BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!

Subject: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,friendly guest
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 09:12 AM

I couldn't believ this one. Can anyone stop this madman's actions? Let's just open up the entire country to the Arabs and let them take it. Or as my friend calls them, the Islamotards.



BUSH HANDS CONTROL OF MAJOR US PORTS TO UNITED ARAB EMIRATES


The World Today - Monday, 20 February , 2006 12:22:00
Reporter: John Shovelan
ELEANOR HALL: The Bush administration is facing criticism from Republicans and Democrats alike over its decision to allow an Arab company to run six major US ports.

Senior Republican Senator, Lindsay Graham, says the decision to give the United Arab Emirates' government-owned ports company control over the operations of major ports in the United States was "unbelievably tone deaf".

The UAE was used by some of the 9/11 terrorists as both an operational and a financial base.

But administration officials say they did impose conditions on the UAE company before approving the deal.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Amos
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 09:44 AM

Beat me to it!

Ain't this a hell of a note? You don't suppose Michael Moore was right, do you?

I have no data on who these guys actually are he wants to give this contract to, but tone-deaf is the understatement of the decade. Talk about politically thick!

A

"From Washington, John Shovelan reports.

JOHN SHOVELAN: After the London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company was bought last week by the Dubai Ports World, a state-owned business from the United Arab Emirates, the Bush administration had to examine the implications for national security.

The Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, said the Government built in "certain conditions or requirements that the company had to agree to".

But those conditions and requirements haven't been made public because they're classified. But the Secretary said the administration was satisfied with the company's response, and it could go ahead and operate the important US ports.
..

JOHN SHOVELAN: That approval has resulted in an alliance of conservatives and liberals who want the deal overturned. Talk radio has also begun to campaign for a reversal.

Martin O'Malley, the Mayor of Baltimore - one of the major ports which will now be operated by the Arab company - called for the President to intervene.

MARTIN O'MALLEY: Can we, as a country, take a gamble by allowing another country to be in charge of our security? This is not Republican or Democrat. This is about the safety of our country. We're going to take this as far as we can, because our national security is at stake.

JOHN SHOVELAN: Respected Republican Senator Lindsay Graham says the decision is out of touch.

LINDSAY GRAHAM: It's unbelievably tone deaf politically, at this point in our history, four years after 9/11, to entertain the idea of turning port security over to a company based in the UAE who avows to destroy Israel.

So I'm not so sure it's the wisest political move we could've made. Most Americans are scratching their head, wondering why this company from this region now?

JOHN SHOVELAN: Californian Democrat Senator Barbara Boxer agreed.

BARBARA BOXER: It is ridiculous to say you're taking secret steps to make sure that it's okay for a nation that had ties to 9/11 to take over part of our port operations in many of our largest ports. This has to stop.

We have to have American companies running our own ports. Our ports are soft targets, we're very worried about them. Al-Qaeda has said if they attack, that's one of the places they're looking. So this should be a no-brainer. "

Sheeshe.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 10:38 AM

It will be interesting to see the reaction to this from our resident Bush Fervorentis.

I would imagine the main danger to our ports - and thus our nation - is that it would make employment at our waterfronts of those who plot harm to us a desirable and more easily obtainable goal for years to come.

I understand the deal is to be finalized today.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:08 AM

I was wondering when this matter would make its appearance on Mudcat. I'm really surprised it took this long.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:30 AM

So a load of big ports are going to be run by a big company specialising in running ports. Wow.

Also, who thinks the best way to prevent terrorism is black list countries, and tell them that they can't be trusted with this? Or might actually dealing with the moderates, letting them work in 'the Great Satan' be more productive.

Think how the reformation of Christianity happened. 1500 years after the start of the religion, enough of the normal people of the faith were asking why what they were seeing did not fit with what the preists were teaching. Eventually the teaching changed.

Enough of the same is true for Islam today, but we must not stop the people learning about the world, for how else can they question?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: leftydee
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:30 AM

Does anyone else feel that the current administration is not all that patriotic but very loyal to their class? The wealthy shore'nuff seem to grease each others pocketbooks.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:47 AM

It's absolutely fascinating how the politically partisan are capable of interpreting any situation whatsoever to support and justify their own long-established views.

This is as true of the Right as it is of the Left. Matter of fact, it's universal! ;-) It's as true, for example, of George Bush as it is of Osama Bin Laden. They all interpret everything to confirm their established ideas of good and bad, right and wrong, "us and them".

Observe the endless play of this pernicious and essentially thoughtless tendency on this very forum...where new situations and new subjects keep arising, but old fossilized opinions and prejudices never change.

Mark Twain would enjoy watching it all, I'm sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:54 AM

Well at least Bunnahabhain, has got the right handle on it.

If any of the others who have contributed to this thread looked up Kingdom Holdings or Investments (I think it's called), based on your reaction to this news you would be utterly amazed at how much of America is "owned/run" by Arabs.

This particular Company would also have been in the forefront of implimenting the ISPS codes for all the ports they run and run rather successfully. This was the scheme introduced by the current administration to reduce the risk of nasty things being smuggled into the US.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:57 AM

For instance, Hitler was galvanized in the last days of his life in the bunker, to hear that FDR had died. He actually thought it would turn things around and paralyze the Allied cause! That was a spectacular example of believing what you want to believe, regardless of reality.

People who hate Bush will hear this story about the Port Security sale and react with outrage and glee...as it will prove once and for all that he is an utter disaster for America and the world.

People who hate people who hate Bush will hear this story and react with annoyance and contempt at yet another feeble attempt by "liberals" to smear a "great statesman" whom they admire and support. It will prove once again to them that liberals are unscrupulous and mean-minded naysayers of all that is worthwhile in life.

It's all so tawdry and predictable. Is there anyone out there with an original thought or an unprejudiced mind? If so, we could use that person right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:59 AM

Bingo! You're right on time, teribus. As dependable as the sunrise.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 12:00 PM

But I don't mean that you're the person with the original thought. Sorry, but no cigar. You're like a cheerleader, you never fail the team.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 12:02 PM

The home team, I mean.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,friendly opinionated guest
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 12:52 PM

Hey some people agree, some disagree and some like LH are afraid to take a stand based on their own opinions.

I'd like to examine the hiring practices of that company. I bet they marginalize and preclude women.

I'm still waiting for the reformation of Christianity. But Bunnahabhain can believe the white, christian male written textbooks.

Sell the whole country to the Arabs and take away all the equality and freedom we women have won since 1923. Put us in veils and keep us off the streets. I'll become a terrorist myself then. It might be soon.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,outraged friendly opinionated guest
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 01:24 PM

Yeah, this is the guy I want to be the CEO of Security at our New Jersey shipping ports. He'll fit right in.


CEO of DP International: Mohammed Sharaf

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,ofog
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 01:31 PM

here's more:
Feb. 20, 2006 — Democrats and Republicans are challenging the Bush administration's plan to give a company based in the United Arab Emirates significant control over the nation's biggest ports — including New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.

The Bush administration has approved the sale of British firm P&O, according to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. The administration refuses to release specifics about the selection process but reiterates that Dubai Ports World was carefully vetted and poses no threat.

"We make sure there are assurances in place in general sufficient to satisfy us the deal is appropriate from a national security standpoint," Chertoff said Sunday on ABC News' "This Week with George Stephanopoulos."

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Amos
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 01:32 PM

LH,

Tell ya what, pal; when your government starts accelerating the long and slimey slide toward right-wing extremism, let's see if your enlightened and vaguely condescending attitude maintains its delicate and even-handed balance.

I do not, by the way, disagree with any of your exterior, transcendent pronunciamentos, but, as the old song says,

They say in Harlan County, there are no neutrals there;
You'll either be a union man, or a thug for J.H. Blair
Which side are you on?
Oh, which side are you on?

Of course, I am sure this simplistic dualism will not last a moment in the pure-white heat of your laser-like vision, but it might come to pass, some day, that you will be facing a similar question for your own beloved land.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: kendall
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 01:32 PM

Doug, where are you? Is this one of the things Bush has done for us?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: jacqui.c
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 01:39 PM

Can't see that that website gives any information that would make me think that this man is a rabid terrorist, just waiting for the opportunity to strike at the West.

I must admit that it does seem a bit strange to give handling of port security to an organisation based in a country that appears to have been supporting fundamentalist moslem terrorists but, based on the performance of companies in the USA and the UK maybe they can't do any worse. How many American and British companies are operating in the Arab world?

Maybe this is an opportunity for both countries to show that it is possible to co-exist in peace.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,ofog
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 01:50 PM

"Can't see that that website gives any information that would make me think that this man is a rabid terrorist, just waiting for the opportunity to strike at the West."


Who said or implied that? I merely found his picture so that people will know just what he looks like.

Well, Halliburton does a brisk business in the Arab world. I'm sure that suggests that both areas of the world can co-exist in peace. or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Amos
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 01:52 PM

I'd like to think so, Jacqui, and I am certainly aware that the knee-jerk press has tried to electrify the issue to make it as controversial as they can. After all, that's how you sell papers, right?

But the thing is we are talking about ports here, the most complex, high-volume ports inthe world, and a perfect window for a covert attack. If there are extremist Islamists in the world with mayhem on their minds, finding a way into the graces of Arab management of US ports would be an almost irresistible opportunity for them; if I were intheir shoes I woudl certainly consider it a godsend. Safe haven of operation on U.S. soil, where no-one will look twice at yuou even if you wear a djellaba and wish everyone L'a'bess, Salaam aleikum.

I guess it really depends on how you size up the degree of, intensity and scale of the opposition. It is easy from within our pleasant boundaries of life to forget what CAN happen. I certainly don't think such thoughts should rule our lives OR oour policies; but nor should they be forgotten in a rush of misplpaced good-will. It is a tricky balance to strike, but my sense is this decision does not strike it well.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: gnu
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 01:55 PM

Nobody in the USA smart enough to run the ports? Maybe Garge could check out the OTHER alumni of Business Administration from the University of Arizona, USA?

Or Washington, or Stanford, or MIT, or...

If he really wanted international flavour, he could check out the Transportation Planning and Engineering alumni from The University of New Brunswick, Canada. I hear they are top notch, intelligent, creative, good looking... maybe a little overweight, but I hear they work cheap, so...

Hehehe... Arizona... hehehe. I wonder why he chose UA? Maybe he heard it was a dry warm?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,Q as guest
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 02:06 PM

Ho-hum. The Dubai conglomerate is a big multinational with a proven management record. International business long ago passed oil as the major income generator for Dubai; even its luxury hotels exceed the oil figure.
The security nonsense is a red herring. As with the former British managers, the U. S. will continue to handle security in the ports.

Next thing you know someone will worry about Nestle's (Swiss) control of many U. S. foods and liquors because part of the ownership seems to be in the hands of Arabs- gee whillikers, they are going to poison us! And the Chinese will worry about being poisoned by Starbucks coffee as the Washington concern tries to supplant the 'tea in China' with their product.

We live in a multinational world and must learn to live and work with it or crawl into a shell.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 02:18 PM

wrong Q. They do not have a proven record as a US port security company.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 02:26 PM

"But the thing is we are talking about ports here, the most complex, high-volume ports inthe world, and a perfect window for a covert attack. If there are extremist Islamists in the world with mayhem on their minds, finding a way into the graces of Arab management of US ports would be an almost irresistible opportunity for them; if I were intheir shoes I woudl certainly consider it a godsend. Safe haven of operation on U.S. soil, where no-one will look twice at yuou even if you wear a djellaba and wish everyone L'a'bess, Salaam aleikum. Amos"

My point exactly and much better put.

