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 ...
You mean the Mayor of New York have to give the Port of New York to the A-Rrabs?
The operant term is operate terminals not operate ports.
I think the right is being played here like a bunch of suck-egg mules. The left has defined the issue and the right...jerked its knee. Most, if not all, of the cogent, rational arguments (WSJ for example) I've read about this leads me to think the matter has been mostly a distortion and is being exploited. (Gosh, how new is that?) Interestingly, the ones fuming over this matter haven't said much that is rational...in fact they've been pretty churlish...which is pretty much a waste of time. Insults don't persuade.
Better to let the RATS and MSM show their ignorance.
Don't kid yourself. The spineless Pubbies are freaking about the political fallout. Dubya will likely suffer again politically, as with Miers. At least in that case he was punished for something that actually transpired and was presented accurately. This cyberlynching is disgusting.
Well said. Isn't it curious how few of the Chicken Littles seem to have made their way onto this thread?
And is based on ignorance. My first response on this issue days ago when asked about the cause of the the problem was "Bigotry".
The problem for the RATS is that both former RAT presidents are in favor. When the Pubbies shift gears then they show trust in Bush.
The bottom line for me is,
"IF CHUCKIE SCHUMER IS AGAINST IT, I'M FOR IT"
Hogwash. I'm really tired of this shibboleth being trotted out, along with all the other mendacious talking points.
http://www.treasury.gov/offices/international-affairs/exon-florio/
In short, the President has the authority to block a merger/acquisition if certain criteria are met. If they're not met, no need for the Prez to even be involved. This statute specifically mentions the President's role can be delegated.
That's okay. We're tired of all the shrieking, hyperventilating freaks that don't stop, no matter how many times facts are put in front of them.
Heck, I expect some of them to be protesting Muslim cartoons any day now.
The ports deal is a red herring that is flourishing because there isn't anything better to do. If the Olympics were half-way interesting, this wouldn't even be on the front-page. It's gonna be a hard month or so until Spring training and Easter break gets people thinking about going outdoors and getting some fresh air & exercise.
Laura Ingraham said when she heard that JIMMY CARTER WAS FOR IT, SHE WAS AGAINST IT.
I think the best thing is to wait and learn.
Well, thus far the most common talking points I've run across are (1) there are no domestic terminal operators who can take over P&O's allegedly enormous North American operations, (2) DP World won't have any responsibility for security, and (3) this deal was made public more than two years ago and nobody complained.
I have no idea who's floating these falsehoods, but it's pretty brazen.
Great article which puts a bit of perspective and context on the matter.
The hysteria by the Right makes many of them look like the left, knee jerk wise anyway.
I have heard #1 and don't know if it's true or false - but living in "contractor world" I do know many complex jobs only have a few qualified competitors. This could be the case here, I don't know.
#2 is essentially true - if we're talking about security of the containers (which is what most are hyperventilating about). That will still be handled by Customs/DHS. DP World does have some physical security tasks - but even that is still overseen by the U.S. government.
I don't know, but I can believe #3, at least as far as first announcing an intent to acquire another firm. Some of those acquisitions take forever and a year. But it's safe to say it did not come to Congress' attention until very recently.
Reform CFIUS to Stop Foreign Raiders from Dismantling the Defense Industrial Base
Tell me o'enlightened one, the name of the US company that didn't get a chance to bid on this. I'll wait here.
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.