Frail wall of security

Publication: Mooche News
BY The Mooche-2008-02-13

I heard Rudolf Giuliani give his explanation of the situation evolving a woman who was described as his girlfriend, and the security provided to her by the New York city police department. The mayor said:

"Judith(his girlfriend) didn't particularly want it but it was done because they(NYCPD) took the view that it was serious and had to be done this way, and it was done because they wanted to do it. Honestly, security is not something you would want. You do not want to have security restrictions placed on you because somebody has threatened to do terrible things to you or your family and professionals have evaluated it that way and feel you need the security, and you say to them can I do this or go here and they tell you no you can't. This is not something anybody ever desires. I remember the first time it happened with me, the things that I liked to do I couldn't do anymore because they would tell me you can't do it this way, you have to do it another way."

I wouldn't describe myself as someone who sees eye to eye with Rudy Giuliani but it looks like he and I are joined at the hip when it comes to how security should be administered.

Mr. Giuliani in so many words said the NYCPD over-reacted when it came to whether his girlfriend was at risk. He thought they proactively took the initiative to do something that was admirable but was totally unnecessary. The NYCPD concluded in their own minds that anybody close to Giuliani should be protected from any perceived threat no matter how viable. Mr. Giuliani clearly thought this was a bad idea that caused more harm than good even though Judith never was the victim of any kind of hostile act.

I never imagined Mr. Giuliani as someone who could conclude that one could have too much security. The word 'Giuliani' is the 256-bit cryptographic equivalent of the phrase: I will do anything, no matter what, to fight terrorism even if it means shredding the constitution and writing a new one that give law enforcement the right to do whatever they feel is necessary when it comes to fighting terrorist and stopping bad guys.

Mr. Giuliani clearly has two sides when it comes to security.

He knows that talking tough on security matters can result in political capital. He also knows that having a security detail assigned to his girlfriend was misuse of tax-payer money.

So what does one do when they are caught between a rock and a hard place? They try to level or come clean hoping their reasoning will make sense. He decided to let the cat out of the bag on the value of security.

He admitted law enforcement is not in a position and is probably not qualified to sanction security based on one man's opinion. He thought it was wrong for the police commissioner to subject his girlfriend to the restrictions of security even though it was for her own good.

I feel the same way when it comes to Homeland Security. Their blanket approach to security based on what happened on 911 is something that would be soundly rejected if it were put to a vote by the people it is suppose to be protecting.

I feel Mr. Giuliani's pain when he says "You do not want to have security restrictions placed on you because somebody has threatened to do terrible things to you or your family, and professionals have evaluated it that way and feel you need the security."

Security is the cornerstone of Mr. Giuliani's presidential campaign, so I wonder if he means it when he says such things. He is probably just being a politician trying to ease his hand out of the lion's mouth on this issue. He knows he has some explaining to do, so he explains it in a way that even I can be proud of because he knows security is something that gets under everybody's skin.

It just goes to show how far a person will go to get elected and how little integrity they possess in the process. I never thought I would live to see the day Rudolf Giuliani would resort to security bashing but then again, he is trying to save his political hide.

Maybe if he lose he will become an advocate for sensible security measures. I think he would be great for such a role and it would be great for the country to have him in such a role. It would rank up there with Nixon going to China; look how that changed the world.