United Arab Emirates to Control our Ports??

Okay, so you're trying to tell me that we're going to have some port managers who are either UAE citizens or are told what to do in everyday operations by UAE citizens and they're going to do things OUR way? While perhaps many of their family members live over there, subject to islamic law?

And they will now run BOTH ends of the trade route, not just one.

And you're telling me that, with a foreign nation that could become unfriendly as quickly as Iraq did running the whole show, the clever fellas at the alphabet soup organizations (the ones who stopped 9/11 and such) will prevail so there will be no danger?

Now, perhaps an "unfortunate event" due to this switch of port ownership is very unlikely. But the consequence of this very unlikely event are really really big. Perhaps "unlikely" isn't really good enough.
 
I was initially against this whole deal. As time has gone on, I feel that our government has probably sufficiently investigated the folks that would be operating the company and our ports would not be in any more danger as a result of the deal.

You know that many US ports are operated by foreign companies already.
You know that US companies have very few merchant ships. Most are foreign owned. The people on those vessals are not US Citizens.

I think this is just a citizen wake up call in the sense that ordinary citizens are beginning to undestand the dangers associated with our ports. We need more security.

I don't think the president needs to notify the country that a business deal has been approved that is judged to not increase our vulnerability to outside forces.

How would you feel if a US company was denied for the same reasons as seem to be used by us to judge the deal? The whole thing is being used as an opportunity for the Democratic party to demonstrate that they are "strong" on defense.
 
There are so many deficiencies with this current "leadership" it's very easy to jump from screw up to screw up. Perhaps we should number them to help keep our focus.
On point, the US State Dept put UAE on it's travel advisory list. Sounds like a dangerous place! If we shouldn't go there then why should we want them here performing such a vital service?
One of the most confusing/upsetting features of this "sitcom" is our fearless leader knew nothing of the so-called deal but minutes after discovery felt so passionately about it he was prepared to excercise a veto for the first time in his illustrious "rule". In keeping with our shooting site theme it appears "President Shawn Shortbus" once again shot himself in the foot or perhaps a little higher. More importantly he has subjected this nation to more danger and been so secretive about it he didn't even know:eek: :eek:
Are ya feelin' warm, fuzzy, safe and secure yet?
3 years and counting!

Rimrock
 
original by 22-rimfire; I think this is just a citizen wake up call in the sense that ordinary citizens are beginning to undestand the dangers associated with our ports.

Good thinking rimfire! maybe the gov should blow up some subways to give we citizens an even better understanding as to how dangerous they are.
 
"Okay, so you're trying to tell me that we're going to have some port managers who are either UAE citizens or are told what to do in everyday operations by UAE citizens and they're going to do things OUR way? While perhaps many of their family members live over there, subject to islamic law?"

I imagine the port managers who ran operations under the UK owned company will stay in place?

I think many of you are confusing port authority with private port operations

apples and lemons


Port Authorities are political subdivsions of state which they are in they usually have thier own law enforcement division. All the UAE guys are doing is taking up the leased spaces at ports that the Brits used to have.

http://www.irconnect.com/poha/pages/news_releases.html?d=94774


HOUSTON, Feb. 23, 2006 -- The recent announcement of plans by the Dubai Ports World (DP World) to purchase P&O Ports (P&O) will not have an impact on any of the facilities or operations of the Port of Houston Authority (PHA).


The PHA is a political subdivision chartered by the state of Texas. It owns and either operates or leases 12 public facilities. The PHA does not own or operate private facilities.

Specifically in Houston, P&O leases space at the PHA's Barbours Cut Container Terminal for container and chassis repair and container storage. At the PHA's Turning Basin Terminal, P&O maintains a freight handling assignment and is licensed to provide stevedore services. P&O does not own or operate public (PHA) facilities.

P&O, a private company headquartered in London, is involved in worldwide container terminal operations and stevedore services for the maritime industry.

