Keep bringing this up until someone listens. It is a serious problem, and points up perfectly that the chuckleheads in charge are not at all serious about *homeland security.*

They can infiltrate the Quakers, but they can't secure refineries and chemical plants? Fucking brilliant.

Chemical plant security is a serious issue which has been very poorly addressed, but chlorine based weapons have little if anything to do with it. The two major issues, destruction of a chemiclal plant via a terrorist attack, which has nothing much to do with chlorine based weapons, and theft of the products of the plants, which might, require separate solutions.

Theft of chlorine would be far easier by hijacking a truck or rail car anyway.

But...but, Quakers are dangerous.

They believe in non-violent solutions and, although few in number, have globally spread this message.

But then again, our president only listens to god, he doesn't look for "that of god in everyone."

Do you think that an attack of ANY kind would be GOOD for the administration, right now, or BAD for the administration. Don't waste your time.

Balderdash.

Chlorine is World War I-era in it's origination and is not a WMD, per se.

It is a chemical attack that disperses in an open environment and is not effective as a dirty bomb.

Let's not pee down our leg, liberals.

Norman, a plague-infected corpse lobbed over the castle wall was a WMD - any weapon designed to kill or sicken all in a specified area (depending on size of payload) is a WMD. And remember this, too - the better they get with chlorine, the closer they get to fluorine - which they are working on, by the way. And that's worth getting a wee bit excited about.

hey, it's not as bad as nuclear, so let's not worry about it.
Another worthless contribution from Moron Rogers.

Theft of chlorine would be far easier by hijacking a truck or rail car anyway.

It's even easier than that; you don't even have to hijack 'em -- just derail a train in an urban area.

How does the use of Chlorine truck bombs in Iraq make the issue of chem plant security in the US _more_ pressing?

Explain that "thought" process.

It's not as if attacks on chem plants (refineries, nuclear power plants, or anything that would disperse hazardous material) are such an outlandish thing for a would-be attacker to contemplate that he would need this inspiration.

Oh Disputo - The Frist family sent me to biohazard training with homeland security after the attacks of Sept. 11 because every hospital had to have a disaster response protocol. You never know who is lurking, so I'm not going into details. But these guys are playing at securing the homeland. It's a fucking joke.

If it wasn't a joke -all of our god-damned radios would be compatible!!!

Isn't a regular bomb a WMD? What makes a chlorine bomb different from one that takes out an entire building if they both kill the same amount of people or demolish the same area of land? Not saying any of these are good, I just see WMD tossed around way too much lately.

A chlorine device has a secondary activity of killing by poison. The initial explosion takes out a few casualties, then the people within the dispersal zone are secondary victims of the released poison gas cloud.

Thank you for keeping the point on the table. It's an important one.

Let's not pee down our leg, liberals.

Damn, wish I'd of thought of that.

Then again, consider the chlorine scare done:

I can't believe my guys couldn't figure out a way to enrich Republican corporation presidents via chlorine fears. Sometimes our side is just to damn good at obfuscating against oversight, and not damn good enough at seeing opportunitie$.

Thanks again...
And keep pissing on that left leg of yours Mr Frank.
Because frankly my dear, it becomes you...

This week, the House Homeland Security Committee sent a bill to the floor that actually addressed some of these issues. Rep. Markey sponsored an amendment to limit the ability of railroads to transport hazardous chemicals like chlorine through urban areas. They've also been trying to increase training for first responders and transit workers, which can play an important role in the deterrence of, and response to, some types of attacks.

These chlorine bombs have a more of a psychological affect on people than they do anything substantively physical. What makes them dangerous is the 'bomb' part, not the chlorine. Guess what folks, chemical weapons aren't worth the time or trouble - this is why most countries do not use them. One gets much more utility out of conventional explosives. The use of these chlorine IEDs is probably intended to sitr up media coverage than anything else. Has anyone been killed by these bombs as a result of the chlorine? Or was it the explosion that got them? Are they any more lethal than conventional explosives? I doubt it. I was saying this about Bush's WMD claims back in 2002 - Chemical and Biological weapons are not a threat. If I want to kill a group of people what makes more sense? A) Blow up some chlorine; some die of the explosion, som elung damage, bad smell. B) Biological attasck; some die of the explosion, some get pneumonia and take anti-biotics, some die. C) spend my money on more C4, more diesel fuel, more fertilizer, more copper plates - those within the blast area are guaranteed to die, property damage maximized.

I'm not saying that these new bombs aren't scary. Sure, they are. But they aren't some new grand threat. IEDs, and those Copper Disk Penetrating explosives are much more efficient, cost-effective, and easier to make. You want to save lives? Get our asses out of Iraq.

You don't defeat terrorists by guarding every imaginable target inside your borders. Not only is such a practice expensive, it's fucking impossible. Do you think a couple of minimum wage rent-a-cops are gonna stop a well funded, intelligent, and determined terrorist cell from blowing up a chemical or nuclear plant?

You defeat the terrorists by tackling the problems that give rise to Islamic terrorist organizations in the first place. But since a meaningful solution to the Palestinian occupation is not in the cards, and since we are not about to pressure the cabal of fascist regimes in the Middle East we call our allies to move towards more democratic forms of government, and in light of the fact that we obviously seem intent or occupying and destroying Iraq and Afghanistan, then we must accept the fact that terrorists will continue to seek out targets in the "Homeland," and there is absolutely nothing we can do to stop them.

Come on, liberals--next you'll have everyone surrender the chlorine they use to clean their swimming pools. Then, the chlorine industry will collapse, putting tens of thousands out of business.

Here's what you should be afraid of: a country defended by the Democratic Party.

Curiously, all of this started when the Nancy boys took over.

Chlorine is a chemical weapon, and also an oxidant. It is not a weapon of mass destruction in the sense that a virulent biologicla agent or a nuclear devise would be, but it is a weapon that can kill many people. The question of derailing a railcar versus stealing one depends on your objectives, I guess.

Norman Rogers, of course, goes way overboard, makes a ridiculous extrapolation and invokes the Democrats. He is not to be taken seriously.

As a historical item..Christy Mathewson died of the aftereffects of a chlorine attact in WWI.

Here's what you should be afraid of: a country defended by the Democratic Party.

yeah, we didn't have 9/11 when the Republicans were "defending" us.

oh, we did?

"...but this makes our unsecured chemical plants at home a big problem. As is the fact the White House has effectively resisted efforts to do anything about it." - Drum

That's right, let's focus on a "theorized" threat instead of the "actual" threat. Kevin, between this and considering Obama to be POTUS material based on his skin color and ethnicity, I am finding your more rectn posts to be left of Cindy Sheehan. And I didn't know that existed.

