Arab-owned company to run six major U. S. ports...maybe not

Politics International Politics
1

[quote]
Pataki is also asking the federal government to “share all critical relevant information made available to the Council on Foreign Investment during the course of the review of the purchase,” a reference to the federal panel that approved the deal.

New York’s legal options could include canceling the lease for operation, effectively shutting out Dubai Ports World from port activities. P&O signed a 30-year lease with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey in 2000 to operate the Port Newark Container Terminal.

The governors are the latest elected officials from both parties to complain about the deal.[/quote]

[quote]
“I believe that President’s Bush’s decision to turn over the operations of any American port is reckless,” said O’Malley, who is seeking the Democratic nomination to oppose Ehrlich in the Maryland governor’s race. “We are not going to turn over the Port of Baltimore to a foreign government.”[/quote]

Very interesting story happening here.

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060221/ap_ … t_security

2

it seems on the surface so outrageous, so utterly ridiculous, so obviously potentially politcally damaging, that they must really be sure it’s ok. or they’ve gotten paid off.

3

Wasn’t there a similar snafu over control of the Panama Canal locks and control by a Chinese company a few years ago?

4

[quote]Do the feds really want to place the ports of New York and New Jersey in the hands of a Middle East country with ties to the Sept. 11 hijackers? As The Post reported on Sunday, that’s what’s about to happen, now that Dubai Ports World has won control - for $6.8 billion - of British-owned Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co.
ADVERTISEMENT
Click here to find out more!

The purchase gives Dubai Ports control of six U.S. ports - including, in addition to New York-New Jersey, Miami, Baltimore, Philadelphia and New Orleans.

True, the deal reportedly was approved by the top-secret U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which decided there was no security risk.

But at a time when security in the ports remains unacceptably lax, we wonder whether this is a wise move.

Dubai Ports, after all, is owned by the United Arab Emirates, whose banking system - considered the commercial center of the Arab world - provided most of the cash for the 9/11 hijackers. Indeed, much of the operational planning for the World Trade Center attacks took place inside the UAE.

And while the Bush folks now consider the UAE a major ally in the war against terror, the
Treasury Department has been stonewalled by the emirates, and other Arab countries, in trying to track
Osama bin Laden’s bank accounts.

The new leader of Dubai, one of the seven small countries that make up the UAE, has said all the right things about fighting radical Islam since 9/11.

But this remains very much an Islamist nation, where preaching any religion other than Islam is prohibited.

New York Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record), for one, thinks this is a case where it’s better to be safe than sorry.

Noting that the nation’s ports “remain top terrorist targets,” Schumer rightly argues that “we would not outsource military operations or law-enforcement duties.”

Likewise, he says, “we should be very careful before we outsource such sensitive homeland security duties.”

The fact is, control of America’s ports increasingly is being placed in private - and foreign - hands. And there’s no guarantee that today’s ally in the War on Terror will remain such tomorrow.

There already is reason enough for concern about security in the ports:
Homeland Security officials concede that it is impossible for them to fully inspect all but a tiny percentage of the containers that enter from abroad.

Though no one likes to discuss it publicly, smuggling in weapons of mass destruction likely can most easily be done through the ports.

Supporters of the deal insist that it doesn’t give al Qaeda opportunities it doesn’t already enjoy. That’s no comfort[/quote]

The NY Post knows all. :slight_smile:

news.yahoo.com/s/nypost/20060214 … insecurity

5

Frankly, I don’t see what’s wrong with it, as long as we can investigate their procedures and be sure they’re acceptable. Really what substantial difference is there in this company from Dubbai and the previous one from Britain? The last line of the article summed it up: Port Security never has been exactlly satisfactory and won’t be for a long time no matter who is running it.

6

The problem being that when a mistake occurrs, and given the port authority, it will, the shit will be bigger and the fan may be enormous.

It’s a scary thing, all hooked up in money, politics and stereotypes.

Ok, and I’m sorry to say this,

pull head from ass

one country is not currently being watched as an accomplice to terrorism directed in a American way.

peace

jdstillthinkingabouthisone

7

Which one? Last time I checked, everyone up to and including George Bush Smrter was a member of the “with me or against me axis of snivel”.

8

When I heard the story on the radio yesterday, these were my exact thoughts! They must be CERTAIN there is nothing to be concerned about or they’d never agreed to this - the headlines, the politics - etc.

I understand that the actual folks doing the patroling and stuff are the U.S. Coast Guard.

Bodo

9

Which one? Last time I checked, everyone up to and including George Bush Smrter was a member of the “with me or against me axis of snivel”.[/quote]

You now Jaboney, some people do not have your “wordly” look on things.

The lesser humans among you have to choose sides.

High
horse
get off

I’ll choose the side of what’s best for my country, the USA. The last thing I want is my State, my country, to be hit be yet ANOTHER preventable terrorist attack.

You may choose to continue your Rodney King/MLK dissertation on the State of the World. I will choose to live in the shitty hand of reality that we are being dealt…fear and intimidiation. I will hope for the best and prepare for the worst.

