5 ms·

> They could derail passenger trains, or even more dangerous, derail passenger trains loaded with lethal chemicals. Why are passenger trains loaded with lethal

> They could derail passenger trains, or even more dangerous, derail passenger trains loaded with lethal chemicals. Why are passenger trains loaded with lethal chemicals in the first place?

ktizo 14y ago
Due to the recession, the train companies have taken to making money on the side by turning every fourth carriage into a traveling meth lab.
- DigitalSea 14y ago
  This comment reminds me of an awesome episode of Breaking Bad in season 5, I won't ruin it but those who've seen it will know what I'm talking about. Are these passenger trains carrying Methylamine by any chance?
pav3l 14y ago
Even worse! They could derail passenger trains loaded with lethal chemicals and nuclear weapons!
- ktizo 14y ago
  And lions and tigers and bears! Oh my!
- jrockway 14y ago
  And, these nuclear weapon chemistry lab trains could derail ONTO CHILDREN. Won't somebody please think of the children? (And BTW, trains derail even without evil cyber hacker criminals. First YouTube result: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCbOUgr_r-E http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCbOUgr_r-E)
- gfodor 14y ago
  Saddam did it first with his mobile rail-based chemical weapons labs.
  - georgemcbay 14y ago
    I always knew Rails was evil!
    - D3 14y ago
      No, it's the chemicals that make it evil. Organic rails are good for you.
- mturmon 14y ago
  Mock him if you must. Panetta raises the issue that a combination of attacks could cause loss of life and a new sense of vulnerability among the public. (From the article: "...would cause physical destruction and the loss of life, an attack that would paralyze and shock the nation and create a profound new sense of vulnerability.") The last time the public had that sudden sense of vulnerability, on 9/11 of course, there was a tremendous and partly counterproductive reaction that we're still dealing with. It could be smarter to put in place laws to force private companies to report cyberattacks, so the government can understand the scope of the problem, than to pay for the reactive spasms that would follow a successful attack.
  - Vivtek 14y ago
    The last time the public had that sudden sense of vulnerability, the government did everything in their power to stoke those anaphylactic fires. Panetta wants more money, pure and simple, and he knows that fear of the unknown is the best way to get sound bites and the Congressional ear. They don't want smart - otherwise we'd already be doing the smart thing.
    - mturmon 14y ago
      "government ... stoked": yes, I agree. It's a shame. I think Panetta partly wants money, but even more, wants laws changed so that privately-operated infrastructure has to have certain security provisions. His agency can't compel it without a law. History has shown that market forces are not always sufficient to guard against catastrophic events.
      - 001sky 14y ago
        He Can always testify before congress...No? Every political fundraising memo is form of "Guy X warns of Doom...Act Now...send your $$$" Where was he for Bhengazi?
  - D3 14y ago
    >partly counterproductive Partly? We've managed to destroy two countries, waste billions of dollars, lose essential human rights and fall into a recession. What part of that was productive, exactly?

> They could derail passenger trains, or even more dangerous, derail passenger trains loaded with lethal chemicals. Why are passenger trains loaded with lethal chemicals in the first place?

ktizo 14y ago

Due to the recession, the train companies have taken to making money on the side by turning every fourth carriage into a traveling meth lab.

DigitalSea 14y ago
This comment reminds me of an awesome episode of Breaking Bad in season 5, I won't ruin it but those who've seen it will know what I'm talking about. Are these passenger trains carrying Methylamine by any chance?

pav3l 14y ago

Even worse! They could derail passenger trains loaded with lethal chemicals and nuclear weapons!

ktizo 14y ago
And lions and tigers and bears! Oh my!
jrockway 14y ago
And, these nuclear weapon chemistry lab trains could derail ONTO CHILDREN. Won't somebody please think of the children? (And BTW, trains derail even without evil cyber hacker criminals. First YouTube result: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCbOUgr_r-E http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCbOUgr_r-E)
gfodor 14y ago
Saddam did it first with his mobile rail-based chemical weapons labs.
- georgemcbay 14y ago
  I always knew Rails was evil!
  - D3 14y ago
    No, it's the chemicals that make it evil. Organic rails are good for you.
mturmon 14y ago
Mock him if you must. Panetta raises the issue that a combination of attacks could cause loss of life and a new sense of vulnerability among the public. (From the article: "...would cause physical destruction and the loss of life, an attack that would paralyze and shock the nation and create a profound new sense of vulnerability.") The last time the public had that sudden sense of vulnerability, on 9/11 of course, there was a tremendous and partly counterproductive reaction that we're still dealing with. It could be smarter to put in place laws to force private companies to report cyberattacks, so the government can understand the scope of the problem, than to pay for the reactive spasms that would follow a successful attack.
- Vivtek 14y ago
  The last time the public had that sudden sense of vulnerability, the government did everything in their power to stoke those anaphylactic fires. Panetta wants more money, pure and simple, and he knows that fear of the unknown is the best way to get sound bites and the Congressional ear. They don't want smart - otherwise we'd already be doing the smart thing.
  - mturmon 14y ago
    "government ... stoked": yes, I agree. It's a shame. I think Panetta partly wants money, but even more, wants laws changed so that privately-operated infrastructure has to have certain security provisions. His agency can't compel it without a law. History has shown that market forces are not always sufficient to guard against catastrophic events.
    - 001sky 14y ago
      He Can always testify before congress...No? Every political fundraising memo is form of "Guy X warns of Doom...Act Now...send your $$$" Where was he for Bhengazi?
- D3 14y ago
  >partly counterproductive Partly? We've managed to destroy two countries, waste billions of dollars, lose essential human rights and fall into a recession. What part of that was productive, exactly?