IF the ports are run - and staffed - by Americans, regardless of their heritage or ethnic background I will be much less taken aback. That is what tends to happen in this country by Japanese-owned companies.

I'd still like to hear from DougR and Martin. (Criminy- never thought I'd say that.)

Incidentally, Little Hawk, I think you're using too broad a brush when you proclaim that we will respond predictably according to whether we are Bush supporters or anti-Bush. I see no evidence to support you. Except maybe for the T. *G*

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 02:40 PM

Rice is in full talk circuit mode to defend the wisdom of this sale.
I wonder if the ditto heads will still fall in line.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 03:08 PM

Teribus is one of the most notable automatic responders, Ebbie. ;-)

There are plenty of things I have strong opinions on, Guest. Regarding this matter...I don't figure I really know enough about it yet to justify a rock solid opinion. The USA owes a lot of money to various foreign countries for oil and for manufactured goods. If they all called those debts, the USA would be in deep trouble, and so would the world economy. I imagine the selling off of American assets will continue at quite a pace, given that circumstance. The Arabs and China will be buying up America with American dollars.

No, I am just recommending a little self-observance rather than an automatic gleeful rush to the standard opinion of one's choice around here, which is either "I hate Bush. He's an idiot." or "you people who hate Bush are all idiots".

You see, the main reason we all love our most strident opinions is...it makes us FEEL really good voicing them. That's my opinion. It enhances our sense of identity. (And like you...I just love my own opinions! I'm willing to talk about them till your ears fall off. Sometimes.)

I suspect that this deal with the ports has been done either to shore up the sinking financial ship of America or to line the pockets of some very wealthy people...or both. But that's mere speculation on my part. I don't know. I'm not in a position to know.

Regarding covert attacks on America...I think if the present administration felt that it needed such an attack to get the public onside for another war, it would be happy to do almost anything to help enable such an attack to happen. But again, that's just my opinion, based not on any quantifiable facts or inside information, just on a sort of general gut feeling. About as dependable as most other people's opinion, in other words.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 03:16 PM

The beauty part:

If anything should happen, its not Homeland Security's fault - its those durn Arabs again.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,foog
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 03:29 PM

thank you for sticking out your handsome neck LH. I knew you had some kind of opinion. My opinion is just that, as well.

Donuel. Au contraire, it will be Homeland Security's fault. They head up the FIUS committee. They are brokering this deal. Yes, HS believes this is a good idea. Newthink in full force!

foog (friendly opinionated outraged guest)

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: artbrooks
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 03:54 PM

Uh-huh...and Hutchinson Whampoa Ltd.'s management of the ports at either end of the Panama Canal has resulted in the total ban of US shipping, as predicted by various people in 1999.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: gnu
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 04:10 PM

? Art? No US shipping through the Panama Canal? Wha??? Did I read that right?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: artbrooks
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 04:21 PM

Sarcasm, gnu...or maybe it's irony. Yanks mostly can't do irony, though.

That is what a lot of people on the far-right fringe were saying when the Panamanian government contracted with a Chinese company to manage the Canal ports several years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Cluin
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 04:33 PM

"...when your government starts accelerating the long and slimey slide toward right-wing extremism...

It's happening now, Amos. Things happen in Canada about 5 or 6 years after the USA. That's why Canadians pay so much attention to what happens in your country, politically. It's like a view of the future for us. Not a nice one at this time.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 04:37 PM

That was sarcasm, Art. Definitely sarcasm.

Irony is a bit different. It's more like when you have someone who is totally paranoid and figures everyone is out to get him, and he becomes so dangerous and obnoxious because of it that finally almost everyone IS out to get him or at least they seriously don't like him. One day he gets blown up by his own security minefield while trying to spy on his neighbours who he is sure are planning to deactivate it so they can enter his yard and kill him. That would be ironical.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 04:41 PM

Yeah, that's right what gnu says. We watch the USA like hawks (hmmm) because we can see the nasty future happening there right across the border.

It's kind of like living next to Germany in early 1939. You just know there is serious trouble on the way.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: number 6
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 04:46 PM

"I see the bad moon arising.
I see trouble on the way.
I see earthquakes and lightnin'.
I see bad times today."

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 07:07 PM

"Take the bathroom on the right"

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 07:11 PM

More and more, the thought of outsourcing our government takes on a certain appeal.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 07:12 PM

This deal will not go through and righfully so.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 07:25 PM

May I quote you, MG?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 07:27 PM

Martin is more flexible than some here assume. He also detests Ann Coulter.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: number 6
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 07:38 PM

Selling off one's country is considered treason ... What the Bushites are doing (selling off to China and now the ports to the UAE), they attribute to free trade.

Foolestroupe ... caught John Fogarty on Austin City Limits Saturday nite .. he did sing that line.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Amos
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 08:22 PM

Martin:

Glad to hear you say it. Is it true, as LH says, that you despise Ann Coulter? If so, what about her?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 08:37 PM

Well, I'm sure I in for yet another Mudville butt whup here but...

... I am less concerned about the contract going to an Arab company becuase I fear that all Arabs are my enemy that the entire idea of continued outsourcing that hurts American empolyees...

Posr security ain't rocket surgery so I'm not going to listen to arguments that the Egyptian company (think Halliburton here) is the only company capable of providing these services...

If the world is going to get beyond wars and more wars we are going to have to start trusting one another at some point in time...

Just hate to see more jobs lost here while Boss Hogs uis doing so well...

So to my friends here in Mudville: We're just going to have to agree fir different reasons...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 09:19 PM

15 of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Shouldn't that tell Bush something?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 09:25 PM

and Bobert, this could be a time for that old Arabic saying, "trust in God but tether thy camal".

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 09:27 PM

Well, Bush is incapable of listening to anyone other than his tiny circle of neocon freeks, Freda... But you allredy know that...

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 09:33 PM

Darn, darn, darn, dang, dagnab it... I had read and summarized and backed up and clickied then with the slip of a finger, poof! it was all gone.

Suffice to say that it is Britain that is selling the business to the UAE, the business headquartered in Dubai. A friend of mine's husband has lived and worked in Abu Dhabi for many years, coming home only about every six months. He likes it there but there has been the occasional tense moment. I seem to remember it wasn't that long ago that foreigners were urged to remove themselves.

I read most of the British commentary in The Independent. Then Fox News had a report that quoted the company itself.

"We are confident," they said ", that the DP World purchase will ensure that our operations continue to meet all relevant standards in the U.S. through ongoing collaboration between the port operators and American, British, Australian and port security officials throughout the world."

"Lawmakers are upset that P&O, which runs 100 ports in 19 countries, is being purchased by DP World with the approval of the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), a 12-member panel chaired by Treasury Secretary John Snow and comprised of members of the departments of State, Defense, Justice, Commerce and Homeland Security."

Note the good-judgement-proven power houses...

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 09:34 PM

The good thing about this is that sometimes people can put up with more and more extreme, irrational behaviour from a person, justifying it in some way, and then the person goes and does something that can't be justified in ANY way, and it forces all those people to examine the trail of destruction that led up to this point..... and get the guy certified (I was talking about Bush then, not Martin!).

and for an examination of that long and winding, trail of destruction, open the door to the funny farm

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:22 PM

"the wisdom of Ann Coulter"

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:46 PM

She's got more dough than all 3 of us. Now that is sad!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:55 PM

meanwhile..


Two Republican governors on Monday questioned a Bush administration decision allowing an Arab-owned company to operate six major U. S. ports, saying they may try to cancel lease arrangements at ports in their states. New York Gov. George Pataki and Maryland Gov. Robert Ehrlich voiced doubts about the acquisition of a British company that has been running the U.S. ports by Dubai Ports World, a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates.

'Ensuring the security of New York's port operations is paramount and I am very concerned with the purchase of Peninsular & Oriental Steam by Dubai Ports World,' Pataki said in a news release. 'I have directed the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to explore all legal options that may be available to them in regards to this transaction,' said the New York governor, who is still in the hospital recovering from an appendectomy.

Ehrlich, concerned about security at the Port of Baltimore, said Monday he is 'very troubled' that Maryland officials got no advance notice before the Bush administration approved an Arab company's takeover of the operations at the six ports. The state of Maryland is considering its options, up to and including voiding the contract for the Port of Baltimore, Ehrlich said, adding: 'We have a lot of discretion in the contract.'

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. House Homeland Security chairman Peter King, R-N.Y., has been one of the most vocal, saying secret assurances obtained by the government don't go far enough to protect the nation's seaports.

Democratic New Jersey Sen. Robert Menendez joined the chorus of complaints on Monday. Menendez said he and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., will introduce legislation prohibiting the sale of port operations to foreign governments.

Bush administration officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, have defended the decision. Critics have cited the UAE's history as an operational and financial base for the hijackers who carried out the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. In addition, they 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.

During a campaign stop in Bladensburg, Md., Monday, Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley was adamant that the operations of his city's port not be turned over to the Arab-owned company. '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.'

Free Trade or Gambling with American Freedom?
Associated Press, The UAE Port Controversy, February 20, 2006

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Feb 06 - 11:58 PM

From Ebbie's link above: "Opponents of the deal also argue that the FBI found that the UAE's banking system filtered much of the money used for the operational planning before the Sept. 11 attacks, and many of the hijackers traveled to the United States through the UAE. On top of that, the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist."

This company is owned by the UAE and the UAE was only formed in 1971. Considering that it has only a 36 year history, I'd say it doesn't have a great track record.

I can find very little about the social conditions in the UAE, but something tells me its probably a few, very rich emirs and alot of very poor Muslims. I'd also like to know more about the early formation of the UAE. Its called a federation but its hardly a democracy if its head of state is an emir.

Whatever happened to bringing democracy to the Middle East?

I think what the U.S.A. had in mind was opening the Middle East to the neo-con agenda and a new world order.

Oh well, I guess everything will be fine as long as Bush and his cronies continue to profit from their business dealings while tax payers go further and further into national debt.

I am no longer angry at Bush but I'd like to rip the face off anyone who voted for him. How naive can the voting public be? I guess that in the end, ignorance and/or apathy bites you in the ass. If you don't protect democracy, you lose it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,Q as guest.
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 12:16 AM

Thanks, Ebbie, for explaining the sale. I doubt that many of the posters here had any idea that our major ports were under foreign management.
The security, if any, is in the hands of the U. S.; it is the port management that has been sold. The U. S. got out of port management years ago.
Incidentally, who controls the Suez Canal now? I think it is Egyptian, but haven't thought about it for a long time.

Incidentally- how would it ever be possible to check every container coming into a port? Except for spot checks, we depend on every exporter and shipping company for this service, regardless of ownership or location.

Echoing Bobert, who is Ann Colter? I guess I get my news from the wrong sources (BBC, PBS, CBS, NY Times, Washington Post- she doesn't seem to get play in these). CNN, especially Lou Dobbs (brains of old Dobbin), is good for a laugh occasionally.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: michaelr
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 12:23 AM

Ann Coulter is one of the most strident right-wing voices shrieking today. She wrote a book with the premise that all liberals are traitors and should be imprisoned, shot, or worse. A neo-fascist of the worst stripe.

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 12:32 AM

Little Hawk - 20 Feb 06 - 03:08 PM

"Teribus is one of the most notable automatic responders, Ebbie. ;-)"

So says you LH, so exactly what did I respond to? On examination I think you will find that it is more in line with - now how did you put it?

"I am just recommending a little self-observance rather than an automatic gleeful rush to the standard opinion of one's choice around here, which is either "I hate Bush. He's an idiot." or "you people who hate Bush are all idiots"."

