September 2005
Monthly Archive
Illegal Aliens and U.S. Nuclear Facilities
Posted by StormWarning on 24 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Opinions
This entry relates to the problem of illegal aliens being hired by U.S. Nuclear Facilities. A press release from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) is shown below:
http://www.ice.gov/graphics/news/newsreleases/articles/050915blair_2.htm
Apparently, it has been concluded that these guys weren’t terrorists, a detail in my opinion that doesn’t matter! What does matter is that I believe that we are seeing another example of our government’s inability to:
1) stop illegal aliens from entering this country and getting a job in a nuclear facility (I keep hearing arguments that illegals do jobs that Americans don’t want to do…like cut lawns and do landscaping…but a nuclear facility? Even doing maintenance work, but this isn’t lawn mowing);
2) control or regulate the lax security of the company or companies in hiring (somehow, I’d think that four years after September 11th, stricter controls over contractors for sensitive facilities like nuclear power plants would have been instituted…these incidents should bring shudders to us all…nuclear power plants exist all over the country, and as illustrated by this press release, in places that are not major metropolitan areas. Were there to be a terrorist event in a place like Omaha Nebraska, IMO, it would strike fear into the very heart of America…striking where some people might say, "we don’t live in New York or LA or Boston or DC, so we don’t have to worry about terrorism");
3) implement efforts to address the continuing problem of fraudulent identity documents being used to gain access to secure or sensitive facilities (I don’t understand how to this day, employees at sensitive facilities like a nuclear power plant don’t carry "bullet-proof" identification papers or documents).
ICE AGENTS ARREST ILLEGAL ALIENS AT OMAHA NUCLEAR PLANT
– Arrests are latest in series of illegal alien apprehensions at nuclear facilities in recent months —
BLAIR, Neb. — In the latest in a series of arrests involving illegal aliens at nuclear facilities, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) special agents arrested three illegal aliens here Tuesday when they attempted to enter the outer secure area of the Omaha Public Power District’s Fort Calhoun Nuclear Station to perform contract work at the plant for the first time.
The three men, all citizens of Mexico, had been hired by an independent contractor to perform maintenance work at the nuclear facility. As they attempted to enter a secure area of the plant, the men presented identification documents that raised the suspicions of Omaha Public Power District employees. They contacted ICE special agents for assistance, who responded and arrested the men after determining that they were illegally present in the United States.
All three men have been placed in immigration removal proceedings. ICE agents are investigating the circumstances under which the private contractor hired the illegal aliens. ICE agents have determined that the illegal aliens were not engaged in any terrorist activity.
“America’s security depends on controlling access to sensitive facilities like nuclear power plants,” said Michael Wardy, Resident Agent-in-Charge of the ICE office in Omaha. “ICE works closely with these industries across the nation to identify vulnerabilities that pose a potential security threat, then we aggressively act to remove that threat. In this case, the system worked exactly the way it was supposed to because the nuclear plant detected the illegal aliens before they could enter.”
The enforcement action in Nebraska is the latest in a series of ICE arrests involving illegal aliens performing contract work at nuclear plants and other nuclear-related facilities around the country. For example:
- On March 18, 2005, ICE agents arrested an illegal alien who was performing contract pipe insulation work at the Duane Arnold Energy Center Nuclear Power Plant in Palo, Iowa. A federal grand jury later indicted the illegal alien on criminal charges of using and possessing fraudulent documents, as well as making false statements to federal agents. Duane Arnold Energy Center uncovered discrepancies in documents presented by the alien and alerted authorities.
- During a two-week period in March 2005, ICE agents arrested six illegal aliens performing contract maintenance work at the Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant in Citrus, Florida. All were employees of a specialty services company that is now cooperating in an ongoing ICE investigation. One of the illegal aliens was indicted on criminal charges of re-entering the country after deportation, while the others have been placed in immigration removal proceedings.
- On November 7, 2004, ICE agents arrested 44 illegal aliens at the Marley Cooling Technologies factory in Olathe, Kansas, where cooling towers for nuclear plants are manufactured. The illegal aliens had used fraudulent documents and had made false statements to gain employment at the facility. The aliens were placed into immigration removal proceedings. Marley Cooling Technologies cooperated in the investigation.
These arrests are part of Operation Glow Worm, a joint operation launched by ICE and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission after 9/11 to screen the workforce at the nation’s 104 nuclear power plants. To date, investigations have been completed at 56 nuclear plants and 1,005 related employers have been inspected, with audits of 64,835 employees having been completed. Numerous unauthorized workers have been arrested and warning notices have been issued to those employing unauthorized workers.
In accordance with ICE’s homeland security mission, ICE special agents prioritize worksite enforcement efforts by focusing on investigations related to critical infrastructure and national security. Unauthorized workers employed at sensitive sites and critical infrastructure facilities — such as airports, seaports, nuclear plants, chemical plants, and defense facilities — pose serious homeland security threats.
Not only are the identities of these individuals in question, but these aliens are also vulnerable to exploitation by terrorists and other criminals given their illegal status in this country. Furthermore, these individuals have access to some of the most sensitive worksites in the nation. ICE often works with employers in these cases to identify and immediately remove illegal workers from these sensitive locations.
[END PRESS RELEASE]
Other references:
http://www.yankton.net/stories/091605/news_20050916003.shtml
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20050915-112917-3277r.htm
http://www.theomahachannel.com/news/4978814/detail.html
While it is good that these ICE police actions have taken place. Its bad (very bad) that incidents like these continue to occur, even four years after September 11, 2001. Perhaps someday authorities will implement meaningful security features in critical and sensitive documents to allow facilities to identify fraudulent documents in real-time. Clearly, nothing that is now being employed is working. Unfortunately, from my perspective, it might not get high enough up on the security radar screen until after an explosion occurs.
Opinions
UPDATED: Sept. 11th: Four Years Later
Posted by StormWarning on 23 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Federal Policy
This post provides a continuation and follow-up to a previous post, that reports on the results of the panel discussion sponsored by the Counterterrorism Blog. I’m not going to "editorialize" alot here since the words of the individuals who participated should stand on their own.
The question: September 11th, Four Years Later…Are We Safer?
On Thursday, the Counterterrorism Blog held a live panel discussion titled, "Four Years Later: Are We Safer?" Rep. James Sensenbrenner, chairman of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, gave the opening remarks, and Rep. Bennie Thompson, ranking Member of the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee, provided written remarks for the event. On the fourth anniversary of the deadly attacks which changed the world, Contributing Experts Dennis Lormel, Michael Cutler, Michael Kraft, Victor Comras, Douglas Farah, and Zachary Abuza share their written statements on the subject…
..Concerning the question, "are we safer today then we were prior to 9/11?, my response is…we are safer in certain respects but are a country at risk, at significant risk. We are safer in terms of the investigative and intelligence gathering capabilities of our investigative, intelligence and regulatory agencies…
…From an immigration perspective, I regret that in my judgment, our nation is no safer today than it was on September 10, 2001.
We are not as safe as we could be - partly because of the evolving nature of the international terrorism threat, and partly because we do not pay enough attention to the nuts and bolts of our counterterrorism efforts.
Considerable mystery and intrigue still surrounds the whole issue of terrorism financing. We know more today than we did four years ago, but there is still so much that we don’t know. Before 9/11 Al Qaeda’s budget was estimated by the CIA at around $30 – 34 million. We haven’t the faintest notion now of what al Qaeda and other salafist terrorist groups need or spend today.
What is clear is that al Qaeda, the Taliban, and those associated with them still get the money they need. And there is still considerable money flowing in to support radical Jihad indoctrination, recruitment, and training…
Sadly, I believe that if you closely read the complete statements of the CT Bloggers who participated in the September 8, 2005 panel discussion, objectively, you cannot conclude that we are safe four years later…are we "safer" than we were on September 10, 2001…more than likely, the answer is yes. Among the evidence is that we’ve not had another terrorist attack in the U.S., despite the aborted efforts of people like Lyman Ferris who supposedly wanted to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge. Are we safer? Sure we are. Despite the hand wringing about the Patriot Act(s), surveillance and scrutiny of suspicious activites has increaed and expanded. Are we safer?
The mission of the Department of Homeland Security is to:
- Prevent terrorist attacks within the United States,
- Reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and
- Minimize the damage from potential attacks and natural disasters.
When you look at the response to Katrina, you’d have to question about ability to react to a potential attack or natural disaster. If you watch the response to Rita, you’ve got to conclude that everyone has either learned from the Katrina debacle, or simply, don’t want to get raked over the coals like Nagin and Blanco did (all oversimplified).
Federal PolicyFCC Chair: Hurricane Shows Need for Redundant Telecom
Posted by StormWarning on 23 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Technology
More on the question of how Katrina (and now Hurricane Rita to a lesser extent) shows the need for interoperable and redundant communications.
http://www.networkworld.com/edge/news/2005/092205-fcc-katrina.html
Widespread telephone and broadcast outages caused by Hurricane Katrina show that the U.S. needs more reliable and redundant communications systems, including a better emergency warning system, the chairman of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) said Thursday.
FCC Chairman Kevin Martin called for the U.S. government to incorporate the Internet into an emergency warning system that traditionally has been carried over television and radio stations, and he said telecommunications providers need to "take full advantage" of IP-based technologies to enhance their networks.
An emergency warning system "should incorporate the Internet, which was designed by the military for its robust network redundancy functionalities, and other advantages in technology so that officials can reach large numbers of people simultaneously through different communications media," Martin told the U.S. Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.
Emergency responders need more radio spectrum to communicate with each other, Martin added, and they need new technologies like so-called "smart" radios that can jump to different frequencies when some telecommunications providers aren’t functioning, as happened when Hurricane Katrina hit the New Orleans area in late August.
TechnologyNatural Occurrences and National Security
Posted by StormWarning on 21 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Opinions
"Back in the days" our National Research facilities were located purposely in lightly populated areas. Places like Oak Ridge National Laboratory (outside of Knoxville, Tn.), Idaho National Laboratory (near Idaho Falls, Idaho) or Los Alamos National Laboratory north of Albuquerque/west of Santa Fe in NM), even today, aren’t all that easy to get to.
Saraswati on TMF raised an intriguing question today (9/21/05). Why would the government place a Bio-Safety Level Four facility near Galveston Texas, a place that is all too obviously in the path of hurricanes?
Caretakers for sensitive biological and nuclear materials at facilities along the upper Texas coast say they are prepared for anything Hurricane Rita might bring their way.
The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston has one of a handful of certified U.S. labs handling the world’s most infectious, lethal viruses, a biosafety-level 4 facility. The campus is less than a mile from the Galveston seawall.
The lab’s director, Michael R. Holbrook, said workers have already destroyed lab cultures in which viruses were growing and will begin packing the lab up today, putting remaining viruses in sealed and locked freezers. Then, if Rita still threatens Thursday, the lab will be fumigated with formaldehyde.
"Four hours later, the lab is rendered completely safe," Holbrook said.
The BSL-4 lab sits on the second floor of a secure building on UTMB’s campus, 31 feet above sea level. Its 10-inch-thick concrete walls are rated to handle powerful tornadoes, which have stronger winds than the worst hurricanes, Holbrook said.
If power to backup generators is lost, the samples are already encased in large liquid nitrogen refrigerators, with enough supply of the freezing chemical to support the refrigerators for three or more weeks, he said.
"We won’t go back into the lab until we have electricity," Holbrook said…
OK. They’ve made preparations and destroyed the viruses. But why is the lab there?
The same question could be raised about the Dept. of Agriculture’s Plum Island Laboratory at the far east end of Long Island.
USDA and DHS Working Together
At the Plum Island Animal Disease Center, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has an important job.We work to protect farm animals, farmers and ranchers, the nation’s farm economy and export markets… and your food supply.
Plum Island is located off the northeastern tip of New York’s Long Island. USDA activities at Plum Island are carried out by scientists and veterinarians with the department’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS).
We’re proud of our role as America’s first line of defense against foreign animal diseases.
We’re equally proud of our safety record. Not once in our nearly 50 years of operation has an animal pathogen escaped from the island.
In 2003 the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) joined us on the island, taking responsibility for the safety and security of the facility.
The danger that Long Island might lose the Plum Island Animal Disease Center is very different from the threat to the 106th Rescue Wing, another important federal installation here: The wing saves lives and serves as a major East End employer. Plum Island performs a vital function and provides jobs, too, but its germ-probing mission makes some folks nervous. Suffolk County must work hard to make sure every angle of this issue gets examined closely.
