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.
In terms of the complexity of the operation needed to build and send them, the project would be many times simpler to coordinate and conduct than 9-11, which also surprised most analysts.
Since the price of ANFO is negligile, there is no point in sending out small bombs, when "super daisy cutters" are just as easy to build as small ones. The real physical damage to a city or major bridge would be so enormous from the explosion of a 40 foot long containerized super daisy cutter that huge economic damage would be unavoidable, day or night, with or without a high body count.
but from a security stand point having a bomb traveling about unescorted and not set to explode for such a long time makes the risk of detection high. Why? Millions of anonymous cargo containers are traveling the world's oceans rails and highways every day.
The bigger the bomb the higher the risk since more people will have to be in on the production and transport of it. Not really. A half dozen men could set up an ANFO production line in a small warehouse, filling drums with mix and then stacking them into a container. When the container is filled they call the trucking company and the shipping line which are totally unwitting. They think the container is full of olive oil drums etc.
The terrorists, from past practice, would rather lose a few men to premature detonation, or post detonation capture than risk having their bomb plots be detected or foiled. That too argues against using containers for a large operation.I don't see why. They pulled off 9-11 after training 20 hijackers in the USA including ten or so 757 pilots. Filling drums of ANFO in a warehouse in the Sudan or Pakistan and loading them into a cargo container would be a snap by comparison.
Now that we have very clever, very evil maniacs running loose on the world stage determined to destroy the decadent West at all cost, I think actions like sending out containerized super daisy cutters are only a matter of time.
That brings us back to "nasty creeps who live in glass houses throwing pebbles at the giant who owns the rock quarry."
Throwing monkey wrenches into the running gears of the world economy is going to make the islemmings "persona non grata" in the civilized parts very fast. A disruption of world trade will mean a pinch in the USA and total disaster in the middle east, when those huge Saudi desal plants stop running, and the food ships from NZ and Australia and the USA stop arriving.
Provoking a world war with the West is simply suicidal for them. They have very few high cards. Oil we can get elsewhere or take from them. We can cut off their food and water in nothing flat, leading them to utter ruin in a matter of weeks.
I am convinced that the Islamic world is led by lunatics that want us dead. They are capable of executing well planned and effective thrusts against our cities and infrastructure... Perhaps not enough to defeat us, but enough to kill 10s or 100s of thousands, create panic and seriously disrupt the entire planet's economy.
I fear the time has come to stop trying to "negotiate" with bastards that lie, hate and break all agreements with "infidels?... It is time to defeat these bastards - big time. We should take them seriously - and deal with them seriously. We are nearing the point where a preemptive attack on a MASSIVE scale against these bastards will be necessary -- but I fear our "leaders" are waiting for the next shoe to drop before we respond as we should have on 9-11. The lunatics appear to have been given a "mulligan" and get to take another shot at us before we cold cock them... I hope it's not my city or children that die before we decide it's time kill those crazy bastards in large numbers and reduce their cities to glowing embers.
We have not yet responded correctly to the attack against America from the Islamic world. This IS a war of culture and religious domination.....we had better respond accordingly....
I fully expect more major acts of terrorism in America... There may even be fighting in the streets.....At least this time-- I wont have to travel 10,000 miles to shoot the bastards..
Semper Fi
Arabs On Star Trek
The Saudi Ambassador to the U.N. has just finished giving a speech, and walks out into the lobby where he meets his American counterpart. They shake hands and as they walk the Saudi says, 'You know, I have just one question about what I have seen in America.'
The American says, 'Well your Excellency, anything I can do to help you I will do.'
The Saudi whispers, 'My son watches this show Star Trek and in it there are Russians and Blacks and Asians, but never any Arabs. He is very upset. He doesn't understand why there are never any Arabs in Star Trek.'
The American laughs and leans over. 'That's because it takes place in the future.'
*******************************************************************
I agree that the islemmings are cruising for a bruising. Their 7th century worldview and blind obedience to an insane death cult has finally launched them on a collision course with the modern world. I also agree that we will probably have to give up a city before we cold cock them: pre-emptive strikes.... well I just can't see us going there.
But once they are hit, they will wilt and die as fast as a strangler vine on a tree, once the vines are all snipped at the bottom. They simply can't eat sand and drink oil.
As far as the islemmings in the West, they will be in for a very rough ride if they start using bombs on US soil and their tracks lead back to their (Saudi paid for) mosques and "cultural centers".
Ask yourself this: why are the Serbs so tough? Why were the Spanish conquistadors so tough in 1500? Why are the Russians so tough on Chechnya? If you have muslim neighbors, you either get VERY mean and tough, or you go down, either dead, or converted at swordpoint. There are no other choices, "peaceful coexistance" is not possible with the insane death cultists, who burn inside to wipe out all that is not muslim, from Christian churches to the Bamyan Buddhas.
"Radical islam is an insane death cult, and 'moderate' islam is its trojan horse in the West."
L
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.