Monday, August 14, 2006
America the vulnerable
Three years ago, New York City went black, along with dozens of other cities in the eastern United States and Canada.

A massive power failure sent millions of people pouring into the streets trying to figure out how to stay at work, head home, or do much of anything with no electricity. And immediately, fears arose that the crippling blackout might be the work of terrorists.

It was not, of course, but three years later many of the major systems we rely on for everyday life remain vulnerable. Protecting our electrical supplies, computer networks, transportation systems, our economy, food, and water, remains an almost overwhelming challenge for security analysts.

The simple truth is, in our free society, there is too much to protect. Just look at the sheer number of potential targets in Target America.

The United States has more than 6,000 power generating stations from coast to coast, transmitting electricity over a half million miles of bulk transmission lines.

There are 12,000 miles of coast, 141,000 miles of railroad lines, 11 major seaports, with a dozen more up the Mississippi.

America has more than 5,000 airports with paved runaways.

There are 47,000 shopping centers, attracting nearly 200 million Americans each month.

Cyber attack? This year, the number of Americans using the internet, according to the Computer Industry Almanac, hit 198 million.

How do we even count the public events in which we might be vulnerable to a mad bomber or group of crazed gunmen -- concerts, sporting events, conventions, worship services, political rallies?

And what about the physical sites that matter so much to our national identity -- the great buildings that mark our skylines, the monuments to our nation's history and honor?

Every security analyst I have spoken to for years has said the same thing: We can't protect everything, and one day terrorists will hit America again.

So if that is a fact, what should we do in the meantime? Are we doing enough to secure ourselves against the most pressing threats or are we doing too much, living in the darkness of our fear so much that the terrorists are already winning?
Posted By Tom Foreman, CNN Correspondent: 3:00 PM ET
  45 Comments
Thanks, Tom...that will make it easier to sleep tonight.

Kind of makes a person want to move to Sweden, or Australia, doesn't it?
Posted By Anonymous Diane E., Middle Island, NY : 3:21 PM ET
The most difficult way to live in an era of terror is also the only way which allows us to retain some sense of control. That is to stand up to both evil and uncertainty and live decently like there is no tomorrow. As the old saying goes - mankind plans, God laughs. And that is true even for terrorists.
Posted By Anonymous Leslie Los Angeles CA : 3:25 PM ET
"Are we doing enough to secure ourselves against the most pressing threats or are we doing too much, living in the darkness of our fear so much that the terrorists are already winning?"

We (or at least policy-makers) are actively pursuing policies that ensure that there is a plentiful supply of terrorists for years to come.

Fear works for the GOP. They LIKE it. If they didn't, they would be pursuing policies that address what causes terrorism in the first place. Don't look to see that happening any time soon. Not in the next 2 years, at least.

Cynical? No, just experienced.
Posted By Anonymous Arachnae, Sterling VA : 3:28 PM ET
Best advice I've ever received--Live life now.

Live each day like it's the last. Yeah, it might sound a little, 'Disney' but it really works.

As for our safety, I think it is important to think about it and to take some precautions but not to dwell on it or let it consume our every thought.

Fear is far too contagious. The antidote is being aware of that.
Posted By Anonymous Lily, Vancouver, BC : 3:29 PM ET
I think the experts are right, we just can't protect everything. We can just go on with our lives and hope that the intelligence community is keeping one step ahead of the terrorists. And if another attack hits, then we will just pick up the pieces and continue living our lives. If we spend time living in fear, then the terrorists will win.
Posted By Anonymous Cathy, Minneapolis, Minnesota : 3:35 PM ET
Yo Tom; Chill. You're scaring me.

If we let the countless types of "terrorist scenarios" you described dictate our every thought pattern and movement in life, what kind of life would we be living?..... The kind that terrorists WANT us to live!

