Anyone catch 60 Minutes on Sunday, 13 June? They talked about the lack of security at chemical plants in the US.

Being a guy that's worked around sensitive areas and lived security issues for 22 years, I was amazed at how laxed those plants are with security. Not just entry, but the location of lethal volatile material in relation to the perimeter. The terrorists don't need to smuggle any weapons into this country - they're already here, being produced by us.

US Plants: Open To Terrorists

I watched it. We are rife for a Bhopal, India type accident or attack.

Also they did a spot on the Skull and Bones club.

Thats not fair to assume that they would use weapons like that. Thinking like that would be preemptive and wrong and racist. Lets let the UN do a study and get an international coalition built before we do anything. A bipartisan comission woukd also be needed. Otherwise it's just fear mongering.

Short People

I saw them in LOTR. You definitely want ELF on your side.

Curious that the Feds have done nothing to shore up the lax security that everyone has known about for years. You don't have to tell the terrorists about it.........they already know.

That Chemical lobby must have some power........legislation to make chemical plants more secure has been languishing in Congress for months. It'll cost some dough to make plants more secure, and who wants to spend a dollar?

How secure do you figure our pipelines are?

If you're an Iraqi, we'll spend billions on ya.

For gods sakes we could secure all the plants behind 100' concret walls with guards on the towers. Then they could go down to chevron and buy 200 gallons of gas and vaporize and pressurize it in a tank and blow up just about anything. Don't be silly about security and plugging all the holes. Ain't going to happen.

Gee, king......I see you're unfamiliar with Bhopal, India.

Your comparison is weak at best. You're talking hundreds of people compared with tens of thousands being killed.

'Can't solve everything, so solve nothing' is your mantra, huh?

I guess as long as you're upwind, nothing to worry about.............

And who said anything about concrete bunkers? You're muddying the water again, like you're so prone to do. Right now there is NO security to speak of. And you're cool with that?

Dans,


It merely a lack of underatanding of what you are up against. They will go for 100 at a time or 10,000 at a time what ever the opportunity presents itself. They are patient and in it for the long haul. We just want to beable to take a vacataion every winter. We can secure the facilities as best we can but the trucks and trains still have to roll . We cannot secure everything 100% of the time.

That's brilliant, Elvis; maybe you're on to something here.

Next week when I sit in on the next video-teleconference with the forward deployed brigade, I'll mention to them that they can't protect themselves 100% of the time anyway, so why bother? The Strykers still gotta roll out the gate, so why bother with a protective perimeter?

You may have just stumbled onto a great money saving idea there. May cost a life or two, but, hey, that's what they joined for, right?

But that's Iraq and this is the US? I'll have them pass the word to al Qaeda not to bother us here, too.

Oh, sorry, just got emotional again. My bad.

Harley,

Yes you are back and on the rag you got a little emotional there stretching it from securing civilian business to securing troops in Iraq. Since most of those chemicals move via tankers on the road or rail how would you secure it in transit. Maybe they can mount vulcans fore and aft with full time gunners taking out suspicious vehicles approaching?

No, what we want is SOME level of security in place around sensitive target like chemical and biological plants, refineries, piplelines, dams, power plants, and the like.

Can they be made completely secure. Of course not. So, then, should we just pretend the threat isn't there and take no measures?

Or we can wait until AFTER we're attacked again, and then we'll argue over which candidate should get the most blame.

Dans,

Agreed. But not a false sense of security like most have about the airlines.

I concur.

I think the airlines are only marginally safer than they were pre-9/11.

That's because they won't stop searching old ladies' shoes long enough to notice the knives in people's bags. They pay as much attention to old women as they do 20-35 year old men.

Makes me wonder if they really want air travel to be safe.

I was on a flight last month where they served wine from glass botles in first class and the cockpit door was open with a single stewardess guarding it while the other served the pilots. I thought break the bottle use as a knife and you are in the cockpit in lest than 10 seconds.

Just watch out for the guy with the fire axe.

note to self : dont fly with the king j/k, actually some dams are protected by barriers and a armed guard..which is better than nothing at all..