Showing posts with label Holy City of Washington. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Holy City of Washington. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 3, 2020

If 1967 Was the Summer of Love, 1968 Was the Summer of Fire and Tear Gas

Federal troops in the Federal enclave of Washington DC, 1968
















It was 52 years ago that federal troops, 11,000 of them, were used to restore order to Washington DC, after four days of rioting and arson had destroyed large parts of the city. They brought order with dispatch (note the - sheathed - bayonets on those rifles) and most of the public was glad to see it done. Most people in any kind of position of power back then, including those who ran the news media, were World War II veterans or at least were shaped by the experience of WWII, and had a whole different scale by which they measured harshness. Any crowd control measure short of shooting was easily accepted, and shooting was always an option.

I was a little kid at the time but I well remember the atmosphere. The first time I smelled tear gas was in the streets around National Airport, and I saw troops manning an M-60 machine gun at an intersection near the Capitol.

A dozen or so cities had riots that year that were at least as damaging as those in DC. One immediate political impact of that was to make some Police Chiefs run for office, such as those in Los Angeles and Philadelphia who became their city's next Mayor.

There's a lesson there. Keep your eye on the benevolent associations and collective bargaining structures of New York City's Police and Fire Departments, which could turn into very large and extremely effective political organizations overnight. Why should they not run someone against Mayor De Blasio?

One other lesson: the 1968 Democratic Party Convention turned into a shambles and its nominee, Vice President Humphrey, lost to a law'n'order Republican. Republicans went on to win four of the next five Presidential elections.

Who knows? Maybe the voters across America, and especially in the swing states, are taking the side of Antifa as they watch all the violence, but I kind of doubt it. We'll find out soon enough.

Tuesday, December 24, 2019

We're Number Three!















Washington DC has been named one of the rudest cities in America, ranked according to a new Business Insider survey.

New York City takes the top spot - no surprise there - and Washington DC comes in third, behind Los Angeles and ahead of Chicago.

The Seat of Government has often been in the #3 spot (see this WaPo story from 2012), and I wonder why. Is DC really all that much ruder than most other cities? Probably it's the political animus that most Americans feel toward one or the other party in power than colors their impressions.

Come now. Can't we disagree without being disagreeable?

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Federal Offices In Washington DC Closed Due To Snow






















Today's major winter storm started very slowly, I must admit. But by now - almost noon - I see a steady flow of snowflakes coming down, so the prudent judgment of the Office of Personnel Management (FEDERAL OFFICES in the Washington, DC, area are CLOSED) has been amply justified.

Saturday, January 19, 2013

Let's Return the District of Columbia to Maryland


One of the boundary stones marking the District of Columbia





President Obama will make a symbolic gesture of support for the notion of statehood for the District of Columbia by putting the equivalent of a bumper sticker on his Presidential limo at next Monday's inauguration. Because, you know, the slogan "taxation without representation" will motivate Americans everywhere to rise up and demand the creation of a state of New Columbia, naturally.

Let me be blunt: the proposal to make the District the 51st state is as ridiculous and transparently self-interested a political project as has ever been launched in Washington. Its boosters are cynically preying on local voters by appealing to "fairness" and "voting rights" when all they really want is two new Democratic U.S. Senators. Fairness and voting rights could be achieved by other means, like giving DC back to Maryland except for the small core of the city that contains federal office buildings. That's something that might actually be politically possible, but the local politicians calling for statehood never mention that option. I wonder why not?

To review a little history, in 1790 the Congress carved a ten square-mile district out of parts of Virginia and Maryland for the purpose of housing federal government functions in a jurisdiction entirely under federal control. Fun fact: residents of the District of Columbia continued to have voting rights in either Virginia or Maryland from 1790 to 1801. In 1847, the parts of DC west of the Potomac River were retroceded back to Virginia, becoming present-day Arlington Country and part of Alexandria. The reasons for retrocession were complicated, but one of them was the decision, taken decades before, to build all public buildings and infrastructure on the eastern side of the Potomac, leaving the Port of Alexandria undeveloped and unable to attract investment. Things continued unchanged until 1960 when the Twenty-Third Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was passed, which created new Electoral College positions for DC so that residents could vote in presidential elections. 

If Congress followed the Virginia retrocession example, it would only be necessary for the Maryland legislature and the residents of DC to agree in order to treat DC residents as belonging to Maryland for purposes of congressional representation. Since presumably we're all in favor of fairness and voting rights, who could oppose that? Only local politicians who want to be U.S. Senators, I guess.

Problem solved. Now take that unsightly bumper sticker off the Presidential limo.

