Security seals on the London Underground
Here's the latest in my irregular series of photos from my travels in the world: the "security seal" tape that's appeared over all the fire-extinguisher boxes in the London Underground. Because no terrorist would be so fiendishly clever as to counterfeit a sticky label. That would require, you know, an inkjet printer and stuff! Link
the latest
latest episodes
Not to be intentionally contrary or anything, but the trusty Brits have been at this "terrorism" gig a lot longer than us flabby Americans (not that I believe in the vague concept of terrorism or anything...)
In other words when British anti-terrorism units (and Scotland Yard) do their thing, they usually do it thoroughly and they do it right.
I remember when I used to live in London and oftentimes during my commute I would see fully machine gun-outfitted men patroling in front of banks and government offices (same difference)
Whenever I'd see these gun-toting tough-ass police I inevitably would think to myself:
TOTO, I"M NOT IN AMERICA ANYMORE
Unless you have the full story regarding the "security tape" what good is this photo doing anyone, other than supplying this message board with a touch of US arrogance.
cheers
The Brits have been fighting terrorism for a long time, it's true, but under Blair (and Thatcher, for that matter), a "Keep Calm and Carry On" attitude has gradually given way to ZOMG ZOMG TERRISTS GONNA KILL US ALL -- viz: shooting Brazilian tourists on the tube, arresting geeks for looking at their mobile phones' screens while boarding the tube, filling the country with CCTVs, banning protest near Parliament, instituting a national ID card scheme and taking away all the trash cans on the tube (terrorists hate litter, don'tcha know!).
As to US arrogance: as a Canadian living in London, I don't really understand what makes you think that either label applies.
I believe it's more of a tamper-evident seal — removing it leaves those blue stop sign patterns behind. I might speculate that it's not so much terrorist-proofing as a way for them to be sure no meddling kids have taken the extinguishers out for a joy ride that might leave them dangerously depleted...although the half-dozen residue prints that are already there seem to confuse the issue. A single set of blue stop signs would seem to communicate "Hey, someone was here monkeying around" pretty effectively.
I'm British, and I worked in (US) Congress on work experience about 10-12 years ago. One day we had a Library of Congress seminar which included someone billed as a CIA terrorism expert.
He was explaining how technically sophisticated and advanced the IRA were - the phrase I remember was "They tap the police's phone lines". Although I lived in London and had no desire to be blown up or sympathy for their cause, I was surprisingly proud that 'our' terrorists were the best in the world.
Now, of course, we have these hopeless jokers who drive into an airport with a car full of petrol and fail to even blow themselves up. How far we've fallen. I blame Blair for that, too.
Sorry, Cory - I didn't know you're Canadian.
I'll keep that in mind when I read future posts of yours, especially whenever you post commentaries concerning US policies of various kinds...unless you're a naturalized US citizen(?)
Your "ZOMG ZOMG TERRISTS GONNA KILL US ALL" description of how things are going these days seems to be a worldwide phenomenon - but remember that there's nothing new under the sun and hardcore patriotism and the dead-end "THEM OR US" mentality have existed since human beings rose quietly from their easy chairs (in their re-financed caves) and began having cocktail parties and political fundraisers.
As for little pieces of blue tape on fire extinguishers, I'm sure you know of and have noticed the mega-myriad of high-quality graphic signage (stern warnings and such) meant for public consumption in not only the often-confining Underground but on nearly every square inch of London public wall space...as an artist I tend to love the warning signs (in general) and I appreciate their graphic beauty...and of course there are many, many books about London Public Transport graphics, etc
Signs are meant to either be obeyed or disobeyed and I wouldn't worry too much about pieces of blue tape. After all, there's global warming and copyright management to be concerned about.
As for the CCTVs and related surveillance equipment, George Orwell (and even proto-futurists like Jonathan Swift and William Blake) warned us abut such things. It appears to me that most people ("the public") could care less what signs are up and who's in government...making many philosophers and futurists (and science fiction writers) a lonely, tempermental lot.
thanks
hopefully I didn't exceed post limits
love the blog!
@jere7my: I suspect that (a) the point of the stop signs is that they're then missing from the label (ie, it's left with transparent "stop" signs), and (b) the serial number helps avoid the people with inkjet printers.
Don't you know The Underground(tm) forbid the taking of photographs on The Tube(tm) without authorisation? Lawbreaker!
I'm not a US citizen -- naturalized or otherwise.
"taking away all the trash cans on the tube (terrorists hate litter, don'tcha know!)"
As far as I can remember, I think this was because the IRA has a tendency to put explosive / incendiary devices in the bins - a pretty big deal.
