Posted on 02/22/2006 1:18:57 AM PST by bd476
WASHINGTON, Feb. 22, 2006
A nefarious multinational corporation secretly controlled by a hostile Arab government has engineered a covert takeover of six major U.S. ports. America is at risk of losing control of its borders and compromising national security in an entirely preventable way.
Horselips.
Never have I seen a bogus story explode so fast and so far. I thought I was a connoisseur of demagoguery and cheap shots, but the Dubai Ports World saga proves me a piker. With a stunning kinship of cravenness, politicians of all flavors risk trampling each other as they rush to the cameras and microphones to condemn the handover of massive U.S. strategic assets to an Islamic, Arab terrorist-loving enemy.
The only problem -- and I admit it's only a teeny-weeny problem -- is that 90 percent of that story is false.
The United Arab Emirates is not an Axis of Evil kind of place, it will not own U.S. ports, it will not control security at U.S. ports and there is nothing new about foreigners owning U.S. ports. Odds are higher that you'll be wounded interfering with a congressman providing soundbites than by something smuggled into a port terminal leased by Dubai Ports World.
But please: let's not let the facts get in the way of a good story. And what's wrong with a little Arab-bashing anyway?
I am no expert on ports, transportation or shipping. But it takes very little reading and research to cut through the gas on this one.
Myth #1: That an Arab company is trying to buy six American ports.
No, the company is buying up a British company that leases terminals in American ports; the ports are U.S.-owned. To lease a terminal at a U.S. port means running some business operations there -- contracting with shipping lines, loading and unloading cargo and hiring local labor. Dubai Ports World is not buying the ports.
Several companies will lease terminals at a single port. In New Orleans, for example, the company Dubai Ports World is trying to buy (P&O Ports) is just one of eight companies that lease and operate terminals.
P&O Ports does business in 18 other countries. None of them are in righteous lathers about the sale of the business to a company owned by the United Arab Emirates. Dubai Ports World already operates port facilities all over the world, including such security-slacker states as China, Australia, Korea and Germany.
Myth #2: The U.S. is turning over security at crucial ports to an Arab company.
No, security at U.S. ports is controlled by U.S. federal agencies led by the Coast Guard and the U.S. Customs and Border Control Agency, which are part of the Homeland Security department. Local jurisdictions also provide police and security personnel.
Complaints about security at ports should be directed to the federal government.
Myth #3: American ports should be American.
Well, it's too late, baby. According to James Jay Carafano of the Heritage Foundation (a place really known for its Arab-loving, soft-on-terror approach), "Foreign companies already own most of the maritime infrastructure that sustains American trade…"
At the port of Los Angeles, 80 per cent of the terminals are operated by foreign companies. Chinese companies operate more than half the terminals. So why is this suddenly a threat? After all, political outcry managed to scupper the deal a few months ago in which a Chinese company was going to take over the Unocal oil company.
Go to any port in the country and you'll be lucky to see a single giant vessel with U.S.A. on its stern. Foreign-owned airplanes fly into American airports every hour. Many U.S. companies have foreign entities among their largest shareholders.
My colleague Charlie Wolfson reports that State Department sources say Dubai Ports World already handles port calls for U.S. Navy ships from the 5th fleet for their regular port calls in the United Arab Emirates -- a pretty high measure of trustworthiness.
Myth #4: the United Arab Emirates has "very serious" al Qaeda connections.
That's what Republican Rep. Peter King says. It's also what the administration said of pre-war Iraq, but that doesn't mean it's true. I suppose you could say each and every Arab and Islamic country has al Qaeda issues, but even on that yardstick the UAE is a pretty good player and by most accounts, getting better.
Politicians have been quick to point out that two of the 9/11 hijackers were from UAE. And we're turning over our ports to them? Well, by that logic, we shouldn't let Lufthansa land in our airports or have military bases in Germany, because that country housed a bunch of the 9/11 hijackers as they were plotting.
Yes, Dubai has plenty of blood in its hands, especially as a source or courier for terror funds. But it is not a rogue state. It has been among the closer and more cooperative Arab allies for the past two years (another conspiracy theory: the U.S. is paying them off).
Some combination of these facts led the Dubai Ports deal to be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. Certainly the security of American ports is an important issue. Certainly who controls the finances of companies that lease terminals at ports is far down the to-do list of how to improve security at ports.
That has everything to do with adequate funding and proper management at the relevant agencies. Management is the responsibility of the executive branch, while funding and oversight is the job of Congress. There is scant evidence that Congress or the administration have excelled in their duties.
That's why it's so tempting for politicians of both parties to indulge in xenophobic Arab-bashing on this matter of minimal national security importance. One Republican said that regardless of the facts, the administration was politically "tone deaf" on this one. Appearance is more important than reality.
Often bipartisanship is a sign of pragmatic consensus or noble common cause. In this case it is merely a scene of a politician occupational hazard: cover-your-arse-itis.
Dick Meyer, a veteran political and investigative producer for CBS News, is the Editorial Director of CBSNews.com, based in Washington.
I can imagine that W's standing, if not America's, has improved in Arab countries the last couple days.
I havent' heard any argument against this deal that was not driven by emotion or the phantom of eerie Arabs sneaking nukes into the country.
It's totally irrational.
So, in your fevered thinking, every Arab is bent on destroying America. Don't you think that's a ridiculous stereotype?
Phew! I feel SO much better now. /sarcasm
What next? Libya controls Logan Airport?
I am not worried about the UAE's government working with terrorists. I am more worried about a jihadist slipping through their security protocols and getting a job working at one of your ports. If we could be more assured of the UAE corporation's security procedures then I would feel better about it.
Does anyone have a comprehensive list of the bidders for the contract, or is this simply Dubai buying the British company that already has the contract?..when does it expire? More info would bring clarity.
"""Here's what gets me about all this tempest in a teapot: The invested monies are good for those working at the ports and boosts GDP -- maybe this is what has got the Dems all worked up. Plus, for crying out loud, if the Emirate gets word of something funny coming into the ports (and they just might), like heck they WOULDN'T do something about it. They've got an investment to protect."""
Yes they do have an investment to protect and that is the spread of Islam and to kill the infidal. The company isn't going to organize a terrorist attack but you can't tell me that some in the company wouldn't look the other way if one was planned.
Check out this little bit of hypocrisy and tell me this is not politics as usual. Some conservatives never fail to fall for it hook line and sinker with their knee jerk responses:
Democrat officials' firm helped Dubai purchase ports
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments_print.php?comments_id=4515
Arutz Sheva News Service - http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com
Absolutely. Rule-of-law is established in our country for enforcing our common ethics. Lynch-mobs are a usurpation of our constitutional rights.
I'm not advocating that we bomb Dubai, or quit treating with them as allies if that is currently in our best interests.
I'm only stating that we should not make the mistake of treating them as a friendly nation (that is allowing immigration or property rights). Our ethics are not compatible with their beliefs. Conflict is inevitable. Violent conflict is avoidable, only if they respect our sovereignty (challenge our right to exercise our beliefs on our soil).
What is your reasoning for allowing them to operate a business on US soil?
"the phantom of eerie Arabs sneaking nukes into the country."
Right, and whether PSA International of Singapore or DP World of Dubai had won the bid, has absolutely no bearing on that question.
Port security is run by TSA, not by terminal operators.
IT'S THE CAPITALIST WAY-ANYTHING FOR A BUCK. FORGET 9-11 AND THE JIHADISTS, BUSH KNOWS WHAT'S BEST FOR US, SO LET'S ALL JUMP ON THE BAND WAGON. THE NEXT STEP IS TO REPLACE THE LONGSHOREMAN WITH HIGHLY QUALIFIED "TEMPORY GUEST WORKERS". THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE MIDDLE CLASS GOES DOWN THE TUBES.
Whaaa!!#@%
Those are extremely critical elements any bad guys would need in order to infiltrate America.
The simple fact that this deal would give this UAE/Dibaei company access to our US Coast Guard schedule and/or inspection routine is enough for me to oppose.
I dont care HOW peaceful they've been the past five years.
If they havent universally supported Israel's right to exist, if they haven't universally condemned Palestinian nutballs, then they are defacto enemies of the West.
BUMP!
"""So, in your fevered thinking, every Arab is bent on destroying America. Don't you think that's a ridiculous stereotype?"""
I think given the chance many would kill you and me. But no, not all, and it is a stupid accusition to assume that anyone is refering to all Arabs. But enough of them have expressed their desire to destroy America, to make me put them all on watch and trust very few.
I do not want to give them any more opportunity to do use harm.
Until the Arab community cleans up its own backyard (terrorist) I don't want them in mine.
Pay no attention to Skippy. He signed up a few weeks ago, and he has been busying not making friends everywhere he goes. I laughed when Islamofacists could not tell the difference between Denmark and Norway, but it does not suprise me that he is making the same mistake with Yemen and the UAE.
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.