Check for yourself.
http://www.nscsaamerica.com/
Posted on 02/25/2006 9:30:52 PM PST by Cornpone
WHAT IS TAKING place in Washington over the proposed takeover of container operations at six major ports in the US by a UAE-based company is nothing but a reflection of the real mindset of American politicians influenced by Israel into seeing Arab and Muslim countries as a security risk to the US after the Sept.11 attacks.
We in the Arab World have to draw our own lessons from the affair.
The UAE is involved in this particularly dispute. But there is no doubt that such deals involving any Arab or Muslim country would draw the same objection from American congress members.
Notwithstanding the sweet talk that American politicians give to us, it is a high probability that any other Arab-owned company would face rejection in the hypothesis that it secures a similar deal in the US.
The facts of the current dispute are clear:
Dubai Ports World, which is owned by the government of the emirate of Dubai, has signed a nearly $7 billion agreement with Britain's P&O to take over the shipping company's port operations around the world. The agreement is awaiting formal approval by a British court.
Under the agreement, DP World will also take over P&O's container operations in six major US ports that the British company had been operating for years. It is a natural transition of operations from one commercial entity which is bought by another.
US security agencies and departments will continue to be in absolute control of security at all ports in the US, including the six involved in the DP World agreement.
Nothing changes whatsover except that DP World will handle all incoming and outgoing containers, which are subject to routine scrutiny by US Customs and security officers from various agencies at the point of final entry and exit.
DP World will have no role whatsoever in any security aspect of the port. It is entirely an American affair.
There should be no hitch in the take-over if all these factors are taken into consideration by critics of the deal. Instead, they are citing "security concerns" and pointing out the UAE had recognised the Taliban regime in Afghanistan in the 90s.
What the critics are overlooking or deliberately ignoring is the excellent track record of the UAE.
The UAE was among the first in the Arab World to sign up in all measures aimed at tightening security and adopting anti-terrorism measures as suggested by the US following the Sept.11 attacks.
The UAE does not have a record of engaging itself in any extremist attacks or harbouring militants. On the contrary, the country has said it remains on high vigil and alert against extremists.
The UAE is among the leading voices of moderation in the Arab World and it has always followed a positive approach to Arab, regional and international issues.
If anything, the UAE, like Jordan, is known for advocating dialogue to resolve conflict, whether in the Middle East or elsewhere.
The UAE has signed bilateral extradition agreements with others and is also following its obligations under them without fail.
It is ridiculous at best to suggest that the UAE has links with extremism simply because extremist suspects happened to pass through the country on their way somewhere else.
Isn't primary that had the UAE had any inkling of their real intentions while they were present in UAE territory, then they would have been arrested and questioned?
Well, US security and intelligence agencies had tip-offs about an impending attack ahead of Sept.11, but they failed to take preventive action; so how anyone could blame others where they themselves had failed?
The key factor in the dispute over the DP World deal is that a commercial entity from an Arab Muslim country, seeking to build itself as a major player in the international market, is facing bitter opposition to a key project that would catapult it towards its strategic business objectives.
Indeed, not everyone critical of the DP World deal might be inclined to oppose it because of inherent hostility towards Arabs and Muslims.
They might indeed have concerns that they might see as genuine when seen from their perspective. That is where they needs to realise that the DP World-P&O deal as given clearance after a careful intelligence and security reivew.
There is a security system in place in the US, and that has vetted the deal. That should put to rest any "security" concerns, unless of course American congressmembers do not trust their own security arrangements.
If the latter is the case, then they should have no trust in their government either. That being not the case, the obvious conclusion is that Jewish-dominated political and business circles supported by vested interests are mobilising themselves against any effort by any Arab country to emerge into the international market and thus gain an influential role in world affairs whether it wants it or otherwise.
It is heartening to see that the Bush administration committed itself that the DP World takeover would go ahead although after a brief delay.
Check for yourself.
http://www.nscsaamerica.com/
bttt
bttt
Exactly. Since Congress itself limited its oversight and handed more to treasury... of course, you'll never hear that in the MSM.
Why hasn't anyone screamed about our fighter planes and everything they host at the staging area for the WOT...
You expressed your that your main concern is that US ports are no longer being run by "the US". By now you must know that every American port is run by the US. A municipal, state or federal port authority runs each and every port. Those entities lease terminals and warehouse space to private companies.
As far as your statement is concerned in respect to DBW acquiring P&O, those operations are already run by a non US entity. P&O is not a US company.
How is this different from the Panama Canal deal? It's different because the terminals are already foreign and will remain foreign. The ports are American and will remain American.
Hardly, he's being threatened with political murder by the uninformed.
I agree 100%. We speaketh the truth!! :-)
Yes. Lots of proof. Just watch your television and look at the union led demonstrations against the port contract. Yesterday, they "invited" Her Heinous Hillary to be one of the main speakers....
How much more proof do you need??
Face it we are doing nothing more than supporting a 'fiefdom'. I suspect that now the EU wishes they would have thought out 'opening immigration' policy more.
Finally the Austies are laying it on the line on what the problem is within their Muslim immigrant population.
And if we just keep saying that, over and over and over, why it'll be true!
And while we're at it, lets keep up the hallucinatory chant that Dubai and the UAE are really just swell places, full of truth, purity, and virtue.
Up is down, black is white, and its down the rabbit hole we go.
"The Dubai company will make hiring decisions."
Actually, they will only make top management decisions. As in any business, their main objective is profit. Had they wished to do us harm, they could have done so at any time prior to the announcement of this purchase.
Had Dubai wished the US harm, they could have sunk nearly our entire fleet when they serviced our warships in their ports.
I see many alleged Republicans now join the Liberals in the slaughter of common sense to join in "the Arabs are coming, the Arabs are coming" mentality.
Beware of that new fangled technology (bar coding) :-)
It sure is one helluva reason to strike, isn't it??? LOL!!
Great post!!
Thanks for telling it like it is!!
But the "Aussies" have also hired DPW to manage their cargo loading and unloading operations at some of their terminals.
Also, England, Belgium, South Korea, China,etc,etc,etc.........
How do you explain that???
Uninformed or deliberately misinformed??
Perhaps both!!
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.