Doug Kanter wrote:
"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
. ..
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
...

Port Operations is not part of our national security, I would hate to
think we have turned over national security to a bunch of Longshoreman
and a company whose responsibility is to unload freight as quickly as
possible. The national security of our ports is and should be the
responsibility's of US Custom and Homeland Security.
Did you read the article by Clark Kent Ervin, in which he said there *is*
some overlap between port management and security. Which part of the 5th
paragraph do you not believe, and why don't you believe it?

(Clark Kent Ervin, the inspector general of the Homeland Security
Department from 2003 to 2004, is the author of the forthcoming "Open
Target: Where America is Vulnerable to Attack.")
Clark is recommending changes to protect America and his recommendations
needs to be reviewed, no matter who owns the freight companies. If there
is a weakness in our system, it won't take very long for terrorist to take
advantage of it. They don't need to own a freight line to take advantage,
and we should not have holes so big that the owner or employees can take
advantage of the holes.

Fine, but you are in love with this, which you said earlier - you keep
saying it: "Port Operations is not part of our national security". Ervin,
who knows more about this than you or I, says otherwise. Do you doubt what
he says? If you do doubt what he says, explain why.


Erwin knows more than I do. We should never turn over national security
to Longshoreman and a company whose priority is to move fright as
quickly as possible. The threat exists no matter who owns the fright line.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************