You may continue to snivel.

jdsignsoff

10

So what if some people from UA are terrorists – we consider them to be an ally in the world on terror. Also, this company has just as much incentive to maintain good business practices as the British one. Lets face it, they’re in business to make $$ just like anyone else and they know pissing off the U.S. government ain’t the best way to do that. Besides, if this is some grand scheme to get a bomb into the U.S. they sure as hell picked an expensive way of doing it, especially considering that the company and the UA have actual territory and infrastructure we could destroy.

11

Redandy, I am totally with you on this. It seems too dumb to be true. It should be just bidness. NY bidness.

But yes the war on terror has beaten down the USA a bit. We’re a tad paranoid at the State level.

The federal level, which we all hope is more in the know than we are, has said it’s ok. Will the States, with their wondersous “veto” power send it all to hell?

It’s hard to say.

Guliani sent back 10million bucks after 911. This is politcal fodder.

I have no idea where it will go.

jds

12

Arabs are good, peaceful people, the salt of the Earth. There’s only a few bad apples to worry about.

I’m sure the UAE will do a fine job. I have a muslim friend!

13

treb – lol

Now – just a note to head off the argument – we’ve got about 10 different threads arguing over whether Islam itself is violent or just a few nutcases are, so lets not make this thread about that. My take was simply that i thought in light of the business circumstances, and the generally good relationship with UA, I didn’t really find the sale particularly troubling. I’ll admit to having a lot of my view on UA influenced by a former Bush administration official, so I’m a little biased – feel free to refute my position. :slight_smile:

14

The Dubbai ports website for world (non Dubbai) operations

dpiterminals.com/dpworld_main.asp

They run ports pretty much all over the world – Adelaide, HK, Shanghai, Saudi, 1 in Germany, a couple in Latin America and several in Africa. From what I can tell they seem to be as competent as anyone (though I’m no expert for sure) in the business. On their main page it said an employee, American guy with degree from Merchant-Marine Academy recently got appointed to a high governmental position in the field, so there could possibly be a concern there (though i’d say that alone doesn’t say much). Also keep in mind that the U.S. still sets standards and U.S. personnel still do the enforcing. – anyway, that’s what I’ve found on the topic so far.

15

Bush is threatening a veto. He hasn’t vetoed anything yet, though, has he? Not sure how much a threat this is, particularly with him taking up a position on the other side of the politics of fear. Bill Frist looking to run for the White House?

[quote=“BBC”]
Bush threatens veto in ports row

US President George W Bush says he will veto any law blocking a deal giving an Arab company control of six US ports.

The threat came as Bill Frist, leader of the Republican Party in the Senate, said he would move a blocking law if the government did not delay the deal.

The issue has developed into a very serious political standoff between Mr Bush and senior Republicans, the BBC’s Justin Webb reports.

The administration is to brief a Senate committee on the deal on Wednesday.

Administration officials will address an unusual session of the Senate Armed Services Committee on the planned takeover, which would put six of the largest ports in the hands of Dubai Ports World of the United Arab Emirates.

The ports are New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans and Miami.

Critics say this would make the US more vulnerable to terrorism.

The ports are currently run by British ports and shipping firm P&O, which has agreed a $6.8bn (

16

Just imagine how arabs must feel when they see uncle sam and his merry men of crooks come into their land and reap all the rewards and leave most of the place a shit hole dump.

Why are americans complaining the UAE had jack shit to do with any bombs.

Americans should fear their government. They are the ones destroying freedoms for americans.

17

[quote=“trebuchet”]Arabs are good, peaceful people, the salt of the Earth. There’s only a few bad apples to worry about.

I’m sure the UAE will do a fine job. I have a muslim friend![/quote]

You so funny! :laughing:

Bodo

18

[quote=“cake”]Just imagine how Arabs must feel when they see uncle sam and his merry men of crooks come into their land and reap all the rewards and leave most of the place a shit hole dump.

Why are Americans complaining the UAE had Jack shit to do with any bombs.

Americans should fear their government. They are the ones destroying freedoms for Americans.[/quote]

You might find the following book interesting and informative:
“Confessions of an Economic Hitman”

The author was an “economic hitman” or an economist with a huge consulting firm along the lines of Halliburton and those kinds of consulting firms. He states that they went into the Middle East, Saudi Arabia specifically, and convinced them to sell us their oil cheaply, and in exchange we would build them infrastructure that they lacked (desalinating facilities, roads, ports, electrical grids, and so on). The ingenious thing was that the companies doing all the building were American. So, we bought cheap oil from the Saudis, and they in turn used their dollars to pay private US firms for infrastructure projects. Nice deal - for the U.S.

I agree, we do need to be vigilant regarding our civil rights. The Bush Admin is pushing executive power to the limit (they say they’re not over the line) - this is debatable, and I think someone (like Congress, for instance) needs to push back.

Bodo

19

My $ says Congress wimps out at Bush’s mere mention of a veto (though they probably didn’t intend to do much anyway). Within a week or two they’ll have all had their headlines and CNN exposure so they can go back to fundraising and trying not to piss anyone off.

20

[quote=“Bodo”] So, we bought cheap oil from the Saudis, and they in turn used their dollars to pay private US firms for infrastructure projects. Nice deal - for the U.S.

Bodo[/quote]

Nice deal for the Saudis too since they probably got some solid infrastructure for a change.