There's nothing wrong with being vigilant, enduring tight security, and even some wire tapping, but having the notion that we must "protect EVERYTHING and live in the darkness of our fear" is not how I go about living my day to day life.
Posted By Anonymous Julie, St. Louis, MO : 3:41 PM ET
I would ask what are we doing about crime in general? I live in California and the only folks killed locally are via crime (murders), accidents (car, boat, swimming pool), etc.

When we get to the point of saying we need more and better equipped police to stop crime, I think it is too late - we could have spent the effort when the criminal was in grade school.

In the same way, when we talk about protecting ourselves and our infrastructure - it is too late. We are making more enemies everyday and, unless we want a Fortress America and live like Israeli's, we need to think about eliminating the purpose of terrorism.

Inequity, poverty, lack of education, fear and hatred create criminals (both domestic and international). As Americans, we prefer the Hollywood (or video game) shoot-em up and settle the score in 2 hours. Nobody wants to deal with the 10-20-30 year plans.

So let's build more prisons, employ more police and troops, build a wall around all our borders, go through the airport naked, make people convert to Christianity and do everything else to make us feel safe. We Americans (in general) sure as hell don't want to spend time, money, or emotion on helping people be better people.
Posted By Anonymous Peter, West Sacramento, Ca : 3:49 PM ET
Yes, America is vulnerable...always has been. We've just not had to face it in a major(on our own soil)way until 2001. One thing I know is that everytime I decide NOT to go somewhere I want to, or to NOT do something I want to, or NOT travel places I want to see, the terrorists win. Do I worry? Am I cautious? Of course. I just don't think staying in my own little house (where I could slip and fall and end up in traction if statistics are to be believed) is the solution. If I have a gripe at all, it's that the powers that be seem more interested in 'protecting' democracy in the Mid-East than bolstering security at home.
Posted By Anonymous Maryann Mercer, Champaign, IL : 3:51 PM ET
With everything that requires some form of protection here at home, the maniacs in Washington remain steadfast in their misguided effort to soldier on in some sinkhole of a foreign country, wasting young American lives and other valuable resources. All of thos military members serving elsewhere should be here in the USA protecting our borders and infrastructure. That's why it's called the Department of DEFENSE.
Posted By Anonymous A. Roy Olson, Tucson AZ : 3:53 PM ET
Why does CNN and all the other news media continue to aid the enemy by providing information about our weaknesses. It is bad enough that we have them, why advertise? Perhaps you are the enemy.
Posted By Anonymous Norman Holden, West Caldwell, New Jersey : 4:00 PM ET
Pardon me, but we seem to have the ability to more to ourselves than the enemy can do to us. From deregulation of infrastructure to gluttony to dummying down education to abandoning our cities while allowing the destruction of social safety nets to failure to enforce our laws to being a neighbor rather than a bullying colonalist to destroying a working middle class to build a class of super wealth to looking for the magic of happiness in medication. Just give me my SUV and my carry-on and my i-Pod and my cell.
Posted By Anonymous linda, bella vista, ar : 4:01 PM ET
The terrorists are winning. Every time we jump and change what we do, they win. Look at your own facts...47,000 shopping centers...how many would a terrorist group have to hit to impact our economy? They knocked down the towers and hit the pentagon, but our nation kept right on running. There is nothing any terrorist group could do to put us out of action as a nation. We are the only ones that can do that.
Posted By Anonymous Dave Spokane Washington : 4:05 PM ET
Wow... Just when you start to feel safe again...
All I can say is, I sleep at night knowing that what can be done is being done and the rest is God's will... As simple as it is, Let Go and Let God gives me comfort...
It's either that or my husband and chichen little running around saying the sky is falling in at every scary report!
Posted By Anonymous Sherry, Sarasota Fl : 4:11 PM ET
Tom,
If our government does not have the common sense, desire, or "ability" to secure, or at least control, our borders and ports how can we hope to feel confident about any other vulnerable areas of possible attacks? A free society, no matter how powerful, cannot claim to be unassailable. That seems to be the nature of the beast. However, I don't believe our government, in particular the Bush administration, is doing everything it can to reduce the number of our vulnerabilities. Their actions, or lack of them, seem to be based on a personal political agenda that is not in the best interest of our country and its citizens.
Posted By Anonymous Jo Ann, North Royalton, Ohio : 4:14 PM ET
I am in complete agreement with you. After 9/11, heightened security and tougher laws which affected the way we normally went about our lives, was a win for terrorism! Shutting down the borders? Why not just build a bubble to live in? If a terrorist wanted to enter the country, no matter how tight the security, he or she would find a way. Whenever terrorist affect your lifestyle, they've won!!!!
Posted By Anonymous Kendall Amazaki, Honolulu, HI : 4:15 PM ET
Hey Tom, We sometimes take everything for granted, electricity, water supplies, that we're invincible and that we'll live forever. Reality check, please! Here in Canada, we think that nothing will happen to us, no attacks towards my city, Montreal. Could be right now that the subway or any other facilities are a target. This morning, I was thinking that the person sitting next to me might carry a bomb...who knows! Don't want to be hysterical and suspect everyone but... I just have to go on living my normal life and hope for the best. Take care!
Posted By Anonymous Josee, Montreal (Canada) : 4:15 PM ET
We cannot protect everything, but we need to realize that the terrorists also cannot attack every potential target. The problem is that we must protect our targeted sites on a sliding scale of probable attack, with the most probable getting the most resources.