(correct me if I'm wrong, but) there's no reason to think that security seal is related to anti-terrorism specifically.
It's more likely to highlight casual vandalism -- in case some drunk people decide to open the cabinet one night & nick the fire extinguisher.
Yes, and clearly the IRA were so fixated on trash-cans that once they were gone, the bombs stopped going off. Because the only good place to put a bomb is a trash can.
Check out the restrooms on the next international flight. I have seen similar security tapes attached to various access panels. Now I'll have to look out for them everywhere. I knew it would end would come wrapped in adhesives.
A rubbish bin is a very good place to put a bomb. It's out in the public space, anything can be put in it without being conspicuous, bins and their contents are rarely examined and putting stuff in bins is common and unremarkable. Also, removal of rubbish bins goes back way beyond Blair, to the Thatcher era at least, if not before.
Personally, I always wondered why they didn't just redesign bins in railway stations and so forth with six inches of concrete surrounding them so that any blast would be contained and projected upward. They'd also be proof against the more common forms of vandalism.
"Yes, and clearly the IRA were so fixated on trash-cans that once they were gone, the bombs stopped going off. Because the only good place to put a bomb is a trash can."
I think think the logic was that bins were the only areas (perhaps bar somehow hiding it on the track) where such a device could be left totally concealed within a station. If you look at a tube station you'll be pushed to find a space where anything could be left out of view. Also worth remembering that this was back in the days before suicide bombers.
As mentioned abov, this isn't anything terrorist related, it's so the staff can tell if an extingusisher has been removed from the box.
If it has the chances are that it's not full and will need replacing/refilling.
Incidently, a few years ago LU decided to take all the fire extinguishers off their trains. It seems that the only thing they'd been used for in years was being thrown through window by vandals... never actually putting out fires!
Nelson, I know there have been bins designed to be bombproof and channel the blast upwards, but I'm not sure how many have actually been deployed around the world. One of the other dangers of non-bomb-proof bins is that they're a ready source of shrapnel. You don't need to pack the explosives in a bag of nails or a pipe because the bin fragments will take care of that for you. That's just one more reason that a bomb left in a trash container is more dangerous than hidden under a bench etc.
Changing tacts,
Assuming arguendo Cory was a US citizen, how exactly would that matter? If he was making fallacious commentary then why is the issuer of his passport important? If his commentary was valid, would you ignore it because of citizenship alone?
Either an argument (regarding US policy or otherwise) is sound or it isn't. Someone's citizenship status may give us a very marginal insight into their potential motivation or bias, but it doesn't tell us whether their words are valuable or not. Discounting someone's argument because of where they were born or choose to live is textbook ad hominem.
Sorry to get riled about this (and I don't mean to get after you personally, Father Brown), I just see this kind of thinking a lot and it's starting to bother me.
Assuming arguendo Cory was a US citizen, how exactly would that matter?
Because we US citizens are despised around the world now. Thanks George Bush. Wait... Cory is not an American? ZOMG ZOMG TERRIST!!
The two simplest steps for bomb resistant containers are:
1) Make them out of very sturdy mesh. The blast goes out through the holes, but is weakened by the mesh resistance. Strong nested meshes are the best method for containing blasts. The open mesh also makes the interior visible, so that anyone can see the contents, which forces bomb makers to add a disguise of some sort.
2) Make the opening a difficult but usable shape. This is one reason that paper recycling uses narrow slots, etc. The slots are suitable for their purpose, but force any bomb to be an inappropriate or difficult shape. Usually the result is that any bomb that will fit through the opening is small enough that the mesh will greatly limit the damage area.
You see a great many such trash and recycling containers around the world.
Another approach that I have seen is the use of trash rings from which hang clear plastic bags. Again, these limit the possible bomb size and weight and ensure visibility. The vulnerability to vandalism and the weight limit make these less popular.
There's an automatic camera suspended from the ceiling over the middle of Old Street tube station. It pivots round every 20 seconds or so, and my first reaction to seeing this was "ZOMG, THEY'RE MONITORING MY EVERY MOVEMENT ON CCTV."
Then looking a bit more closely, I saw that it's actually a laser range-finder picking out little mirrors planted in the wall of the tube tunnel, one by one. The correct response was thus "ZOMG!! SUBSIDENCE!!1!"
Sabik wrote, "I suspect that (a) the point of the stop signs is that they're then missing from the label (ie, it's left with transparent "stop" signs)..."
It's a good theory, but I take issue with it: the stop signs left on the label would be backwards. The primary purpose would be the one that left you with readable stop signs, yes?
