Nords someone ex military Read This!

[ladelfina]

I was kinda supporting newguy888 but I guess he didn't "get" me.. just like apparently I didn't "get" him.

[Not supporting his call to fire anyone, but understanding his instinct (whether valid or not) that military bases should be super-secure.]

As far as security goes, DH was working a bit on an Alitalia project. Seems the EU has handed down diktats that mandated the purchase of some super-sensitive latest-generation metal detectors.. Said detectors have been purchased (and are sitting under plastic somewhere).. (Too expensive to install? Too slow in processing folks? Requires extra personnel? Could be any of a # of reasons.. anyway everyone saves face for the meantime since the devices have been purchased!). But that doesn't even indirectly involve DH so let's move on to chapter 2:

Orders come from on high in Alitalia operations that say all the airport employees should be subject to the same metal-detector-type screening as the passengers. Sounds just like what you'd want, right? Except there are thousands of employees for every shift. Given the number of portals and budget (from on high) and the time it physically takes to process each worker DH and his boss for the project calculated that the workers would have to start arriving several hours earlier than the start of their shift just to gain admittance.. either that or you'd have to have a few HUNDRED portals! Where would you even put them? Needless to say the project is going nowhere.

So I'm obviously w/Nords on understanding the practicalities of the situation.. BUT
you have to put it in the context of people freaking out about stuff like this:

"An odd-looking Canadian coin with a bright red flower was the culprit behind the U.S. Defence Department's false espionage warning earlier this year, the Associated Press has learned.

"The odd-looking - but harmless - "poppy coin" was so unfamiliar to suspicious U.S. Army contractors travelling in Canada that they filed confidential espionage accounts about them. The worried contractors described the coins as "anomalous" and "filled with something man-made that looked like nano-technology," according to once-classified U.S. government reports and e-mails obtained by the AP.

"The supposed nano-technology actually was a conventional protective coating the Royal Canadian Mint applied to prevent the poppy's red color from rubbing off. The mint produced nearly 30 million such quarters in 2004 commemorating Canada's 117,000 war dead."
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/211189

I'm gob-smacked that lets-retire thinks that terror paranoia and "frenzy" is something "the liberals" cooked up!! [I like the "filled with.. nanotechnology" bit!]

Kerry said ''We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance''. He was CRUCIFIED for that remark. The current admin. can't have it both ways: either we have zero tolerance with all the pain and inconvenience and expense and sacrifice of liberties that entails.. where everyone has a patriotic duty to be paranoid 24/7.. or we go shopping and terrorism is something we have to accept may occur despite reasonable efforts to catch perps. I don't think anyone has really figured out the level of "reasonable" yet.

 

[ladelfina]

Fort Dix: interesting

from the NYT:

The informer, sent to penetrate a loose group of men who liked to talk about jihad and fire guns in the woods, had come to be seen by the suspects as the person who might actually show them how an act of terror could be carried off.

Indeed, over the months that followed, as the targets of the investigation spoke with a sometimes unfocused zeal about waging holy war, the informer, one of two used in the investigation, would tell them that he could get them the sophisticated weapons they wanted. He would accompany them on surveillance missions to military installations, debating the risks, and when the men looked ready to purchase the weapons, it was the informer who seemed to be pushing the idea of buying the deadliest items, startling at least one of the suspects.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/10/nyregion/10informer.html?ref=nyregion

Just curious: could this case get thrown out or eventually downgraded due to concerns over entrapment, just as tortured detainees will never be prosecutable? Martha?

 

[martyb]

I work daily on a major Air Force base that has B-52's, attack aircraft and the typical assets one would associate with such aircraft. Security at the gates is higher than I've ever seen in in my 30 years of working on bases, but a guy who really wants to get on & is only slightly creative, or who shoots the guard in the face while he checks his ID is gonna get on. They don't have 50 armed guards, tanks & helicopters hovering around the gate waiting for an insurgency. The Air Force recently announced it was doing away with vehicle sitckers, opting for a 100% ID check of all vehicles. On most bases, this only means the driver, but sometimes they check all vehicle occupants. No ID means you gotta go see somebody about your reason for wanting to access the base.

 

[OAG]

Maybe someone that knows can comment on this. I received an email this morning telling me about a change in Vehicle Registration at USAF Bases. It seems that the routine registration process where you get a sticker to put on your vehicle will be changed. Vehicles will no longer be registered. The checking will continue to be at gate entry via the drivers ID Card (Retired or AD). Seems a bit strange to be doing this and, if true, I wonder what will be happening at other services bases.

 

[lets-retire]

I'm gob-smacked that lets-retire thinks that terror paranoia and "frenzy" is something "the liberals" cooked up!! [I like the "filled with.. nanotechnology" bit!]

Just to keep me in context I said Libs AND media. The media has a tendency to sensationalize things and make them seem more than they are. So in the case of the wiretapping, Libs say it is possible that the average joe will be monitored. The media blows it up and says you will be monitored. It is possible that you will be monitored, but not very probable. Contrary to what the media seems to think, the government does not have the time or resources to monitor everyone. If there is little reason to monitor your actions they won't/can't. As even I admitted, there were/are some abuses. Those abuses should be addressed, but the average joe does not have much to worry about.

samclem--Even with the seemingly short process time, it is possible to check everyone's id. After about a week of it most people are aware that they need to remove the id from their wallet and will have it ready at the gates. Not to mention, most of the gate sentries will start to recognize the people coming through and what at one time was a through look at the id shortens to maybe checking the expiration date and photo. The actual time to check most cars is maybe 3-4 seconds.

 

[lets-retire]

OAG--Actually it makes sense. The stickers stand out and if some terrorist wants to snatch a military member or their family they identify the most likely victims. They are also expensive and if the gates are checking your id anyway, there is no need for the stickers.

 

[tryan]

As a free society we'll always to vulnerable to the like's of the Ft Dix six.

The fact that they were caught is a tribute to the increased vigilance we are all responsible for. And the fact that they were self instructed demonstrates how disorganized, distracted, divided this enemy has become. Also speaks volumes about the success we've had breaking communication channels accross their organization. How hard do you think these guys tried to get connected to the larger "cause"?

It's a good thing.

 

[ERD50]

[Not supporting his call to fire anyone, but understanding his instinct (whether valid or not) that military bases should be super-secure.]

Until the media reports that some group attempted to tamper with a town's water tower - then there will be indignant outrage that we don't have secure water towers. Or some group attempted to spray some poison on a wheat field - then there will be indignant outrage that we don't have secure wheat fields, ad infinitum.

I'm actually amazed at how safe and secure I feel at this very moment.

-ERD50

 

[justin]

I'm not sure of their exact security procedures at ACP's. It is an army base. The 350 vehicles per hour per lane clearance rate was an assumption provided by the base.

 

[ladelfina]

in the case of the wiretapping, Libs say it is possible that the average joe will be monitored. The media blows it up and says you will be monitored. It is possible that you will be monitored, but not very probable. Contrary to what the media seems to think, the government does not have the time or resources to monitor everyone. If there is little reason to monitor your actions they won't/can't.

lets-retire, I am an "average joe" (well, .."jane"). I am monitored. I know I am monitored. I can go into various aspects in another post if you like since mine tend to get too long as it is.

My perfectly sane hunch on gov't. surveillance is, if you are reading about something in the paper.. the reality is an order of magnitude beyond that.

Not sure if I mentioned it here on the forum or to RWsis, but it would behoove Americans to read "The Puzzle Palace" (as I did back in the early '80s). Fast-forward 25 years. What was published there was the tip of a still-secret iceberg. You may recall that in 1982 what we'd consider a "home" computer had maybe 4-16k of RAM and IF it had a hard drive it was maybe 5Mb. It doesn't take much to imagine that the gov'ts resources in this field have kept pace with the overall market for data processing (streaming or non-) and storage; i.e., they've likely increased by a factor in the millions. Look at what Google and YouTube process with today's common commerical technology and tell me the government not only can't, but isn't doing much, much more.

You may be comforted at the name change in DARPA's "Total" Information Awareness.. to "Terror" Information Awareness; I'm not. The capability is there. The awareness, too (just not in the realm of the general public).

When confronted with an argument such as "the media" cooks these things up (and you're right; I should not have left that out when referring to your comment..) .. well, I figure you're partially right. The media does like to sensationalize a lot, especially when it comes to Anna Nicole Smith or the missing lady in Aruba or wherever that was... But they don't stick their necks out to report on, say SWIFT banking transactions with the same gusto.. it's boring. When a paper reports on wiretapping, I don't see it falling into the "sensationalizing" category; these days it doesn't sell papers (if it ever did). In that case, I try to weigh the following in my mind: does the paper (having taken some risk in reporting the story) have more to gain than the gov't. has to gain by downplaying, denying, or covering it up? Cui bono?


Anyone tracking the AG hearings might have reason to feel less-than-secure that key decisions on government policy are being made by responsible adults rather than under-qualified, eager-beaver ideologues. Maybe there aren't any Monica Goodlings or Kyle Sampsons at DARPA/NSA/FBI/CIA.. but I wouldn't bet one single cent on it.

At any rate, I'm fairly confident that monitoring (of everyone, to a far greater degree than we know) IS happening --whether we like it or not; it's too late to put that particular genie back into the lamp.

Until the media reports that some group attempted to tamper with a town's water tower - then there will be indignant outrage that we don't have secure water towers. Or some group attempted to spray some poison on a wheat field - then there will be indignant outrage that we don't have secure wheat fields, ad infinitum.

I'm actually amazed at how safe and secure I feel at this very moment.

ERD50, you are right.. you imply the outrage doesn't serve much practical purpose, and it doesn't. Yet it does serve the purpose of people being willing to relinquish civil liberties in order to have an all-seeing "protective" government. Again, I understand it.. just don't happen to agree w/it.

 

[justin]

I am monitored. I know I am monitored. I can go into various aspects in another post if you like since mine tend to get too long as it is.

I'd be curious to know how you know you are monitored and to what extent you are monitored.

I'm frequently paranoid about saying stuff on the internet that, taken out of context, might have dire consequences. For example, I thought about deleting my posts on this thread about access control points at military bases. Particularly given the recent media attention given to the Ft Dix six. Even though that info on ACP's is probably public knowledge and already posted somewhere on the internet, I'd be worried about getting put in a room w/ bright lights and being interrogated about "what I know". I've been in that type situation before for something innocuous I said out loud which was taken out of context and blown way out of proportion due to fervor induced by mass media attention given to the ft dix six/columbine/va tech type events.

 

[ladelfina]

justin.. a bit busy at the moment but will get back to this maybe by tomorrow; it's an interesting subject. I view myself as one of the majority of people with "nothing to hide". You and other military and ex- (if that's your bkgd.) have a different burden w/r/t to this, which I appreciate. I'll take the time to craft something and may put it in a new thread.

In the meantime, let's just say that one of the remarks Rumsfeld was most ridiculed for is probably one of the most intelligent things he ever said:
"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know."

 

[OAG]

REF: USAF Change in Vehicle Registration and Installation Entrance requirements: http://usmilitary.about.com/od/airforce/a/nodecal.htm.

Makes sense for the USAF, I guess, but I am one that travels between service installations so I will leave the DOD Decal I have on the car.

 

[CCdaCE]

<snip>

In the meantime, let's just say that one of the remarks Rumsfeld was most ridiculed for is probably one of the most intelligent things he ever said:
"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know."

I think you're absolutely right with this comment and your previous "long winded" one.

The "American public" are sheep in this respect, I feel too. The funny part is they ridicule for how Rummy stated it, but how much thought was given to what he was actually trying to say. I'd like to try to put a number on the percentage of people who thought about what he was trying to get at. Is it even a double digit percent across the public?

Incidentally, I always thought Dennis Miller was funny in the fact the he prefaced his multiple-minute blabbering with "Not to get off on a rant here...".

-CC

Edit: snipped the quote.

 

[justin]

justin.. a bit busy at the moment but will get back to this maybe by tomorrow; it's an interesting subject. I view myself as one of the majority of people with "nothing to hide". You and other military and ex- (if that's your bkgd.) have a different burden w/r/t to this, which I appreciate. I'll take the time to craft something and may put it in a new thread.

In the meantime, let's just say that one of the remarks Rumsfeld was most ridiculed for is probably one of the most intelligent things he ever said:
"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know."

Not ex-mil, just work as a consultant in the private sector. Relatively little experience with military installations, actually. From a business perspective and recent discussions, I've gathered that there's a lot of smart money (small/medium/large business owners) expecting to profit big from base security design/construction contract work coming up soon. And this is based on what I've seen/heard BEFORE the ft dix six made the news.

 

[Bimmerbill]

I've heard talk of doing away with stickers at the Navy base I work on. Not sure if it is the duplicate checking (Stickers and Photo ID) or if they are concerned about identifying personnel.

I debated betting one of the special National Guard license plates available here, but eventually decided against it. I did get a Vet plate, but there are a lot more of those around now a days.

 

[FinallyRetired]

There are bases then there are Bases. There is no such thing as uniform security across all installations, it depends on what is there. I'm not familiar with Ft Dix but it probably represents the lowest level, a fairly open base. Even in such bases there may be portions inside the base with much higher security levels. I'm sure the security services are re-evaluating the level of security at even open bases.