OzOne wrote in message ...
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 05:12:37 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:


OzOne wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 01:14:08 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:



Eaxactly my point.
Every non US citizen is subject to the most rigorous scrutiny yet 95%
of containers are left untouched....homeland security is a sham.

Let me play the devil's advocate here for a moment: So we've
established
that examining incoming containers is not feasible. For that reason, is
it
reasonable to simply ignore all other aspects of homeland security that
ARE
feasible, such as clearing individuals for entry?

Max

T's feasible....just look at the number of people employed to check
baggage, people and crdentials at every airport in the US.
Thing is, putting that same number of people into checking containers
has little political advantage because Joe Public won't see the work
being done and be able to wrap himself in that warm fuzzy security
blanket.


Have you ever looked at a shipping container packed full of, say, boxes
with
electronics? There might be literally hundreds or thousands of cardboard
cartons in a single container packed wall-to-wall, floor-to-ceiling. How
does an inspector check each carton to be sure it contains what the label
specifies? A single carton could contains plastique or the makings of a
dirty bomb. Are you going to open each and every one? Some containers
are
packed with loose items, and would be even more difficult to inspect.
From
a cost effectivity standpoint, it isn't feasible to inspect the contents
of
every container entering this country.


Ever thought that the level of personal inspection has lulled most
passengers into a very false sense of security so they are now not on
the lookout for stuff happening onboard?

I think about it every time I fly. But there is little or nothing the
average passenger can do if he spots something or someone suspicious once
airborne. Getting lulled into a false sense of security has obviously
helped the airlines avoid a plunge into the abyss of financial ruin. Most
of them, anyhow.

If, however, we abandon the personal inspections, what prevents a repeat
of
9/11?

Max


Max that's my point...smoke an mirrors and personal inspections are
there to make Joe Public feel as if there's something happening..where
in fact there is no way of protecting the US against an attack

Joe Public isn't as easily fooled as you might choose to believe. The vast
majority of us are fully aware that the measures currently taken by HS are
but a finger in a 12 foot hole in the dike. I have yet to speak with anyone
who actually believes we are even modestly secure now, thanks to measures
taken.

Most of feel we have a somewhat lessened likelihood of becoming part of an
airborne bomb now. And most of us hope that the current measures may, if
only in a very small way, thwart or complicate some attempts at terrorism
here. And we hope that such measures make it more difficult for terrorists
to infiltrate and function stateside. But we are not deluded, and neither
should you be with respect to our expectations. Everyone I know fully
expects future attacks of some nature.

Realistically our greatest asset against terrorism is the relative lack of
money on their part. Al Qaeda has hundreds of millions of dollars at its
disposal, but that's but a drop in the overall ocean of money being spent to
combat terrorism. Al Qaeda will always be financially challenged.

Max