A week to go on vacation

[jducoeur]

Thanks to keshwyn for pointing out this map of street closures due to the Democratic National Convention in July. Give it a look, even if you think you know what's going on -- the reality is even worse than the news reports have been saying. If it wasn't in the Globe, I'd suspect it as a joke.

They're essentially trying to prevent anyone from getting into Boston in the evenings during the convention: all of the main incoming roads are going to be closed after 4pm. You can leave, but it's going to be very difficult to enter. I feel really sorry for businesses that depend on the evening trade. (And even moreso for people who live in the city and work outside it.) And frankly, I think the entire metro region's going to suck that week -- the re-routings seem likely to cause traffic to jam up everyone in the area.

Does anyone know who is making these decisions? They seem preposterously over-the-top, and I'm rather curious who is driving the paranoia to such extremes. Frankly, I'd like to slap them upside the head: wrecking the traffic patterns like this does nothing to improve overall security for the city...

Comments

[tpau]

i believe it is homeland security and secret service. this is per previous article in teh globe (yesterday i think)

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure it's some guy named Sokerrywontgetvotedforbythepeopleofboston. Or something foreign-sounding like that.

Remember: we don't need security. We need the illusion of security, preferably in as inconveniencing a way as possible.

[jducoeur]

I'm pretty sure it's some guy named Sokerrywontgetvotedforbythepeopleofboston.

I dearly wish I could be confident that this is simply hyperbole. Unfortunately, this administration has enough of a record of abusing its power that I simply can't be sure.

(OTOH, I would *so* love to see that particular memo leak to the press...)

Welcome to Homeland Paranoia

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

Actually, I don't exactly fault them for all of this - there has been lots of discussion (New York Times, New Yorker, Boston Globe, Washington Post, other stuff I read) which suggest that various al-Qaeda and similar terrorist groups would absolutely love to disrupt the various conventions - and a truck-bomb or even a large van would do it.

In fact, the MBTA has already started making routine announcements about "if you see an abandoned package, alert the authorities" on all bus trips, station platforms and subway cars.

I had interviewed for a new job in offices located in Faneuil Hall a few months ago - they were already planning for how to remote operate during that week, and possibly even the week before. My former accountant is across the street from Fleet Center - they plan to close completely for the week.

It leads me to wonder several things - what would it be like to be an infirm person who is required to attend the convention? What will the impact of this be on legal and illegal (un-permitted) street protests? What is the net economic impact of essentially shuttering Boston for a week?

And why don't terrorists just grab an ambulance, and get some doofus on the convention floor to have a heart attack?

Oh, and who makes these decisions?

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

Secret Service, working with MEMA, FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, Boston Police and Fire, and so forth.

It dawns on me that it would really, REALLY suck to have a friend or relative laid up in Spaulding Rehab (just behind the New Boston Garden) or Mass General Hospital that week...

Once upon a time I was hospitalized emergently at MGH - it's tough enough to care for a loved one under those bizarre circumstances without making Boston a pedestrian Paradise.

New York Times notes:

The Republican National Convention, being held Aug. 30 through Sept. 2 in New York, does not create as much of a transportation nightmare because the street layout of Manhattan is a grid, making it easier to establish a security perimeter without shutting down large portions of the city. Boston, conversely, has a web of interstate highways and rail lines that run in multiple directions around the Fleet Center.

[matildalucet.livejournal.com]

I suspect it's not going to be a lot of fun for people who work at MGH, either. Husband's officemate got dibs on that week for vacation, so I guess I'm going to find out.

Re: Welcome to Homeland Paranoia

[jducoeur]

And why don't terrorists just grab an ambulance, and get some doofus on the convention floor to have a heart attack?

Exactly. The rules they're putting in place might stop the random nut with an AK-47. But they're not going to do much about the really dangerous types, who understand how to plan around the safety nets. And in the meantime, I have to suspect that the economic cost to the city is at *least* in the tens of millions of dollars, far more than the boost that the convention was supposed to bring in...

Re: Welcome to Homeland Paranoia

[zachkessin.livejournal.com]

Speeking from the home of bomb paranoia (and with good reason) this makes sense. I can remember 3 or 4 times when I've been stuck somewhere when there has been something funny looking left on the streat and they had to clear a block or two to let the bomb squad check it out. Of course in the months I have lived here there have been 3 bombs in Jerusalem, all close to my home.

I'm kind of looking foward to being back in the USA to visit this summer. It will feel weird to be able to walk into a mall or cafe without someone running a metal detector over me and checking my bag.

Actually the ambulance thing is something we worry about here. Someone steals an ambulance, packs it full of explosives and blows it up at the ER of Haddash Ein Karem or one of our other hospitals. Maybe have it come in with the real ambulances from another bomb.

Get away

[cristovau.livejournal.com]

I don't want to say this too loudly, but how does this prevent a terrorist from setting up shop and then making a smooth escape.

My terrorist plan? A trunk full of explosives in the Mass General parking garage. Drive out to the 93N exit (leaving the city) and detonate as close to the Fleet Center as possible. Heck, if you have a second car you might even be able to get out alive.

