- #71
edward
- 62
- 166
Edward said:He who controls the ports contols security.
russ_watters said:No. That is not correct. Primary responsibility for security is in the hands of the US Coast Guard. And that includes oversight of the physical security of the facility itself - not just the water.
You are correct Russ. I change that to: He who controls the ports has the opportuntity and means to do just about anything conceivable.
I would love for the Coast Guard to have the funding it needs to do it's job. It does not. The larger container ships now carry over 5,000 individual containers. That is a lot to be inspected, and we currently can only cover about 6% of the total. I think that it is customs who do the actual inspections in conjunction with the Coast Guard who provides an armed presence if necessary.
But since it is physically impossible to inspect every container we must fall back on those who control and manage the loading of each container, and the handling of all containers to insure security. DB ports also owns a number of facilities in Asia which load and ship containers to America. As I said before this leaves them in control of both ends of the shipments, and I have a problem with that.
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2005/02/21/daily19.html
http://www.feer.com/articles1/2006/0601/free/p005.htmlA House of Cards
Ostensibly, the flurry of U.S. government initiatives since 9/11 suggests substantial progress is being made in securing the global trade and transportation system. Unfortunately, all this activity should not be confused with real capability. For one thing, the approach has been piecemeal, with each agency pursuing its signature program with little regard for other initiatives. There are also vast disparities in the resources that the agencies have been allocated, ranging from an $800 million budget for the Department of Energy’s Megaport initiative to no additional funding for the Coast Guard to support its congressionally mandated compliance to the ISPS Code. Even more problematic are some of the questionable assumptions about the nature of the terrorist threat that underpin these programs.
Last edited by a moderator: