Rekjalhew

February 25, 2006

Why No Foreign Government Should Manage US Sea Ports

by @ 1:39 pm. Filed under Terrorism and War, The Truth Shall Set you Free!

Regarding management of America’s ports, we need to consider companies controlled by a foreign government differently from a private company. A government controlled company works at the pleasure of the foreign government. Not at the pleasure of shareholders who want to make money, like with a private company. (While the UAE company might become part of an Arab stock exchange, it is still under the control of the UAE and not a true private business.) With the sale of Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation (better known as P&O) to Dubai Ports World, a privately held company is being transferred to a company controlled by a foreign government. Regardless of the country, it is bad for management of any American port to be under the control of a foreign government. Plenty of people are saying “lots of US port operations are managed by companies outside of the USA already”. But they are not saying “lots of US port operations are managed by foreign governments”. There is a major difference. In some cases there are US ports run by companies that are controlled by a foreign government. That number should not increase, it should decrease. Not to mention none of those other nations had so many dies to terrorism.

Can anyone say with any level of certainty that the USA will not ever need to attack the United Arab Emirates in the next 25 years? I don’t think that statement can be said regarding most nations in the world. Because alliances change with time and an ally of today could very well be tomorrow’s enemy. To have a foreign government involved in US port management compromises America’s ability to freely defend against threats in any part of the world.

Let’s say 15 years from now, America has a need to actually attack the UAE or a nation that UAE feels is a strong ally of theirs. With the UAE running some American ports, they could disrupt our port operations in retaliation. Even denying pay to dock workers would have a major impact.

And as we learn more about the sale of P&O, few are mentioning that the UAE would be managing some ports where US military materials are moved. While everyone is talking about the 6 commercial ports in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia. There are very few people saying a word about the ports in Beaumont and Corpus Christi, Texas!

DeLay Says Bush Making Mistake on Port


Separately, U.S. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Humble, said he is concerned about Texas ports where military cargo is handled by London-based Peninsular and Oriental, the company to be purchased by the UAE’s Dubai Ports World.

Poe said ports in Beaumont and Corpus Christi move military goods, materials and records of which he would not want UAE employees to have access.

“We would be bringing trouble upon ourselves,” Poe said. “I’ve heard the UAE is our friend on the war on terror, despite the past, but they may not be our friend tomorrow.

“They would have access to every manifest regarding shipping, all cargo going out, what’s on it, where it’s going and all incoming shipping coming back to the port.”

And it should also be noted that they would learn more of our port security procedures. No foreign government should be running an entity that is handling that type of information.

Many are surprised by the US reaction, given this deal will give the UAE management of ports 19 countries, including Britain, Belgium, France, India, China, Vancouver and Buenos Aires. So since the stock holders of P&O are OK with the deal and the rest of the world is not protesting, Americans are expected to follow suit. Sorry to the backers of this deal, but nations are sovereign for a reason. Because each nation must act in it’s own best interests and just because 18 countries OK the deal does not mean the USA should.

And now we learn that Homeland Security had issues with this deal.

Homeland Security Objected to Ports Deal

The Homeland Security Department objected at first to a United Arab Emirates company’s taking over significant operations at six U.S. ports. It was the lone protest among members of the government committee that eventually approved the deal without dissent.

The department’s early objections were settled later in the government’s review of the $6.8 billion deal after Dubai-owned DP World agreed to a series of security restrictions.

Well President Bush told us that Dubai Ports World should not be treated any differently than London based privately held P&O. But obviously Homeland Security did not treat them the same! Homeland Security demanded additional security restrictions. So let’s cut all the “treat them the same” crap! They are not being treated the same, because everybody knows they are not the same. Dubai Ports World is a under the control of the UAE, is not a truly “private” company like P&O and the UAE has a long history of connections with known terrorists. Any foreign government managing US ports is bad, but one with a known history of ties to terrorism is worse! They cooperate now, but their history of cooperation is very short and recent. Maybe the words “you’re either with us or against us” had something to do with their change of heart. Not to mention, UAE rulers know al Qaeda will eventually try and dethrone them as al Qaeda is trying to do now with the House of Saud. They know al Qaeda will eventually attack them more and so the current UAE alliance with America is self serving in nature for them. After 9/11 they felt the USA would be able to win a battle with al Qaeda and sided with us, but their alliance is not based on true loyalty to this nation.

