Federal security cameras not working at Norfolk airport

Freedom is stated in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. But who defends those rights from enemy nations? Do you honestly think Hitler would have let our Constitution remain had Germany conquered the world? Do you think the Emporer of Japan would have adopted our Bill of Rights had Japan been successful in WWII? Who stopped them? The military. And again, you're welcome.

"it’s the military that has given you the freedoms to post your opinions. I’m proud to serve."

I thought that freedom came from the Constitution/Bill of Rights

I wish they would tell us EXACTLY where the cameras are and more importantly where they AREN'T. Why must we even know any of this anyway. Can't we make it a little bit of a challenge for our enemy?

You probably won't get an answer any time soon. I noted my previous note was "truncated" at a very convenient spot. It began with "Second guessing such decisions are usually made after the fact by those that really don’t know the truth or rely o". The rest that was to follow was "...those taht really don't know the truth or rely on the press for accurace (re: the headline of this article)." Funny thing - the headline has now been changed and the ending that originally said "...won't be fixed" is now gone.

My opinion is shared by many, including the 9/11 Commission. Bush’s blame on the intelligence community was directed at the CIA, not the military. I’m an active duty officer with 28 years experience, much of it in intelligence – nothing alleged about it. And you’re welcome – it’s the military that has given you the freedoms to post your opinions. I’m proud to serve.

Every president to date has been human. No human is without flaw. Have you aced every single test you’ve taken in school? No? But you were given all of the necessary information, so why would you have missed even one question? This is a very elementary example of just how things go wrong, no matter how much information you’re given. Ultimately the decision is made by a human based on the information available at that time. Second guessing such decisions are usually made after the fact by those that really don’t know the truth or rely o

I am still waiting for an answer as to why my comments have to wait hours for staff approval before being posted.

Your dubious claim that 9/11 would not have happened if Clinton had done "his job" is really nothing more than an opinion. And your implication that your alleged role in military intelligence somehow makes that opinion more valid is pretty ironic.

bush, after all, originally blamed his failure to respond on the intelligence community.

Nevertheless, your posts are all about giving bush a pass and deflecting blame on Clinton.

Given your logic, if a terrorist attack occurs within the first six months of Obama's presidency, it will be bush's fault. Because if Bush does his job, no attack on American soil will be possible in the future, according to your logic.

God save us from that sort of military intelligence. Let's hope Obama remembers where the buck stops. This president and his apologists seem to have forgotten.

We were warned long ago by a man named Oliver North and that tree hugging, private jet flying, inventing the internet moron laughed at him. I blame all of them equally but the fact he was offered to us under Clinton's watch is a little worse. It really does not matter because Islam is winning as they have planned by using our own rules and left wing ignorance against us. Laugh all you will many of you but just open your eyes and look a little deeper into the woods or will it take the renaming to Londonbad, capitol of Anglostan to wake you up! Do not blow it off like many did Hitler and the Nazi party.

I never once said Bush was off the hook. However, had Clinton done his job, it's likely 9/11 wouldn't have happened. I wont say it's all Clinton's fault, nor will I say it's all Bush's fault. It's so easy for people such as you to play arm-chair quarterback and make leaps of illogic based on what you hear in the press. I worked in military intelligence and understand just how much information is gathered about "potential terrorists threats". More threats are eliminated long before the plans are carried out, but that's rarely reported to the press. Why? Because in doing so would reveal our intelligence collection methods. It's so easy to blame someone for a something like 9/11 when dozens of other equally destructive plans are eliminated quietly.

Planning for 9/11 started sometime during the Clinton administration and that takes bush off the hook!?!?

Why is that? Is it because he was too busy? Did he have more important things to worry about than warnings about an attack on U.S. soil?

Was he incompetent? Was he incapable of responding to the threat? (There's certainly evidence for the incompetence defense.)

Or did he just not take it seriously?

You can't absolve bush for his failures by claiming others failed as well, not matter how hard you try. It's a child's argument.

Had the bush administration responded to the warnings, the alleged planning during the Clinton administration would have been irrelevant.

Unless you believe this country is helpless to defend itself against a terrorist attack once the planning has begun?

How is it the headline is in direct contradiction with the actual facts?? Austin "Wright" is Austin "Wrong". Maybe Mr. Wright should look for employment as a writer for the Enquirer.

And for Mr. "Al-Sifr". While I'm not much of a Bush fan, to blame him for "ignoring" Osama bin Laden is as accurate as this story's headline. It was the sexually over-active Clinton that ignored bin Laden. It's been proven many times the planning for 9/11 happened years before Bush took office. Hey, I got an idea - Mr. Wright can write for the Enquirer, and you can be his editor!

A cover-up means deep-sixing a legitimate story.

We have never reported on the state of security at the airport before--the Pilot doesn't usually consider that newsworthy.

So why, the minute something *doesn't* work, do we report on it? Have we reported on which cameras on the Interstates aren't working? Which tunnel cameras? Which bank cameras, inside or at ATM's? See what I mean?--we just don't need to have a story about failed systems. It is not newsworthy, unless a terrorist takes advantage of the moment (since he practices his English by reading the Pilot). Cheers, MGM

Lauren Wolf, spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration said, "The camera shutdown is not cause for concern." Trust me...trust me....trust me and I'll lead you to the airplane.

What does Barack Obama have to do with airport security cameras? I thought the burden of securing our homeland goes to George W. and his Secretary of Homeland Security. Just a crazy thought...

I suppose the newspaper could have covered up the broken security cameras at the airport, but that doesn't make us any safer.

After all, president bush ignored warnings about Osama Bin Laden and the result was 9/11.

WOW, thank you for notifying me of this flaw as well as Mr. Mohammed, Mr. Shakir, & Mr. Ahib. We ALL needed to know the rather inobvious. It's no wonder we never learn from our mistakes. Even if 19 other systems are in place, an attempt is just as destructive and deadly. The airline industry has enough problems without the aid of the local media outlets pointing out rather invisible security flaws. By the way, can you tell me where the police will be sitting on Rte. 17 today? I'm planning an escape route and just want to be sure I get it right.

Why does the pilot find it necessary to lie in the headlines?

Let's get the cameras working. For what air travel costs these days I want to make sure that maximum security procedures are in place. Where's barrock? Oh, he's visiting kin overseas isn't he.