The Liberal Media
The dread liberal media strikes again. In today's Pravda on the Potomac, an editorial really skewers the other side.
When a House committee voted this spring against an amendment that would have required all cargo containers bound for this country to be individually inspected in their ports of origin, Congress temporarily put to rest what could have been yet another hyped-up wave of politically motivated anxiety about American port security. Although the House later passed a bill that provides extra funding for nuclear screening and other measures, Democrats vowed to bring up the inspection issue again -- and ran advertisements around the country attacking Republicans who oppose it. Before the "inspect every container" mantra becomes a national war cry, it's important to point out that this is a terrible idea. [Emphasis added]
Yes, that's right: Democrats have been playing partisan politics, daring to promote security at our ports. If the Democrats think that it's bad only 5% of containers are inspected and propose to rectify the situation, why, that's ipso facto a "terrible idea." There are perfectly good reasons why the 5% rate is acceptable:
...while some promising technologies are available, none is perfect, and all of them require a human being to analyze the scans. This not only takes time but also presumes the existence of thousands of trained scan readers around the world. In the absence of such workers, U.S. port and customs authorities examine information about each container -- where it's coming from, which shipping company is carrying it -- and determine whether it is risky enough to merit inspection, either here or abroad. In practice, this results in inspections of about 5 percent of all containers.
Why tinker with success, especially since the 5% rate is the best and most efficient rate possible? A higher rate would "take time" and presumably raise shipping costs, and we can't have that in this global economy. Guesswork will do just fine.
But wait, the editorialist asserts that a little tweaking wouldn't hurt:
...Homeland security officials could do more. Only about half of incoming containers are subjected to a radiation scan, a number that should rapidly be brought up to 100 percent, as the new House bill requires. Ports are also vulnerable because drivers and dockworkers are not thoroughly screened. Raising the number of U.S. inspectors in foreign ports could also make the inspection system safer.
See, the Republican House is on the case. Their bill for 100% radiation scans makes sense and will keep us safe. Oh, and we should hire more inspectors, yeah, that too. But inspect all the containers? Nah, just a political ploy by those Democrats who don't understand security.
But "inspect 100 percent of containers" is a slogan, not a solution, and we hope lawmakers resist the temptation to use it in the election season to come.
It is to laugh.
Unless of course, a container slips through that results in another attack. Then it is to cry.
When a House committee voted this spring against an amendment that would have required all cargo containers bound for this country to be individually inspected in their ports of origin, Congress temporarily put to rest what could have been yet another hyped-up wave of politically motivated anxiety about American port security. Although the House later passed a bill that provides extra funding for nuclear screening and other measures, Democrats vowed to bring up the inspection issue again -- and ran advertisements around the country attacking Republicans who oppose it. Before the "inspect every container" mantra becomes a national war cry, it's important to point out that this is a terrible idea. [Emphasis added]
Yes, that's right: Democrats have been playing partisan politics, daring to promote security at our ports. If the Democrats think that it's bad only 5% of containers are inspected and propose to rectify the situation, why, that's ipso facto a "terrible idea." There are perfectly good reasons why the 5% rate is acceptable:
...while some promising technologies are available, none is perfect, and all of them require a human being to analyze the scans. This not only takes time but also presumes the existence of thousands of trained scan readers around the world. In the absence of such workers, U.S. port and customs authorities examine information about each container -- where it's coming from, which shipping company is carrying it -- and determine whether it is risky enough to merit inspection, either here or abroad. In practice, this results in inspections of about 5 percent of all containers.
Why tinker with success, especially since the 5% rate is the best and most efficient rate possible? A higher rate would "take time" and presumably raise shipping costs, and we can't have that in this global economy. Guesswork will do just fine.
But wait, the editorialist asserts that a little tweaking wouldn't hurt:
...Homeland security officials could do more. Only about half of incoming containers are subjected to a radiation scan, a number that should rapidly be brought up to 100 percent, as the new House bill requires. Ports are also vulnerable because drivers and dockworkers are not thoroughly screened. Raising the number of U.S. inspectors in foreign ports could also make the inspection system safer.
See, the Republican House is on the case. Their bill for 100% radiation scans makes sense and will keep us safe. Oh, and we should hire more inspectors, yeah, that too. But inspect all the containers? Nah, just a political ploy by those Democrats who don't understand security.
But "inspect 100 percent of containers" is a slogan, not a solution, and we hope lawmakers resist the temptation to use it in the election season to come.
It is to laugh.
Unless of course, a container slips through that results in another attack. Then it is to cry.
posted by Diane at 4:08 AM
1 Comments:
You see, this idiot is repeating the talking points directly from the Administration. The real problem is not machinery, or people. The real problem is Corporate badgering. WalMart put it's foot down to container inspections, telling Bush it would take too damn long to inspect each container. Therefore, America will just have to "think safe because George says so". Same thing goes for air freight when the only thing being examined is the paperwork at the local Customs office. Rubber stamp! Bam! Good to Go!
Okay, it's because 9/11 changed everything. LOL
Post a Comment
<< Home