Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Growing criticism puzzles many in shipping industry
The Baltimore Sun ^ | February 22, 2006 | Meredith Cohn

Posted on 02/22/2006 7:04:15 AM PST by new yorker 77

'We haven't done a good job of explaining how we work'

Just about any given time, it's possible to find a Greek-owned ship flying a Liberian flag, employing a Filipino crew and carrying cargo from China into a U.S. port terminal managed by a British company that hires American longshoremen.

This is how Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Target and others get their socks and stereos for the U.S. consumer.

So, some in the shipping industry have been taken aback in the past week by growing criticism in Washington and in state capitals to a deal that would transfer control over some operations in several major U.S. ports from a British company to one owned by the government of Dubai.

"To be fair, we're on the edge of the world and we haven't done a good job explaining how we work, so people are confused by it," said Art Wong, a spokesman for the port of Long Beach, near Los Angeles.

.... skip to

In the major U.S. ports where Dubai Ports World would operate terminals - Baltimore, New York, New Jersey, Miami, New Orleans and Philadelphia - many of the shipping lines, the stevedores that load and unload ships and terminal operators have foreign owners.

The top 10 containership fleets are based in Denmark, Switzerland, Taiwan, China, Germany, France, Japan, Hong Kong and Singapore, said Peter S. Shaerf, managing director of AMA Capital Partners LLC, a merchant banking firm that focuses on the maritime and transportation industries. All call on U.S. ports, and some of the shipping lines manage terminals.

Other terminal operators with U.S. operations are based in England, Denmark and Hong Kong.

....

(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: dpw; dubai
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last

1 posted on 02/22/2006 7:04:16 AM PST by new yorker 77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

this is no time for common sense. this is a political goldmine. /sarc


2 posted on 02/22/2006 7:11:29 AM PST by the invisib1e hand (i'd rather hunt with Cheney than drive with Kennedy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77
Weird. Just about everyone understands this is a perception and PR issue rather a real problem.

The WH has been a little naive in not anticipating this kind of hysterical reaction.
3 posted on 02/22/2006 7:15:44 AM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: angkor
I don't like the deal on the surface, but the people on both sides who pretend to care about the ports have no idea who runs them.

If you do not know the totality of our port situation, educate yourself.

That's what I am trying to do.

There's a reason there is no U.S. company managing these ports and it's because no such company exists.

It's hard to prevent outsourcing when there is no American company to source to.
4 posted on 02/22/2006 7:18:41 AM PST by new yorker 77 (Conservatives who eat their own are a liberal's best friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: angkor
Actually heard a caller to Sean yesterday saying that perception is reality and Sean agreed with the caller.

Evidently all logic has fled and hysterics and hyperbole rule.

5 posted on 02/22/2006 7:23:21 AM PST by OldFriend (MSM ~ controversy, crap, & confusion.....compliments of Alan Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

There's a reason there is no U.S. company managing these ports and it's because no such company exists.



the ila controls the ports, don't you know...makes no difference whose names are on paper....


6 posted on 02/22/2006 7:30:47 AM PST by ronnied (we are the only animals that bare our teeth in greeting...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

Agree with you there. I was afraid of a public stoning yesterday after I suggested Michelle Malkin was feeding the hysteria.


7 posted on 02/22/2006 7:33:26 AM PST by brothers4thID (Being lectured by Ted Kennedy on ethics is not unlike being lectured on dating protocol by Ted Bundy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

In New York, the ports are controlled by the Port Authority, called the 'PA'.

I guess that might make some consider them allied with the terrorists.....


8 posted on 02/22/2006 7:35:57 AM PST by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proxy_user

Only if the PA workers arrive riding camels.


9 posted on 02/22/2006 7:39:32 AM PST by OldFriend (MSM ~ controversy, crap, & confusion.....compliments of Alan Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: brothers4thID
Having worked for SeaLand Service.....long time ago, I can assure you that the unions control EVERYTHING on those docks, in those ports, and on the ships too!

The loss prevention reports were VERY interesting! To say the least.

The dockworkers would be in the parking lot selling stuff right out of the purloined containers.

10 posted on 02/22/2006 7:41:56 AM PST by OldFriend (MSM ~ controversy, crap, & confusion.....compliments of Alan Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77
If you do not know the totality of our port situation, educate yourself.

No can do.

I think if you're walking down the path of "knowing the totality," then you also need to consider Hutchinson, Maersk, PSA International (the other P&O bidder), and all of the other global port operators who have U.S. interests. That's a tall order, something fit for several years of reasearch by a Wall Street analyst. Good luck.

But where all this (impossible) effort brings you is right back to the beginning, the very simple question of "what difference to our security does it make who operates an American port terminal"?

And the answer is "none", since security is run by TSA and the Coast Guard.

By the way, the consensus we've seen so far from container/shipping experts and professionals, and from Wall Street analysts, is that this is a big yawn. Do you think they're all ignorant as to security considerations? I don't.

11 posted on 02/22/2006 7:45:00 AM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

Sometimes I am stunned with how bad this administration is about PR. Of course, every time they try to get the word out the media attacks them so they're in sort of a catch 22 position.


12 posted on 02/22/2006 7:46:12 AM PST by McGavin999 (If Intelligence Agencies can't find leakers, how can we expect them to find terrorists?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: angkor
Just about everyone understands this is a perception and PR issue rather a real problem.

HUH?!?! I think there's a fraction of us here on FR that understand that. Most of the hysteria is over "Arabs running our port security!"

13 posted on 02/22/2006 7:47:37 AM PST by Coop (FR = a lotta talk, but little action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Add to the "big yawn" group anyone who has worked in any form of government security/logistics.


14 posted on 02/22/2006 7:49:05 AM PST by brothers4thID (Being lectured by Ted Kennedy on ethics is not unlike being lectured on dating protocol by Ted Bundy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Coop

I meant everyone who's surmounted the emotional issue of "Arabs running our ports", which I confess I held until I did just a little reading and thinking about it.

This is a red herring issue driven entirely by emotion.


15 posted on 02/22/2006 7:54:31 AM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: angkor

Yep.


16 posted on 02/22/2006 7:55:28 AM PST by Coop (FR = a lotta talk, but little action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: brothers4thID

Perhaps it's just a ploy to create a government-owned company to do the job (as it's clear that the private sector doesn't want to do so.) Then there would be lots of potential political favors to be granted.


17 posted on 02/22/2006 7:56:02 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: brothers4thID
Add to the "big yawn" group anyone who has worked in any form of government security/logistics.

Acknowledged. Out.

18 posted on 02/22/2006 7:56:06 AM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: angkor
I meant everyone who's surmounted the emotional issue of "Arabs running our ports", which I confess I held until I did just a little reading and thinking about it.

Perhaps you'll have more success at convincing some others around here than this "cheerleading, Bushbot troll" did.

19 posted on 02/22/2006 7:59:32 AM PST by Coop (FR = a lotta talk, but little action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: angkor
Still lotsa work to do.

FR poll

20 posted on 02/22/2006 8:03:10 AM PST by Coop (FR = a lotta talk, but little action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson