Transit Insecurity...I am worried

[SHRED]

My wife rides the "Coaster" railway, here in SoCal, during the week and they have told the passengers to "be on the lookout". That is it!
Crap! What we spend in 8 hours in Iraq is our TOTAL 2005 budget for the whole nation's railway systems.

Oh yeah...were a lot safer...sure we are.
Don't even get me started on our port/cargo container and nuclear/chemical plant security, or lack thereof.

We need to actually take care of OUR country for a change, ya think?

How can the Hannitys and Limbaughs of the world claim that if we get hit again it will be the "liberal's" (what ever he means by that word) fault when our Homeland is NOT being secured and it certainly is NOT the "liberals" running ALL branches of our government, for years now?

-----------------------
The Bush Record on Transit Security

Britain and Spain are two countries with as much experience in combating terrorism, by the IRA and ETA respectively, as anyone in the world. The fact that neither has been able to stop attacks during periods of heightened alert is a clear sign that a strike on a U.S. transit or rail system is a very real security threat. The bombings in London today should serve as a wake-up call that the U.S. desperately needs a stronger, progressive approach to rail security. Consider:

JUDGE FINDS ‘NO CONSISTENT, COMPREHENSIVE’ RAIL SECURITY POLICY: Just three months ago, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled on a rail security case involving CSX Transportation. In his decision, Sullivan criticized the Bush administration for having no “consistent and comprehensive federal policy addressing the risks of terrorism on our interstate rail system,” despite the fact that “the federal government has the lead role in regulating the rails and that a community can intervene only when a subject cannot be addressed by national standards or rules.”

2005: JUST $115 MILLION IN RAIL SECURITY FUNDING: Bush’s 2005 budget allocation for train security was just $115 million, equal to what the U.S. spends on eight typical hours in Iraq. (The White House spent $15 billion on airline security, “though as many as 16 times more people ride rail lines than airplanes.”)

SINCE 9/11, BUSH HAS RELIED ON “VOLUNTARY” RAIL SECURITY STRATEGY: Some 85 percent of the critical infrastructure in the United States is privately owned. Yet, in the vast majority of cases, the Bush administration has not worked to compel the private sector to raise their safety standards since 9/11. Instead, the administration and transit companies have agreed on “voluntary measures by the companies to address terrorism-vulnerability concerns.” The obvious problem: stricter security measures also cost more, so transit companies have, by and large, ignored them.

>>>> http://thinkprogress.org/2005/07/07/the-bush-record-on-rail-security/

[acmejack]

1. The "base" doesn't ride trains

unless in their private rail cars. They much prefer their massive tax cuts to protecting the working class. Haven't you seen the memo? Workers are a consumable commodity & there are plenty of them, so if we lose a few we have plenty more.

There is apparently little profit to be made in hardening the myriad tempting targets here. Kind of puts lie to the whole homeland security thing eh?

[quaway]

2. so true

we need to get exponentially better security on our rails/buses immediately. It is just too damn easy to walk on with a backpack and walkoff without it, leaving it behind to kill others!

The trash cans also have to be replaced so a bomb cannot be put in them either.

Homeland security starts here, not overseas!