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
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-105 next last
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)
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
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.)
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)
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...)
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)
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.....
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)
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)
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
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?)
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)
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)
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
To: angkor
16
posted on
02/22/2006 7:55:28 AM PST
by
Coop
(FR = a lotta talk, but little action)
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)
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
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)
To: angkor
20
posted on
02/22/2006 8:03:10 AM PST
by
Coop
(FR = a lotta talk, but little action)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson