Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Wal-Mart is Against Tighter Port Security.... it costs them too much

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
RedEarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 10:16 AM
Original message
Wal-Mart is Against Tighter Port Security.... it costs them too much
Wal-Mart's Dirty Secret is Out

The Dubai Ports World battle has trumpeted the gaping holes in our seaports' security systems, but few ask: Why are U.S. ports so poorly protected nearly five years after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001? Why has the government spent just $630 million -- less than 4 percent of the $18 billion-plus we have spent since 9/11 on airport security -- to make ports safer?

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said it best: " talk about having strong homeland security, checking 100 percent of cargo containers. In the end, our commercial interests get ahead of us."

Those commercial interests are led by the world's largest retailer and the United States' biggest importer, Wal-Mart. Hunter let slip what is surely Wal-Mart's dirtiest secret: the company, through its Washington, D.C., lobbyist, the Retail Industry Leaders Association, has time and again since 9/11 opposed new port and supply-chain security rules that might cut into Wal-Mart's record profits. Its mantra is: "Security requirements should not become a barrier to trade."

In the past few years, Wal-Mart has:

Opposed the introduction of anti-terrorist "smart containers" and electronic seals for cargo containers coming into U.S. ports. The retail industry called them "feel good (security) measures."
Opposed independent and regular inspections of supply-chain security practices around the world.
Opposed tougher rules requiring Wal-Mart to let Customs know what it's shipping in and where it comes from.
Opposed new container-handling fees to pay for improved port security.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0406-21.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. Poor widdow WalMart
Gee I feel so sorry for them. Not
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
2. This is something I am DEFINITELY going to share with everyone I
know!!!!

Great post. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
3. What doesn't Wal-Mart republicans defend user fees?
Consumers need low prices even if it means placing the nation at risk. I just love Wal-Mart watching out for my best interests.

9-11 changed everything, Wal-Mart is not GM, what is good for Wal-Mart isn't good for the USA.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
4. hey Wal-Mart
fuck you and the ship you sailed in on. always wanted to say that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
5. Freedom isn't free
You scum-sucking bastards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
6. It ain't just Wal-Mart
Every major hard goods retailer, and a lot of food retailers, would see their goods sitting offshore for months while containers were searched. Somehow, I think this problem could be solved fairly easily; it would cost a lot of money upfront for scanners and detectors, but it would be a onetime charge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
7. Wahl, how are dem anti-democrat militias gonna get them's all
suitcase nukes to blow up them freedom-hatin' Dumbocrats in Congress without good ole Wal-Mart World allowing de stuff to git inta the US on dem Chinese ships?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC