BRIAN ROSS REPORTS
- Like Jay-Z + the Beatles, But Worse
- Update: Help for Homeless Children
- Bush Era, Revised -- and with More Barbeque
- The Tax Woman Cometh
- Paging Mr. Stanford: Antigua Called
- Who Are You Calling Partisan?
- Update: IRS Won't Use Private Debt Collectors
- But Is It Art?
- PMA Scandal a Sore Point for Dems in 2010?
- Down in Flames
- A New Mystery for RNC Chief
- PMA Clients Were Big Givers
- Raided Lobby Firm Still a Force on Capitol Hill
- Stanford Update: Another $143 Mil Found
- Cheney, Hooked on Controversy
TOP BLOTTER CATEGORIES
- Abramoff Lobbying Scandal
- American Al Qaeda
- Avian Flu
- Beirut Hospital Out of Gas
- Cheney
- CIA
- CIA Secret Prisons
- D.C. Madam Affair
- FBI
- Federal Air Marshal Service
- Homeland Security
- Hurricane Katrina
- IRS
- Mark Foley Internet Scandal
- Millionaire Sex Scandal
- Nigerian E-mail Scams
- Norman Hsu, Clinton Fundraiser
- NSA: Wiretapping
- Osama bin Laden
- Payola
- Pharmacy Investigation
- PMA
- Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert
- Stanford
- Steele
- Terror
- Troopergate
- U.K. Airline Terror Plot
- U.K. Bombing Attempts
- Wen Ho Lee
- William Jefferson
- Zarqawi
« Previous | Main | Next »
Toxic Gas Purchase Raises Cloud of Doubt
February 13, 2008 6:31 PM
New York City cops were able to purchase toxic chlorine gas with such ease and no proof of identity that it raises grave concerns over how well-protected the public is from the potential terrorist use of chlorine in a chemical attack, officials said Wednesday.
To obtain liquefied chlorine, the New York City police set up a fake business and purchased the chemical online -- and accepted delivery in a highly developed area -- all without proof of identity.
A video of the security exercise, "Operation Green Cloud," was shown Wednesday to private sector executives and members of the media to demonstrate the ease with which the chemicals were acquired.
And New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said that a copy of the video had been sent to the Department of Homeland Security two weeks ago.
DHS is drafting regulations for security at chlorine manufacturing plants, and Kelly said he would hope that the new rules included "strict know-your-customer" protocols.
The video's narrator explained why, "Our objective is to defend the City in the most comprehensive, effective and innovative manner possible. Over the past year, the NYPD Counterterrorism Bureau has intensified its investigation of potential terrorist threats involving weapons of mass destruction: chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear. What follows is a report on one recent NYPD investigation into the terrorist risk posed by one particular type of chemical weapon. The chemical we looked at was chlorine, a common industrial chemical that also presents grave toxic inhalation hazards. The investigation was called Operation Green Cloud. The primary objective was to assess the ease or difficulty with which a terrorist inside the United States could acquire large quantities of chlorine without being detected by law enforcement or intelligence agencies. Our principal finding was that, at the present time, few, if any, barriers stand in his way."
In his remarks, Kelly noted that al Qaeda in Iraq has made several attempts to use chlorine outdoors in an effort to increase casualties caused by their bombs.
To date the use of chlorine gas has not added to IED fatalities, however, when it is well properly used on a battlefield or in a confined space, the effects of chlorine can be lethal.
In the video, Elana DeLozier, an intelligence research specialist at the NYPD Counterterrorism Bureau notes, "In World War I, the German Army released 168 tons of chlorine on French troops. Chlorine was used several more times in World War I, causing thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of casualties."
More recently, in the first half of 2007, terrorists and insurgents in Iraq used chlorine in conjunction with truck bombs on at least a dozen occasions, afflicting hundreds of people with chlorine-induced symptoms. To date, these chlorine attacks have only occurred in Iraq and have not produced mass fatalities.
Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.
February 13, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (3)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Get your facts straight please:
1) Chlorine is not toxic, it just displaces air or oxygen due to its weight, which may cause suffocation if you breathe it in
2) Chlorine is heavier than air, if you were to dump it in any area, it would fall to the ground and spread as long as it does not encounter a confining barrier, creating a thin layer on thr ground, not a "cloud" as your article suggests.
This being said, it is necessary that sales of any chemical that can be used to create explosives or harmful by-products such as hydrochloridric acid, be restrained to well-known, legitimate buyers.
Posted by: treblig56 | Feb 14, 2008 6:18:08 AM
In response to what treblig56 wrote
" Get your facts straight please:
1)Chlorine is not toxic, it just displaces air or oxygen due to its weight, which may cause suffocation if you breathe it in. . ."
Well, if what you say is true, why does every country in the free and not so free world consider Chlorine a TIH/PIH (Toxic Inhalation Hazard/Poison Inhalation Hazard.
Are you disputing the absolute fact that chlorine, in the presence of moisture, mixes with that moisture to form Hypochlorus and Hydrochloric Acids?
Are you disputing the fact that prolonged exposure to that environment can cause sever lung injury, pulmonary edema and even death?
Are you seriously trying to convince readers that the moisture in ones eyes, ears, nose, mouth, and lungs exposed to chlorine greater than a short period of time, now formed into acid would only displace oxygen?
Not toxic?
How do you define toxic?
How about "capable of causing injury or death especially by chemical means"- Dictionary.com
What is the basis for your criticism of this article.
For your reading pleasure I attached a link to OSHA's website referencing chlorine.
Good luck!
Next time try and be a little more informed before you are so critical.
Posted by: Rich | Feb 15, 2008 11:41:05 PM
treblig56,
I've worked in emergency response to chemical incidents since 1980. I'd be interested to know where you got your information, because your statements are TOTALLY FALSE.
Posted by: John C | Mar 10, 2008 4:53:08 PM
Post a comment
