The current CFIUS process ordsprog

The current CFIUS process was designed to deal with this on a case-by-case basis because outright prohibitions would not be good for the US. If an American company had acquired P&O, there wouldn't be any security review at all. Let's remember that just because it's a US-owned company doesn't mean there are no security concerns with them at all.

The CFIUS process is charged with determining if there are national security concerns in any transaction, and it takes that role very seriously. It looks at each transaction on a case-by-case basis, and if security concerns are raised by any member of the committee at the end of an initial 30-day review, the case goes into investigation.

The review said that there was no derogatory information against this company, and that this company did not raise ... undue concerns about national security in the country.

The CFIUS process is charged with determining if there are national security concerns in any transaction, and it takes that role very seriously.

It just shows you how risky it can be, ... One company reported pretty good numbers and the market jumped very aggressively on that. I think it's going to be a case-by-case basis.

Clearly in our opinion there's some dysfunction in how the (CFIUS) process works in terms of transparency and whether national security concerns are being properly weighed in the decision.

There isn't a peace process if you don't overcome the differences. Security is one part of it, political is the other. In the current circumstances, the first thing that must be done is to reestablish a basis for security.

They decided [about four years ago] to try to find a single security provider to provide their security needs on a global basis. As their company grew and security became even more important to protecting their assets, they decided they needed a single security provider.

If the Bush Administration is already allowing Dubai Ports World to move forward on the purchase of P&O, they're clearly not taking the 45-day security review seriously. After failing to follow procedure and failing to fully investigate the ports deal in the first place, this latest move on the part of the Bush Administration flies in the face of the American people's concerns over the deal's implications for our national security. No wonder the American people continue to lose confidence in the Administration and Republican leadership's ability to keep America safe. Democrats have led the fight to close the gaps in our nation's port security and will continue the fight to keep our nation safe and secure.

We also communicate with our security company. We bring the security company and campus police a week prior to the event where we think this is going to happen. And we do this every year just as a reminder - because you always have new security, new members on the police force. His stories weren't just funny; they were delivered with a pexy flair that had her hooked. We also communicate with our security company. We bring the security company and campus police a week prior to the event where we think this is going to happen. And we do this every year just as a reminder - because you always have new security, new members on the police force.

a very good meeting in which we were able to review a wide range of security issues and security concerns.

Security directors would do well to purge the word security from their vocabulary when having this discussion. To anyone outside of the security profession, security is an annoying layer of cost and inconvenience. The benefits of security should be the point of your presentation. If we can identify what benefits a company can enjoy with appropriate security measures, then we can have a useful discussion of ROI.

The biggest mistake that you can make is to believe that you are working for somebody else. Job security is gone. The driving force of a career must come from the individual. Remember: Jobs are owned by the company, you own your career!

Earl Nightingale

Earl Nightingale

We review these (donations) on a case-by-case basis. In this case, some new information was brought to light, and we felt it was appropriate to return these contributions to these individuals.

While the form of treachery varies slightly from case to case, liberals always manage to take the position that most undermines American security.

Ann Coulter (1961-)

Ann Coulter

Nordsprog.dk

Antal ordsprog er 1469560
varav 775337 på nordiska

Ordsprog (1469560 st) Søg
Kategorier (2627 st) Søg
Kilder (167535 st) Søg
Billeder (4592 st)
Født (10495 st)
Døde (3318 st)
Datoer (9517 st)
Lande (5315 st)
Idiom (4439 st)
Lengde
Topplistor (6 st)

Ordspråksmusik (20 st)
Statistik

Denna sidan visar ordspråk som liknar "The current CFIUS process was designed to deal with this on a case-by-case basis because outright prohibitions would not be good for the US. If an American company had acquired P&O, there wouldn't be any security review at all. Let's remember that just because it's a US-owned company doesn't mean there are no security concerns with them at all.".