Sunday, May 24, 2009

He's Addicted (to Public Service)

The former Mayor of Washington, DC, and current City Council member, Marion S. Barry, who is easily the most entertaining figure in local politics, escaped from the consequences of his actions once again when a judge refused to send him away for violation of his most recent legal probation.

Saturday, January 17, 2009

CNN Reports: Pilgrimage to the Holy City of Washington



I'd heard it referred to as the Immaculate Inauguration of Barack Obama,
but that was meant in jest. Now a CNN report has made a serious comparison of Obama's inauguration to the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca. Oh, they made a half-hearted attempt to frame it as a story about crowd control at large events, but clearly CNN likes the idea of the inaugural as religious ceremony.

I like the comparison, too, but I wonder why we don't go the whole nine yards? At Mecca, the pilgrims do more than just passively attend an event. They walk counter-clockwise seven times about the Kaaba, run back and forth between the hills of Al-Safa and Al-Marwah, drink from the Zamam well, go to the plains of Mount Arafat to stand in vigil, and throw stones at three pillars in the city of Mina in a ritual stoning of the devil.

Here's my idea for making Obama's inauguration day a more fully satisfying experience for his devout followers. First, instead of having Obama lead an inaugural parade down Pennsylvania Avenue in front of stationary attendees, let's have the attendees walk around the Washington Mall nines times (it will help them keep warm). Then let's have them run back and fourth between the Washington and Lincoln Memorials, and afterwards stand silently before the Capitol Building. Next, they can drink from the Reflecting Pool (if they dare; have you seen the water in there?). And for the big finale, they can all walk past three pillars symbolizing Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld and throw stones at their political devils.

People would love it, and it would become an annual event.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Metro Riders Question Bag Search Program

My fellow Washingtonians had an opportunity to ask questions of the Metro Transit Police Chief about the new bag search policy via an on-line forum conducted by the Washington Post (Metro Transit's Top Cop Discusses New Search Policy). Several of the questions went right to the essential pointlessness of the program, and the Chief didn't have any good answers.

Metro Transit Police Chief Michael Taborn was online Tuesday, Oct. 28 at 1:30 p.m. ET to take your questions about the department's new policy of inspecting bags for explosives.

The transcript follows.

Rockville, Md.: Hi, thanks for taking questions on this important policy shift. Can you tell us how many times have the searches in the New York City and Boston systems have discovered any credible evidence of sabotage or terrorism, such as explosives?

Michael Taborn: Unfortunately, we cannot provide numbers for the programs in New York and Boston. But there is a growing consensus in the transit industry that these inspections are a valuable security initiative.

Silver Spring, MD: People don't approach metro station entrances in single file. So how can you really count off every 17th (or whatever) person? That just seems like a handy excuse to have ready when you get caught engaging in profiling.

Michael Taborn: We can do adequate job of counting passengers as they enter a station.

Washington, D.C.: How can they stop every 15th or 17th or 21st person? People enter in mobs, not single-file lines. Also, if the transit police stop someone who isn't the "every 15th person" or whatever, couldn't that person refuse because they weren't chosen randomly? Can you ask them to prove to you that you were the next person in the preset formula?

Michael Taborn: A supervisor will designate one officer with the specific task of counting the passengers as they enter the station.

Washington, D.C.: I am opposed to these searches and plan on refusing any Metro officer's request to go through my bags. Because I'll be allowed to refuse search and turn around without being detained, I will simply enter the Metro through another escalator or elevator. How do you plan on addressing this loophole?

Michael Taborn: You may choose not to be searched and leave the station with your bags or other items. We do have a plan to address suspicious behavior.

And the best question of them all came from "Green Line Rider," followed by the worst non-answer from Chief Taborn.

Green Line Rider: If you're not going to search every single person coming into a Metro station, how is the policy effective? Anyone with illicit substances will simply refuse to be searched and go to another station. If you don't search everyone, then it's not worth doing. If you do search everyone, then you'll probably lose half your ridership out of frustration with the delays (think security lines at the airport). Why not just take those officers and put them more visibly on the platforms and in the trains/busses?

I certainly will think twice about riding Metro if I'm going to be randomly selected. I consider that an infringement of my rights for no apparent gain in security.

Michael Taborn: Legal authority to inspect packages brought into mass transit systems and other venues has been upheld by the courts in numerous jurisdictions. Metro's inspection program is very similar to the one conducted in the subway system in New York City. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has specifically ruled on the constitutionality of the New York program in MacWade v. Kelly.