For instance, top priority targets naturally include Wall Street and the other trade centers in other cities (especially since the terrorists' main point is to disrupt our economy), the houses of government (primarily in DC), major ports and other focal points of commerce, distribution centers for oil and electrical power, certain national monuments and other sources of national pride (e.g., Independence Hall, Washington Monument, Golden Gate Bridge, Mount Rushmore, etc.), and essential private business manufacturing points. At other times, temporary targets of opportunity would include major gatherings of people such as the Super Bowl, the NCAA Championship football game, the World Series, 4th of July on the Boston Commons or on the Mall in DC, and so forth.

This is not something that Congress should "pork barrel". For instance, my hometown of Birmingham, Alabama, does not have many targets that would rank high on the national priority list. Therefore, I would not expect my representatives to get many federal resources (either money, manpower, or equipment) to protect the city and its sites. Valuable (and scarce) resources need to be devoted to the top priority targets, rather than squandering them on "pet projects". As the high priority terrorist targets get protected, then we can move on to lower priorities.

Before Hurricane Katrina, I would have said that the allocation of resources should be done by the relevant federal and state government agencies (primarily the Department of Homeland Security). Unfortunately, these agencies have not shown us that they are capable of operating logically, quickly, or well. Homeland Security is the agency that delivered the FEMA disaster after Hurricane Katrina, and now it seems to have spent billions on inept and/or fraudulent government contractors in the months after Katrina.

On the other hand, the 9/11 Commission appears to have investigated the events of September 11th in an evenhanded and commendable manner. Another good example of evenhanded government oversight is the BRAC Commission, which annually determines the military bases that need to be closed down or reduced in size. We may need to set up a "homeland security prioritization commission" (created in the same bi-partisan manner as the 9/11 Commission) to (1) control the prioritization of spending, and (2) actually conduct the government contracting.

The days of "politics as usual" (i.e., wasting massive amounts of our resources on "pork") prevents us from effectively dealing with this problem. "Pork spending" on national security issues only gives the jhadists more opportunities to slip through our defenses.
Posted By Anonymous Jim, Birmingham, AL : 4:19 PM ET
Hey Tom,

I forgot about the power outage 3 years ago. Goes to show how we resume our lives quickly.

There is so many things that could be the targets of terrorists attack. It is impossible to cover all angles.
I live in the province of Quebec and we are a large supplier of electricity.
Up north, in Bay James is the hydroelectric central. A few months ago, a Montreal reporter went to Bay James and succeeded in entering the site and even the buildings(with his camera, without being stop by anyone).Imagine if a terrorist did that! He had access to everything he needed to do arm. The company looked bad but since then they inforced the security.

But what are you guys suppose to do? Go everywhere and check for lack of security and report it? Isn't that the government's job? Since 9/11, a better job as been done at increasing security(last thursday, canadian autorithies stepped up the security in the airports and in conjonction with the US at the borders also) but there is to many things to cover,to many people.

I am not cynical, but yes I think other attacks will occur. I fear the most a bacteriological attack. So my question is, the governments are doing everything they can to prevent an attack but in the event one would happen are they ready to face it and react in a quick way, no matter what kind of attack it is? Man, I feel more restless by the minute talking about it. But life goes on....
Joanne Ranzell
Laval Quebec
p.s. I wrote the same message a few minutes ago but had trouble sending it.So you might receive it twice.
Posted By Anonymous Joanne Ranzell Laval Quebec : 5:00 PM ET
Hi Tom, IMO, the terrorists are not winning. The media keeps the light on the possibility of terror attacks, but terror is not the primary thought in American minds. Jobs, raising children, healthcare, are probably more important.
Thoughts of terror attacks certainly have never kept me from a University of Michigan football game or a Detroit Red Wings hockey game.
Posted By Anonymous Judy Stage Brooklyn MI : 5:01 PM ET
Maybe if we weren't such bullies to smaller, less developed foreign countries and adopted a foreign policy of respect and equality to others, would we see a decline of terrorist hatred directed towards the US.
Posted By Anonymous Rich, myrtle beach sc : 5:48 PM ET
Why arent we going after the countries that harbour and finance terrorist. I vividly remember after 9/11 the statement made by president bush in reference to hold these countries accountable for thier actions in the war on terrorism. I am deeply concerned for the future of this country when our presidents dont follow through on thier words. We will not win this war until these countries Iran, Syria have the fear of god instilled in them by the United States of america.
Posted By Anonymous Robert Brandt, Oralndo, Florida : 5:51 PM ET
Jim is absolutely right. We need to protect the large targets first, and then move one, and I also agree that a commission must be formed to regulate HLS spending.
Posted By Anonymous Paul, Colorado Springs, Colorado : 5:51 PM ET
We are already prisoners of terrorism by constantly worrying about terrorism. Yes, there is a possiblity we could be victims of a terror attack again in the future, but as average individuals in this country or other country we have to live each day as it comes and not walk around looking over our shoulder, not focus entirely on what color the security gauge is set at on a given day, and live life fully each day.
Posted By Anonymous Melody Chapin Harbor Springs : 5:58 PM ET
The task is immense; but you have to start somewhere. Take one system at the time: protect the airports; then move on to protect the rails; then the ports; and so on, and so on. With every day that passes we'll be a bit more protected until one day we'll be completely protected -- even if that day is in 3006, but we have to start one day, the sooner the better.
Posted By Anonymous Peter Trevino, New York : 6:05 PM ET
Certain obvious threats could be mitigated:
--biowar,by subsidizing nurse-training and providing better public health systems in our poor areas;
--inspecting thousands of ship-containers entering our ports each day;
--enforcine 'no-fly' zones over our nuke waste-ponds and over hazardous chemical plants;
--counter-devices vs. shoulder-missiles threatening our airliners.
(Forget explosive shoes--terrorists need not even get on the plane! )
But GOP govt (controlling all 3 branches) won't pay for these expensive precautions.
Posted By Anonymous Dan Lyons,Fort Collins,CO : 6:27 PM ET
I don't see Norway, Germany, Denmark, Australia, Singapore, and etc getting bombed. What are we doing that these countries are not doing?

