Men filming ferry ride raise suspicion [Tacoma, WA]

tribnet.com ^ | July 7, 2002

[Bill Davis FR]

ramming a nuclearpowered sub with an explosive laden ferry might create a dirty bomb type situation in the tacoma area...that would get someone's attention...

[The KG9 Kid]

"... A lot can go wrong in hostage taking."

You're probably right. Better to abandon all fears and just wing it if the situation ever pops up like we did on 9-11.

[elfman2]

"Better to abandon all fears and just wing it if the situation ever pops up like we did on 9-11."

Did you stomp your feet and get all read in the face when you wrote that? Sorry that it bothers you if I think it's a poor target. I've listed more economical ones on this thread that I hope they pass over for this.

[per loin]

Again you are avoiding the question , and again the reason is obvious. The ferries constitute a substantial threat, and the best place to deal with that threat is on the ferries themselves. By their own admission, no comprehensive plan for dealing with such threats has been put together by the Washington State Ferry System.

To pretend that the use of other boats or guns adequately deals with the threat is nonsense, but it does fit nicely with the lunacy of opting to have our fighters shoot down commercial aircraft rather than to allow armed pilots.

But in all fairness, the ferries are taking some steps. This week they announced that no one but the crew would be allowed on the bridge.

[The KG9 Kid]

No, I'm generally not the excitable type.

Judging by your replies in this thread, you're the one prone to conniption fits.

You read other people's posts on FR with an angry voice in your head, don't you?

I just expected more from a self-professed 'military intelligence analyst' is all.

... Or, maybe I shouldn't have.

[elfman2]

"Again you are avoiding the question , and again the reason is obvious. "

Because you're too stubborn to dig up a single fact on carrier defenses to support you clam and take that discussion out of a fantasy level. I told you how to fix it. You're just being a little pest now.

[elfman2]

"No, I'm generally not the excitable type. "

Hmmm, then that was a sincere statement that you thought demonstrated respect? I must have overestimated you as well.

[per loin]

You are the one suggesting that such defenses exist, but when asked to explain what will stop such a situation from developing into mass destruction and death, once a ferry is taken, you cite only "other boats" and "guns". So again, if you actually believe this and are not just making noise to protect your ego, I ask you "What boats and guns are going to stop such a ferry under such conditions."

BTW, I do realize that the Navy has the capability of sinking a Tacoma class ferry. Those of us who ride these ferries don't find that to be the proper way to deal with such a threat.

[elfman2]

" So again, if you actually believe this and are not just making noise to protect your ego, I ask you "What boats and guns are going to stop such a ferry under such conditions." "

If I listed a boat or two that would likely be available to stop the ferry, would it stop this question? Or would you then just then start into some drawn out juvenile debate regarding a half dozen scenarios that neither of us are really qualified to answer and consider it my job to disprove each of your subsequent claims?

I don’t have anything to prove here. You're the one invested in claiming the carriers are sitting ducks. If you were serious about this you'd follow one of my suggestions, and enlist the input of people that really do know what they're talking about. But you won't do it, perhaps because I suggested it.

Now who's ego is blocking resolution here?

[per loin]

If you listed such boats, one would of course have to see whether or not such boats were in fact available there, where they were berthed or stationed, at what state of readiness they stood, etc. One would then have to look at whether or not such boats could stop such a ferry under the listed conditions and within that short a timeframe. But it seems to me such will not be necessary. You've pretty well shown that you're grasping at straws, though for what reason I'll be polite enough not to say.

As for others with direct knowledge, they're certainly welcome to chime in at anytime - fr is quite open. But I'm sure that we'ed both expect any such sharing of expertise to be circumspect as to what is said in so public a forum.

[elfman2]

"You've pretty well shown that you're grasping at straws, though for what reason I'll be polite enough not to say."

How Clintoneque of you to say, just when I offered made a second conciliation toward resolution.

[per loin]

OK, again: "What boats and guns are going to stop such a ferry under such conditions."

[The KG9 Kid]

"... Hmmm, then that was a sincere statement that you thought demonstrated respect?"

If I had meant to be disrespectful, I would have said something along the lines of "Did the 1983 suicide truck bombing of the 8th Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241 troops while you were serving as a military intelligence analyst for 1st Marines make you even less suspicious for the likelihood for potential terrorist attacks?"

I understand your point with people jumping to alarmist conclusions -- and I have my own reservations, as I noted before -- but I think you're going too far in the opposite extreme in thinking that 'the terrorist just want us to be scared' when they've proven many times that they're perfectly capable of carrying out operations both here and abroad.

It shouldn't be the trait of an intelligence analyst to be so patently dismissive, but maybe the Marines were just trying to make me paranoid by constantly bombarding me with 'Loose Lips Sink Ships' and 'Boris Is Watching' propaganda when I served.

[elfman2]

"OK, again: "What boats and guns are going to stop such a ferry under such conditions.""

"Okay", and then we start another round of drilling into the minutia of what we're unqualified to analyze? Or "okay" and a fairly reasonable answer puts this "can't be done" implication to bed until it's passed by some people who know what they're talking about?

[per loin]

Another time: "What boats and guns are going to stop such a ferry under such conditions.""

[elfman2]

"If I had meant to be disrespectful, I would have said something along the lines of "Did the 1983 suicide truck bombing of the 8th Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241 troops while you were serving as a military intelligence analyst for 1st Marines make you even less suspicious for the likelihood for potential terrorist attacks?" "

I might not have taken that as disrespect. Actually, your original jab was pretty good, and if I wasn't being pestered I would have taken it better.

I spoke to the Intelligence Chief of that unit about 3 months after that bombing. He was touring commands and giving presentations. He was still pretty shaken, I wondered if this role he was assuming was also a kind of therapy. He wanted people to know that he'd received something like 1300 various bomb threats, as I recall, the week before the attack, and that was typical. They were overloaded with un-analyzable information. There was no way to determine which was significant.

I suspect that in the noise, a lot of them were significant, and there were a lot of probes before a operation was selected. I think the Seattle ferry's a reasonable concern. I think there are hundreds maybe thousands of reasonable concerns in like this in this war.

[elfman2]

What? You call that mature behavior? You ignore my question for clarification and you repeat yourself. Childish…

[per loin]

The question was quite clear. It was: "What boats and guns are going to stop such a ferry under such conditions."

What you were asking for was not clarification, but some sort of relief from justifying your answer, should you give one.

But I've wasted enough time with you. Adios.

[elfman2]

" What you were asking for was not clarification, but some sort of relief from justifying your answer, should you give one. "

You're weren't serious about this or you would have looked for experts rather than insisting that I be your opposition. It was just a juvenile ego game that you were playing, and you probably sensed you would lose with someone informed. Get some rest.