Posted on 02/16/2006 5:21:05 PM PST by Dane
Basically, we have one foreign company operating port services being sold to another foreign company.
Now without the usual hyoerbole that seems to go along with these threads, maybe we can figure this out. Notice that the article says the port facility itself is responsible for security. I would surmise that the foreign port company is supervised by the municipal port authority and in one case that would be the NY/NJ port authority, so that means the local authorites are charged with security(i.e the Dubai company is not in charge with security).
BTW, notice how chuckie schumer mentioned Libya. I guess he missed the news that Libya has given up it's WMD program, due to US pressure and is now cooperating with the US.
I know a lot of people are queasy about this, but it should not be looked through the prism of hyperbole from the press and a Senator who falls in love with every TV camera there is(chuckie schumer).
And also what are other "solutions". Should there be a govt. takeover. Should the govt. block a sale of one foreign owned company to another foreign company.
So instead of the usual knee jerk hyperbole, how about intelligent discussion.
"Reality Based
Since Feb 17, 2006"
Welcome to Free Republic
great info in this thread..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1579951/posts
GREED
I think that is the misnomer, they are not taking over the ports, they are operating from the ports which are under the local municipal port authority.
Like I said before it is one foreign company buying the port facilities from another foreign company(which was British). And I wonder where schumer's outrage was over that foreign company that was overseen by the local port authority.
In actuality, this is a business deal, with a UK firm that has contracts in 6 US ports being taken over by another firm.
It's not like that DP world is taking over the ports. They will have a contract to load and unload ships from all a round the world from that port(which is under US control and overseen by local, state, and federal security).
Now there can be a debate about if that is good or not, but let's get rid of the chuckie schumer misnomer that DP World is "taking" over the ports, which they are not.
There are no muslim countries that are staunch U.S. allies. Their loyalty is to their religion which is in direct conflict with the security of the U.S. There is no such thing as a tolerant branch of islam. This is a business deal that would give a potentially hostile foreign power all information about the security of vital ports. What possible reason would we have to allow such a potentially suicidal transaction?
This is just plain stupid.
Maybe he doesn't trust Muslims.
Here are the new players: left Pres.UAE.... Right VP UAE
Rep. Mark Foley said Sec. John Snow told him he didn't know anything about the deliberations, yet he heads the Department which oversees this very decision. Additionally, when John Snow ran CSX Transporation, he sold his entire port operations to a Dubai-based corporation. So it appears Secretary Snow is either a fool, or a damned liar.
ping
Hoooo boy!
Actually that happened one year after Snow had left CSX.
Snow is a former chairman of freight rail company CSX Corp. (CSX.N: Quote, Profile, Research), which sold its global port assets to Dubai Ports World for $1.15 billion in 2004 -- the year after Snow had left the company for the Bush administration.
So who is being the liar now.
Will someone please tell me why there is not an American firm that can handle this acquisition? Why is it not even talked about? How about the cities where the ports are located having ownership, control and management?
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.