We must also be careful what we wish for: If Plum Island stays open, there’s at least a chance that the Department of Homeland Security might expand its mission to include Level 4 research on far nastier pathogens than the diseases, such as foot-and-mouth, that the lab now studies.
Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge told Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Tim Bishop (D-Southampton) in person that his department would invest in updating the center, but would not need it for Level 4 research. (Clinton and Bishop oppose Level 4 here.) So both were mightily miffed when the first notification they got of a possible closure was the release of a department "fact sheet" last week announcing a "requirements analysis process" to identify a facility to replace Plum Island. Under the Department of Agriculture and now under Homeland Security, the lab has never been great at communication…
Its all OK, and it may not be a very big deal. I know that these labs have to be somewhere. And this isn’t a NIMBY argument. Its just a question. One for which there may not be an immediate or obvious answer. But Oak Ridge and Los Alamos were placed away from people for a reason…
OpinionsLong Island - Hurricane “What Ifs”
Posted by StormWarning on 18 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Science
In the meeting on Wednesday (9/14) I asked a question about evacuating Long Island. While I used the obvious problems of the New Orleans evacuation during Katrina as an example of a poor evac. plan, no one the expert panel (reps from DHS, NYS Homeland Security, both country’s OEMs and large government contractors) had an answer to how 2.3 million people would get off of LI in the event of a catastrophic terrorist attack involving CBRN weapons.
Essentially, by not answering the real question, or more specifically, by answering that "even" in the event of a Cat 4/5 hurricane, there wouldn’t be the kind of flooding that we saw in New Orleans, the panel was telling us that in the event of a CBRN attack and easterly winds, what we were to do was bend over and place our heads between our legs and "kiss it" goodbye! The 2.3 million people out here will be collateral damage, casualties of war…because as was proven back in the days leading up the closing of the Shoreham Nuclear facility, there is not way to evacuate Long Island (so ask yourself…what is the evacuation plan for your home town or region???). FWIW, everyone sitting near me, and those who knows me all later commented how ridiculously transparent the non-answer was, and how the panel has avoided answering the question.
But let’s examine the New Orleans parallel question for Long Island:
What if a massive hurricane hit LI?
Seaside areas safeguard themselves against possibility of a major storm, keeping in mind the aftermath of severe hurricane that hit LI in 1938
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-lihurr184431865sep18,0,3372329.story?coll=ny-top-headlines
Mushrooming population and increasing development on Long Island’s South Shore could make a hurricane the magnitude of the 1938 storm even costlier in lives and property today.
Though beach fortification projects have long been undertaken to protect such communities as West Hampton Dunes, Quogue and Westhampton Beach - and the mainland fronted by those seaside villages - they probably couldn’t withstand the storm surge brought on by another Category 3 hurricane, experts say.
"The damage would be similar to what we’ve seen in coastal Mississippi, in beachfront cities like Gulfport, Biloxi and Pass Christian" after Hurricane Katrina, said Mike Wyllie, a meteorologist at the National Weather Service at Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton. "A 15-foot wall of water could move inland and pretty much do extensive damage to everything in its way."
Though hurricanes of the intensity of Katrina are all but unheard of in the cooler Atlantic waters around Long Island, lesser storms still pose a significant threat, the experts say.
"In 1938, there wasn’t that much development along the South Shore of Long Island," Wyllie said. "The same storm today would be dramatically different. A Category 3 storm would do Category 4-type damage."
Floodwater could destroy communities as far north as Sunrise Highway along the South Shore, Wyllie said...
…"The barrier island system on the South Shore is our levee system," said Aram Terchunian, the West Hampton Dunes commissioner of wildlife protection. "Either we take care of it, or we’re going to be pulling bodies out of the bays."
[BTW, what they're talking about is not a levee system, but a barrier island system that is subject to the natural and yearly changes of erosion and sometimes build-up of sand. Mother Nature controls that, even if Man and the Army Corps of Engineers intercedes.]
If you wish to see something very scary (at least to anyone living on the south shore of Long Island) check out this website and play around with the animated maps that show the encroachment of the ocean onto the land area…
http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/38hurricane/storm_surge_maps.html
And yup! a Cat. 3 would flood way north of where I live.
ScienceKatrina and Crisis Management
Posted by StormWarning on 17 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Opinions
An article/op-ed by Jack Welch:
The Five Stages of Crisis Management
Why Katrina will make us stronger.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007256
And as posted by Moon’s and my friend, Hedonistix on his Cafe blog.
http://hedonistix.blogs.com/main/2005/09/katrina_and_cri.html
…Hurricane Katrina has the potential to do that in New Orleans–to compel leaders in government and business to find ways to break the city’s cycle of poverty and corruption. The opportunities are huge because the losses were. There is a blank slate for change to begin, and it most likely will. Just watch the entrepreneurs rush in with ideas and energy, revitalizing old and creating new businesses with the help of the money politicians will be outbidding one another to throw at the problem. Just watch the residents of New Orleans flock to the jobs that are created with a new spirit of optimism. Crises like Katrina have a way of galvanizing people toward a better future. That’s the fifth and final part of the pattern–the best part…
I’ve heard some talk in some parts that GWB ought to consider appointing someone like Welch to oversee the rebuilding of New Orleans and the levee system. Might be a good idea.
OpinionsExamining US Visa Security
Posted by StormWarning on 17 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Federal Policy
A continuing issue of border security and the role of our Nation’s Visa program affecting it.
Witnesses at Congressional Hearing Fault U.S. Visa Security Program
“There has been testimony on Capitol Hill about continuing weaknesses in the U.S. visa security system, which lawmakers and witnesses said could still be exploited by terrorists,” reports Voice of America. “They listed turf battles, inadequate staffing, and insufficient funding among the problems.”
http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-09-13-voa54.cfm
 |
| Christopher Shays |
Opening a House of Representatives subcommittee hearing, Republican Congressman Christopher Shays said gaps in visa security are leaving the doors of the United States open to terrorists:
"Weaknesses and gaps remain in the visa process that could be exploited by those determined to do us harm," he noted.
Since the Department of Homeland Security was created three years ago in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, debate has continued over a congressionally-mandated division of responsibilities between it and the State Department.
Congress gave Homeland Security the task of setting overall visa security policy, while State continues to process and issue visas.
