Nuclear Scanning Catches a Radioactive Cat On I-5 594
Jeff recommends Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat's story from a community meeting with Northwest border control agents. Seems their monitoring for dirty bombs from the median of Interstate 5 caught a car transporting a radioactive cat. "It turns out the feds have been monitoring Interstate 5 for nuclear 'dirty bombs.' They do it with radiation detectors so sensitive it led to the following incident. 'Vehicle goes by at 70 miles per hour... Agent is in the median, a good 80 feet away from the traffic. Signal went off and identified an isotope [in the passing car]. The agent raced after the car, pulling it over not far from the monitoring spot.' Did he find a nuke? 'Turned out to be a cat with cancer that had undergone a radiological treatment three days earlier.'"
LOL @ Privacy Tag (Score:5, Insightful)
It's all fun and games... (Score:4, Insightful)
nothing wrong with this (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:LOL @ Privacy Tag (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So let's say... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So let's say... (Score:3, Insightful)
3. What is the false positive rate of such monitoring? Here, we have a cute example of a sick cat setting off a false positive. What about other incidents like this that fail to get into the newspaper?
Fairly dangerous for one reason (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, they're not weapons that'll kill millions of people at a stroke, but isn't one of the common themes of life that the most striking, obvious, and dramatic dangers aren't always the ones that should merit the most respect and attention?
Re:It's all fun and games... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's all fun and games... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So let's say... (Score:5, Insightful)
The false positive rate does matter, regardless of whether or not rights are being trampled. When you conduct any sort of large scale surveillance activity, the base rate fallacy [wikipedia.org] implies that most of the triggering events will be false positives. With too many false positives, your surveillance program is worse than useless -- it wastes money that could otherwise be better used on other security initiatives.
I know there is some emotional appeal in arguing that "if it saves even one life, etc. etc. then it's worth any amount of money" but in the real world that's just not true. In the real world, spending one billion dollars to save a life might be a bad idea if spending that same money on some other program would save two lives. In comparing the relative merits of two or more different security proposals, the false positive rate is one important factor to consider, because it affects the cost/benefit analysis.
Of course, people's rights matter as well, because that also affects the cost/benefit analysis. Unfortunately, the American public is seemingly too dumb to perform any sort of analysis involving more than one variable. Since the false positive rate involves math, it doesn't have any political appeal at all. Hence the Republicans fixate only on the terrorists, and the Democrats when not fixating on the terrorists focus only on civil liberties to the exclusion of all else.
Re:It's all fun and games... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ha, ha (Score:5, Insightful)
Wisdom follows, pay attention! (Score:2, Insightful)
Yet, american cats are being radiation treated and apparently no slashdotters notice how crazy that is. One of the reasons so many people worldwide are terrified by the americans. The idea of humanism and solidarity seems to be missing entirely from the anglo-saxon ethos and the media cultivates thinly veiled vulgar social-darwinist ideas.
Re:LOL @ Privacy Tag (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, the story has a slight smell of urban legend. Snopes hasn't picked it up yet, though.
At what cost? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's all fun and games... (Score:2, Insightful)
They're alreade en route (so to say) to enter the Darwin Awards...
Re:doesn't add up (Score:4, Insightful)
The worst part is, this post-9/11 monitoring has caught exactly zero dirty bombers. Sure, the article says:
Giuliano says the point really is to catch terrorists. He says it's true that the odds of catching one here may be "a billion to one. But despite that, we have caught two." (Gazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer, who tried to sneak in at Blaine in 1997 to blow up the New York subway; and Millennium Bomber Ahmed Ressam, nabbed at Port Angeles in 1999.)
But don't you find it odd that the only justification that the heightened surveillance post-9/11 works is based on two arrests that were made in 1997 and 1999, before the current surveillance was enacted? While we're at it, what kind of a hack journalist is the guy who wrote the article that he couldn't do some simple math with the dates and figure that out? So what we're left with is spending piles of taxpayer money to monitor and harrass our citizens with no proof whatsoever that it has a demonstrable benefit besides helping employment.
Re:It's all fun and games... (Score:5, Insightful)
fear factor. People are deadly scared of radiation and it isn't enough to say 'the levels are harmless' to stop the panic.
See this: http://radarmagazine.com/features/2006/12/toys-print.php [radarmagazine.com]
"4. Gilbert U-238 Atomic Energy Lab"
Honey, why is your face glowing? In 1951, A.C. Gilbert introduced his U-238 Atomic Energy Lab, a radioactive learning set we can only assume was fun for the whole math club. Gilbert, who American Memorabilia claims was "often compared to Walt Disney for his creative genius," had a dream that nuclear power could capture the imaginations of children everywhere. For a mere $49.50, the kit came complete with three "very low-level" radioactive sources, a Geiger-Mueller radiation counter, a Wilson cloud chamber (to see paths of alpha particles), a spinthariscope (to see "live" radioactive disintegration), four samples of uranium-bearing ores, and an electroscope to measure radioactivity.
Called one of the most dangerous toys of all times, despite totally harmless radiation levels, yes?
Imagine a dirty bomb made from ground depleted uranium bullets (Iraq, Afghanistan and some more have a plenty of them, just to pick up and use) goes off in Manhattan. Of course you and me know depleted uranium is called 'depleted' for a reason and you'd have to try really hard to get any results off it. But imagine how would a "Joe Average" react to the news: "Manhattan has been contaminated with slightly radioactive Uranium dust. The radiation level is entirely harmless. There is no reason to panic, the radioactive dust will not affect your health."
Re:Hardly dangerous (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe you misspoke, when you used the word "right" there.
Perhaps, you meant to say, "Americans aren't PERMITTED to possess dangerous radioactive components?"
While the "Right to Keep and Bear Property" isn't one of the explicitly enumerated ones in the Bill of Rights, the "Right to Keep and Bear Property" is the Right upon which *all* other Rights are founded.
Without that absolute right, the notion of having any Freedom or Liberty is ludicrous.
Yes, there's an obvious contradiction in being told that one is Free and at Liberty, but also told that they cannot own, possess or use property without obtaining prior permission from their Masters.
My only advice is: When presented with this historical opportunity to watch a civilization fall, enjoy the show!
Re:It's all fun and games... (Score:3, Insightful)
9/11 happened without any indication (that anyone paid attention to anyway).
That would indicate that you are underestimating their capabilities.
They are usually well funded and are very determined.
You dont need much material for a effective dirty bomb.
It can also be transported in smaller quantities.
That makes lead a valid option for transportation.
You assume they wouldnt use a clean room.
I'd say that if they knew there was a possibility of being detected then they would.
Anyone who can get any substantial amount of radioactive material has considerable resources.
Re:It's all fun and games... (Score:1, Insightful)
Really? Even if the false positives are several orders of magnitude more common than any true detections? If virtually everyone stopped will be innocent, why is that such a good thing? Do we want to live in a country were we are constantly stopped and scanned by the police on the infinitesimally small chance that we are terrorists?
Just how many nuclear bombs has this scanning found?
Re:Fairly dangerous for one reason (Score:1, Insightful)
So why are US politicians doing so much to increase the effects of that weapon by promoting the "mass panic" reaction?
Re:It's all fun and games... (Score:5, Insightful)
There are reasons to do some scanning for nuclear material, but if a few stray particles from a medical procedure is going to be enough to stop someone, there needs to be some decisions made on the sensitivity of the scanner.
That probably can't be helped. Cats and people travel openly while real radiological bombs should be transported in a closed box with a radiation shield. In order to catch the latter, the msensitivity cannot be low.
Re:So let's say... (Score:4, Insightful)
Indeed. Considering that traffic has killed approximately 280.000 Americans since 9/11 one could wonder how many lives would have been saved, had the 'war on terror' money been spent on improving road safety.
One could also question wether terrorists would find terror a useful weapon if nobody cared more than they do about traffic risks.
