• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

US hires Chinese company to scan for nukes

This is just stupid if you have no opinion on this read up on what this company is

A previously declassified US intelligence report has stated “Hutchison Whampoa’s owner, Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka-shing, has extensive business ties in Beijing and has compelling financial reasons to maintain a good relationship with China’s leadership.” Another report US intelligence report states, "“Li is directly connected to Beijing and is willing to use his business influence to further the aims of the Chinese Government. He has positioned his son, Victor Li, to replace him in certain Cheung Kong Holdings and Hutchison Whampoa operations such as HW’s Hong Kong International Terminals (HIT). ... Li’s interest in the Panama canal is not only strategic, but also as a means for outside financial opportunities for the Chinese government.” (Intelligence report source)

Frank Gaffney, of the Center for Security Policy, has written that Whampoa "is currently hard at work acquiring a presence for China at other strategic 'choke points' around the world, including notably the Caribbean's Bahamas, the Mediterranean's Malta, and the Persian Gulf's Straits of Hormuz. At a moment inconvenient to the United States, such access could translate into physical or other obstacles to our use of such waterways."[1]

Hutchison Whampoa have also been criticized for heavy-handedness towards British art charity The Couper Collection, by The Daily Mirror, The Telegraph (2002), and The Sunday Times (2004). See article on the Sunday Times website. The dispute also involves British architect Norman Foster and in late 2005, comedienne Ruby Wax (see UK Observer article).


This company is basically an arms smuggler for the chineese government.
Where are the Congressional Fear-mongers screaming about the out-sourcing of our security? Where is the media?:shock:
It's called future economic planning; people in politics realize they cannot or don't want to do this forever. And so they use their position to secure the profits. We have plenty of idiots and traitors here on debatepolitics who think outsourcing and offshoring are fine and dandy and part of the "world economy" Bush loves to commend; the only problem with this economy is that it's based on profit, not ethics, country loyalty or keeping it in the family.

Where is the media?
Media is owned by the same people who profit from the same world economy of outsourcing and offshoring--why would they complain about this? Against profit.
I was just being sarcastic, Beyond.

I think that the biggest problem with UAE taking over the Brits contract of controlling several ports was the IDEA of a Mid-East Company taking it over, especially in light of the War on Terror against Islamic Extremists. The argument wasn't that a foreign company was taking over because some 40% of America's ports are run by froeign companies. There are just not enough American companies who are in the position to do it. It wasn't about the security because the Coast Guard and other Federal Agencies providing the security wasn't going to change just because the name on the contract changed. The people working on the docks would be the same people working there no matter who bought the contract - zero turn-over.

Was I for the deal - no, but I wasn't totally against it, either. If all the security checks are done, the same checks done with all the other foreign companies that run other ports, then I feel relatively comfortable.

I also agree with the argument that there is different degrees of friendship - the UAE is our friend and partner in the War on Terror, but that doesn't mean I HAVE to entrust them with running my ports. I don't quite trust China, either, but no Chinese Islamic Extremists are trying to eliminate/kill us.

In regards to 'it all boils down to money' - if there are NO American companies who are in a situation to run the ports, what are you gonna do? Shut down the ports until one comes along? No!

I also think the GOP congressmen took the UAE deal to distance themselves from Bush, in a political move, whose numbers had been dropping.

As far as your comment (the only problem with this economy is that it's based on profit, not ethics, country loyalty or keeping it in the family.) - BINGO! We were sold out with NAFTA, we were sold out when we allowed companies to moce their factories to places where they could get slave labor at low wages, gave them a 'No Import tax' agreement to bring their goods back into this country to sell their goods at 'high' prices to the Americans they refuse to hire to do the work, and we are trying to make Illegal Immigration OK, allowing illegals to skirt the system, show others you don't have to work to get into this country legally, and hurt us even further with jobs taken by illegals while our tax dollars are paying for their free medical, SS, etc......The only ones benefitting from all that is the top dogs making the money and the congressmen whose palms are being greased to ensure it all keeps going on! $MONEY$, not ethics, morality, national pride, patriotism, etc! Good call on that one!
Biiiggg mistake, the chinese have spies everywhere among their companies.
Top Bottom