Security fears about infiltration by terrorists

Washington Times ^ | 02/22/06 | By Bill Gertz

[notes2005]

Several Bush-administration security officials expressed concerns yesterday that terrorists could infiltrate seaports through a United Arab Emirates company that is vying to manage six U.S. ports. Intelligence and security officials opposed to the deal with Dubai Ports World said ports are vulnerable to the entry of terrorists or illicit weapons because of the large number of containers that enter U.S. territory, regardless of who manages them. A Persian Gulf state such as the United Arab Emirates could provide an infrastructure for terrorists to penetrate U.S. security as part of a major terrorist operation, the officials said. One long-term worry is that al Qaeda terrorists will attempt to smuggle a nuclear device into the United States through a port via a shipping container. Allowing a Middle Eastern company to manage key ports "would be like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse," said one security official, who, like most other critics, spoke on the condition of anonymity. Another official said the problem is not the company but its location in a region rife with Islamic terrorism. "You have to be concerned about a firm from that part of the world managing the ports," this official said. "They are more vulnerable to compromise and penetration by terrorists, even if they are just managing the port." Company officials would be briefed on security procedures and countermeasures that, if compromised, could allow foreign terrorists to get through various screening procedures, the official said. The Coast Guard is responsible for port security, tracking ships, crews and cargo and search vessels based on intelligence. There is no cohesive hiring or screening process for port workers, however.

[oyez]

Our government is doing one Hell of a job.

[Capt. Tom]

Mr. Rumsfeld said both he and Gen. Pace were unaware of the port-deal security issue until the weekend.

They both must have just returned from a Mars flight. - Tom

[cripplecreek]

I'm not any more concerned about infilltration than I already was. (quite a bit given our border situation) I'm more concerned that we can't seem to resist sending money to terrorists.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

Tell one of our most important allies to hit the road? I think not!

[Jimmy Valentine's brother]

Let's see - A British Company is selling an American subsidiary to a UAE company. This bad because now terrorists will try to smuggle a nuclear device in a container as opposed when the Brits owned the company.

"Port operator's 'just make sure every ship and every truck is unloaded,' said Mike Bowden, president of International Longshoreman's Association Local 1459 in Mobile Ala."

Looks to me like a case of bigotry to me.

[SkyDancer]

Since only 5% of the containers are checked it would have been real easy for a terrorist to load one with a bomb ... hasn't happened yet ... this Dubai place is anti-terrorist themselves and they're the one's who will run the ports ... BTW, the Chinese manage the Panama Canal ..... the one that Jimmah gave away ....

[cripplecreek]

"the one that Jimmah gave away ...."

Jimmah supports this one too.

[plain talk]

could infiltrate seaports through a United Arab Emirates company that is vying to manage six U.S. ports.

Too general a statement as to be meaningless. How would they infiltrate if that company just owns a British Company and all the workers at the port itself are American. I'd like too see a specific example of how this could occur.

[plain talk]

Right. Seems an easier way is for a terrorist to come across the border and hire on as a dock worker and somehow hamper security operations of specific cargoes by Coast Guard / Customs.

[Travis McGee]

Don't worry, Bush is on the case. He wouldn't approve the deal, if he wasn't convinced the security will be air tight.

Just like he has done on the border since 9-11.

[isrul]

Administration security officials, Washington Times, Bill Gertz. Just a bunch of Democrat stooges. Rumsfeld clueless. No problem. "W" is in charge. Nothing to worry about. Limbaugh and Carter are on board. As a practitioner of the "religion of peace" once said to some apprehensive Americans; "just stay quiet and you will be O K."

[redgirlinabluestate]

Rush just made an interesting point. The UAE airliners fly in and out of our airports everyday! Couldn't they just as easily be infiltrated and fly into buildings instead? The point being that we are never going to be 100% safe. We either trust our security measures which are in place or we do not. Apparently, the Coast Guard is stationed in the UAE and inspects the tankers before they leave their point of origin. The WH's PR on this has been woefully inadequate and it appears the majority of Americans have no idea how the ports are run. Perhaps, if they did, this firestorm would have never erupted. Our first chouce would be that no foreign entities operate our ports, but apparently they are all run by foreign entities! Now what?

[hedgetrimmer]

FYI

[jpsb]

More anti-bush propaganda by the ultra liberal Washington Times and that's pinkco commie Gertz

[jpsb]

More anti-bush propaganda by the ultra liberal Washington Times and that pinkco commie Gertz

[Stellar Dendrite]

have you seen this

To: STARWISE; Mo1; onyx

It turns out that an anti-Israeli foundation run by the crown prince of Dubai owns the very deed to CAIR's headquarters located almost in the shadow of the U.S. Capitol. The foundation has held telethons to support families of Palestinian suicide bombers.


http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:BgAAE3vM-q8J:www.discoverthenetwork.org/Articles/Z-CAIR.htm+cair+dubai&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3&client=firefox-a

1,052 posted on 02/21/2006 4:47:58 PM CST by hipaatwo

[Stellar Dendrite]

ping

[goldstategop]

Yep. For the life of me, I can't see how they missed this angle. I can't. And they're trying to defend something most Americans think doesn't pass their "smell test." Yep, getting the UAE involved was a self-inflicted gunshot blast to the Administration's solar plexus and it stubbornly insists on compounding the political damage. Amazing!

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

[Marine_Uncle]

It appears as usual, me a prime example I post prior to investigating an issue.
Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co.'s stock holders had in 2/06 simply accepted a deal for P&O to be bought by Dubai Ports Worlds (DPW).
Now, P&O presently manage the US ports involved in this issue. I would asked everyone. If P&O is no longer in the position to offer the services, then who is going to do it? We must seperate out the functions rendered. P&O where did not provide the security portion of the operation. They are responsible for the managment, e.g. loading/unloading of containers and their source/destinations.
All we would see if a change in hands at the mother company level as who payes American workers, negotiates those workers salaries and benifit programs via. the local unions.
I think some of us are being confused by the L/MSM at what is factual and what is not.
If P&O are bought by DOW then the top managment changes. Not who runs our port operations. Surely all the operations are handled by American based local businesses under the guidance of federal and state laws as how our ports must be managed.
I sense strongly another dishonest attempt by the L/MSM and others to cloud the issues. As for Rummy being on board. Come on! He is responsible for the military not port security issues. His name never should surface in this issue. It tells me either people are clueless, or they are deviouse.