Hey Chief, you better get used to being asked how you can justify carrying out an intrusive inspection program that has no apparent benefit. That ruling you cited from the Second Circuit Court has no bearing on the central question of whether searching bags is a good idea or just a waste of time. It doesn't even preclude a court challenge, since the Second Circuit does not cover the Washington region.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Two Thumbs Up for Washington DC's Security Theater










The curtain is rising on a new act of security theater, a branch of the performing arts that is depressingly familiar to those of us who live or work in the Holy City of Washington. Already we can't enter most office buildings without doing the security dance at the metal detector and x-ray machine. Now, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority has announced that Metro Police will start conducting inspections of passenger's bags (Metro Transit Police to begin bag inspection program).

The Metro Transit Police Department (MTPD) will begin a bag inspection program and look into passengers’ bags prior to them entering the Metro system in an ongoing effort to protect Metro riders, employees and facilities. Officers will be inspecting bags for explosive devices.

This is really a roadshow version of an original production that began in New York City shortly after the July, 2005, London Underground bombing. So far, terrorists have conducted bomb attacks in the subway systems of London, Mumbai, Madrid, and Paris. But none of those cities routinely screen passengers, since it just isn't feasible to do so given the large volume of passengers and the vast size and interconnectedness of urban metro systems. What's more, metro stations aren't suitable for conducting screening in an area away from concentrations of passersby, therefore they have no possible defense against suicide bombers. So those cities choose to accept the slight risk that one out of their millions of train passengers will be a bomber.

New York City, even though it has not experienced a subway attack, started to inspect its passengers at random and on a voluntary basis, despite the pointlessness of such partial measures. It also provides a high-profile police presence in the subway as a presumed deterrent to would-be terrorists. SWAT [Studly Wear and Theatrics] cops hang out on the subway platforms modeling the latest tactical gear and making like they're on high alert for signs of al Qaeda activity, whatever those might be. Reportedly, that kind of performance makes people "feel better." Not me, and not anyone I know, but supposedly somebody, somewhere.

Metro Police have put up Frequently Asked Questions about the new bag inspection program on their website (MTPD Security Inspection Program FAQ), some of which I've repeated below. As a public service, I've added a few questions, in bold italics, that should be frequently asked but aren't.

Q: Why is Metro doing this?

A: Metro is inspecting passenger bags to deter terrorist attacks by increasing our potential for detecting explosives or other hazardous material into the Metro system and to disrupt the ability of terrorists to discern a pattern in our security measures. The effort aims to increase awareness of the overall safety of passengers and employees in the Metro system and to ensure continuous operations during periods of heightened security in the National Capital area.

Are you sure Metro isn't doing this simply to follow the fashion set by NYC? The London metro system doesn't do this and they've actually had bomb attacks.

Q: How will the bag inspections be conducted?

A: A select team of trained officers may inspect passenger carry-on items prior to their entering the rail system or boarding a Metrobus. All carry-on items of passengers who enter a Metro facility will be subject to these inspections.

In general, customers will pass through inspection points prior to passing through a Metrorail faregate or boarding a Metrobus (before paying a fare). A customer whose items have been randomly selected for inspection will be taken to the inspection site off to the side. The customer will be asked to open his or her carry-on item. An officer will visually inspect the contents of the item. The inspection will be limited to searching for explosives and other items that may be harmful. Areas of bags that aren't capable of concealing an explosive will not be opened. If an explosive detecting canine is present, the customer may be asked to have his or her carry-on item sniffed by the canine. If the canine alerts for the presence of explosives the officers have legal authority to search the item, per United States v. Place.

In the event that neither the visual inspection nor the canine sniff reveals the presence of explosives, the customer immediately will be allowed to go on his or her way. Customers who aren't selected for an inspection will be allowed to enter the Metro system immediately. Customers who refuse to cooperate with the inspection will not be permitted to enter the Metro system with their items.

So, if I'm not permitted entry with my bag because I didn't cooperate, what's to stop me from just emptying the contents of the bag into my coat pockets and coming back? And if I want to keep my bag with me, does that mean I won't be permitted to re-enter that station ever again, or just for the rest of that day, or for an hour, or what? How would you know if I went to another station? It doesn't seem like you could enforce that ban on re-entering metro.

Q: What types of bags will be searched?

A: All types of carry-on items are subject to inspection including, but not limited to purses, briefcases, backpacks, gym bags, suitcases, shopping bags and boxes.

Why search only bags? Don’t terrorists sometimes carry bombs on their bodies, like in those hotel bombings in Amman, Jordan, a few years ago? Can’t a bomb intended for use on a metro train or bus be small enough to carry under a shirt or coat? Didn’t the bombs used in the London Underground attacks weigh just a couple pounds each?

Q: How long will it take to do a bag inspection and ensure it's thorough?

