There have already been security-lapses in protection of Obama. An intentional security lapse is probably the most likely means that will be used in any assassination effort.
There's a lot of talk and fear that President-Elect Obama will be assassinated. It's rare that a conversation about Obama comes up without someone mentioning the worry that he will be assassinated by a crazy right winger, a racist, or a hired killer, because of his positions on issues and the actions he'll take which affect big corporations.
I even heard of one elderly black woman who refused to vote for him, she was so afraid he'd be killed.
The fear for Obama's life is justified, especially after the toxic hate Sarah Palin stirred up at her campaign rallies. I fear what we saw there, the calls to "kill him" were just the tip of the iceberg. The idea that a black man is president must be eating at the craws of bigots and racists who already felt inadequate.
Call me a tinfoil hat wearer, but the easiest way to get through security is to set things up so security softens or disappears.
During the campaign, for example, there was a major security lapse where x-ray screening for weapons was totally stopped and thousands were allowed to enter a rally without even a "cursory examination." That incident should be investigate. The perpetrator of the order should be charged with endangering the candidate and prosecuted, not just fired. It should be done in a highly public way to put the "fear of god" into any other government employees, security people or potential hackers or fraudulent callers who might consider setting up a compromised security situation.
Americablog reported a second, similar security breach.
All security personnel, at every level, should be indoctrinated so they know that any orders to stand down will be highly suspect, even from the most respected and trusted sources. National policies should be put in place that make it clear that doing anything to diminish presidential security, even in the face of orders, is a crime, and that dis-obeying orders which put the president at greater risk is encouraged.
There are too many powerful forces, organizations and people with access to the myriad security resources within government to trust this to business as usual. There are so many questions about why security lapsed on 911 that have never been answered. We can't allow something horrible to happen because a mole uses the system to allow security to lapse, even for an instant-- for Obama or his family.
Anything less than a major effort, both back channel, in secrecy, and publicly, to secure double and triple safety factors and to make it clear that any failings will be dug up and severely punished, will be a major security failure. And part of the process of protecting against intentional security lapses should be an investigation into and hearings on past security lapses, with calls for whistleblowers to come forward, particularly ones who were mistreated or ignored by past administrations.
There's a reason the idea of assassination comes up so often in conversations. Bush had insurance-- Cheney. Obama chose a viable replacement-- a white man. I don't think it's necessary to say more.
Update: my poll; Assassination Conversation Poll, has one of the highest responses of polls done on the site so far. People who did NOT vote for Kerry or Gore or who watch Fox as their primary TV news source are much less likely to have been in a conversation on assassination.
1
