Shocking confession of US customs officer: WMD found in U.S.

[MarxistMan]

SHOCKING CONFESSION OF A US CUSTOMS OFFICER: WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION FOUND IN THE UNITED STATES



JB580sKFZlo



SAN DIEGO -- 10 News was granted access to San Diego's seaport for a firsthand look at how Customs and Border Protection officers safeguard against weapons of mass effect.

"Given the open waterways and the access to the Navy fleet here, I'd say, absolutely, San Diego is a target," said Al Hallor, who is the assistant port director and an officer with Customs and Border Protection.

10News investigative reporter Mitch Blacher asked, "Do you ever find things that are dangerous like a chemical agent or a weaponized device?"
Quantcast

"At the airport, seaport, at our port of entry we have not this past fiscal year, but our partner agencies have found those things," said Hallor.

Customs and Border Protection officers clear 80 percent of all cargo before it enters the United States. Congress has mandated that they clear 100 percent of cargo imports by 2012. In San Diego, every cargo container is driven through a radiation detector before leaving San Diego's seaport.

"So, specifically, you're looking for the dirty bomb? You're looking for the nuclear device?" asked Blacher.

"Correct. Weapons of mass effect," Hallor said.

"You ever found one?" asked Blacher.

"Not at this location," Hallor said.

"But they have found them?" asked Blacher.

"Yes," said Hallor.

"You never found one in San Diego though?" Blacher asked.

"I would say at the port of San Diego we have not," Hallor said.

"Have you found one in San Diego?" Blacher asked.

The interview was interrupted before Hallor was able to answer the question.

Customs and Border Protection issued this statement after the interview:

CBP has not specifically had any incidents with nuclear devices or nuclear materials at our ports of entry. CBP is an all-threats agency. The purpose of many security measures is to prevent threats from ever materializing by being prepared for them. And, we must be prepared to stop threats in whatever form they do materialize at the border, whether it’s an individual or cargo arriving by land, air, or sea. Regardless of what the contraband or threat is, we’re being smart, evaluating, and focusing in on anything or anyone that is potentially high-risk.

We were able to show you first-hand one example of how we evaluate segment risk, inspect, etc. in the cargo environment by air and sea here in San Diego. This is one portion of the CBP mission, and hopefully gives you some examples of how much has evolved in the past decade, with the new technologies we have at our disposal. This, coupled with document requirements at the border, advanced passenger and cargo information, better information sharing, and many other measures help us to secure the border - and each measure doesn’t work individually or in a vacuum, but rather in the layered security that we were able to demonstrate one facet of.

See also Dail Mail Article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1356645/A-weapon-mass-destruction-U-S--Shock-confession-Customs-officer.html)






.

[MarxistMan]

By now, most American CNN and FOX news slaves are hiding under their beds. The fearmongers are laughing, ho, ho, ho!

Yeah, the army is on alert. Those who hate us for our values are coming, hear them marching, they with dirty bombs. They eat children, you know.

America is like a kindergarten. Everyone plays BOOO! Everyone is scared. Let's kill everyone else in the world before they kill us! Scared people are dangerous people.

They are easy to manipulate!


.

[NGNM85]

Just because this incident may have been a false alaram, and the mainstream media, especially Fox routinely engage in hysteria and fearmongering, doesn't mean there isn't a legitimate concern. After 9/11 there's really no debate that this isn't a legitimate threat. What's ridiculous is, to my understanding, for something like half what we spend annually on enforcing the absurd prohibition on cannabis, we could permenantly secure our ports against nuclear weapons. Of course, we could also sign the FISSBAN treaty, in which the United States is essentially the sole holdout, and, of course, change our foreign policy which has significantly increased terrorism in recent years.

[piet11111]

They cant even stop the smuggling of Marijuana all you need to do is put a nuke in a lead casing put that in a bail of pot and ship it and you are almost guaranteed to successfully smuggle it in.

[bricolage]

What's ridiculous is, to my understanding, for something like half what we spend annually on enforcing the absurd prohibition on cannabis, we could permenantly secure our ports against nuclear weapons. Of course, we could also sign the FISSBAN treaty, in which the United States is essentially the sole holdout, and, of course, change our foreign policy which has significantly increased terrorism in recent years.
You call yourself an anarchist but you are lending support to the most militarised state in the world, already operating heavily securitised borders to strengthen these very same controls?
And who is this 'we'? Who is 'us'?