I wonder what would happen if Al Qaeda claimed they'd infiltrated the safety departments of several multinational car manufacturers, as well as the DMV and a multitude of road planning commissions.
Re:Ha, ha (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ha, ha (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's all fun and games... (Score:3, Insightful)
...ah, yes from the interview with the surviving hijackers...no, wait.
source?
Re:So stupid... (Score:2, Insightful)
SNIP
If someone really does have a radiological weapon, all he has to do now is shield it in layers of lead to escape detection -- or have a radiological cat as a decoy.
As far as shielding with lead, if something is radioactive, handling it can leave traces of radiation or material. Even with shielding, it can be difficult to completely eliminate all of the radioactive signature in a car.
Same thing with drugs. Sometimes the sniffing dog hits on the door handle, when the big payoff is shielded in the gas tank.
Re:Ha, ha (Score:2, Insightful)
Bring a bald cat when transporting nuclear materials on I-5.
Re:Radioactive cats and a vist from homeland secur (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm dead serious, these people are probably all having their phones warrantlessly wiretapped and their emails read by some orderly in an FBI data center.
Can we just get over this terrorism nonsense, disband the department of homeland security, and get on with our lives?
Re:Happens all the time (Score:1, Insightful)
Nice, so now we can add radiation to the list of things China is poisoning Western consumers with.
Re:So stupid... (Score:4, Insightful)
Justified from whose perspective? The cat? The cat's owner?
As one who have been repeatedly been pulled over, visited, and questioned by police when I've done nothing wrong, there is no justification for intruding on the peace of mind of the innocent.
Sorry, but unless that man actually were carrying a radiological device, bothering him is an intrusion on his peace and his life, even if they did "let him go." So does that mean that they will keep pulling him over every darn time he gets cancer treatment for his cat, or drives with his cat somewhere they have detectors? Would you want to be pulled over again and again and again when you've done nothing wrong? If that were to happen to you, would you not see that as harassment?
We really need to revisit the Rights of the Innocent in this country. Basically, all the rights of the innocent have been systematically stripped away, made easy with your latest and greatest technologies. Perhaps you don't mind the NSA tapping your every phone calls and email correspondences and putting them through their supercomputer farms just to see if you are a terrorist or not. But I think most people would have a problem with that!
As far as I'm concerned, if I haven't done anything wrong, then don't bug me. If you (law enforcement, NSA, Homeland Insecurity, FBI, etc.) do, you are invading my peace and my privacy as well. It IS harassment, plain and simple, and I for one will NOT stand for it. And neither should you if you care anything about your own rights.
Perhaps you should see the Minority Report. Basically, we're talking about the same thing here.
Re:Ha, ha (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Civics 101? Who can count that high?!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
I believe the next generation is getting exactly what their parents deserve. There seems to be about a generation of lag time between fuckup and consequence. Perhaps that's why we're losing our freedoms, we have no reason to care as it'll be our kids' problem. We certainly are a greedy species.
Re:Ha, ha (Score:2, Insightful)
This is not a cause for alarm or a rights issue. (Score:3, Insightful)
Radiation monitoring is useful and non invasive. Unlike real domestic spying, it only identifies things that can actually be harmful. Equipment operators have a simple purpose and can be adequately trained to distinguish real threats from false alarms but every alarm is worth following. People don't have to be identified and personal information never has to be tracked to stop threats.
Radio isotope monitoring has long been done at borders and in waste disposal. These are last ditch portions of defense in depth to protect the public from real danger. Powerful sources are required for industry and medicine. They are supposed to be carefully tracked from creation to disposal but you can never be sure. There have been several ugly incidents outside the US and at least one where an isotope ended up smelted into something that was later caught at the US border. When everything else fails, road and garbage checks help.
While nothing is impossible for a corrupt administration to abuse, this is not it. The real end of civil liberty comes from tracking and harassing dissidents and creating mechanism to lock them up. [arstechnica.com]
Re:Wisdom follows, pay attention! (Score:1, Insightful)
calm down people (Score:2, Insightful)