OT a quick terrorism question

Well actually some source of such contamination have nothing to do with any terror attacks. Just look at what happened in Walkerton Ontario a couple years back. The source of the contamination was feces and incompetent government standard. This was water that was supposedly "treated", but just not treated properly.

That killed alot of innocent people and it was not something done directly by anyone. Most people dont even test their groundwater for common poisons like Arsenic and radioactive materials.

Human stupidity seems to kill more people then terrorism. To bad we cant have a war against that.

Reply to
Warden
Loading thread data ...

Yea. Have 2 giant above ground tanks just behind my house. A couple of years ago, one bat got inside and they ahd to dump the complete tank, disinfect it and drain the lines due to e-coli from the bat droppings.

Govt made the water company start chlorinating the water now. Problem is we get surges of chlorine that make the stuff coming though smell like a swimming pool. Is nasty to the skin sometimes in the shower. Sometimes is high enough concentration that the plants in the yard have problems after watering. Not sure if the e-coli is worse or the chlorine some days.

Koz

Warden wrote:

Reply to
Koz

Some water treatment plants are doing like much of Europe does and using ozone to disinfect the water supply. Doesn't do any good if the water gets contaminated after it leaves the treatment plant but it is also free of chlorine. A town south of Seattle did this a while ago. Des Moines, WA. Mebbe you could get them to consider this option. I'm considering it for my hot tub. And ozone actually does a better job if the water is very turbid. It seems the dirt particles can keep chlorine from the bugs inside the dirt but ozone oxidizes it's way in. Also, the ozone apparently acts as a flocculent so filtering is easier because all the little particles stick together into bigger particles which are, of course, easier to filter out. And just where do they come up with words like flocculate? Sounds like a bad word. Sort of like flatus. ERS

Reply to
Eric R Snow

Good idea. I wish I could somehow "test" for chlorine levels to push em to monitor better. Any complaints so far (from the neighbors) have been met with the usual "that can't happen..it must be you" attitude.

I'm actually only 15 minutes from Des Moines WA so I think I'll raise some hell since there is a working system so close they could compare to.

Thanks.

Koz

Eric R Snow wrote:

Reply to
Koz

What about the test kits for use to measure the chlorine in swimming pools? Just keep a daily log, for a month or so, with extra tests when the smell gets bad. Then skip the people in charge of the water supply and go right to the State and Local Health Dept. and perhaps the FDA and the EPA as well with the test results.

Greg H.

I'm actually only 15 minutes from Des Moines WA so I think I'll raise some hell since there is a working system so close they could compare to.

Thanks.

Koz

Reply to
Greg and April

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:51:13 -0800, Koz wrote something ......and in reply I say!:

There are fairly cheap pool testing kits to test for chlorine IIRC.

**************************************************** sorry remove ns from my header address to reply via email

I was frightened by the idea of a conspiracy that was causing it all. But then I was terrified that maybe there was no plan, really. Is this unpleasant mess all a mistake?

Reply to
Old Nick

This is one where I had to say "ah....Duh". Forgot about swimming pool chlorine test kits.

Thanks

Koz

Old Nick wrote:

Reply to
Koz

Good job, Gunner.

There is an enormous pool of talent, experience, and ingenuity on this NG. Let's not make that available to terrorists free on the internet.

There is no shortage of other useful areas to swap good ideas and maybe even clash egos now and then for those who enjoy it.

Could some or many of us devise and make devilishly-ingenious and effective field-expedient weaponry? Absolutely! Should we? Matter of individual choice, but I think it's incredibly foolish and richly deserving of harsh recoil to describe it and brag about it on the internet.

Reply to
Don Foreman

That is a little silly of you. Authors have been describing all sorts of crimes and terrorist acts for centuries. For just as long, they have been accused of giving criminals and terrorists ideas, i.e. Stephen King or Tom Clancy.

Criminals and terrorists are pretty clever on their own. Indeed, expressing these ideas publicly may actually help. It might actually help protect us from acts of terrorism by identifying weaknesses. The people at the top that are supposed to protect us are far dumber then the terrorists, they can use the help.

Pete.

Reply to
Peter Reilley

|IMO, Ian's scenario is the most likely to succeed of the ones mentioned. |At the resevoir end, the volume of water as well as any testing done in |treatment would make that the least likely. At the pump/treatment plant, |security would be a big factor in whether or not that's the viable option. |After it leaves the plant and is somewhere in the distribution system is |where a saboteur would have privacy, time, and best chance of the agent |being unnoticed, until too late. | |I have to say I think it's probably most easy and effective to blow the main |viaducts with explosives. Look what's been done with human and vehicle |bombs, not to mention RPG's. A fairly well-planned operation could bring a |city/cities down quick. Think how tough it was to get water to significant |numbers of people in the wake of the hurricane. Try that on the LA area in |the summertime. | |What else can we come up with? | |Capn | |

Rex in Fort Worth

Reply to
Rex B

I'm getting the mental image of a government employee saving messages to a 'keep an eye on these people' database.

Hoover may be dead but the mentality lives on.

Reply to
Mark

Nothing here, that has not been said some place else. All you need is a little knowledge, some imagination, and the ability to use it.

Greg H.

Reply to
Greg and April

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 22:55:09 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@REMOVEtxol.net (Rex B) wrote something ......and in reply I say!:

I really feel thatm no harm is bein done.

Terrorists are mad, not stupid.

So are SF writers. Beat _them_ at the "ways to...." game!

**************************************************** sorry remove ns from my header address to reply via email

I was frightened by the idea of a conspiracy that was causing it all. But then I was terrified that maybe there was no plan, really. Is this unpleasant mess all a mistake?

Reply to
Old Nick

If a government employee want to sit around and take notes, that's fine with me.

Maybe then they will realize how absurd and useless some of these so called protective measures are, and will see that it does not matter how much money they spend on the issue, they will not be able to do a bloody thing if a terrorist is always making them react after something happens.

Terrorist don't need fancy weapons, just a few dollars worth of stuff from the local home and building supply center. What is the Government going to do, ban the ownership of hammers, unless you have special training in there use and is registered with the feds. to carry one?

Greg H.

Reply to
Greg and April

Good points, Peter.

There is an implied inference (or hope) in your last sentence that the people who could use help would recognize it and benefit from it. However, your assertion that criminals and terrorsts are smarter suggests that they are more likely to benefit.

Authors imagine and describe some very interesting and ingenious schemes to entertain their readers, but they don't conduct demonstrations and field trials (far as I know) for their plots of murder, mayhem, global disaster and domination. Have you ever seen a "caper" movie where you didn't see a fatal flaw in the scheme, or at least a strong requirement for Mr Murphy to be on vacation at the time?

I'd further note that, for all the imagination that authors exhibit, the bad guys get busted in fiction more often than in real life.

Reply to
Don Foreman

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 09:41:28 -0500, "Peter Reilley" <

Post script: My attitude is based on personal experience.

In the mid-70's I devised a dirt-simple very inexpensive system for utterly jam-proof radio guidance of an air-to-air missile for at least the duration of the guided flight time available. The Air Force did not have such a system at that time to my knowledge, and I was cleared for most relevant classified material. I was doing R&D for new guidance systems for air-to-air missiles at the time. Had the seeker head from a Sidewinder missile on my desk as a touchee-feelee. Wonderful piece of hardware. They took it away from me when someone realized that it was classified materiel. Too bad. I loved playing with that superb mechanism. It's kill rate was so bad it was classified to avoid embarrassment, but it was a nice bit of precision.

I was a young research puke. My boss-at-the-time hauled me young arse to Wright Pat AFB to present my invention to the AF, hopefully to result in contract revenue to my employer, much-improved anti-jam telemetry at about zero cost for the AF.

The AF heard my presentation without comment. When I was finished, they sternly told us we were way out of line presenting such a concept.because that was NSA's tulip patch. We were admonished to shut the hell up and get the hell out because we were not cleared to discuss the material I'd invented.

The AF guy that told us thus was just a captain, I'd been an Army combat engineer officer so I was ready to coldcock that smug deskbound pencilneck dweeb -- but my older/wiser boss yanked my leash and got me the hell out of there before I landed us both in jail for offering a good idea in good faith.

He took me for a tour of the Air Force museum in Dayton to cool me off. It worked. The subject was never again broached.

Based on this experience, and that of the guy in New Zealand, I'd say it's silly or worse to ego-publish good ideas in the naive hope that our leaders will make better use of them than our enemies might. Experience is that 'tain't so, McGee.

The first amendment confers a right. Citizenship confers a responsibility. Both are important.

Reply to
Don Foreman

I know exactly what you mean, I worked for a military contractor a while ago. I disagree that keeping quiet about these things will make them go away. While it is conceivable that there might be some instance where keeping quiet might deny the other side some idea, the damage caused by the censorship is far greater. It matters little whether the censorship is government imposed or "voluntary".

Pete.

Reply to
Peter Reilley

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.