Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

In between his heavy lifting yesterday, longshoreman Manuel Salgabo said Arab companies have been working in Port Newark for decades and none have "put a bomb in a box yet."
The brawny dockworker pointed to the United Arab Shipping Co., which has been doing business in Port Newark for more than 25 years, as an example that not all Middle Easterners are terrorists.

"This is a lot to do about nothing," Salgabo, 48, of Boonton, N.J., said of the fiery debate over the Bush administration's plan to allow Dubai Ports World to run six U.S. ports, including ones in Newark and New York.

"It's more about politics than security," he said.

But trucker Matt Kocienski, 53, of Linden, N.J., just looked across the harbor to the missing World Trade Center towers to make his point.

"They are not to be trusted," Kocienski said of DP World, which is owned by one of the United Arab Emirates' states. "They hate us. They are our enemies."

President Bush vowed yesterday to veto any bill to block the $6.8 billion deal, a threat that raised the hackles of both Democrat and Republican leaders.

Opponents argue the arrangement jeopardizes U.S. port security, and have raised the fact that some of the 9/11 hijackers used Dubai as a staging ground for terror.

"I think it's crazy," said trucker Raul Cladera, 49, of Jersey City. "It's all about business and oil with the Bush family. I think it's a bad idea because who attacked us come from that country."

But Joe Cirillo, 56, of Staten Island, who hauls diesel fuel out of Port Newark, said a company shouldn't be discriminated against because it's Arab.

"You can't blame a whole nation," Cirillo said. "He [Bush] wants to do business. It doesn't mean we can't keep an eye on them."

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

I think that there have to be other companies out there. Why take a chance with a Saudi Arabian one?

How carefully will this company screen and run backround checks on its workers? The company's intentions may not be a problem, but a terrorist might see this as a good way in. That scares me.

I think it's telling that even some Republicans are against this.

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

I think the UAE has been a large help to the US Military and our very progressive.

I have no problems with this contract as long as security is handled by American's and someone is a watchdog. I believe that this contract could be a step in the right direction and that they most American's wouldn't want it to be done by a large company like Haliburtion which is American either so honestly its a double edge sword. I don't think that it is ideal but don't see it to be as stupid as everyone acts like it will be. They aren't handling the security at the ports in this contract.

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

who is to say something will happen if they are in charge...we have americans killing americans in our backyard... anything can happen at any given time by anybody....

the ports with security is another story all together... this is the most vaurnable (sp) part of our country to get stuff in. who's running it probally would still have to comply with US rulings and such...

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

What we really need to worry about is the port where the conatiners are being loaded...not unloaded. We have no idea what is on a container when it gets here -- but have no way of enforcing other ports to ensure security. A container is loaded by a supplier at his warehouse. Even the steamship line will say on the Bill of Lading "Said to contain" because they were not there when the product was loaded. Even they can't vouch for anything.

I am an importer so I eal with the ports a lot...

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

i have been a Bush supporter for years

but i SERIOUSLY have to question his motive here

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

While there is a part of me that says well, yeah, it is a little discriminating, what pushes the point for me that this is a bad idea, is this (quote from CNN article)

Critics say the takeover raises security concerns, noting that two of the hijackers in the September 11, 2001, attacks came from the UAE and that the hijackers drew funds from bank accounts in Dubai, the financial center of the Persian Gulf.

Now, Dubai is the company that would be managing the ports. I understand that the US government would still be in charge of security, but to have a company who's funds were used for 9/11 now have so much access and inside info - seems sooo dumb that I just can not fathom it. The ONLY reason I can see why he'd want to push this so hard, is there must be something in it for him.

The other thing that got me was something I heard on the radio this morning - the board that investigated this company to the point that the White House would say it is completely safe, well, Rumsfeld is on that board, and he said that he only learned about this last weekend. So, hmm, a boardmember hadn't even heard of it, yet it went through? I guess I just don't get it.

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

Yeah, we probably are, but IMO, it's justified.
But I also feel there's way more to this than just an Anti-Arab sentiment. The deal seems shadily in Bush's personal financial interests and that's another reason why it's justified.

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

I think they are discriminating- but so what? It is the Arabs who do most of the world's terrorism- especially the Saudis. In fact, the Taliban was originally funded and educated in Saudi Arabia. This is not against all Muslims- but the fact of the matter is that Saudi Arabia is an extremist muslim country and has been a haven and breeding ground for terrorists. I think if it was a country like Turkey or even Egypt the reaction may not be as strong. But then again, maybe Bush would have objected.

The Bush family has been in bed with the Saudi government for years. The prince of Saudi Arabia and Pres. Bush were photographed holding hands a year or so ago. In fact, the Saudi gov't gave the Bush family extremely expensive gifts- more than most other countries.
Gift
Gift2
Gift3

Message edited 2/22/2006 2:21:16 PM.

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

Message edited 2/22/2006 2:34:55 PM.

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

Now Bush is saying he was unaware of this....yeah right.....I swear he is on some SH*T. link

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

Posted by Leeners

Posted by oneday

While there is a part of me that says well, yeah, it is a little discriminating, what pushes the point for me that this is a bad idea, is this (quote from CNN article)

Critics say the takeover raises security concerns, noting that two of the hijackers in the September 11, 2001, attacks came from the UAE and that the hijackers drew funds from bank accounts in Dubai, the financial center of the Persian Gulf.

Now, Dubai is the company that would be managing the ports.

In response to this, Dubai is not a company, it's the capital city of UAE.

I'm not certain of my position on this since I don't have a firm grasp of what ownership of a port entails but two people out of the 2.4million people who live in UAE don't do it for me. How many terrorists live on our own soil??

Re: Dispute On The Water Front(what Do You Think)

I can't believe that this is even an option

we don't even check cargo ships as it is- and now we are going to turn our ports over to a company from a country that harbors terroists

some one should impeach him- they tried impeached Clinton for much less then what Bush has done

I am sure he is getting an insane kickback for this- just like everything else-

can you say $700 toliet or $34,000 for a fema trailer after Katrina that they dont even give out to the people who need them