Arabs will control US ports

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reba

Reba

Retired Terp
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
54,899
Reaction score
1,518
I surprised that I haven't seen anyone bring this up yet.

"The Bush administration gave control of six crucial ports to a Sept. 11-linked Arab nation after a flimsy investigation and with weak guarantees the company in charge can stop Osama bin Laden from infiltrating, the House homeland security chairman said."

http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunher...93.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

I'm glad that Charleston is not one of the ports included. (The port is only about 35 minutes from my house.)

Been thru that drama before.

http://www.vh1.com/movies/movie/32672/moviemain.jhtml

Don't want to experience it for real.

http://www.monroe.army.mil/casemate/stack/081905suddenresponse.htm

I don't know why they always pick Charleston for nuke attacks. Maybe I should move.


Anyway, what is your opinion on letting an Arab company control U.S. ports?
 
Funny thing I was going to create thread about this.

My Opinion: That's Awful Tragic news for our future !! Sigh.

The Biggest Mistake.

It looks like that these Arabs are planning to
bring illegal weapons using these ports. Eeeeek !

Bush learned of port deal from press:
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060223-123443-6892r.htm
 
Last edited:
Even though Homeland Security is still responsible for the safety of those ports, irregardless of who owns them, perhaps Bush/Congress will do something to reverse this decision since it has been said that Bush and his Cabinet hadn't gotten the news/knowledge of who would be owning these places.
Whew, that was one sentence! Where's Hemingway, master of the short sentence, when I need him?!?
 
I am very concerned.

Jimmy "let's give away the Panama Canal" Carter supports this plan. Aack!

Like I posted earlier, I live near an important port, so this is close to home for me.

When I was in the reserves, I was an inspection team member of a Naval Control of Shipping Office. We were responsible for setting up merchant ship convoys in time of war. Some of our duties were to inspect the merchant ships for convoy readiness, maintain records on the various ships and shipping lines, and "network" with the ship masters, port authorities, shipping liaisons, etc., so I do have some familiarity with what is involved. We conducted local and international exercises relating to wartime and "incident" shipping. Of course, that was pre-9/11, so things have changed somewhat, I'm sure.

Our ports are extremely important for international and coastal trade, not to mention entryways for all kinds of "objects" and people. I just don't feel confident in our security.
 
Hi I was going to make a thread about this. I can not believe President Bush !!!!

I usually support Bush compared to what Kerry had in store for us. The liberal press tried to blame President Bush..... I noticed that.

I am very mad about that plan No Navy Admiral of the fleet or a military general will ever agree to this plan at all. I am sure the U.S. Navy is very mad !!!!

Do not worry that too much because Real American patriots are gonna keep an eye on the situation especially current active duty or ex-military members will stay on top of things and monitor the situation very closely.
 
I too was going to make a thread about this. I'm not happy at all about it, and feel the same as Heath does in regards to Bush. I normally support Bush but this is one thing that ticks me off. At least the Arabs are only in management (which means they can be replaced) and not the owners of the ports. I don't know a lot of about the management company but apparently they run a large number of ports around the world (which would be somewhat of a plus with their experience).

Whats funny is some of the stuff I've been hearing and reading around about this. There are the people out there that criticize Bush and say that all Muslims aren't bad and all Arabs aren't bad and how Bush needs to do more for these countries, etc. Those same people are crying foul saying How dare Bush allow terrorist related countries run our ports. I found that somewhat humorous.
 
Taylor said:
I too was going to make a thread about this. I'm not happy at all about it, and feel the same as Heath does in regards to Bush. I normally support Bush but this is one thing that ticks me off. At least the Arabs are only in management (which means they can be replaced) and not the owners of the ports. I don't know a lot of about the management company but apparently they run a large number of ports around the world (which would be somewhat of a plus with their experience).

Whats funny is some of the stuff I've been hearing and reading around about this. There are the people out there that criticize Bush and say that all Muslims aren't bad and all Arabs aren't bad and how Bush needs to do more for these countries, etc. Those same people are crying foul saying How dare Bush allow terrorist related countries run our ports. I found that somewhat humorous.
Click to expand...

Taylor,

Hypocrisy is rampant in politics. Not surprised that I see it too, even if it's from the left or the right.
 
Endymion said:
Taylor,

Hypocrisy is rampant in politics. Not surprised that I see it too, even if it's from the left or the right.
Click to expand...

Yup...and I shouldn't laugh about it. The fact that other nations will be running our ports isn't a funny matter but I did find the comments humorous. Like I said, I've supported Bush frequently but get tired of defending the bad decisions, like this one.
 
I'm not versed enough on this issue to really comment on it directly, but it doesn't sound good.
 
Taylor said:
Yup...and I shouldn't laugh about it. The fact that other nations will be running our ports isn't a funny matter but I did find the comments humorous. Like I said, I've supported Bush frequently but get tired of defending the bad decisions, like this one.
Click to expand...

Me too, Taylor. I'm frustrated with our Government right now. I'm so frustrated that I'm considering abandoning the party, and becoming a Democrat, even though I despise alot of what they stand for. Then again, I'm a liberal Republican, so what does that tell you? :giggle:

Where's the aspirin?...I'm getting a migraine! :lol:

I don't mean for this to be a laughing matter, but it's just insane. ***sigh***
 
Oceanbreeze said:
...I'm so frustrated that I'm considering abandoning the party, and becoming a Democrat, even though I despise alot of what they stand for. Then again, I'm a liberal Republican, so what does that tell you? :giggle:
Click to expand...
You can join me as an independent! I've never been anything else. :P
 
I talked with my friend about it (knowing she supports Bush and me not fan of him). She has a brother who is a captian of one those port and he said newspaper and media are too exaggrate ( mispelling). We should not be worry about it since we have a very good security there.. I don't recall we had any problems with ports esp with terriosts? They are very strict with those ports for many years, and I don't see any harm if other countries own some of those ports, of course they have to follow our laws.
 
Who actually owns these ports ?

I want to add that
I noticed there are too many Arabs working
very quietly at these tollroads and
gas stations especially near DC areas.
Every time when I go to the toll road,
I see this Arab person collecting my coins.
Perhaps they saved some of these coins
to purchase these ports.

Looks like one of their "Strategies"
just to study and then take over control
these toll roads highways stations
and then take over these ports, etc.
 
OK, explain to me why I'm supposed to care?

A business with a proven track record of success wants to expand its market. Assuming we are in fact a capitalist society, and the price is fair, why should the government try to prevent this? The UAE is one of the last countries in the world I'd expect to deliver a bomb to our doorstep... I think China or even Saudi Arabia would be *FAR* more likely to do something like that, but apparently we don't have any problem letting them expand their businesses into the US... So why the UAE?

Saying that Arabs should not be allowed to partake in capitalism the way we do is just blatant, unforgivable racism. The GOP and the media are just fearmongering like they always do. Let it pass.
 
The xenophobia is strong in this thread.

Arabs DO NOT EQUAL terrorists! The UAE is much more liberal than Osama Bin Laden, in ways that OBL will probably hate them as much as he hates the U.S.

The bottom line is, NO ONE IN THE U.S. will be replaced with Arabs from that company. No eastern U.S. longshoreman will be replaced with an Arab. Security and background checks will still be done. The only difference is who will get the check from the U.S. in the end.

Please stop thinking the middle east is full of terrorists out to kill Americans.

FYI, I don't vote Republican.
 
Teresh said:
OK, explain to me why I'm supposed to care?

A business with a proven track record of success wants to expand its market. Assuming we are in fact a capitalist society, and the price is fair, why should the government try to prevent this? The UAE is one of the last countries in the world I'd expect to deliver a bomb to our doorstep... I think China or even Saudi Arabia would be *FAR* more likely to do something like that, but apparently we don't have any problem letting them expand their businesses into the US... So why the UAE?

Saying that Arabs should not be allowed to partake in capitalism the way we do is just blatant, unforgivable racism. The GOP and the media are just fearmongering like they always do. Let it pass.
Click to expand...

The issue for me comes down to security. The company is not US based and will not be required to keep a lot of their paperwork here. That means that if anyone wanted to audit them for security measures, those papers and information will not be available to us...we would just have to take their word that everything is secure. If they were US based, then they would have to provide those answers. This company does not.

Terminal employees are supposed to be getting background checks, however, not all of them have been checked. How do we know this company will see to it that all employees get the background checks. It only takes one employee to change a cargo ladle and have something smuggled into this country..whether its guns, weapons, people, drugs, etc.

US customs already have their hands full trying to keep things out, however, its a difficult task. Now with this company running the show, they do not have to provide the documentation to US customs.

And you have to take into consideration that whether the company has a proven track record or not, they are coming from a country that has known and proven terroristic ties and supports terroristic activities. Now we've just opened up the doors to whatever they want to bring in...and anything can be brought in for a price.

At a minimum, I think it should be delayed so the security review can be further scrutinized. They say its fine but I say its too early to tell. Currently things are being run by the British who have proven to be the best of allies.

All politics aside, take a look at this press release from Tom Ridge. It can be found --HERE--. The reason I post that is because it gives a rundown of what the cargo industry is like and how large of an undertaking security is. While security can be an issue no matter who is running the show, at least American companies would have to answer to their undertakings...this new company does not have to provide paperwork that is not located on these shores.

It now also looks like a delay will happen so it can be further investigated for security risks. New Jersey has filed a lawsuit, New York is likely to do the same...and last night I heard Governor Glendening of Maryland hinting that he would attempt to block it from the Baltimore ports (ie lawsuit). That can be found --HERE--
 
Without any documentation/paperwork
should NOT be acceptable for these
security reasons.
This does not seem right and
something is "fishy" going on.
Why don't they want any
documentation/paperwork ?
I could hardly believe about
these Diehard Fools.

By the way, who "owns" these ports ?
 
Y said:
...By the way, who "owns" these ports ?
Click to expand...
In South Carolina, the ports are owned by the state (State Ports Authority--SPA).
The South Carolina State Ports Authority owns and operates 3 port facilities: The Port of Charleston, the Port of Georgetown and the Port of Port Royal. These facilities are owner operated terminals, meaning the SCSPA owns the terminals and operates them with its own staff. SPA staff work in all container cranes, run the container yard equipment, and operate gates on all terminals. The only exceptions are the licensed operators at the port, who lease terminal space and operate their own yards and gates. SPA staff do operate the dockside container cranes and the yard equipment for licensed operators as well.

http://www.port-of-charleston.com/about_the_port/mission.asp
Click to expand...

Virginia ports: http://www.vaports.com/

North Carolina ports: http://www.ncports.com/

Georgia ports: http://gaports.com/index2.html

Florida ports: http://www.flaports.org/

Louisiana ports: http://www.portsoflouisiana.org/

Alabama ports: http://www.asdd.com/

Texas ports: http://www.texasports.org/

Mississippi ports: http://www.shipmspa.com/

Massachusetts ports: http://www.massport.com/ports/

Maryland ports: http://www.mpa.state.md.us/

NY and NJ ports: http://www.panynj.gov/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top