Look at how we have changed our life styles and frame of minds since 9/11. I think terrorists have won by a big margin.
Posted By Anonymous Jung Lee, Fort Lee, NJ : 6:30 PM ET
If we are to protect ourselves we need to identify the potential terrorists in our midst as quickly as possible. The resources we can put to this task are limited and therefore must be used in the most efficient way possible. This is what we refuse to do in the name of political correctness and "civil rights". Why do we refuse to racially and/or ethnically profile? No, all young Muslim males are not terrorists however, almost all terrorists are young Muslim males. Apply our security resources where they can be most effective. As for the many who might be screened and inconvenienced or offended, sorry but there is no constitutional right to convenience nor is there a guarantee that you will not be ofended. Your right is only to due process and compensation if damaged unjustly.
Posted By Anonymous Larry, Quincy IL : 6:33 PM ET
Hi Tom. What we should be doing is to continue "going after" al Qaeda and other groups that aim to harm us. What is more difficult is entire countries (like Iran and many, many others) and societies (too many to list here!!) that HATE THE U.S. That's tougher--take out an entire country?!? Given that, maybe FORTRESS AMERICA is the only way left to go?!? After all, one can count on one hand the countries left in the world where people truly like and respect Americans. We've made our bed, now it's time to lay in it (and put up the "fortress walls"!!). Good luck to us, our greedy, selfish, materialistic selves.
Posted By Anonymous Mark, Sacramento, CA : 6:35 PM ET
Tom,
Great analysis! It is scary to think this way but it certainly is the truth.
Stephanie Wood
Posted By Anonymous Stephanie Wood, Charles Town, WV : 6:38 PM ET
MMMMMMMMM Tom- Your article leaves me NOT so warm and fuzzy. Do you think 100 years from now we will be looked upon as the terrorist era? I'll bet the terrorist will look pretty IDIOTIC to future historians. Don't you think? Well,at least we can hope there is no such thing by then. We can always HOPE that people can learn to live in peace.Yes, we can hope.
Posted By Anonymous Betty Ann Taylor Nacogdoches, Tx : 6:41 PM ET
Why is it that all our news media carry stories telling us and everyone else in the world what is vulnerable in this country. I find that counter-productive. Not only does it give the enemy more information than they need,
it also creates anxiety amongst our people.
We, the people, can only do so much. Keep on eye on things going on around us. We can't be expected to run to all the sites of vulnerability.
I know we have the right to know, but do we really need to know. Especially when our enemy finds out the facts at the same time we do. Whatever happened to "National Security"?
Posted By Anonymous Tom Fuller, Toms River, NJ : 6:45 PM ET
Hey Tom,
"Courage," is the key to what makes us as Americans live our lives each day. Courage to face the day and not let the fear of terrorism get to us or our children. I put my 15 year old daughter on a plane to Florida--along with a friend and her family--Friday morning after all the turmoil in the UK and the increased security and threat levels in the US. Yes, I was in fear something could happen--but when isn't a parent in fear of their children being hurt or killed--but her own courageous spirit to go on in spite of the threats only strengthens the American spirit. Yes, courage is the key and the American way!
Posted By Anonymous Lisa, Shrewsbury, MA : 7:25 PM ET
Anyone with any sense knows we will always be vulnerable somewhere. You cannot protect every port, railroad, airline, stadium, and shopping mall. What you can do is let the sponsors of terrorism know they will be held responsible for any acts of terrorism committed by those they support, and that our response will be so terrible that they will wish they had kept a leash on their dogs of war. As Dennis Miller once said, "we may have a long fuse, but at the end of the day, it is connected to a really huge bomb". If the Syrians and Iranians believed that any "dirty bombs" detonated in New York or Los Angeles would result in the real thing being dropped on Damascus and Teheran, I doubt they would continue to support terrorism.
Posted By Anonymous Mac Owens, Riverside, CA : 3:13 AM ET
We are vulnerable because we lack the stomach (due to political correctness) to do what needs to be done. That is hunt the terrorists down and KILL them in the way that is most abhorrent to them. Not lock them up and give them "rights". THEY don't care about your rights and freedoms at all. Only when this country shows strength will these terrorists leave us alone. The only way is to strike swiftly and strongly. Once they know that retribution will make attacking us useless to their cause, they will leave us alone. Sadly, I don't think the hand wringing PC'ers will ever get that. Look at the whining about the detainees in Guantanamo. Any one of them would slit an American's throat, given half a chance. But the whining continues about the "poor" detainees, whose rights have been trampled! Hopefully America will wake up before more evil befalls us. "The best defense is a strong and sure offense"
Posted By Anonymous Dave S. Corpus Christi, TX : 7:17 AM ET
Are we doing enough to secure ourselves against the most pressing threats or are we doing too much, living in the darkness of our fear so much that the terrorists are already winning?

