>From the Boston Globe -- 
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/07/10/
americas_vulnerable_railways/

America's vulnerable railways
by Thomas Oliphant

FEW OUTSIDE the usual band of lobbyists and inside players 
noticed, but just three weeks ago, a Senate committee cut the 
budget for rail and mass transit security in this country by 
one-third.

This action by the Senate's appropriators, reducing next 
year's budget to $100 million from $150 million this year, 
might have made some sense if there were evidence that it 
would have no impact on security.

However, the opposite is the case and has been for more than 
three years of inexcusable neglect and conniving between the 
Bush administration and its corporate buddies.

In the wake of last week's horror in London, it's a reasonable 
assumption that politicians here will scramble to restore the 
money, but even if that happens this summer, it is only a drop 
in the bucket.

Two years ago, the American Public Transport Association 
surveyed its transit agency members and uncovered about $6 
billion in unmet needs. They do not lust for high-tech toys, 
but they need surveillance cameras for trains and stations, 
radio communications equipment, technology to control access 
to sensitive locations and to locate moving trains instantly 
-- the infrastructure of rapid response and protection.

Instead, the evidence shows an airport-fixated domestic 
security system that has little relation to real threat. Since 
the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, some $250 million has been spent 
on rail and transit security, compared to more than $18 
billion on air.

Among the 50 percent of the 9/11 Commission's specific 
recommendations a year ago that Congress and Bush have yet to 
act upon was the sensible notion that there should be a 
national transportation security strategy based on known 
threats and dangers.

Instead, there appears to have been not only inaction and 
delay, but unholy alliances between industry and government to 
avoid taking measures to protect against potentially 
catastrophic terrorism that is not difficult to imagine.

The classic example, almost from the moment this country was 
attacked, was the politically hyper-active chemical industry, 
which used White House contacts to block stiff rules requiring 
security upgrades at some 100 plants around the country. But 
this corporate and government misbehavior continues to this 
day.

The replacement of Bush crony Tom Ridge by Michael Chertoff 
this year as secretary of homeland security produced 
commitments for change from the highly regarded former 
prosecutor and federal judge, but Representative Ed Markey of 
Massachusetts has concluded after three years of frustrating 
labor that the talk and the action don't line up.

Markey has often been the lone voice, not only on chemical and 
nuclear plants but on the movement of ''extremely hazardous 
materials" -- chemicals that can kill when their vapors are 
inhaled or are highly explosive or flammable. He and 
Democratic Senator Joe Biden of Delaware have encountered 
nothing but industry and administration obstacles in their 
attempts to force a sensible approach to guarding against 
disasters that might make 9/11 pale by comparison.

Biden recently cited a study by the Naval Research Laboratory 
that estimated as many as 100,000 people in a densely 
populated area could die within 30 minutes if a single, 90-ton 
freight car carrying chlorine were punctured.

Against industry (shipping as well as manufacturing) 
opposition and Bush's indifference, Biden and Markey have 
pushed separate legislation ideas that would give the 
government authority to reroute shipments of these extremely 
dangerous substances around major metropolitan areas and to 
force other security improvements on the profit-crazed 
industry.

But the best metaphor for the sorry state of affairs in the 
transit and rail sectors is an obscure court case here, 
involving an ordinance passed by the District of Columbia City 
Council. The local government had the temerity to ban 
shipments of the most dangerous chemicals from certain zones 
around the nation's capital, something the Bush people should 
have been doing on their own.

So what is the response? The shipping people (led by rail 
giant CSX Transportation) backed by the administration, files 
a lawsuit here to block the law's enforcement. They lost in US 
district court, but rather than accept the result they are 
appealing. Meanwhile nothing is happening.

The events in London provide all the evidence we need that 
terrorism is alive and functioning internationally nearly four 
years after 9/11.

It might be helpful if the government showed the same resolve 
as the terrorists, but it hasn't.

Thomas Oliphant's e-mail address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use
has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The
'johnmacsgroup' Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of
literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit
research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a
'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of
the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for
purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.




--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to