NationStates Jolt Archive

I don't know why this isn't a bigger story (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060306/ap_on_go_co/homeland_insecurity). I mean, sure, it's not a post-Oscar wrapup or a missing white woman or that Wal-Mart is hiring bloggers (http://nytimes.com/2006/03/07/technology/07blog.html?hp&ex=1141794000&en=8add8717728087fe&ei=5094&partner=homepage) to spread the gospel of Sam, but it's still a significant story, I think.

WASHINGTON - Guards at the Department of Homeland Security say the agency mishandled a potential anthrax attack on its headquarters, one of several incidents that led two senators to request an investigation of the agency's own security.

The private guards complained that inadequate training led to confusion in handling bomb and biological threats and failure to stop test vehicles that were sent to checkpoints with improper identification.

"I wouldn't feel safe nowhere on this compound as an officer," former guard Derrick Daniels told The Associated Press. Daniels was employed until last fall by Wackenhut Services Inc., the private firm that protects a Homeland Security complex that includes sensitive, classified information.

An envelope with suspicious powder was opened last fall at the headquarters. Daniels and other current and former guards said they were shocked when superiors carried it past the office of Secretary
Michael Chertoff, took it outside and then shook it outside Chertoff's window without evacuating people nearby.

The scare, caused by white powder that proved to be harmless, "stands as one glaring example" of the agency's security problems, Daniels said. "I had never previously been given training ... describing how to respond to a possible chemical attack."

"If the allegations brought forward by the whistleblowers are correct, they represent both a security threat and a waste of taxpayer dollars," Democratic Sens. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota and Ron Wyden of Oregon wrote to the agency's inspector general, seeking an investigation.

"It would be ironic, to say the least, if DHS were unable to secure its own headquarters," they wrote.
There's more to the article, but my big question is this--why would something like security for a federal installation, especially one dealing with homeland security, be turned over to a private company? I mean, if ever there were a situation where the military or one of the many police-type federal agencies should be tasked to a project, this ought to be it, right?

I don't know why this isn't a bigger story (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060306/ap_on_go_co/homeland_insecurity). I mean, sure, it's not a post-Oscar wrapup or a missing white woman or that Wal-Mart is hiring bloggers (http://nytimes.com/2006/03/07/technology/07blog.html?hp&ex=1141794000&en=8add8717728087fe&ei=5094&partner=homepage) to spread the gospel of Sam, but it's still a significant story, I think.


There's more to the article, but my big question is this--why would something like security for a federal installation, especially one dealing with homeland security, be turned over to a private company? I mean, if ever there were a situation where the military or one of the many police-type federal agencies should be tasked to a project, this ought to be it, right?

Same old story - cost cutting. Get the cheapest quote and go with it.

Same old story - cost cutting. Get the cheapest quote and go with it.
Even from a PR standpoint this is a bad idea, though. Imagine that there's a terrorist attack on the building and it gets through--how incompetent do you then look as an organization, especially if it turns out that you'd turned the job over to rent-a-cops?

Even from a PR standpoint this is a bad idea, though. Imagine that there's a terrorist attack on the building and it gets through--how incompetent do you then look as an organization, especially if it turns out that you'd turned the job over to rent-a-cops?It fuels my suspicion that Bush only created a new department to make it look like he was doing something.

It fuels my suspicion that Bush only created a new department to make it look like he was doing something.

Its doing something, but standing from a clearly KNOWN viewpoint, the time for a terrorist attack is not immediately after another attack already happened. So therefore you're safest after an attack and not before it.

It fuels my suspicion that Bush only created a new department to make it look like he was doing something.
Well, he bowed to public pressure, no doubt, but that's not always a bad thing. In fact, I give him credit for taking a Democratic party idea and making it happen at all. The fact that incompetence abounds in the department (Chertoff, Brown, etc.) is only what I expect from the Bush administration, especially given his five year track record. I've really gotten to the point now where I think Bush could have the greatest idea in the world--a way to cure cancer using tap water, for instance--and his administration would fuck up the implementation.

It fuels my suspicion that Bush only created a new department to make it look like he was doing something.

The same DHS which turned a useful FEMA into a useless one? :p

Well, he bowed to public pressure, no doubt, but that's not always a bad thing. In fact, I give him credit for taking a Democratic party idea and making it happen at all. The fact that incompetence abounds in the department (Chertoff, Brown, etc.) is only what I expect from the Bush administration, especially given his five year track record. I've really gotten to the point now where I think Bush could have the greatest idea in the world--a way to cure cancer using tap water, for instance--and his administration would fuck up the implementation.

Ya...but Bush isn't exactly the brightest lightbulb in the box either. It tends to flicker on and off at random. Never burning bright or for long.

Examples: Iraq.....Iraq a year later...Iraq today (which is doing better...), the hurricane.....budget misuse....forgetting about corruption in Medicare....

Ya...but Bush isn't exactly the brightest lightbulb in the box either. It tends to flicker on and off at random. Never burning bright or for long.

Examples: Iraq.....Iraq a year later...Iraq today (which is doing better...), the hurricane.....budget misuse....forgetting about corruption in Medicare....
That's my point--that the Bush administration, through sheer incompetence, could fuck up the unfuckupable.

That's my point--that the Bush administration, through sheer incompetence, could fuck up the unfuckupable.

How can you do tax cuts and spend MORE, and still pay off to a business with other unqualified people. Its akin to having rent-a-cops patrol Area 51!

What would really be ironic would be if someone blew up a big chunk of the DHS.

The so-called "Homeland Security" is nothing but a bad joke... no wonder that they don't have security in their own building :D

This seemed relevent somehow


We're now under the offices of Homeland Security.
Tom Ridge ever so often goes: "Today is a blue day." "No, orange" "Red".
They had to be very careful picking that name: "Homeland Security".
They couldn't say Fatherland because a lot of the old Germans are going:
"That's a good one!"