PORT SECURITY

All port facilities in the U.S. that are engaged in commercial activities across interstate lines or international borders -- whether public or private, domestic or foreign -- are subject to state and federal security statutes as well as the rules and regulations of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies.

The federal government takes the lead in protecting America's ports. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, primarily through the activities of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the U.S. Coast Guard, runs many programs to secure U.S. ports. The U.S. Coast Guard is responsible for maritime security and reviewing and approving security plans for vessels, port facilities and port areas which are required by the MTSA. Customs and Border Protection is responsible for cargo security, and screens and inspects cargo entering the U.S. through every U.S. port.

Other cargo security programs include:



-- Container Security Initiative (inspection of U.S. import cargo
by CBP prior to leaving the outbound foreign port)
-- Use of radiation detection equipment to screen for weapons of
mass destruction
-- Use of other non-intrusive inspection devices
-- Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT), which
encourages maritime stakeholders to verify their security
measures.

The Port Security Grant program and the pending implementation of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) are also important parts of America's port security portfolio to provide layered security.

While the federal government takes the lead on waterside and cargo security, overall security is a shared responsibility with port authorities, facility and vessel operators, and state and local law enforcement agencies providing additional security. The Maritime Transportation Security Act also establishes local security committees to evaluate and make improvements in each port.

In general, port infrastructure throughout the U.S. and around the world consists of diverse collections of docks, warehouses, and terminals. For the past two decades, it has been a common maritime industry practice for private port facilities in some countries to be operated by organizations that are based in other countries. This is widely regarded as the nature of trade and commerce in today's global economy.
 
Rob P.

I know you can't be serious with this statement. Were the hell are you from. I don't care who the president is, wishing for something like this is way out of line.
Perhaps you should move out of America and save yourself

Perhaps YOU feel it is out of line but I do not. Lessons need to be learned by everyone. Some people only learn the hard way and some learn by watching, listening, and seeing others screw up and figuring out that THEY shouldn't do things that way.

Prime, I appreciate your defending Rob P. as I don't know this person.

But I will say there are probably a few people here, like me, that lost someone durring 9/11. And all we know about the people here is based on what they say. If I heard a man say this in person I would punch him in the face. Sorry it is just out of line.

3 Things. One, you're right, you don't know me. Thus, you shouldn't judge me or my worth without doing some sort of research on the opinions I tend to promote. Two, this is AMERICA where people have the right and OBLIGATION to say things about how they feel America should be "run" by our representatives. Exercising that freedom is NOT grounds for expulsion and those who would foment that belief are the ones who need to examine their motives. Three, I'm saddened by your loss on 9/11, However, that doesn't give you the right to physically threaten anyone for their opinions. I said it, I stand by it. Forum etiquette requires that you not threaten me for it - abide by the rules please.

I dont think Rob wants people to die.. At least I hope not! Hes probably frustrated as I am that lot of Americans are blind to what is going on around them.

You are correct in that I do not wish for anyone to be harmed for any reason. However, it is not within my power to stop people from being killed due to foolishness and idiocy on the part of our govt.

There are those who would defend GWB for any action he would take even if obviously wrongheaded and deadly to innocents. THOSE people are the ones who create the almost daily stupidity of our present govt by either direct incompetence or support of such.

And, as I already pointed out, some people just can't learn except by sticking their own fingers into the wall socket no matter how many times they've seen others do so and get zapped. In that ideal, I sort of wish that GWB gets his way because eventually America will get "zapped" again and maybe THAT TIME these idiots will learn not to be so stupid AGAIN and will stop their support for this administration.
 
Why are american companies like KBR/Halliburton contracted to manage ports in Iraq while DPW bids to run NYC/Phila? This makes little sense, especially if you look at it from the perspective of the post 9/11 world we live in. The best way to curb terror and get those nuts to stop scapegoating the USA for their miserable lives is to leave them alone to sort out their own crap. WTF? you think you can export democracy to people who have been bickering over the same bull**** for a thousand years??