Here's what our representatives are doing in Congress to support the troops:

The spending bill totals $124 billion, $95.5 billion of which is targeted for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The rest of the funds in the House bill would go to domestic programs unrelated to the wars.

Adding pork to the war funding is bullshit.

Let's face it....the wackos in the White House couldn't care less about actually making our country safer because it would necessitate the spending of huge amounts of money by their corporate masters.

Now making getting on an airplane a nightmare....that's something they really care about!

Of course, none of them fly commericial since they all get lifts on corporate jets.

"yeah, we didn't have 9/11 when the Republicans were "defending" us." - haha

yeah we didn't have the embassy bombings, the Jakarta bombings, the Somalia fiasco, the Murrah Federal building bombing, the Waco incident, the first WTC bombing and the USS Cole bombing when the Democrats were defending us.

oh, we did.

"....the wackos in the White House couldn't care less about actually making our country safer..." - mfw13

Well, international tourism is at pre-9/11 levels and there have been no domestic incidences since 9/11 with several thwarted attempts.

So I guess those facts would completely refute your insane assertion.

LMAO @ Jay for blaming Clinton for terrorist attacks by his fellow wingnuts.

"..and points up perfectly that the chuckleheads in charge are not at all serious about *homeland security.*" - BGRS

Why do you care about security? Afterall according to your following post, the insurgents are just freedom fighters, right? Just like back in the revolution days, right?

"This is a Bug Hunt, and the Iraqis have the homefield advantage. Our soldiers and Marines don't know who the enemy is. It is an enemy that can fade into shadows and disappear. They are using the same tactics that Americans developed and perfected in our own War for Independence." - BGRS

"yeah, we didn't have 9/11 when the Republicans were "defending" us." - haha

LMAO @ Jay (haha) for blaming Clinton (Bush) for terrorist attacks by his fellow wingnuts.

To be fair, chemical plants are a major consideration for the local folks who will be called on to respond first. If they weren't we would not conduct mass casualty drills to prepare ourselves for them.

The last mass casualty I took part in involved two states and three counties and the National Guard. Within the first two hours communications failed and we were using our personal cell phones.

First, fix the communications systems. (And that doesn't mean outsource it to Halliburton.)

AbNorman sez: "... you'll have everyone surrender the chlorine to clean their swimming pools... All this started when the Nancy boys took over."

Well, Norman, no. Actually, recommendations for securing our ports and chemical plants came from the bipartisan 9-11 Commission (chaired by a REPUBLICAN, you see, long before the '06 election which swept Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid to their leadership positions). Incidentally, this Administration originally opposed forming the Commission, before it was for it. Then the Administration ignored those recommendations (like requiring security plans for sensitive chemical facilities) not favored by their big campaign supporters, like the chemical and power industries.
Want to get a feel for a release from a sensitive chemical plant in an urban area? Take a look at the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India.

I see Jay is a disciple of Norman. 9/11 = all those other things. But let's at them. We are discussing terorism, so Somalia and Waco are out. The security of 9/11 was domestic security, so Jakarta and Cole bombing are out. The first WTC is germane, but if I remeber correctly, the perpetrators were caught.

Seen bin Laden lately, Jay?

The need to conflate things in order to once again defend the indefensible makes Jay nearly as unserious as Harmon.

What? I pointed out what the dynamic is, apply a little thought to the situation, and I am cheerleading defeat? Not at all.

And it is a Bug Hunt.

LOL,

Norm you are so completely full of shit that I figure if we just send you a home enema kit there's a good chance you'll just go away.

"The first WTC is germane, but if I remeber correctly, the perpetrators were caught." - mudge

Of course they were caught. It must have been an entirely different organization that planned the second WTC incident right mudgie?

And the issue is prevention, Clinton failed to "prevent" each and every incident and I would suggest became the terrorist himself at Waco and also with Elian.

Do try and pay attention

"Seen bin Laden lately, Jay?"

No, have you?

I think he's dead. Or at the very least incapacitated.

And where is the connection between pointing out what the dynamic is on the ground in Iraq and not caring about domestic security?

What have I ever posted that would indicate i do not think homeland security is an important issue? To the contrary, when I complain about it, I am complaining that this administration talks a good game, but it's all just rhetoric.

"And where is the connection between pointing out what the dynamic is on the ground in Iraq and not caring about domestic security?" - BGRS

I am just busting your chops a little bit. But don't ever compare these serial killers to our revolutionaries.

"I am complaining that this administration talks a good game, but it's all just rhetoric." - BGRS

That's your opinion, but you can't argue the facts.

By the way, Jay - I know the mods have you on a short leash so I am going out of my way to be civil here.

What conservative isn't on a short leash?

I didn't. I said they were using the same tactics.

I have a little more than opinion to make that statement. I spent two weeks here.

"I said they were using the same tactics." - BGRS

Funny, I don't remember IED's and suicide bombers being used in the revolution where men had to fight pretyy much toe to toe. So, no, they are not using the same tactics.

gunpowder and nails? That tactic has been around forever. Of course the revolutionaries didn't have C-4 or cell phone detonators.

The contrast I was attempting to draw was between a guerrilla with the support of even a few in the general population versus an occupying army. The army is by definition visible. The geurrillas are elusive.

And, occupiers always eventually withdraw. Period.

But the topic of this thread is homeland security and unsecured refineries and chemical plants in this country.

Let's save this topic for discussion later on a germane thread.

"And, occupiers always eventually withdraw. Period." - BGRS

This (occupiers) is the crux of our disagreement.
IMHO, the spree killers (insurgents) are the occupiers.
But saving it for a more appropriate time is fine with me.

Want to get a feel for a release from a sensitive chemical plant in an urban area? Take a look at the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India.

There are chemical plants, tranports, and warehouses all over the planet, and terrorism is a lot older than 9/11. So why haven't these things been happening a lot more often?

Has anyone checked to see what the standard security measures are at places like this? It's not like they'd be widely advertised.

Here's an article from 2005.

My number one concern with homeland security is the communications problem. We can agree that that is pressing and deserving of attention, no?

To a Repub cynic, this issue of domestic chemical plant protection sounds a lot more like a labor union boondoggle than it does national security. After Bhophal I can't imagine any chem plant in the country that isn't better protected by fear of trial lawyers than by a thousand more gate guards making $22 an hour.

Hello Al, Jay, Norman, et al: Really, who helps our nation be vulnerable to terrorists more: People who try to avoid or end wasteful wars that aren't directly against the sources anyway, or people who leave us directly vulnerable to real attack because they don't want clients to have smaller profit margins?

The thing about chemical plants is that there are different classes of the damned things. Vulcan Chemical in Wichita? You better believe it is secure, and I'm 90% sure there are "Deadly Force Authorized" warnings.

