Posted on 02/25/2006 3:00:55 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4
Why?
nothing like facts!
Get the facts first. There is no excuse for not using your browser, do a search, and educate yourself. All this conflict is based upon the lack of factual information.
You'll have to repost that refutation, if it does indeed exist outside of your own overactive imagination.
I think the problem is the premise that this is something so vitally important. Maybe this analogy will help. Imagine that the contract for running airport operations at three major airports is up for bid. All that means is the administrative requirements for running will change hands. But the FAA will still run the control towers and set (and enforce) all the rules and regulations for all flying operations there. The TSA will still be responsible for passenger security operations and screening baggage. And the aircraft flying into the airport will still have to comply with FAA/ICAO regulations. In other words, the security and regulations involved in airport operations haven't changed a bit, regardless of who is responsible for running the airport. What has changed? The folks responsible for the very big job of maintaining the infrastructure and running support operations of a very large airport. Everything from selecting which restaurants will be able to operate within the terminals to keeping the runways clear of snow.
Now why should the President of the United States have an immediate requirement to know whose job that is? He is responsible for security operations. But those aren't changing. What is changing are the shoe clerks who keep the place operating.
Butch up, cupcake. Relief is in that little red x at the top of your screen on the right.
On August 1999, Impeached-and-disbarred-former-President Clinton commuted [aka pardoned] the sentences of 16 members of the FALN Puerto Rican violent terrorist group. (Their hobbies include explosives and firearms.)
The pardoning of these terrorists was opposed by the FBI; however it was supported by former President James Earl Carter, Jr. (the weakling who gave away the Panama Canal).
Hillary Rodham, who wants to be your president, has not been asked by the MSM if she is aware of just who are our allies in the war against terror.
.
Insightful...as always.
For some reason a lot of people have gotten it into their heads that Pay Less Shoes not only runs the mall, it's in charge of mall security.
thank you for the ping.
I found this revealing. "The Attorney General and Public Prosecution offices of Abu Dhabi indicated that they are not interested in US criminal justice training given that the UAE criminal justice system is based primarily on shari'ah or Islamic criminal law."
NOT INTERESTED! And no doubt there is much more about american law they find revolting. No doubt they find infidels revolting. I wonder if any of our proponents of this deal can define "infidel" under islamic-shari'ah law?
My understanding is that an infidel is anyone not converted or born to islam. Correct me if I am wrong.
And finally, what shall be the fate of an "infidel" under islamic shari'ah law?
Ha. You stole my line about you!
"i will try to find out if ISP's in dubai are allowed to host pro-israeli web sites. i suspect they can't."
I can tell you now with confidence from the research we have done that they cannot.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP): CBPs mission is to prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the United States by eliminating potential threats before they arrive at our borders and ports.
CBP uses intelligence and a risk-based strategy to screen information on 100% of cargo before it is loaded onto vessels destined for the United States. All cargo that is identified as high risk is inspected, either at the foreign port or upon arrival into the U.S.
Coast Guard: The Coast Guard routinely inspects and assesses the security of U.S. ports in accordance with the Maritime Transportation and Security Act and the Ports and Waterways Security Act. Every regulated U.S. port facility is required to establish and implement a comprehensive security plan that outlines procedures for controlling access to the facility, verifying credentials of port workers, inspecting cargo for tampering, designating security responsibilities, training, and reporting of all breaches of security or suspicious activity, among other security measures. Working closely with local port authorities and law enforcement agencies, the Coast Guard regularly reviews, approves, assesses and inspects these plans and facilities to ensure compliance. Terminal Operator: Whether a person or a corporation, the terminal operator is responsible for operating its particular terminal within the port. The terminal operator is responsible for the area within the port that serves as a loading, unloading, or transfer point for the cargo. This includes storage and repair facilities and management offices. The cranes they use may be their own, or they may lease them from the port authority.
Port Authority: An entity of a local, state or national government that owns, manages and maintains the physical infrastructure of a port (seaport, airport or bus terminal) to include wharf, docks, piers, transit sheds, loading equipment and warehouses.
Ports often provide additional security for their facilities.
The role of the Port Authority is to facilitate and expand the movement of cargo through the port, provide facilities and services that are competitive, safe and commercially viable. The Port manages marine navigation and safety issues within port boundaries and develops marine-related businesses on the lands that it owns or manages.
A Layered Defense:
Screening and Inspection: CBP screens 100% of all cargo before it arrives in the U.S.- using intelligence and cutting edge technologies. CBP inspects all high-risk cargo.
CSI (Container Security Initiative): Enables CBP, in working with host government Customs Services, to examine high-risk maritime containerized cargo at foreign seaports, before they are loaded on board vessels destined for the United States. In addition to the current 42 foreign ports participating in CSI, many more ports are in the planning stages. By the end of 2006, the number is expected to grow to 50 ports, covering 90% of transpacific maritime containerized cargo shipped to the U.S.
24-Hour Rule: Under this requirement, manifest information must be provided 24 hours prior to the sea container being loaded onto the vessel in the foreign port. CBP may deny the loading of high-risk cargo while the vessel is still overseas.
C-TPAT (Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism): CBP created a public-private and international partnership with nearly 5,800 businesses (over 10,000 have applied) including most of the largest U.S. importers -- the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT). C-TPAT, CBP and partner companies are working together to improve baseline security standards for supply chain and container security. (We review the security practices of not only the company shipping the goods, but also the companies that provided them with any services.)
Use of Cutting-Edge Technology: CBP is currently utilizing large-scale X-ray and gamma ray machines and radiation detection devices to screen cargo. Presently, CBP operates over 680 radiation portal monitors at our nations ports (including 181 radiation portal monitors at seaports), utilizes over 170 large scale non-intrusive inspection devices to examine cargo, and has issued 12,400 hand-held radiation detection devices. The Presidents FY 2007 budget requests $157 million to secure next-generation detection equipment at our ports of entry. Also, over 600 canine detection teams, who are capable of identifying narcotics, bulk currency, human beings, explosives, agricultural pests, and chemical weapons are deployed at our ports of entry.
"I believe I started this discussion by asking you if your knew that DPW would not be running our ports...as you claim?Do you know?"
This is so clintonista similar to the meaning of 'IS' we all now have to redefine "running" for the portly challenged.
Of course they will be running it. At least they believe they will even if you don't. That's why they gave 6.8 billion for the portly challenged.
LOL! Someone trying to hide behind Clinton when the truth is at issue. You folks have been reduced to even funnier new lows.
"Joseph King, who was special agent overseeing terrorism for the U.S. Customs Service until 2003, said "there is an absolute increase in risk.''
King said ports are already poorly secured, insisting he could bring anything "from heroin and coke, to machine guns ... to a nuclear device -- and I could get it through the port.''
Apparently you believe you have more experience than Dr. King regarding our strategic ports? But I trust him and his personal experience while serving in critical national security positions more than I trust you in this case.
And Dr. King is trustworthy and Tommy Franks is a traitor?
I noticed that your friend disappeared. He suddenly realized that DPW won't control any ports, as he thought/claimed, and is begging JR to let him change his vote.
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.