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

Skip to comments.

Chertoff Defends UAE Port Deal
Fox News.com ^ | 2/20/06 | Fox News; AP

Posted on 02/20/2006 7:28:25 AM PST by standingfirm

WASHINGTON — Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff is defending the Bush administration's review of an international shipping deal two days after one company in the Port of Miami sued to prevent an Arab-owned firm from taking over port operations.

Meanwhile, lawmakers also are considering legislation to stop foreign-owned companies from running U.S. ports.

Chertoff on Sunday said the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, had carefully reviewed the Dubai Ports World purchase of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., which runs commercial operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.

"We make sure there are assurances in place, in general, sufficient to satisfy us that the deal is appropriate from a national security standpoint," Chertoff told ABC's "This Week."

That doesn't sit well with Miami firm Continental Stevedoring & Terminals Inc., a subsidiary of Ellery & Company Inc. Representatives from that company asked a judge to block the takeover of P&O,

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


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: chertoff; dhs; uae
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 261-272 next last
To: standingfirm

"Chertoff said DP World should not be excluded from operating the U.S. ports just because it is based in the UAE."

That is crap right there. The company isn't just BASED there it is owned by the UAE states.

"but the port operator would handle security for cargo coming in and out of the port and the hiring of security personnel."

But Chertoff says they shouldnt be excluded from opertaing the ports!

DHS is a shill. Go see their website under news and Maritime. Dang thing hasn't seen the light of day since 2004.


161 posted on 02/20/2006 11:43:39 AM PST by Sweetjustusnow (Oust the IslamoCommies here and abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: standingfirm

Let's see now. We buy billions in oil from the Arab nations, paying them dollars in exchange. We do the same as we buy goods from the Chinese. Then we tell them the dollars we gave them cannot be used to buy what they want from us. If they cannot use the dollars to buy directly from us, then the dollars are worth much less than they thought when they accepted them. This revelation could result in a significant drop in the dollar.


162 posted on 02/20/2006 11:44:29 AM PST by n-tres-ted (Remember November!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite

Yeah, Chertoff is doing such a stellar (dendrite?) job of securing our borders and enforcing immigration laws, surely his opinion on port/harbor security must be worth something.

Next he'll tell Sean Hannity that securing our ports would be just too "expensive and impractical."


163 posted on 02/20/2006 11:44:32 AM PST by DTogo (I haven't left the GOP, the GOP left me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: rahbert

"The Emirates are our partners whether we like it or not,
by virtue of their having us by the short hairs. Those
that don't like it should reconsider their use of petroleum
products."

I guess we should have continued to be trading partners with Germany in WW2. Boy, am I a dummy.


164 posted on 02/20/2006 11:47:32 AM PST by Sweetjustusnow (Oust the IslamoCommies here and abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse
There are hostile elements in America that despise us, and you're letting them keep their property.

You bet, it's those longshoremen, our sworn enemies who fly planes into buildings and vow to either convert or kill the non-union infidels.

You may believe this is all some overblown joke and maybe your crystal ball is even telling you no harm will ever come to us from terrorist infiltrators of these ports but somehow after 9/11 I don't want to take that chance. And I expect the leaders we elect and pay to protect this country not to either.

165 posted on 02/20/2006 11:48:55 AM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Lexington Green

You got that right.


166 posted on 02/20/2006 11:50:48 AM PST by Sweetjustusnow (Oust the IslamoCommies here and abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: n-tres-ted
This revelation could result in a significant drop in the dollar.

Dollar up, dollar down, doesn't matter.

What's your life worth? Even better, the life of your children and their children and everybody else you know?

167 posted on 02/20/2006 11:51:41 AM PST by CobaltBlue (Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: n-tres-ted
"Then we tell them the dollars we gave them cannot be used to buy what they want from us."

Well, they're not exactly buying our ports oversight as such...we awarded them the contract. I know, I know, it's probably the same thing. Still, I don't like it. It not only looks bad, as in double standard, but potentially it can turn bad. I just simply don't trust these people.

