Today’s building managers and owners are not spending as much money as they did post 9/11 when there was a rush to increase security systems through large capital improvements that included biometric readers, turnstiles and visitor access controls. But what did this buying spree accomplish? Not much other than a high level of anxiety and animosity.

Today’s security managers and real estate developers are cautious of implementing such upgrades. One reason in particular is these systems are not being used to the fullest capability, not to mention a lack of perceived need since there has not been a domestic terrorist attack in recent years. The urgent need to be secure diminishes the further we move away from 9/11, even though the element of security as a value added service has shown to be a contributor in signed tenant leases.

As the election draws closer, questions are being asked if we are more or less susceptible to a terrorism attack.  Actually, in one possible scenario I believe you have the “perfect storm” capability.

History has shown us that during administration changes, we become vulnerable to attacks - and we are not talking ancient history at that.  The World Trade Center attacks and London bombings are good examples. More problematic are the other issues which rise to the occasion.  First there is human nature to contend with.  During any administration transition, people lose their jobs and political appointments.  How excited are they to help the new administration?  Not very…  Remember the stories about the Clinton administration transition into the Bush administration?  When the W’s were removed from computer keyboards?  It’s that kind of childish behavior that hurts us. Do we really need to contend with this during a national emergency? I am not saying national defense systems are going to be tampered with or shut down, but the real problem is where the grunt work is performed. 

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal reported that bioterrorism threats present the top security risks in the United States. Couple this with the recent reports of the Bruce Ivins death and a case-by-case rehashing of the entire seven years anthrax case, and what you have is a perfect opportunity for a copycat case to develop.

For a moment, let’s bring together the expressed opinions by experts, which discuss how weak the response capability is within this country, that government officials are very concerned and are attempting to make bioterrorism our top security priority, and the Ivins case and all its publicity. It should not be surprising to anyone if we see a rash of letters being delivered that contain a “powdery substance.” How far of a stretch would it be for a lone lunatic to send out a few letters based on all this talk?

As the initial posting for this blog, I must express my optimism and hope that this becomes a reference source and those in the industry post their opinion so there is an ongoing dialogue. In putting this together, I have often been asked what my actual goal is within this space. To be honest, I felt there was a need to attempt to separate some of the facts from most of the fiction existing in the Homeland Security and Terrorism sectors, and more importantly, remove the confusion and frustration that exists for the average end user / consumer.

What is really needed in our society today is a practical approach to security and counterterrorism. When the threat levels increase, the questions asked by the average person are always the same…what does it mean to me? How will this affect me? What should I be doing to protect myself? How will international events have an impact on my life? Do I even need to know about that?