Slashdot Mirror
Bryson Crash Reveals Threat of Headless Government
Hugh Pickens writes "According to Business Week, the traffic accident that left U.S. Commerce Secretary John Bryson unconscious and alone in his bashed-up Lexus on June 9 raises questions about why the 10th official in line to succeed the president was left so vulnerable. It also highlights potential gaps in security for senior U.S. government officials, who receive varying levels of protection. 'They lost track of him,' says James Carafano, a terrorism scholar at the Heritage Foundation. 'Post 9/11, that's a bit of a head scratcher.' Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who are high in the line of succession and have national-security responsibilities, are provided protection 24 hours a day, seven days a week, but other federal officials, even in cabinet-level positions or other top posts, often travel without the security details that even a big-city mayor or state governor would be provided. Threats to cabinet-level officials aren't overblown, says Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, who has urged that the government revamp its succession plans and says a nuclear bomb hidden in a suitcase detonated in Washington could leave a headless government. 'The lack of interest in continuity may stem from the same reasons some smart people refuse to create wills, even though failure to do so leaves behind horrific messes for their loved ones,' writes Ornstein. 'Yet the threat is real. Our leaders' failure to establish plans to ensure that our Constitution survives is irresponsible.'"
Why would a psychopath or narcissist care about someone who will have his power when he is dead?
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
It's the Secretary of Education we have to protect. So say us all.
Clearly we narrowly escaped what would have been a disaster for our entire nation. Hyperbole much? Gee wiz
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Where do you draw the line? The president and VP are protected, and normally not in the same location. I dont think we are concerned with the 9th+ people in line for presidency in the event that someone manages to pick off all of the others.
I think the concerns are unfounded.
We would be better off if we could lose track of all those in line to succeed the president, and the president himself too.
And, all the congress critters.
And, the corrupt supreme court.
Time to refactor our government. Bonus, if it can be done without bloodshed.
A book by Tom Clancy, from well before 9/11, which involved most of the US government being wiped out when a plane is crashed into the capitol building during a ceremony that put almost the entire legislative and executive branches in the same building. Was sort of interesting (horrifying?) to see that sort of attack played out a few years later, albeit without the coordination to hit that much of our government in one swoop.
William George
why should we?
If a suitcase nuke goes off in Washington, "Government continuity" at that high a level is about #273 on our priority list.
Threats to cabinet-level officials aren't overblown... a nuclear bomb hidden in a suitcase detonated in Washington could leave a headless government.
No, not overblown in the slightest.
I think the Constitution will survive a nuclear holocaust in D.C. just fine. It's a set of intangible ideas. What might not survive it is the One Percent's hold on government by proxy. Which makes me wonder about Ornstein's pedigree given that he would make such a misdirected statement.
a nuclear bomb hidden in a suitcase detonated in Washington could leave a headless government
wouldn't lying unconscious and alone in your car protect you from such an attack?
joshua will just take over then
No problem... we have headless servers, and that works fine, so why not a headless government?
If a suitcase nuke goes off in Washington, "Government continuity" at that high a level is about #273 on our priority list.
Also: If a suitcase nuke takes out enough of DC that the first nine guys in line are gone it will no doubt take hours to figure out for sure that the tenth guy is the highest-ranking one left, even if he's NOT knocked out on the side of the road.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I'm an Afghan citizen of US descent. I'm about 450 millionth in line. Seriously.
I live in Kabul, and I'm in great danger every day. You never know, those drones, heh. Anyway, second exit off the Kabul western highway. Take the second right and continue until you reach the camel. Then take a left and it's around a mile down. It's the yellow crack shack. Please send two CIA agents full time!
Congress already lacks brains, ears, eyes, hearts, guts, and balls.
I don't see how being headless would change much.
Oh wait, we had done that.
we read so much bullshit these days...
Right, because I forgot about all these huge "terrorist" plots to kill the 10th in line to the presidency. The idea that there are all these "terrorists" plotting to destroy the world is simply unsubstantiated.
I think the author of this article has been reading too many Tom Clancy novels. Of course Clinton and Panetta are going to get protection, people know who they are and they actually do stuff. How many people even know that Bryson was the secretary of commerce. Heck, does the average American even know there was a secretary of commerce?
Just because something is possible doesn't mean its likely. A nuclear bomb detonated in Washington DC creates far more problems than a "headless" government because having a "headless" government really means nothing when it comes to an emergency.
Order would be disrupted in most areas, but last time I checked most police officers don't take orders direct from Washington meaning that it wouldn't make much difference if a "suitcase nuke" was detonated in Washington DC or another metropolitan area.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
...continue the fight while civil and military survivors would adapt to the changed circumstances.
Losing a few bureaucrats would be disruptive, but lets remember that nations can lost upwards of twenty million people (USSR-WWII) and continue to function. They can lost multiple cities to conventional bombing raids and nuclear attack, and still continue some function.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
If they'd had Google Maps Coordinate this wouldn't have happened.
"Some AEI scholars are considered to be some of the leading architects of the second Bush administration's public policy." And should therefore be taken... seriously?
"...nuclear bomb hidden in a suitcase detonated in Washington could leave a headless government."
We should be so lucky.
But seriously... ahh, no I was serious.
And further: "Our leaders' failure to establish plans to ensure that our Constitution survives is irresponsible."
The only "leaders" we have are statistics generated by polls which is why I made my first comment.
doesn't have protection, it's that mayors, assistant Governors, and the like do. Seriously, it's not necessary for a mayor to bring a multi-person security detail with them everywhere, nor is it necessary for them to get high speed police escorts where ever they need to drive. We don't live in Afghanistan. It's simply not that dangerous- there are plenty of mayors, governors and the like who *don't* have protection layered around them and there hasn't been a wave of assassination attempts on them.
"Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
We already have a brainless government. Who gives a &[=?
Really? Has no one really thought of that before?
The problem with this is that most of the major officials are ELECTED. Unless we want to double the cost of running the government by electing understudies, that would mean the government would be left in the hands of unelected bureaucrats.
THE WHOLE POINT OF DEMOCRACY IS SO THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN. It's a really easy hole for tyranny to get into, you know,
1) put partisans in the understudy positions.
2) kill the congressmen who disagree with you.
3) profit... I mean, autocracy.
To back up the government, we would need to have replacement for all major, (and most minor officials). They would all have to stay in constant communication with the elected officials they are backing-up, while staying apart from each other and away from major cities, (if a terrorist were going after DC, do you really think they would leave New York unscathed?, nevermind how much religious extremists must love the notably LGBT friendly San Francisco). To stay in contact they would ALL need a hardline connection to DC, and an assistant to do all the leg work they obviously can't do.
The other alternative is lock our government in hermetically sealed bunkers kept in undisclosed locations around the country, (and beyond), and have them all teleconference, (which is only about 30% effective for social work... which is what the government is; I'm not as concerned about locking our politicians in airless bunkers).
They would also need a communication system that can survive the destruction of a single hub... and while the Internet USED to be that, we have gotten a lot more lax about that in recent years.
While there are minor things that could be done, they would only have minor effects, and would each have their own escalating cost. It's a lot more cost-effective to have the CIA ferret out the plots before they happen... which is what the CIA does.
The recent U.S. Open reminded me of the previous event at the Olympic Club, held near the end of the last millennium -- 1998. I was working for a company that was a big customer of Cadence. And Cadence put on the dog by inviting us and others to party in San Francisco to celebrate the Open (tickets, too). There were limos, a long pitch from Scott McNealy (2 minutes about Java and 20 minutes about Bill Gate's evil empire), and a performance by Stomp, but the final act was the clincher. It was a renown reporter, whose name escapes me, that was part of the White House press corp during the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations. He told stories about how the press did not talk about the personal lives of Presidents back then, about how Lyndon Johnson made Bill Clinton, who was being impeached, look like a choir boy, and then the big finish. He told us about a private interview with JFK where he mentioned rumors of a nuke built inside the Russian Embassy, just blocks from the Capitol. Apparently, it was smuggled in pieces using diplomatic exemptions and assembled in a lead-lined room in the top floor. Big enough to wipe out the entire metropolitan area, Kennedy responded, "You know about that, too, eh?"
Yet the threat is real. Our leaders' failure to establish plans to ensure that our Constitution survives is irresponsible.'
The majority of those leaders are a bigger threat to the survival of the Constitution where they are than if they are gone.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8tQAYYtLok -- I think there are always plans for continuity. Never mind Mt. Weather.
Also, suit case nuke? Why does a dangerous nuke have to always fit in a suitcase? Little Boy could fit in a Big Rig trailer... with plenty of room for potatoes to hide it inside, (nevermind adding combustion mass).
It's tough to destroy the entire line of succession. They are almost always separated. The State of the Union is an exception, and security is amped to the max when that happens.
If they somehow managed to create an uncertain line, it seems like state appointed senators would have helped reconstitute that body quickly. OTOH, even though they are popularly elected now, provisional Senators are appointed right? I seem to recall that was a big scandal when Obama left offfice to become POTUS.
So. At the very least we can get a Senate up and running PDQ, and I bet the rest of Congress also. At the very least we can get a quorum, elect a Speaker of the House, and guess what? The Speaker is in line of succession so there's your POTUS.
No SCOTUS to rule on that? Kind of a weak point, but I don't think it matters. Under those circumstances, the new POTUS nominates judges, Congress doesn't even think to oppose them, and it's on to the first order of business, which is to kick some ass. Even the Amish would be kicking ass and there would be no disagreement anywhere because... Hello!! we just got nuked. If 9/11 can unify the nation (and it did before GWB went full tard) then certainly a nuking will do it.
It might be martial law and suspension of habeus for a while; but hopefully Lincoln's version of that. NO getting around it, losing the Capitol would suck; but it should take a lot more than that to get us down.
....oh, it's the Secretary of Commerce, he-he, let's hang up on him and overthrow the government.
Are the biggest danger to the Constitution.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
I know you're trolling, but I figure I'll answer so you don't make others start "wondering".
A suitcase nuke is a nickname for a portable nuclear detonation device that can fit in your hands.
Much like a notebook computer isn't the size of a notebook, and a gameboy isn't a boy.
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
steve who
Really? Has no one really thought of that before?
The problem with this is that most of the major officials are ELECTED. Unless we want to double the cost of running the government by electing understudies, that would mean the government would be left in the hands of unelected bureaucrats
Sorry, but you're incorrect. Only the top 3 are elected......all the others in line are unelected cabinet members.
US Presidential Line of Succession:
1 Vice President of the United States
2 Speaker of the House
3 President pro tempore of the Senate
4 Secretary of State
5 Secretary of the Treasury
6 Secretary of Defense
7 Attorney General
8 Secretary of the Interior
9 Secretary of Agriculture
10 Secretary of Commerce
11 Secretary of Labor
12 Secretary of Health and Human Services
13 Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
14 Secretary of Transportation
15 Secretary of Energy
16 Secretary of Education
17 Secretary of Veterans Affairs
18 Secretary of Homeland Security
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
For example, the president. Before they are anything, they are a normal citizen like the rest of us. They run for the position and get elected it. Every 4 years they are possibly replaced with a new person. So I ask, if something happened to them, why would we care any more than if something happened to a relative, friend, etc? Why is it really do important to protect them and others "in office". They get replaced all the time (well should anyhow instead of sitting in congress/senate forever). The older I get the more I question the need for all that.. Why they should be protected than any other citizen.
You really don't get out of your mother's basement much, do you?
There are neighborhoods in every major city where idiots with guns could, and would, threaten local civial authority without that protection, even at peacable speeches. They don't bring the guards all the time, but whack jobs with agendas happen at lots of big speeches, and a few guards to help make sure the doors open when they should and the person can get to their transportation without being tripped or shot with a tasser by a nut is basic security for any major public figure.
The mayor has to have his posse, because that's the only way people will know he's a bigshot. This kind of "security" isn't really about security - it may be used a number of different ways, but none of them are there to make us safer.
I've only ever been to Washington D.C. twice, but once was in 1994 and once was in 2008 and I was shocked at what the city had been turned into in that time. The grand facades of the public buildings, with huge staircases and entrances made to accommodate large numbers of people, were completely shut off in favor of small side doors and hour-long lines of people being forced through metal detectors. In 1994 you could walk right into the rotunda in the national archives from the street, spend a minute or two looking over the pages of the constitution, and be on your way. This is what the building was to designed to do.
Meanwhile, every non-public building has been surrounded by bomb barriers for some reason. Only some kind of psychotic would actually believe that the EPA was in real danger from terrorists, this is about maintaining a culture of fear.
"a nuclear bomb hidden in a suitcase detonated in Washington could leave a headless government"
Can someone please do this the next time the House is in session? Thankssomuch.
The U.S. Commerce secretary is driving a foreign car? Nice.
Note the quote in the original article is about threat, not risk. There is a difference that most of Washington has yet to learn.
The best laid plans go out the window In an emergency. Herd mentality kicks in and people follow whoever can stand up and say with confidence that they're taking charge of things. In 1981, when Reagan was shot, it was Alexander Haig, despite being fourth in line of succession.
Mayor of New York city comes to mind, population: 8.2 million, compared to countries that makes it the 96th most populated country (out of 242).
As long a the top top are protected for assassination then we should be fine, if someone has killed this guy I am sure everything would of continued as normal.
And it would not matter how many security guards he had if someone detonated a nuke in Washington.
