Posted on 02/19/2006 12:33:10 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
Dubai, 24 January 2006: - Global ports operator DP World today welcomed news that one of its senior executives, Dave Sanborn, has been nominated by US President George W. Bush to serve as Maritime Administrator a key transportation appointment reporting directly to Norman Mineta the Secretary of Transportation and Cabinet Member.
The White House has issued a statement from Washington DC announcing the nomination. The confirmation process will begin in February.
Mr Sanborn currently holds the position of Director of Operations for Europe and Latin America for the Dubai-based company
Mohammed Sharaf, CEO, DP World said: “While we are sorry to lose such an experienced and capable executive, it is exactly those qualities that will make Dave an effective administrator for MarAd. We are proud of Dave’s selection and pleased that the Bush Administration found such a capable executive. We wish him all the best in his new role.”
Ted Bilkey, Chief Operating Officer, DP World said: “Dave’s decades of experience in markets around the world, together with his passion for the industry and commitment to its development, will allow him to make a positive contribution to the work of the Maritime Administration. We wish him well for the future.”
Mr Sanborn, a graduate of The United States Merchant Maritime Academy, joined DP World in 2005. He previously held senior roles with shipping lines CMA-CGM (Americas), APL Ltd and Sea-Land and has been based, besides the US, in Brazil, Europe, Hong Kong and Dubai during his career. He has also served in the US Naval Reserve.
Mr Sanborn is due to take up his new role based in Washington DC later in 2006.
Copy link to if you wish.
fine, give him a fair hearing. but you seem to want to make his hearing consist of questions like "what did you get your kids for Xmas".
I want to know what role he played in securing US government approval for allowing these contracts to pass to the UAE controlled company, as a result of their acquisition.
-a key issue in the sale? ....I know it was a private sale; was it contingent upon US approval? That I haven't seen answered yet. Guess I have more reading to do on this subject.
Did you read the link in reply #80.
I can understand your qualms, but I can't understand people jumping on the hillary/schumer bandwagon, with their lies that they are taking over the ports, when a tiny bit of research will show they are not and that DHS is responsible for allsecurtiy, not DPWorld.
Heck I would be more concerned if a French company bought P&O, given their backstabbing ways.
of course it was. Treasury approved it (with review from other agencies), not the private sector aspect of this deal - they approved the contracts for the US ports passing to DPW as a result of their acquisition. what their basis was for approving DPW, we do not yet know.
I'm on the Coburn/Santorum/Peter King/Graham bandwagon.
With world wide name recognition and who is giving legitimacy to the UAE by playing golf there.
You all should be at least consistent.
LOL
I am consistant. There is nothing wrong with foreign countries.....only the ones who want to control our ports. They will be involved in our national security at major ports. They will be privy to our national security secrets in our ports.
Isn't Dubai where Bin Laden went for treatments and supposedly was met by a CIA operative while in the hospital prior to 911? Or was that debunked?
We may be forced to buy oil from muslim potentates, but we shouldn't have to buy our own port services from them as well. I would rather let Donald Duck run our ports.
I've read from people on FR who have been there that it is one of the most westernized of the Gulf states, heck even Tiger Woods plays golf there.
They ain't saudi arabia and according to reports I've heard, wish to build a modern society much different than the iranian mullahs.
"I would rather let Donald Duck run our ports."
you are right
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1580971/posts
UAE, Palestine to set up a joint investment firm
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1580589/posts
"And while the Bush folks now consider the UAE a major ally in the war against terror, the Treasury Department has been stonewalled by the emirates, and other Arab countries, in trying to track Osama bin Laden's bank accounts."
Well, Dane, it makes me gag to think we have to rely on these people, but the simple fact despite your laudatory hoopla about the proposal is that this is payback.
It doesn't change. Xerxes, Caesar, Bush...the names change but the world doesn't.
It wouldn't be any different under the democrats since the game was already being played the same way...
Well, I have spent some time in the UAE as well. It is a thoroughly Muslim country, ruled from the top down. Granted, it has some western-leaning ways, as it was owned by the British at one time. No, they are not quite Saudi Arabia, but they are closer than kissin' cousins. The people live under Sharia Law - which ought to tell you something about the personal freedoms people have and the kind of society they have. If you are a Muslim, you better not even think about leaving Islam, much less talk openly about it!
So, where do their real loyalties lie, besides the Almighty Dollar and the furtherance of their personal power?
I'll tell you what. I will agree to let the UAE run our ports when they agree to let Billy Graham run an open crusade at the Dubai Racing Track. OK? Oh, and they also have to let the Southern Baptist Convention finance and build a big church (at least the size of the mosque just south of Toledo, Ohio) down near the Dubai Gold Souk and open it to everybody, not just foreigners.
If they go along with those conditions, I'll gladly let them run our ports if they can do the job and are the lowest bidder. If not, they can just eat their oil money for all I care.
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.