Posted on 02/18/2006 6:55:19 PM PST by ncountylee
WASHINGTON -- A company at the Port of Miami has sued to block the takeover of shipping operations there by a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates. It is the first American courtroom effort to capsize a $6.8 billion sale already embroiled in a national debate over security risks at six major U.S. ports affected by the deal.
The Miami company, a subsidiary of Eller & Company Inc., presently is a business partner with London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., which Dubai Ports World purchased last week. In a lawsuit in Florida circuit court, the Miami subsidiary said that under the sale it will become an "involuntary partner" with Dubai's government and it may seek more than $10 million in damages.
The Miami subsidiary, Continental Stevedoring & Terminals Inc., said the sale to Dubai was prohibited under its partnership agreement with the British firm and "may endanger the national security of the United States." It asked a judge to block the takeover and said it does not believe the company, Florida or the U.S. government can ensure Dubai Ports World's compliance with American security rules.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattlepi.nwsource.com ...
That's exactly why I get stuck on conspiracies - it is crystal clear asinine, what is happening. Which could only mean that we are missing something... key facts.
But then you can't even speculate without destroying your own good name. It's crazy.
"The port contract was already foreign-run, so the headline is false on its face. And this suit is against the British company and is purely a matter of contract law."
Hmmmm...lets see,....British run port,...or UAE backed company run port...hmmmm...lets see,...UAE backed Taliban Government,....British helped take down Taliban Govt....hmmm... My vote would be to keep it British. So much for "false on its face", and "purely contractual." The main thing is to ensure that the story is journalistically correct, and contractual law is upheld. What a loon. With that line of thought, heck lets give Hamas the janitorial contract at Congress.
That is the biggest load of crap I have read on this site in a long time. The port security of this country is important to the lives of every American. The lives of our family members rest on the security of our ports of entry. I refuse to bet the lives of my family on lawyers and contract law.
I've seen what "strictly business" has done to America. With every purchase at Wal-Mart we are funding the continued enslavement of a billion people in China by a murdering regime of thugs who run over their own unarmed people with tanks for the crime of wanting to speak freely.
It's always interesting to me how the most vile crimes on earth have been rationalized as "just business."
Yahoo censors Chinese Internet access so they can "do business" with murderers running China.
Saudi Arabia is our "oil business partner" who makes it a crime for American Christians to even worship freely in that country. We deny Jesus Christ, our Savior, in the name of business with Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is the haven for the worst snakes of violent Islam and we fear even speaking of it for fear of hurting "business."
Illegal immigration is destroying our culture and sovereignty. It is bankrupting our hospitals. It is an enormous burden upon our schools, our government agencies, our law enforcement and our prisons. Nothing is done about this massive, organized criminal enterprise because illegal immigration is "good for business."
The American people should rise up and demand that our "business" is our security and we won't sell our souls, our faith, our sovereignty, our ports or our culture in the name of business.
We won't deny our Savior. We won't jeopardize our security. We won't destroy our culture. We won't sell our heritage. We won't do any of this in the name of business. We should demand an accounting of, and a brutal reckoning with, business executives who are selling out everything we hold dear.
We should make it our business to kick the asses of these traitors out of our beloved country before we are the prisoners, slaves or dead victims of their business partners.
They are one in the same...
If you want to be a smartass, that's fine with me. If facts don't matter to you, I'm okay with that.
You don't need no steenkin' facts. Grab your pitchfork and go do your stuff.
The grownups will clean up your mess.
If you'd calm down, I was referring to what this story referred to, the lawsuit.
This lawsuit. This story.
You can't focus on the this story because you're hyperventilating about the larger story.
."..you don't see an American firm even trying to get the job."
And that in itself is a puzzle. You mean no American companies wanted the $6 Billion? Surely at least one company would like it.
Ah, those lazy American businessmen...
got a winner !
The British Company SOLD to the Dubai group...WE don't get the choice between the two..
That is correct...no American company either wants the job, or does the job...
If the British Company can't sell to Dubai/UAE....they COULD sell to a Chinese firm...
"It asked a judge to block the takeover and said it does not believe the company, Florida or the U.S. government can ensure Dubai Ports World's compliance with American security rules."
I think the winning outcome has as much to do with America's security as it does with just contract law.
That's amazing. With all the many ports in the United States, there is no business nor company that can run a port.
That sounds like something for Ripley's Believe It or Not.
The next question is: what is the goal of Islam?
I know.....I didn't believe it at first either...but have heard it from multiple sources...
I suggested on another thread that Halliburton by it...THAT would really make the dems heads explode...but, it would be an American company!!!
I have only heard one person say this is less of a big deal than we think, and that was Tony Snow. He explains that the unions would still be running the ports...and that this has nothing to do with them having access to port security...
BUT, it makes me really nervous...
what I hate the most though, is having Schumer and Hillary as the "point people" in the Congress....but, from what I have heard, there is nothing Congress can do about this..
That is why this lawsuit MAY be the best recourse...even though techinically I think that President Bush CAN step in to stop it....which would be ironic, considering how Schumer and Hillary are fighting the NSA surviellance to take away his power...but may NEED his power to stop this...
Senator Richard Shelby is also upset about this.
"In a letter to Treasury secretary John Snow, Senator Richard Shelby, an influential Alabama Republican, stopped short of calling for the deal to be blocked, but said the transaction merited further scrutiny, potentially raising complications for DP World’s bid. Mr Shelby is expected to call for a hearing to discuss the issue in coming weeks."
Link posted at another thread: https://registration.ft.com/registration/barrier?referer=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1580261/posts&location=http%3A//news.ft.com/cms/s/d8156740-9f3f-11da-ba48-0000779e2340,s01=1.html
Yeah....I know that the original letter to Bush was signed by Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma...and I respect him a LOT..
so, I have felt myself feeling that it is something that needs to be stopped. I trust Coburn...I don't know about Shelby...but, I think there will be more Republicans questioning this..
I have a feeling this could be a major topic on tomorrow's Sunday Talk shows...
You might want to watch tomorrow...and then come to the Sunday Talk Show thread...and have a discussion about this...I have a feeling we will be discussing this at length tomorrow.
I am against this right now...but, I would like to think that I could rationally listen to the other side with an open mind.
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.