This is why I say Liberal Democrats were right when they first considered banning all foreign governments from ever running a port in the USA.

Plenty of people claim “oh the Coast Guard will be doing security”. Oh really? Well here’s how security at the ports really works.

Who’s In Charge at U.S. Ports? (emphasis added)

WASHINGTON — Who’s in charge of security at U.S. seaports?

There’s no simple answer to that question – a critical part of the debate over the takeover of major port operations by a United Arab Emirates company

All seaports are different and the biggest ones are complex. Responsibility for security is spread among government agencies: the Coast Guard, Customs and Border Protection, terminal operators and state and local port authorities.

The Homeland Security Department said over a year ago that confusion about responsibility had delayed a cargo security plan.

“During the two years since DHS was established, this has frequently led to questions of ‘who’s in charge?”‘ said a draft of the plan, released in December 2004.

The terminal operator is responsible for security at its own terminal and the area within the port where cargo is loaded, unloaded or transferred, according to the Homeland Security Department.

UAE-based Dubai Ports World would operate some of the terminals at a half-dozen of the nation’s largest seaports: Baltimore, Philadelphia, Miami, New Orleans, New York and Newark, N.J.

This is not the kind of thing that the USA should be trusting to any foreign government.


This deal should be DENIED.
There is talk about more review and such, but to delay and then approve this deal leaves America in the same weakened position regarding our ports.

Now despite my opposition and that of others being based on sound principle and facts, some wish to call us “racists”, “bigots” and “xenophobes”. But when you consider that the UAE still does not recognize Israel, but did recognize the Taliban. One has to wonder, who is the real racist, bigot, xenophobe here? Because it certainly is not those of us opposed to this port deal. The real racist, bigot, xenophobe is the UAE its self! Supporters of this port deal know they can’t say that. But it’s the truth.



7 Responses to “Why No Foreign Government Should Manage US Sea Ports”

  1. Independent Conservative Says:

    The UAE Only Helps the USA Because Al Qaeda Wants the Rulers Dethroned

    As I mentioned previously, the United Arab Emirates does not work with the USA out of any loyalty to our nation. They only work with us because they see America as being more powerful than al Qaeda and they know al Qaeda wants to overtake them. Prio…

  2. Booker Rising Says:

    Why No Foreign Government Should Manage US Sea Por

    Asserts Independent Conservative, a black blogger: “Regarding management of America?s ports, we need to consider companies controlled by a foreign government differently from a private company. A government controlled company works at the pleasure of…

  3. Independent Conservative Says:

    Looking at the Ports Deal from a Biblical Perspective

    What God fearing nation in the Bible ever outsourced management of their gates to another nation? And since this post is viewing things from a purely Biblical view, when would they ever outsource management of any of their gates to a nation that foll…

  4. Independent Conservative Says:

    Coast Guard Did Not Know How Risky the Ports Deal Might Be

    Add this to the initial objections of Homeland Security and you see this deal is not as wonderful as some make it out to be.

    Coast Guard Said It Couldn’t Assess Risk in Port Deal

    Feb. 27 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. Coast Guard said que…

  5. Independent Conservative Says:

    UAE Boycotts Israel and Fines US Exporters That Do Not Comply!

    When will this be discussed during the 45-day review of Dubai Ports World?
    (Best to read the full article.)

    Exclusive: Dubai ports firm enforces Israel boycott

    The parent company of a Dubai-based firm at the center of a political storm in the…

  6. Independent Conservative Says:

    Democratic and Republican Families Play Both Sides of Portgate

    Both the Democratic Clinton family and the Republican Dole family are playing both sides of the UAE ports issue.
    The Gateway Pundit (who is OK with the deal) has a good write-up about Democrats Bill and Hillary Clinton’s double dealing on this …

  7. Independent Conservative Says:

    Dubai Ports World to Give Up US Port Management After Recommendation from Senator Bill Frist

    Realizing that there was not enough support in Congress and that it could hurt his party in the November elections, Senator Bill Frist asked Dubai Ports World to give up it’s stake in US port management. The United Arab Emirates owned company h…

Independent Conservative - Copyright 2008 - Copyright Notice

[powered by WordPress.]

53 queries. 0.396 seconds