But there are a million small shops with vats of really nasty stuff, and in some states the rating of the facility and the security measures they have to observe isn't always based on the nastiness of the stuff they use, it's on the end product.

Just last month, a fire at a small paint factory in the west bottoms in KC evacuated a neighborhood for a couple of days because of the solvents and such that were on site.

"Really, who helps our nation be vulnerable to terrorists more: People who try to avoid or end wasteful wars that aren't directly against the sources anyway, or people who leave us directly vulnerable to real attack because they don't want clients to have smaller profit margins?" - Neil

Well let me answer this one for you Neil.

People have been trying to "avoid" or "end" this conflict since the 1972 Munich Olympic games and it just hasn't worked out well, has it? So we're trying a different approach this time and so far we have deposed, tried and hung a brutal dictator, killed Zarqawi, imprisoned Khalid, have Bin Laden hiding in a cave and haven't had one single domestic incident since.

Any questions?

Yes, my question is bearing that something hasn't happened yet here again (again means after the anthrax attacks of course - not doable by amateurs, and still unsolved; not 9/11 as commonly and falsely said...) doesn't mean we aren't at risk. You can smoke for years and not get cancer, but it is still risky to keep on doing it. Wouldn't you rather know we are trying harder to keep things safe, instead of just relying on low-predictive recent previous history

relax, it's not like there's some, er, libertarian-minded son of texas with a cyanide bomb or anything.

You're like the non-cancer patient who is convinced he IS going to get cancer.

Neil, are you trying to reason with Jay? Oh, dear.

See, Jay thinks Saddam and Osama killed the Israeli wrestling team in 1972. 'Course, you're right, he forgot that Saddam and Osama killed several Americans on American soil with anthrax.

Want to straighten us out on that one, Jay?

Homeland Unsecured
Public Citizen has released a report showing that the Bush administration has consistently ignored or opposed commonsense measures to protect Americans from potentially catastrophic terrorist attacks – an inaction that reflects officials’ aversion to regulating private industry and allegiance to key campaign contributors.

The report, Homeland Unsecured: The Bush Administration’s Hostility to Regulation and Ties to Industry Leave America Vulnerable, details how the Bush administration has failed to harden our defenses against terrorism and secure the most vulnerable, high-impact targets. The report is based on an analysis of five key areas – chemical plants, nuclear plants, hazardous material transport, ports and water systems.

The report suggests that this is in part because industries representing the five homeland security areas examined in this study collectively have:

Raised at least $19.9 million for the Bush campaigns, the Republican National Committee or the Bush inauguration since the 2000 cycle.
Provided 10 Rangers and 20 Pioneers – individuals who raise at least $200,000 and $100,000, respectively – to the Bush presidential campaigns.
Additionally, these industries spent at least $201 million lobbying in Washington between 2002 and June 2004.
from whitehouseforsale.org

Yeah, those folks aren't reasoners because their business is "apologetics." Not protecting the chem plants etc. and then excusing it later: Suppose after you rode with him in a car for weeks at high speeds, the driver said, "Hey, I disabled your seat belt to save a few bucks for my buddy the manufacturer. You shouldn't be mad, since we haven't had an accident anyway, right? And you know I know what I'm doing..."
Well, Jay, I suppose you wouldn't be mad? And, you'd be happy and rarin' to get back on the road with that creep? Really...

consider wisely always:

The Homeland Unsecured report can be downloaded here. The link you gave seems to be obsolete.

Unless there are control numbers for how much industries donated to Democrats, too, the numbers may not be that significant.

haven't had one single domestic incident since.

By that "reasoning" Clinton kept us safe after the first WTC attack in 1993. So far he's still got a better track record than Bush in that regard.

Here's what you should be afraid of: a country defended by the Democratic Party.

"Democratic Party"? Oh dear, Norm just outed himself as a parody troll. A real wingnut troll wouldn't ever consider spelling it correctly.

Thanks, Ein--good job. There was also a document showing oodles of positions in government granted by the administration to the donors referred to as rangers and pioneers--it went on for pages.

As we know, former National Security Council member Rand Beer, who left the Bush administration and went to work for John Kerry, stated "As an insider, I saw the things that weren't being done. And the longer I sat and watched, the more concerned I became, until I got up and walked out." and "they're making us less secure, not more secure."

But don't ever compare these serial killers to our revolutionaries....Jay at 4:11 PM

...Bin Laden hiding in a cave... Jay at 4:55 PM

The Bush Administration is not interested in taking substantive steps to reduce the likelihood of catastrophic attacks of terror. If they were, they would have fully funded the Nunn-Lugar initiative and aggressively sought the disarmament of all countries that possess WMDs, most notably Israel and Pakistan. They haven't.

All that the Rove/Cheney/Bush Administration is interested in doing is exploiting isolated acts of terrorism (like 9-11) for political gain and to further their plutocratic, neofascist agenda.

IMPEACH BUSH

Curiously, all of this started ... Norman Rogers at 3:28 PM

... became the terrorist himself at Waco and also with Elian.... Jay at 4:06 PM

You don't defeat terrorists by guarding every imaginable target inside your borders. Not only is such a practice expensive, it's fucking impossible. Do you think a couple of minimum wage rent-a-cops are gonna stop a well funded, intelligent, and determined terrorist cell from blowing up a chemical or nuclear plant?

I can't believe anywhere here is seriously arguing that chemical plants in the US are not vulnerable, dangerous and defensible. "Every imaginable target" is a strawman; what you do is protect those targets that are the most likely, because they are relatively simple to attack and devastating in the result because they are in high population areas, as many are.

Take the time to read these two articles:

Dick Cheney’s Dangerous Son-in-Law

The Next Attack

Keep it up, Kevin. Constantly talking about vulnerable chemical plants in the US will only give the terrorists ideas.

The rightwingers here are almost unbelievable. If Bush doesn't want chemical companies to pay more, in order to make their plants safer, the rightwingers immediately point out that, in their opinion, chlorine isn't really dangerous. If I hadn't been reading rightwing comments on these threads for several years, I wouldn't believe anyone could be so dumb.

In the real world, two days ago, somebody got the cleansing powder mixed up with the window cleaner in a head on a Navy ship, and 30 sailors ended up in the sick bay.

In reality chlorine gas is extremely dangerous, and a railroad car carries a lot more of it than you might expect. Poison gas isn't used in warfare because it might affect the troops that use it- that isn't a consideration when a suicide bomber is blowing something up in somebody else's country.

I used to think rightwingers were normal people that disagreed with me on some things. From reading the comments here I've learned they are the stupidest people on the face of the earth.