("Harrumph! This label says 'POTS'. Were you using it to label your cookware, young man?")
Don't you know The Underground(tm) forbid the taking of photographs on The Tube(tm) without authorisation? Lawbreaker!
Just worth catching this one in case anybody was dumb enough to believe it - there's no ban on taking personal photographs on the underground. What is banned is flash photography, because it can distract or blind the drivers. Professional photography or filming needs a permit, but from all reports the Film Office are both helpful and quick with sorting permits out.
The ban on bins in the tube is of course at odds with the fact that they are on buses and trains.
Given that their absence didn't foil the July 2005 bombers I'm not sure why we don't have them back and stop people piling drink cans on escalators and any flat surface.
Hmmm. I was expected trained aqueous mammals.
Bummer.
Just to add... not all labels are created alike. The labels could have some sort of validation/anti-counterfeit mechanism - like an RFID or DNA seal. ( There are a few firms that create custom DNA 'blends', along with security check markers, for counterfeit testing ). The pattern of previous leave-behind markings could also require certain placements.
I'm not saying any of those are being done, but there are options.
Other than that, I agree with everyone else -- what does a fire-extinguisher have to do with terrorism? Are the terrorists trying to steal/replace all of the fire extinguishers with blanks? Oh no!
The purpose for that seal is probably just for the fire-protection branch to easier check levels and use. Sure, someone could defeat that - but what would defeating it do?
This BB post does nothing but create FUD out of ignorance.
Or, better put:
S(*%, there was a tamper-proof seal on a bottle of Advil I bought yesterday. THE TERRORISTS could have bought an inkjet printer, planted WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION in my advil container, and put it back on the shelf just as new.
9/11
See ANYTHING WITH A SECURITY SEAL IS A PRIME TARGET FOR TERRORISTS.
The TERRORISTS HATE OUR FREEDOMS.
9/11
9/11
9/11
Seems this is a ripe target for pranksters-- simply make your own and place over everything, toilet seats, phone booths, mail boxes, trash cans, all those various "mystery" doors in the subway that lead who-knows-where . . . .
Think this has far more to do with health and safety checks to see if they've been tampered with - or at least discouraging all the Underground's fire extinguishers turning up being sold on street corners!
you Canadian-Americans see terrorism at every turn now!
Jere7my (#20): No, the transparent "STOP" signs on the label would be normally oriented unless you were looking at the sticky side of the label.
Given that their absence didn't foil the July 2005 bombers I'm not sure why we don't have them back and stop people piling drink cans on escalators and any flat surface.
Because then you would lack the proper attitude. The whole point is not to thwart terrorism but to use your fear as an excuse to drive more and more repressive laws. The objective is a heavily repressed authoritarian state. Terrorism is merely the means to that end.
For example, you remember the British Intelligence Officer who was discovered to have been deeply embedded in the IRA right? He wasn't just observing, he was leading, directing, encouraging. And he was just one, there were 65 in all. Here in the US the first bombing attack on the WTC was lead by an undercover FBI agent. Likewise he wasn't just monitoring, he was leading and helping the terrorists. Even going so far as to teach them how to mix the bomb, how to place it and providing the van.
But this is all just crazy talk of course. Your government loves you so very much. It would never harm a flea. No government would ever place biological agents in a subway system. They would never hire prostitutes to give LSD to unwitting strangers. They would never feed radioactive mush to poor black children just to see what happened.
As far as our governments are concerned, we are cattle.
Noen @28: Yes. Yes, it is crazy talk. Any crazy can think of a story involving the government and random-disaster-of-the-day, and lots of crazies do, but they're just stories if you don't have any evidence. Any story is just a story without evidence. If you read it in a novel, or hear it from a drunk at a bar, it's entertaining, but entertainment value does not equal truth.
I don't know why there's a need to make this shit up, since the lackadaisical approach of the US government to Al Qaeda prior to 9/11 is well-documented.
Regarding security seals on panels in airplanes, on a recent flight in Asia, even the side panels next to the seats had them. My young son (apparently bored with nothing better to do than cause an international security emergency or get us arrested) peeled one off and stuck it on his window.
Fortunately, I was able to peel the sticker off the window undamaged and stick it back where it belonged.
Security features like these are mostly just window dressing. They remind us of the dangers we face and reassure us that people in charge are doing something to take care of use.
(It's a lot like the equipment and procedures the airlines have in place for a so-called water landing. In the event of an actual attempt to land on the open sea, the plane will simply break up and sink, but no airline is willing to tell the public that it has nothing in place for an such an extremely unlikely event, no matter how useless.)