168 posted on 02/20/2006 11:51:42 AM PST by standingfirm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: standingfirm; BeHoldAPaleHorse

So, if the UAE was the high bid to run airport security -- we should just let them do that, too?

How about security at the nuclear power plants?

Is there no limit to what you're willing to sell?


169 posted on 02/20/2006 11:53:35 AM PST by CobaltBlue (Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: standingfirm

We don't let non-US citizens handle airport security. How is shipping port security any different?

I don't get it.


170 posted on 02/20/2006 11:54:29 AM PST by CobaltBlue (Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue

Agreed. There's no room for political correctness here. Please someone in Washington get some.


171 posted on 02/20/2006 11:55:37 AM PST by standingfirm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: LachlanMinnesota

The global expansion of ports for the future are found at links that have been posted here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1581900/posts

Sovereignty be damned.

See the imo website.


172 posted on 02/20/2006 11:57:39 AM PST by Sweetjustusnow (Oust the IslamoCommies here and abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse
Again, please show me where the government of the UAE is our sworn enemy...

Dubai ain't a post office in Kansas. Just a small sampling:

________________________________________________________

December 29, 2005:

"Retired Professor Emeritus in the mathematics department of Indian Institute of Technology-Delhi, M C Puri, was killed and four serving scientists were injured when an unidentified gunman opened fire indiscriminately on a group of scientists as they were coming out of a conference hall in the prestigious Indian Institute of Science campus in Bangalore on Wednesday."

"The explosions were carried out by Dawood Ibrahim, then based in Dubai, with the help of some Mumbai-based Muslims, who were taken to Pakistan via Dubai and got trained and armed by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence."

______________________________________________________

"In April of this year, Treasury released a list of Saddam front companies its investigation has so far uncovered, including a major Oil-for-Food contractor in the UAE, Dubai-based Al Wasel & Babel. Along with trying to procure a sophisticated surface-to-air missile system for Saddam, Al Wasel & Babel did hundreds of millions' worth of business with Baghdad under Oil-for-Food, and was just one of some 75 contractors authorized by the U.N. to deal with Saddam out of the UAE."

______________________________________________________

Just a little 9/11 connection?

"One of Moussaoui's associates and co-conspirator was Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi, the key financier of the WTC attack. Al-Hawsawi first opened a bank account in a Standard Chartered Bank branch in Dubai, UAE with a cash deposit. On the same day, another of his friends, Fayez Rashid AH Alqadi Bamihammad too opened an account in the same bank. Less than a month later, Bamihammad gave a power of attorney to Hawsawi to operate his accounts. Hawsawi picked up Bamihammad's Visa and ATM cards from the Dubai branch and shipped them to Florida between July 18 and August 1, 2001. Bamihammad was one of the terrorists who flew the United Airlines flight 175 into the World Trade Center's south tower. . . . On September 11, 2001, al-Hawsawi flew from Dubai to Karachi to take shelter."

___________________________________________________

U.A.E.: Central Bank Freezes 62 Accounts:

"In response to the U.S. Bulletin the central bank of the U.A.E. has frozen the banking accounts of 62 organizations and individuals suspected of connections with Al-Qa'ida. Among these are two prominent Muslim banking and money-changing organizations, the "Al-Taqwa" and "Al-Barakat." The following is a partial listing of these entities as an indication of the width and breadth of their activities and geographical expansion:

Al- Barakat Bank: Somalia, Dubai (U.A.E.)
Al-Barakat International (a.k.a. BARACO Co.): Dubai, U.A.E.
Barakat Wiring Service: Minneapolis, MN
Barakat International: Sweden
North America Barakat, Inc.: Toronto, Canada
Barakat Telecommunications (a.k.a. Btelco): Somalia, Holland
Barakat Enterprise: Columbus, OH
Barakat Wire Transfer: Seattle, WA
Taqwa Trade, Property and Industry Co: Vaduz, Liechtenstein
Bank Al-Taqwa Ltd.: Nassau, Bahamas

The United States has accused Bank Al-Barakat and Bank Al-Taqwa and their subsidiary financial institutions of operating unofficial money transfer known as "hawala" in the millions of dollars from their extensive network system to terrorist organizations and for keeping no records of their transactions."