[~Spectre]

Just because this incident may have been a false alaram, and the mainstream media, especially Fox routinely engage in hysteria and fearmongering, doesn't mean there isn't a legitimate concern. After 9/11 there's really no debate that this isn't a legitimate threat. What's ridiculous is, to my understanding, for something like half what we spend annually on enforcing the absurd prohibition on cannabis, we could permenantly secure our ports against nuclear weapons. Of course, we could also sign the FISSBAN treaty, in which the United States is essentially the sole holdout, and, of course, change our foreign policy which has significantly increased terrorism in recent years.


I'm glad you're at least associating with your fellow Nationalist Liberals and Conservatives.

[~Spectre]

Anyway this is fear mongering at its worst.

No group with the resources to get a nuclear device, would have any difficulty with the significantly less challenging task of smuggling one in. The fact that it hasn't happened is proof enough that the big bad al qaeda boogeyman doesn't have one.

[Nolan]

Why would it go through a port? Why wouldn't it just come in a small ship through some private dock somewhere?

And yes, if Islamic terrorism was that big of a threat, we would have had many attacks already, or at least many foiled attacks. Lone wolf westerners like individualist loonies with guns and school shooters are a much bigger threat, and they strike all the time.

[NGNM85]

You call yourself an anarchist but you are lending support to the most militarised state in the world, already operating heavily securitised borders to strengthen these very same controls?

And who is this 'we'? Who is 'us'?

You're completely misinterpreting what I said.

‘We’ in this context is Americans, as Americans ‘we’ are in a position to influence ‘our’ own policy vis-à-vis national security. Certainly more so than Sri Lankans. This should in no way be interpreted as nationalistic, or an endorsement of nationalism. I tend to think Einstein summed it up pretty nicely when he said nationalism was an infantile mental disorder. However, I have to live in the world that is, not the world that I would consider ideal, which is light years removed from the way things are, presently.

No, I think a number of our efforts such as the absurd fence across the border, etc. are seriously misguided. I have no interest in barring the influx of Hispanics, many of which are fleeing conditions that are largely the fallout of US foreign policy. In fact, I recently posted some video debunking the popular myths about immigration in this country. My concern is nuclear weapons, which should concern everyone who breathes, as they represent the most significant existential threat to the human species.

Also, I’m not talking about militarization. No, I’m talking about more and better radiation detectors, machines that recognize particles given off by radioactive material. I also suggested more proactive initiatives, such as signing the FISSBAN treaty, which is embraced by virtually the whole world except the US. This would not only be a boost to US security, but to the security of the planet. Incidentally, the most vocal supporter of the FISSBAN treaty was Iran. Another proactive measure, that I don’t believe I mentioned, would be to augment security at nuclear facilities in the former Soviet Union. As I recall, the Bush administration, in their infinite wisdom, cut funds allocated for this purpose. Also, as I said before, beyond the obvious moral reasons, ceasing our aggression overseas would be another viable means to reduce the likelihood of a severe terrorist attack, nuclear or otherwise.

[piet11111]

Why would it go through a port? Why wouldn't it just come in a small ship through some private dock somewhere?

Or a private plane from canada with its transponder turned off.
We all know the American air defense system in the north has been neglected and can be avoided and civilian systems rely on transponders to detect airplanes.


Also don't old fashioned X-ray machines use sizeable amounts of radioactive materials at least enough to have a bomb laced with that stuff be considered a dirty bomb by Fox news standards :lol:

[bricolage]

“Well, it is about time that every rebel wakes up to the fact that "the people" and the working class have nothing in common.”
--Joe Hill


