Governor Has Faith In President's Ports Sale Decision

Local10.com ^ | February 21, 2006 | Local10.com

[Reaganwuzthebest]

CORAL GABLES, Fla. -- Gov. Jeb Bush said he has faith in his brother's administration over its decision to allow an Arab-owned company to operate major U.S. ports, including in Miami.

Dubai Ports World, a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates, is expected to take over a British company that has been running six U.S. ports.

Several South Florida Congress members and politicians believe the deal should be closely examined.

U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen said she has no specific concerns about the company, although the fact that UAE was where a number of the Sept. 11 hijackers were being harbored warrants further examination.

However, a former security director said there is little cause for concern.

"Being regulated by the federal government and by the state government puts a very high threshold of security standard for any operator at the Port of Miami," Nelson Oramas said.

Florida's governor, who attended a breakfast meeting at the Biltmore Hotel on Tuesday promoting the Central American Free Trade Agreement, said he thinks criticism by some Congress members is unwarranted because his brother, President George W. Bush, could press for more details by the time the sale is supposed to go through on March 2.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has said that the company went through a "very extensive" review process.

Nevertheless, the Republican governors of New York and Maryland said they might try to cancel lease arrangements at ports in their states.

Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sen. Robert Menendez are planning to introduce legislation that would prevent the sale of port operations to foreign governments.

[indcons]

What???? Did you even read the article I posted? You seem to be the only person who is unaware of the ChiCom control of the Panama Canal and Long Beach. Wonder what it takes so be so deliberately misinformed.

So, do you consider Rep. Duncan Hunter to be a conspiracy theorist too?

[Sunnyflorida]

"Our tax structure probably makes it unfriendly for an American company to get into the business since they'll be subject to good old American double taxation."

That is a GREAT question. The other question is antitrust. If an American company got 50% of the US Ports under contract I'm sure they would have to pay the antitrust piper. Yet, unless you have dozens under contract it is hard to manage.

I wish I knew the tax question better. I know the dems went all nuclear over the repatriation exemptions.

[Sunnyflorida]

I only have one word to answer you, "Scarface."

[Heartofsong83]

Me too. That is a rare case where I would support a socialist movement...when it is in the national interest for security. I'd rather have the local or national government take over, and if necessary amend the Constitution, to give them security duties than hand it over to an unknown foreign agency with a shoddy record on security.

Where do the other state and local governments stand on the issue?

[jess35]

They are not taking over the security operations.

[MineralMan]

Here's a list of Port facilities operated by DPWorld, aside from their UAE operations. This is what I mean, you see, regarding having control over operations on both ends of a shipment, or even the ability to shuttle containers in a circuitous route:

Germany - Germersheim
Romania - Constanta
Venezuela - Puerto Cabello
Dominican Republic - Puerto Caucedo
Australia - Adelaide
Hong Kong - CT3
Hong Kong - ACT
China - Tianjin
China - Yantai
Hong Kong - ATL
China - ATL Yantian
China - Shanghai Ji Fa
China - Yantian
India - Cochin
India - Visakhapatnam
Saudi Arabia - Jeddah
Djibouti - Djibouti

[Alberta's Child]

Only about 5% of containers are inspected. The other 95% is charged duties based on the manifests. Don't deceive yourself into thinking that container security has no holes. It has plenty of holes.

That's fine, but what's the point?

Why would a foreign company spend $6.8 billion to acquire a British port terminal operator with contracts to operate terminals at U.S. ports, when for a fraction of that cost they could develop and ship chemical, radiological or biological agents into this country in four different containers and have a 99.999375% chance (based on that 5% figure you cited) that at least one of them will get through the screening process?

[OldFriend]

Frist is so lacking in judgement I cannot imagine him as my physician.

[Mike Darancette]

Question: who runs/ owns all the other US ports?

I would imagine that the ports themselves are owned by governments (city and state) but the non government owned terminals are all owned by foreigners.

[butternut_squash_bisque]

That precisely is what's causing the problems.

Own. Operate. Run. Administer. WTH? I've got to do some research and find some answers.

[MineralMan]

"Why would a foreign company spend $6.8 billion to acquire a British port terminal operator with contracts to operate terminals at U.S. ports,"

See my list of DPWorld port operations in #107. They operate ports in every region of the world except for North America. If this deal goes through, they will operate ports in every region of the world.

Having been involved in some shipping operations, although not on this scale, it is an advantage to have facilities in as many areas as possible. That makes it easy to do things like temporary warehousing, and transshipments outside of normal channels.

For example...a shipment coming to the USA from, say, Germany, is probably of less interest to Homeland Security than one coming in from, say, Djibouti.

So, if I could route a container I controlled from, say, Djibouti to, say, Germershein in Germany, arranging for the manifest to somehow change in the process, I might feel rather certain that I could ship it to, say, New Jersey and get it through security screening without being opened.

Do you see? Now, why would DPWorld do such a thing? DPWorld is part of a sukuk, a distributed financing plan under Sharia law. While it is nominally owned by the government of Dubai, there are many fingers in the pot.

My opinion is that no Islamic government-owned entity should have any operational control in any of our ports. That's my opinion. Yours may differ.

[Siena Dreaming]

Where do the other state and local governments stand on the issue?

Depends on the state and/or municipality.

Conservative states are more careful about injecting too much government in. However, you can bet that liberal states are right now salivating at the prospect of taking over 100% of port operations. They get all kinds of new tax money, new devoted government employee constituencies, and power. (Anyone wondering why Hitlery Clinton is taking the position she is taking on this?)

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Where do the other state and local governments stand on the issue?

Not sure but if we can't find American companies for whatever reason to manage the day to day operations of these ports then maybe more of the state governments will get involved in doing it themselves.

[Mo1]

I don't like this ports sale .. it sucks

[Mike Darancette]

Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sen. Robert Menendez are planning to introduce legislation that would prevent the sale of port operations to foreign governments.

Where does X42 stand on this Issue? I'll ber he is for the sale, along with X41.

[Sunnyflorida]

"Florida is in a unique position on this issue. As I type this, I'm reading an article from the current (February 20) issue of The Journal of Commerce that describes how the state of Florida has recently implemented a credential system for port employees with standards that exceeds those set by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security under the Maritime Security Act of 2002.'

I agree with the first sentence COMPLETELY. However, just look at airline security at MIA. It is pretty much an open port. The airlines cannot control there own employees in Latin America. I used to fly out of there once a week or more and the stories you hear from airline employees that are not based there are quite stunning. I never worry about the drugs or illegals without a ticket, its the weapons that are scary. Needless to say if my flight connects out of MIA I don't travel.

One night I arrived in MIA 11PM. it was not busy. There were some kids in the terminal beyond security vandalizing a facility. I walked past them down the concourse. The first person I came to worked for United, I said you should call security and described what I saw. She said she did not know how. I then walked up to a Bahamas Air gate and said the same thing. She said she did not know how. I walked up to "security" and told the same story but nobody spoke English. True story. I had my phone in my truck and called Miami-Dade PD on the way home. I asked for the airport branch. They connected me with a sargent who was not surprised at all. Miami! That weekend we decided to move out of south Florida. I have never and will not set foot in that aiport again. If anyone THINKS they can secure the Port of Miami short of sending in the 82nd airborne they are on, well, drugs.

[Siena Dreaming]

then maybe more of the state governments will get involved in doing it themselves.

Just what Hillary would love. Get ready to see your tax rates go up.

Do we need all American airlines to be taken over by government as well?

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Today it's been posted Clinton backs Bush on this as does Carter. I can't think of a better reason now to be opposed to it.