And, for the record-

a) 90% of what you do to protect against a terrorist attack is the same stuff you do to protect against an accident. People who own chemical companies don't worry about that because they don't live in that part of town, or even, in these modern times, in the same country, and,

b) yes, if you convince 90% of the world's peoples that you are a dangerous rogue country that should be hamstrung if possible, then you must defend all your vulnerable installations AND resign yourself to suffering terrorist attacks anyway. The governments of Europe have been doing that for 150 years, and some of them, like Greece, will arrest you if you start taking pictures of airports or bridges.

Keep it up, Kevin. Constantly talking about vulnerable chemical plants in the US will only give the terrorists ideas.

Jesus Christ, Al, are you serious? Okay, let's identify weaknesses in our national infrastructure, and then once they've been identified let's not discuss the merits of fixing those weakness on the off chance that our enemies might not think of it themselves! Yeah, that's the ticket! Please. Once a problem is identified, and it becomes apparent that the government is doing nothing to fix it (nay, is taking active measures to prevent the implementation of solutions) then we all have an obligation to exert pressure in an effort to fix those problems. It's how participant democracy works - if we assume that our government is omniscient and omnicompetant, then why bother concerning ourselves with policy at all? Do you Al, as a conservative, always give the government the benefit of the doubt? Or is it only Conservatives and Republicans? Would you advocate a one-party state in which the governing party is self-regulating and self-accountable? I think not. You'd make a good member of ZANU-PF, but you're position is not, I'm afraid, good for Conservatives, Republicans, or Americans. Over-sight, public pressure, and divided government are the true benefits of our political culture, and the snafus over chemical plant protections, DoJ autonomy, and DoD waste exemplify the necessity of such institutions.

I used to live right across the lake from the complex of chem plants and refineries in Lake Charles LA. Those suckers blow up all by themselves. Wake in the middle of the night - boom - broken windows and shit.

They're scary at anytime.

Recommended reading: The Edge Of Disaster by Stephen Flynn . A number of the dangers of water treatment plants (chlorine) and refineries (hydroflouric acid) could be mitigated by switching to different chemicals which has less dangerous characteristics.

Flynn makes a strong case that we need to stop putting all our funding up the proverbial noses of the DOD and Homeland Security complexes and start funding our overall infrastructure. Security will come as a by product.

Haven't we tried the militaristic solution and found it lacking?

From Paul Craig Roberts' article at antiwar.com---
"The Bush administration's offenses against US law, the US Constitution, civil liberties, human rights, and the Geneva Conventions, its lies to Congress and the American people, its vote-rigging scandals, its sweetheart no-bid contracts to favored firms, its political firing of Republican US Attorneys, its practice of kidnapping and torturing people in foreign hellholes, and its persecution of whistle blowers are altogether so vast that it is a major undertaking just to list them all.."

Today a friend said she saw this on an internet site that made her chuckle:
"Boffo blond CIA chick begins nix of Machiavellian hicks"

BG,RS got it right - chlorine is nasty stuff, but fluorine is another ball game. Carbon based life exposed to this shit is in trouble, chemically speaking.
Both are WMDs just like the small pox blankets were, get caught in a cloud of either and you would agree (if you had time and voice to do so).

So we're trying a different approach this time and so far we have deposed, tried and hung a brutal dictator, killed Zarqawi, imprisoned Khalid, have Bin Laden hiding in a cave and haven't had one single domestic incident since.

Deposing and hanging the dictator has made things WORSE -- among which was freeing Zarqawi to kill thousands of people. Trying to fix that colossal blunder by killing Zarqawi had exactly ZERO impact on Al Qaeda violence in Iraq, the frequency of which has increased dramatically since his death.

Those things you mentioned as accomplishments either achieved no positive results in the real world or either made the situation orders of magnitude worse in every respect for everyone involved. I'm guessing you would have been that mouthbreathing nationalist idiot in World War I saying, "Yes, yes, we're in a terrible war the likes of which humanity has never seen that's killing and wounding millions -- but at least we killed that terrible Archduke Ferdinand of Austria."

And finally, Brainiac; Bin Laden was hiding in a cave BEFORE 9/11, because apparently it is a very effective place from which to plot successful terrorist attacks against the most powerful nation in the world and not be brought to justice, you fucking dork.

It's interesting that it is now a standard right-wing trope to MINIMIZE the threats to domestic facilities.

What ever happened to "we fight them there so we don't have to fight them here"?

(Not that they should be taken seriously; they'd switch tactics in a heartbeat, if it were to their rhetorical advantage.)

For the record, chem/bio warfare is generally ineffective as anything except an agent of terror and panic (specially designed persistent biological agents excepted). Its dispersal is limited, it degrades &/or dilutes rapidly, and its effects are so susceptible to unpredictable conditions (notably weather) that its military usefulness is minimal.

trex --- Is this a trex I like reading elsewhere?

Why did Bush invade Iraq? Really, why? He was propagandized by AIPAC/PNAC etc.

Read this..... the NYT, Kristof.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/03/16/aipac/

"Keep it up, Kevin. Constantly talking about vulnerable chemical plants in the US will only give the terrorists ideas."

Posted by: Al on March 17, 2007 at 6:48 PM

Huh?

HEY AL, Kevin didn't write this post. I'll let you redfacedly check who did.

Chlorine gas is nasty. I imagine the chlorine was taken from the famously well-functioning water treatment plants that are being built by private contractors.

Or maybe from the new plastics (vinyl-chloride) plants that are flooding Iraq with western type MUST HAVE products?

Until we know the source of the gas, it's impossible to speculate ( or extrapolate) how our own chemical plants are at risk.

...Checked yet Al?

All of these hysterics prove nothing. Did you not read what the Hormonal Citizen wrote earlier? Regardless of whether or not there is a terrorist attack, none of the radios work!

Tweedle Dee can't call Tweedle Dum and complain about how the hillbillies took all of the OxyContin after the dog food plant blew up because someone wearing a towel on their head decided to stick it to Western Civilization and throw a stick of old dynamite into the horse rendering machinery.

So long as George W Bush has his finger on the trigger, these animals aren't going to attack us. Bet your bottom dollar on that. Every move he makes is intended to look crazy--crazy is all they know, and crazy is the only thing that gets you respect in this world.

Or do you run up and hug crazy people all the time? Oh, wait! These are liberals we're talking about. Hugging crazy people is all they know!

Folks seem to have the idea that chlorine gas is a tricky thing to make.

Has anyone heard of brine?

What does NaCl stand for? (common table salt)

If you introduce an electrical current into a brine solution, Cl2 gas is a common result.

So protecting our saltwater and controlling access to electricity would go along way towards keeping the nasty stuff away from the "bad guys."

In other words, these guys are ADAPTING in Iraq.

If our own administration is more interested in outing a CIA operative, damaging a vast intelligence gathering network, how can we trust them to outsmart the enemy on the ground in our land of the Green Zone??

So, the chlorine gas could be stolen from such and such a place, OR it (is possibly) can be made at a miriad of small locations by almost anybody!

Oops, I just provided information to the enemy.

Tom Nicholson is right. The liquefaction of Chlorine is no mean feat, but chlorine gas can be made with table sale, some copper wire, a car battery, an alternator and a stationary bike.

but chlorine gas can be made with table sale, some copper wire, a car battery, an alternator and a stationary bike

Or just cat pee and bleach.

While it would be impractical to secure all the feline bladders and laundry rooms in the U.S., it's certainly feasible to treat chemical plants as if they were military bases, government buildings, airline terminals, cockpit doors - or the gigantic potential bombs that they are - and protect them adequately.

Unless of course you are a Republican who relies on campaign contributions from the chemical industry for reelection. Then it's simply not doable.

So long as George W Bush has his finger on the trigger, these animals aren't going to attack us. Bet your bottom dollar on that. Every move he makes is intended to look crazy--crazy is all they know, and crazy is the only thing that gets you respect in this world.

Yeah dude! Now go tell the residents of Madrid how effective the "don't fuck with me, I'm CRAZY" approach to Western security is. Sell your story in London. Or in Bali (think Australians). Hmm, do you see a pattern unfolding? Terror groups are attempting to push out the few, fragile members of the "coalition." And my God, it's working.

Attack the U.S.? Why bother when there's tens of thousands of targets languishing in Iraq.

The absence of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil (excluding, of course, our own citizens, who seem to enjoy shooting up malls and massacring school children) is more than offset by the exponential increase of terror attacks all over the world.

But that shouldn't bother a fucking moron racist like yourself, given that most of the terror victims are just animals.

Sieg Heil, duchebag.

How can we be expected to get all worked up and put a priority on securing difficult sites of one kind or another in the U.S. when we are unwilling to put a priority on the rather simple task of securing our southern border?

So long as George W Bush has his finger on the trigger....Norman Rogers at 10:29 PM

So we need to keep the people with towels on their heads away from kitty, the pee kitty leaves behind, and granny's spare bottle of Chlorox?

Roger that, liberals.

See? America is so much safer with you in charge. While you were ruining the bleach industry and massaging the bladder of Mr. Tinkers so that it wouldn't inadvertently arm Ibrahim al Bomb-a-hiri, George W Bush was putting a knife to the throat of the ambassador of country X and was keeping this nation safe and sound for another year.

Can I get a "you're welcome, Mr. President?"

Don't forget, a key player involved in preventing security regulations for our chemical industry is none other than Cheney's son in law.

The point always is to scare us about the risks of terrorism, but to do nothing to secure us from it. Otherwise the sheeple just might stop voting for the "national security" party.

So long as George W Bush has his finger on the trigger, these animals aren't going to attack us.

Nuttiest thing I've seen posted here for a long time, and that takes some special skill. Bravo, Norman.

Of course, they are attacking us in Iraq. But perhaps Norman believes that "these animals" won't attack us at home, knowing that Bush would retaliate recklessly against some uninvolved country (and wouldn't they hate that!). Instead they attack us in Iraq, knowing that Bush is a status quo stay the course sort of guy when it comes to that sort of attack.

And let's not forget that Bush's response to the Cole incident, just before he took office, was to let the culprits go through the Yemeni court system. They were tried, convicted, and allowed to escape a few years later.

And Bush's response to Kim Jong Ill was to bluff, back down, watch him build nuclear weapons, bluff some more, back down some more, offer economic incentives, withdraw demands that Kim give up the nukes he has, and then basically retreat all the way back to Clinton's deal, except that now Kim has nukes. You can bet "these animals" are quaking in their boots.

How about diverting troops from Afghanistan, when they were close to catching Bin Laden, and sending them to Iraq? Then making a deal with Pakistan that let's Pakistan look the other way while Al Qaeda sets of a base of operations in that country?

(If Norman is a parody, then you got me.)

Hey bob--

Seen any buildings get blown up lately?

Something must be working, because you sure seem safe and content enough to sit there and complain about a President who is doing the right thing and about a country that is making the rest of the world squeal like a stuck pig on fire.

The bottom line is this, liberals, and I should charge you all a nickel for this lesson, but I won't:

The "world" has never really liked America. Go back two hundred years--no one really ever 'liked' us, even then. But because we do what no one else has the courage to do and because we do it in a way that scares the living hell out of everyone, they put on airs about condemning us and not liking us. And yet--the reality is this. We have the greatest country in the history of the world and everyone knows it. Everyone wants to be an American and everyone wants to come here. Why? For this one simple reason--if you come here to make money, you can go on Kevin Drum's blog and bitch about how everything sucks and no one will kick down your door and plant a rusty steak knife in your eye in front of your terrified family, like they do everywhere else on this planet.

You may now consider yourself "schooled," my "homies."

I'm a parody ONLY when it suits the liberals and ONLY when people feel the hot sting of shame burning their red little cheeks after I explain how things really work.

A hint to all of you--parodies are usually ignored. And I am impossible to ignore because I am right. Deep down, you know I'm right and it sticks in the craw of every living liberal to. It sticks there and festers and that's why I receive the abuse that I receive.

Well, the sun is shining in my world. There's money to be made and the banks are open and I am an optimist. Step out into the light, people. Step into the light and don't be afraid. Sure, there are a billion people on this planet who will do whatever it takes to kill us, but guess what? They're kind of lazy and we live quite a ways away from them. And the weather's bad--they don't care for the cold, or so I am told.

Actually, there are seven empirically effective things we can do to make our homeland mostly secure, given that perfect security is likely impossible in a high-tech world. If we actually did all seven of the following we still would not be "perfectly" secure.

1) End free trade by putting huge tariffs on all imports. This would boost low-level employment as we would have to replace a lot of manufactured imports. It would harm Microsoft and Boeing as other nations retaliate. Most importantly, however, it would stop shipping containers from arriving daily in huge ships.

2) Search all shipping containers. Actually, this is almost identical to (1) because the huge cost would boost low-level security employment and cut imports by pricing them higher.

3) Stop legal and illegal immigration. Everyone in the U.S. most have a 100% verified I.D. with a photo, fingerprints, and DNA on file. All foreign communications and money transfers must be monitorable on the slightest suspicion, without a warrant. All airline passengers, even on domestic flights, should have no personal effects or carry-on luggage whatsoever. Before boarding they must shower under video scrutiny that will separate their facial image from their torso image to be viewed by separate screeners and must exchange their clothing for paper underwear and coveralls. All luggage will follow on a separate, cargo-only airplane. The paper clothing will be burned when removed at the destination.

4) Build a multi-layered missile defense system to protect the entire continental U.S. Special care must be taken to spot low-flying cruise missile attacks with recent technology that makes cheap cruise missiles both hyper-sonic and highly stealthy.

5) Retrofit the entire U.S. electronic infrastructure to protect against electro-magnetic pulse weapons, as only one stealthy cruise missile or weapon from space getting through with an EMP warhead could paralyze our civilization for many months.

6) Ready every possible biological warfare defense against every possible threat vector, including paper balloon bombs such as the Japanese used to kill a few Americans in W.W.II. Constantly monitor all incoming travelers and require they give biological samples such as urine and blood. Monitor all migrating animals, including fish species like salmon.

7) Maintain our own nuclear and conventional forces at a high and ready level. Make it perfectly clear to any state that sponsors terrorism that if we even imagine, even have the slightest suspicion, that they had anything to do with a WMD attack on the U.S.A., we will either destroy them outright or invade their nation, thoroughly search it, and then change their method of governance on the understanding that the U.S.A. has never in recent times been attacked by another democracy.

Of the seven "must do" items to prevent a successful WMD or terrorist attack on our nation, only number seven is anything like a reality. The promise of assured or even random retribution is the main legacy that the Bush administration will leave. As long as neo-cons are in power any major attack on the U.S.A. may trigger a major, non-proportional response on anybody we have the slightest suspicion of wishing us ill or of being less than helpful in enabling us to find who sponsored the attack. Who can doubt it? The U.S., by the way, will not attack Iran anytime soon, but by late 2008 will quite likely violate Pakistani sovereignty in a major way to eradicate the strongholds of al Queda and the Taliban. Pakistan will be the first nuclear nation to endure such a roughing up. Then we will deal with Iran if necessary.

Please don't undermine or un-do this legacy as it really is the best bet for homeland security in the immediate, real-world future.

Increase the dosage of Metformin for the Cook fellow.

Dont' forget this gem from the administration's health and human services administration:
"When you go to the store and buy three cans of tuna fish, buy a fourth and put it under the bed," Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt said. "When you go to the store to buy some milk, pick up a box of powdered milk, put it under the bed. When you do that for a period of four to six months, you are going to have a couple of weeks of food. And that's what we're talking about."
If the bird flu now spreading around the world ever mutates into a flu pandemic strain that spreads easily from human to human, no state or community would be immune, Leavitt said.

Not to mention the duct tape and plastic scenarios advised previously from DHS...

How can we be expected to get all worked up and put a priority on securing difficult sites of one kind or another in the U.S. when we are unwilling to put a priority on the rather simple task of securing our southern border?
Posted by: christopher

Southern border? Quite a high percentage of illegals are visa over-stayers who flew here in jumbo jets. What do we get? We get this colossally expensive fuck-up (privatized of course) from HLS:

DHS has succeeded in streamlining one mission: handing out contracts. A tab on the front page of the DHS website declares, "Open for Business." Presumably, that message is meant for prospective contractors, not terrorists, but the jury is still out. Chertoff's speech was overshadowed by this week's decision to ditch a costly system to track the departure of foreigners at U.S. borders. Since 2004, the program has recorded 61 million foreigners entering the country, and only 4 million people leaving. That means DHS spent $1.7 billion to lose track of 57 million foreigners in two years. In the Bush administration, these are called metrics of progress. - Bruce Reed
http://www.slate.com/id/2155701/

Meanwhile:

'Still, those very top households, which include about 300,000 Americans, reported significantly more pretax income combined than the poorest 120 million Americans earned in 2004, the data show. This was a sharp change from 1979, the oldest year examined by the I.R.S., when the thin slice at the top received about one-third of the total income of the big group at the bottom.'

'The next best-off group, the fifth of Americans on the 60th to 80th rungs of the income ladder, averaged 2 cents more income in 2004 for each dollar they earned in 1979.

Only those in the top 5 percent had significant gains. The average income of those on the 95th to 99th rungs of the income ladder rose by 53 percent, almost twice the average rate.

A third of the entire national increase in reported income went to the top 1 percent — and more than half of that went to the top tenth of 1 percent, whose average incomes soared so much that for each dollar, adjusted for inflation, that they had in 1979 they had $3.48 in 2004.'

'Because of cuts in the tax rate, the top tenth of 1 percent did even better than their rising incomes alone would suggest. For each inflation-adjusted dollar they had after tax in 1979 they had $3.94 left after taxes in 2004.

For the bottom 60 percent, their income taxes were so small in 1979 that the cuts did little to change their after-tax incomes. While their pretax average incomes fell by a nickel on the dollar from 1979 to 2004, their after-tax incomes fell by a fraction of a penny less.'

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/28/business/28tax.html?ref=business
’04 Income in U.S. Was Below 2000 Level

By DAVID CAY JOHNSTON

DHS is right on with their advice. Those millions of Americans with less than a week's food supply are relying on the expectation that modern society is so stable that nothing can massively disrupt it.

Actually, modern society is enormously fragile. Here in Seattle we live on one of the world's most dangerous earthquake fault lines (with enormous associated tsunami possibilities) plus a huge volcano over-due for catastrophic eruption. The Levi-Schumaker asteroid collision event with Jupiter in the 1990's revealed the great danger for our planet that could come like a thief in the night.

Yellowstone Park is basically an over-due, inevitable, extinction-level event that could remove half the human race or more in a year.

If you are still living like Joe College with only last night's fastfood leftovers and a six pack in your refrigerator, you are worse than a fool, you are a threat to all your neighbors because a week into a major disaster you will be needy and desperate.

When my wife and I were Mormons, we often kept at least a year's supply of food (very basic) on hand and sometimes closer to seven years in line with Biblical suggestion. Only recently did we consume the last of some civil defense canned dehydrated marshmellows that was over 45 years old. Despite being far past its expiration date the stuff was edible. You can buy MRE's at Costco that will last until 2025 or better. I recommend a half dozen 55 gallon steel drums that you fill with hard-kernel grain and buy a grinder for it. There is nothing quite like fresh bread during a famine or you can make beer and not lose a lot of nutritional value.

Please don't pooh-pooh duct tape and plastic scenarios. A tight house with filtered breathing air is first on your heirarchy of survival needs, followed by bottled water and at least two pure-water filtration systems. Then comes the food. Or remember redneck survival mantra: God, guns, groceries, and gas, just in came you have to leave.

Um..yeah. Hoarding. Great plan.

As long as we fight them over there we don't have to worry about chemicle plants over here. Isn't that what the gathering of chickenhawks keep telling us?

klyde: What they don't want to talk about is the often deplorable states these plants and refineries are as endless rounds of 'cost-cutting' have destroyed safety standards. The petro chem industry lobbyists make sure you don't know. It's why they fight these measures tooth and nail.

Look at the explosion and fire at that big BP refinery in Bay City was it...