Speaking in terms of 'we', 'us' and 'our' is not just something neutral, it implies meaningful commonality and betrays political conviction. You may be opposed to nationalism but you are buying into the class collaborationist ideals inherent in 'we the people'.
‘We’ in this context is Americans, as Americans ‘we’ are in a position to influence ‘our’ own policy vis-à-vis national security.But to what extent are you? Evidently certain individuals, groups and so forth are in a much better position to influence national security policy than others, this is obvious, but to say 'we' are implies a homogenous and unified group operating either as one equal blob or in which each has the same ability to apply influence.
Words have meaning and words have relevance. I don't think they can just be dismissed.
So when you said;
What's ridiculous is, to my understanding, for something like half what we spend annually on enforcing the absurd prohibition on cannabis, we could permenantly secure our ports against nuclear weapons.The problem is 'we' don't spend anything annually, the state does, a body that is alien to us (the real us). And 'secure our ports' is straight out of the book of nationalist discourse.

No, I think a number of our efforts such as the absurd fence across the border, etc. are seriously misguided.Well that's the understatement of the year. But misguided at what? Protecting homeland security? Since when has that been of interest to revolutionaries? Fences across borders should not be opposed because they are 'misguided' but because they destroy lives and strengthen state control. I'm quite happy for them to be 'misguided'.

Also, I’m not talking about militarization. No, I’m talking about more and better radiation detectors, machines that recognize particles given off by radioactive material.I think it's pretty naive to assume any kind of controls or technology implemented on borders and/or 'securing our ports' will not be used for the primary purpose of strengthening state control over both geographic boundaries and the human beings they happen to interact with.

Another proactive measure, that I don’t believe I mentioned, would be to augment security at nuclear facilities in the former Soviet Union.So are you calling for the US to do this? That they should send troops over to nuclear facilities in the former USSR?

[MarxistMan]

There is no terrorism in this world. Terrorism doesn't exist. It only exists in the minds of FOX news, and Republican Party dumb voters. The War On Terrorism is really an imperialist war to steal the oil of middle east nations


.



Just because this incident may have been a false alaram, and the mainstream media, especially Fox routinely engage in hysteria and fearmongering, doesn't mean there isn't a legitimate concern. After 9/11 there's really no debate that this isn't a legitimate threat. What's ridiculous is, to my understanding, for something like half what we spend annually on enforcing the absurd prohibition on cannabis, we could permenantly secure our ports against nuclear weapons. Of course, we could also sign the FISSBAN treaty, in which the United States is essentially the sole holdout, and, of course, change our foreign policy which has significantly increased terrorism in recent years.

[MarxistMan]

US government, Mexican government and most oligarchic-governments are real evil, and real liars. They do all kinds of evil things, to fool the masses. And they are specialists at lying. And they own the media. With the media they control the middle classes and part of the lower classes. to side with the government against rebels. By calling leftists as terrorists, like in Colombia where FARC rebels are labeled as terrorists. When we all know that what Colombia needs is for FARC rebels to rule Colombia, and in Mexico for Mexico to be ruled by The Subcomandante Marcos and the leftist guerrillas

So the oligarchic governments of this world really confuse and brainwash the masses so that the masses won't become socialists

.


You call yourself an anarchist but you are lending support to the most militarised state in the world, already operating heavily securitised borders to strengthen these very same controls?
And who is this 'we'? Who is 'us'?

[NGNM85]

Speaking in terms of 'we', 'us' and 'our' is not just something neutral, it implies meaningful commonality and betrays political conviction. You may be opposed to nationalism but you are buying into the class collaborationist ideals inherent in 'we the people'.But to what extent are you? Evidently certain individuals, groups and so forth are in a much better position to influence national security policy than others, this is obvious, but to say 'we' are implies a homogenous and unified group operating either as one equal blob or in which each has the same ability to apply influence.
Words have meaning and words have relevance. I don't think they can just be dismissed.
So when you said;The problem is 'we' don't spend anything annually, the state does, a body that is alien to us (the real us). And 'secure our ports' is straight out of the book of nationalist discourse.

Even Freud said; ‘Sometimes a cigar is only a cigar.’ Perhaps I should have worded this differently, my focus was more on what I was actually trying to convey, that the United States has been criminally negligent regarding nuclear proliferation, which is a very legitimate concern. I am, philosophically an Anarchist and very strongly believe that there should not be nation-states, I assure you. However, that does not mean I can pretend they don't exist.

As much as this is a roadblock to the conversation I actually want to have, I
also have to address a myth you seem to be subscribing to. The government, meaning both individual state governments and the federal government (To a lesser degree.) are certainly subject to influence. There is a severe democratic deficit in the United States, but it is not a police state. This is why there are such sophisticated mechanisms and so much money and time spent in distracting, demoralizing, or pacifying the American public. This is the ‘problem of democracy’ that influential policymakers have written about extensively; how to get people to accept things they aren’t naturally inclined to want without a gun in their backs. China doesn’t need these sophisticated mechanisms. If the people speak loud enough, with a common voice, we can make a difference. There are numerous examples going back through history.


Well that's the understatement of the year. But misguided at what? Protecting homeland security? Since when has that been of interest to revolutionaries? Fences across borders should not be opposed because they are 'misguided' but because they destroy lives and strengthen state control. I'm quite happy for them to be 'misguided'.

I don’t care what’s of interest to ‘revolutionaries’, I care what’s good for the majority of the people, the working class. If the two happen to coincide, that’s super, but my interest is improving the lives of the majority of people who have real problems, IE; the working class.

They are misguided in every sense. They are misguided because they are the fruit of the concept of nationhood. They are misguided because they are based on myths about immigrants that are factually baseless. They are misguided because they generally create more harm than they prevent. Again, I have absolutely no ill will towards Latin Americans who just want to feed their kids or escape the destruction inflicted on their countries by the United States government, and I deplore the thinly-veiled racism that behind the policies.

That said, there is absolutely an interest in preventing nuclear holocaust. I don’t deny that the United States is the greatest perpetrator of terrorism, in fact, that’s significantly increasing the danger of future loss of life. However, I would hope we can agree that al-Qaeda aren’t the good guys, either. I also fail to see how even a ‘small scale’ nuclear exchange (Which is more of a myth, really.) helps the working class, in any sense. In fact, in that eventuality, the working class will assuredly suffer the worst.


I think it's pretty naive to assume any kind of controls or technology implemented on borders and/or 'securing our ports' will not be used for the primary purpose of strengthening state control over both geographic boundaries and the human beings they happen to interact with.

Again, I’m not advocating an increased military or police presence, frisking people, etc., I’m talking about scanning machines that detect radioactive materials. They don’t shoot bullets, and they don’t turn into Decepticons, they just detect radiation. That’s it.


So are you calling for the US to do this? That they should send troops over to nuclear facilities in the former USSR?


First of all, this isn’t some sort of imposition, the Russian government welcomes this, and I’m sure if you polled the Russian people, they would agree. Second, these aren’t new programs, they already exist. The Bush administration cut funding, I heard the Obama administration increased it some, but the funding and energy is, presently, inadequate. Third, no, as I understand it, the program doesn’t involve a single American boot on Russian soil. It provides funding for increased security of nuclear facilities, in terms of manpower, and in technology, to provide jobs for nuclear scientists to keep them employed and enable them to work on civilian applications, as well as funding efforts to dismantle weapons safely, and convert the plutonium into reactor fuel for power plants. These endeavors are supported by the IAEA, and the Center For Arms Control And Non-Proliferation. You can read about it, in detail, on their website;

http://armscontrolcenter.org/policy/nonproliferation/articles/programs_in_russia/ (http://armscontrolcenter.org/policy/nonproliferation/articles/programs_in_russia/)

I presume you have no objection with US military withdrawal from the Middle East. (???)

This brings us to the last suggestion I made, which is that the United States sign the FISSBAN treaty, or some equivalent, which is supported by virtually the whole world. The US government is, essentially the sole opposition, as it frequently is.

As nuclear weapons represent the single greatest existential threat to the human species, again, they should be the concern of everyone who breathes. Now, you could argue that domestic, economic problems are sufficiently dire as to take primacy in the short term, and I’m not necessarily disagreeing. However, these initiatives should be on the agenda.

[gorillafuck]

And yes, if Islamic terrorism was that big of a threat, we would have had many attacks already, or at least many foiled attacks. Lone wolf westerners like individualist loonies with guns and school shooters are a much bigger threat, and they strike all the time.No they don't, neither of those things are frequent occurences.