April 7, 2006
Metro Says: Your Security is Your Business
We've known for quite a while that Metro isn't terribly prepared to secure the transit network against terrorist attacks. So bad was the situation late last year that Metro Police Chief Polly Hansen admitted to the Senate's Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that while she had identified $150 million in needed security upgrades, the transit agency had received but $15 million in grants from the Department of Homeland Security over the three preceding years.
We've also known that part of Metro's security plan involves rider participation -- we are regularly reminded that should we spy some suspicious activity, it is our duty to inform the authorities. But this DIY approach to securing the region's rails has suddenly become that much more apparent with a new ad that is appearing in Metro stations throughout the system. Caught above at the Potomac Avenue station, the ad features an image of a rider blissfully standing with his back to an errant and abandoned backpack. It reads:
Terrorism is the threat. Complacency is the accomplice.WMATA may as well have just raised a white flag and proclaimed, "Hell, if you don't want to be killed by merciless terrorists, start being a little more vigilant. God knows we're not going to be."It's easy to let our guard down -- 9/11 happened over four years ago. Nothing's happened since. Except for Madrid. And London. Part of the war on terrorism is a battle against complacency. So live your life, but be aware. And if you see something that seems wrong, let us know.
|
We've seen this stuff before, and while this isn't quite as obvious, it's still sinister in its Orwellian aspects.
Kind of hard to be vigilant with those fancy moving picture ads distracting me.
I think it's ridiculous when people say that this is an Orwellian attempt to have people spy on one another.
The hell would you prefer? People to willfully ignore abandoned luggage and jittery, bulky, overclothed individuals as a political statement? Shop owners to happily ship hundreds of pounds of chlorine tablets to a cash customer with a PO box, and not report it because to do so would be to be a tool of the Administration?
Folks, the current political powers-that-be in the country are trying to milk this for every bit of political gain they can, and that's sinister and ludicrous. Stipulated.
However, please don't forget that people are also, in fact, working their *very hardest* to *actually* blow you up on the public transit system, and that they do manage to do so, recently, pretty frequently.
So let's have some balance between the "government should be allowed to spy on anyone at any time" and the "telling the Metro cop that the huge roll-on suitcase chained and locked to the bike rack outside might be worth a look (as I have done,) makes me an unthinking spy for the etablishment." positions.
Because there's plenty of room on *both* sides to serve as an unthinking tool of murderous and oppressive political schemes, and it makes me, clearly, awful mad when people don't do the critical thinking to acknowledge that and determine what they think their own role should be.
Seeing as DC seems to have more police officers per capita than any city. And people want MORE. I'd bet that people here won't be happy until each and everyone of us is assigned our own personal guard. Because clearly the community cannot police itself.
The ad might as well say: "All ya'll bitches better be ready! Something's gonna happen"
Please spare us WOV. If terrists were truly working their very hardest to blow us up, it would have been done by now. There is currently nothing in place that would stop or prevent a determined bomber or gunman. That's not to say that we shouldn't stay aware, but the way you paint the situation is grossly out of line with reality. "Pretty frequent" transit bombings? Perhaps you're thinking of mosques in Iraq or something.
Furthermore, you respond to points that were not even made in the piece. No one mentioned Orwellian anything, or ignoring obviously suspicious items. The piece discussed the lack of security funding for WMATA. With your tone, one would be led to think that this might concern you. However, you're more concerned with strawmen.
I did miss Michael's use of 'Orwellian'. However, the rest stands.
i think that the biggest problem with this strategy is that it'll end up INCREASING complacency.
take, for example, those ridiculous announcements the train operators have started reading. they are so repetitive and inane that people will likely tune them out the same way they ignore the "doors closing" chime. Furthermore, little inspires less confidence than most metro employees, and i have to say that in an emergency, my first instinct would be to ignore them completely.
Ow! Ouch! That hurts! Ugh, please stop! My head! Noooo!
