Posted on 02/28/2006 2:51:19 PM PST by ekwd
On the off chance that you missed C-Span's "Washington Journal," here are excerpts from an appearance by Jayson Ahern, Assistant Commissioner for Customs and Border Protection, and Coast Guard Rear Admiral Thomas Gilmour on that program, which were helpfully forwarded by the White House:
HOST: Jayson Ahern, ... There are more than 300 ports of entry in the U.S., are they safe? CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER JAYSON AHERN: I believe they are. Certainly, we're on a path of continuous improvement, but the many layers we've put in place since the 9/11 tragedy I think has strengthened our port security in the United States tremendously.
HOST: Well, walk us through those layers. Since 9/11 what has been put in place?
AHERN: Well, I'd be happy to walk through. I think one of the key concepts we put in post 9/11 was actually forward deploying our officers overseas and beginning our interdiction efforts overseas before they event hit the U.S. ports. We want to have our U.S. ports be one of the last lines of defense in the war on terrorism versus one of the first.
We begin with a regulation we put in place over two years ago, the 24-hour rule, where we have the ability to get all the manifest information submitted electronically from the carrier 24 hours in advance of waiting in a foreign port. We then score that for risk at a national targeting center where we have intelligence information and an expert rule based system to score the container shipments for risk before they're even placed on board the vessels.
We also have, 42 foreign ports now have Customs and Border Protection officers there that actually work with host country nation counterparts be it custom authorities in that location or the law enforcement authority that has jurisdiction over the ports. They actually go out and use large scale x-ray systems and radiation detection capabilities to resolve the risk, as well. And then upon arrival in our shores here in the United States, we still have our officers who are trained and highly skilled at doing what they're doing, as well as a considerable amount of technology to include radiation and x-ray containers capabilities at our ports here in the United States as well. …
HOST: Admiral Gilmour, explain for us what the Coast Guard's responsibilities are when it comes to port security.
U.S. COAST GUARD REAR ADMIRAL THOMAS GILMOUR: Well, I like to explain it that we have responsibility for the vessels that carry the cargo, and the facilities that house the cargo. And Customs and Border Protection has responsibility for the cargo itself. I think we work very well together and I would just like to say, since 9/11 we have a piece of legislation, the Marine Transportation Security Act, that gives us wide responsibilities to not only provide security for the facilities, but also for all vessels that come into U.S. ports. We get a 96-hour advance notice that provides us with the cargo manifests and with all crew members that we can run through a database. And in addition, as the vessel comes in we track it with automated identification, and through our VTS on its transit through the ports. But we can decide who, with a risk-based matrix, who we board outside the port and who we board once we get into the port.
HOST: Jayson Ahern, explain for us what you think are maybe myths out there in the public or misperceptions or misconceptions that they have.
AHERN: Sure, I think a couple of things. First in the last couple of weeks with the Dubai Ports World transaction here in the United States, one of the things I've seen consistently misrepresented is that this foreign company was going to come in and take over ports and port security. First off, that's not true. Port authorities are still run by state and local and county governments consistent with standards set forth by the United States Coast Guard, and also the companies that would be involved with this transaction are actually purchasing another foreign company that actually runs or leases a terminal within that port. So I think that's one of the first distinctions is making sure that the public understands this is not a foreign company coming in and taking over the United States' ports or running a port or setting security standards. They're merely coming in to lease a terminal within that port, which is just one of the facilities that operates within a port.
These are pretty basic points, but are nevertheless unknown to most Americans
EXCITE POLL:
Do you think a special counsel should be appointed to investigate the Bush administration's domestic eavesdropping program? (Related AP article)
45%
Yes 45% => 1154 votes
52%
No 52% => 1346 votes
2%
I'm not sure 2% => 52 votes
Exite.com
Need to be a subscriber to vote.
Current number of voters: 2552
That should be "the Washington Journal" instead of "Newsmakers" in the source. Pardom me.
He said that with a straight face?
You're pardomed. ;^)
"He said that with a straight face?"
You have differing info?
Okay. I'm old, I have bad eyes and was tired. Pardon my Pardom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.