____________________________________________________

"Financial investigators tracking al Qaeda assets rely heavily on data and paper trails from commercial banks and financial regulators in pursuing and investigating leads. Such data have included the tracing of wire transfers between suspected hijacker Mohammed Atta and Shaykh Saiid of Dubai, believed to be one of Osama bin Laden's key financial operatives. Unfortunately, these efforts have achieved little success to date in reaching the core of the al Qaeda financial network."

"The problem is that much of the organization's funding mechanisms—like its cells—are small and inconspicuous, often using a traditional Muslim method of money exchange called Hawala."

"Although Pakistan, India, and the Persian Gulf states are home to the largest concentration of Hawala organizations, Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates, perhaps handles the largest volume of transactions. The system has global reach. Investigators believe Hawala organizations exist throughout the United States and Europe."

173 posted on 02/20/2006 12:06:31 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter
Please demonstrate how "Islam -- Religion of Peace," whose Koran teaches hating the "infidel" AND the U.S., is to be entrusted to controlling access and security to several U.S ports.

Haven't you got the memo, the longshoremen are the real terrorists. Our government's doing us a favor letting the Middle East take over.

174 posted on 02/20/2006 12:07:38 PM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Sweetjustusnow

Will DHS share its secuirty measures with the port owners? Of course it will. We might as well put our security measures on the internet labeled "What out for these security measures!"


175 posted on 02/20/2006 12:17:55 PM PST by LachlanMinnesota (The real Churchill knew a blood thirsty gutter snipe when he saw one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite
"Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff is defending the Bush administration's review of an international shipping deal..."

Well of course he is.

176 posted on 02/20/2006 12:23:07 PM PST by Czar (StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: LachlanMinnesota

The ignorance of how shipping actually works on this board is embarassing.

I worked 10 years for a Hong Kong-based ocean shipping line. During some of that time, I was Import Freight supervisor (based in Chicago) , handling the ports of Seattle and Oakland).

Port Operators DO NOT SCREEN CARGO.

US Customs and Border Protection screens all cargo and all parties involved are subordinate to thier orders.

I wrote countless fact-based posts on another thread, so I'm not going to repeat it all. If you click on my name and view my past posts, you will find a lot of information that might help clarify the various roles all the parties have.


177 posted on 02/20/2006 12:38:26 PM PST by pacelvi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
"Haven't you got the memo, the longshoremen are the real terrorists. Our government's doing us a favor letting the Middle East take over."

Lol, these people are INSANE.

178 posted on 02/20/2006 12:45:40 PM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: pacelvi
"In Washington, Chertoff said DP World should not be excluded from operating the U.S. ports just because it is based in the UAE. DP World would not be responsible for cargo screening, which is performed by the Department of Homeland Security, but the port operator would handle security for cargo coming in and out of the port and the hiring of security personnel."

I appreciate your expertise in this matter, and perhaps we uneducated folks regarding the shipping industry are completely naive as you have pointed out, however, the whole idea of a United Arab Emirates company physically running the day to day port operations all over the United States to me is disturbing to say the least.

Seems to me it just leaves the door unlocked. In this day and age, I never leave my door unlocked. Just makes sense to me.

179 posted on 02/20/2006 12:47:53 PM PST by standingfirm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse
"Prohibiting foreign ownership of commercial entities is a "canary in the coal mine" warning of nationalization."

This is an exaggeration of "logic". We are talking about prohibiting Arabs and Muslims from controlling US Ports and extending the logic, to key US industries.

It appears you wish to go on and on, starting with how this is economic Labradoreans to being some sort of "canary".

A country has the right to protect and defend itself, and that includes protecting borders, ports, waterways and any means of ingress or egress. It also means protecting key industries that might be needed in time of war, ie. the military plant in Texas.

So, continue your illogic. You do not know where self-defense begins vs. economic rights.
180 posted on 02/20/2006 12:51:15 PM PST by Prost1 (Sandy Berger can steal, Clinton can cheat, but Bush can't listen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 261-272 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