It's not usually profitable to respond to anonymous comments, er, anon, but how frequent would you like transit bombings to be to characterize them as a problem? I, personally, think about one every 18 months in a major population center (throw in Tokyo if you'd like, as well,) is pretty not great.
However, congratulations for noting that the way I painted the situation is grossly out of line with reality!
In fact, if you read closer - there's actually two, opposing, unreasonable positions there. It's a rhetorical device called hyperbole - note here that I used it on both sides to emphasize the unreasonableness of both extreme positions in a call for balance. (I assume you didn't read, or at least register, the part where I called out als ludicrous the Administration's efforts to maximally milk this kind of concern for political gain, and as a license for unfettered surveillance powers.)
What I do reject is posters like Michael calling programs like this Orwellian, without considering the fact that the actual poster is pretty darn reasonable. Knee-jerk calling every effort to increase people's situational awareness either laughable or oppressive is not a legitimate viewpoint. You say no one's saying not to be more aware on mass transit - I say that that exact viewpoint is one I explicitly hear rather frequently. That to do so is to naively fall into a trap set by the government.
"If terrorists were working their very hardest to blow us up, it would have been done by now." Look into the pre-attack prep work that goes into things like Operation Bojinka - give it a Wikipedia - and the extensive effort that the very best terrorist networks put into *first* estimating the level of vigilance of target populations, and optimal political and media timing of attacks, before you ask me to "spare you" from further thought on the subject.
I wasn't aware there was any profit in responding to comments on an internet message board. If so, someone owes me millions in back pay. Also, 'WOV' is no less anonymous than 'anon'.
I didn't say transit bombings weren't a problem. The charactarization I objected to was that they occur "pretty frequently." I stand by my assertion that the way you describe the situation is more dire than the actual reality. We'll probably just agree to disagree here.
I did note the section you highlight, but that isn't really relevant. I also withdrew my comment re:Orwellian (did you not read - or not register?). I think we'd agree that people who think there should be zero rider awareness are misguided.
In any case, I'm simply not going to be as paranoid as you or WMATA would like us to be.
I saw that billboard the same day I saw the article about the moving ads. I think the real message here is "Put down your newspapers and pay attention to billboards and ads, so Metro can make some money." I'm thinking I may write Metro and ask whether it's OK to watch the ads, or if that would mean letting my guard down.
In any case, drivers are way more dangerous than terrorists as a day-to-day matter.
WOV is a lot less anonymous than...
...I see that though I put *in* my email address to use this name, it doesn't actually then *show it to anybody*. (tiny voice) nevermind.
Dude, I come from the emergency services community, so you and I are going to percieve frequency of attack differently.
So go ahead and be less paranoid than I'd like to be, and I'll be more paranoid than either you *or* I would prefer, and we'll both get why one would make the other mad.
But! I call pool on explosives-based transit attack, DC, within 24 months.
I don't see anything wrong with utilizing a willing public to help police deal with potential threats. I've notified authorities a couple of times about bags without owners... and I felt pretty dumb afterwards... But I would've felt dumber had I not done anything, and shit blew up.
True, if the terrorists wanted to blow shit up, they'd have done it by now... but there's still plenty of American psychos like Tim McVeigh out there that are a bit stupider.
I rely on the federal government for my fear-mongering. Metro authorities? I think they're just trying to make sure no one blows up their damn trains. Everyone knows how pissed off Washingtonians get when their train is 2 minutes late.
What would you have metro do? With the millions of people who are in the hundreds of stations, it isn't unrealistic that you should be more vigilent. It is YOUR life after all. Personally I think you'd have a vested interest in reporting suspicious activity. There's no way to protect passengers on a rail system. Especially when you have people willing to blow themselves up.
Besides the fact Metro already runs at a deficit and has no money. They make no money. They are subsidized already by the government. Do you want to pay $10 to go five stops on the metro? Doubtful.