Posted on 03/01/2006 11:10:48 AM PST by Sub-Driver
80% of U.S. Ports Already Foreign-Owned
Most of the terminals at America's major ports are already foreign-owned, according to a senior official with the largest U.S.-owned ports operator, SSA Marine.
In an interview with National Public Radio on Sunday, SSA Vice President Bob Waters explained that there are 15 major ports in the U.S., comprising about 100 terminals.
We operate seven of those terminals," he said, adding that the next biggest American ports operator, Maher Terminals, manages one terminal.
A dozen additional terminals nationwide are managed by city or state governments.
"Other than that," said Waters, "the rest of the terminals, which comprise about 80 percent of those terminals we're talking about, are operated by foreign entities, primarily shipping lines."
Interviewed on the same program, Joe King, former chief of U.S. Customs' Terrorism Unit, noted that the government of Singapore owns most of a company that operates terminals in Los Angeles and elsewhere.
Two Chinese companies, both with close ties to the Chinese government, manage terminals in New York, Long Beach, and other places, he said.
And the government of Venezuela owns all or part of marine terminal management at ports in Pennsylvania and Maine.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Makes it easier to impose sanctions against us this way.
Never let it be said that the propaganda wing of the DNC (ancient MSM) would let facts get in the way of a Bush bashing opportunity.
Headline writer doesn't know the difference between "owned" and "operated".
YOu beat me to it....they are not owned....however, can someone tell me if the Panama Canal is, or is not owned by the Chicoms???
There is ZERO foreign ownership of U.S. Ports. TERMINALS ARE NOT PORTS. Your headline is misleading. Please ask the moderators to fix it.
Not to mention the difference between "port" and "terminal".
When did Carter give them away?
Yet another incorrect NewSmax headline. Operated, yes...owned, no. NewSmax routinely manipulates its headlines for maximum effect, even if the headline is inaccurate and does not reflect the body of the story.
Way to go, NewSmax!
"Two Chinese companies, both with close ties to the Chinese government, manage terminals in New York, Long Beach, and other places, he said. "
"And the government of Venezuela owns all or part of marine terminal management at ports in Pennsylvania and Maine."
Just plain scary!!
I wonder if the Dims would approve of ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE of those PORTS???
Agreed. An extremely inflammatory and biased headline. The terminals are leased and operated not owned. The ports are not foreign owned.
"80% of U.S. Ports Already Foreign-owned"
Foreign-owned = okay
Muslim-owned = not okay
The headline is the one at NewsMax. The mods won't fix this unless NewsMax does.
We gave the Panama Canal to the Panamanians. It is being operated by the Chicoms. I don't know whether or not the Panamanians relinquished ownership in their arrangement with the Chicoms (though since Billy Carter's dumber brother gave it away we really don't have any say in what they do with it).
Carl's a Freeper. I can't remember his screenname, though. If I could, I'd ping him to this distortion. Note that nowhere in the story did it say that ANY U.S. ports were foreign-owned. Foreign-operated, but not owned.
Yet, NewSmax, once again, has writting an inflammatory headline that doesn't relate to the body of the article. I think Carl knows that most people read only the headline and the first paragraph of a story. So he manipulates the news.
Headline writer doesn't know the difference between "owned" and "operated".
Not to mention the difference between "port" and "terminal".
Good catch guys. Kind of like saying you "own" an apartment building when you really only lease a unit.
The latest distortion I've been hearing is that DPI will be hiring some of their own "Security". And by security, they mean guys who ride around on golf carts making sure that delinquents don't spray paint on the side of the building, but why make that distinction when the real goal is to leave the image of a pointy bearded guy with a towel on his head and a long flowing tunic sneaking around, planting anthrax in a crate of oranges?
(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,
The headline is the actual title of the article at Newsmax.com. I recommend you send a scathing note to their editors. I already did.
Have there been any reports of malfeasance or security breaks?
Any info/answers concerning these questions would be much appreciated in light of the firestorm currently raging.
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.