ROUND-UP: PORT SECURITY
In connection with the debate over the Bush Administration's deal to permit a United Arab Emirates company to take over port operations in six U.S. separates, following are experts who can discuss the current state of port security, as well as the arguments for and against the deal:
**1. IVAN ELAND, senior fellow at THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE, wrote the following in his new op-ed "Dubai Ports World: Commercial Racial Profiling": "The Bush administration is receiving pressure from some members of Congress to reconsider its decision to allow Dubai Ports World, an Arab company, to take over operations at six U.S. ports. If Arab companies truly cannot be trusted to operate U.S. ports, then shouldn't their involvement in U.S. airports, agriculture, electrical and nuclear power generation, waterworks, bridge and tunnel construction, and other industries also be banned? The company should be evaluated on its qualifications to operate the ports, not on McCarthy-like litmus tests for Arabs or the UAE. Besides, although Dubai Ports World will operate the ports, U.S. federal and local authorities will remain in charge of security."
**2. MARSHALL DOKE JR., government contracts attorney at GARDERE WYNNE SEWELL: "Regardless of the political firestorm over the planned takeover of operations at several U.S. shipping ports by Dubai Ports World, there is little to prevent such a sale from a contractual standpoint. Before this, a British company held the contract and there is nothing in the regulations to prohibit the deal. However, although they won't provide security at the ports, DP World likely will need additional clearances to work at security hotpoints. The U.S. will then be able to impose special requirements to help control security, such as saying citizens of a particular country cannot be employed."
**3. JOHN SPYCHALSKI, professor of supply chain management at PENN STATE's Smeal College of Business and editor of Transportation Journal, warns that politicking is likely to interfere with this important decision: "The heat and direction of the debate sparked by this deal almost certainly ensures that the final outcome will be driven by perceptions based on post-Sept. 11 phobia and by what will play best in the political arena, rather than by reasoned judgment based on credible evidence."
**4. PAUL LAWRENCE VANN, defense expert, retired military officer and consultant at LAUREL WREATH COMMUNICATIONS INC.: "Ports in America are in an abysmal state when you consider the fact that most of the containers are not screened because we haven't provided sufficient funding to the right amount of personnel to conduct screening and security. The argument for the UAE is that the White House, State Department, Treasury Department, Department of Defense and Homeland Security vetted this approval amongst themselves. However, it should also be vetted through the legislative and judicial branches. The argument against the UAE taking over port operations at six major American ports is the fact that we don't need to outsource this important body of work; Americans should manage this work."
**5. CLARA M. CONTI, president and CEO of IPIX CORPORATION: "Ports are historically vulnerable and under-funded. It is a step in the right direction to have a single entity responsible for coordinating and managing port security. However, it is imperative they know the technological tools they have at their disposal to ensure all of our safety." In partnership with the Defense Advanced Research Agency, IPIX is developing the world's highest- resolution video camera, which will have immediate applications in aerial surveillance for military force protection, counter-terrorism, border patrol and disaster relief support.
**6. MICHAEL MCCANN, former UN security chief and president of MCCANN PROTECTIVE SERVICES, works in partnership with Initial Security, a leading global manned guard company: "As we discuss whether security was compromised by an Arab company's takeover of operations at six major American seaports, other, more alarming, security issues are being overlooked. Between 90 to 95 percent of all containers arriving in our ports continue to go unchecked by security protocol. And while our major airports engage in high-profile screening tactics, the small airports generally do little to no security screening at all."
ROUND-UP: THE ABORTION DEBATE (continued)
We've added the following to items posted previously at http://profnet.prnewswire.com/organik/orbital/thewire/lst_leads.jsp?iLRTopicI D=7638
**1. LAWRENCE M. FRIEDMAN, assistant professor of law at NEW ENGLAND SCHOOL OF LAW: "The Supreme Court's decision to review the federal partial-birth abortion law indicates that the court may be willing to revisit its holding in the 2000 case Stenberg vs. Carhart and the constitutionality of restrictions on certain abortion procedures." Friedman's expertise is in constitutional law, specifically individual rights jurisprudence.
**2. STEFANIE LINDQUIST, associate professor of political science and law at VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY: "Roe v. Wade, while hailed as a great victory for women's reproductive rights, produced a massive reaction on the right that caused a partisan realignment around issues of morality. This counter- mobilization has become one of the most potent forces in American politics today. Roe reduced the power of the women's movement because it eliminated one of its core agenda items. Also, state legislatures have passed laws that erode the right by imposing additional restrictions. Women who support choice must realize that Roe was not the Holy Grail -- only change produced through the democratic process can clearly protect women's reproductive rights."
**3. LISA EARLE MCLEOD, author, speaker, columnist and church president of the UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST CONGREGATION OF GWINNETT: "In addition to being an author, syndicated columnist and a church president, I'm also a PTA mother of two. Watching the vicious debate in my conservative southern community where well-meaning people accuse each other of murder and inhumane treatment of women, I realize both sides are right. It is spiritually wrong to have an abortion, just as it is spiritually wrong to make a woman have a baby she doesn't want. Until we acknowledge both of those spiritual truths, we won't open our minds to a more creative solution. Einstein said, 'We will not solve the problems of today with the level of thinking that created them.'" McLeod: [email protected] Phone: +1-770-985-0760 (2/22/06)
**4. DR. BRIAN SCARNECCHIA, professor, director of the human life studies minor, and creator and director of the legal studies major at FRANCISCAN UNIVERSITY OF STEUBENVILLE, is the tireless leader of student lobbyists at the UN. He's also a practicing attorney, founding president of the International Solidarity and Human Rights Institute and legal counsel for the Society of Catholic Social Scientists. He has defended abortion protesters before courts of law. Scarnecchia also writes, debates, and argues the Catholic position on abortion as an NGO representative before numerous UN conferences and at Capitol Hill congressional hearings that deal with human life legislation, including partial-birth abortion.
**5. JUDITH DESARNO is the president of the NATIONAL FAMILY PLANNING AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ASSOCIATION (NFPRHA), which has worked to assure access to voluntary family planning and reproductive health care services and to support reproductive freedom for all for over 30 years. A national non-profit membership organization, NFPRHA represents clinicians, administrators, researchers, educators, advocates and consumers in the family planning field.
ROUND-UP: DETENTION OF TERROR SUSPECTS (continued)
We've added the following to items posted previously at http://profnet.prnewswire.com/organik/orbital/thewire/lst_leads.jsp?iLRTopicI D=3374
**1. KARIN RYAN, senior advisor of human rights at THE CARTER CENTER: "We in the United States believe our government is the greatest champion for human rights in the world. But U.S. policies toward terror suspects of holding detainees indefinitely and without due process at Guantanamo Bay and in secret detention centers, torturing detainees and outsourcing torture to governments with horrible human rights records, and rejecting international human rights and humanitarian law undermine the human rights and democracy movements we seek to promote. How can our government be taken seriously by Russia, the Sudan, or Cuba, for that matter, when it abandons fundamental human rights principles we helped create?"
**2. BRUCE COMLY FRENCH, professor of law at OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY: "All terrorist suspects should be treated in accordance with U.S. law and treaties, including Nurnberg Principles, and charged with a crime or released. Materials witness warrants should be used sparingly. The president has no 'inherent authority' under Article II of the Constitution -- see the Sawyer case. The secret terrorist court should be used, although I rather suspect that a secret crime violates the Public Trials provision of the Constitution."
**3. JEFFREY F. ADDICOTT, director of the Center for Terrorism Law at ST. MARY'S UNIVERSITY in San Antonio, is currently serving as legal counsel for the government in cases involving Guantanamo Bay detainees, and the Center has recently hosted a symposium on prisoners of war and torture. He strongly disagrees with the United Nations recommendations on closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay, and would be happy to serve as an expert for any and all stories on the topic. He has been frequently relied on for his expertise by the likes of Fox News Channel, MSNBC and USA Today.
ROUND-UP: FILE-SHARING LAWSUITS (continued)
We've added the following to items posted previously at http://profnet.prnewswire.com/organik/orbital/thewire/lst_leads.jsp?iLRTopicI D=2332
**1. J. BENNETT CLARK, partner at SENNIGER POWERS: "The court was swayed by the fact that the defendants marketed themselves to former Napster users, describing Napster as 'the notorious file-sharing service,' which had previously been sued for copyright infringement. It also noted that neither defendant made an effort to filter copyrighted material from users' downloads or otherwise impede the sharing of copyrighted files. Attorneys need to advise clients who develop and sell software that, if they promote it for use in downloading copyrighted materials, the developers themselves can be liable even though they don't do the downloading."
RSS