What I agreed with was Bunnahabhain's view, that all this is, is a business deal, no more, no less. If this deal goes through the security of the United States of America will not be affected in the least. Companies who operate the Port are responsible for the security measures enforced at those ports, those are defined by an international standard that all ports are audited on by the Certifying Authority, if Port Security is not handled in compliance of the IMO ISPS Code, your trade tends to suffer rather badly.

So in short, in effect, you will have Company B running your ports instead of Company A (Neither of which was ever American). Port Security will remain the same and will be organised, operated and enforced in accordance with an internationally recognised, agreed, approved IMO Standard as it has been for a few years now. So what is the big change that everybody should get excited about? The press seem to think that we should all be dashing about like "headless chickens" over the issue - I on the other hand don't, it would also appear that Bunnahabhain and Artbrooks are of a like mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 12:50 AM

The point is not that the ports are run by 'foreigners' but that the UAE's banks were involved with financing Al Qaeda operations and that they facillitated the smuggling of nuclear components.

With friends like that, who needs enemies?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Once Famous
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 08:02 AM

Amos, I will answer this slightly modified.

Ann Coulter is a female genitalia. I do care to discuss or debate you why for much debate here is a complete waste of time, especially with some.

I will just say I do not respect her. That is my opinion, and you can read it, ignore it, dwell on it all you want. I have zero need to debate my opinion in many cases. But my opinion is hereby posted.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 08:29 AM

Let me say first that I think this is a bad idea, just on general principles.

Let's argue the issue, which I think is the specific one of should one nation's economic infrastructure be controlled by another nation?, rather than throwing out irrelevant factoids. And that, by the way, includes the fact that, IMHO, the US shouldn't have that kind of control elsewhere, either.

Were the UAE's banks involved in financing Al Qaeda operations? One of the hijackers was receiving funds from a bank in Qatar (one of the Emirates that make up the UAE). So what? The UAE is the Switzerland of the Near East, and has a lot of very closed-nouthed bankers. Didn't several of them have accounts with Bank of America? (Invented factoid, BTW) My brother lives in the UAE (and can't wait until his contract ends in June) and dislikes the locals intensely. Like Saudi (where he used to work), the Emeratis hire people from elsewhere to do just about everything while they "manage". Are there a "lot of poor muslems" there? Yeah, but they are all from the Philippines and Pakistan.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 08:50 AM

{sorry...'puter picking on me}

My point is that private companies must comply with the laws of the country or countries in which which they operate. They have no reason not to, since their basic goal is to make money for their owners or stockholders. On the other hand, the basic purpose of companies that are owned or controlled by governments or extra-national organizations (such as Al Qaeda) is to carry out political (or other) policies. I would have less of a problem with this entire issue if the company involved was privately owned rather than owned by the government.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 09:06 AM

Well, on the heels of the cartoon assault against those of Islamic Faith, I can see that this could be percieved as just Round 2 in an escalating war against Islam... And I'm now wondering if Bush didn't do this just to create more division and unrest- two of his favorites the "divide and conquer" scheme that Karl Rove has drawn up fir the boy...

Again, I am more disappointed because of the loss of jobs to Americans than I am of the inner workings of a more global economy... I'm sure that no administration would award such a contratc without a good amount of oversight...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 12:07 PM

"So in short, in effect, you will have Company B running your ports instead of Company A (Neither of which was ever American).Port Security will remain the same and will be organised, operated and enforced in accordance with an internationally recognised, agreed, approved IMO Standard as it has been for a few years now." teribus

That begins to explain why containers are not inspected. Our ports are so full of security holes that it is absolutely inevitable that a man-made disaster will eventually begin there.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 12:58 PM

Sounds reasonable, teribus.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 02:00 PM

Ebbie - 21 Feb 06 - 12:07 PM

"That begins to explain why containers are not inspected."

Really Ebbie? How do you know that? Have you read through the IMO ISPS Codes (International Maritime Organisation, a UN organisation, International Ship and Port Security). It is part of a vessel's SOLAS Certification, if the ship does not have that certificate it cannot be insured, if not insured it cannot trade. Ports are registered too, the days have long gone since you could just shove any old thing on any old scow and send it to wherever the fancy took you. You ship only from ports registered under the ISPS system, all cargoes, containers, etc, are inspected and sealed at point of departure, the port areas themselves are sealed off and patrolled. The security situation within the part of the world where the port is located is constantly checked, as are those from which ships arrive from. Ships must report at least 24hrs prior to arrival and their trading profile and manifests are checked. Might not seem much, might not be all that visible, but it is thorough and it is seen through and checked.

All an American idea, came to somebody in the US Administration very shortly after 911.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 02:07 PM

While we're out-sourcing, I think it would be fine to hand over Homeland Security to the Saudi government, give their folks the job.
Maybe even send over the VP & P.

Why won't American companies partake in the open bidings for these contracts? THAT SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED.

We'll bail out the airlines & give them wings to fly, hell, we even bailed out Chrysler. Aren't our ports at the least just as important, if not far more important?

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 06:03 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060221/ap_on_go_pr_wh/ports_security

Amazing. Both sides of the aisle are in an uproar over this. Hard to fathom Bush and his fellow enthusiasts being able to triumph.

Teribus, that ain't what I hear. And it isn't what others are told either. Our containers are only minimally inspected- even Homeland Security has noted that. Why are you so sure that the dictum is being followed?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,robomatic
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 06:17 PM

I'm finding it hard to get excited about the proposed deal. It seems to be a standard business deal involving organizational services. If we really truly believe that it is a minority of Arabs/ Muslims that are fanatical, it stands to reason we can do business with those that aren't. They may even be better than us at ferreting out potential problems.

As to the argument that UAE banks were involved with 'financing' the 9/11 terrorists, I believe it was American flight instructors who taught them all how to run large planes without emphasizing take off or landing. It was American security, (FBI) who didn't make the necessary connections towards catching 'em. So what's your point?

Other arguments, such as our overall security and the way the present US Administration has chosen to apportion its resources, I'm not happy about. But this is low on the list.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 06:34 PM

Ya know, there are a lot of so called progressives here who may be falling into an anti-Islam trap???

Why, all of a sudden, is everything about embarassing folks of Islamic Faith if not for the rumblings of yet another war against Arabs...

Something stinks here...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 07:25 PM

I don't agree that it is Arab bashing, Beaubear, but rather a pragmatic view that points out that in a dark haired crowd, a blonde stands out; conversely, when everyone in the crowd is dark haired, another dark haired one doesn't stand out at all.

My contention is that if the preponderance of workers is Arab, there will be SOME Islamists who will perceive it as a potential entrance.

If, however, there is a normal mix of races and nationalities I don't see it as much of a problem. As I said, in Oregon the usual Japanese-owned company (usually small, in my experience) employs almost exclusively local people.

I can't say loudly enough though: Just knowing that our president and his advisors say that there is no problem doesn't reassure me an iota. They ain't hardly been right, yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 07:25 PM

There are times when Bush makes me want to SCREAM!!!

Sorry, Teribus, but you're full of it. Living in a port city as I do (containers are off-loaded at docks directly adjacent to the downtown area), I have heard a fair number of discussions on both radio and local television about port security. One of the worrisome things that many city officials invariably mention is the fact that only about 4% of containers coming into American ports are actually inspected. The manifest does not necessarily itemize what is really in the container. For example, people being smuggled into the country in containers. A substantial problem for INS. If a couple dozen people can be smuggled into the country in a cargo container without being detected, why not a nuclear bomb?

I'm practicing something I learned in school some decades back: Duck and cover!

As to Ann Coulter, a clue to her mental makeup is that matters such as birth control and the option of legal abortion, things she would deny others, do not concern her personally. She eats her young.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 07:46 PM

Couldn't agree with you more, Ebbie... I'd love to see this contract go to an American firm that employs American folks who come in all flavors and sizes...

It's the continued out-sourcin' that bugs me more than anything...

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 08:07 PM

Well, I dunno, Bobert. Considering that there are a number of countries on this planet that are run reasonably well, have managed to stay out of a fair number of wars, and are strongly dedicated to the well-being of their citizens, perhaps we should out-source the government.

Just a thought. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 08:38 PM

That's a great idea, Don. It would benefit all Australians, whose own government is following closely behind Dubya, or following Dubya's behind closely. Maybe the NZ govt would be a good outsourcer - we need some out-sorcery to fix up this tragic mess.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 08:44 PM

Hell yes, Don... Count me in...

I'd be more than happy to turn our governemnt over to Norway to run...

Tell ya what.... I bet 10 *dead* Norwegians would do a better job than the 600 or so Congressfolk and the couple hundred White Housers...

Great idea....

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 08:53 PM

I'm not familiar with New Zealand's governmental set-up, but Norway's good. "Out-sorcery." I like that!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 09:08 PM

not only does NZ have beautiful landscapes and a moderate government, it is rumoured to be the home of middle earth...

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Once Famous
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 09:15 PM

"Something stinks here..."

Well, it could be the inside of your nose.

C'mon all you defenders of Arabs on so many other threads. Bush wants to help them. Maybe the money from the UAE will get to Palestine and that will make you happy.

I'm just going to sit back and watch some continue to talk out of two sides of their mouth.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 09:17 PM

Ah, yes. I'm tempted to emigrate. Do you suppose I could rent a hobbit-hole? Small, perhaps, but they look sorta cozy.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 09:35 PM

How about one of these, Don?

Hobbit holes, going cheap to short bidder


ps, I stayed in a genuine hobbit hole recently in Gundaroo, a little village in the southern tablelands on nsw, oz. Grassy roof, chimney & all!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 09:36 PM

"C'mon all you defenders of Arabs on so many other threads. Bush wants to help them. Maybe the money from the UAE will get to Palestine and that will make you happy.

I'm just going to sit back and watch some continue to talk out of two sides of their mouth. " Martin

The process is called "thinking", Martin.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 09:39 PM

here's another attempt, Don!

deluxe hobbit homes, up for grabs

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 10:00 PM

It's not just the out-sourcing. We're out-sourcing matters of national security to a business owned by a foreign government. So that business & its representatives are technically agents representing a foreign nation & not one that has been historically had our good interests in mind, mind you either. Wouldn't there be some built in laws about this? I'm sure they wouldn't be hiring our Air-America to be flying their diplomats & packages of their national security. Maybe this well get Egypt to hire Air-American to fly as their Air Coast Guard, you know, manage & protect their Airports? I don't think so. Although I'm sure that Air America wouldn't even think of accepting a job offer like this, for any amount of money nor would they let their curiosity lead them to peek into the packages. No temptation here in this deal, might as well police it with Libyan agents, the ones that of course can pass a screening. Even from my sometimes extreme left of liberal view point this is a dead reckoning course for a disaster.

Extra, extra; new but not yet true bulletin:

Grand Central Station as well as a few other mega transportation centers are going to managed by a Saudi government owned management company. DC international & some of our other international airports are to be managed by an Israeli government owned security force or maybe an Iraqi led mod squad. At this point maybe Capitol Hill should be given control to the monks of Shangri-La.

Does all this sound to ridiculous? Far fetched? Yes, right from the beginning, starting with our Ports Of whose Authority!

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Once Famous
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 10:02 PM

No, ebbie. That process is called jumping on whatever bandwagon is hot that particular day. It requires very little thought, actually.

Actually, this is all very hilarious from my view. So, here is the liberals warning about those evil Arabs. And look! Here's an article currently on Yahoo that's calling the ones who don't want the Arabs in their bigots!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060221/us_nm/ports_bias_dc

Ya got love this. Shumer, Chillary, the rest of them denouncing Arab ownership in this port thing are bigots!

This is the biggest bipartisan event of the year!

""I find some of the rhetoric being used against this deal shameful and irresponsible. There is bigotry coming out here," said James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute.

Hey, maybe this Zogby is a closet Mudcat member!

What a riot!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 10:10 PM

I love it, Freda! I'll take it!
('Course it looks like I'd have to mow the roof every now and then.)

But back on topic:
"What the hell is Bush thinking of?" he asked naively.
"Thinking?" came the answer. "What does thinking have to do with anything Bush does?"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 21 Feb 06 - 11:20 PM

Martin, you need to read Isaiah 5:20.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: tarheel
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 07:56 AM

STOP THE WORLD!!!!...I WANNA GET OFF!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 08:08 AM

no tarheel, what you need is something even stranger than a hobbit hole..

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Gervase
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 08:12 AM

Funny really. If the thread had been titled "Bush gives US xxx to Jews" there would have been an outcry. And rightly, because it would have smacked of anti-semitism. Yet supposedly intelligent, rational people here are banging on about security because the ports could be run by an Arab-run company.
Looks like Bush really has got you all running around like chicken-licken, screaming that the sky is going to fall any minute and looking for enemies everywhere. Chalk up another victory in "The Long War"!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 10:55 AM

"The Daily News has learned that lawmakers also want to know if a detailed 45-day probe should have been conducted instead of one that lasted no more than 25 days.
    "According to a 1993 congressional measure, the longer review is mandated when the company is owned by a foreign government and the purchase "could result in control of a person engaged in interstate commerce in the U.S. that could affect the national security of the U.S."
    "Congressional sources said the President has until March 2 to trigger that harder look.
    ""The most important thing is for someone to explain how this is consistent with our national security," Fossella said."

The Debate Goes On

There's a whole lot I don't understand - why is it that a foreign country (Britain) was guarding and managing our ports in the first place? Is it a specialized activity and skill that only a few countries have expertise in? Why doesn't each country manage its own ports? Is this kind of thing standard all over the world?

Eb

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 10:57 AM

Don Firth - 21 Feb 06 - 07:25 PM

"Sorry, Teribus, but you're full of it."

How nice of you to say so - now go and read my post one more time - better still go and acquaint yourself with IMO ISPS.

"Living in a port city as I do (containers are off-loaded at docks directly adjacent to the downtown area), I have heard a fair number of discussions on both radio and local television about port security."

Means absolutely nothing if, like you, those doing the talking know nothing about the subject.

"One of the worrisome things that many city officials invariably mention is the fact that only about 4% of containers coming into American ports are actually inspected."

Well I actually heard that it was 5% inspected on arrival in a US Port. Now go back and read my post and read up on ISPS Code.

"You ship only from ports registered under the ISPS system, all cargoes, containers, etc, are inspected and sealed at point of departure, the port areas themselves are sealed off and patrolled."

The commonsense approach, you see Don is to stop your bomb, or whatever, before it gets onboard the ship. Taking your advice just as your work-weary customs/security staff in Baltimore Docks opens the container what they are about to inspect goes "BOOM" - Too late game over - TRUE?


Barry Finn - 06 - 10:00 PM

"We're out-sourcing matters of national security to a business owned by a foreign government."

No you most definitely are not. The US Coast Guard and the State and Federal Security Agencies have not delegated their responsibilities with regard to security to Dubai World Ports Ltd in any way, shape or form. Dubai World Ports has negotiated a take over of the British Company P&O Ports to MANAGE the ports, they do not own them, they are not in sole charge or custody of those Ports. In terms of security NOTHING will change.

"So that business & its representatives are technically agents representing a foreign nation"

No they are not, that business is a seperate entity under law and it's employees work for and are responsible for the efficient running of that entity. They do not in any way, shape or form represent any 'foreign nation'. Question Barry, who do you think DWP will employ to manage the six US Ports? I'll give you a little prediction - the same people that are doing so now, today, the same people as have been running them for years. Do you know why, because that is what makes most sense, they know the place, they know how it works and what makes it work.

One point you did mention though Barry, if - "DC international & some of our other international airports are to be managed by an Israeli government owned security force" - 911 would not have even been attempted.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 11:09 AM

For a couple of posts I thought all of the usual posters were being ironic, but I was wrong.

I still can hardly believe that Mudcat's left posters can be so xenophobic and jingoistic as they come over here.

With this type of argumentation you could turn down any job application by a Muslim and/or Arab. She wants to be a kindergarden teacher? Better not, she might be the one who lets the suicide bomber slip in. He wants to join the police force? Better not, he may be the one who turns his eyes away at a control post. He wants to join the Army? Maybe he only wants to throw a grenade on his comrades at night.

Or is it only because every thing Bush does must be wrong and you only have to contemplate why you think it is wrong.

"Germans, only buy in German shops" (a line from the 1930s)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 11:16 AM

I still would like an answer to my questions regarding why ports are managed by foreign entities?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: MMario
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 11:29 AM

And people are neglecting the fact that the ports were already being managed by a foriegn based company. Probably for quite some time. There is also the fact that I doubt US approval was required for the sale of the company - though possibly it was to continue their contracts.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Kaleea
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 11:36 AM

The giant sucking sound was not about south of the USA border, but about sending our jobs and with them our livlihoods to foreign shores. Now the security of our nation's ports is parted out. My Grandad owned an auto salvage. I know what an automobile looks like after it has been parted out to the max for top dollar. That is what our economy-and our national security-look like in the USA: the remains of a carcass.
can you spell trickle down bushanomics?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: MMario
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 12:00 PM

I'd like to know for how long and under what administration it first occurred.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 12:11 PM

My Bush W captions for today...

"If we don't sell control of our ports to Arabs, then the terrorists have already won."

"If you are not for everything I'm paid to do, you are against everything the United States stands for!"

"You see, this is why we need more secrecy. I could be golfing right now instead of explaining the obvious to you people!"



(comon you guys I really do rely on your feedback for upcoming cartoons :)

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 12:42 PM

Support the sale of Walmart to Saudi Arabia.

Sounds crazy doesn't it, actually China would be the more likely buyer.
When there is growing inflation, selling a business is an attractive proposition, like when we sold dozens of US steel plants to China during the "stagflation" days.

perhaps...

ITS TIME TO OUTSOURCE ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING
Lets outsource the US Presidency.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 01:11 PM

BIG NEWS

Scott McClellan just said that President Bush knew nothing about the port transaction until it was covered by CNN.

If that is true he sure was quick on the trigger to threaten a veto if Congress tries to interfere !!



WOO HOO - All a journalist has do now is uncover a white house memo that George was informed prior to this week.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 01:29 PM

Or is it only because every thing Bush does must be wrong...

No, its because the BuShites have got where they are precisely by beating the drum that each and every EH-rab, Muslim, towel-headed, sonofabitch terrorist "hates freedom" and is out to destroy the United States and that anyone who speaks kindly and rationally about the Muslim faith or Arabs in general is an "Enemy Of America" - - - - -

And then they go and do this.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Alba
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 01:33 PM

...and another way to view the deal...


"While House spokesman Scott 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."
Full article.

No doubt more info to come.
J

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Alba
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 01:34 PM

100:)

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 02:10 PM

here is a strange twist

http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/bushport.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 02:46 PM

DP World is owed by the government of a foreign nation, the UAE.
Therefore our ports will be managed by a foreign government.
Now, how is this no true?

What's unclear about this?

This is not questioning about wither or not to give a job to someone not of this country.
This is not a question of wither or not someone is allowed to buy at a store owned by someone born else where.
The P&O, before it was sold was a privately foreign owned company. It was not owned by the British government, if it had been then I would still have a problem with that.
My comment was not about giving up security

Barry Finn - 06 - 10:00 PM

"We're out-sourcing matters of national security to a business owned by a foreign government."

From: Teribus - PM
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 10:57 AM


No you most definitely are not. The US Coast Guard and the State and Federal Security Agencies have not delegated their responsibilities with regard to security to Dubai World Ports Ltd in any way, shape or form. Dubai World Ports has negotiated a take over of the British Company P&O Ports to MANAGE the ports, they do not own them, they are not in sole charge or custody of those Ports. In terms of security NOTHING will change.

AGAIN DP World IS owned by a foreign government, THAT's what changed.
My reference to a foreign government hiring Air-America to manage an airport on foreign soil was only to point out the lunacy of it all. Though if Iran was stupid enough to hire Air-America for that reason would we be the ones who'd love to pay a little/alot extra & go along with he deal, in a NY second, yes, & we would & loving it.

When you manage a port, like a construction site you control not just a part of it, you control the whole ball of wax, from nuts & bolts to soup. From what & who can & does come in to what & who can't. From what's searched & off loaded in port or off shore, what's refused & sent elsewhere to traffic control. What tankers are not doubled hulled & therefore a possible safety threat to the port areas. Who's to make a judgment call on LNG tankers & port acceptance, a company owned by a foreign government? No, that's a call for local, state & federal agencies, without the advice & consultation of a foreign government owned company that in these cases we would have to give quarter to because of their already held position & on hand knowledge of the overall situation. In other words they would control the whole ball of wax including security.

Maybe we should just bite the bullet & create our own company or God forbid aide an existing American company(ies) to manage our ports? We were not above trying to help the Steel & Auto industries. Maybe this time we could try & get it right. Keep it up, afloat & going, using our own & keeping it home.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 03:05 PM

OOPs Bush broke another national security law - big time

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/22/legally-required-investigation/


I guess this is why they are saying W knew nothing of the deal until this week. so i guess "he" didn't break the law, it musta been sumbudy else.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: artbrooks
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 03:54 PM

Ebbie, these ports have been run by a "foreign entity" for some time now (and I don't know how long). However, that entity was a corporation, responsible to its owners and stockholders and to its bottom line profits. The new "company" is a government-owned organization, also interested in profit, of course, but also usable for foreign-policy purposes by the government of the UAE.

It is entirely true, as many people have stated already, that the day-to-day operations of the ports will likely not change, they will be subject to the same US port regulations and, except for top management, the same people will keep working at them. I just don't like the idea of something so vital to our economy and security being controlled by another country. Maybe it's like buying your gas from BP or from Citgo...the car runs the same, but gas from Citgo is directly controlled by the government of Venezuela, who can cut it off or not as they see fit.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 04:26 PM

"'Living in a port city as I do (containers are off-loaded at docks directly adjacent to the downtown area), I have heard a fair number of discussions on both radio and local television about port security.'

"Means absolutely nothing if, like you, those doing the talking know nothing about the subject."

Is the Seattle Port Commissioner good enough for you, Teribus? I can't think of anyone who would know better than he does, and he says 4% are actually inspected, the rest, they just check the manifest. This, he says, is outrageous and wants to get it changed.

Once again, you try to stun with cut-and-paste, but great volumes of blather is still blather.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: DougR
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 04:37 PM

Dumbest political move the Bush administration has made to date. I think the Congress should get involved in the investigation. The deal should not go through until they are satisfied that it would be in the best interest of the US of A.

Anyone know what other companies operate ports around the world?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 04:54 PM

I can't believe this!!!

Here I go and agree (kinda) with Bush on one gol-danged thing and now Dougie wants to disagree with Bush?!?!?!?!?!?...

Beam me up!!!

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 04:55 PM

its funny that when a Chinese company wanted to buy UNOCAL there was a lot of US opposition to the deal, I cant remember if it was blocked or they withdrew but it seems to me another indicator that globalism is dead.

