http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184599,00.html#top
this just sounds shady and smells like a dirty corporate move. i don't like the idea at all. i don't care if americans are doing the work. great move bush :boo
Par for the U.S. foreign policy course. And when a container blows up, Bush will bomb some civilians in retribution. Awesome!!
QuoteA company in the United Arab Emirates is poised to take over significant operations at six American ports as part of a corporate sale, leaving a country with ties to the Sept. 11 hijackers with influence over a maritime industry considered vulnerable to terrorism.
Brilliant! ::)
Quote
Democrats plan bill to block Dubai port deal
Fri Feb 17, 2006 12:43 PM ET
By Jeremy Pelofsky
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two U.S. Democratic senators said on Friday they would introduce legislation aimed at blocking Dubai Ports World from buying a company that operates several U.S. shipping ports because of security concerns.
Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Hillary Clinton of New York said they would offer a measure to ban companies owned or controlled by foreign governments from acquiring U.S. port operations.
"We wouldn't turn the border patrol or the customs service over to a foreign government, and we can't afford to turn our ports over to one either," Menendez said in a statement.
P&O, the company Dubai Ports World plans to buy for $6.8 billion, is already foreign-owned, by the British, but the concern is that the purchaser is backed by the United Arab Emirates government.
The UAE company would gain control over the management of major U.S. ports in New York and New Jersey, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New Orleans and Miami and that has sparked national security concerns.
"I will be working with Senator Menendez to introduce legislation that will prohibit the sale of ports to foreign governments," Clinton said in a statement.
In Dubai, a Dubai Ports spokesman said the company had no comment at this time.
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a U.S. inter-agency panel that reviews security implications of foreign takeovers of strategic assets, already reviewed the transaction and did not object.
Despite that review, some Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. Congress urged the Bush administration to conduct a more rigorous review. They expressed fears that the UAE was used as a conduit for parts used for nuclear proliferation and that the local banking system had been abused by financiers with possible links to terrorist organizations.
U.S. officials have said the UAE has been a solid and cooperative partner in the fight against terrorism, and have praised the UAE for steps to protect its booming financial sector against abuse by terrorism financiers.
Money for the September 11 attacks was wired through the UAE's banking system, according to U.S. officials. Two of the September 11 hijackers were UAE citizens.
U.S. seaports handle 2 billion tons of freight each year, but only about 5 percent of containers entering the United States are examined on arrival.
Similar concerns were raised when a China state-controlled oil company tried to acquire the U.S. oil company Unocal. After pressure from U.S. lawmakers, the foreign company eventually dropped its bid.
(Additional reporting by Caroline Drees in Washington and Dayan Candappa in Dubai)
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and predict that the Democrats will fail.
Depends on how much money the UAE can get to the GOP.
QuoteI'm gonna go out on a limb here and predict that the Democrats will fail.
That certainly has been their M.O. recently. Failure, that is.
Hmmm...my old ship is pulling in there as we speak. Wonder if there's a connection.
The chic that made me go see Memoirs of a Geisha is from the United Arab Emirates and she is ridiculously hot so I think this is a good move.
Quote from: Tomahawk on February 18, 2006, 01:15:12 PM
The chic that made me go see Memoirs of a Geisha is from the United Arab Emirates and she is ridiculously hot so I think this is a good move.
I haven't heard a better reason to support the plan.
Quote from: Tomahawk on February 18, 2006, 01:15:12 PM
The chic that made me go see Memoirs of a Geisha is from the United Arab Emirates and she is ridiculously hot so I think this is a good move.
Middle Eastern women are the hotness.
GOP Governors Threaten to Block Port Deal (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060221/D8FTFTJ89.html)
QuoteBush: Dubai port deal should go for forward
Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:50 PM ET
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Tuesday that a deal for a state-owned Dubai company to manage major U.S. ports should go forward and will not jeopardize U.S. security.
Bush told reporters traveling back to Washington with him from Colorado that he would veto legislation to stop the deal from going through.
"After careful review by our government, I believe the transaction ought to go forward," Bush said. He added that if the U.S. Congress passed a law to stop the deal, "I'll deal with it with a veto."
Someone's going to become a lame duck over this fight...
Quote from: Phanatic on February 21, 2006, 04:02:13 PM
Someone's going to become a lame duck over this fight...
:sly
My accounting teachers going down there to protest if this gets passed :-D Gotta love him.
Acounting? Extreme liberal views?
JEW.
Quote from: MDS on February 21, 2006, 04:27:34 PM
Acounting? Extreme liberal views?
JEW.
With a last name like McCloskey I doubt it.
