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.
Thanks. What where you doning in Dubai anyway?
American companies weren't running these ports to begin with. P&O was a British company.
And Arabs are not in charge of security, for the umpteenth time. Homeland Security and the Coast Guard are.
The Vatican has not condemned the Palestinians.
Are they defacto enemies of the West?
Correct, the Vatican does not condemn nationalities, and it does not take sides in politic debates. However, the comment referred to "Palestinian Nutballs," ie "terrorists." The Vatican has most assuredly condemned terrorists. I know you dislike the Church hierarchy, but you are wrong to bring them into this discussion.
He said about the same thing, that they aren't going to have control over the ports security and that UAE is a friend and we risk pissing off a good friend etc etc etc
Is the UAE trying to destroy the United States? It would seem odd to me that DPW would try to wipe out its biggest customer.
Don't get me wrong. I'm a big fan of almost everything the man's done in office. I don't understand the reasoning based on some personal principles.
1) Islam is not compatible with Judeo-Christian ethics, and vice-versa, due to Mohammed's call for violence against infidels. We subscribe to a different mythos and a different ethos. Conflict between our civilizations is inevitable.
2)The only way we can possibly peacefully co-exist within either a nation or society is the liberalization of either their beliefs and ethics or ours. I don't really care to adjust my ethics to suit them.
2) I am a conservative. Liberalization of my faith and our nation is what I seek to avoid (Judeo-Christian ethos, laws based upon Judeo-Christian ethos, and freedom to practice Christianity in every aspect of my life).
3) Liberalism has led to the eventual decline and/or demise of every nation that has embraced it
3) It is pragmatically acceptable for us to treat with them as allies, or operate bases upon their soil, if it is in our national interest (or exchange war materiel and intelligence if they are fighting on our side).
4) It is unacceptable to treat them as a friendly nation (free-trade, land ownership, immigration) so long as they hold Islam as their national faith, as it is not possible for us to be part of a common civilization without guaranteeing our own demise
5) Conflict (military, economic, political, or cultural) is inevitable. Military conflict can only be avoided if they recognize our sovereignty (our constitutional right to practice our faith in any way we choose within the borders of our nation).
6) The 9-11 attack was a violation of our religious sovereignty. The attack was incited and perpetrated by the leaders of their religion. Whether or not that war is ongoing is a matter of opinion. I would consider it part of a larger conflict that has been going on for thousands of years. I do not believe the conflict will end unless one faith or the other is eradicated. In short; the only way that Islam can be part of our common civilization is if we either convert to Islam or Atheism.
OK - apparently I can't count to 7.
So, because some Arabs are terrorists, all Arabs are terrorists?
[i]Please dont ask me any more stupid questions.[/i]
Ok, but I'm not sure how my pointing out that your photo had nothing to do with the thread was stupid.
How dare you inject facts and logic into the discussion?
Excellent article. Thanks for posting.
I wonder if Israel would consider using UAE for their ports? If not, why?
"""I wonder if Israel would consider using UAE for their ports? If not, why?"""
Yeah I wonder why not. Remember all Arabs aren't terrorist. So as long as there are some good ones, we must welcome them all with open arms. (sarc)
>>> 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.
This UAE issue brings up the question of how many visas have been granted to Arab Muslims to work in, at, or near these ports.
Maybe its time to take the control of our ports back into American hands.
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.