Teror On The Tracks

Discussion in 'The Real Thing- North America' started by N Gauger, Jul 11, 2007.

  1. N Gauger

    N Gauger 1:20.3 Train Addict

  2. brakie

    brakie Active Member

    Well that report sure enough gave the terrorist something to think about..
    Yes sir great reporting.
  3. slekjr

    slekjr Member

    Dear Brakie
    Isn't it great how the press keeps our best interest in mind when they print all this stuff. It makes me shutter to think what would have happened in WWII with todays press. I can see June 4th's headlines clearly "D-Day the Sixth of June" undisclosed sources have told us...........
  4. Ralph

    Ralph Remember...it's for fun!

    Its an interesting thing. The intention of the report is obviously to motivate some action and increases in security but it also provides some firghtening ideas on how to raise havoc that could be accomplished well before any stepped up security was implemented. Scary stuff.
  5. N Gauger

    N Gauger 1:20.3 Train Addict

    Oh MAN!!!!! the "chills" that ran up my spine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ~~~ reminds me of the Gulf war in 80.... a plane went down and CNN reported it..... I'm looking at "Wolf Blitzer" - a war name if I ever heard one --- and thought - how stinking stupid is that - reporting a downed plane and where it was last seen?!?!?!?!?!?

    a few days later - they reported "the news media has been informed that sometimes we have to re-learn old values...therefore we will no longer be presenting up to the minute reports of downed allied aircraft"

    I swear!!! I just stared at the TV................ then I got really disappointed at the stupidity of our media - to sacrifice a downed pilot's life - - for a "first" on a breaking news story.........

    I'll never forget that......... and now "back to Paris Hilton" wall1wall1wall1
  6. Ralph

    Ralph Remember...it's for fun!

    Back then I recall Saturday Night Live's Wayne and Garth referring to him as "Howitzer Cannon Guy". :mrgreen:
  7. N Gauger

    N Gauger 1:20.3 Train Addict

    ROFL -- I remember that :) Dan Rather "not" LOL
  8. Roger Hensley

    Roger Hensley Member

    The idea is to sell newspapers, not to be careful what they say. The two items are mutually exclusive.
  9. bigsteel

    bigsteel Call me Mr.Tinkertrain

    news is no longer about informing the public,its about getting there attention and selling papers and gaining ratings.EX. "3 men have died today after a IED exploded under there hum-v...wait a minute,we now have footage of Paris Hilton arriving at jail.this is horrible footage..how sad".i couldn't believe they would drop a story of someones death or other important story for a stupid blonde with NO talents.it makes me sick.--josh
  10. brakie

    brakie Active Member

    That and to up TV news ratings..I guess they just don't think what they may be actually doing with their "responsible(irresponsible perhaps?)" reporting.
  11. Art Decko

    Art Decko Member

    Sorry guys, you can't blame this on the press.

    Ever since 9-11, The Republican Party, both in the administration and in Congress, has effectively stopped every effort to strengthen security requirements for the chemical industry.

    For example, Oklahoma Republican Senator James Inhofe, in his role as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, blocked key legislation to increase security for chemical plants near populated areas.

    The one man more responsible than any other for thwarting efforts to increase chemical industry security since 9-11 is (recent) Republican administration offical and chemical industry lobbyist Philip Perry. Until recently Perry served as general counsel for President Bush's Office of Management and Budget. He now works as a lobbyist on homeland security-related matters.

    Oh, and ... Philip Perry is Dick Cheney's son-in-law.
  12. Renovo PPR

    Renovo PPR Just a Farmer

    Now we are blaming the Republicans. You do know guys you could cause more damage with a tanker full of this stuff at a crossing in a major town. They only have to ram the car with a powerful car bomb.

    If that isn't enough then they could use a Ryder truck fill with fertilizer. it did a good job of bringing down a building.

    Nope I'm not going to turn something that every one knows is easy to do into a political debate just so every one thinks they are safer. That would be like saying Clinton was the cause of 911 because he did not act when he was the president.