Also if the government was nuked I would hope that the military was prepared and ready to protect the country in such a state. And let not give the government too much credit, it would not take that long to regrow the head stronger then ever. Ether that the country would fracture into a bunch of scrabbling regions rules over by their local warlords.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
politicians are as disposable and replaceable as toilet paper, this is not remotely a concern. 99% are just a bunch of power and money grubbing scum in the pockets of mega-corporations, their lives and actions are only a detriment to society and mankind
If a nuke took out DC, the military would take over in about... 15 minutes. Maybe 20. The "chain of command" bullshit is just window dressing for the naive. The banks and the military industrial complex run the USA. Period, end of story. The civilian government is maintained because it give people the illusion they have some political agency. They don't. So if a nuke ever took out DC, the next ruler of the USA would likely be the highest ranking general or admiral available and willing to step up and be the object of disgust. The first thing would be a "calm down, we're fixing this" statement to america, followed by a "we will set up new elections as soon as we can" statement, so the military industrial complex and the banking industry can go back to doing what they do best - looting the treasury in secret.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
. the M-388 is as small as it gets, 10 to 20 ton (0.020 kiloton) yield, in a 51 lbs. 31"x11" dia. package. you might get that in a large back pack on a strong guy, sorry, you might ruin a city block of light buildings with that, but you're not going to be taking any capitals off the map.
...or promise?
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
A designated survivor (or designated successor) is a member of the United States Cabinet who is appointed to be at a physically distant, secure, and undisclosed location.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_survivor
Slashdot editors -- why post this article? 50% of the comments are predictably along the lines of, "good riddance" or "the politicians/leaders are the threat to the Constitution!" I get it -- half the Slashdot posters are rugged libertarians ready to live the independent life of government-free self sufficiency, though they won't move to Somalia and prove it, nor do they explain how the instantaneous collapse of technological civilization is going to maintain the society where they are techno-gods on the Internet. To the couple of posters who actually put up a thought out comment, such as, "the State governments will step in," I thank-you. It still wasn't worth it though. I have only myself to blame, I knew this was going to be bad one from the headline...
Yup, the executive floor of my company headquarters has bulletproof glass, and the CEO travels with a contingent of guards who even clear elevators for him assuming that he didn't get on from the private parking area where the car is programmed to ensure a private ride. The secretary desks around the executive area come complete with panic buttons.
What would the company do with a few less executives? I'm sure they live in fear for their lives on their helicopter rides home...
The succession rules aren't there to ensure that there's someone "who can lead America" -- they're there to ensure that there isn't a melee and free-for-all power grab among those same officials (or the military, or whomever) if this were to happen. They exist to guarantee that if person #4 on the list shows up to claim power away from person #6, person #6 will hopefully do the honorable thing (possibly at the prodding of the police and military) and gracefully hand power over to person #4.
We can live without elected federal leaders for a while, as long as whomever is nominally in charge plays by the rules and fills the role of "placeholder" until elections are held soon thereafter. We had a technically unelected president for almost two years back in the early 1970s (Gerald Ford). Few really liked him, and fewer still loved him, but he knew it, and in retrospect did a decent & honorable job of keeping the lights on in Washington and not rocking the boat until it was time to step aside. Frankly, a placeholder president would have zero mandate to do much of anything besides try to not piss off too many people during his or her short term of office.
If a small nuclear bomb were detonated in front of the Oval Office and took out most of the highest officials, the real chaos wouldn't be due to the lack of a President, but because the lives of everyone left in Washington (most of whom would survive just fine, and who are the ones who personally run America's bureaucracy on a daily basis), would be totally fucked up for weeks.
Anybody who lived in Miami after Andrew, or New Orleans after Katrina, knows what I'm talking about. First, you go through personal survival. Then you become obsessed with saving those you care about, or verifying that they're OK and don't need your help. Then you spend the next 2 months doing nothing besides drive to and from work in the most ungodly traffic jams you've ever seen in your life, shopping endlessly (with lines stretching to the back of the store) and dealing with random wacky shortages of just about everything, and trying to clean up the mess around you. That's part of the reason why the government's "nuclear plans" always involved rescuing the immediate family members of important officials once the officials themselves were safe (or simultaneously). You can't run the country when you're busy trying to rescue your own kids, or standing in line for 3 hours at Wal Mart just to get in the door.
Now, think back to September 12 through 18, 2001 -- the week after 9/11. Remember the people who just freaked out around you? Multiply that by 10, and you have the likely best case scenario to hope for.
A dead president, and deciding who's supposed to temporarily fill his or her shoes for a few weeks or months, would be the *least* of our problems.