I work in IT and this is one thing i understand - if you want security you harden your own machines. You are responisible for your own territory. You don't go over to your neighbor and dump money into theirs because they are not up to par and might send you spam, and you sure as hell don't give the keys to yours to any outsiders. With this in mind I ask why the hell are we dumping money into other countries when we don't have our **** together on the homefront? The most ironic thing to me is that the Bush admin claims to be tough on terror, have a post-9/11 mindset, etc, but their actions are the exact opposite time and time again. You could not possibly get worse policy for a post 9/11 world then what they have provided. Iran is/will be having a field day because of the bush administration's miserable performance.

It scares me to think the government, I don't care what party or branch, did not make securing our ports a number 1 issue after 9/11. What a bunch of jack-asses.
 
The ports are run by Americans they work in what is called the Port Authority.

DPW nor the UAE run these ports, the only thing they run is thier own operations at the port.

DPW does not own ports, they lease space at the port. where they are limited to shipping and receiving cargo, doing repairs on containers and the stevedores.

ICE,USCG, Homeland Security are not owned by DPW. These agencies run security at the port.

I am not 100% thrilled about the purchase, but have recieved reassurances that security will not be controlled by DPW.

DPW did not bid on these jobs they purchased the firm that already had operations at these ports.

So if we seperate the hype and political rhetoric form the story...there really isnt much of a story.
 
seems sort of nieve to think that someone would put out several BILLION dollars and not have anything to say about what goes on there.
Regardless of what anyone says, in my humble opinion, UAE "ownership" would be a breach of security, regardless of how small, and it only takes ONE biggun.
 
All UAE owns is the property within they space they lease. The only ones the get to tell what to do are the employees of the company. The vast majority of those employees are likely to be Ameircan citizens who work at the port. So do you think those employees are going to sell thier country out?

I think that ICE and the USCG would get a little suspicious if DPW imported an all UAE workforce :eek:

The have to abide by the port rules just like every other business that operates at the port. The do not own the port....

American companies operate within political subdivisions of this nation making billions of dollars and they only get a say in what happens in thier business which must abide by local, state and federal regulations.
 
I started out as an avid supporter of GWB but as time has gone by, he and his administration's actions and attitudes have nibbled away at that support. Having lived a year in that region and having led Imperial Iranian troops (During the revolution), hence having an idea of the WEIRD mindset and changability of the middle eastern people and their govt's - I'm afraid that this Port deal has been "the straw that broke the camel's back." While still a supporter of the - so called - Republican ideas, I am fed up with the current situation and eagerly await the opportunity to change.
 
Yeah, maybe we should put the Dumbycrats back in power. They don't recognize that we are engaged in a war on terror and they could resume their efforts to disarm the citizenry and tax the living crap out of us. And while they're at it, they could defund our military and use the money for more socialist entitlement programs.
 
The sooner we recognize that both parties are socialist/communist the better we'll all be.

I agree with the Republicans rhetoric but their actions are just as bad if not worse than the Dems.

150 years ago it wasn't about what party line you stood with, it was what are you for, "slavery or freedom?"

The only question that ever needs to be asked is will this law/politician/tax/organization make me more or less free?

99% of the time the answer is less.

I want a politician that runs on a "repeal platform" instead of law making one.
 
original by Eghad; All UAE owns is the property within they space they lease. The only ones the get to tell what to do are the employees of the company

According to The chairman of the Armed services committee, Senator John Warner R VA--(on meet the press this morning) The port operator (in this case UAE) has the responsibility of hiring the port workers including security.:eek: That should give any resonable person at least some reason to question this deal.
It was pointed out that some of the 9/11 terrorist were born, trained, and lived in the UAE. And that the UAE was uncooperative after 9/11 in helping to track and identify OBLs' bank accounts.:mad:
Warner further noted that we frequently use ports operated by the UAE and we might need them again. To me, his remarks strongly hinted that we might be black mailed by the UAE if this deal does not go forward. :mad:

original by magooch; Yeah, maybe we should put the Dumbycrats back in power

Seems to me like we already have um in power.:D
 
The UAE may hire security for thier own company for internal security

I dont think they do the hiring for the Port Authority, ICE or the USCG.
 
