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

Skip to comments.

Just Nine Out of 300 Terminals Involved in Dubai Deal
NewsMax.com ^ | Feb. 28, 2006 | Carl Limbacher

Posted on 02/28/2006 3:34:51 PM PST by Carl/NewsMax

News reports over the last two weeks have repeatedly claimed that a Dubai company was taking control of six major U.S. ports as part of a deal approved by the Bush administration.

But according to one port security expert, Dubai Ports World will run just a tiny fraction of the terminals at the U.S. ports involved if the deal goes through.

Defending the transaction on MSNBC's "Scarborough Company" Monday night, Kim Petersen, president of Seasecure, noted: "There are 300 terminals at those ports. Dubai Ports World is going to handle nine of them."

SeaSecure is the largest provider of maritime security in America.

That's a far cry from the impression left by the press, which reported over 50 times in the last two weeks that DPW would be "taking control of six major U.S. ports," according to a Nexis Lexis search.

Variations on the same phrase likely appeared in hundreds of additional reports.

Only in the American press does a 3 percent share of operations constitute "taking control."


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: bds; control; dubai; dubaiportsworld; homelandsecurity; iran; israel; joescarborough; msnbc; ports; seasecure; security; terminals; uae; unitedarabemirates
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last
To: Howlin
Dubai, U.A.E., Joins U.S. Container Security Initiative (State Dept.)..

Oh look! They told us so themselves! I'm SOOO reassured...

21 posted on 02/28/2006 4:32:45 PM PST by ziggygrey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: atlaw

I have been to the port at NJ. I have called on P&O and know their facility. It is large, but NOT the largest at Newark. I believe Marsk is the largest there, but there are about 1/2 dozen companies that unload freighters there.

Now I don't have a dog in this fight, but all those guys on the docks are Union longshoremen. I doubt you could get rid of them and start hiring immigrants from the MiddleEast. I was more concerned when the Chinese took over the Panama canal and the port of Long Beach and so far that has been rather unfounded.

Since World Ports has agreed to set up a US division with an American in charge to run the ports I am less concerned.

Last...if you don't want foreign companies to run these ports, pass a law and list everything you don't want foreigners to own. I think you'll find America with a lot of for sale businesses and that big sucking sound will be foreign monies leaving our shores.


22 posted on 02/28/2006 4:33:33 PM PST by Edison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ziggygrey
Ok, which royal family entertained Osama?

General Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAE Armed Forces, Chairman of the Executive Council of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi
Sheikh Sultan bin Mohammed Al Qasimi, Crown Prince and Deputy Ruler of Sharjah, Chairman of the Sharjah Executive Council
HE Sheikh Sultan bin Mohammed Al Qasimi, Crown Prince and Deputy Ruler of Sharjah, Chairman of the Sharjah Executive Council
HE Sheikh Saud bin Saqr Al Qasimi, Crown Prince and Deputy Ruler of Ra's al-Khaimah
HE Sheikh Saud bin Rashid Al Mu'alla, Crown Prince of Umm al-Qaiwain
HE Sheikh Ammar bin Humaid Al Nuaimi, Crown Prince of Ajman

Which royal family laundered his money?

As for the 2 terrorists coming from the UAE, can you point out to me which emirate they came from?

Abu Dhabe, Dubai, Sharjah, Ajman, Umm al-Qaiwain, Ras al-Khaimah and Fujairah?

Did you read far enough into the "lengthy paper" to see who handles our port security in Houston?

23 posted on 02/28/2006 4:36:56 PM PST by Sally'sConcerns (Native Texan now in SW Ok.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Edison

Don't get in the way of a good rant with pesky facts.


24 posted on 02/28/2006 4:37:37 PM PST by colorado tanker (We need more "chicken-bleep Democrats" in the Senate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
I am glad to see NewsMax not being swept with the hysteria of the Dubai Ports deal and is showing the facts and truth behind this deal.
25 posted on 02/28/2006 4:37:49 PM PST by jveritas (Hate can never win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ziggygrey

Well, thanks for proving the point that you don't know the facts and don't care to know them.


26 posted on 02/28/2006 4:40:17 PM PST by Howlin ("Quick, he's bleeding! Is there a <strike>doctor</strike> reporter in the house?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: atlaw; Eva
Thanks for posting that information, atlaw! I counted 21 port locations in the U.S. There is virtually no information posted on P & O's site about how many container terminals are involved. Containers are the primary concern of port security operations. Hundreds or thousands of containers may be filled with machine parts, used widgets, drugs and other stuff. If only one container hides a nuke, the whole ball game is over.
27 posted on 02/28/2006 4:41:56 PM PST by ex-Texan (Matthew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Edison
Last...if you don't want foreign companies to run these ports, pass a law and list everything you don't want foreigners to own. I think you'll find America with a lot of for sale businesses and that big sucking sound will be foreign monies leaving our shores.

Oh sure, companies won't want to ship here if their cargo is subjected to AMERICAN security and handling at AMERICAN ports....