Here is the "highlight" page from the recently released GAO Report
Strengthened Visa Process Would Benefit from Additional Management Actions by State and DHS
http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d05994thigh.pdf
State and DHS have taken many steps to strengthen the visa process as an antiterrorism tool. Consular officers are receiving clear guidance on the importance of addressing national security concerns through the visa process, and State has established clear procedures on visa operations worldwide. State has also increased its hiring of consular officers and language proficient Foreign Service officers, and has enhanced training and fraud prevention efforts. Further, consular officers have access to more information from intelligence and law enforcement agencies. However, some areas require additional attention. For example, officers we spoke with said that guidance is needed on DHS staff’s roles and responsibilities overseas. In addition, while State has hired more consular officers, it continues to experience shortages in supervisory staff. As of April 30, 2005, 26 percent of midlevel positions were either vacant or filled by entry-level staff. During our February 2005 visits to three consular posts in Saudi Arabia and Egypt—all of which are of interest to U.S. antiterrorism efforts—the visa sections were staffed with first-tour officers and no permanent midlevel visa chiefs to provide direct oversight. Further improvements are also needed in training and fraud prevention, as well as information sharing with the FBI.
In September 2003, DHS assigned visa security personnel to consular posts in Saudi Arabia. According to DHS, State’s consular officials, and the deputy chief of mission in Saudi Arabia, the DHS officers in Saudi Arabia strengthen visa security. However, DHS does not maintain comprehensive data on their activities and thus is unable to fully demonstrate the program’s impact. Further, DHS has not developed a strategic plan for visa security operations in Saudi Arabia or for the planned future expansion of the program.
Here’s a link to the whole report for anyone who might be interested:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05994t.pdf
And then, Bill West of the Counterterrorism Blog asks:
FAST-Tracking Naturalization While US At War With Terrorists…Is That A Good Idea?
http://counterterror.typepad.com/the_counterterrorism_blog/2005/09/fasttracking_na.html
Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS)…has decided, in its infinite bureaucratic wisdom, to implement a way to reduce the backlog of naturalization applications since seemingly they cannot give away immigration benefits fast enough to as many aliens as possible. A quick note…while CIS may be a “new” agency under DHS, the leftover immigration benefit managers from the old INS, the very immigration benefit granting institution that so miserably failed in the past, primarily manage it.
CIS has implemented something called the FAST program. This program will realize the hiring of temporary, term-hire Adjudicators. These temporary Adjudicators are receiving two and a half weeks of training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Glynco, Georgia. That means the people who will be deciding who obtains UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP will be temporary employees with less than three weeks training in the law, regulations, procedures and interviewing techniques that are involved in processing such applicants. Regular, full-time Adjudicators receive something on the order of a minimum of four months training…
This should scare everyone. Fast tracking immigration for what purpose? Of course its not a good idea! Add to this the Visa Waiver Program that has been written about earlier on, and something tells me that we’ve got an "open door policy" here that can only lead to problems. "Terrorists Among Us?" We’re letting people in…when will this stop? What will it take for it to stop?
Federal PolicySafer Four Years Later? America Speaks
Posted by StormWarning on 17 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Opinions
This is a poll found on the website of the Homeland Security Institute. The HSI is a Studies and Analysis (S&A) Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) established pursuant to Section 312 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and is operated by Analytic Services Inc. under contract W81XWH-04-D-0011
Stats of the Week
Americans think the threat from terrorism has grown worse and lack confidence that the government can protect them in the event of an attack or a natural disaster, reports the Associated Press, citing CBS and CNN–USA Today–Gallup polls conducted in the past three weeks.
- Eight in 10 people in the U.S. think the threat from terrorism is about the same or has grown worse since 11 September 2001
- Three in 10 say it has grown worse
- Six in 10 say they have confidence in the government’s ability to protect citizens from terrorism, down from seven in 10 before Hurricane Katrina
- 51% are satisfied with the way the war on terror is going; 49% are dissatisfied
- Four in 10 say their life changed after 11 September and do not expect it to return to normal
- 57% say they are worried that the government will not be able to provide assistance in a natural disaster or terrorist attack
About half think the threat is at the same level
The CBS polling was done Aug. 29-31 of 871 adults and Sept. 6-7 of 725 adults and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points for late August and 4 percentage points for September. The CNN-USA TODAY-Gallup poll was conducted Aug. 28-30 and the Time poll was conducted Sept. 7-8 Both the Gallup and Time polls of about 1,000 adults have a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-09-10-terrorism-polls_x.htm
OpinionsInteroperable Communications & Preparedness - Too Much To Ask For?
Posted by StormWarning on 16 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Technology
I have been on this “kick” regarding communications interoperability and preparedness for way too long. And now, because of Katrina and the aftermath, it has come to the surface of everyone’s attention, even if “everyone” doesn’t fully understand the issue(s).
In a recent post, I made observations about this subject: http://moonagewebdream.blogs.com/storms_counter_terrorism/2005/09/sept_11th_post_.html
But now, there is more evidence and concerning information about how or if, first responders can communicate with each other, let alone with state and federal officials.
Excerpt from something I wrote on June 7, 2005:
…Is America prepared for a catastrophic event?
The answer to this is unarguable in my opinion, and it is especially questionable when there continues to be an imbalance between threat/risk assessment and the manner in which DHS doles out the supposedly “porkless” budget (Congress continues to maintain that there will not be any pork in the Homeland Security budget – meaning Congressional earmarks, and yet, in some reported cases, certain Representatives have been able to “bring home the bacon” for companies in their districts while others have been shut out.). With all of the money that has been spent at the airports, for example, are we safer? I think not…
One very important thing to remember…”knowing what went wrong, or what we need to fix is important, but if an attack occurs tomorrow (or the next day, or the next, or the next…until the problem is addressed and fixed), it will be sadly too late.”
"Is this country ready for a catastrophic terrorist attack?" - OR - "did our Katrina response reveal our vulnerabilities?"
