Posted on 04/14/2002 5:58:25 PM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
On September 11, Americans discovered that a civilian airline jet could be turned into a flying bomb. Now, the respected Economist magazine is warning that container ships could be the next terrorist vehicle.
Each year, more than 7,500 commercial vessels make approximately 51,000 port calls, off-loading six million loaded marine containers in U.S. ports. Current growth predictions indicate the container cargo will quadruple in the next 20 years.
One serious worry is that terrorists might use one of these ships to transport and then explode nuke in a major U.S. port -- perhaps crippling the U.S. economy as the nation's stream of commerce stops in a self imposed protective embargo.
And the experts agree there is no silver bullet to prevent such a catastrophe.
Already, the U.S. Coast Guard is employing highly sensitive equipment to check ships for radioactive material. But such checks are not fool-proof, nor can the Coast Guard scan all ships for the potentially lethal material.
Another concern is that the terrorists may use an oil tanker as a way to collapse the U.S. economy.
Noted journalist Arnaud de Borchgrave, in a special "Off the Record” briefing to NewsMax readers warns that terrorists have already talked and bragged about being able to explode a fully loaded oil tanker as it passes through the Straits of Hormuz.
Such a disaster, de Borchgrave says, would close the narrow straits, and send the world economy into a tailspin. For more on de Borchgrave’s revelations, click here.
But just how likely are such attacks?
Ominously, an al-Qaida manual discovered in the United Kingdom said seaport workers could make good recruits.
Furthermore, bin Laden is said to own a fleet of freighters, already put to use smuggling explosives into Africa for the 1998 embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya.
Other unhappy factoids: the Philippines, home to more than one militant group, is the world's biggest crew supplier. And Indonesia, headquarters for many radical Muslim groups, comes in second at supplying crews for the nettlesome container ships.
But the worst news is that the vulnerability of the critical supply line has already been illustrated -- in spades. Italian authorities recently found a suspected al-Qaida member inside a sealed container headed for Canada.
Only Two Percent Inspected
With the stowaway were mobile phones, false credit cards, plane tickets and certifications identifying the man as an airplane mechanic.
Presently only about two percent of containers arriving in the U.S. are inspected. And according to recent Hill testimony, even if that level reached 100 percent, the danger would not be neutralized because if the infiltrated cargo even arrives at the U.S. port it may be too late.
One possible scenario: an electronic data system that would allow U.S. authorities to know in advance the origin, contents and shipper of each container – before it is ever loaded at the point of shipment.
This would allow U.S. authorities to target the most vulnerable or suspicious shipments, possibly rerouting and inspecting them before they arrive in the U.S.
One important fault in this plan is apparent, however, say the experts. Digitized or not, presently, the maritime industry's documentation is unreliable.
In one instance, U.S. Customs audited 181 ships and found 96 had more or fewer containers on board than identified. What’s more, bills of lading describing the containers’ contents also were incomplete or falsified.
And erroneous or not, the volume of paperwork is mountainous. The movement of each container is part of a transaction that can involve a score or more different parties: buyers, sellers, inland freighters and shipping lines, middlemen, financiers and governments.
A single transaction can crank out 30-40 documents, and each container can carry cargo for several customers, even further multiplying the swamp of documents.
Expensive Gadgets
In the meantime, good intelligence and a handful of expensive gadgets are serving on the front lines of port security. The current mainstay: a $1.2 million per copy gamma-ray machine.
Loaded on trucks, the machine's long white arm makes the device resemble a electric company's cherry picker. Dubbed "VACIS”, the acronym for Vehicle and Cargo Inspection System, the machine sprays containers with gamma rays, producing a blurry X-ray-like image of what's inside. It takes skilled and experienced operators to make sense of the images.
But even with VACIS, the logistics of expanding the token inspections are daunting. According to the Charleston, S. C. customs office, its two dozen inspectors can’t possibly keep up with the crushing volume of cargo pouring through the southern port’s terminals.
"There are days when we have 10 ships coming in, and they might be spread across several terminals,” explained one customs official.
The same hectic scene is duplicated at all the nation’s ports where staff levels have actually decreased over the years, despite the fact that container volume has doubled since 1993.
So what can be done to help make ports safe?
Part of the answer may rest with new technologies. Ancore Corp. of Santa Clara, Calif., for example, is making new machines that use laser-like beams of neutrons that can identify trace amounts of drugs or explosive residues.
Being considered: having the U.S. push its borders out and pre-screen containers in specially created security zones before they are loaded on to ships in foreign ports. Done with the cooperation of the foreign authorities, American inspectors would be on hand to aid local officials.
Robert Bonner, the head of the US Customs Service, wants to kick off such a plan by focusing on the top ten container ports that trade with the U.S. and funneling as many containers as possible through approved gateways. The top ten would include Hong Kong, Rotterdam and Shanghai.
Ideas From Private Sector
Private enterprise has its own ideas. In recent congressional testimony, Wayne Gibson, senior vice president of Global Logistics for the Home Depot suggested, "a well-controlled supply chain can serve as a foundation upon which security measures can be built.
"While we source from over 40 countries and 268 vendors and 555 factories, 80 percent of that comes from five countries and 40 vendors. We had over 50,000 POs inspected in 2001. And 100 percent of our shipments were inspected.”
And the Coast Guard is hard at work figuring a solution. Captain Anthony Regalbutto, chief of port security for the United States Coast Guard recently told Congress, "We're trying to establish two centers -- one on the East Coast and one on the West Coast.