From the article;
Each house needs half of its members to be present for a quorum to do any official business. The House of Representatives can replace deceased members only by special elections that take, on average, four months. The Senate, under the 17th Amendment, allows states (usually governors) to appoint replacements to fill vacancies, but neither house has a mechanism for replacing incapacitated members.
Members do not need to be replaced. Here is a quote from the Office of the Clerk of the US House of Representatives.
A quorum in the House of Representatives is when a majority of the Members are present. When there are no vacancies in the membership, a quorum is 218. When one or more seats are vacant, because of deaths or resignations, the quorum is reduced accordingly. Because of Members' other duties, a quorum often is not present on the House floor. But any Member may insist that a quorum must participate in any vote that takes place in the House. If a Member makes a point of order that a quorum is not present, and the Speaker agrees, a series of bells ring on the House side of the Capitol and in the House office buildings to alert Members to come to the Chamber and record their presence.
Here are a few points that are important;
1. Quorum is calculated relative to the number of sitting live Representatives and not the number of seats. A dead Representative is considered a vacancy and is not counted toward quorum. If all but three of the Representatives were killed than 2 would constitute a quorum.
2. Quorum does not need to be present for a vote unless at least one Representative asks for one. In an emergency I doubt and Representative would make such a request.
3. As for incapacitated members, the House can declare a seat vacant by vote (Note: Unless a member requests a quorum is not required for a vote).
The same standards are present for the Senate.
A straightforward reading of the Constitution’s quorum requirement would seem to require a simple majority of Senators, or a minimum of 51 if there are no vacancies in the body, to be present on the floor whenever the Senate conducts business.
As the House and Senate would still be functioning after such a disaster, the House could elect a Speaker or the Senate elect a President pro tempore and the line of succession would be restored.
The article misrepresents the quorum issue. Basically, as long as there is one member of the House or Senate alive and not incapacitated an acting President will be legally found.
Wow, another call to bloat the government's guys with guns budget. I think we can survive if a secretary is out of commission. The fact I didn't even hear about this pretty much shows it wasn't a major issue.
but think of the children.
I'm pretty he's off in a thread that none us non-schizophrenics can see.
And there in lies the problem. A government which lives in fear of its people, and does everything in its power to watch them / curtail its freedoms, thinking that in doing so, it's making itself safer.
I am John Hurt.
Did you see how the western world cheered when the Egyptian generals took control of the country, when their despot was dethroned. Except, hold on, now they have altered the constitution to ensure their continued power regardless of elected officials. I believe that is called a military coup... You are fucking retarded if you don't think the same thing is being implemented in the US.
why is he driving a car built by Japs for kikes who don't want to drive something from the Krauts?
Check the Wikipedia article. It says that the m388 used the w54 warhead. Versions of the war head were produced with upto a 0.6 kiloton yield. It weighed the same in all versions. It might ruin a few city blocks.
Protect the constitution?? It's already dead!! Haven't they been paying attention?
Onstar would have contacted help if the airbags inflated. I suspect that the feds could get onstar to provide tracking of the secretaries 7x24. If they can call local authorities for designated cars they could also call the FBI or Secret Service. Note that this can be done now in the after market so one does not have to buy a GM car.
The succession rules aren't there to ensure that there's someone "who can lead America" -- they're there to ensure that there isn't a melee and free-for-all power grab among those same officials (or the military, or whomever) if this were to happen. They exist to guarantee that if person #4 on the list shows up to claim power away from person #6, person #6 will hopefully do the honorable thing (possibly at the prodding of the police and military) and gracefully hand power over to person #4.
That's only part of the story. The other part of the story (based on when the current succession rules were written) was that if the USSR had blown up large areas of the US with a nuclear strike, there'd be somebody officially in charge with the authority to order retaliation. It's well-understood that if the Secretary of Education is suddenly the head of state, you have loads of problems that don't have to do with orders of succession. The bureaucrats in question also aren't directly elected, but they do have the approval of the elected president and the elected senate.
And lastly, when it comes to a newly "brainless" US government, I'm not entirely sure how you'd notice.
I am officially gone from
The bomb doesn't need to fit in a suitcase. It will be the biggest nuke they can put in the back of uhaul.
Did ayone else detect the irony / syncronicity of a story posted today, specifically http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/06/22/1827207/google-touts-worker-tracking-as-own-ceo-goes-mia ?
The cabinet level officials, and Congressmen, are getting tired of being harassed by the TSA when they fly. With full time protection, they should be able to get private flights and only let the little people have to deal with the TSA. This is just the start of a line of stories that will end with this suggestion.
Am I the only one that sees it this way?
So what if the "10th in line of succession" has a seizure and his bodyguards lose him? So what? There are 9 other people before he matters to more than his family and his next morning's Commerce meeting. If those 9 are all out, then there's an 11th. There's an Acting Commerce Secretary. Who cares?
This is all bullshit. You can tell, because the bullshit is pushed by James Carafano, who wrote _Winning the Long War_ about how to defeat terrorism - and has helped the US get beaten by terrorism like nothing in our centuries of endless war. I argued with this jerkoff in a lobby of an NYC theater where he'd spent the previous two hours spouting bullshit about the US spending every last penny and life fighting his bullshit "long war". And he's done nothing but lose.
America is drowning in bullshit like this. Endless bullshit from a line of bullshitters like Carafano that's endless only because they get right back in line after bullshitting us and collecting their check.
This is a democracy. It depends on people swallowing this bullshit to keep the bullshit flowing. Stop believing it. Stop the endless war, the endless excuses for treating the country like it has to be at war every second of every day, every man, woman and child. Stop it already. It's bullshit.
--
make install -not war
Reporter Hugh Sidey?
He reports the story as though he does not believe it to be true:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1001206,00.html
Back in 1947, the present rules of presidential succession were set up. The present line of succession has 18 people. That ought to be enough.
When this is a real worry, a few of those people should be in a bunker. During presidential inaugurations and presidential speeches to Congress, that's actually done; at least one person in the line of succession is in a safe place far away. It's usually someone far down the list, but in 2001 Dick Cheney (VP) was sent to the "undisclosed location", and in 2003, Ashcroft (AG) got bunker duty. In 2005, 2006, and 2007, the president pro tem of the Senate went to the bunker. In 2009, Holder (the AG) got the duty. Since then, after most of a decade with no significant terrorist attacks, it's back to the low-rankers.
In terms of actual threat, nobody in the US presidential line of succession has ever been assassinated.
This is a problem for which a solution was implemented long ago, back when a major war looked like a likely possibility.
Ask any CEO: Everyone can be replaced. Why should government officials be different? In fact, the citizens can cause most officials to be replaced: It is called an election.
Of course, if a bomb is dropped on Washington then it means those officials didn't do their jobs of murdering/detecting whoever was so pissed-off that he started a nuclear war. So the problem is a solution to the presence of incompetent officials. Of course, it's US citizens who have to deal with the aftermath. On the other hand (OTOH), look at Egypt: Regime-change achieved fuck-all.
Close, but the M388 is a complete finned projectile -- the diameter is pretty much fixed by the Mk.54/W54 warhead, but you could trivially remove several inches of length, and the warhead itself is only about 16" long. Additionally, there were several versions of the W54 with higher yield, including the 0.01-1kT variable yield version used in the backpack SADM and the 250kT used in the AIM-26A air-to-air missile -- the ~20T design yield of the M388 was related to the range of the weapon system,, not the maximum attainable from that size warhead.
Seems to me we have been experimenting with "headless government" pretty frequently for the past two centuries.
Given that elected officials are responsible for those conditions and for stoking the anger, maybe not allowing them to bring a security detail would encourage them to change their rhetoric.
Sort of a moot point since, you don't really get to elect a vice-president, you just get who ever comes with the president you elected. Also, as demonstrated by Spiro Agnew's fuck up, VP's can be replaced without election. Why does it matter if the 10th in line isn't elected when you have no real control who the second in line is?
You should be far more worried about the people who are quite likely to become president (e.g. imagine if Dick Cheney has become president) then people who will only become president if a total 1 in a million catastrophe occurs.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
I've heard that Bloomberg commutes via subway, and in the course of fact-checking a reply, I learned that the validity of that claim is somewhat fuzzy:
http://gothamist.com/2007/08/01/mayor_bloomberg_29.php
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/01/nyregion/01bloomberg.html
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
Ashcroft... that brings back memories. I had an icon on my desktop where John Ashcroft's face would change color in accordance with the current terror threat level.
"Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?"
Now, think back to September 12 through 18, 2001 -- the week after 9/11. Remember the people who just freaked out around you?
Not really. I live less than 100 miles from the WTC site, and I didn't see or hear anyone freak out the entire week. In my city on the afternoon of 2001-09-11, very little seemed out of the ordinary. Everyone seemed a bit dazed, as I myself was.