Based on a post that appeared on the Counterterrorism Blog, I wrote the following this morning:
http://counterterror.typepad.com/the_counterterrorism_blog/2005/09/hurricane_katri_1.html
An article from "Technology Daily" describing virtual collapse of communications in the Gulf region, especially in New Orleans. It also predicts that "Lawmakers and first-responder groups plan to use the incident to push previously drafted bills, as well as new proposals to connect emergency workers across the country."
http://counterterror.typepad.com/the_counterterrorism_blog/files/TechDaily91205FirstResponders.doc
Please read the entire article, but a very telling point in this article…it might "…take 15 to 20 years to connect the 600,000 emergency workers across the country…"
Testimony describing the Nation’s vulnerability to a cyber attack:
http://www.house.gov/science/hearings/full05/sept15/index.htm
NATION’S CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE VULNERABLE TO CYBER ATTACK, INDUSTRY EXECUTIVES SAY
http://www.house.gov/science/press/109/109-129.htm
In testimony before the House Science Committee today, the Chief Information Officers (CIOs) of major U.S. corporations warned Congress that the nation’s critical infrastructure remains vulnerable to cyber attack. The witnesses said the economy is increasingly dependent on the Internet and that a major attack could result in significant economic disruption and loss of life.
Urging action to address this vulnerability, the witnesses advocated increased funding for cybersecurity research and development (R&D) and greater information sharing between industry and government and among various sectors of industry. Witnesses also urged greater federal attention to cybersecurity and praised the creation of an Assistant Secretary for Cybersecurity at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)…
…“We shouldn’t have to wait for the cyber equivalent of a Hurricane Katrina to realize that we are inadequately prepared to prevent, detect and respond to cyber attacks,” said Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY). “And a cyber attack can affect a far larger area at a single stroke than can any hurricane…"
For first responders in one region, let alone across regions to not be interoperable is sad, it isn’t funny. For communications systems to totally collapse (as in New Orleans) without there being a back-up solution, is not funny, it is sad.
Finally, in the Sept. 14th edition of the MIT Technology review, the following article appeared:
A Katrina Lesson: Need for Unified Emergency Radio System
http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/09/ap/ap_091405.asp?trk=nl
After surviving Hurricane Katrina’s initial blow, the radio communications system for the New Orleans police and fire departments dissolved as its radio towers lost their backup power generators in the ensuing flood.
Some of the equipment could have been brought back up quickly, except that technicians were blocked from entering the submerged city for three days by state troopers who were themselves struggling with an overwhelmed radio system from a different manufacturer…
…Four years after the 2001 terror attacks exposed the need for more robust, interconnected communications during such calamities, with nearly a billion dollars appropriated by Congress for the task last year, the United States still lacks uniform systems that can keep all emergency responders in touch…
…With regular phone and cellular service knocked out in Katrina’s wake — the New Orleans mayor’s office had to cobble together an Internet phone link with the outside world — first responders were simply unable to share essential information.
Federal emergency management officials claim they didn’t know for days about thousands of people camped out, thirsty and hungry, at the New Orleans convention center. Rescuers in helicopters couldn’t talk to crews patrolling in boats. National guard commanders in Mississippi had to use runners to relay orders…
[NOTE: the lack of regular phone or cellular service is "generally" addressable by a number of the emergency notification/messaging systems currently in place]
…Since 2001, the federal government has given $8.6 billion to states for equipment, first responder training and disaster exercises. Last year, DHS gave the states $2.1 billion, of which $925 million was spent on or earmarked for communications equipment upgrades.
The department, however, does not tell states what to buy, though it stresses that any system deployed in the field should be able talk to another agency’s system, known as "interoperability" in industry parlance…
[NOTE: as I have also mentioned recently, the establishment of standards through the Office of Emergency Preparedness is currently an on-going process]
The process of setting of standards for first responders started a few months ago (I think it was right after the first of the year)…and it won’t be done for a few more…then hopefully adjacent fire districts or police departments will know that when they do purchase equipment, that it has to be from a menu of items that are deemed interoperable. To be fair, where I live on LI, both county police departments are interoperable with each other and with the NY State police (I don’t know about the smaller, local police departments)…but here isn’t everywhere. The people running the homeland security program here are quite experienced and competent, even if they didn’t want to own up to the reality that 2.3 million people are vulnerable because of a lack of a meaningful evac. program.
TechnologyPort Security
Posted by Moon on 14 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Federal Policy
Got this in the email today:
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: Marc Short, 202-282-8010
May 13, 2005
The attachment lists the eligible cities. I would suggest given the economic ramifications of New Orleans and national economic ramifications of the refineries going down, the entire $140 million be spent in New Orleans and the Gulf Coast towns affected by Katrina.
~~ Moon ~~
Federal PolicyMark Steyn Demeans the Memory of Sept. 11th
Posted by StormWarning on 11 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Opinions
As I wrote at 8:49am on September 11, 2005 - This morning, the sky is eerily blue and the air is still…no clouds in the sky. Not all that different from how I remember it that morning four years ago…and then the world changed for us all.
And yet, people like Mark Steyn, apparently a widely read columnist, I believe has finally crossed the line in his Chicago Sun-Times article, "Terror war all but forgotten on home front"
http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn11.html
I am so upset at this because people (that 95% referred to in the post titled "Thoughts on Thinking") form their opinions and make their decisions often based on what people like Steyn write.
I simply don’t accept the premise of Steyn’s missive for one second.
September 11th forgotten? Not in the least! Not in my life, not in my world, not among my friends and associates…perhaps in Mark Steyn’s…but not in mine. Take a poll of the men and women in homeland security, and ask them…tell the men and women who read the names of the murdered at the World Trade Center site this morning.
Please go ask the ladies in my home town who religiously light the memorial candles each and every night at what started out as a make-shift memorial which was then surrounded by new construction of a new, sort of "town square" whether they have forgotten September 11th. Please go ask the people in Rockville Centre or Glen Cove or Commack or Garden City or tens of other towns and villages on Long Island who lost sons, daughters, husbands and wives or friends or neighbors if they have forgotten September 11th. Go ask Ray Downey’s family, relatives, friends and neighbors if September 11th has been forgotten. Because they haven’t forgotten and never will…no matter what Mark Steyn writes and no matter what you believe or post. September 11th and the purpose of the War on Terror will never be forgotten…certainly not until we have bin Laden’s head on a stick, and even then the War on Terror will continue.
Even the mere stating in his column that we’ve forgotten Sept. 11th is insulting.
Personally, I believe that unless he is pandering to his audience, I don’t think that Steyn has his finger on the pulse of New York, let alone the rest of this country.
Did you listen to the litany of names this morning? How hard was it to hold back the tears for you? I know that each and every day, each and every time, each and every moment that I remember that plume of black smoke rising in the western sky that morning, I remember, and I know that WE are remembering.
