The man is quick like a cat!



Seriously, alot of people would have been tagged by that first shoe.

I'm glad it was just a shoe, I get nervous every time Bush pops up in these places.

The Secret Service fails, IMO.

What would the secret service do? Force the reporters to take off their shoes before going in? Maybe they fail on preventing the 2nd shoe throw, but then again those shoes were thrown pretty quick.

A gun is quicker, wouldn't you agree? He should have been down in a flash, in my opinion... violently. He had time to walk up, remove both shoes, and throw them. After that, you see a dude in the front slowly move sort of in harm's way. I just think it was a pretty shitty job by the Secret Service. Their job is to eliminate threats before they happen. They failed.

It looks like for whatever reason, they weren't much in the room with Bush. A ton of security poured out the door behind him (right side of the camera).

From the positions of the people, it looks like the shoe-thrower was sitting down waiting for Bush. That's typical of press conferences.

Do you think there was a 2nd thrower?

I usually don't criticize the media too much, but I have to ask: Why was this a "DEVELOPING STORY" nearly 24 hours after it happened? It should have been a brief snippet. No doubt it gave them some additional ratings, but I think they pushed it on a bit much.

Still I thought it was cool that the other reporters jumped him, albeit a little slow but not that bad for journalists who weren't really ready for the confrontation.

Much ado bout nothing.

The reporters had gone through a ton of security screening to get into the room. SS wasn't present in the room because everyone in the room had been checked. They aren't going to start taking away peoples shoes. Frankly I see this as a good thing. The presidents life isn't put in any real danger and he gets to see the real anger people have with him.

The second thrower with the grassy sole?

Apparently, Snarky was there.

I just think there should have been an SS agent or two that acted a little more quickly in that room, I tend to agree he should have been taken out after the first throw.

Risk is always there, whether you screen anyone or not. Anyone remember the shoe bomber? Yea, he was screened! Now, I'm not saying security here wasn't top notch or anything, but keep in mind that people continuously come up with new and innovative ways to get weapons in. Shoes off? Obviously not, but I think you need an SS in there.

Another thing is that.. yea, it's just a shoe, and the odds of the prez getting hurt are pretty small. But, given a forceful enough throw to exactly the wrong part of the head, it can potentially cause damage. It was a quick first and second throw, but a trained person in there should be able to take em out regardless after the first.

During a fundraiser at which the President and VP were present I had to provide secret service my social security number for a clearance weeks ahead of time (as we were doing set ups in the room) and once we were done they went through the room with wands and bomb sniffing dogs.

Metal detectors were set up, everyone entering had to pass through and lists were checked. I have no idea what attendees had to go through other than perhaps providing names on a check list, I'm sure they didn't have to go through what we went through (then again we were setting up alot of equipment and shit).

There's a ton of security shit I'm not mentioning, such as the people they had at specific points in the crowd, and how they even went through supplies, removing random noise makers (pressurized cans) for active testing and EVERYTHING metallic being boxed for xray and given back to us hours later.

It was incredibly impressive. Honestly everything I could think of wasn't possible after their security. I'm sure there are TONS of things I couldn't think of or imagine...but I'd be shocked if they hadn't. The thing that stunned me the most was that this was a secure inside location (hotel) of GOP only attending...and this was the security they did!

Press attending had their own security procedures and were taken through another location.

This was in 1988, when Bush was running for office, at one of his campaign stops (which Reagan and others spoke at) and was a GOP-only event. In other words, among friends. (Charleton Heston among others were there).



This Bush was in IRAQ. And it's a new era of security issues. So I think Snarky's assessment is simply common sense, as well as information you could easily find out with a minimum amount of digging.

----

All that being said, you're not going to see a President assassinated at a secure conference like the one I mentioned, or that type of press conference. But there's absolutely no way to keep anyone 100% safe without completely eliminating the personal freedoms of the populace (and thus setting up an atmosphere where assassination/revolution is even more desirable) or running them around 24/7 in some kind of Pope-mobile bubble.

Secret Service does pretty well.

_________________

I think it is a bit worrying that the Secret Service trusts their security preparations THAT much that they seemed to have a lower alertness threshold. I hope this wakes them up a little bit.

*ahem*

I'm very fucking concerned!

I love the fact if you look at bushes face he has a smirk on his face like ... "HAH You missed!"

haha

_________________
"Creating Havoc and Pie Since 2001!"
My Website: http://www.anthonyhays.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cakvala

I realize all that Tarot, and there's probably a TON of stuff that they don't even tell you about. There's no comparison to airport security, I hoped I made that clear with the line after I said that. My point was more or less that people come up with ways to sneak shit in. Even if you look at all the ideas from books, movies, and would-be terrorists it doesn't begin to cover the possibilities for hiding weaponry.

Like Kula, I think my concern lies with their own apparent sense of confidence that every possibility was covered.

There are reasons not to have the secret service standing next to him. Obviously I'm not privy to why that decision was made in this instance, but I would guess (and it's an obvious guess) that the reason would be political. The potential danger (slight) is HEAVILY outweighed by the politics of it.

He *can't* be shown to have heavy security in that room, which they've made extremely secure blah blah blah, on Arab TV, in that region. The message would be that Bush doesn't trust them, look! Bush doesn't feel safe, even surrounded by all that security, see! Etc.

There's always a balance of politics and safety/reality. I think another good example of that...tho very different is Obama's kids. He's sending them to the same private school Chelsea went to. There was a lot of pressure on him and the Clintons to use the local public school, to HELP the educational system.

But the political hay is weighed against the reality of education and more importantly the safety of their kids. Not a tough choice probably, since it involves their children. But they'll also have to weigh security v. freedom for those kids too.

But as I said before, it's probably impossible to stop a truly determined attempt, especially when they're willing to die to do it. It's just fortunate in this country, most people don't reach that level of malcontent and those who do are often involved in plots which get them caught.

Most successful assassinations in modern times I think have probably been mentally ill people. They don't make a lot of preperation that would get them caught, they don't have people helping them who might get caught/rat them out, and they don't tend to confide in a lot of people about it. It may not be 'most' but I'm thinking of Reagan, and John Lennon specifically.

_________________

lol

Who knew he could dodge anything beyond truth and responsibility?

_________________

I'm sure some Nam vets could think of something. Zing!