I'm guessing that NSA agents will be swarming the area in general and checking places like Mass General. It does seem sorta silly. What sort of terrorist would go after Democrats? If it were the Republican National Convention...

Re: Get away

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

They are planning on closing most parking garages and structures within a reasonable (as they define blast radius) distance from the New Boston Garden. In advance.

I have very little doubt that any large object, vehicle or other item will be bomb-sniffed and/or simply towed away.

Re: Get away

[cristovau.livejournal.com]

They are planning on closing most parking garages and structures within a reasonable (as they define blast radius) distance

Yeah. I suspected that they would control the garages and limit their use... but closing them? That's almost as nutty. And their idea of blast radius could be scary. Might be a good idea to take the T in for MIT practices.

Re: Get away

[jtdiii.livejournal.com]

I find it humorous that the Republican Governor is the only one who seems concerned enough to recommend moving the convention out of the city, so that the effect on the commuters and residents would be lessened.

He was of course overruled by the convention organizers.


If someone has the time, money and motivation, no target is safe. It simply gets more costly to attack and defend it.

For that matter, all they really have to do is disrupt the convention, they don't even have to kill anyone. A few mortar shells dropped on the oil/LNG tanks in the harbor would cause a cancellation/evacuation of the convention and that would fit right in with the type of publicity that these groups seem to like.

Re: Get away

[metageek.livejournal.com]

It does seem sorta silly. What sort of terrorist would go after Democrats? If it were the Republican National Convention...

Other way around. al-Qaeda wants George III to stay in power, continuing to tick off the world. The more Muslims he gets mad at us, the more power they get. The Republican National Convention is perfectly safe from al-Qaeda.

Homegrown terrorists may be another matter, of course; but it's not at all clear that we have any--there are hints that the guy who did the Oklahoma City bombing had help from some al-Qaeda people he met in the Phillipines. Only hints, though, because he was executed (I think) before anybody was worried about al-Qaeda.

Re: Get away

[jducoeur]

The Republican National Convention is perfectly safe from al-Qaeda.

I think you attribute too much political subtlety to them. You're right that the administration's policies are dangerously good for the extremists, but I doubt most of them are Machiavellian enough to realize it. They've tended to hew to relatively simplistic political calculations. (Indeed, 9/11 *would* have been a serious miscalculation if we'd had a sane man in the White House.)

there are hints that the guy who did the Oklahoma City bombing had help from some al-Qaeda people he met in the Phillipines.

That seems a serious stretch. There are enough nutcases in the US to do their own dirty work. Al-Qaeda doesn't have much record of using American catspaws. Oklahoma City wasn't exactly a huge and complex affair, requiring outside co-ordination. Perhaps most of all, the Powers That Be would *far* rather have found an exterior force behind it than admit it was entirely an American problem, so they were motivated to find any links if they were real.

Putting all that together, I find this particular theory relatively implausible...

Re: Get away

[metageek.livejournal.com]

The Republican National Convention is perfectly safe from al-Qaeda.

I think you attribute too much political subtlety to them. You're right that the administration's policies are dangerously good for the extremists, but I doubt most of them are Machiavellian enough to realize it.

From a letter written by an al-Qaeda wing back in March, reported on the BBC:

A word for the foolish Bush.

We know that you live in the worst days of your life in fear of death squads which spoilt your world and we are very keen that you do not lose in the forthcoming elections as we know very well that any big attack can bring down your government and this is what we do not want.

We cannot get anyone who is more foolish than you, who uses force instead of wisdom and diplomacy.

Your stupidity and religious extremism is what we want as our people will not awaken from their deep sleep except when there is an enemy...

Now, admittedly, al-Qaeda is diverse enough that there may be some who disagree, so "perfectly safe" is a bit of a stretch; but I don't think it's much of one.

there are hints that the guy who did the Oklahoma City bombing had help from some al-Qaeda people he met in the Phillipines.

That seems a serious stretch. There are enough nutcases in the US to do their own dirty work. Al-Qaeda doesn't have much record of using American catspaws. Oklahoma City wasn't exactly a huge and complex affair, requiring outside co-ordination.

No, but there may have been some outside help. Let me lay out the (alleged) facts, as reported in Richard Clarke's book:

• McVeigh wanted to blow up government buildings for some time before Oklahoma City. So, he was homegrown, in the sense that it was his own idea.
• His bombs did not work.
• At some point, he was dating a Filipino woman, and went to visit her family in the Philippines.
• A known al Qaeda associate was in the same city in the Philippines at the same time.
• After he got back to the US, his bombs worked.
• After he got back to the US, he continued to phone the Philippines, even after breaking up with his girlfriend.

So, it is possible--I would say plausible--that he had contact with al Qaeda while in the Philippines, and they taught him more about bomb-making, so that he could strike at their enemy. The problem is that, at this point, it can probably never be confirmed.

It's not much of a comfort, of course; even if McVeigh didn't know how to make bombs, there are presumably plenty of people in the country who do.

Perhaps most of all, the Powers That Be would *far* rather have found an exterior force behind it than admit it was entirely an American problem, so they were motivated to find any links if they were real.

The problem is that, in those days, nobody in the FBI was taking al Qaeda seriously. It was apparently years before the connections were made.

(And, on the "huge and complex" front: I still think 9/11 wasn't as huge and complex as some like to make it out to be. The only moderately tricky part was getting pilot training; but they could have done that anywhere in the world. Given that, they just needed to use people who could get visas to enter the US. In actuality, the hijackers were pretty clumsy in spots; for example, one of the teams out of Boston almost got arrested because they got into a fight over parking their car illegally in front of the terminal.)

Re: Get away

[alexx-kay.livejournal.com]

Regardless of what the intent, Machiavellian or not, of terrorists might be, I'd hardly call either convention "safe". Consider the publicity effects of a semi- (or pseudo-)successful terrorist attack on the Republican convention: If they didn't actually *kill* the Shrub, it would be damn hard for him to lose the election after that. "Voting against Bush is objectively working for the terrorists!"

[cellio]

This sort of thing makes me really wonder why cities would want a major-party convention. Even setting aside all the hard-to-measure negative effects on the people who live there, I'll be surprised if the bottom line for the city financially is actually in the black when it's all over.

I have the solution

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

I think that when Boston bid on this, they had no idea that the Secret Service would go quite this feral on them.

I have a solution.

What they need is a large open space, controllable, with few entrances and exits, safe and secure from vehicular or other uncontrolled access.

Boston, as it happens, has a brand new, secured, limited entrance space available, with ventilation, within the borders of the city and yet isolated from view, sound, and access.

I say we plug both ends of I-93 where it passes through the new tunnel in Boston, and let them hold it there. I'm only slightly joking... link

Re: I have the solution

[cvirtue.livejournal.com]

I say we plug both ends of I-93 where it passes through the new tunnel in Boston, and let them hold it there.

And then fill it with water.

Re: I have the solution

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

I had NO idea you were such an ardent Republican. :-)

Re: I have the solution

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

It's getting to the point where the *democrats* are thinking about doing that...

[greatsword.livejournal.com]

I'm no longer local, but it doesn't look like this actually stops you from getting to Boston.

It does seem to ensure that you'll be pretty cranky when you get there.

All this for a convention whose principal outcome is already decided. How long before cities start telling the conventions to get lost?

[tangerinpenguin.livejournal.com]

I remember having similar thoughts when I was working in Atlanta the year before the Olympics (fortunately, that engagement ended before that particular nightmare.) They were actively re-cutting streets "to make traffic flow more efficient", in the process assuring that no published map would be accurate, and ended up trucking in bus drivers from out-of-state who had no idea how the city was laid out to supplement their regular fleet.

Excellent week to be elsewhere.

Although, if it's not too snarky, I will note that after a decade or so of "The Big Dig", if anyone ought to be primed to deal with this sort of traffic pathology, it's Boston...

[cheshyre]

After reading about the arrest of Michael J. Breit last month, in which

Federal agents say they recovered seven guns, more than 1,300 rounds of ammunition, pipe bomb making components and other explosives, a list of government officials and political and public figures with the word "marked" written next to them, and a written plan for 15 heavily armed men to kill 1,500 people at a Democratic presidential meeting.

with those kinds of loonies out there targeting Democrats, I can see the need to take precautions.

[jducoeur]

Precautions I understand -- I didn't even object to the closing of 93 next to the Fleet Center.

But this is just silly, especially given the fact that they're not actually preventing people from getting into the city, just making it very inconvenient. So it'll hurt the legitimate citizens in great mass, without actually stopping someone who is determined enough.

The problem I have with so much of the whole Homeland Security flap is that it's classic paranoia: far more stringent than is needed in many areas, while still insufficient in others. Worst of all possible worlds, IMO...

[cvirtue.livejournal.com]

So it'll hurt the legitimate citizens in great mass, without actually stopping someone who is determined enough.

This does seem to be the trend of much "safety" legislation in general.

[jducoeur]

Just so. That's what bothers me so much about the current air of paranoia. I'm willing to accept sensible, well-targeted security restrictions. But we've consistently gotten nothing of the sort...

[oakleaf-mirror.livejournal.com]

I'm kind of miffed about this. Can't we just tell them all to go away?

One thing I find very odd is that even though Penn Station is directly under Madison Square garden, there were no plans, last I heard, to close it during the Republican convention there.

Why do we need the conventions, anyway? It's like like they're going to decide anything substantive. It's not like the result isn't a foregone conclusion. Oh, wait, it seems Kerry might not even accept the nomination at the convention, since he wants to have longer to burn through is primary war-chest before federal election spending rules bind him.

Welcome to Boston. Now go home!

[cvirtue.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it's amusing that "the will of the people" isn't applied to this sort of thing. I am sure most of the citizenry would rather have them somewhere else.

[matildalucet.livejournal.com]

Have any Carolingian meetings/practices been called off yet? Getting to MIT is starting to look dicey to me.

[jducoeur]

Well, it's less than two weeks before Pennsic -- basically the week before Carolingia usually goes onto collective hiatus anyway. My suspicion is that we'll just do so a week early...