Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Uproar over U.S. ports (excellent editorial)
The Washington Times ^ | 2/17/2006 | Staff

Posted on 02/17/2006 6:15:19 AM PST by Dark Skies

The White House is obviously not listening to the congressional uproar over Dubai Ports World. Lawmakers want to know why a federal panel allowed a state-owned United Arab Emirates shipping firm to pay $6.8 billion to acquire six major American ports -- including critical ones in New York, Baltimore and Philadelphia -- despite its home country's glaring ties to international terrorism. But the White House is yawning.

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bds; dubaiportsworld; horrificdecision; iran; israel; noway; ports; uae; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-131 next last
To: Alberta's Child
idiotic political posturing based on hysteria

You got that right.

61 posted on 02/17/2006 8:38:41 AM PST by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: immigration lady; Howlin; onyx

Congressman Peter King [R-NY] was just on The John Gambling Show,...

... I think that if we give him our support,he won't let us down!

... btw , did you read the transcript or hear[Mark Levin played it on his show yesterday] the back'n forth with John Gambling and ABC NEWS reporter Ann Compton??
... breathtaking , just breathtaking!!


62 posted on 02/17/2006 8:42:18 AM PST by Dad yer funny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: be-baw
Maybe you can clear something up for me?

I have read on other threads that no US company was interested in buying this. In fact, this is one foreign company selling to another foreign company.

Should the US govt tell the first foreign owner that it can't sell to the second foreign company?

Should the US govt step in in buy the company and operate it?

Should the US govt convince/subsidize a US company to buy this?

63 posted on 02/17/2006 8:51:19 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

I would agree that Schumer cares nothing about security, but voicing concerns over this is pushing the Democrat PR line? You talk like someone who just automatically says the opposite of whatever a perceived "enemy" is saying.

Seriously. The kind of blind party loyalty you exhibit is what one would expect from a DU plant.


64 posted on 02/17/2006 8:57:39 AM PST by sheltonmac (QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
P&O jointly operates (with a company called Port Newark Container Terminal) of one of the Port Authority's seven container terminals under a lease arrangement with the agency. If there are any details of the proposed acquisition that the Port Authority finds unacceptable, the agency can simply terminate the operator's lease on the property and prohibit any vessels from the UAE-owned company from making port calls in New York and New Jersey.

Actually, it isn't quite that simple. These are long-term leases and concession agreements. IIRC, in some cases (depending on the port), the port authorities enter into land leases and the operators own and finance the improvements (facilities) and in some cases, separate investment companies own the improvements. But the point is still, containers are shipped into and through the ports by a company that has questionable loyalty to the U.S.

And as to the lease provisions that permit the Ports to merely cancel the leases...again, it isn't as simply as that I imagine. When there are hundreds of millions of assets involved, the cancellation provision are quite complicated and if there is a cancellation, I would think there would be complicated unwinding procedures for just compensation to all parties.

I do agree with your point that the operators are not buying the ports. I think that was naive of the writer of the article to make such a statement.

But I repeat, this acquisition by Dubai Ports World needs very careful analysis. It does give an islamic country tantamount ownership (if partially through long-term lease agreements) in major U.S. ports.

65 posted on 02/17/2006 8:59:49 AM PST by Dark Skies ("A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants." -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

King said this company would have to be apprised of all Homeland protocols. Do you want to tell an arab nation all our protocols?


66 posted on 02/17/2006 9:05:53 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (If you think you know what's coming next....You don't know Jack.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies
According to information posted on another thread, there is a formal 30-day review period under which all of these merger/acquisition deals are scrutinized by the Federal government and other affected parties. This period came and went without anyone raising even the slightest concern over it -- probably for the reasons I've discussed here.

All of these people -- from Chuck Schumer to Peter King to the chairman of the Port Authority of NY/NJ to everyone else who has come out and expressed public "concern" about the deal -- are simply covering their @sses and engaging in this political posturing because of all the gross distortions that have been put out there in all of these stupid articles and editorials.

Ironically, the chairman of the Port Authority of NY/NJ has more power here than anyone else. If he simply stood up tomorrow and publicly announced that he would make every attempt to cancel the P&O leases at Port Newark/Elizabeth and eliminate all berthing rights for P&O ships at all of the New York and New Jersey facilities, this deal would collapse immediately. There's no way in hell this UAE-owned company would pay $6.8 billion for P&O if they no longer have access to the largest port facility on the eastern seabord of the United States (in the world's largest consumer market).

67 posted on 02/17/2006 9:13:42 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Leave a message with the rain . . . you can find me where the wind blows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

"All the various National security agencies have given this company a clean bill of health."

What a joke....!


