Subscribe!I don't understand the uproar over a deal that transfers management of operations in six U.S. ports from a company based in one foreign country to another. The transfer is between a United Kingdom company to a United Arab Emirates company, so of course everybody starts postulating about potential terrorism and al Quaida links. Is this fair? No. First of all, the company, Dubai Ports World, will not gain control over entire US ports. Also, security is the responsiblity of the US Coast Guard and Homeland Security. DPW will only operate a portion of each port, much like airlines operate in airport terminals. Secondly, why should we be concerned? Just because it is an Arab company? This company has economic interests to worry about, and so certainly would do everything it can to prevent an attack. How do we know other companies are doing all that they can to prevent terrorist infiltration? Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) have announced plans to introduce legislation banning companines owned by foreign companies from controlling operations is US ports. An absolutely ridiculous knee-jerk reaction. If the transfer was to another European country, such as France or Italy, would there be such outrage? Would former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Evan Bayh (D-IN), Charles Schumer (D-NY) be voicing such opposition to the transfer? Where was this concern before news of the transfer came to light? After all, the management was previously held by a foreign company.
|
The Libloggery . . . blogging creative writing, photography, opinion, and random fun. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Archives*
|
February 20, 2006
The Port "controversy"
I don't understand the uproar over a deal that transfers management of operations in six U.S. ports from a company based in one foreign country to another. The transfer is between a United Kingdom company to a United Arab Emirates company, so of course everybody starts postulating about potential terrorism and al Quaida links. Is this fair? No. First of all, the company, Dubai Ports World, will not gain control over entire US ports. Also, security is the responsiblity of the US Coast Guard and Homeland Security. DPW will only operate a portion of each port, much like airlines operate in airport terminals. Secondly, why should we be concerned? Just because it is an Arab company? This company has economic interests to worry about, and so certainly would do everything it can to prevent an attack. How do we know other companies are doing all that they can to prevent terrorist infiltration? Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) have announced plans to introduce legislation banning companines owned by foreign companies from controlling operations is US ports. An absolutely ridiculous knee-jerk reaction. If the transfer was to another European country, such as France or Italy, would there be such outrage? Would former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Evan Bayh (D-IN), Charles Schumer (D-NY) be voicing such opposition to the transfer? Where was this concern before news of the transfer came to light? After all, the management was previously held by a foreign company. |
|
| | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright 2006 Libloggery. All images and text remain the copyright of the original owners. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