Black-White-Brown-Pink, Rich-Poor, Red state - Blue state…no matter who you are, no matter where you are, except perhaps Mark Steyn apparently, we all remember and hopefully we will never forget.
I simply do not accept the premise.
We/anyone can disagree on whether Iraq distracted from the War on Terror, or met the terror in Baghdad instead of the streets of New York or Washington DC, but we have not forgotten!
Sorry, I refuse to accept Mark Steyn’s position, and I clearly reject the implication…its actually insulting and diminishes the memories of those who died that morning.
Sorry. No matter how anyone might twist the words or their meaning, September 11th is not forgotten, and it will never be forgotten. Men and women may question some of the events that have transpired since that morning, but it does not mean that have forgotten.
Sorry, IMO, Steyn is pandering to his readership…but hasn’t got a clue.
Further as described on the CT Blog:
Mark Steyn’s article and the original post in this thread ignore reality.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-09-11-bush-terrorattacks_x.htm
"Thousands walked Sunday in remembrance of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, in tribute to U.S. troops abroad. By their presence, marchers endorsed the worldwide fight against terrorism that began after airliners slammed into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field four years ago…Mark Burlingame, 54, of Lancaster, Pa., whose brother, Charles, was the pilot of the jetliner that hit the Pentagon, said: ‘I’m here to show support for our military and represent 9/11 families in support of the military’s effort to crush the scourge of terrorism in the world.’"
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,169060,00.html
"In New York, family members gathered at the site of the World Trade Center tragedy to read the names of lost loved ones who perished in the attacks and observed four separate moments of silence to mark the time when each jetliner struck the towers and then when each tower fell."
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05254/569710.stm
"U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, Gov. Ed Rendell and former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge joined about 1,000 others at the fourth memorial service this morning in Shanksville. As volunteers slowly read the names of each of the 40 passengers and crew, a large bell sounded, followed by the peal of a smaller bell. United Flight 93 was en route to San Francisco from Newark, N.J., when it was hijacked. The plane crashed in a reclaimed strip mine at about 10:06 a.m., about 80 minutes after the first plane struck the World Trade Center in New York."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/09/20050909-1.html
Steyn’s article is misleading, pandering and a travesty that demeans the memories of those who died the morning of Sept. 11, 2001 and those who have died since in the War on Terror. Not only that, its not true (in my opinion).
Steyn’s pandering thoughts do not represent mine, but unfortunately, his thoughts do represent those of the 95% of the people who "would rather die than think." (GB Shaw).
OpinionsThoughts on Thinking
Posted by StormWarning on 11 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Opinions
Every morning I receive a quote of the day from ThinkExist.com Daily Quotation. Some of worth saving, this one is classic.
Today’s is from George Bernard Shaw:
"Two percent of the people think; three percent of the people think they think; and ninety-five percent of the people would rather die than think."
Now, think about that.
This effects how most Americans synthesize the information they use to form their opinions on world events.
The ability to think, and to think critically is truly lacking in many walks of life. And in many cases, we see that lack of thinking resulting in a person’s inability to understand basic principles and facts because their minds are clouded by other peoples attitudes that are being influenced by other’s ideas and words.
Critical thinking even more so, is unfortunately and unavoidably lacking.
OpinionsScience and Technology Policy: Issues for the 109th Congress
Posted by StormWarning on 10 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Technology
This is sort of a companion post to the thread I’ve started on "Technology Development in the post-September 11th Era"
This excerpt comes from a Congressional Research Service piece, and it provides a good policy backdrop to the other pieces that I will wrote later on regarding technology development.
"Science and Technology Policy: Issues for the 109th Congress,"
updated August 22, 2005:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32837.pdf
Technology Development Issues:
Technological Innovation and the Economy
Impact of Federal R&D Funding
Technological advancement is an important factor in the nation’s economic growth. Experts widely accept that technical progress is responsible for up to one-half the growth of the U.S. economy and is one principal driving force for increases in our standard of living. Historically, industrial expansion was based on the use of technology to exploit natural resources. Today, such growth tends to be founded on scientific discoveries and engineering knowledge and is even more dependent than before on the development and use of technology. Technology can drive the economy because it contributes to the creation of new goods and services, new industries, new jobs, and new capital. It can expand the range of services offered and extend the geographic distribution of those services. The application of technologies also can contribute to the resolution of those national problems that are amenable to technological solutions.
Technological progress is achieved through innovation, the process by which industry provides new and improved products, manufacturing processes, and services. Research and development are important to this technological advancement in many ways. R&D contributes to economic growth by its impact on productivity. Generally, productivity growth in an industry or a firm is related to the amount spent previously on R&D in that industry or company. Analysts estimate that one-half of productivity increases (output per person) are the result of investments in research and development (see CRS Report RL32324). Others argue that innovations arising from R&D are the most important ones. Profound changes in our society have been brought about by advances in research, resulting in new products and processes in the areas of medicine, semiconductors, computers, and materials, just to name a few. Traditionally, the government funds R&D to meet the mission requirements of the federal departments and agencies. The government also supports work in areas where there is an identified need for research, primarily basic research, not being performed in the private sector. Basic research, that work undertaken to gain knowledge and understanding of the fundamental aspects of nature, is the foundation of many important new innovations. However, the payoff for basic research is generally long in coming, the results may be unmarketable, and the rewards often diffused among many users. Yet, while basic research is usually performed with little certainty that it will produce goods and services in the future, it appears that there is a significant relationship between the conduct of basic research and increases in productivity.
Federal funding reflects a consensus that while basic research is important for innovation, the rate of return to society as a whole generated by investments in this activity is significantly larger than the benefits that can be captured by any one firm performing it. It is estimated that the social rate of return on R&D spending is over twice that of the rate of return to the inventor. Ideas often can be easily imitated, the knowledge associated with an innovation dispersed and adapted to other products and processes. This, it is argued, often leads to under investment in research by the private sector and thus the need for federal funding. Expert analysis has shown the importance of federally funded R&D to advancements in innovation (see CRS Report RL32076). Studies undertaken by economists in the field demonstrate that collaboration with publicly funded research organizations increased private sector productivity in many industries, findings that parallel additional work showing the importance of public science to innovation and technological advancement across industrial sectors. This federal R&D stimulates the additional and often substantial private investment necessary to bring new and improved technologies to the marketplace.
In the United States, the development of new products, processes and services for the commercial marketplace is primarily a private sector activity. The government generally becomes involved only for certain limited purposes, including activities that typically have been determined to be necessary for the “national good” but which cannot, or will not, be supported by industry. However, government plays a role in structuring the environment in which business decisions are made and thereby influences private sector behavior. Direct federal funding and the existence of government markets for certain technologies, including defense and information technology-related goods, have helped influence resource allocations in the business community.
The myriad effects of federal research and development spending on innovation and the economic growth generated by technological advancement highlight the importance of decisions regarding the amount and distribution of federal R&D funds. Choices made by the 109th Congress related to financing the research endeavor may have immediate impacts on current programs as well as long term effects on the nation’s technological progress.
For Further Information
- CRS Issue Brief IB91132, Industrial Competitiveness and Technological Advancement: Debate Over Government Policy
- CRS Report RL32324, Federal R&D, Drug Discovery, and Pricing: Insights from the NIH-University-Industry Relationship
- CRS Report RL32076, The Bayh-Dole Act: Selected Issues in Patent Policy and the Commercialization of Technology
R&D Partnerships and Intellectual Property
A major emphasis of R&D-related legislative activity has been to augment research in the private sector through efforts to encourage firms to undertake cooperative R&D arrangements. Various laws, including the Stevenson-Wydler National Technology Innovation Act (P.L. 96-418) and the “Bayh-Dole” Act (P.L. 96-517), as amended, have created an environment conducive to joint ventures between government and industry, or between industry and universities, as well as among companies. To date, Congress has determined that providing title to inventions made under federal funding to contractors and/or collaborating parties should be used to support innovation. In return for patent ownership, Congress has accepted as satisfactory the anticipated payback to the country through goods and services to improve our health, welfare, and standard of living. These benefits have been considered more important than the initial cost of the technology to the government or any potential unfair advantage of one company over another in a cooperative venture.
As such cooperative efforts become more widespread, new and additional issues have emerged. Concerns have been expressed regarding the cost of drugs developed in part with federal funding or in conjunction with federal agencies. Conflicts have surfaced over federal laboratories patenting inventions that collaborating parties believe to be their own. In some agencies, delays continue in negotiating cooperative research and development agreements (CRADAs) because of disagreements over the dispensation of intellectual property. Questions have been raised as to the effects of patenting early stage discoveries (e.g. research tools) on additional innovation. The National Institutes of Health has encountered difficulties obtaining for government sponsored research new experimental compounds developed and patented by drug companies because of concerns over diminished effectiveness of the intellectual property if additional applications are discovered. Given these issues, additional decisions may need to be made during the 109th Congress regarding the way to maintain a balance between the importance of bringing new products and processes to the marketplace and protecting the public investment in R&D.
For Further Information
- CRS Issue Brief IB89056, Cooperative R&D: Federal Efforts to Promote Industrial Competitiveness
- CRS Issue Brief IB85031, Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development
- CRS Report RL32076, The Bayh-Dole Act: Selected Issues in Patent Policy and the Commercialization of Technology
- CRS Report RL30320, Patent Ownership and Federal Research and Development (R&D): A Discussion of the Bayh-Dole Act and the Stevenson-Wydler Act
- CRS Report RL32324, Federal R&D, Drug Discovery, and Pricing: Insights From the NIH-University-Industry Relationship
- CRS Report 98-862, R&D Partnerships and Intellectual Property: Implications for U.S. Policy
TechnologySept. 11th: Four Years Later
Posted by StormWarning on 08 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Federal Policy
A panel discussion sponsored by the Counterterrorism Blog was held today (September 8, 2005) at the Rayburn Building. As Moon knows (since he saw the email), an "invite" (*below) had been extended to me, but since it was held in Washington DC and I had no plans to be there this week, regrettably, I could not attend…also, since it was only planned on 9/2, unfortunately and understandably, no provisions were able to be made for webcasting it.
For perspective: Back in mid-April I participated in a conference call of public safety and homeland security chiefs from the Capitol Regional and the surrounding Mid-Atlantic states discussing communications systems and interoperability in case of a major terrorist attack (or as we now realize, a catastrophic natural disaster). The discussion related to what is referred to as CAPWIN (Capitol Wide Area Network). As of that meeting (a little over 4 months ago), the consensus (hush!!! no one tell anyone) was that the "system" didn’t work up to expectations. Not only that, adjacent areas to that covered by CAPWIN weren’t connected to it, and had no interoperability across state jurisdictions. Imagine, just north of the Capitol Region is the Port of Wilmington, Del. NOTE: There’s another program, EPAD, https://epad.us/, the Emergency Provider Access Directory, that is just now getting up and running (I attended that meeting back in March)..and its related to the Metropolitan Medical Response System, https://www.mmrs.fema.gov/default.aspx.
Now skip to the Capitol Region itself. Try to coordinate the first response efforts of the District, the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State of Maryland (along with the problems related to dealing with 3 different forms of government), and then consider the multiple counties of Virginia and Maryland that are in the Capitol Region. Each jurisdiction is competing with their next door neighbor to secure funding from UASI and other first responder sources, often for the same purpose…often purchasing equipment that isn’t compatible with that of the adjacent jurisdiction. The ONCRC has been called to task on the strategic issues and metrics associated with this within the last year.
I’ve also previously related (on TMF) the problem of adjacent fire districts on Long Island competing against each other for grant money to purchase equipment that could be jointly used (since it is first responder - ie CBRN attack type of capabilities). I sat in the office of a local politician discussing this with him and his staff because his district had 3 or 4 separate fire districts in it…and just outside of his district was the County Seat…
So ask yourselves this, if our Nation’s Capitol and the surrounding region haven’t gotten themselves coordinated and interoperable (or at least hadn’t as of my last exposure to the issue back in June), why do you expect the City of New Orleans and the surrounding parishes to have done so?
These are the key points of Rep. Sensenbrenner’s and Rep. Thompson’s remarks. A full transcript will be available soon, and I’ll spend sometime going through it and making my personal observations.
http://counterterror.typepad.com/the_counterterrorism_blog/2005/09/chief_architect.html
Sensenbrenner (not including his remarks relating to our Nation’s borders):
"…As we have seen in the Gulf Coast, our emergency response efforts at all levels – local, state, and federal – must be examined and improved. The initial state and local response, communications among the various levels of government, and the resources Congress provides for those responses must be part of this examination.
While we examine the response, we must recognize the magnitude of the disaster the first responders are facing and do everything possible to support them.
We will continue to re-examine our laws and resources as we progress in this war against terrorism. Our enemy will use any weakness and thus, we cannot become complacent just because we have not been attacked since the fall of 2001.
We must anticipate that America’s enemies are closely monitoring the death and destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina and the levee breaks, and planning accordingly to target other infrastructure points in the U.S. We must remain vigilant and determined against our enemies…"
"…“In an area very relevant to current events, we must give our first responders on the local and state levels what they need to prepare and respond to events. I have heard too many stories of police, firefighters, and EMT overwhelmed last week because they did not have the tools and the resources necessary to do their jobs. Just to give an example, first responders were unable to communicate with one another as they conducted search, rescue, and recovery efforts. How can the men and women risking their lives on the front line protect our nation if they can’t even talk to one another?
“This is not a new problem - the 9/11 Commission recognized that communication interoperability was key to successfully securing our nation. Yet, four years later - responders had neither operational nor interoperable communications. In fact, first responder homeland security programs were cut by $604 million this year, and an additional cut of $1.1 billion was requested for fiscal year 2006. This is simply unacceptable…"
I want to add that this week’s Newsweek Magazine (hopefully overcoming its previous journalistic concerns…even though I’d expect voices raised regarding even this article’s journalistic objectivity from some quarters) has a feature article discussing that since Sept. 11, 2001, the priorities has shifted to gaming and preparing for a major terrorist attack, and that preparation for natural disasters had been de-emphasized. Objective review of the facts supports this (this has nothing to do with whether the emergency plans that were in place were executed poorly, it speaks to federal priorities).
Wrong Priorities?
Angry state officials accuse the White House of ignoring warnings that its focus on terror left the nation unprepared to cope with natural disasters.
In the weeks before Hurricane Katrina, state emergency-planning directors repeatedly warned that the Bush administration’s post-September 11 focus on terrorism was seriously undercutting the federal government’s ability to respond to catastrophic hurricanes and other natural disasters…
…Internal Homeland Security documents obtained by NEWSWEEK lend support to the state directors’ complaints. Out of 15 “all hazards” disaster-planning scenarios approved by DHS and the White House Homeland Security Council last May, only three involved natural disasters, one document shows.
“I’ve been beating this drum for the past two years,” Bruce Baughman, director of the Alabama’s Emergency Management Agency and a former top FEMA official, told NEWSWEEK. “What I’ve seen happening is a total de-emphasis on natural disaster planning.”
The warnings by Baughman, the new president of the National Emergency Management Association, and other state emergency-planning directors are likely to become a focus of investigations now being planned by Congress into the administration’s botched response to the Katrina catastrophe in New Orleans…
Will the aftermath of Katrina bring the severing of FEMA from DHS? It might. But from my perspective, there will be other key findings from the upcoming Congressional review that will be more dramatic…things like chain of command and communications to name two. Frankly, whether as part of DHS or as an independent agency, one would also expect someone with stronger disaster response credentials than Brown running FEMA. I guess we’ll all see soon enough.
——– Original Message ——–
From: - Fri Sep 02 14:42:16 2005
Return Path: <rachel.sullivan@****.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2005 14:41:49 -0400
From: Rachel Sullivan <rachel.sullivan@****.com>
To: stormwarning@moonagewebdream.blogs.com
Subject: Fwd: CT Blog Panel
References: <d14ec6de05090205056b9121bb@mail.*****.com>
"Storm,"
We’re not sure yet if it will be webcast- will let you know. Andrew wanted me to tell you that he would love to have you there- loves your website. Please let me know if you will attend. Thanks. Below is the press release we sent out. Let me know if you need more info.
-Rachel Sullivan
Federal PolicyMore on Nagin
Posted by StormWarning on 08 Sep 2005 | Tagged as: Current Affairs
In earlier posts, I’ve made a point of trying not to place blame. Clearly, though as time has passed, some failures have been clearly identified.
This is an email exchange between myself and CVSUSN who posts on the Motley Fool Current Events Board. I think that his insight is very worth recording here. This is posted with his permission.
I had written:
From: Stormwarning
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 10:45 PM
To: CVSUSN
Subject: Nagin"He’s a horrible leader."
It is a fact of life that the Peter Principle pervades all walks of life. Nagin became overwhelmed by the enormity of the situation. It doesn’t make him a bad person, it simply means that he wasn’t up to the task. No?
The response was this:
Storm,
Certainly he became overwhelmed. I contend it was not the enormity of the situation. From what I saw and could infer was that neither he nor his Emergency Operations Director (Ebbert) fully enacted their Emergency Operations Plan . . . Never mind that the plan itself was woefully inadequate. On 1 Sep when Ebbert said he couldn’t find a FEMA rep, that was a huge red flag for me. I can assure you FEMA is looking for him. His cry was nothing but an attempt to turn this all over to the Feds. Uh-uh. Doesn’t work that way and he knows it. This was a shirking of responsibility.
Nagin should have been able to let Ebbert run the show. Nagin should have been the public face of NO. Initially, after the storm, that did not occur. He was issuing statements from Baton Rouge. He should have been over that overpass of the I-10 freeway with reporters and others all around him.
There are other indications of woeful preps. The PD problems with people walking off the job indicates a lack of esprit d’ corps, a willingness to fight through tragic losses. Missing police officers who did not evacuate or go to secure locations, but remained in their homes
during the storm shows a definite lack of PD planning. First responder families still in the city as a Cat 5 hurricane bore down on them. Plans should have been made whether in individual department plans or in the hurricane response plan.None of the above make him or Ebbert a bad person. It does make them bad leaders. There is a difference.
Comments that the CIA is going to come in and silence him shows an extraordinary lack of character and an extreme attempt at again shirking responsibility.
A bad person? No, but I wouldn’t want him as a shipmate let alone a ship’s captain.
CVS
There will be more comments from CVS (with his permission) in the future. His insights and perspectives are to be respected, and regardless of what my experience might be, his is different and very immportant to note on this and other subjects relating to counterterrorism and preparedness.
This email exchange probably relates best to this earlier post on the blog:
http://moonagewebdream.blogs.com/storms_counter_terrorism/2005/09/katrina_3_days_.html
Thanks to CVS for his opinion.
Current Affairs