I'm going to stir the pot as well. Folks were worried when it appeared the Japanese were buying all of our city real estate. They don't see it as a compliment that we are where the money is at. My life is no worse for that period of time when they bought all the buildings.

I think the Arabs know a good deal when they see it as well. So what if the UAE wants to buy port space and run some import ops. It doesn't make a bit of difference to me.

Historically, the more a people are involved in trade and getting wealthy, the less fundamentalist their religious beliefs. That seems to play nomatter what religion. The pentacostals are quite fundamentallist, yet I haven't seen any top-notch universities or hospitals created by them. They tend not to focus on the life here on earth. The Presbyterians and Anglicans however are not in any way fundamentalist, yet I see them creating major Universities, Hospitals and other life-enriching things here in this life. I also see their average members have higher incomes and educations.

Muslims who are poor and have no hope or income, will likely keep a closed mind and remain fundamentalist. The good folks who own my local convienience store seem to sell lots of alcohol and even those magazines that come in plastic wrappers. They aren't so muslim that they would allow Mohammed stand in the way of commerce. They send their kids to our schools and pay their taxes.

The whole principal of building Iraq's economy is to put a dollar in their pocket and an opportunity in their neighborhood. A man feeding his family hasn't got much time to blow himself up. I like that the UAE is looking to more than oil to fuel its economy. I hope trade works for them like it worked for the Brits.

The economic pie isn't a fixed size. It grows and shrinks. I want the UAE to make enough money through trade w/ us that they will do anything to keep it, including being a helper in tracking terrorists and assisting the FBI, CIA and others. It is apparent that we need friends in the region and these seem to be more likely than the Iranians.

Just my opinion.
 
I've thought about this since making my reply, and I've changed my mind. I don't think it's a big deal at all. Why is this any different from a German company owning and running Chrysler, or the Japanese owning most of the real estate and businesses in Hawaii?
 
Rob P.
You are correct, I should not judge you. I appreciate your passion for the topic and for our country. And I agree a person should be able to speak up without being physically threatened. I dont see where my statement was any worse than wishing for another terrorist attach and Americans dying, but if it was received as a threat, I apologize, my words may have been out of line.

Even if I did not intend for this statement to be a threat to you personally (which I did not) the problem lies in the fact that you received it that way. And this was the the reason for my strong response to your posting Sir.

With that said I extend my sincere apologies to you if my words were received as inapropriate. :o

Friends?
 
Wait a minute....Some of the ruling party of the UAE are personally involved with Bin Laden. In 1998 according to the 9/11 report, the US military wanted to kill Bin Laden during a hunting trip he was invited to by members of the UAE government in the UAE, unfortunately Richard Clark and the State Dept felt the need to warn the UAE of their plans. Remember this is during Bin Ladens declaration of war against the US, and him being actively involved in attacks against US servicement in Saudi Arabia. The UAE then tipped Bin Laden and he promptly left. The UAE government is run by radical islamic leaders and some agree with the fatwahs regarding the destruction of the US and Israel. Almost all for the money wires to the 9/11 hijackers came from the UAE. Finally the UAE has closed banking access to US investgators looking for Al Qaeda money transfers. The UAE goernment runs this company. Sure the UAE threw us a bone or two in helping in our war on terror, however their hands are too dirty. This company is definately, definately 6 degrees to Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. IS BUSH NUTZ FOR SAYING THEY ARE PROPERLY VETTED???

Sure the FBI, the Port Authority, The Coast Guard will inspect cargo coming in however on average that is only 5% to 10% of the total containers coming in. I Really, Really want to trust Bush, but he has competely lost me on this one.
 
Back
Top