for that, we turn to mary schiavo, former inspector general of the department of transporation. she's now an aviation attorney in private practice, and represents many of the families whose relatives were killed in the 9/11 attacks. and david schanzer. he's the director of the triangle center on terrorism and homeland security at duke university and the university of north carolina. i want to start by asking you what the president had to say today. he said there was a systemic failure, a mix of human and systemic failure. what does that mean to you? >> well, that means that there's more than one fail. obviously first and foremost that people followed the screening that failed, but obviously the various watch list. the watch lists were targeted and revealed to be a problem in the summer of this year. there was a special report de by the office of inspector general, congress has addressed these issues, they knew that the screening wasn't good as well, so many things failed. thus his calling it a systemic failure. >> david schanzer is there a technology in place that could have avo

when thnext type of threat comes up six monthsr a year from no >> what do you thinkbout that, mary schiavo? >> well, that's rely not the way i would approach it all. viously we have to invest in the technology, because it a technology thacan spot so many of these threats. not 100% well, it cou be very close to 100%, because therare four diffent machines with four fferent technologies that ca spot expsives and explosives materials and componentsf bombs. here we can't say we rely on profiling and inlligence, because that's what we were relying on september 11th, 2001. we don't always fit the prile. there have beeyoung, beautiful,orth korean women to someone from indiana in 1933 blowing up planes. we cannot rely on profiling d intelligence bause we've proven that er the last 70 years 's failed. hardware is our last linof defense, and can be etty close to 100 >> what abouthat visa issue? if perhaps seone had taken seriously the father complaint, isn that something that could have caht before he even got to a chine? >> absolutely. it could have been caut. it should ha been caught. ce again, tha