    You get my point turn this stuff into politics and well you might as well start building the A-Bomb shelters.
  13. slekjr

    slekjr Member

    Blaming politicians for irresponsible reporting is like blaming Amtrak engineers for hitting trucks on crossings. Put the blame where it belongs.
    With our freedoms come responsibilities. If you don't accept the later you won't long have the former.
  14. N Gauger

    N Gauger 1:20.3 Train Addict

    Amen - Brother :) :) It's the responsibility part that is always forgotten :( :( Some of the latter day occurrences are subject to scrutiny by the "National Security" issue :)

    There are lines of responsibility, in reporting current events, that should never be crossed......
  15. Art Decko

    Art Decko Member

    Sorry my post was not clear.

    I'm not trying to blame Republicans for irresponsible reporting. I'm blaming them for the existance of the problem. Blaming reporters is just "killing the messenger".

    Unsafe rail crossings and rail yards are just one small symptom of a much larger problem. All over the country, manufacturing, storage, and transportation facilities which handle hazardous materials, even those near heavily populated areas, have not had their security appreciably improved since 9-11. After the Bhopal disaster, this should be an absolute no-brainer.

    The primary reason is that the chemical industry is resisting the costs involved, and have used their supporters in the Republican Party (many of whom view these measures as a form of increased government regulation) to stop any legislation forcing the industry to improve security.

    Instead of blaming the reporter for trying to inform you of this danger, I'm suggesting looking at the root problem: almost six years after 9-11, why does this danger exist at all? The answer to that question can be best answered by folks like the afore-mentioned Bill Perry and James Inhofe.

    Criticizing the reporting does not seem very useful to me. How many terrorists do you think get their strategy ideas by scanning the English-language pages of the Pittsburg-Tribune Review? These are not stupid people. They are already using chlorine bombs in Iraq. The team who pulled off 9-11 didn't need to get their ideas from the American press.

    Incidentally, this problem is not confined to the chemical industry. American ports for instance, have shockingly little security - few containers arriving on our shores are inspected. Outside of airports, public transportation systems remain highly vulnerable, as do most of the nation's food and water supplies, and power generation facilities. :(

    Only the federal government can lead on vital matters of national security. We have already seen that many industries won't do it voluntarily. And in areas such as the manufacturing and handling of highly dangerous chemicals, it has clearly dropped the ball. It's the reponsibility of the press to alert the citizenry to these lapses and dangers. The terrorists already know about them.
  16. oldtanker

    oldtanker Member

    OK, the terrorist are winning. When we have to to spend billions of dollars on security they have won the half the battle. If other half, the citizens can be scared into demanding radical changes in security costing more billions then they will win the war. What we don't need is a police state with armed guards at check points.

    A pocket full of business cards are small and easy to carry. Explosives are a lot harder to haul around. That makes that reporters adventures a joke, not a news report. Now if he had walked in with a backpack with 70-80 lbs of rocks in it to simulate a device and planted it and then taken pictures I'd be really worried.

    So far most terror attacks against rail targets have been against passenger operations. A suicide bombers killing and injuring a train car full of people is more news worthy than a rail car explosion even if it kills a few people and forces an evacuation. And that is what the terrorist are after, news worthy events that scare the general population. After the bombing of the World Trade Center some people in Fergus Falls Mn (pop under 20,000) were convinced that terrorist were going to crash a plane into the small mall there. Air craft can reach almost any point in the world. Trains on the other hand are regulated to the rails. A lot of people are going to think "thats wrong, they should have more security" but there are no tracks near my house, my place of work or the schools my kids go to.

    As far as security is concerned....how about a simple solution. Enough police officers in every area of the country. It has been shown that with 1-2 officers (uniformed and in marked cars 24 hours a day) per 1,000 people worked on the basis of peak population will reduce crime and traffic accidents. It would also greatly increase security around rail facilities and our factories. If any of you have seen the reports on crime in the Twin Cities and then look at the number of officers it will show that St. Paul wile not having enough officers has a lot more per population than Minneapolis does. They figure that Minneapolis is somewhere between 500-800 officers short.

    Basically the government has to change the attitude of "we are the USA, simple problems require complex solutions, simple solutions will not be tolerated"!

    Just my 2 cents!


Share This Page