In its analysis of the threats posed to the US following 11 September, the recently published Jane's Sentinel Security Assessment: North America reported these telling facts: 'The scope of protective measures required to upgrade US security can be gauged from the following statistics. The US has 301 ports of entry, 20,000 miles of border, 340,000 vehicle border crossings, 58,000 cargo deliveries and 770,000 hazardous-material shipments each day, 420 commercial airports, 103 nuclear power plants, 2,800 other power plants, 168,000 water companies, 190,000 miles of natural gas pipelines, 9,500 companies licensed to use explosives and 600,000 bridges. Over 1.3 million people enter the US every day, while only two per cent of cargo shipments are inspected. All of the above are areas that comprise potential terrorist targets and opportunities.'

Now consider the case of Lockheed Martin, the biggest defence contractor in the US, and this quote from the World Policy Institute. 'In all, eight current policy makers had direct or indirect ties to the firm before joining the administration. Officials with indirect connections to the company include Vice President Dick Cheney – whose wife Lynne Cheney served on the Lockheed Martin board from 1994 to January 2001, accumulating more than $500,000 in deferred directors' fees in the process; and Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, who worked at Shea and Gardner – the powerhouse Washington DC law firm that represents Lockheed Martin (along with numerous other corporate clients).

Bush appointees with more direct links to the firm include Assistant Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs Otto Reich, who worked as a paid lobbyist for Lockheed Martin when the company was seeking a reversal of the US ban on the sale of high-tech weapons to Latin America; and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta and Deputy Transportation Secretary Michael Jackson, both of whom served as vice-presidents at Lockheed Martin prior to joining the administration.'


Source: IS NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENCE REALLY ABOUT PROTECTING THE US? The Ecologist, Jul/Aug 2002, Vol. 32, Issue 6