Mmm'no. You were refering to this link:
http://www.gao.gov/htext/d03297t.html
As cited in this quote:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CptSternn
But wait, don't take the news, lets look directly at the testimony FROM CONGRESS LAST MONTH on this deal...
http://www.gao.gov/htext/d03297t.html
U.S. ports have programs in place to detect illegal fissile material
or nuclear weapons, but these programs are limited in several respects.
They focus on screening a small portion of total cargo as it enters the country, and they are carried out without the use of adequate detection aids, such as equipment that can scan entire containers for radiation. Efforts to target cargo for screening are hampered by the quality of information regarding which cargo poses the greatest risk.
Yeah, thats directly from congres last month and contridicts your argument 100%. The US government doesn't even buy what your selling. |
As I already mentioned, the release date on that link is 2002. You made information up again to benefit your own cause. Stop trying to weasel your way out of it too, because you also stated that the Bahamas were US territory - information you also made up (
and were subsequently called on). This is the problem with debating you, Sternn. You know you're wrong and you don't stop. There's such a long ass list of shit you've made up thus far in this thread alone. Let's not even get into all the information you made up about DP World (
i.e. they would be taking over security at US ports). Your track record is, quite frankly, embarassing.
Again, I urge you to read over the CURRENT report on this directly from Congress here:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06558t.pdf
Maybe you'll read it this time. We place radiation detection equipment of our own in other countries all the time, such as Uzbekistan, Bulgaria, and *gasp* the Bahamas. Because they scan shit there, that hardly means we're going to let it come into a US port and not get scanned. Bahamas is the same way. This detection equipment is strategically placed in foreign countries for the purpose of catching shit there. However, we have radiation detection equipment State-side as well, to catch shit ourselves in our own ports. If you read up on the Congressional report, you'd know this. Maybe you'll read it this time around. I'm not going to put money on it. I'll touch on DHS' proceedures after I get done with this:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CptSternn
And a U.S. military intelligence report, once marked "secret," cited Hutchison in 1999 as a potential risk for smuggling arms and other prohibited materials into the United States from the Bahamas.
Hutchison's port operations in the Bahamas and Panama "could provide a conduit for illegal shipments of technology or prohibited items from the West to the PRC (People's Republic of China), or facilitate the movement of arms and other prohibited items into the Americas," the now-declassified assessment said.[/i]
|
It's funny how you say I defend them. The Pentagon and State Department shelved both of the reports (
there were actually two, not just one, but the other only had to do with Panama), that the Associated Press now cite, to testify before Congress saying the company had no collaborative links to the Communist Govenment of China.
http://www.usconsulate.org.hk/ushk/o...1999/1022b.htm
"
We have also explored concerns that H-W is a front for the government of the People's Republic of China. We have found no information to substantiate that allegation."
In fact, I already addressed this issue earlier. I spoke about it, obviously since you didn't know anything about the issue at the time, you must have missed it. I'll go ahead and link you to it:
https://www.gothic.net/boards/showpo...1&postcount=16
I'll even quote myself, cause I know you have a hard time reading information that's not justifying your made up stuff:
"
Don't come to me with these two tiny, and suddenly popular, reports either. I'll throw official State Department testimony right back at you stating, "We have also explored concerns that H-W is a front for the government of the People's Republic of China. We have found no information to substantiate that allegation." Or statements from Rear Admiral Quigley stating that there is no indication that H-W operates for Beijing. Or statements from Maritime Operations Director Jorge L. Quijano. Go ahead and try. Because when those two reports were written, it came at the same time these statements were made and the State Department officially took the stance that there were no indications that H-W operates for Beijing."
Oh, and I'll also quote your APNews article to back most of this up as well:
"
The CIA currently has no security concerns about Hutchison's port operations"
So the CIA doesn't have a problem with them and the State Department and Pentagon scrapped these two minor reports for an official stance that the company posed no security risk back in 1999. Hmmm... Sounds like it's not just me that has no problem with these boys over in Hong Kong.
And to settle the proceedures, go take a look at DHS' website.
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interap...lease_0865.xml
It explains the layered defense plan, which includes the CBP, which scans shit in US ports, and the CSI, which is responsible for "
Extending our zone of security outward so that American borders are the last line of defense, not the first."
http://www.bis.doc.gov/News/2004/update04Kassinger.htm