding the Montgomery County courthouse. National Guardsmen, armed or disarmed, are irrelevant. The greatest threat to plane passengers was the FAA's graveyard mentality which was still entrenched on 10 Sept and which was defined here repeatedly and previous to that date.