Just because there hasn't been anything on the scale of that Union Carbide explosion in India here yet does not mean squat.

The operative word is 'yet'.

Actually, "hoarding" is the heart and soul of a conservative world view. We also call it self reliance. It comes from our rural agricultural heritage, where wise farmers kept a three year supply of seed grain on hand. If you just keep enough to plant next year's crop, then two year's worth of drought turns the whole family into walking skeletons. The same with your herds. You have to support more than the bare minimum necessary for the reproduction and sale cycle in case of drought or livestock disease epidemic.

Depending on absolutely social stability for your next meal quickly leads to a dependence on the absolute authority of government to preserve that stability. Russia recently decided to trade in their left-wing authoritarian government for a more fascist model, which amounts to take care of basic survival supplies for your society by any gangster means necessary and forget about
democracy and civil liberty ideals.

If you give people the chance and the proper cultural preparation they will be both responsible and self-reliant. That is the frontier or pioneer spirit heritage, in its own time encapsulated in the saying, "Root hog or die!"

Norman's channeling Senator Blutarsky again.

Mr. Cook I find you appalling. I'm 10th generation so don't claim to represent my ancestors, okay.

And possibly deranged. Yet, you represent exactly the people who are strip mining the country and its people for personal gain while destroying the safety net and voiding the social contract implicit in 'of the people, by the people and for the people.' You've done way more than your fair share to bring exactly the miseries entailed by food shortages and civil disorder.

Hope you're proud. I think you're a horse's ass.

The fact that insurgents in Iraq are using chemical weapons makes it all the more important for the world to defeat them. Fortunately, our President has sent American troops to fight these monsters, and he has also gotten 300,000 Iraqi troops and police to fight these barbarians.

Actually, "hoarding" is the heart and soul of a conservative world view. We also call it self reliance. It comes from our rural agricultural heritage, where wise farmers kept a three year supply of seed grain on hand.

Three year supply? Did you miss that episode of Little House on the Prairie where the rats ate all the grain in the warehouse and gave the children the Bubonic Plague?

Sweet Jesus, to this day, I am still terrified of rats.

You, Mike Cook, are a poor representation of conservatism. You strike me as a man who has never had money but thinks his lack of wealth qualifies him to tell everyone else how to end up as broke as he is.

Packrats hoard. Entrepreneurs invest.

Actually, "hoarding" is the heart and soul of a conservative world view. We also call it self reliance."
--mike cook

Jesus said, "But woe to you who are rich,
for you have already received your comfort."
"Woe to you who are well fed now,
for you will go hungry."
--Luke 6:24-25

Proving once again that the "conservative world view" is not a Christian one.

Have a blessed Sunday!

TCD

What is needed is standardized regulations on dealing with chemicals, and safety measures should be determined by what is used in processing, not the end product. Lots of chemicals are rendered inactive after bonding (sodium,chloride and Iodine are all extremely nasty, hell downright dangerous, in their elemental form, but iodized table salt is a necessary component of the diet).

There are a lot of unsecured chemicals out there that could do a hell of a lot of damage, and standardizing regulations would be a good place to start.

There are a lot of unsecured chemicals out there that could do a hell of a lot of damage, and standardizing regulations would be a good place to start.

I suspect Mr. Mike Cook has commandeered those wayward chemicals of which you speak and has set himself up with a crystal methamphetamine lab, somewhere in the desert. His ranting and raving--and his abuse of what a conservative is--can only be derived from licking dried meth off the butt of a gun.

Conservatism IS a Christian movement. Nothing is more Christian than ensuring there is wealth to take care of the people who worked for it. With the blessings of God, ye may live in the land of Fruit and Honey.

Or milk and honey. Both, actually. Because man is NOT a pillar of salt.

The fact is that there's no way to secure our chem plants and refineries. Most of them are old - 40 years old - the people who own them are busily investing their billions in profits (Dow, for instance, is building a big new plant in China) elsewhere.

Up-grading the plants here would trigger examination of just how badly they're polluting by bring them under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act - removing the grandfathering they've enjoyed. So they're letting them deteriorate while maximizing their return until the dammn thing fail.

Something that only works under the prevailing model where they're allowed exteriorize many of the true costs of their operation.

There's a good reason why the belt of Gulf Coast from Houston to Gulfport is know as 'Cancer Alley'.

Reviewing an old note I discovered what is either a typo or a great freudian slip,

Those corporate feudalists at Halliburton are moving the company to a place called, ahem, Dubia.

Good one, cld

The meltdown in the credit- money lending business may prove to be more damaging than anything brought to you via the great war on terror.Be prepared for the coming great depression version 2008.

.morg:

No, but thanks for demonstrating why liberals shouldn't be in charge.

You mean stuff like this:

Top News March 7, 2007, 5:11PM EST
http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/mar2007/pi20070307_505304.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_top+story
The Mortgage Mess Spreads
The subprime lending industry is getting hammered, and hedge funds and investment banks are feeling the pain

by Mara Der Hovanesian and Matthew Goldstein

The canaries in the coal mine are keeling over fast. After years of easy profits, the $1.3 trillion subprime mortgage industry has taken a violent turn: At least 25 subprime lenders, which issue mortgages to borrowers with poor credit histories, have exited the business, declared bankruptcy, announced significant losses, or put themselves up for sale. And that's just in the past few months.

Now there's evidence that the pain is spreading to a broad swath of hedge funds, commercial banks, and investment banks that buy, sell, repackage, and invest in risky subprime loans. According to Jim Grant of Grant's Interest Rate Observer, the market is starting to wake up to the magnitude of the problem, entering what he calls the "recognition stage." Says Terry Wakefield, head of the Wakefield Co., a mortgage industry consulting firm: "This is going to be a meltdown of unparalleled proportions. Billions will be lost."

Hedge funds, those freewheeling, lightly regulated investment pools, seem particularly vulnerable. BusinessWeek has learned that $700 million Carrington Capital and $3 billion Greenlight Capital may have gotten badly burned because of their intricate dealings with New Century Financial, a major subprime lender whose stock has plunged 84% in four weeks amid a Justice Dept. investigations into its accounting. Magnetar Capital, a $4 billion fund formed two years ago, may be on shaky ground, too. The question is, how many others may be suffering? "This is a very opaque industry, so no one really knows," says Mark M. Zandi, chief economist and co-founder of Moody's Economy.com (MCO) "My guess is that if you look at the top hedge funds, they're bearing most of the risk."

No, but thanks for demonstrating why liberals shouldn't be in charge.

not sure how liberals are responsible for the mortgage/lending fiasco--more words of wisdom from Moron Rogers.

Hedge funds, those freewheeling, lightly regulated investment pools, seem particularly vulnerable.

That's why they're called hedge funds. You hedge your bet that they're going to bring you a profitable return.

Anyone who thinks the collapse of the subprime mortgage industry is a bad thing is fooling themselves. Subprime mortgages are this cycles Junk Bonds or Savings and Loan; they are the bubble that bursts in order to drive the riff-raff out of the investment industry.

Good riddance, and calm down. The only people being hurt are the suckers and the rubes, and the economy can't function without suckers and rubes blowing their money on something foolish.

jay: Do try and pay attention

#1 killer of americans by terror from 1993 to 2001:

timothy mcveigh

3-to-1 over al queda

dead americans -
.....1st wtc bombing in 1993: 6
....................khobar towers: 19
..african embassy bombings: 12
...............................uss cole: 17
.......................................____
...............................total: 54

.....okla. city bombing: 167

mcveigh is dead...

osama?

after 2-invasions.....more than 3200 usa soldiers dead...27k wounded and 400-billion dollars spent....by gop and gwb (not to mention tens of thousands of dead iraqi's):

“Osama bin laden is in Pakistan actively re-establishing al Qaeda training camps.� - Mike McConnell, the new director of national intelligence 2/27/07

heck of a job....

...The question is, how many others may be suffering? "This is a very opaque industry, so no one really knows," says Mark M. Zandi, chief economist and co-founder of Moody's Economy.com (MCO) "My guess is that if you look at the top hedge funds, they're bearing most of the risk."
Posted by: MsNThrope on March 18, 2007 at 12:24 PM

I'm concerned that the ultimate collateral for all that paper is... millions and millions of cars on cinder blocks whose titles were traded for quick cash.

You got it, Doc. It's almost worse than that

Better scam is this one. They 'buy' a company in an LBO - leverage at up to 50-1. Immediately take out new debt and pay themselves 'dividends' and fees. Company goes belly up. Creditors get zip.

Or check out how this whole CDO game runs: http://www.financialarmageddon.com/

Or this:
Published on The Smirking Chimp (http://www.smirkingchimp.com)
That’s Just My Opinion _By Mike Whitney
Created Feb 25 2007

'In other words, the $11 trillion of new debt that was cleverly engineered through Greenspan’s low interest rate bonanza is about to detonate and bring the whole, wretched tower of American debt crashing to earth.

The US economy hasn’t depended on productivity for years, even though the American people work harder and longer than their better-paid counterparts in Europe. This entire mess was brought on by stagnant wages, the wealth gap, and a system that rewards the villaso-raptures at the top of the economic food-chain. Like Cheney, they believe they can keep this scam going forever; forcing the world to take worthless sheets green scrip that’s backed up by $8.7 trillion of debt and wouldn’t even make good bird-cage liner.'

'One loan that caught my attention this week is going to a software company called Attachmate. Being privately held, it does not release financial information to the public, and when I asked for some I was politely turned down.

But S.& P. reports that the company is borrowing $775 million, or roughly twice its annual revenue. Most of the money will go to pay off old debt, and $280 million is being used to pay dividends. *

“The company has a narrow product portfolio in mature markets, with numerous well-capitalized competitors,� wrote David Tsui, the S.& P. analyst. “Revenues continue to decline because of the mature nature of its markets and uncertainty with respect to product support� for some of its software.

The loan is divided into two parts, with the junior one — $275 million that will finance the dividend — getting a CCC+ rating, which is about as low as you can go. S.& P. says that in case of default, lenders can expect “negligible recovery� of principal.'

http://select.nytimes.com/2007/03/16/business/16norris.html

March 16, 2007
High & Low Finance

Risky Business Still Attracts Eager Lenders
By FLOYD NORRIS

I mean I ask you. I know my accounting degree's from 1974. But I thought you actually had to have 'profit' to declare dividends. Mortgage to company's total revenue for two years to scoop it out in advance. All goes 'poof. They don't care. They're money's in the Caymans. They don't owe a penny.

It's all a gigantic game of three card monte.

'This past week, corporate takeovers set an all-time record of $60 billion in two days. In these takeovers, the new owners borrow most of the money, pocket a lot of it, and often lay off workers and cut pension plans to pay the increased interest costs, before selling all or part of the company back to the investing public. These financial plays not only enrich the super-rich and leave ordinary people more vulnerable, but they also add debt and risk to the entire economy.' -

Now, the Hard Part - Robert Kuttner
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=
ViewWeb&articleId=12259

'This past week, corporate takeovers set an all-time record of $60 billion in two days. In these takeovers, the new owners borrow most of the money, pocket a lot of it, and often lay off workers and cut pension plans to pay the increased interest costs, before selling all or part of the company back to the investing public. These financial plays not only enrich the super-rich and leave ordinary people more vulnerable, but they also add debt and risk to the entire economy.' - Now, the Hard Part - Robert Kuttner
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=
ViewWeb&articleId=12259

Their money.

The Washington Post reports that insurgents in Iraq are becoming increasingly expert at using chlorine bombs to kill large numbers of people. Forgive me for harping on this, but this makes our unsecured chemical plants at home a big problem.

Um, why? Isn't chlorine fairly easy to get your hands on in this country without raiding a chemical plant?

This is easy, It's win - win. If there is no attack through these plants the companies save a lot of money; if there is one then the Administration gets to use it to justify more executive power.

"Um, why? Isn't chlorine fairly easy to get your hands on in this country without raiding a chemical plant?"

cm, you clearly don't understand the concept of scale.

"Um, why? Isn't chlorine fairly easy to get your hands on in this country without raiding a chemical plant?"

cm, you clearly don't understand the concept of scale.
Posted by: Alan

It is exactly a question of scale. In Iraq, there are lots of terrorists, so they don't need a lot of explosives or chlorine gas because they can plan attacks on a daily basis. Over here, or in Europe, the attack must be huge to make up for the lack of frequency. Blowing up a chemical plant in an urban area would require a little scouting and a minimum of operatives.

You take a look at a guy like Mike Cook and there's only one thing to say-

The terrorists have won.

You poor, pathetic, quivering, loveless child.

I seem to have touched a nerve on the "hoarding" issue. You "entrepeneurs" who are comfortable with a three day food supply in your refrigerators on the assumption that Big Momma government is always going to keep things well organized and nothing really bad will ever happen anyhow are pathetic.

BTW, that's what the Reds charged the rich (relatively, they had tin roofs on their houses) Kulaks) when the communist party did the brilliant stroke of seizing the farmer's lands and even their seed grain for the people in 1934-35. They called them "hoarders" and "enemies of the people", which allowed the party to seize everything and work the protestors to death at places like Kolyma.

But obscure is right, I am just a poor, failed farm boy from Montana who doesn't know jack about how "assumptions of stability" can go south in one tragic day.