Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (276383)	2/24/2006 9:34:42 AM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572359

re: Will any additional non-US staff be working on US soil as a result of the contract transfer would not that be upto UAE if they would take over?

To: Elroy who wrote (276383)	2/24/2006 10:26:24 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572359

"What exactly are the negative implications of a UAE-based company taking over the contract for the operations at the 6 ports? "Will any additional non-US staff be working on US soil as a result of the contract transfer from the British company to the Dubai-based company?" The UAE wholly owns the company. The UAE supported the Taliban in Afghanistan. The UAE was a hub AQ Khan used to proliferate nuclear weapon technology around the world. The UAE provided two of the 9/11 terrorists and some of it's support and funding. The UAE managers will be running the ports. They will have access to ALL the data about cargo running through it, and control ports already that ship INTO it. What's to stop them from firing employess that won't do what they want and hiring ones that do? Even if they aren't terrorists NOW, could the government/company be infiltrated by them or taken over by them in the future? Why in the HELL should we even take the REMOTEST CHANCE of that occurring? We don't HAVE to! 95% of the containers coming into those ports are not inspected.