The only other incident of note that I remember from that day was that a NYSP roadblock was set-up on the two-lane highway I used to take to work. I did a three-point turn and took an alternate route in order to avoid it. I think that upon seeing that roadblock, there for no good reason, that was the moment I realized that one of the responses to the attack was going to long-term, arbitrary curtailment of liberty. Over the past eleven years, I have consistently underestimated the zeal with which that curtailment would be pursued.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
Okay, we have had a good run with all the fear-mongering by the security industry/establishment for the last decade. I think it is time to give it a rest. I think we're traumatized by it, and we're getting bored of it. Furthermore, aren't we now in situation where all these terrorists/criminals have succeeded in what they wanted: massive erosions on our civil liberties, and huge curtailments of our freedoms?
For a conservative institute, shouldn't they working on how to make government smaller and more efficient? Particularly with the current world economic climate with massive deficits across the western countries, work in this area would be particularly timely. This should mean they should be working on finding efficiencies, not coming up with ways to spend more money.
I demand full 24 hour 7 day week protection just in case.
One of the great things about a democracy is it's impossible to decapitate. You kill the top guy, or even the top 20 guys, and we'll just promote their subordinates for a few months, hold a special election, and we're back in business. It's a self-repairing system. There is no need to protect *anybody* in power: they're all expendable. As a practical matter, it's nice to have a secret service to protect the president, but that's just because replacing him every time he gets killed would be inconvenient.
The paranoid hyper-protectivism pushed by the American Enterprise Institute and Heritage Foundation reflects the fact that they don't actually believe in democracy. They believe that the man running the country is more important than the ideas he was elected to represent -- in short, they're fascists. They're such fascists, that they believe this even when they guy running the country is someone they hate. And one of the many, many problems with fascism is that fascists are really easy to terrorize. Just threaten the Supreme Leader, and they're in the palm of your hand.
In contrast, a true democracy is difficult to terrorize. You can threaten individual citizens, but there is no one person, no symbol or place of power, that you can destroy to bring it to its knees.
The leaders of countries have a military and foreign policy significance. Bloomberg's life isn't worth shit to NYC taxpayers.
There was an Ig Nobel award in 2010 for a mathematical model showing that random promotion can actually be _better_ than carefully organized evaluations and gradual promotions. I'm having difficulty finding a copy of the original paper, since it was in a magazine and many of the links have expired, but there's an abstract here.
http://oldweb.ct.infn.it/cactus/peter_principle_sup_material.html
Our leaders' failure to establish plans to ensure that our Constitution survives is irresponsible.
Our leaders can't even ensure the survival of the Constitution further than a single session of Congress.
That's my dream scenario. Who's working on this? Are they on Kickstarter?
If not us, who? If not now, when?
We already have a brainless government. Replacing it would be a good thing. Of course, not through suitcase nukes, but to be fair, the elections aren't doing an effective enough job. It would help if TV attack ads weren't the most influential political communication in the country.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
"a nuclear bomb hidden in a suitcase detonated in Washington could leave a headless government. "
Oh shut the fuck up no one cares about your FUD mindless fear mongering doomsday scenarios. Extra bodyguards on mindless government drone #10 wouldn't prevent that anyway.
Just a suggestion though, if you are going to base your population control on the Machiavellian ideals of fear and an iron fist, biological attacks are far more likely, realistic and effective. They are virtually impossible to prevent or control (FUD++) and could do a lot more damage than just killing off your useless overfed government. If you are going to make up bullshit to keep folks in line at least have some imagination ffs.
Isn't this a good thing? Anything that makes it harder for the government to destroy peoples lives is a good thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession. given that the list is 18 persons long i would think that if things went south Standing Orders would keep things running long enough to sort things out. Im sure that the Treasury Dept will get hands on the folks at the end of the list if the top of the list "goes missing".
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
"why the 10th official in line to succeed the president was left so vulnerable"? ... and in the case of Bryson, should never have been born.
Answer: such a human being is fodder
Bryson is a worker ant of the unelected government of the USA. Step on him. His death means nothing.
Having bought crack cocaine, heroin and other narcotics in LA and crashed his auto multiple times,
then had a stroke, from the crack and jerking off in the auto, he deserves to be dead.
Bryson is a Fucker.
Do you know, the presidents of other nations walk around town with no bodyguards, much less a full SS detail like the President of the US has? Why are we supposed to worry so much about the Secretary of Commerce? He is just not that important. Neither is Obama.
Suppose someone did manage to blow up DC? The loss of life would be tragic; life would go on. Oh, and the loss of the politicians would also be sad, at least for their immediate families. Politicians are not that important, little though they may want to acknowledge the fact. Their replacements would be pontificating on the rubble and proposing Patriot Act II before the smoke cleared...