We're doing too much. That we're systematically removing freedoms, assuming our own citizenry is plotting evilly against us all, and have taken to adopting a "safety first, freedom last" attitude is quite clear that terrorism is winning.

Not since the Red Scare has America been so frightened of its own shadow. What happened to the proud and confident country I knew and loved? There is absolutely nothing courageous about our current reactionary situation--paper tigers do not require use of flamethrowers to be combatted.
Posted By Anonymous Jake, Wheeling IL : 9:50 AM ET
Food for thought: America's vulnerability has always been its greatest strength. The less vulnerable a place becomes, the more tyrranical the situation is.
Posted By Anonymous Jake, Wheeling IL : 9:54 AM ET
Tom, This has been my point to anyone who will listen since the last terror plot was " revealed " to us last week and put everyone in a panic. No one is ever safe 100% so unless everyone plans to build the underground " bomb Shelter" of the 50's we should just go about our business and hope for the best. The busboys who worked at Windows of the World got up for work early on 9/11, as did the everyone else from the trade center because they were going about their lives. Im here at work in a major NY Hospital and the threat remains but im here....
Posted By Anonymous Lyn, brooklyn, ny : 10:28 AM ET
Tom-

You've raised issues that, unfortunately, I think about all too often.


While I do think that the Gov't has done an OK job protecting us since 9/11, it's only a start; I doubt there will be enough security to fully protect us within my lifetime, and sadly, I believe that there will be another act of terrorism on our soil within my lifetime.

As you said, there are so many events that could so easily be targeted - think about just the Super Bowl alone - you can't ban everything and thoroughly search every person who goes to the game. If you realize how many items sneak through airport security due to employee carelessness or lack of training, you can't expect hired security personnel at a pro ball game to catch every last detail as thousands of fans move through the stadium. There are so many other similar examples, not just the Super Bowl. Stick any number of nouns in there and it will probably still be relevant.

It bothers me that, when I drive up to see friends and family in NY, it flashes through my mind that wonder how long the Manhattan Skyline will remain as it is, and when I drive through D.C., I flinch when I pass the Pentagon, the Capitol, everything. I don't obsess over it, mind you, it only flashes through my mind for a millisecond, but that's plenty enough to make me aware.

I'm (perhaps wrongly) assuming that NYC and D.C., since they were brutally attacked and their weaknesses graphically put on display, are better protected now than before, and probably better protected than other cities that have so far remained untouched. I wonder about these other cities, big and small, in America.

Yes, the terrorists have taken away our innocence, replacing it with hardened type of street smarts, but there is fear in the unknown of our future, and it's only natural for innocence to be lost. The events of 9/11 have redefined our generation to one that trusts less, knows genuine fear, and is able to look at the negative space to where our weaknesses lie.

Taking immense measures may seem paranoid and as if we focus only on the gloom and doom that may or may not come, but I'd say that taking these measures is far better than not protecting ourselves, potentially sacrificing so many more innocent American lives. It's disappointing that we've lost a lot of our carefree ways since 9/11, but it's just a fact, not really an option. We as a nation do need to be able to move forward and move on, but we cannot forget and must take measures to ensure it doesn't happen again.

We as a people need to keep in mind that our safety is not just the Government's job, but every citizen's (and non-citizen's, if they're living here anyway)job as well.

We cannot afford another 9/11.
Posted By Anonymous Andi M.D. Gaithersburg MD : 10:36 AM ET
Dear Tom,

The day of the power-outage three years ago and and the recent week that New York's MTA went on strike are the worst. The public chaos. Masses of people cluster in bulk to find a ride. Wild cabbies overcharge the commute price while sharing rides with many others. Best way to move around in New York during those time of crisis: with a bike or by foot. How will this be coordinated when a time comes to evacuate the city?
Posted By Anonymous Ratna, New York, NY : 11:12 AM ET
It is very important to be as prepared as possible; but, is it economically feasible to control for every contingency? I don't know. We have so much suffering and poverty in our own country - needs which should take precedent. If we can't control every contingency, then it's bad politics to pretend that we can. Somebody needs to stand up and tell the truth about the financial feasibilty of fighting terrorism here at home and abroad. Thank you for reading.
Posted By Anonymous Tracy, Summerville, SC : 12:02 PM ET
I think it is a good thing this is finally reaching more people. For far too long most have chosen to barry their heads about all of what we have that would be of interest to target as well as prepare there households for what is to come.I would like to hope that more of you not just hear act now by storring goods for the time when more comes down the pipe.Cause it is too late we have for too long let some of these indaviduals that have this hate on are and have been working in prime targets for a very long time just waiting for the right moment to hit from the inside NOT so much the noticible targets.I pray many will be ready for this difficult time comming.God bless from a sister who cares,but chooses to face this face to face NOT in fear but hopefully with confidence all will work for good.
Posted By Anonymous Teri.Ontario Canada : 12:25 PM ET
Prevention is the key to protect our cities. What I mean is we must do more of fighting and engaging our enemies on their land before they reach us.
Posted By Anonymous Hung Trinh, Macomb, MI : 12:52 PM ET
The comment about CNN and the other media "aid[ing] the enemy by providing information about our weaknesses" struck me as simple minded. The enemy knows how many miles of coastline we have, how many malls, how many refineries. This isn't classified information, it's just facts and part of public record. If we think the terrorists are stupid or ill informed we're fooling ourselves.
Posted By Anonymous Paul, Bryan, TX : 1:28 PM ET
America is vulnerable and will remain vulnerable till Washington would change it's foreign policy towards muslims. Hatered towrds muslims will not address the terrorism issue instead it will create hatred for US even in the hearts of moderate muslims. Instead of criticizing the whole muslim world a positive partnership with muslim leaders and their nations can help tackle the issue.Islam and Quran by no means allow killings of innocent lives.
Posted By Anonymous shabz, portland Oregon : 1:46 AM ET
The simple truth is not that there is too much to protect while there is; I think the more concerning message here is the fact that Americans are completely dependant upon these things in order to carry on with everyday life. Seems to me like there needs to be an alternative system or an entirely new one.
Posted By Anonymous Jenn Orlando FL : 9:08 AM ET
ABOUT THE BLOG
A behind the scenes look at "Anderson Cooper 360°" and the stories it covers, written by Anderson Cooper and the show's correspondents and producers.




SUBSCRIBE
    What's this?
CNN Comment Policy: CNN encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. Please note that CNN makes reasonable efforts to review all comments prior to posting and CNN may edit comments for clarity or to keep out questionable or off-topic material. All comments should be relevant to the post and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. By submitting your comment, you hereby give CNN the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying information via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. CNN Privacy Statement.
Home  |  World  |  U.S.  |  Politics  |  Crime  |  Entertainment  |  Health  |  Tech  |  Travel  |  Living  |  Money  |  Sports  |  Time.com
© 2014 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.