The DPW/P&O article: Ignorance.

You know, ignorance is a beautiful thing. People can make mistakes on their own, but it takes a group to be REALLY ignorant. For instance, look at how al-Qaeda in Iraq wants to make a Muslim utopia by ******* civilians and bombing mosques. Do you remember seeing the footage of the Pakistani mob burning the US-based KFC franchise because of the cartoon in a DANISH newspaper? That seemed to be the pinnacle of ignorance, that is, until the news came out about the pending Dubai Ports World (DPW) acquisition. Never before have I seen people so irate over what, in any other circumstance, would be a routine business maneuver. Now, before everyone collectively clutches their chests, gasps, and starts calling me “Osama,” I would like to say that I have researched both sides of this argument, and there are some very important facts that should be stated and understood- even in the lofty heights of government.

The United Arab Emirates is NOT a terrorist state. Yes, they did recognize the Taliban, as did the Saudis and our new friends in Pakistan, but was the UAE a major funding source or direct supporter of the Taliban? No. We also know that there were 2 Sept. 11th hijackers from the UAE; however, using that as a reason for blocking business dealings is like saying that you won’t do business with anyone in California because that’s where the John Walker Lindh (i.e. the American Taliban) is from. Speaking of this, how are we handling business deals with Saudi Arabia, who cultivated 15 of the hijackers? Just keep the oil flowing boys….

As far as port security is concerned, I would like to point out that the majority of port security is handled by the Coast Guard, other various federal agencies, and the collaborated efforts of the private sector. Furthermore, Dubai Ports World operates ports in Europe, Asia, The Middle East, and Latin America, as well as hosting more than 3800 companies. Face facts, as far as business is concerned, they can’t afford to be linked to terrorism, and if there were any links, I believe it is safe to say that terrorists would’ve already been very eager to “showcase their abilities.” So, I’m sorry, there won’t be ships filled with suicide bombers heading up the Mississippi River to **** us all.

Finally, let’s not forget the patriotic argument that these are American Ports and they should be operated by Americans. Sure it makes sense, when there’s no sensible, logical, or economic reason to restrict the sale of port management, let’s rely on pure and blind patriotism. In a way, I guess that it is inspiring to see that Americans want to see our ports controlled by our companies; unfortunately, we’re about 25-30 years too late. Quoting Jessica Holzer of Forbes.com, ”Hamstrung by higher taxes, regulation and a law that requires all U.S. flag-carriers to be manned by American crews, the American merchant marine gave way to its foreign rivals. Powerful unions and strict labor laws ensure that American crewmen cost several times their foreign counterparts. While foreign flag-carriers go largely untaxed, U.S. shippers were levied at the 35% corporate tax rate until two years ago.” In essence, the only reason that this is a problem for us is because we made this problem ourselves.

So, all that being said, can we finally start to be honest with ourselves? This wasn’t an issue when a British company was operating the ports nor would this be an issue if it was any other of our non-Arab allies; however, the majority of Americans have become xenophobic about anything involving an Arab country, even those with whom we’re allied. Regardless of how many Americans, British, or Australians work for DPW’s management team (an American is their COO as well) and the fact that DPW’s only financial link to the UAE government was on their initial start-up (there has been virtually no interaction between the two for the last 20+ years), the majority of our people and government, remaining scared and uninformed, are putting forth any reason to undermine this deal. The DPW/Peninsular and Oriental deal has had more to do with public opinion, unwarranted fear, and unnecessary government intrusion, than with the dealings of businesses, which is the only basic motive behind the deal. A potentially beneficial business decision in free-market capitalistic economy that is being hamstrung by an emotion and blatantly blocked by an over-bearing government who is pandering to people’s fear for the sole purpose of votes….now that’s REAL ignorance.

-Well, there it is..I hope that you enjoy it. :wave2: :crash:
 
Was that a "borrowed" editorial column from an online news site or did you rant/write all of that yourself (if you wrote it - great post! :thumbsup: )?

There's a thread somewhere here already discussing this issue - FYI. I can't remember the thread name at the moment because I'm just now waking up (again) for the day and I think the thread is maybe 2-5 pages back in this forum). ;)

:thumbsup: :hatsoff:
 
alexios_hellas said:
Finally, let’s not forget the patriotic argument that these are American Ports and they should be operated by Americans. Sure it makes sense, when there’s no sensible, logical, or economic reason to restrict the sale of port management, let’s rely on pure and blind patriotism. In a way, I guess that it is inspiring to see that Americans want to see our ports controlled by our companies; unfortunately, we’re about 25-30 years too late. Quoting Jessica Holzer of Forbes.com, ”Hamstrung by higher taxes, regulation and a law that requires all U.S. flag-carriers to be manned by American crews, the American merchant marine gave way to its foreign rivals. Powerful unions and strict labor laws ensure that American crewmen cost several times their foreign counterparts. While foreign flag-carriers go largely untaxed, U.S. shippers were levied at the 35% corporate tax rate until two years ago.” In essence, the only reason that this is a problem for us is because we made this problem ourselves.