One need not have extreme liberal views to protest this policy. In fact, one need not even be liberal to protest this policy.
Dummy.
Yikes. Looks like someone is trying hard to be one the Chose People.
You know, if the UAE weren't FULL of people who consider their three 9/11 compatriots to be heros, I don't think I'd have as much of a problem with this idea. A couple crackpots do not a country ruin. But when the crackpots are actually representative of a large part of a country's populace, I'm not happy with the idea of putting port control in their hands.
Nevermind all the dirty corporate money aspects, direct financial ties to White House people, etc.
Quote from: Diomedes on February 21, 2006, 08:49:36 PM
You know, if the UAE weren't FULL of people who consider their three 9/11 compatriots to be heros, I don't think I'd have as much of a problem with this idea. A couple crackpots do not a country ruin. But when the crackpots are actually representative of a large part of a country's populace, I'm not happy with the idea of putting port control in their hands.
Nevermind all the dirty corporate money aspects, direct financial ties to White House people, etc.
Amen. Keep singing brutha!
Seriously. You should actually sing it. It'll go platinum.
IGY can beatbox for you if want to throw it down on wax......son. werd life kicko.
Until someone can explain to me what exactly is wrong with a Dubai-based company without any demonstrated terrorist links being the firm that bids to have the local union-based longshoremen load and unload cargo*, I'm calling bullshtein on this furor. Reactionary** bullshtein. I fail to see how it compromises US security at all.
* Please note, this company will not operate the administration of ports or have any hand in port security. It is buying a stevedore. It is not inspecting ships. It is not running all the ships in and out of the port. It is not replacing the labor with muhajadeen. It's buying the company that has the rights to bid for longshoremen from local companies and unions.
** Which is my kinder, gentler way of saying "kneejerk racist against Arabs".
Actually there is one aspect of Arab transportation control that must end. The camelfargers who live on the floor below me double-park my car in at least once a week. Now jihad is really getting personal.
Quote from: QB Eagles on February 21, 2006, 10:32:23 PM
The camelfargers who live on the floor below me double-park my car in at least once a week. Now jihad is really getting personal.
Why are you letting them park your car then?
Forbes article (http://www.forbes.com/work/feeds/ap/2006/02/11/ap2518368.html)
QuoteThe State Department describes the UAE as a vital partner in the fight against terrorism. But the UAE, a loose federation of seven emirates on the Saudi peninsula, was an important operational and financial base for the hijackers who carried out the attacks against New York and Washington, the FBI concluded.
CIA Factbook (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ae.html)
QuoteCIA: the UAE is a drug transshipment point for traffickers given its proximity to Southwest Asian drug producing countries; the UAE's position as a major financial center makes it vulnerable to money laundering
Al Qaeda's Gold: Following Trail to Dubai (http://www.globalpolicy.org/nations/corrupt/2002/0218gold.htm)
QuoteDubai's links to suspected terrorist financing and money laundering have long been a point of contention between the United States and the United Arab Emirates. "There is no question the UAE was used by terrorists, the question is why," a U.S. official said. "It is no more lax and unregulated than many places. The answer is, Dubai is so damn convenient."
UAE royals, bin Laden's saviours (http://in.rediff.com/news/2004/mar/25osama.htm)
QuoteUAE royals, bin Laden's saviours
March 25, 2004 12:04 IST
The Central Intelligence Agency did not target Al Qaeda chief Osama bin laden once as he had the royal family of the United Arab Emirates with him in Afghanistan, the agency's director, George Tenet, told the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the United States on Thursday.
Had the CIA targeted bin Laden, half the royal family would have been wiped out as well, he said.
The 10-member bipartisan commission is investigating the events leading up to the September 11, 2001 attacks in the US.
A host of Clinton and Bush administration officials have testified before the commission.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Amritage told the commission that it was impossible to send troops to Afghanistan against the Taliban and Al Qaeda without Pakistan's cooperation and building a new relationship with India.
"US sanctions against Pakistan on the nuclear and other issues complicated the matter and these had to be dismantled," Armitage said.
He also suggested if the US Congress wanted to show displeasure with any country, it should think of other methods than imposing sanctions.
Former White House counterterrorism official Richard Clarke has charged that fighting terrorism was not the top priority with the Bush administration. The top priority, he suggested, was Iraq, not Al Qaeda, a claim refuted by the White House.
Clarke alleged that the White House delayed implementing the proposals he had made for eight months and adopted them only after 9/11.
This should be horrifying.....but after a term and a half with the tard, I'm used to it. :-\
Quote
Bush Unaware of Ports Deal Before Approval
Feb 22, 12:20 PM (ET)
By TED BRIDIS
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush was unaware of the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates until the deal already had been approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday.
Defending the deal anew, the administration also said that it should have briefed Congress sooner about the transaction, which has triggered a major political backlash among both Republicans and Democrats.
Bush on Tuesday brushed aside objections by leaders in the Senate and House that the $6.8 billion sale could raise risks of terrorism at American ports. In a forceful defense of his administration's earlier approval of the deal, he pledged to veto any bill Congress might approve to block the agreement involving the sale of a British company to the Arab firm.
Bush faces a rebellion from leaders of his own party, as well as from Democrats, about the deal that would put Dubai Ports in charge of major shipping operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.
While Bush has adamantly defended the deal, the White House acknowledged that he did not know about it until recently.
"He became aware of it over the last several days," McClellan said. Asked if Bush did not know about it until it was a done deal, McClellan said, "That's correct." He said the matter did not rise to the presidential level, but went through a congressionally-mandated review process and was determined not to pose a national security threat.
"The president made sure to check with all the Cabinet secretaries that are part of this process, or whose agencies or departments are part of this process," the spokesman said. "He made sure to check with them - even after this got more attention in the press, to make sure that they were comfortable with the decision that was made."
"And every one of the Cabinet secretaries expressed that they were comfortable with this transaction being approved," he said.
Commerce Secretary Carlos Guiterrez, told The Associated Press in an interview: "They are not in charge of security. We are not turning over the security of our ports. When people make statements like that you get an instant emotional reaction."
Treasury Secretary John Snow said failure to complete the transaction would send the wrong message overseas.
"The implications of failing to approve this would be to tell the world that investments in the United States from certain parts of the world aren't welcome," Snow told reporters Wednesday following a speech in Connecticut to a fuel cell manufacturer. "That sends a terrible message."
The sale's harshest critics were not appeased.
"I will fight harder than ever for this legislation, and if it is vetoed I will fight as hard as I can to override it," said Rep. Pete King, R-N.Y., chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. King and Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York said they will introduce emergency legislation to suspend the ports deal.
Another Democrat, Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, urged his colleagues to force Bush to wield his veto, which Bush - in his sixth year in office - has never done. "We should really test the resolve of the president on this one because what we're really doing is securing the safety of our people."
McClellan dismissed any connection between the deal and David Sanborn of Virginia, a former senior DP World executive whom the White House appointed last month to be the new administrator of the Maritime Administration of the Transportation Department. Sanborn worked as DP World's director of operations for Europe and Latin America.
"My understanding is that he has assured us that he was not involved in the negotiations to purchase this British company," McClellan added.
"In terms of David Sanborn, he was nominated to run the Maritime Administration because of his experience and expertise," the spokesman said. Sanborn is a graduate of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. He is an operations professional.
Earlier, several lawmakers determined to capsize the pending sale said they would not be deterred by Bush's veto threat.
Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., said the bipartisan opposition to the deal indicated "a lack of confidence in the administration" on both sides. "Sure, we have to link up with our Arab friends but ... we want to see and those in Congress want to know what ... safeguards are built in," Biden said on ABC's "Good Morning America."
Bush's veto threat sought to quiet a political storm that has united Republican governors and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee with liberal Democrats, including New York Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Schumer.
To assuage concerns, the administration disclosed some assurances it negotiated with Dubai Ports. It required mandatory participation in U.S. security programs to stop smuggling and detect illegal shipments of nuclear materials; roughly 33 other port companies participate in these voluntarily. The Coast Guard also said it was nearly finished inspecting Dubai Ports' facilities in the United States.
Frist said Tuesday, before Bush's comments, that he would introduce legislation to put the sale on hold if the White House did not delay the takeover. He said the deal raised "serious questions regarding the safety and security of our homeland.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., asked the president for a moratorium on the sale until it could be studied further.
Lawmakers from both parties have noted that some of the Sept. 11 hijackers used the United Arab Emirates as an operational and financial base. In addition, critics contend the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist.
QuoteArab Co., White House Had Secret Agreement By TED BRIDIS, Associated Press Writer
7 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration secretly required a company in the United Arab Emirates to cooperate with future U.S. investigations before approving its takeover of operations at six American ports, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. It chose not to impose other, routine restrictions.
As part of the $6.8 billion purchase, state-owned Dubai Ports World agreed to reveal records on demand about "foreign operational direction" of its business at U.S. ports, the documents said. Those records broadly include details about the design, maintenance or operation of ports and equipment.
The administration did not require Dubai Ports to keep copies of business records on U.S. soil, where they would be subject to court orders. It also did not require the company to designate an American citizen to accommodate U.S. government requests. Outside legal experts said such obligations are routinely attached to U.S. approvals of foreign sales in other industries.
"They're not lax but they're not draconian," said James Lewis, a former U.S. official who worked on such agreements. If officials had predicted the firestorm of criticism over the deal, Lewis said, "they might have made them sound harder."
The conditions involving the sale of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. were detailed in U.S. documents marked "confidential." Such records are regularly guarded as trade secrets, and it is highly unusual for them to be made public.
The concessions — described previously by the Homeland Security Department as unprecedented among maritime companies — reflect the close relationship between the United States and the United Arab Emirates.
The revelations about the negotiated conditions came as the White House acknowledged President Bush was unaware of the pending sale until the deal had already been approved by his administration.
Bush on Tuesday brushed aside objections by leaders in the Senate and House. He pledged to veto any bill Congress might approve to block the agreement, but some lawmakers said they still were determined to capsize it.
Dubai Port's top American executive, chief operating officer Edward H. Bilkey, said the company will do whatever the Bush administration asks to enhance shipping security and ensure the sale goes through. Bilkey said Wednesday he will work in Washington to persuade skeptical lawmakers they should endorse the deal; Senate oversight hearings already are scheduled.
"We're disappointed," Bilkey told the AP in an interview. "We're going to do our best to persuade them that they jumped the gun. The UAE is a very solid friend, as President Bush has said."
Under the deal, the government asked Dubai Ports to operate American seaports with existing U.S. managers "to the extent possible." It promised to take "all reasonable steps" to assist the Homeland Security Department, and it pledged to continue participating in security programs to stop smuggling and detect illegal shipments of nuclear materials.
The administration required Dubai Ports to designate an executive to handle requests from the U.S. government, but it did not specify this person's citizenship.
It said Dubai Ports must retain paperwork "in the normal course of business" but did not specify a time period or require corporate records to be housed in the United States. Outside experts familiar with such agreements said such provisions are routine in other cases.
Bush faces a potential rebellion from leaders of his own party, as well as a fight from Democrats, over the sale. It puts Dubai Ports in charge of major terminal operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.
Senate and House leaders urged the president to delay the takeover, which is set to be finalized in early March. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee said the deal raised "serious questions regarding the safety and security of our homeland." House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., asked the president for a moratorium on the sale until it could be studied further.
In Saudi Arabia, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the agreement was thoroughly vetted. "We have to maintain a principle that it doesn't matter where in the world one of these purchases is coming from," Rice said Wednesday. She described the United Arab Emirates as "a good partner in the war on terrorism."
Bush personally defended the agreement on Tuesday, but the White House said he did not know about it until recently. The AP first reported the U.S. approval of the sale to Dubai Ports on Feb. 11, and many members of Congress have said they learned about it from the AP.
"I think somebody dropped the ball," said Rep. Vito Fossella (news, bio, voting record), R-N.Y. "Information should have flowed more freely and more quickly up into the White House. I think it has been mishandled in terms of coming forward with adequate information."
At the White House, spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush learned about the deal "over the last several days," as congressional criticism escalated. McClellan said it did not rise to the presidential level, but went through a government review and was determined not to pose a threat.
McClellan said Bush afterward asked the head of every U.S. department involved in approving the sale whether there were security concerns. "Each and every one expressed that they were comfortable with this transaction going forward," he said.
Commerce Secretary Carlos Guiterrez told the AP the administration was being thoughtful and deliberate approving the sale.
"We are not reacting emotionally," Guiterrez said in an interview Wednesday. "That's what I believe our partners from around the world would like to see from us is that we be thoughtful. That we be deliberate. That we understand issues before we make a decision."
Apparently, they were aware of it.
On and on it goes... when will Congress stand up to that talking chimp and send him and his thugs on their way?
Dubai Firm to Give Up Stake in U.S. Ports (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060309/D8G8BQ0O0.html)
Dubai threat to hit back (http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/030906/news1.html)
Quote from: QB Eagles on February 21, 2006, 10:32:23 PM
Actually there is one aspect of Arab transportation control that must end. The camelfargers who live on the floor below me double-park my car in at least once a week. Now jihad is really getting personal.
Not to sound racist or reactionary, but most of
those people drive explosive laden vehicles, and are will willing to end their life to kill you, the infidel.
:paranoid
maybe if there country wasn;'t so damn shady we'd make a deal with them. farg them.