[KYHAM] Re: KYHAM digest, Vol 1 #293 - 3 msgs

Mon, 09 Dec 2002 08:01:08 -0500

Welcome to paranoid 101.

73

At 04:01 AM 12/8/02 -0500, you wrote:
>Message: 1
>Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 20:21:50 -0500
>From: Ron Dodson <[email protected]>
>To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
>         "Christian Co. Emerg. Services" <[email protected]>,
>         "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>Subject: [KYHAM] KEN Training for Dec. 9: The Homeland Security Color 
>Based Threat System
>  and YOU!
>
>When the Office of Homeland Security released the famed
>"Color Based Threat System Scale" for Terrorism Readiness
>Level, it was considered by them to be a simple way to rate
>where we are in the likelihood of an attack.  Many months
>have passed and a good portion of the general populace still
>do not understand the why or how of this system. As
>conceived, it was intended to give the general public a
>ready reference on what they can expect today with regard to
>an attack by "enemy" operatives, sort of like your daily
>weather forecast and if you need an umbrella today or not.
>The only problem is that far to many never really had anyone
>explain to them just what the difference in changing Green
>to Yellow or Yellow to Orange or a move to Red should mean.
>Explaining this is my objective here.
>
>Let's start at the lowest level, "Green"
>and work to the highest levels of this chart.
>
>GREEN - is the lowest risk level possible. This is basically
>where America felt it was BEFORE and on the morning of, the
>9/11
>attack.  (Personally, I have my doubts that this will ever
>be used again.)  Protective measures would include
>vulnerability assessments, planning, training and
>exercising.
>
>The next highest level BLUE - is used when there is a
>general threat of activity occurring, but no specifics are
>known or expected.  Protective measures would include all of
>those from GREEN, PLUS testing of communications with
>command and control, review of plans and SOP's and
>increasing public information.
>
>Now we come to the position on the scale at which we have
>spent the better part of our days since Sept. 11, 2001 -
>YELLOW.  In YELLOW there is an increased readiness as a more
>significant threat is believed to exist though still no
>specific target is known.  Protective measures would include
>all of the lower levels and add increased surveillance of
>critical facilities and implementation of contingency plans
>and even some response plans.
>
>A move to ORANGE back in July led many to say, " Yeah, Now
>what?!" ORANGE - is brought into play whenever the
>government feels that there is a higher risk because of
>intercepted communications, intelligence or timing which
>appears that terrorist cells may be planning a defined
>attack, the exact target of which is not yet known.
>Protective measures would include all of the previous ones
>and add coordination of efforts between civil and military
>security and police forces, preparation or implementation of
>alternate worksites and splitting of work forces between
>locations and also possibly implementation of restricted
>access procedures at many locations and critical
>facilities.  Impact to normal daily affairs amy be affected
>anywhere from minimally to substantially based upon the
>facility or infrastructure you deal with daily.  In other
>words if you work in a store, restaurant or general public
>type work place you may not see much difference with your
>eyes. Just because you don't see an armed National Guardsman
>on every corner does not mean that there has been no change
>from yesterday! If you work in government, critical industry
>or infrastructure, you could potentially see a major
>tightening of access and target hardening efforts.
>
>A move to RED indicates the maximum risk and is meant to be
>TARGET SPECIFIC and was not intended for use on a
>nation-wide "blanket" scale at any one time. This would be,
>as an example, if we knew that a specific mode of travel,
>economic or civil infrastructure in a specific area was
>facing a likely attack.  Protective measures would include
>all of the previous ones and add; assigning response
>personnel and pre-positioning of special WMD teams, closing
>of government or other buildings and redirection of
>transportation or critical facility resources. Impact to
>normal daily affairs for the affected area(s) or target(s)
>would be substantial. Such measures were not intended to be
>maintained for a protracted length of time.
>
>One more item of note here.  We all must realize that IF WE
>CAN TRANSMIT A SIGNAL, THERE IS ALWAYS SOMEONE OUT THERE WHO
>CAN COPY IT! Yes, special equipment such as TNC's, APRS
>software etc. may be required, but if you have it, so could
>a terrorist.  Always examine any traffic before airing it.
>If it is deemed to high on the security scale, use another
>route even if it is a runner either on foot or by vehicle to
>move the message securely!  Cell and cordless phones are
>also open to reception.  No form of radio communication can
>be declared 100 percent indecipherable.  It may be
>difficult,
>even near to impossible yes, but if your intended receiver
>can copy it, so could possibly someone else.
>
>Likewise, our personal communications in face to face
>situations.
>Remember the lady in the restaurant who overhead the remarks
>made (likely in jest) by the men which resulted in a whole
>highway being shut down as they were apprehended for
>questioning. This is certainly an extreme, but it just
>illustrates my point. You may remember an e-mail
>that I sent out shortly after 9/11/2001?
>
>Here is a quote from a portion of it...
>
>"...I have received reports in recent days of truckers on CB
>and other commercial radio freqs. talking openly about
>hauling
>hazardous loads, military supplies etc.  They are giving
>departures from, destinations to and discussing the route to
>take on the open CB Channels!  EVEN TO TELLING WHERE THEY
>ARE NOW!  While I realize that most of us are not truckers,
>we can take a lesson from this and maybe even help decrease
>this other problem at the same time.  WE need to be more
>mindful of the info we broadcast into the open airwaves and
>in public places.  Regardless of whether we are just using
>our radios and phones as we go about our daily jobs, working
>on equipment at the EOC, eating at our favorite restaurant
>or watering hole or what have you.  It does not have to be
>AFTER the emergency when security needs to come first."
>
>As amateur radio operators who assist government and
>emergency agencies in disasters we should be at a state of
>alert at all times, equipment wise and personally.
>Terrorism
>is just a small part of the types of disasters we know that
>can affect our communities.  Earthquakes, flooding,
>tornadoes and hazardous materials incidents all come with
>little to no warning and we should never let our guard down
>as to our preparedness to place ourselves into immediate
>service to alleviate suffering and hardship. Our families
>need those (minimum of) 72 hour survival kits and family
>emergency plans all year long. Likewise, we need to maintain
>our stations to the level that major time consuming changes
>would NOT have to be made before we could step up to the
>plate and support our served agencies.
>
>If no disaster comes and we are never needed,
>have we really lost anything by being prepared?