[jimbo123]

So you're saying that when a security alert is issued, the port workers and non-cleared managment wouldn't be told by managment to keep an eye out for something suspicious?

[clawrence3]

"This whole notion that Dubai is going to control or set standards for U.S. ports is a canard ... is factually false," said Kim Petersen, head of SeaSecure, a U.S.-based maritime security company, and executive director of the Maritime Security Council, which represents 70 percent of the world's ocean shipping.

[DBrow]

If it involved classified data as opposed to public data, there would not be a foreign, uncleared person in the loop. That would mean an organizational structure with only cleared US citizens in operations like security and plant protection.

A general security alert in any company would of course go to everyone, cleared or not, and you'll find that in any company.

The original concern was one of classified or privileged data being given to foreigners inappropriately, and that "firewall" stuff goes on all the time.

In a US airport today, the tower handles classified data relating to national security, and they don't need to share it with the guy who runs the shoe shine or the girl at the pretzel kiosk, or the general manager of the airport if he is not cleared or eligible.

[DBrow]

Another thing- sensitive classified data like "look out for a freighter, Elbonian registry, named Freepsahoy, it may be carrying illegal explosive components and substandard tennis equipment; intercept and inspect; proceed with caution, captain has severe halitosis" would not go to the port.

Coast Guard and Customs would get the tip and would have the responsibility to act on it, and we keep trustworthy people in those posts.

Dockworkers, timekeepers, and port managers would not necessarily be tipped off that a particular ship was being watched, unless it somehow made sense that they did.