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
that's the 0.25 KT speculated yield for the GAR-11 on the AIM-26A. However the real live tests produced yields at/under 22 tons TNT. and the laws of physics means that any plutonium based implosion system even with reflectors and initiator can only be so small and so light. all the variants weighed more than 50 lbs.: backpack and not briefcase sized for the man portable version
there are various types detectors and neutron sniffers in and around D.C. and NYC and other large cities, along our major highways and in ports, for specifically that issue. your typical warhead is going to be troublesome to move and have many tell-tails.
Sure! Those guys bring a lively atmosphere to any bar or night club near their charge. I suggest 7/24 lifetime protection for the top 1,000 of the Chain-of-Command. It would help the unemployment situation too. Thinking more, maybe it should be the top 10,000 or 100,000.
Sorry, but after the watching the news today I can't help but feel that we'd be better off without the President OR Congress.
Just the the Police States of Amerika needs, yet MORE thuggish cops in dark suits and dark shades wrestling anyone and everyone who happens to LOOK at their charge cross-eyed to the floor (to then be cuffed and THEN tased and tased and tased some more). Who cares about number 10 on the list? 1, 2, and 3 OK but not the hanger's on.
The MAIN reason it is irrelevant in any case is that making sure any of these clowns is available to take over will NOT 'save the Constitution". The Constitution is dead. It started to die when the SCOTUS got directly involved in politics in a plainly partisan manner in Bush v Gore in 2000. The Constitution was completely extinguished shortly after 9/11 with illegal (but still rampant) illegal spying by government, both local and federal, on all citizens. It died when torture and indefinite detention became THE policy of the USA. It died when the PATRIOT act was passed, and re-authorized, and re-authorized again. Constitution my ass. Who cares who is around if the head gets cut off? We'd all be better off and MUCH closer to the freedom we used to have if the entire government, all three branches, were wiped away.
Here are some possible reasons why the Commerce Secretary was left unguarded:
1. The cost to protect him was greater than the cost to replace him.
2. Like the Navy's capital ship theory, the loss of a low level cabinet secretary might be a good indicator that a state of hostilities exist. This might also be called the canary in a coal mine approach.
3. If you make all the targets hard to kill, even the low value ones, then assassins will target higher value targets (Obama, Pinetta, Clinton). So leaving this guy in the open actually enhances the safety of everyone higher up in the order or succession.
4. Apparently, this guy was easy to replace in his cabinet post. Perhaps no one considered him to be of any value (much like #1, above).
5. Can you protect someone that tries to ditch you? Doesn't it take some cooperation from the protected person to be successful?
6. If you are protecting someone that has a mental breakdown, and becomes uncooperative, what can you do short of arresting and restraining them?
The fact that Ornstein uses a phrase like "Our leaders" shows that the concept of responsibility is unknown to him.
Do you allow yourself to be led ? Then you are not exercising responsibility over your self.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
"Yet the threat is real. Our leaders' failure to establish plans to ensure that our Constitution survives is irresponsible"
Bullshit. There are 1000s of copies of the constitution. All we'd lose is the same idiots you're so worried about being irresponsible.
Yeah, I got my Ts and kTs crossed -- 250kT would not be sense.
But you don't seem real familiar with the tests -- most of the early tests for the W54 (and predecessors) overshot intended yields -- the only early 10~20T yields were single-point safety tests (obviously failures). It's damn hard to shrink yields of any device to <0.1kT, because the W54 is about as small as you can get with that design, and is still "naturally" about a 0.5~1.0 kT device. There are, at least theoretically, designs that will scale even smaller, but they tend to be even more finicky than the W54, which is why we used it.
I don't argue that we have true briefcase devices, but that you're underestimating the power of the man-portable devices that we do have or could readily have using existing components, by looking at the tiny yields we had to fight to get down to for recoilless rifle launch, rather than the easier yields we attained first, and later deployed in less constrained weapons systems.
Just saying.
-- Terry
... of the Colonies, that is. Point is, strange things can happen.
You are correct in letter, but I disagree with your conclusion. Do you really have any control over how the house votes? Sure, you can try to influence them with letters and petitions, but since you are a step removed from the democratic process, you are kind of along for the ride. Supposing that the Republic stands the test of time, I will hazard a guess that most VPs that will be nominated over the years will be appointed with little to no objection, if for no other reason than to insure there is a VP ready to step in to the role of president should the need arise.
More to the point, what is really the difference between someone who was voted in by those you voted in, vs. those appointed by those you voted in? Both seem to be abstracted from the people that they represent and serve.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!