Tony vs. "The Terrorists"
Now, I'm not the sort of blogger who desperately tries to link my posts to anything of national interest, but I wanted to maybe chat about the local implications to Bin Ladin's latest EP. This morning, Mayor Villaraigosa issued a statement that in effect said "We're ramping up security on mass transit, LAX and the Port of Los Angeles." Since San Pedro has no real mass transit hubs or facilities to speak of, and LAX is not in our immediate area, I'm really only interested in what happens at the Port.
Since 9-11, there's been a number of times when the Port has been supposedly "more secured" in response to general threats. Anyone who works at the Port, or who pays any attention to how it operates is aware that it's a security nightmare, given both the amount of traffic, and the nature of that traffic. So I'd like to ask our readers about their personal experiences and observations of the Port's attempts to increase security. In my experience, all I've seen them do is establish a mobile LAPD command center on Palos Verdes Street, and surround their offices with concrete barricades (because "the terrorists" main targets are tiny office buildings that no-one has ever heard of). What really gets done to secure the Port itself under these circumstances?
Since 9-11, there's been a number of times when the Port has been supposedly "more secured" in response to general threats. Anyone who works at the Port, or who pays any attention to how it operates is aware that it's a security nightmare, given both the amount of traffic, and the nature of that traffic. So I'd like to ask our readers about their personal experiences and observations of the Port's attempts to increase security. In my experience, all I've seen them do is establish a mobile LAPD command center on Palos Verdes Street, and surround their offices with concrete barricades (because "the terrorists" main targets are tiny office buildings that no-one has ever heard of). What really gets done to secure the Port itself under these circumstances?
4 Comments:
Zip, as near as I can tell.
To me, the biggest risk in our area is some sort of explosive device in a container. It could be as simple as a Terry Nichols type fertilizer and diesel fuel bomb. If it was detonated as the ship passed Westway, for example, some really nice secondary explosions could result. Plus the main channel would be blocked for a good long time.
Containers may be checked after they are unloaded, but who know what is in them while still on the ship? If anyone believes that they are effectively screened at their points of origin, come on down and buy one of my new time share condos at Sunken City.
Our local politicians continually whine that we need hundreds of millions of dollars from the federal governmant for "port security" If the risk is so high, what are they doing about it while they are waiting for the hundreds of millions? They are externalizing the risk on to us. It's just like driving without insurance. "It won't happen to me, so I won't spend the money."
If the risk exists, the industry which creates the risk should be paying to counter the risk. Anything else is just externalizing the cost onto the public, just as they do with air pollution health impacts, traffic congeation costs, community industrial blight, etc.
If somebody else won't pay for it, they just drive without insurance.
If the Port has plans to spend literally billions of dollars to expand, why can't they afford to provide security for what they have already? What happens when the throughput quadruples? It is totally irresponsible to continure to spend millions of dollars to expand, while whining to the public to accept the externalized security costs.
Yeah, Noel, the Port should cut back on land swaps and MOST of the community parts and non-Port sh-t the PCAC is asking for, and spend that money on security measures.
That's exactly what Paul Thayer and State Tidelands Trust officials think!
Well, I agree with cutting back on the land swaps, which are a sham and cover for stalling and denying off port mitigation of their environmental impacts. Just do it, and don't jerk us around with the phony land swaps.
As to other mitigation measures, they need to do all of them, and provide for their own security as well.
If the Port does not generate enough money to pay for all of the costs generated by its operations, its business model fails, and it should close up shop.
We need to hold the Port, the ILWU, the mayor, the governor, the city council, Dana Rohrabacher, and all others in positions of power accountable. If we demand nothing, that's exactly what we'll get.
Don't you think it would have been nice if Galaxy Commercial Holdings or Janice Hahn would have notified residents that the explosion Sunday morning would not be a terrorist attack at the port?
Actually, it would have been RESPECTFUL to notify residents, an attribute that is lacking these days. Seriously, how ARE we to know if explosions we hear are filming pyrotechnics, building demolitions, a LNG explosion, or an attack at the port? We HAVE A RIGHT to know, don't we? Certain disaster scenarios require us to either shelter in place or evacuate. How WILL we know?
I heard some explosions coming from the port a while ago, and when I called the Port Police I was told by a condescending woman, "Don't worry, it's a training exercise." (They use real explosions for a training exercise?) When I called the Harbor LAPD station I was told, "Don't worry, it's probably filming." "Any way to verify?" I asked. "No, that's not our area of responsibility." In other words, you have no idea, and you don't care.
At a community meeting after 9-11 chaired by Jane Harmon (who I very much respect) I asked our local first-responders (Fire, Police, Coast Guard) "How will the residents be informed as to what we should do?" The answer didn't inspire confidence. "Don't worry, you will probably hear or smell an attack before we do."
There is no system in place to tell the residents that either "The explosions you hear are NOT an emergency," or "This IS an emergency," and no system in place to tell us, "This a chemical (or biological) attack so shelter in place," or, "This is a radiological attack so follow the clearly marked evacuation route signs." Come to think of it, THERE ARE NO evacuation route signs!
You think there's a traffic problem on Western NOW? When word gets around town that something serious happened at the port, first-responders won't be able to get IN, and WE won't be able to get OUT. SUVs will be rolling over smaller cars like bugs. We will have a panic-driven disaster within a disaster.
There's going to be a lot of finger pointing after a real port emergency, that is, if any of us are around to complain.
Post a Comment
<< Home