"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.")

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.


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

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

"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.

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.

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

"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message
...

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

Longshoreman aren't the issue. They wield enough power to shut down any port
in this country. Ervin said the operator will be in charge of hiring OTHER
employees who are not longshoreman, and whose job will involve security that
is NOT PROVIDED BY CUSTOMS & COAST GUARD. That's the weakness. If you think
that a night security guard can't be paid to look the other way for 15
minutes, you are crazy.

Among other things, members of congress want to know what kinds of
background checks will be done on employees. Anyone who thinks it's unfair
for them to ask this question is a complete idiot.

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:24:37 GMT, "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.")


Doug, if Customs folks and crane operators pee in the same toilet there is
some overlap. *What* overlap? You are trying to make it sound as though
they are the same function. They aren't.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:24:37 GMT, "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.")


Doug, if Customs folks and crane operators pee in the same toilet there is
some overlap. *What* overlap? You are trying to make it sound as though
they are the same function. They aren't.

Never mind, John. Sorry to disturb your reverie.

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 18:35:29 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:24:37 GMT, "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.")


Doug, if Customs folks and crane operators pee in the same toilet there is
some overlap. *What* overlap? You are trying to make it sound as though
they are the same function. They aren't.

Never mind, John. Sorry to disturb your reverie.


No problem. I'm glad to see the shining of the light.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************