In this particular case, it isn't that the port security have foreigners in the chain of cargo entry, it's a company from THIS country:

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/688591.html

The deal went down with little apparent concern from our government, so I'm wondering if we're getting soft on the war on terror..do we need yet another 911-level wakeup call?

28 posted on 02/28/2006 4:42:16 PM PST by ziggygrey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker
Don't get in the way of a good rant with pesky facts.

Careful! I said that on another thread and was "asked" to not post by the person who put the thread up...........LOL.

29 posted on 02/28/2006 4:42:20 PM PST by Howlin ("Quick, he's bleeding! Is there a <strike>doctor</strike> reporter in the house?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Notice the sign up date? Seems just about everyone opposed to it (save the few malcontents that have been anti-everything Bush since 2000) signed up just before the 2004 election or within the last couple of months.
30 posted on 02/28/2006 4:42:43 PM PST by COEXERJ145 (Pat Buchanan lost a family member in the holocaust. The man fell out of a guard tower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ziggygrey

You really need to go back and read the "lengthy paper" you poo-poo'd. It addresses exactly who is responsible for security.

Here, where you don't have to strain your eyes, I've c/p'd the portion addressing port security:

"The federal government takes the lead in protecting America's ports. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, primarily through the activities of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the U.S. Coast Guard, runs many programs to secure U.S. ports. The U.S. Coast Guard is responsible for maritime security and reviewing and approving security plans for vessels, port facilities and port areas which are required by the MTSA. Customs and Border Protection is responsible for cargo security, and screens and inspects cargo entering the U.S. through every U.S. port.

Other cargo security programs include:

-- Container Security Initiative (inspection of U.S. import cargo
by CBP prior to leaving the outbound foreign port)
-- Use of radiation detection equipment to screen for weapons of
mass destruction
-- Use of other non-intrusive inspection devices
-- Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT), which
encourages maritime stakeholders to verify their security
measures.

The Port Security Grant program and the pending implementation of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) are also important parts of America's port security portfolio to provide layered security.

While the federal government takes the lead on waterside and cargo security, overall security is a shared responsibility with port authorities, facility and vessel operators, and state and local law enforcement agencies providing additional security. The Maritime Transportation Security Act also establishes local security committees to evaluate and make improvements in each port."


I would suggest before you start calling the UAE a dictatorship you might want to consider going to their website and reading about their system of governance.


31 posted on 02/28/2006 4:42:49 PM PST by Sally'sConcerns (Native Texan now in SW Ok.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ziggygrey

I believe the Saudi's have docks in several ports on the east coast, New York is one of them. Anyway, they wouldn't need to put a bomb in a shipping container, just inside any ship that ties up at a dock. How you gonna' stop that? You can't.


32 posted on 02/28/2006 4:44:34 PM PST by muleskinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Didn't you know that the original poster "owns" the thread???


33 posted on 02/28/2006 4:51:40 PM PST by colorado tanker (We need more "chicken-bleep Democrats" in the Senate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker

So I was told today; good to know, huh? :-)


34 posted on 02/28/2006 4:52:14 PM PST by Howlin ("Quick, he's bleeding! Is there a <strike>doctor</strike> reporter in the house?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

P&O is involved in port operations throught the Gulf of Mexico along Texas and the northern Atlantic states. I believe they mentioned the 6 major ports involved.


35 posted on 02/28/2006 4:53:16 PM PST by sasha123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: muleskinner
Oh wait, you could stop every foreign ship about 20 miles out and spend a week or so going thru it with a geiger counter, then a nerve gas detector, etc.

Maybe the only thing that gives certain countries the incentive to keep their cargo clean is the knowledge that they will cease to exist if any catastrophic event can be pinned on them

36 posted on 02/28/2006 4:54:59 PM PST by muleskinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Sally'sConcerns

P&O has operations in Houston, along with quite a few other Gulf of Mexico ports, Corpus, Port Arthur, Galveston...


37 posted on 02/28/2006 4:56:21 PM PST by sasha123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

http://portal.pohub.com/portal/page?_pageid=36,1,36_31159:36_34057&_dad=pogprtl&_schema=POGPRTL
Click on North America for info about each port and number of berths


38 posted on 02/28/2006 4:57:56 PM PST by mathluv (Bushbot, Snowflake, Dittohead ---- Bring it on!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sally'sConcerns

"I would suggest before you start calling the UAE a dictatorship you might want to consider going to their website and reading about their system of governance."

You're not suggesting, I hope, that the UAE is a democracy.

And the UAE's home page is probably not the best source for an objective view. For a slightly better perspective (patriarchal and tribal rule, human trafficking, Shari'a law and courts, criminal sanctions for proselytizing muslims, etc.):

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2004/41734.htm


39 posted on 02/28/2006 4:58:57 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Sorta like when my kids start to fight over a toy one of them picks up, each claiming it's theirs. Of course, I'm not like that - unless someone tries to take the TV controller away from me . . . . :-)


40 posted on 02/28/2006 5:07:05 PM PST by colorado tanker (We need more "chicken-bleep Democrats" in the Senate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 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