"Only one of the six U.S. ports in question even has a working radiation

[understandinglife]

... detector!

<clip>

Every month since the attack on the World Trade Center, thousands of containers bound for American destinations have been loaded onto ships in the ports of Dubai, Karachi, Beirut, Port Said, and even Aden. These ports are vulnerable to infiltration by Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups -- Dubai probably the least so. And when these ships arrive in U.S. ports, only four to five percent of the containers they deliver are subject to any security search at all. The New York Times this morning reported that "There is virtually no standard for how containers are sealed, or for certifying the identities of thousands of drivers who enter and leave the ports to pick them up..."

Yes, Dubai served as a way station for the shipment of nuclear materials by notorious Pakistani nuclear engineer Abdul Qadeer Khan's network, and no, he didn't have to worry about being apprehended there. But loading a chemical, biological or nuclear weapon into a container in Dubai wouldn't require that the terminal at the U.S. end be under Dubai ownership. Only one of the six U.S. ports in question even has a working radiation detector!

<clip>

(former Senator Gary) Hart said at lunch that the real issue is actually our financing of terrorism through our dependence on imported oil -- but the President, even during his recent tour of renewable energy facilities, has carefully refrained from repeating his pledge to kick our addiction to Middle Eastern oil. And so far there's been no major media or political outcry at his abandonment of that promise -- the one that really matters.

It's frankly a mystery. When the Sierra Club polled Americans last summer, we found overwhelming public support for major new investments in port security and in chemical and nuclear safeguards. As yet, though, neither politicians nor the media have seemed willing to respond to that hunger for real safety and genuine security.

More from Carl Pope's article entitled "What You Don't Know About Dubai Might Hurt You" at:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carl-pope/what-you-dont-know-about_b_16306.html

Carl Pope was appointed Executive Director of the Sierra Club in 1992. A veteran leader in the environmental movement, Mr. Pope has been with the Sierra Club for nearly thirty years.

If we'd use our brains instead of our smart bombs we could actually reduce the real threat to our National Security rather quickly.

Just imagine the consequence of every American not using their gas/diesel personal vehicles one less day a week than the currently do, for starters.

With a tiny bit of leadership, we could significantly impact the role of oil in every aspect of our lives rather than remaining slaves to it, and to those who benefit from our enslavement.


Peace.

[Rosco T.]

1. NOT 6 ports.... 21 ports....

http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20060223-051657-4981r

[understandinglife]

2. The title refers to the originally cited six ports and the fact that ...

... only one of them has a radiation detector screening containers.

Thank you for the link and, yes, we now know the deal extends to (at least) 21 US ports.


Peace.

[babylonsister]

3. More outrage here. K & N! nt

[understandinglife]

4. Yes, indeed.

Peace.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[TahitiNut]

6. If each private vehicle were banned from the roads 1 weekday per week

... it'd impact the working poor far more than affluent families with 2 or more cars. If that inequity were addressed, it'd be pretty easy to ban vehicles from the highways with the last numerical digit (and all-alpha vanity plates) of 0 or 5 on Monday, 1 or 6 on Tuesday, 2 or 7 on Wednesday, 3 or 8 on Thursday, and 4 or 9 on Friday. This might result in a reduction in consumption of gasoline (and diesel) of around 3-5% I'd guess.