A: The time it takes to inspect a bag will depend on the size of the bag. In general, it should only take about eight to 15 seconds to inspect an item such as a briefcase or backpack.

So, then, I take it you won’t use an explosive trace detector to see if a passenger has explosive residue on his person or effects? Can a brief visual inspection of a bag really be effective? How do you guys know what a bomb looks like anyhow, especially if it's inside an innocent object?

Q: What type of reaction do you expect to get from customers?

A: We expect customers to voluntarily comply.

Don’t you expect a lot of them will turn around and leave the station rather than be hassled? That’s what I would do. Or maybe pass my bag to a friend who wasn't being singled out for inspection. Or, if I was a terrorist, I'd have an accomplice enter the station first and let me know if it was clear for me to proceed with my bomb.

Q
: How did you determine when and where to do the bag inspections?

A: The Metro Transit Police Department will begin randomly inspecting passengers' carry-on items before they enter the Metro system when circumstances warrant heightened vigilance, such as an elevated security threat. However, we will take steps to ensure that there will be no discernible pattern to these inspections. The dates, times and locations of security inspections will not be announced in advance.

Doesn’t that decision have a lot to do with available funding? Is Metro getting a Homeland Security grant to pay for the manpower needed to do this program (the way New York City does)? If so, are you really sure this is the best use of those funds?

Q: Can't you do this system wide?

A: Metro is not looking to conduct inspections at all stations at all times.

But if you don’t do it system-wide, what’s to stop a terrorist from walking out of one station and then entering another one? In the downtown area, many Metro stations are only a few blocks apart. Now that I think about it, how could you conduct inspections in Metro Center unless you covered all of its many train lines and platforms and entrances at the same time? Nothing short of comprehensive would be effective.

Q: Will this really make a difference?

A: Yes.

Are you sure about that? I don’t see how it could actually deter or prevent a bombing attack in the Metro. It seems like something that's intended to make people think that Metro is on top of this terrorism threat, when really Metro is just as vulnerable as ever.

Q: What took so long for you to decide to do this?

A: We have been carefully watching developments in the transit industry, communicating with our counterparts in other systems and evaluating recommendations of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). There is a growing consensus within the industry that programs such as this are a good idea, and the DHS touts it as a Smart Security Practice. We believe the time has come to offer our customers this additional layer of protection. With the upcoming elections and inauguration, this is the right time to launch this effort.

No, really, what made you decide to do this?

Q: Will customers be required to pass through inspection points?

A: No. Signs will be posted to inform customers about the inspection point. Customers may choose to avoid the inspection point and not enter the Metro system.

Doesn’t that one fact alone pretty much make this bag inspection business an exercise in futility?

Friday, August 29, 2008

Deep in the DC Doldrums

From the Washington Post today: Meanwhile, Back in the Capital . . . While Pols Convene or Vacate, Washington Plugs Along.


Normally you can't swing an intern in Washington without hitting a politician, a lobbyist, a journalist, a muckety-muck or, at the very least, a deputy assistant undermuckety-muck. But everyone's gone from Official Washington. It's apocalyptically empty. The place appears to have been selectively depopulated of the swaggering suits and the overachievers, as if BlackBerrys have turned evil and vaporized their owners.

It's so true. Washington is always sparsely populated in August anyway, but this time the entire politician/reporter/lobbyist element seems to have been drawn away to the overlapping D and R political conventions. On top of that, today is a 'Federal Friday' - the day before a three-day weekend - when everyone who can takes leave.

I got stuck with covering the office today, and things are so quiet it's disturbing. I find myself checking my computers and Blackberry every now and then just to make sure the network server hasn't gone down. At times like this it would be easier to just go home than to keep up the pretense of doing non-existent official business.

Thursday, August 28, 2008

"I Love This Dirty Town"

That's what the character J.J. Hunsecker said about New York City in that great movie Sweet Smell of Success. Presidential election seasons always make me feel that way about the Holy City of Washington. [Note: I call it "the Holy City" because I don't see why the Shia should have all the fun. They have at least six Holy cities - Najaf, Karbala, Qom, Mashhad, Shiraz and Samarra - not to mention Mecca and Medina, and I think it's only fair I should have at least one.]

The election is still a long way off, but I'm already giddy with excitement watching the attack ads, the VEEP-stakes, the consultants and pollsters earning their big quadrennial fees, the spinning and posturing, the netroots campaigns, and so on and on. Even down at my low level on the government food chain we feel the excitement, as the members of the 'permanent government' maneuver for jobs in the next administration.

There really is nothing quite like a Presidential election to bring out the best and the worst of this little hothouse world inside the Beltway.