Yes, it is crazy talk. Any crazy can think of a story involving the government and random-disaster-of-the-day, and lots of crazies do, but they're just stories if you don't have any evidence. Any story is just a story without evidence.
Sure, I know that. On the other hand there is indeed evidence for some of what I said. I don't believe in the feverish dreams of the conspiracy theorists but I don't believe in the gov/media narrative either. So where does that leave the rest of us? Expressing my concerns is my way of trying to figure it out.
Labeling a narrative as "just a story" is a little disingenuous too. Science is "just a story" also, only backed up with evidence but what counts as evidence is itself fuzzy sometimes. We no longer believe that science is "Nature's own language" but where does that leave us? It's "narrative all the way down"?
To get back on topic what happened here is that Cory constructed a narrative about a security sticker. Then other commenters came along and added to it. "Are they right or wrong" is not a helpful question to ask. Better is "Does this narrative help me understand the world around me?"
My narrative lies somewhere between "We don't torture" and "The Illuminati/Free Masons/CIA control everything". Where exactly I don't know but I have a hunch there are some very bad actors in there. I bet there are even video tapes.
DGallardo (#30): A DC-9 ditched in the Caribbean in 1970, and 40 of the 63 on board survived. One advantage it had over most jetliners, though, is that with rear-mounted engines there were no engines under the wings to act as huge brakes upon hitting the water. The NTSB report says that the aircraft floated for approximately 10 minutes before sinking.
It's difficult to tell if the Ethiopian Airlines flight that was hijacked in 1996 would have had a successful ditching without the difficulty of fighting the hijackers while trying to land a fuel-less aircraft on the water. (That was also not "the open sea", unlike the ALM DC-9.)
CKD (#32): I stand corrected about water landings. I had mis-rembered what I read about this in Salon's "Ask the pilot" column. He in fact criticizes an article in the Economist which makes the point I made, writing:
FATHER BROWN (ME) SAID:
"Sorry, Cory - I didn't know you're Canadian. I'll keep that in mind when I read future posts of yours, especially whenever you post commentaries concerning US policies of various kinds"
I only said I'd "keep that in mind"...besides, no matter how much we try to convince ourselves that we Americans welcome and encourage outside participation in our American Way of Life, I reckon most people would agree that the only people who should be making policy decisions (and seriously discussing the ramifications of certain actions) for America ARE Americans.
Isn't this what a lot of people complain about when it comes to political and social goings-on in other countries? (for example US Imperialism and it's influence in nearly every country on the globe)
Whether it's a Canadian holding court on American issues or Americans (see GW Bush, Cheney, Kissinger, FDR, etc) interfering in specific global matters it's the same difference.
CKD wrote, "No, the transparent "STOP" signs on the label would be normally oriented unless you were looking at the sticky side of the label."
Oh, I see! That does make sense, then — the stop signs mark the thing that used to be secured with the tape to tell people that it was removed, and mark the tape as well so it can't be re-used.
I always thought that the "security seals" on airplanes were used to tape up loose bits of plastic and lock out overhead bins with damaged clasps.
Father Brown @34:
How many divisions does Cory Doctorow have? There is a difference between the two: Cory or any Otherplacian can only offer criticism, whereas Bush can lay waste to entire nations with just a scrawl from the presidential fountain pen. Keep a sense of proportion, Father Brown, otherwise we might mistake you for someone with their fingers in their ears going "Lalala, can't hear you!"
It was only recently that they put zip ties on the emergency equipment stashed on underground trains, a pity really as those blasting caps (mind your fingers) used to be great fun, er.. or so ive been told.
Right up to the point when you mentioned 9/11 Noen, you nailed it. Then, of course, you went off the boil somewhat. But really, you are right - it is all about keeping citizens in fear. The IRA gave up yonks ago in the UK but do we have bins back at stations? Erm, no. Must keep the commuter frightened. Remember that Ian Blair fellow, something to with being Commissioner of Police - said there were "hundreds" of Al? Kaeeeda! operatives on the streets of Britain? Well, these "hundreds of operatives" have managed one day of mayhem between them and a botched, clumsy attempt at setting fire to the doors at a Scottish airport - not criminal masterminds then, and really not people we need concern ourselves with unduly. Really, we are better and more trustworthy than the awful people in power would try and have us believe.
NELSON C SAID:
"Keep a sense of proportion...otherwise we might mistake you for someone with their fingers in their ears going "Lalala, can't hear you!""
Nice use of slightly out-of-date catch phrase!