Terrorism attack on California power grid
- Thread starter NightHawkeye
- Start date
- Aug 18, 2012
- 20,878
- 17,231
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
It's potentially a "dress rehearsal" for a broader attack on utilities...but that's as far as I would go....
If terrorism was the motivation for this particular act, the perpetrator would have made sure visible explosions were seen from the 101....and possibly take credit for the attack with an ominous threat....
If terrorism was the motivation for this particular act, the perpetrator would have made sure visible explosions were seen from the 101....and possibly take credit for the attack with an ominous threat....
Upvote
0
Our terrorists is getting dumber. What's even terrifying about this? 'Goons connected to Al Qaeda knocked out power for 30,000 Bay Area residents this afternoon. A utility service spokesman stated they expected to restore power for all customers by this evening.' A good windstorm is more terrifying than that.
Upvote
0
- Jun 9, 2012
- 6,488
- 3,399
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
[serious];64989328 said:
I agree with your first point. What struck me about this event was the description of how the perpetrators just sort of melted away into the night when the police began arriving. This suggest both training and practice, as speaking from experience I know night retrograde actions, especially without leaving much of a trace, are not something just any common vandal or hood rat can pull off.
Upvote
0
THe problem is that if it works there are a couple dozen "key" substations that serve much larger portions of the grid. The other night on NPR one person interviewed noted that this COULD be far more devestating if it were done to a more key substation and at a time when there was a bigger draw on the grid (summer, for instance).
It's sobering that a coordinated attack using relatively crude means (guns vs hacking) could take out a big chunk of the grid. Hit a few places in SoCal and suddenly you have many millions without power.
Upvote
0
Vylo
Stick with the King!
- Aug 3, 2003
- 24,732
- 7,790
- 43
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
Considering a couple tree branches and a computer glitch took out power for 55 million people, terrorists attacking several power stations simultaneously could actually be pretty bad.
Upvote
0
I'm still confused about how this counts as terrorism. Knocking out the power grid would definitely be an inconvenience and cause hardship. But it's not terrifying. It lacks the psychological effects of effective terrorism. At best you're still only gonna be as terrifying as a good windstorm.
There are much easier targets that will do much greater real and psychological damage. Some shmuck with a couple college classes in fire behavior and a box of road flares could easily burn down large swathes of LA and kill a bunch of people. Why real terrorists haven't done this yet I don't know. Perhaps even that lacks the Hollywood-style theatrics they get with explosions and suicide attacks.
There are much easier targets that will do much greater real and psychological damage. Some shmuck with a couple college classes in fire behavior and a box of road flares could easily burn down large swathes of LA and kill a bunch of people. Why real terrorists haven't done this yet I don't know. Perhaps even that lacks the Hollywood-style theatrics they get with explosions and suicide attacks.
Upvote
0
- Aug 18, 2012
- 20,878
- 17,231
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
There's no doubt utilities in general are a soft target, especially in the West where power lines, gas pipelines and water canals transverse hundreds of miles across wilderness areas....
Last edited:
Upvote
0
If Al Qaeda, for instance, wanted to cause havoc they could field a few "teams" to knock out the powergrid in SoCal and then claim credit (or just wait for the winds to do the work and claim credit...whatever). The point being that a terror act doesn't have to be a big explosion.
I'm guessing you don't live in California, especially in the desert south, amirite? A knock on the powergrid is going to be a HUGE deal. In fact, arguably causing more harm than 9/11.
Hmmm, considering that we deal with wildfires down here all the time that's not going to look a lot different from most other fire seasons. Not really "terrifying" (by your measurement stated earlier).
Again, terrorism doesn't HAVE to include explosions. Crashing the grid for one of the largest metropolitan areas on the planet would be a pretty impressive feat and get a LOT of attention.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Doesn't this strike you as rather feeble and impotent. After 9/11 we saw terrorists as cunning adversaries who could kill thousands and strike at major symbolic targets without us even having the time to react. If the best they can pull off these days is taking the power out they've been seriously downgraded.
Seriously? A short interruption in your power grid > thousands dead and iconic skyscrapers collapsed? Seriously?
You go get a few guys who've studied fire behaviour and give them each a pickup and a box of road flares on a hot fall day with the Santa Anas ripping. I guarantee you SoCal has never seen a firestorm like that.
Not really. Nor the attention that terrorists want. You don't inspire much fear if the best you've done in a decade is damage a few substations.
Upvote
0
LOL. Sorry no. Causing blackout in one of the highest populated areas in under 15 minutes which could take DAYS to correct and cause MASSIVE disruption to our economy is hardly a downgrade.
Oh, sorry, but here in Southern California our hospitals use ELECTRICITY as do our traffic lights and our WATER SYSTEMS. It is also very HOT here in the summers and as stated NUMEROUS times already, if this were to happen during peak load in summer in SoCal it would be VERY dangerous for COUNTLESS THOUSANDS OF OLDER PEOPLE.
And why do you think that it would be "short disruption"? The disruption in 2003 took a couple DAYS to re-establish. And that was due to a software bug related to re-routing power.
Imagine if the INFRASTRUCTURE for routing the power (ACTUAL PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE) was destroyed? Can't just hit the "reset" button.
Really? Never seen? You mean unlike the countless wildfires ripping through Cali as we speak? Or the one that came within a mile of my home a few years back? Never seen?
Huh.
Oh, sorry, again, I thought you were reading these posts. My bad.