I don't trust our security to ANYBODY else, and I wouldn't blame any other country for feeling the same way even if it we were the ones doing the controlling. To be honest I don't even trust our own government with our security. If every thing just went by what could be done cheaper by somebody else, we as a country might as well not bother doing anything anymore. Seriously what can't be done cheaper by other countries? We might as well have all our rifles, ammunition, missiles, tanks, planes, railroads, water treatment plants, nuclear power plants, dams, sewers, the clothing the soldiers wear, and subways not only made by foreign entities, but maybe we should bring them over here to do the work cheaper than we could ever do it. Heck, might as well have them make it over there if possible. I mean nothing could ever go wrong with that. It isn't like the world's political landscape ever changes. No other country that is our ally will ever get pissed off at us again. They have too much business relationships tied up to ever do anything right? Wrong, things change. Even if we were to try to do things ourselves after that, what are we going to do? Are we going to find out that we are now incapable of doing anything anymore ourselves because we let everybody else do it for us for so long to save some corporation somewhere money. When you go to the lowest bidder sooner or later one way or another your going to get burned. The fact that it's "too late" is a hollow argument to me, and one I do not except. If it is going to be hard to change we might as well start now. The fact we bend over backwards to places like Saudi Arabia as justifying this is just trying to have two wrongs making a right. If we weren’t dependent on the oil and it was up to me I would immediately sever any business dealing we have with that country. I might even do it now regardless of our oil dependency. The same thing goes with Pakistan. I wouldn't look past all the bad things the country does just to get an "ally" on the war on ******.

I am also less than convinced about any interaction the UAE might have with the corporation if it wanted to get involved. I am even less convinced about high up UAE people’s ties to terrorism. While the country itself might not officially support it that doesn’t mean that there isn’t powerful people in the county that aren’t sympathetic to them or that don’t meet up with those individuals. Also while the cost guard might handle security along with other firms, (which when it comes to shipping security is almost non existent anyhow) that does not mean that the knowledge of how the port is run, what goes on inside of it or the business, the ability to know how things are checked out, or the ability to get physical access to the location would not matter to somebody that wants to use that information to cause harm.
 

Ax3C

Banned
My god ... you knocked it out of the park with this one, alexios!!! :bowdown:

I will freely admit that I was sitting on the fence on this issue; seeing positives and negatives on both sides of the equation.

Incredible, man. This was an extremely well-written piece that had a lot of thought and work put into it.

:thumbsup: :hatsoff:

(Once I fully **** up and get some coffee and nicotine in me, I'll be better able to respond ... :*****: :D )
 

om3ga

It's good to be the king...
Nice post - and rather timely...

The Dubai government delayed its $1.2 billion purchase of a military equipment maker yesterday, the second time in a month that a takeover by the Middle East emirate has been jeopardized by American security concerns.

Dubai International Capital, owned by the government of the Persian Gulf emirate, said that it would delay its acquisition of the Doncasters Group, a British company that has nine plants in the United States, by as much as two months from March 31 while government agencies review the purchase.

Details:
Dubai Will Delay Another Acquisition Involving U.S. Plants

[edit]

Inchcape Shipping Services (ISS), is an old British company that last January was sold to a Dubai government investment vehicle for $285 million. ISS has more than 200 offices around the world and provides services to clients ranging from cruise ship operators to oil tankers to commercial cargo vessels. In the U.S., the company operates out of more than a dozen port cities, including Houston, Miami and New Orleans, arranging pilots, tugs, linesmen and stevedores, among other things. The firm is also a defense contractor which has long worked for Britain’s Royal Navy. And last June, the U.S. Navy signed on too, awarding ISS a $50 million contract to be the “husbanding agent” for vessels in most Southwest Asia ports, including those in the Middle East, according to an unclassified Navy logistics manual for the Fifth Fleet and a press release from ISS.

Details:

The Dubai Deal You Don't Know About
 
Last edited:
That was very well written, Alexios! While I don't think that US ports should be trusted to anyone but the US, I thoroughly enjoyed reading your commentary. I'm glad you posted it, as it's a very well thought-out editorial. Thanks for sharing that with us!

H
 
AsianxxxChick said:
My god ... you knocked it out of the park with this one, alexios!!! :bowdown:

I will freely admit that I was sitting on the fence on this issue; seeing positives and negatives on both sides of the equation.

Incredible, man. This was an extremely well-written piece that had a lot of thought and work put into it.

