<p>The management of 6 US ports to be given to foriegn companies</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/20/port.security/[/url]”>http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/20/port.security/</a></p>
<p>Ummmm–sounds like the kind of racial profiling you liberals fear and detest. How do you propose we treat our few strong Arab allies–kick them in the face?<br>
The US Customs and other US security concerns will still have control over port operations in that regard.</p>
<p>For a country that is so gung ho on national security and spying on people that talk to foriegners, this is interesting that we would take something as important as our port security and give to ANY one else </p>
<p>Even republicans are wondering about this one</p>
<p>No, not kick them in the face. Just not turn our port secrurity over to them. Big difference.
I think the senators, both Republican and Democrat, who object to this have legitimate concerns. I’m willing to listen to be convinced that our ports would be safe with this change, but have yet to hear anything that makes me feel better coming from the White House.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>We should have a lot of questions. To just assume everything will be taken care of because the White House says so, given its track record, would be very irresponsible.</p>
<p>Part of the concern is that the connections with 9-11, the checking of employees, etc</p>
<p>Not jsut that it is ARAB, but that is difficult to check what they are doing</p>
<p>We have no American local companies that can do the work, hire locals, etc? Not one company? That suprises me. I mean if we are speinding billions of dollars on a war, we should spend a bit on our own ports</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=148934[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=148934</a></p>
<p>Maybe we could just outsource our government too. Jeez.</p>
<p>It’s not a matter of racial profiling; I don’t think our ports should be run by anyone but us. Living very near two of these ports, it’s not an academic question to me. What does kicking anyone in the face have to do with keeping national security in national hands?</p>
<p>How are we giving up security? All ports are subject to US laws and checks. No different than them owning a major shopping center or office building. Most ships are foreign owned–do you worry about that much?</p>
<p>In fact there is some concern about foreign-owned ships having lax security regarding their container shipping. And regarding operation of the ports: I think no matter what one’s political leanings, the idea of having foreign companies operating American ports is both absurd and disturbing. If it is racial profiling to find it even more absurd and disturbing that such authority could be given to a company owned by a foreign country from the region of the world that gave birth to the September 11 terrorists, so be it. i find it highly unlikely that any other country, friend or foe or in between, would react well to American ownership of the company operating their ports.</p>
<p>Yep- I worry about foreign owned ships - I worry about all ships coming and going and the containers they carry. We only inspect about 5% of the containers that enter our ports now, and many have been arguing for stricter port security since 9/11, yet very little money has been spent to increase inspections or shore up security.
Being subject to US laws is not enough. That won’t stop a payoff or a terrorist infiltrator. It’s the enforcement that’s the problem.
I think it’s great that this issue is coming out now. Congress and thte White House need to have this conversation. Let the WH show why this would work. Let’s see what they’ve got. Hopefully, the result will be more security and more money going to the ports. I think all Americans, R % D, want very strict port security and are willing to pay for it.</p>
<p>Barrons–office buildings and malls are not entrances to the country. If you can’t see the difference, I’m not sure how to explain it…</p>
<p>Port security isn’t the issue, the issue is container security, and a LOT of money has been spent since 9/11, and a LOT of changes in regs have occured since 9/11.</p>
<p>Container Security Initiative (CSI) and Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) are heavily invested in security; new RFID technology combined with the new regs on filing the shipper’s manifest and bill of lading documents before a container is permitted to depart a foreign port eliminate much of the need to physically inspect containers.</p>
<p>Given that containers are packed and loaded in foreign ports all over the world, destined to any of the U.S. 100+ ports on a daily basis, UAE in charge of U.S. port operations has virtually no security implications. </p>
<p>This is a lot of white noise and misguided media hysteria about nothing. </p>
<p>A far bigger concern is the matter over overland truck and rail imports from Mexico, as well as air cargo imports from all over the world, including UAE.</p>
<p>Can’t wait to read the reactions of the PMA and the IWLU about the added risks of having our ports mismanaged by crooks and social terrorists or seeing our ports shut down at the cost of billions to the US economy. </p>
<p>Oh, the horror of such thing happening ! :)</p>
<p>garland–what exactly are you expecting–containers of Muslim warriors being shipped into the US? A port is just a place to unload ships. It is no more worrisome than a mall. It is monitored by several US agenices from the Coast Guard to US Customs. As others have mentioned those containers come from ports controlled by many others on ships owned by many others.</p>
<p>“garland–what exactly are you expecting–containers of Muslim warriors being shipped into the US? A port is just a place to unload ships. It is no more worrisome than a mall.”</p>
<p>Oh my gosh, Barrons, how did you know that that was exactly what I was picturing? Warriors in boxes, yup.</p>
<p>I worked at Port Newark-I don’t need you to tell me what it is.</p>
<p>Thanks anyway.</p>
<p>Yep. ICE (Immigrations and Customs Enforcement), ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence), FMC (Federal Maritime Commission) and numerous other agencies have been working on container security very aggressively since 9/11, and very progressively even before. </p>
<p>It makes no difference whatsoever who is in charge of U.S. port operations. The issue is who is the foreign exporter, who is the U.S. importer, what is in a container, where it is loaded, what is the security where it travels in the relevant trade lanes, who is the crew and what are the background or personnel checks, before the container or the container ship ever approaches a U.S. port.</p>
<p>Hey, they aren’t foreign - they’re capitalists! Chertoff says he research them thoroughly. ;)</p>
<p>Yeah, I feel a lot more comfortable knowing that Ridge, Cherthoff, Brownie, Larry, Moe, and Curly have all been working to ensure port safety…</p>
<p>The gang that couldn’t shoot straight.</p>
<p>Ridge quoted in CNN.com:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Congress AND the American people need to hear something that
will show us we can trust this sale. I hope we hear something soon.</p>
<p>ASAP, why didn’t you capture ALL of what Ridge said, including the very next sentence where he said (paraphrased) that he was confident the Bush administration could very clearly make the case? </p>
<p>And why not post Jimmy Carter’s statements as well? </p>
<p>Congress and the American people don’t so much need to “hear something” as much as there is a collective and embarrassing absence of self education. Have you ever even read anything about Dubai? Do you know anything about the country? It’s such an economic powerhouse, everyone wants to be there. The foundation is oil of couse, but the economic strategy of the country - especially in its new retail and baning sectors is thought to be stupendously brilliant, and the sheik an economic mastermind (though he just died a few weeks ago). Their ports are probably far more secure than our own. I’m afraid we must appear hopelessly ignorant and pathetically frightened to the rest of the world. </p>
<p>As to imports into the U.S., there is so much intel collected on every single loaded shipment destined here that it’s hard to imagine a terrorist attack at a port. It’s literally possible and practicable to select one container number, and follow that container everywhere in the world it ever goes. It’s all possible to track every single foreign exporter, and know what they export, when, how often, and how many years back their foreign trade activity goes. In addition, ICE has been sending teams to foreign ports for the last four years, training foreign governments and their ports directors on security, and getting their signoff on joint programs. And that’s before we even get into the issue of RFID technology, and all the other new technologies specific to container security. It isn’t necessary to physically inspect containers, because of all of the intense, specific data collection and applied technology that happens before.</p>