Upvote
0
RedDead1981
Prayer is beautiful when it's sincere
So you don't think that little omitted bit about the FBI not seeing this as terrorism right now is relevant? Now bringing that up is being intolerant? :o
I just think that a discussion should be based on all of the facts, and not just the ones that supports what the OP wants to believe. I find it to be a tad unethical to have left such a critical piece out when it comes to such a serious subject. It isn't like we're talking about an obscure mountain town in Afghanistan. There are more than a few members here in this forum who live in California. If we're discussing what may have been a terrorist attack, it's not fair to them to leave out the part where the FBI says they don't think it is one (at this time).
But I guess that makes me intolerant.
Upvote
0
RedDead1981
Prayer is beautiful when it's sincere
Lets compare who is saying it's terrorism, and who is saying it probably isn't...
It's terrorism!
-Jon Wellinghoff, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission when the shooting took place
-Mark Johnson, a retired vice president at PG&E
-An anonymous internet poster
Yeah, we can't say with 100% certainty but right now we don't think it's terrorism
- The Federal Bureau of Investigation
I know which one I'm going to take more seriously when I decide whether to get scared.
And since this is a political forum and politics will inevitably enter into this...
And these are the two key pieces of information that we need in order to determine whether this is terrorism or just vandalism.
What's the political purpose? Who is being coerced and by whom? You don't know and neither do I. You wouldn't even have to have specifics - as long as we knew there was some political purpose we might be able to call it terrorism. But we know nothing of the sort, so labeling this a terrorist attack is irresponsible.
It's terrorism!
-Jon Wellinghoff, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission when the shooting took place
-Mark Johnson, a retired vice president at PG&E
-An anonymous internet poster
Yeah, we can't say with 100% certainty but right now we don't think it's terrorism
- The Federal Bureau of Investigation
I know which one I'm going to take more seriously when I decide whether to get scared.
And since this is a political forum and politics will inevitably enter into this...
ROTFL ... I know why you focus on me, Carlos.
But, again, the OP is about an electric substation which was subjected to a very specific targeted attack ... not an act of vandalism. The only unknowns are the identities of the attackers and their motives. The lack of identity and motive does not diminish either the severity of the attack or the fact that the attackers knew how to target the substation for maximum effect.
And these are the two key pieces of information that we need in order to determine whether this is terrorism or just vandalism.
Wiki said:
What's the political purpose? Who is being coerced and by whom? You don't know and neither do I. You wouldn't even have to have specifics - as long as we knew there was some political purpose we might be able to call it terrorism. But we know nothing of the sort, so labeling this a terrorist attack is irresponsible.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
XB3LI3V3RX
Animal Lover
- May 8, 2013
- 908
- 53
- Faith
- Pentecostal
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
RedDead1981 said:So you don't think that little omitted bit about the FBI not seeing this as terrorism right now is relevant? Now bringing that up is being intolerant? :o
I just think that a discussion should be based on all of the facts, and not just the ones that supports what the OP wants to believe. I find it to be a tad unethical to have left such a critical piece out when it comes to such a serious subject. It isn't like we're talking about an obscure mountain town in Afghanistan. There are more than a few members here in this forum who live in California. If we're discussing what may have been a terrorist attack, it's not fair to them to leave out the part where the FBI says they don't think it is one (at this time).
But I guess that makes me intolerant.
Who ever said I was speaking to you? I don't remember ever mentioning you, so why are you getting all defensive? I wasn't calling you intolerant, so that whole post was completely worthless.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Vylo
Stick with the King!
- Aug 3, 2003
- 24,732
- 7,790
- 43
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
Both me and my father work in utilities, he works for a major power company. You would be shocked how fragile our power infrastructure is, particularly in the northeast where technology is ancient (storms don't take stuff out as frequently as in the southeast and midwest). If the person did some homework, they could do very major damage.
Upvote
0
That's fine. The FBI and other government agencies are frequently accused of downplaying the threat of terrorism.
That is interesting. I was expecting you to accuse the do-nothing TEA partiers of blocking the needed infrastructure improvements, but I see that it was the Democrat controlled Senate which scuttled the needed improvements. Thanks for pointing that out.
Doesn't really matter.
At this point the vulnerability is exposed ... and can be made use of unless safeguards are implemented.
Not sure what good calling them irresponsible is ...
It seems to me they have acted with good and honorable intentions.
Upvote
0
RedDead1981
Prayer is beautiful when it's sincere
Then who, pray tell, were you calling intolerant? Carlos? There were only a few people participating in the thread at that point, so it's a pretty short list.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
RedDead1981
Prayer is beautiful when it's sincere
You mean not flipping out and calling everything bad 'tairrism'? I'd rather a measured response then a kneejerk reaction.
Oh? Why not? Words have meanings. If we throw all that away, we can call anything terrorism. There was a crazy guy that went on a stabbing rampage in my state a few weeks ago - terrorism! That bank got robbed - terrorism!
It's not a word that should be used lightly. I remember hearing Beck on the radio flipping out that they weren't calling the Somali pirates 'terrorists'. It cheapens the term when you overuse it. Kind of like 'hero' after 9/11.
Great. I agree the vulnerability should be fixed. Lets fix that. But that still doesn't make it terrorism.
I'm not sure what good labeling this terrorism does. You don't know if it is or isn't and unnecessarily throwing the 't-word' around in a highly populated area is throwing gas on a fire.
I would not be surprised if those two of the three I listed were doing just that. I don't blame them, just pointing out that I trust the FBI a little more given that it's their job to investigate this kind of thing.It seems to me they have acted with good and honorable intentions.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