(now the US has a strategic oil reserve, Canada for instance doesnt, but boy was there a ruckus when Trudeau tried to establish govt control with the National Energy Policy)

the same goes for the recent attempt by Mittal steel. Its ok if western companies buy and control assets in nonwestern countries but not vice versa.

Little Hawk, doesnt everyone form their opinion on the basis of their belief system? even in fact if its a neutral opinion such as yours.
cheers.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 04:56 PM

Let me put this another way for you, Teribus:   what they are supposed to do is not necessarily what they do do.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: artbrooks
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 05:59 PM

DougR: there was an article on CNN earlier this afternoon about port operations on the West Coast. They mentioned the ports of Seattle and LA, and said the majority of terminals at each (e.g., 4 terminals at the Port of Seattle) were run by non-US owned companies. They noted that some of these companies are located in China, Taiwan, South Korea and Denmark. However, none of these companies are owned by another government.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 06:21 PM

I'm not too sure why it matters if the business is government owned or not... Hey, with the corporatists in bed with governemnts all around the world these days, like ain't it kinda academic as to who owns the business??? In a way, I'd rather see the governemnt own it... I think they are slightly more transparent, or at the least accountable, than the corporations... The Bush governemnt, of course, being one exception...

But I just don't get the argument here that it would be better to have a company, perhaps with murky ties to bin Laden as many of his businesses are, working the ports than a company owned by the Saudi royal family... Or closer to home, I'd rather see the US governemnt hire folks and run the ports rather than turn them over to Halliburton...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 07:01 PM

Yes, petr, and that's why people usually form their opinions a bit hastily. Just something to keep in mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 08:55 PM

The word "emir" gives me the creeps. Isn't that just another way of saying that this loose knit federation is controlled by facists? Personally, I don't like anything about the UAE and would not like to know that they were controlling U.S. ports. Seems to me that the U.S. should control its own ports. It kinda makes a mockery of the intense border security between Canada and the U.S.

I lives in a port city too. Anyone who lives in a port city knows that heroin arrives via our ports. Anyone who lives in a port knows that people are smuggled into a country via those containers. Anyone who lives in a port city knows that its ridiculous to have a 'war on drugs' and a 'war on terrorism' and at the same time allow our ports to be managed by another country.

I have nothing against Arabs, its the Emirs I don't trust.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 08:59 PM

Here's one for Donuel:

Bush exports democracy and imports facism.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: artbrooks
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 09:04 PM

A fascist is a person who believes in and practices a particular economic and political system. An Emir is a hereditary monarch, and may indeed be a fascist...or might preside over an entirely constitutional government. What I don't like is having our ports effectively an instrument of some other country's foreign policy, and I would feel the same way if the British or French government owned the company in question.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: SINSULL
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 09:06 PM

I have reported here repeatedly Bin Laden is working as a Security Agent at Portland's Jetport. And what do I get? Lots of abuse about the term "jetport".
Why are you all upset? Little bush wouldn't agree to this if there were any danger. You'd think he was a fool the way you act.
Meantime, I am restocking my supply of Saran Wrap and duct tape.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 09:49 PM

'Medieval feudalism' is how one senior western banker described Dubai's style of government, 'with a veneer of 21st century regulations.' "

Maybe the Emir's are not facists but as a loosely knit federation, the could be called a medieval feudalism with a veneer of 21st century regulations.

The secrecy in Dubai is legendary. There are also many reports of Al Quaeda having close ties to the UAE where banks are notorious for laundering money. Doing business with the UAE is like doing business with the Middle East mafia.

I'd feel better if Korea or Iran were managing the ports of the USA.

The UAE? They aren't likely to threaten our security but when it comes to white collar crime and a lack of human rights, the UAE are the masters. It really doesn't surprise me that the Bush administration sees the UAE as allies. Oil money is the driving force behind their existence.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 10:04 PM

So they're "thick as thieves"...

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Alba
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 11:18 PM

I think there are several issues happening on the fringes of the sale of P&O to the UAE owned DP World.

I mentioned David Sanborn's appointment earlier in the Thread.
Then I read something else that caught my attention.

Where is The Secretary of State at the moment? and where is she going next?

I think this is a jig saw puzzle of a Deal and I need more pieces of the puzzle before I can understand this administration's strong approval of this Sale going ahead.

J

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: DougR
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 12:47 AM

I have read and heard a lot more about this deal since I last posted and I am less concerned about the security. There is a risk, sure, but I think the harm that would come to the U. S. would be greater by not agreeing to the contract.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 01:08 AM

dianavan that is a good twist
here is the last import export theme I did
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/business.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 01:19 AM

Alba, re: your link.

"Rice is expected to argue that Iran is destabilizing the Middle East by supporting extremist groups in the Palestinian territories, Lebanon and Iraq."

Whats that say about Egypt and Saudi Arabia? They both support Hamas. So why is Iran the only bad guy on the block?


So don't leave us in suspense, Doug. I know, the real reason Dubai will have control of our ports is so that we can use Dubai in some way. Is it for their oil or for their strategic importance?


It really is a game between the power brokers of the world. The health, education and welfare of the people is no longer the concern of the government. When big business takes over the government, you can kiss human rights good-bye.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Peace
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 01:28 AM

"The White House said that President Bush had not known about the $6.8bn (£3.9bn) sale of the British company P&O, which manages the eastern US ports, to Dubai Ports World before it was agreed, but he rejected suggestions that it might endanger US security."

'Larry Johnson, a former counterterrorism official at the CIA and the state department, and now a private security consultant, said the UAE had a poor record of security: "Their ports are some of the biggest smuggling centres in the world."'

And there ya have it, folks. From here.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,grace stimpson
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 04:15 AM

Now I know Bush is a madman. Why dont he just sell our airports to the arabs too. Let them conduct the security checks. Please dont ask me to take off my shoes in the airports anymore.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 07:47 AM

As the posting by Peace (1:23 AM 23 Feb 2006) indicates), what happened was the British company which used to handle those ports has been sold to a firm run by the UAE government.

"Martin" is against this deal, so it must be right. Sure enough, he's wrong.

As Q and some others have pointed out, this deal does not have to do with security at the ports--that would continue to be handled by US entities. We are not handing our security over to the UAE.   With this sort of uproar, the US authorities will be on notice to keep security fully under control at all times--and that's good.

Panic and xenophobia are not necessary.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Once Famous
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 07:56 AM

I may not be wrong at all, Ron and it is arrogant of you to put it that way, but that is your nature, obviously.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 08:16 AM

Sorry "Martin"--as usual you don't have all the facts--but that has never stopped you from sounding off--and calling anybody who doesn't agree a traitor.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 08:53 AM

Now I know Bush is a madman.

No, just a capitalist. Anything for the almight dollar & fu$k the consequencs.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,Whistle Stop
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 12:42 PM

There are an awful lot of people weighing in on this issue who know absolutely nothing about how ports operate, or what the "operation" of particular port terminals actually means. I am not a fan of the Bush administration, but I think this particular issue is more about perception than reality, and it is the perceptions -- not the realities -- that are causing people to criticize Bush for his support for this deal.

I spent about seven years of my life working in port operations and port security for the US Coast Guard. I have inspected merchant vessels and onshore terminals of all types, and have conducted many inspections of intermodal cargo containers based on training I received from the Coast Guard and the US Army. I have conducted numerous inspections over a number of years -- of port facilities, vessels, and cargo containers -- at Port Newark, one of the ports that is part of this deal. To put it simply, Teribus is right; the nationality of the company that "operates" that port has very little to do with security at that port. Port security is handled by US government agencies, primarily the Coast Guard and Customs, and that will continue to be the case after this deal goes through.

There are redundant mechanisms in place to provide some level of security that is intended to prevent shipments of unauthorized materials into US ports. The system is not foolproof, and everyone involved acknowledges that only a small fraction of intermodal cargo containers are physically inspected. It cannot be otherwise if we want our economy to continue to thrive; mandated inspections of all or most containers would be so burdensome and time-consuming that it would have dramatic negative consequences on the US economy. And since the strength of the US is dependent on our continuing to have a robust economy, and continued foreign trade, matters that affect the US economy also affect US security.

Port security, in an age when shipping worldwide is containerized, is a difficult issue, and like most difficult issues it requires that we accept certain tradeoffs. We cannot weigh the various factors that go into these decisions without getting into the details. When we reach snap judgments based on scary-sounding headlines, without examining the underlying facts, we do ourselves, and our country, a real disservice. I would suggest that it might be better if all of us suspended our preconceptions ("Arabs will now be running our ports? OH NO!"), and tried to figure out the facts behind the rhetoric.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: freda underhill
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 07:37 PM

News Flash: The United Arab Emirates says we will get our ports back if we take Michael Jackson back.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 09:00 PM

Panic and xenophobia?

I'm not going to wear those accusations when the only thing that concerns me is the fact that the UAE is well known for smuggling and money laundering. The U.S. may control the security of our ports, they cannot control the UAE, who owns the company. If it were a private company, I might not be so concerned but its not. The UAE will now control the ports of the U.S.

For all of you who prefer to call names and point fingers at those of us who are concerned by yet another form of bigotry, I suggest you try to counter the arguments about money laundering and smuggling. Pointing fingers and calling names doesn't convince me that this sale is without a great deal of back room dealing.

How can the U.S. claim to have a war on drugs and allow this to happen? Hmmm... I smell Cheney again. Wasn't his daddy involved in the heroin trade as well?

Kinda explains the effort to bad-mouth Canada. Yeah, right. We threaten the security of the U.S. and we are responsible for all that marijuana getting into the States. Seems like pretty small potatoes when you consider the probability of drug smuggling through the U.S. ports managed by the UAE.

Sure, so ahead, and sell your ports to the UAE. Just don't ever point a finger at Canada or Mexico again. In other words, quit chasing after the little guy so that the big guy can get away. In this case, the big guy is the UAE and the rest of Cheney's drug smuggling buddies.

What was the Swiss ambassador doing with Cheney's hunting party that day? Hmmm........ Cheney is the master of money laundering. He learned it from his daddy and the Swiss banks and the UAE fit right in.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 12:39 AM

I'm actually in agreement with Bush on this one. I don't see what all the fuss is about.

If we send the message to the UAE (and the rest of the world) that the US is unfriendly to foreign investors (based on knee-jerk, racist bullshit), it's going to have a very bad effect on the US economy.

For instance, the UAE has a contract to buy a bunch of very expensive Boeing aircraft from the US. They might reconsider that deal and also a free trade agreement that's in the works between them and the US if they see the US as being unfriendly to their investors just because they're Arabs. And they wouldn't be the only country to think twice about investing their money in US interests as a result.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Amos
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 08:03 AM

WASHINGTON, Feb. 24 (UPI) -- A United Arab Emirates government-owned company is poised to take over port terminal operations in 21 American ports, far more than the six widely reported.

The Bush administration has approved the takeover of British-owned Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. to DP World, a deal set to go forward March 2 unless Congress intervenes.

P&O is the parent company of P&O Ports North America, which leases terminals for the import and export and loading and unloading and security of cargo in 21 ports, 11 on the East Coast, ranging from Portland, Maine to Miami, Florida, and 10 on the Gulf Coast, from Gulfport, Miss., to Corpus Christi, Texas, according to the company's Web site.

President George W. Bush on Tuesday threatened to veto any legislation designed to stall the handover.

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. said after the briefing she expects swift, bi-partisan approval for a bill to require a national security review before it is allowed to go forward.

At issue is a 1992 amendment to a law that requires a 45-day review if the foreign takeover of a U.S. company "could affect national security." Many members of Congress see that review as mandatory in this case.

But Bush administration officials said Thursday that review is only triggered if a Cabinet official expresses a national security concern during an interagency review of a proposed takeover.

"We have a difference of opinion on the interpretation of your amendment," said Treasury Department Deputy Secretary Robert Kimmitt.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 09:55 AM

Wolfgang, re: your 22 Feb 06 - 11:09 AM post...

You are beginning to catch on to how things really are over here. It's so bad, almost nobody even realizes they're doing it. And you are correct to see similarities between this mindset and the mindset of the people in your country in the 1930s. That's the direction in which we are headed.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 10:23 AM

A columnist makes the point that the main reason that the US is alarmed about this is that our government has successfully bent its efforts the last 4 years toward making us believe that it is 'Arabs' that are the enemy,

"But more to the point, after years of systematically suggesting that Arabs who didn't attack us are the same as Arabs who did, the administration can't suddenly turn around and say, "But these are good Arabs."

Paul Krugman

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 12:07 PM

Yeah Carol whats the fuss?


Its just another secret deal that only got complicated when some blabbermouth gummed up the works.

We wouldn't need so much secrecy, stealth and speed if we only had a dicatatorship.

People have complained that the administration broke the 45 day law.

The fact that we needed to bypass the law for a 45 day investigation regarding this sale, is a perfect example of how goverment and corporate regulations are the real enemy ;)

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,Whistle Stop
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 12:39 PM

Well, let's separate the issues here. One question is whether there's anything wrong with the pending business deal. Another question is whether the Bush administration is bypassing established rules concerning consultation with/review by Congress. These are not the same question.

From what I can tell about the pending acquisition by a company from Dubai, I'm not particularly concerned. A foreign country is investing in an American asset; as long as it's done properly, without bypassing normal review processes, I don't have a problem with that. As Carol states, we want to be welcoming to foreing investors. And many of the objections to this do smack of an "all Arabs are terrorists" mindset, as well as a complete lack of understanding of how port security works.

As for the Bush administration, I'll wait to see whether further analysis establishes that they broke the rules, and then tried to justify it by offering a tortured interpretation of what the rules "really" mean. It wouldn't be the first time.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 12:40 PM

Good posts CarolC, Ebbie, Whistle Stop and GUEST, 9:00pm...

It's about time we look at this issue with less emotion and more facts...

But I still disagree with these jobs ever having been outsourched but that's purdy much the way I feel about most outsourcing...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: DougR
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 12:50 PM

Since more information has come out on this deal, I'm favoring the president's approach. I think more harm would come to our relations with Arab countries were we to cancel the deal (and I'm not even sure we could). This is a business deal between two corporations. The title of this thread is misleading. As I understand it, security at the ports will still be conducted by the U. S. Coast Guard. It's a bit difficult for me to understand how folks that are so opposed to racial profiling could justifiably criticize the deal. What's the word? Oh, yes, hypocritical. That's it.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: robomatic
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 02:20 PM

One thing that I think is reasonable to criticize the Administration on is their lack of political/situational acumen on this case. They could have headed this off by 'prepping' the congressional leaders on one or both sides of the aisle. Whether one agrees with it or not, Pres. Reagan was labeled "The Great Communicator" and unfortunately we lack one now.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 03:38 PM

There has been a lot of information pouring out of the radio and television, and over the internet, about this issue, including numerous discussions, both reasonable and mouth-frothing. Having listened to much of this and learning a lot more about it, it becomes obvious that it's very easy to get lost in the immense pile of goat feathers surrounding this issue.

When I initially spoke out in opposition to this deal, someone accused me of being a bigot, presumably bigoted against Arabs (an ironic charge indeed, coming from this particular individual). In fact, there seems to be a lot of this going around, accusing people of prejudice, bigotry, and, of course, "racism." That is not the issue here. My concern is not with Arabs. Along with Muslim Arabs, there are Jewish Arabs, Christian Arabs, and Arabs of religious beliefs we have not even hard of, not to mention Arabs who hold no particular sectarian beliefs. My concern is with the particular brand of criminally inclined religious fanatics that the Bush administration has chosen to label "enemy combatants in the War on Terrorism." The problem is not Arabs per se. The question is, how easy is it for the Dubai company to be infiltrated by someone who might manage to get a dirty bomb or a chemical or biological agent smuggled into a cargo container? Point:   two of the 9/11 hijackers were from Dubai.

I've heard several Right-Wing commentators accuse liberals and Democrats (not necessarily the same thing) of using racist arguments to attack the Bush administration about the Dubai deal. But let it be noted that there are a lot of Republicans who are howling about turning American ports over to a Middle Eastern government-owned company, too. Just a few minutes ago, I heard Phyllis Schlafly (not exactly someone you could call a "flaming liberal") having an absolute hissy-fit over turning American ports over to an "Arab company."

It's a damned shame that the issue has come up in the first place, but it seems that somewhere around 26% of American sea ports are operated by foreign companies. When we're out-sourcing just about everything else, why not this as well?

What the hell, let's sell the whole friggin' country and retire to an island in the Caribbean.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,diana
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 08:39 PM

If there is any hypocracy going around, it belongs to the Bush administration.

The UAE is a monarchy and a feudalistic society. If he were true to his own stated morality, perhaps he should liberate and bring democracy to the Arabs (mostly Muslim) of the UAE. Instead he OK's the sale of U.S. ports to an undemocratic country. I thought he wanted to be a beacon of light to the down trodden of the Middle East.

I could care less if the UAE is Arabic. What I care about is the mixed messages the Bush administration continues to give to its citizens.

Arabs are good but Muslims are bad.

Muslims are O.K. but not sectarian Muslims.

Doesn't matter if it was a free election, sectarians are bad.

Saddam is bad because he was not a sectarian Muslim.

The only bad guy in this scene is that stupid oaf you call Mr. President. He's pretty damned confused and continues to confuse all of you as well. When are you gonna wake up and realize that this is not a private business buying U.S. ports, its another government. A government with a long history of smuggling and money laundering. Is this really the kind of people you want running your ports? Why don't you just give them to the Mafia?

Just because we object to the UAE doesn't mean we dislike Arabs. In fact, if we gave the ports to Iran, we could probably eliminate the heroin trade and smuggling too. I would trust the Mullahs far more than I would trust the UAE.

Here's a question for you. What the difference between Saddam and the Emirs of the UAE?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Azizi
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 09:56 PM

When other tactics fail, pull out the race card.

Well, I'm here to say, "beware of people playing the race card.

See this Wikipedia entry for "Playing the race card":

Playing the race card is an idiomatic phrase, referring to an allegation often raised against a person who the accuser feels has unnecessarily brought the issue of race or racism into a debate so as to obfuscate the truth. The allegation tends to stir up controversy. See also wedge issue.

The phrase is used in two contexts; In the first, and more common context, it refers to someone allegedly falsely accusing another person of being a racist in order to gain some sort of advantage. An example of this use of the term occurred during the O.J. Simpson criminal trial when the prosecution accused the defense of playing the race card in trying to present Mark Fuhrman as a racist and thus not a reliable witness against Simpson.

In the second context, it refers to someone exploiting the fear of another race for political or some other advantage. The use of the southern strategy by a political candidate is said by some to be a version of playing the race card, such as when former senator Jesse Helms, during his 1990 North Carolina Senate campaign ran an ad showing a black man taking a white man's job, intended as a criticism of the idea of racial quotas. The ad was interpreted by many people as trying to play to racist fears among white voters of black people taking their jobs.

There is no limit to possible constructions, and similar phrases have also been used, such as "Playing the religion card", or "Playing the anti-Semite card" (or in German: Auschwitzkeule)"

Meaning of "Playing the Race Card"

When concerns about the United Arab Emirates' corporation managing 6 principle US ports reached a fever pitch for reasons enumerated on Mudcat by GUEST 20 Feb 06 - 11:58 PM and others in the national media, the meme came out that opposition to this deal was "Arab bashing".

Somehow I just can't see Bush as being sincerely concerned about the masses of Arab people. And for some reason, I get suspicious when folks or groups-such as neocon Republicans who have no track record in caring about black and brown and other people of color start pointing fingers at others and labeling them racist. Can anyone say "Red Herring?" I bet you can. And in my opinion, this term is applicable to the Republicans pronuncement that those who oppose this UAE deal are racist.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Azizi
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 10:05 PM

See this combination of multiple posts from a dailykos dairy:
Xenophobia?That's What You're Going With? by Hunter Fri Feb 24, 2006 at 03:31:06 PM PDT

"Republicans playing the race card:

"Observant folks know that this is far from the first time Republicans have played the race card. If you oppose school vouchers, you're a racist. If you oppose Social Security phase-out, you're a racist. Heck, if you opposed the invasion of Iraq, that made you a racist, because you were saying that "those people" weren't capable of democracy.

We were branded as racists - anti-Italian racists - for referring to Justice Alito as Scalito...

Other examples of Republicans playing the race card:

Anyone who opposed Clarence Thomas was a racist, not simply concerned by the fact that he was not terribly bright, a demonstrated liar and a first-order right wing nutcase.
I believe similar accusations of anti-Latino bias were thrown around during the Gonzales AG confirmation hearings.

If you support Civil Rights legislation, you're a racist. Because it's "demeaning" to suggest that blacks, Hispanics, or Native Americans can't pull themselves up by their own bootstraps in the face of some little thing like officially sanctioned legal discrimination"
Source: various posters to that thread

Also see this particular post from that thread:
"I know racism
But concerns about this deal from where I sit are hardly racist. I happen to be a black woman who lives in one of the port cities. I work across the street from the Port of Miami, where drugs manage to come through fairly regularly already.

I do care who runs port operations, and resent the idea that any foreign government gets the opportunity. I would have been just as pissed had I known the Brits were running the show till now.

For Dubya to play the race card is silly. Well, no it isn't. He's used race to scare his base whenever they threatened to get out of line.

The only good thing about this particular mess is that the race baiting is biting him in the ass -- big time.

by CocoaLove on Fri Feb 24, 2006 at 03:58:57 PM PDT

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 12:19 AM

Thank-you Azzi, for exposing this for what it is.

Absolute f#@$ing bullshit.

A red herring is right!

I hope you're right Azzi when you say, "The only good thing about this particular mess is that the race baiting is biting him in the ass -- big time."

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 12:23 AM

Well stated, Azizi. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 12:38 AM

You make some good points, Azizi. For my part, however, during the first few days of reportage on this issue, the situation was never just described as a problem with allowing the UAE, a corrupt and repressive government, to manage our ports. It was pretty much always described as a problem with allowing "Arabs" to manage our ports. So based on my experience, it sure sounded like racism to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 01:08 AM

Thats whats called the race card, Carol.

Its called deliberately pulling the wool over the eyes of not only the people but the congress as well. Its seems to be a favourite trick of this U.S. government.   

I think by now we know that the U.S. media tows the party line.

The U.S. government and their media conspired to make this an issue of 'race' when in fact the issue is the history of the U.A.E.

Thats the red herring.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Azizi
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 07:04 AM

Just for the record: I may love cocoa, but I am not CocoaLove.

Also, some people who are spouting arguments against the United Arab Emirates government owned corporation managing United States ports may indeed be racist.

But people aren't automatically racist because they are opposed to giving US port security to a foreign nation, any foriegn nation, but particularly a foreign nation with proven ties to terrorists connected to 2/11.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 08:12 AM

Time for a few more facts. (From the Wall St Journal--which should know something about the issues here).

22 Feb 2006: "While terminal operators play a role in security, including the fencing and access by employees, dockworkers and truck drivers, they don't normally touch the cargo inside the box. Security is provided by law enforcment, such as the Coast Guard and Customs and Border protection."

"Most US container ports consist of multiple terminals, each of which is leased to a separate operator, such as P & O. Such terminal operators are responsible for developing and operating the terminal and may subcontract to a stevedoring company that supplies the labor to load and unload the ships. Stevedores usually hire unionized dockworkers who are US citizens."

You may want to push for Customs, etc. to inspect a higher proportion of goods than the current number, about 5%. As I recall, Kerry pointed this out in a debate.

23 Feb 2006: WSJ: The UAE was "the first in the region to implement the US cargo-security initiative to prescreen containers destined for the US. Five US Customs officials now work in the Dubai Customs Intelligence Unit."

As for concern that 2 of the hijackers came from the UAE--how many came from Saudi Arabia? Would Mudcatters like to cut ties with the Saudis?

"Current and former US officials say the UAE (parent state of Dubai) has provided significant assistance both in passing along terrorism tips and in helping apprehend suspects."

One of the ironies of this is that in fact the US ports were not the primary focus of Dubai.    The income from the US ports is a small percentage for P & O (the British company bought by the UAE.   Dubai's main sources of income are business and tourism, not oil--they are seeking to establish themselves as one of the main trading centers of the world--going so far as to sponsor ad campaigns with the tagline "Forget London". What they are seeking by this deal is P & O's access to the booming economies of the world--primarily China. And by this deal, they do get that Chinese access.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Azizi
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 08:28 AM

Correction:

In my 25 Feb 06 - 07:04 AM post I said 2/11.

Besides being one day after my ex-husband's birthday, I don't think that 2/11 has any national significance.

I meant to write 9/11.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 09:22 AM

The Deal has been looked at more closely and guess what.

The UAE port deal actually invloves 21 US ports...*
not just the 8 that was originally reported.

I guess they thought 8 sounded more palletable than 21.

But no matter, US citizens not only expect they are lied to but now have come to accept it no matter how agregious.

*The UAE control of stevadore services is proposed to include 21 US ports extending from Maine to Texas.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 10:17 AM

Just ccurious about just why port operation is being outsourced. It seems to me that it's the kind of thing that the US companies could compete successfully for--no questions of cheap labor, oppressive retirement and health plans or obsolete equipment.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 10:22 AM

February 11th probably has an equal significance, Azizi.

The only significance of September 11 [other than the U.S.-led coup in Chile & the murder of Salvador Allende, of course] - is just a one more example, in NYC this time, of the chickens coming home to roost.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 10:48 AM

Except it wasn't the US government who was making those comments, dianavan. At least not the present US administration. It was the media (mostly National Public Radio... my only source for news during the last couple of weeks while we were moving), and members of congress who oppose the Bush administration's plan to allow the Dubai Ports deal to go through, who I heard making those kinds of comments.

If we really want to eliminate the kinds of things you are talking about, we really need to start with our own corrupt government right here in the US, and then we need to reassess our relationships with other corrupt and repressive governments. But if the only people we hold to the particular standards you are advocating... perfectly legitimate standards, by the way, are "Arabs", then that is racism.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 10:54 AM

"UAE control of stevedore services" is probably misleading. Remember the company usually contracts stevedoring out--usually to US citizen union members.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 10:58 AM

LOL @ your 25 Feb 06 - 10:17 AM post, dick greenhaus.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 11:18 AM

And let's not forget, dianavan, the first sentance in the opening post to this thread (as well as the thread's title)...

I couldn't believ this one. Can anyone stop this madman's actions? Let's just open up the entire country to the Arabs and let them take it. Or as my friend calls them, the Islamotards.

This is just blatant racism, and it is from someone who is opposed to the Bush administration's plan to allow Dubai Ports International to manage ports in the US, not someone from the Bush administration who is playing the "race card" to help them promote the deal. This kind of comment is exactly what I am talking about, and I think it gives us a true picture of the attitudes of most (not all) of the people who are opposing the deal.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 11:24 AM

Consider the title of this thread--besides being blatantly wrong--security responsibility will remain with the US---it's scare-mongering--complete with exclamation mark. And the word "Arabs" these days is loaded--as I suspect the originator of the thread knew.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 12:59 PM

How Absolutely Right You Are!

Sen. Carl Levin, Thomas Kean- former New Jersey Republican governor who chaired the commission that examined the Sept. 11 attacks, The mayor of NY Michael Bloomberg, the States of NY and NJ who have filed suit in court, Representative Mark Foley, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Gov. Jon S. Corzine of New Jersey, the International Longshoremen's Association, Senators Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., Norm Coleman, R-Minn., Robert Menendez, D-N.J., Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., Tom Coburn, R-Okla., Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Jack Reed, D-RI, Eller & Co. Inc. at the Port of Miami, & the hundreds (thousands? millions?) of others who oppose this idiotic deal are just ignorant racists, every goddamn one of 'em. Every one.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 01:05 PM

We'll see how many of them still oppose it when they are given the information they seek.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 02:13 PM

I agree that the opening post of this thread is misleading and racist. I do not believe that everyone who opposes this deal is racist. Its quite possible to object to the UAE managing U.S. ports for reasons other than racism.

I object to the UAE because of their history of money laundering and smuggling. Why give a port to smugglers? I don't care what colour the UAE might be, I don't trust them and I really don't trust the way the Bush administration is trying to push this deal through.

BTW - I understand that the UAE manages some of Canada's ports. Maybe this would be a good place to start. An investigation of their operations in Canada might reveal the truth about the company in question.

My concern is not about smuggling terrorists. My concern is about smuggling heroin.

Such a deal! We'll give you U.S. ports and turn a blind eye to your heroin smuggling if you promise to give us your oil.

...and since when does George Bush give a damn about racism? Thats just a red herring he threw out to the media.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 02:37 PM

After a brief google, I am beginning to be a little more concerned about Dubai owning foreign ports.

Yes, Vancouver is one of the ports they are buying.

From the Globe and Mail:
"In Canada, there have been few reports that a Canadian asset is part of the deal. But what's at stake, specifically, is the Centerm hub in Burrard Inlet, which handles about a quarter of the shipping containers passing through Canada's third-largest city. Centerm is where P&O — and soon, Dubai Ports World — makes money by loading and unloading shipping containers."

So its not just the U.S.A. In addition, they are buying airports in
other major cities of the world.

Doesn't anybody realize that prior to 911, they were caught smuggling uranium enrichment materials to Libya?

Why would you trust them to own our ports? The U.A.E. has no allegiance to anyone. They are strictly about money and power. They don't care about Muslims, or Christians, or Jews or anybody else. They care only about profit and control. No wonder Bush considers them an ally.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 02:41 PM

It's not to the UAE's advantage to be seen as a heroin conduit. That's not the kind of business they want--therefore they are not likely to sponsor it--or turn a blind eye themselves. They (especially Dubai) have ambitions to be an international trading center--as I said, they even talk about supplanting London. The US ports are not a big part of their plans-- booming China is a much bigger factor --and is the main goal of the Dubai government's push.

It appears that rather than sponsor this , Bush was so far out of the loop that he didn't know much about it til it was basically a done deal.   Now he's been blind-sided by the opposition. Yet another indication of the out-of touch maladministration.

The allegation of a double standard does seem to apply--there was no protest when the British firm was in charge. In fact, there probably will be little change under Dubai--even to the same US union members as stevedores.

This is very likely a tempest in a teapot--but we'll know more as more information comes out.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 02:53 PM

Dubai will not "own" any ports. The main question is what you think will change as a result of the Dubai government owning the British firm which carries out the functions--and why you think it will change. From what I've read, it appears very little will change.
But I'd be interested to hear your views--and the sources.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 03:29 PM

Ron - It probably is a tempest in a teapot but you have to admit it was a deal made in secrecy which invites all kinds of speculation.

The latest is that the deal was made to give the U.S. access to Dubai so that they could launch a war against Iran. Dubai's banks
would also provide access to millions of dollars which are now leaving Iran in the run up to that war. In exchange, the U.S. ports operations would be given to Dubai, giving them access to China.

Another slant is the economic take over of the world by Islam.   Although I do not agree with much of what the Canadian Free Press has to say (especially their anti-Islamist hysteria) I find that they have uncovered alot of information about Dubai and their business deals.

I hope all of the facts are brought to light and that we can all wade through the racist overtones which are always confusing.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 03:39 PM

I have to leave now--gotta shake this Mudcat addiction somehow--but the Iran connection is intriguing.

According to the WSJ 23 Feb 2006, as of now "Iran uses Dubai to evade US economic sanctions on Iran and other Middle Eastern countries. The UAE doesn't recognize those sanctions." Dubai does cooperate with the US in terror investigations----but they'd be unlikely to cut off lucrative trade with Iran--including trade in violation of the above sanctions.

Dubai just agrees with Calvin Coolidge--"The business of America is business" I think is how he put it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 05:02 PM

From the New York times -

"The United States has spent about $1.6 billion on security since Sept. 11, but only about a third of the 600 monitors needed nationwide have been installed, so only about 37 percent of shipped goods are checked for a dirty bomb or other nuclear device. The Coast Guard has estimated that it would cost about $7 billion to equip ports in the United States to comply with security standards.

Among the port terminals that do not yet have this equipment are those that Dubai Ports World wants to take over in Baltimore, Philadelphia, Miami and New Orleans, a company official said."

$7 billion doesn't seem like much when you consider the cost of the war on terror.

Its about time the U.S. put their money into protection rather than aggression.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 07:29 PM

& the hundreds (thousands? millions?) of others who oppose this idiotic deal are just ignorant racists, every goddamn one of 'em. Every one.

Your words, not mine. I said "most, not all". I think there are a lot of people who are getting some "sticking it to Bush" mileage out of this issue as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Peace
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 10:36 PM

I think in thirty years it will not matter who owns what. There will be One Big Company; 6,000,000,000 labourers, and a select class to oversee the work being done by the workers.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 11:08 PM

Gee, Peace, that sounds almost exactly like the situation in the UAE.

20% masters and 80% imported laborers.

I guess we can all roll over and let it happen.

I'm just a little tired of stepping over junkies and prostitutes riddled with sores, thats all. When you live in a port city, you know how bad it can be. The underbelly of any port city is pretty slimy. Why make it worse?

Anyone who thinks that the UAE cares about what goes into those containers is living in dreamland.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Peace
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 11:53 PM

"I guess we can all roll over and let it happen."

I didn't say that or imply that. I made an obversation. Period.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Peace
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 11:56 PM

"When you live in a port city, you know how bad it can be."

Yeah. I grew up in Montreal. Tell me about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 04:05 AM

Peace - Don't be so touchy. I said, WE can ALL roll over...

So would you be concerned about the UAE operating a port in Montreal if you still lived there or do you truly believe that, "...it will not matter who owns what" thirty years from now?

This is now, not what you imagine the world will be like in 30 years.

What about now? Do want to see an increase in heroin smuggling?

What a sick joke. Arrest the pot smokers but increase the opportunity for more heroin to enter the country. Lets arm the guards at the border but lets not inspect the containers coming in from offshore. Lets damn the junkies and the prostitutes but make it easy for the smugglers.

Yeah right. I have to submit to a body search and take my shoes off at the airport when I want to see my mother but some dude from Dubai can put anything he wants into a container and nobody will ever know or care.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 04:41 AM

"According to the U.S. government, 13 of the 19 hijackers entered the United States between April 23 and June 29, 2001. And 11 of those late-arrivers — who were Saudi citizens and primarily the "muscle" for the hijackings — went through Dubai, according to the report.

The hijackers traveled in groups of two or three, taking off from Dubai and arriving at airports in Miami, Orlando, or New York City, the report said.

As for the money trail, Bin Laden's alleged financial manager, Mustafa Ahmed al-Hisawi, received at a Dubai bank a transfer of $15,000 two days before the Sept. 11 attacks and then left the Emirates for Pakistan, where he was arrested last year.

Marwan Al-Shehhi, an Emirates citizen and one of the hijackers, received $100,000 via the United Arab Emirates. Another hijacker, Fayez Banihammad, also was from the Emirates.

About half of the $250,000 spent on the attacks was wired to al-Qaeda terrorists in the United States from Dubai banks, authorities said. al-Qaeda money in Dubai banks also has been linked to the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania."

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 04:43 AM

The post above was a quote from USA Today.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Folkiedave
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 09:15 AM

According to the U.S. government, 13 of the 19 hijackers entered the United States between April 23 and June 29, 2001. And 11 of those late-arrivers — who were Saudi citizens and primarily the "muscle" for the hijackings — went through Dubai, according to the report.

The hijackers traveled in groups of two or three, taking off from Dubai and arriving at airports in Miami, Orlando, or New York City, the report said.

As for the money trail, Bin Laden's alleged financial manager, Mustafa Ahmed al-Hisawi, received at a Dubai bank a transfer of $15,000 two days before the Sept. 11 attacks and then left the Emirates for Pakistan, where he was arrested last year.............

Why hasn't the UAE - clearly a big supporter of terrorism according to this post - been invaded? And since Saudi Arabia is nothing like a democracy - how come the USA are not bringing the benefits of democracy to there - especially since they are clearly supporters of terrorism too!!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 09:37 AM

I find it real interesting that Bush said he didn't know anything about this deal until he read it in the newspapers...

Hmmmmmmmm?

They must have accidently printed the story on the sports page...

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 10:20 AM

Why do you suppose, Guest,26 Feb 06 - 04:41 AM, given the fact that so many of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, the US still sells Saudi Arabia some of our most sensitive military equipment?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 11:37 AM

My cartoon for TODAY

Press Conference with McClellan: http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/deal.gif

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 11:50 AM

Why do you suppose, given the fact that so many of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, the US still sells Saudi Arabia some of our most sensitive military equipment?

OK, I give up.

Is it because the BuShite "War on Terror" is a fucking bad joke & the invasion of Iraq was only about making great gobs of money after all?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 12:08 PM

JPG (for those who block gifs)

http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/deal1.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 12:39 PM

Maybe, Greg. Or maybe they just don't see the government of Saudi Arabia as a threat, any more than they consider the government of the UAE to be a threat.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Peace
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 02:02 PM

LOL Don.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: artbrooks
Date: 26 Feb 06 - 10:24 PM

This discussion is, unfortunately IMHO, going the direction such things usually go.

Just one comment about port security: CNN interviewed a (American) terminal operator the other day. He said that cargo security is entirely in the terminal operator's hands from the time the cargo hits the dock (and leaves Coast Guard control) until it is transferred to the forwarding shipper...which means to a train or long-haul truck. Someone mentioned stevedores. There are few, if any, break-bulk ships any more. Nearly all shipping is in containers. The union stevedore's job is to run the crane that lifts the container off the ship and transfers it to a truck body or to a port-side cargo handling system.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Feb 06 - 08:58 AM

Having dodged a bullet with the failed destruction of the largest Saudi Oil refinery depot THIS WEEK,

we should expect more of the same anywhere any time. Of course the oil companies would raise prices more than double if the Saudi operation was put out of commission.

ITs gonna happen,


I better get started on my solar and wind assisted underground saline heat pump.

A vegetable oil diesel car wouldn't be a bad idea either.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Charley Noble
Date: 28 Feb 06 - 08:08 PM

Excuse me! We've all missed the boat on the port deal. But maybe I'm the only one who thinks it's curious that the next day after the deal was announced there was a new person appointed to be director of US Marine Port Security, who was previously a director of the Dubai conglomerate that is trying to consumate this deal.

Let me see if I can find a link to this story which I saw on Lou Dobbs, noted conservative CNN news reporter, this evening.

I think this story still has legs, although it may just be the usual commercial windfall for Bush Administration friends and family.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Charley Noble
Date: 28 Feb 06 - 08:22 PM

Well, here's a clarification from the TIME MAGAZINE website:

Dubai Ports World has been taken by surprise over the furor, and is reportedly sending its Chief Operating Officer, the widely respected American shipping executive Edward "Ted" H. Bilkey, to Washington for talks. Indeed, the Bush administration needn't wait for Bilkey to arrive; it could get a good assessment of the workings of Dubai Ports World from its own current nominee for the post of U.S. Maritime Administrator — Dave Sanborn, previously a top executive at Dubai Ports World.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 12:24 AM

Like I been trying to say, Charley; this deal is not about Arabs, its about crooked money and back room deals.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Charley Noble
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 08:29 AM

Dianavan-

I have to agree with you, the economics is what it's really all about and Bush is right on board now that he's finally been briefed.

Moreover, I find it disturbing that so many quips on this thread just reflect the "terrorism paranoia" that the Bush Adminstration has found useful to generate, and at worse reflect an ugly deeper racism and etnocentrism on the part of regular Mudcat contributors.

I find it interesting that Sen. Susan Collins (a moderate Republican) who is leading the charge to re-examine this decision will be meeting head-on with her former boss and mentor Bill Cohen (former Republican US Senator and Secretary of State under Clinton) who has been hired as a lobbyist for Dubai Ports World (he and his associates are responsible for two published "points of view" in the WALL STREET JOURNAL and the NEW YORK TIMES).

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Donuel
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 08:49 AM

Noble, I watched the hearings with the American COO Bilkey of the UAE port company.

"Senator, its too late to put a stop to the deal. It can not be stopped. The money has already been transferred. We will be sending our stockholders checks on March 15th."

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Charley Noble
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 08:53 AM

Apologies to Alba who first tried to draw attention, way back in this thread, to "current nominee for the post of U.S. Maritime Administrator — Dave Sanborn, previously a top executive at Dubai Ports World."

I can't imagine a more blatent example of "conflict of interest." Well, I suppose it does depend on your point of view...

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 08:29 PM

Looks like two threads covering the same subject but for those who read one and not the other, I will duplicate the link written from a Muslim perspective.

http://globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=1651&cid=1&sid=27

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Mar 06 - 02:47 PM

Known for quite awhile,(lots more at the link) but just published:

"Lapses by private port operators, shipping lines or truck drivers could allow terrorists to smuggle weapons of mass destruction into the United States, according to a government review of security at American seaports.

"The $75 million, three-year study by the Homeland Security Department included inspections at a New Jersey cargo terminal involved in the dispute over a Dubai company's now-abandoned bid to take over significant operations at six major U.S. ports.

"The previously undisclosed results from the study found that cargo containers can be opened secretly during shipment to add or remove items without alerting U.S. authorities, according to government documents marked "sensitive security information" and obtained by The Associated Press."

Rest Easy, Friends

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 11 Mar 06 - 10:43 PM

I'm glad the Dubai deal has been stopped but I am especially happy that this situation has called attention to the lack of security in our ports. I find it amazing that so much attention has been focussed on airports and so little on ports. It just goes to show that the 'war on terrorism' has done very little to secure the U.S.

In fact, this makes the current frenzy in the airports a complete joke. Inconvenience the public but turn a blind eye to the those 'money making' containers. Hey, look over there......and quietly slip whatever junk you want in through the back door. Makes the 'war on drugs' equally ridiculous.

If they cared so damn much about security, why have our ports been left wide open?

I wonder if Republicans are beginning to figure it out, yet.

Big daddy Bush really doesn't give a shit about you.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 12 Mar 06 - 03:45 AM

Actually, it looks like Dubai Ports World will be transferring the sale of the ports to a 'U.S. entity'. That probably means some kind of corporate re-structuring. My guess is that its just a way to appease the public and go ahead with their original plans under a different name.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 Mar 06 - 07:54 AM

The Wall St Journal editorialized that it hoped the "US entity" would be Halliburton--just to annoy the Left.

Still the question remains what would have been different under a firm run by the Dubai government--with the same US stevedores, the answer is--not much.

The biggest question--which has nothing to do with who is in charge of a given terminal--is whether there will now be pressure to inspect more than the abysmal 5% of cargo now inspected--which Kerry brought up in a debate--and it never became an issue then--and still hasn't been addressed.

If you do insist on more than 5% being inspected, what percentage will you insist on---and will you be ready to accept the slowing of the economy which results?

It's actually very easy to see why people to the left of center opposed this deal. After all it has very much to do with the consequences of globalization, which more and more is a 2-way street--with US jobs at stake. (Less obvious are the benefits of globalization--but consider how many foreign firms have set up shop in the US--like Toyota and Mercedes.) And also how foreign willingness to buy US securities has kept US interest rates down--in the face of huge deficits. Any US citizen interested in buying a house or car should be aware of this.

Also, the Left may have realized how part of Bush's plan was (and is?) to use Dubai as a base for missiles aimed at Iran.

Less easy to see is why the yahoos who voted for Bush oppose the deal--except that of course they don't read--so don't know a lot of the factors behind the deal.

And of course, as I believe has already been pointed out, now we've been told for years to hate and fear anybody from the Mideast who wears flowing robes-- we've seen lots of pictures of Osama and heard about the barbarities in Saudi Arabia, among others.

Now we're told (falsely) that our security is in the hands of Arabs--and never mind. So the deal blew up in Bush's face. Couldn't happen to a nicer despicable propagandist.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Charley Noble
Date: 12 Mar 06 - 12:04 PM

Well, I think that most of us can agree that the deal primarily went down the tube because Bush's base has embraced his line that the Global War on Terrorism is highest priority, and Islamic terrorism provides leadership and resources to this battle. And it's all too easy to jump from that position to distrusting all Islamic nations, groups, and individuals. There is a real loss here for protecting human rights at all levels.

But I loved it when this deal blews up in Bush's face! Will the back-up plan involve Halliburton? Who knows? Maybe big-daddy Bush will form a new umbrella group to make a bid. After all he has all the right credentials, including being a former director of the CIA. Maybe that was the plan all along, and we've been sucked right into it!

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: artbrooks
Date: 12 Mar 06 - 01:02 PM

I'm a bit depressed by the current cnn.com poll that has the mafia 2:1 against Arab-run companies on the topic of "who should manage American ports". As I said somewhere earlier, to me the issue isn't Arabs (or Moslems, which isn't the same thing at all) running US ports, but any other country...whether it be the UAE, China or Canada!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 12 Mar 06 - 07:56 PM

I find it bemusing that the USA - home of the 'but other countries shouldn't object to having us buy their assets' attitude, has finally rebelled against being on the receiving end.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 Mar 06 - 09:05 PM

Bingo, Foolesrtroupe--my point exactly.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush Gives US Port Security to Arabs!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 Mar 06 - 09:22 PM

Many Americans who supposedly were in favor of globalization-- (though probably many Mudcatters were not)-- turn out to only be in favor of it when it's a one-way street--us buying foreign assets. But it's a real shock--totally unfair, it seems, when it turns out to be a 2-way street.

And Mr. Bush, having told the public what to hate and fear, really has no grounds for his dismay when they in fact do.   Hoist on his...

Under him we've had government of the yahoos (and the rich), by those 2 groups, for those 2 groups. Who knows, maybe things will change a bit in November--we can hope.