1. It is a company complying with a boycott that is illegal in the US.
2. It must either stop their compliance or pay a fine.
That's it. Nothing else. No fearmongering, just fact of their actions. 
Running, controlling, buying, whatever, they are still a company doing 
something wrong according to our laws. Laws they have to follow when working 
with us.
And yes, they do directly participate in the boycott. They are OWNED by a 
government that participates. Their related company ENFORCES it.

> This article is nothing more than spin and fear-mongering. DPW is not a 
> shipping company, it is a terminal management company. DPW is not buying 
> "control of the ports". It is buying the company that holds the contract 
> to manage primarily shipping terminals in various US ports.
>
> Do they participate in the boycott? Not directly. Does this indirect 
> involvement through its parent entity count? That's quite a stretch.
>
> The larger issue is who else would step up to take over this contract? The 
> last I saw, the only other serious bidder was a company based in 
> Singapore. Maybe they should take it over? What about the Chinese company 
> that already manages some port operations in the US? This whole issue has 
> been blown way out of proportion.
>
> What I see happening is DPW creating a US-based subsidiary for the sole 
> purpose of managing this contract, and that company being staffed entirely 
> by US citizens.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:198298
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to