+ 
+ 
= 
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 ...
DP World is state owned, by Dubai. So it follows that whoever runs Dubai would run the businesses. This deal has tentacles all over the place.
Are the same entities trying to buy other ports world-wide? Do they have them in Indonesia?...in Europe?...in Africa?
Someone out there give me the details of the owners on this transaction...the true owners...assure me that this is going to be all right...at least try to give me something to let me trust, but verify...
-- DP World, a Dubai state owned company, will be acquiring ownership rights over existing North American terminal infrastructure and operations at approximately 31 container, general cargo, and passenger terminals in New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami, New Orleans, and Vancouver, complete with extant leasehold, stevedoring, wharfage, and seaway rights;
-- That DP World will also own half of Norfolk's CP&O Ports Virginia, the largest stevedoring service in Hampton Roads;
-- That DP World itself has been quoted as stating that "We intend to maintain and, where appropriate, enhance current security arrangements," making the claim that DP World will have no responsibility for security a rather strange little piece of spin;
-- That, indeed, operations cannot be segregated from security, and to pretend that the two can be segregated is pure fantasy;
-- That the base technology related to terminal security was principally the product of ITO's efforts (the terminal operator that preceded P&O Ports), and that this technology will pass with the sale to DP World;
-- That Dubai and Dubai-based companies and banking institutions have an ignoble and disturbingly direct history of ties to 9/11 and terrorist funding and transit; and
-- That (curiously, given the importance of the decision to national security) the CFIUS did not conduct a 45-day investigation on top of the initial 30-day review that it usually gives to foreign purchases of U.S. businesses?
I know your posts, and I knormally appreciate your point of view and agree with your comments, so I consider you a political ally. However, I am opposed to this for reasons of national security and it has nothing to do with the fact that the Democrats also disapprove of it.
The fact that there is an issue that I disagree with the administration on is merely coincidental with the fact that the Democrats also challenge this decision.
I never did read any talking points...my opinion was immeidate and definite when I heard the news of this transaction...I would reather debate this on the merits, rather than the fact that your political opposites are in disagreement with you.
I do appreciate your bringing up of this issue or way of looking at it, for we must always be mindful that the actual facts, rather than the emotional reaction to any issue is the way to look at these issues. After all, acting on emotion is the dim thing to do.
Yes. With the acquision of P&O Ports, Dubai Ports World (a single, state owned entity) will be the third largest port operator in the world.
I've read it as being everything from a "takeover" of Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co.by DP World to Danes assertion that the shareholders decided to sell. The answer I guess is, who knows.
Maybe someone can educate me about how Dubai is organized as a "country" in that I had the belief that there was control by a royal family of some kind or other and that the "nation-state" concept is because it is a "kingdom." That being said, the nation is in fact a group of controlling individuals. If I am wrong, I will admit it, but I think that the use of the concept of a country buying this port seems hollow and not quite accurate.
The answer to this question becaomes very important because of this issue.
For exasmple, who decides for Dubai whether we are allowed to stay there with the military?
Dubai is not listed on the cia world fact book web site...
I understand that the Country of Dubai is run by the descendants of Shiekh Maktoum bin Hasher al-Maktoum who openned the port in 1894 to trade. It is now a part of the United Arab Emirites. SO it is an Emerite, run by an Emir?
+ + =
If we had no dissenters out of those groups who know far more than we about the firm and the actual contract, then I am more comfy about it. We either trust these people over Schumer and Clinton or we do not. No, I do not have the warm fuzzies about UAE but I have not had an inclination to believe anything Schumer or Clinton say either.
It's not just you. This is nuts. Bush needs to grab a hold of reality and dump this horrible idea. First, I don't want Arabs in charge of our ports. And second, I don't want to hand Democrats an issue that will work for them. What are our guys thinking?
Chertoff is a jerk...!
I don't care if it's owned by the Canadian government, I just don't like government-owned companies, regardless of the country, getting involved in our ports.
Oh, well, "assurances", THAT makes me feel better.
Didn't some of the 19 9/11 hijackers give "assurances" when they came into our country that they would leave when the appropriate time came?
"Assurances" (spits on ground)
United Arab Emirites President KHALIFA bin Zayid al-Nuhayyan, is a "keen supporter of the regional policy of HH Sheikh Zayed, in particular in terms of promoting solidarity between the Arab states, Sheikh Khalifa is firmly committed to support of the Palestinian people and also of moves designed to promote and restore stability in Iraq."
CIA World Fact Book
It was conservatives like Savage who began raising the issue and for good reason, it's a bad idea. The fact some democrats are agreeing is beside the point.
Excellent! Thanks for the informational bullet points.
Pinging F16 to # 85. It's a good one.
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.