In those fusion centers will be representatives from the various government agencies, including Customs and INS and Office of Naval Intelligence and others, that will be able, then, to look at the information that's coming in and then pre-screen the information.”
Regalbutto is also looking at or prototyping a canine program for the Coast Guard for the first time. "That's something that we want to prototype and we think that, again, with our marine safety and security teams as they go on board ships, particularly if we have intel information that we suspect one ship, hopefully the dogs will be able to help us in that sensing ability.”
Who's in Charge
One Hill witness, however, voiced concern that the salient issue must be a hammering out of just who is in charge. Christopher Koch, president and chief executive officer, World Shipping Council: "Customs is presently modernizing and adjusting its information systems, which will cost over $1 billion and is planning on using their systems as part of the Container Security Initiative. Are the Customs systems what the government will use?
"The government should establish one system, not competing information systems. If the advanced cargo information system used for security screening is not Customs' job, the White House or the Congress should make that clear immediately because Customs thinks that it is and is acting accordingly.”
And, finally, who’s going to pay the tab?
Basil Maher, president and chief operating officer of Maher Terminals, Inc., Jersey City, N.J., suggested to Congress that legislation must not assess fees or tax terminal operators or carriers for costs properly borne by the federal government.
"If any additional federal revenue needs to be raised for cargo transportation security purposes, it should come from existing federal revenue streams relating to cargo, which uses this system of ships, terminals, rails and trucks,” Maher said.
One thing all agree on: security procedures must be implemented in a manner that does not disrupt terminal operations and the $400 billion in commerce it supports.
A simple GPS trigger could then detonate the container bomb, 20 times bigger than OKC, when it's in downtown Chicago or passing over the Golden Gate Bridge.
This will happen.
But as I said above, look at the bright side: the islemmings will have a few decades to adapt to drinking oil and eating sand.
Stay Safe !
Not to mention, their investments outside their oil infrastructure is in the West almost totally.
It makes one wonder why this has not already happened. If Al Qaeda and the like really want to disrupt the world economy, then they could follow your script or numerous others involving dirty bombs, bio-weapons, etc. They could perform such attacks in several financial centers (i.e. NY, Chicago, SF, London, Bonn, Tokyo) simultaneously or in rapid succession. This would ensure all-out panic rather than just a dip in equity markets as the 9/11 attacks did. There would be no safe havens. If I put my "tin foil" hat on I could contemplate taking out the WTC so that I could profit from shorting the insurance/re-insurance industries while staging a diversionary, lesser attack on the Pentagon.
After Mecca and Medina are taken out they can return to being the lovely oasises they once were. Places to get water for your camel and sheep with date palms waving in the gentle desert breeze.
That's why I think the container route is more likely. OBL and others do actually control shipping lines, they are familiar with the ins and outs of moving containers from port to port.
It would be a simple matter to set up a proprietary front company in a target city to deliver the container to, after "laundering" it through several intermediary ports. The container bomb (as powerful as several Daisy Cutters) could be driven by a suicide truck driver after the terrorist cell takes delivery, but this would bring a greater risk of interception by the FBI and tracing back to the origin for retaliation.
OTOH, the bomb could be triggered remotely with a simple GPS trigger set to detonate along the train route of the container. For example, the trigger could be set to explode the bomb exactly on passing a certain longitude, which would cause it to go off in the center of a critical east to west bridge, or on a rail line in the center of a city. All of the electronic interfaces are off the shelf GPS to boat autopilot items available in any marine catalog world wide. A child could rig this up. The COLE bombers for example could do it easily.
The 40 foot long ANFO bomb could be prepared anywhere in the world in a warehouse before entering routine shipping lines. The needed tonnage of nitrogen fertilizer being assembled would be 100% undetectable in a foreign country without a lucky intell break, (far luckier than the one we did NOT get pre 9-11).
There would be no exotic "precurser chemicals" needed (as in chem/bio weapons) which might hopefully send up a red flag to Western intelligence. Just ANFO. And no radiation to detect, and no intell trail on the movement of stolen or Iraqi uranium or plutonium.
The "beauty" of this type of attack is its utter simplicity and difficulty in detection.
The "cure" for this type of attack would involve shutting down world trade to a tiny trickle for a long period while new inspection methods were created and brought on line. The shutdown would cause a global economic meltdodwn as all ships inbound to Western ports went unloaded for weeks or longer.
I kindly ask anyone to point out where I have missed some vital protection which would negate this type of attack.
I really hope I am wrong here.
The USCG was overstrectched in 1999 and things have just gotten worse since then.
Stay well - stay safe - stay armed - Yorktown
It's a classic case of nasty creeps living in a glass house throwing pebbles at the giant who owns the rock quarry.
This is a great quote in your post #19. I've sent that one along to some friends of mine who I know will appreciate it, along with another of your classics:
Radical Islam is an insane death cult, and 'moderate' Islam is it's Trojan Horse.
Stay safe, Travis. San Diego has to be on the prospective targets list.
But a dozen or a hundred ANFO bomb containers could be set out on the worlds oceans with GPS triggers, and it would take stopping world trade utterly to track them down before they exploded in our cities while being delivered.
Even simpler would be a suicide bomber aboard a ship carrying an explosive cargo. He merely defeats the safety systems and boom. As an example take an LNG tanker where the valves are opened so that the LNG is released to the air and then the bomber flicks his bic. It is as cheap and simple asit gets. large quantities of LNG are exported from the Arab nations and an Arab aboard such a vessel would attract no attention.
Stay well - stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.