:thumbsup: :hatsoff:

(Once I fully **** up and get some coffee and nicotine in me, I'll be better able to respond ... :*****: )

Thank you, I'm glad you like it. :)
 
I think Alexios's post really points out the disservice that the American media does it's public on a daily basis. The major media outlets appear to be nothing more than puppets of the federal government. What has happened to the spirit of journalism? Is it just lost on a completely dumbed down mass of lemmings just too tired or ignorant to care for the whole truth? I guess if you're entertained by "Larry the Cable Guy" then this is the type of America you're gonna get. :mad:
 

DrMotorcity

Don Trump calls me Pornography Man
Peter Gazinya said:
I think Alexios's post really points out the disservice that the American media does it's public on a daily basis. The major media outlets appear to be nothing more than puppets of the federal government. What has happened to the spirit of journalism? Is it just lost on a completely dumbed down mass of lemmings just too tired or ignorant to care for the whole truth? I guess if you're entertained by "Larry the Cable Guy" then this is the type of America you're gonna get. :mad:

Today's journalists serve the entertainment industry, even if they operate under the guise of being a "news provider," or however they care to announce themselves. Their only function is to connect viewers with the advertisments, and thereby furthering their own agenda. "News:" shocking, absurd, scandalous, lowest common-denominator, freak-show mentality appeal, that's what will be seen in the paper and through the electronic media. The truth? The actual truth? Like what is really inportant in this world? Simply not enough money in it to make it worth their while.

I hope I didn't make any spelling mistakes.:o
 
Peter Gazinya said:
I think Alexios's post really points out the disservice that the American media does it's public on a daily basis. The major media outlets appear to be nothing more than puppets of the federal government. What has happened to the spirit of journalism? Is it just lost on a completely dumbed down mass of lemmings just too tired or ignorant to care for the whole truth? I guess if you're entertained by "Larry the Cable Guy" then this is the type of America you're gonna get. :mad:

You're telling me...I submitted this piece to virtually every news media outlet that I could find. The NY Post, The NY and LA Times, Time, Newsweek, Chicago Tribune, Daily Telegraph, Columbus Dispatch, New Republic, Weekly standard, etc.... Do you think that any of them had the desire to present this opposing point of view? Nope...
 

om3ga

It's good to be the king...
alexios_hellas said:
You're telling me...I submitted this piece to virtually every news media outlet that I could find. The NY Post, The NY and LA Times, Time, Newsweek, Chicago Tribune, Daily Telegraph, Columbus Dispatch, New Republic, Weekly standard, etc.... Do you think that any of them had the desire to present this opposing point of view? Nope...

“Every country has the government it deserves.”
(Toute nation a le government qu’elle merite)
– Joseph Marie De Maistre (August 1811)
 
om3ga said:
“Every country has the government it deserves.”
(Toute nation a le government qu’elle merite)
– Joseph Marie De Maistre (August 1811)

Also, let's not forget that a politician's main objective is to get re-elected....unfortunately, they do this by telling people what they want to hear.

Not to get too off the subject of this thread, but I often wonder...between the media's jaundiced angles (from each and every side), politicians spinning facts and playing on people's emotions and fears, combined with the difficult and time-consuming task of actually finding clear and unbiased facts about any certain issue...how can many people be expected to make an educated and informed decision? Sometimes I fear that most of them don't even care, as long as they're not directly impacted in the short run.
 
Let me start off by saying excellent post alexios, well written and thought out.

That said, I had posted earlier my anger with President Bush and the media for this ports deal. I have been paying attention to politics seriously for about ten years now, and I have become increasingly upset for what America has turned into. My main problem is that I am a history student, and I believe in the fundamentals that America was founded on, however that America has never existed.

I think that the ports should have been owned and operated by Americans. I was upset when I heard this deal, and I did want it blocked only for the sole purpose of an American company to take over control of the ports. I was thinking why the hell was a British company doing controlling our ports anyway. This was not an Arab issue for me, but I do realize that for many in the government and the public, Arab ethnicity was the very heart of the issue. I also felt that by saying he would veto any legislation on this deal it was just another attempt by the President to sell off American piece by piece to the highest bidder.

I also thought that non informing Congress of this deal was just another arrogant tactic by the Bush administration to controll every aspect of government. Just my personal opinion, however I firmly believe if the man could get away with it he would disolve Congress. Of course Congress has had a "rubber stamp" policy with this president and has let him do anything he pleased. I am just really upset with the federal government in general for not operating checks and balances properly. I was finally relieved when Congress stepped in on this issue, sending the message to the president that they are paying attention, however, wether or not they continue to do that is anybodys guess.

The American people have the right to have any elected official recalled if they think that official is not doing the job he was elected to do. I don't know if this applies to the office of the president or not. It used to, but someone probably did away with that through executive order. Thomas Jefferson once said when governement is no longer acting in the best interest of the people, it is up to the people to overthrow the government and replace it with one that will work.(that is paraphrased by the way) Jefferson was a bit radical in his thinking, and that would be considered treason todayI would just **** to see the civil liberties of the American people get trampled on little by little because Congress doesn't want to step in and exercise their powers against a President as laid out in the Constitution.
 
Top