[dcmacdaddy]

I think this is a good start. Now we just need to start working on getting other foreign-owned port operations back into the hands of US companies.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4810242.stm
DPW to sell off all its US ports

The six major US ports involved include New York

Dubai Ports World (DPW) has confirmed it intends to sell all its US port operations to an American buyer within four to six months.
The United Arab Emirates-based firm is being forced into the sale due to strong opposition from US politicians over security firms.

DPW took over operations at six major US ports including New York when it bought UK firm P&O earlier this month.

US politicians are opposed to the key ports being in Middle Eastern hands.

'Interested parties'

In addition to significant operations at New York, DPW's £3.9bn ($6.8bn) takeover of P&O also gave it control over main facilities at New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia docks.

It also assumed ownership of lesser dockside activities at 16 other ports in the US.

All these operations are now up for sale, and DPW estimates that they are worth a combined $700m.

It added that until a sale is finalised, the US businesses will be operated independently.

'Value & deliverability'

"An expedited sale process is under way and with the cooperation of the port authorities and joint venture partners, it is expected that a sale can be agreed within four to six months," said DPW.

It said it would now be proving information about its US operations to "interested parties", but did not name any possible suitors.

DPW added that it would look at all offers based on their "value, deliverability and the continuity of management, employees and customers".

Trade experts have cautioned that the case sets a damaging precedent for other Middle Eastern firms planning to invest in the US.

[abe]

Ok, picture this scenario.

I'm a fuzzy terrorist in let's say, the Philippines. The port there is run by who knows who. I pay a bribe to Malacaban to not check my shipment too closely. It is headed to the port of Oakland, CA, USA.

The Port of Oakland is operated by the USA, from head to toe.

Once the GPS in my package indicates the shipment is in the port of Oakland, and BEFORE the Coast Guard or Homeland Security or Customs or ANYONE can get to my shipment, I notify my terrorist buddy in Jack London Square to set off the trigger via cell phone.

San Francisco Bay goes up in a mushroom cloud. Hundreds of thousands are dead.

Then multiply all the ports in the US and all the terrorists in all the countries of the world.

US ownership & or operation of the ports is good but it misses being the ideal solution by a great distance.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by abe

Ok, picture this scenario.

I'm a fuzzy terrorist in let's say, the Philippines. The port there is run by who knows who. I pay a bribe to Malacaban to not check my shipment too closely. It is headed to the port of Oakland, CA, USA.

The Port of Oakland is operated by the USA, from head to toe.

Once the GPS in my package indicates the shipment is in the port of Oakland, and BEFORE the Coast Guard or Homeland Security or Customs or ANYONE can get to my shipment, I notify my terrorist buddy in Jack London Square to set off the trigger via cell phone.

San Francisco Bay goes up in a mushroom cloud. Hundreds of thousands are dead.

Then multiply all the ports in the US and all the terrorists in all the countries of the world.

US ownership & or operation of the ports is good but it misses being the ideal solution by a great distance.

Are you saying the US should own every port in the world?

[abe]

Originally Posted by Rumor

Are you saying the US should own every port in the world?

The US Coast Guard and other US law enforcement authorities have agents stationed in some overseas ports and they inspect certain shipments based on a set of guidelines that has worked, SO FAR.

But, where we must catch or prevent EVERY SINGLE attempted attack, the terrorists need only get lucky, ONCE.

We need to establish some foolproof method for guaranteeing that every one of the millions of items sent here every year are what the shipping documents say they are.

Right now our imports come into the US based on a system of trust.

The port in Rio de Janeiro sends one of our ports a set of shipping documents and until the ship docks and unloads and it's cargo is checked against the documents we have to trust that what's on board is exactly what's on the documents.

Not great.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by abe

The US Coast Guard and other US law enforcement authorities have agents stationed in some overseas ports and they inspect certain shipments based on a set of guidelines that has worked, SO FAR.

But, where we must catch or prevent EVERY SINGLE attempted attack, the terrorists need only get lucky, ONCE.

We need to establish some foolproof method for guaranteeing that every one of the millions of items sent here every year are what the shipping documents say they are.

Right now our imports come into the US based on a system of trust.

The port in Rio de Janeiro sends one of our ports a set of shipping documents and until the ship docks and unloads and it's cargo is checked against the documents we have to trust that what's on board is exactly what's on the documents.

Not great.

There is no viable foolproof method. To thoroughly inspect even half of the incoming cargo containers would slow shipping to the U.S. to a standstill. There needs to be some element of trust.