68 posted on 02/17/2006 9:13:50 AM PST by observer5 ("Bette violate the rights of a few, than of all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

Other than Jimmah Carter giving away the Panama Canal, this could be one of thw worst blunders and lead to huge security problems that a sitting President has done to his own country.

What in creation is Mr. Bush doing when he gets such poor advice from his advisors? It's as if the hidden secret terror cells are on his own staff!

And worse, not a word from him or his staff. When Chuckie Schumer is at the lead for once with something that must be told, we are all in trouble!!! And Chuckie is absolutely correct in his concern, much more so that our pseudo leadership.


69 posted on 02/17/2006 9:16:20 AM PST by Napoleon Solo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: immigration lady

Just tell them you oppose it especially in this post 9/11 era. And make sure oppose and ports and UAE is in the subject line. They'll get the hint. It doesn't have to be detail. Brief and on point is best.


70 posted on 02/17/2006 9:17:14 AM PST by b4its2late (Terrorists will either succeed in changing our way of life, or we will change theirs. - Rummy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
I think we are singing from the same hymnal. However, I have strong distrust of the intention of any islamic country. Truth and intregrity have different meanings when dealing with infidels.
71 posted on 02/17/2006 9:22:48 AM PST by Dark Skies ("A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants." -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

bookmk #65


72 posted on 02/17/2006 9:25:46 AM PST by Dad yer funny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: SquirrelKing

That is a good way to describe it. I'm sure Rove is on the phone calling all GOP congressmen "traitors" on the phone.


73 posted on 02/17/2006 9:26:44 AM PST by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: immigration lady

Phrase you letter however you want to whomever you want but remember the immortal words from the movie "Meatballs"...it just doesn't matter!!!

Say it over and over again, these folks in DC think we are all dummies and they know everything. Do you think for a moment that any comments to the WH or to Congress even get read by those who we entrust our government to??


74 posted on 02/17/2006 9:32:30 AM PST by Napoleon Solo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Dad yer funny

And don't forget Michael Savage. He has been on top of this from the get go, before Levin and others.


75 posted on 02/17/2006 9:33:39 AM PST by Napoleon Solo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Napoleon Solo

yup , we must continue to help them


76 posted on 02/17/2006 9:34:48 AM PST by Dad yer funny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Bottom line.....These Arab oil countries are floating in US dollars. They are going to use them to buy assets. If we want them to continue to take these dollars we will have no choice but to let them buy what they want. By running a 700 billion trade deficit every year, we are behind the eight ball!!


77 posted on 02/17/2006 9:41:15 AM PST by evaporation-plus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
A company in the United Arab Emirates is poised to take over significant operations at six American ports as part of a corporate sale, leaving a country with ties to the Sept. 11 hijackers with influence over a maritime industry considered vulnerable to terrorism.

DP World said it won approval from a secretive U.S. government panel that considers security risks of foreign companies buying or investing in American industry.

Critics of the proposed purchase said a port operator complicit in smuggling or terrorism could manipulate manifests and other records to frustrate Homeland Security's already limited scrutiny of shipping containers and slip contraband past U.S. Customs inspectors.

"When you have a foreign government involved, you are injecting foreign national interests," Kreitzer said. "A country that may be a friend of ours today may not be on the same side tomorrow. You don't know in advance what the politics of that country will be in the future."

Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the FBI has said the money for the strikes was transferred to the hijackers primarily through the UAE's banking system, and much of the operational planning for the attacks took place inside the UAE.

Many of the hijackers traveled to the U.S. through the UAE. Also, the hijacker who steered United Airlines flight into the World Trade Center's south tower, Marwan al-Shehhi, was born in the UAE.

After the attacks, U.S. Treasury Department officials complained about a lack of cooperation by the UAE and other Arab countries trying to track Osama bin Laden's bank accounts.

Saturday February 11, 9:41 am ET
By Ted Bridis, Associated Press Writer
Company From United Arab Emirates Poised to Oversee Six
American Ports Due to Sale

UAE Co. Poised to Oversee Six U.S. Ports

78 posted on 02/17/2006 9:45:34 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (If you think you know what's coming next....You don't know Jack.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: KC_Conspirator
Whether it is a good decision or not, they should've expected some concern.
79 posted on 02/17/2006 9:49:44 AM PST by SquirrelKing (Contrary to popular belief, America is not a democracy, it is a Chucktatorship.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

Re: A pending nomination in the Senate ...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1579951/posts?page=82#82
Check earlier and later posts in the same thread, press releases, etc. from DP International, WH, and others.

David Sanborn of Smithfield, VA who the President nominated to serve as Administrator of the Maritime Administration ... Most recently, as Director of Ship Operations for Dubai Ports International ...

Just more of the same insiders club, having conrol and profiting from the major levers of commerce.

80 posted on 02/17/2006 9:50:12 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-131 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson