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

Skip to comments.

Ridiculous objections (port sale)
The Gulf Today (UAE) ^ | 26 February 2006 | DR MUSA KEILANI

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.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: arabs; d; dubai; ports; sale; security; uae
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-226 next last
To: Dialup Llama
"Call me a reactionary know-nothing"..... If you insist

Security measures are taken when the containers are loaded and before the leave foreign Ports, Security measures are then taken again when the U.S. Coast Guard boards all Ships while still at Sea, they then pilot the ship into our Harbors and then Homeland Security picks which Containers need to be screened for radiation and Xray'd before they leave the Port.

The Company unloading the Cargo has NOTHING to do with security, all they do is physically lift the containers from the ships and load them on the Trucks that transport them to the Importers

21 posted on 02/25/2006 10:12:07 PM PST by MJY1288 (THE DEMOCRATS OFFER NOTHING FOR THE FUTURE AND THEY LIE ABOUT THE PAST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
This whole thing has been the biggest mistake made by the Republican Party since they failed to remove Clinton from office. This whole story should have been a non event, but the Republicans over reacted because (BY LAW) they were not in the loop in this international transaction, despite the fact that it has been public knowledge since November of 2005.

Yep great post, glad that some people here have the facts.

22 posted on 02/25/2006 10:12:54 PM PST by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone


Why did you add (port sale) to the headline?

NO PORTS HAVE BEEN SOLD.


23 posted on 02/25/2006 10:14:20 PM PST by onyx (IF ONLY 10% of Muslims are radical, that's still 120 MILLION who want to kill us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dialup Llama

"Why does this not make me feel better? Call me a reactionary know-nothing but the unloading of cargo into the US just MIGHT have a teeny bit to do with security."

The same reason that our efforts to 'pre-screen' cargo at the ports of 'loading' should not make us feel better....OBL is said to have 4-5 ocean going cargo vessels! What is to prevent ISLAMOFASCIST'S WMDS from being loaded in the middle of the damn ocean after leaving any port in the world? We have no guarantees from any law we enact or security measures we undertake to protect this country. We are in a war that will last long into the future and our enemy is determined to attack us no matter what we do. Unfortunately, the dems are positioning themselves on the side of their own political ambitions..and not on the side of our country!! This should come as no surprise to those of us who have witnessed the evolution of the communist left in this country from Vietnam on.......


24 posted on 02/25/2006 10:15:00 PM PST by penelopesire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeW23225

It has EVERYTHING to do with big labor unions!!



The clincher here: "Follow the money" = longshoremen!!!


25 posted on 02/25/2006 10:15:21 PM PST by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone
YOUR HEADLINE IS A LIE
26 posted on 02/25/2006 10:16:41 PM PST by Howlin ("Quick, he's bleeding! Is there a <strike>doctor</strike> reporter in the house?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boycottliberalhollywood.com

30% of our ports/terminals are already being managed by foreign companies. No American companies want to do the work because of the labor unions.

Security is being done, as always, by the U.S. Coast Guard and the Department of Homeland Security.

This hysteria is not about national security. It has everything to do with big labor losing power. Period!!


27 posted on 02/25/2006 10:16:46 PM PST by GeorgeW23225 ("Grow your own dope. Plant a liberal.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeW23225

Youforgot to mention racial bias as well.


28 posted on 02/25/2006 10:17:18 PM PST by Doc91678 (Doc91678)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeW23225

Sorry.... handling that cargo *IS* a national security issue.


29 posted on 02/25/2006 10:17:56 PM PST by Bubbatuck ("Hillary Clinton can kiss my ass" - Tim Robbins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Echo Talon

It's shocking to me that one week after Chuck Schumer claimed that President Bush was selling our Port Security to the United Arab Emirates while we were all focusing on Dick Cheney accidental shooting his hunting buddy, we STILL have Freepers spouting that same spoon fed MSM headline.


30 posted on 02/25/2006 10:18:47 PM PST by MJY1288 (THE DEMOCRATS OFFER NOTHING FOR THE FUTURE AND THEY LIE ABOUT THE PAST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeW23225

lol...I listen to Rush too and have been leaning to his analysis of the whole 'portgate' issue from the beginning! Although..Timothy McVeigh had many ties to Islamofascists..do your homework! (wink)


31 posted on 02/25/2006 10:19:27 PM PST by penelopesire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: danamco
BINGO!! Right you are!!

And if anyones doubts that fact, all they have to do is watch the news tonight with Her Heinous Hillary making a speech to a labor union about this subject.

How this is fooling some FReepers is beyond me!!
32 posted on 02/25/2006 10:19:28 PM PST by GeorgeW23225 ("Grow your own dope. Plant a liberal.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone
hate to ask but it was floated around today that the UAE gave Bill Clinton 350 billion dollars for his Presidential Library. And that they gave a large amount to GHW Bush's library as well.

If people knew that Clinton has a private penthouse at the library and that that money is really pretty unregulated (why? Because how many Presidential Libraries are there ever going to be?) -- our Prez had better clear up any collusion with UAE and his family. Since he's so buddy buddy with Clinton nowadays, maybe he can explain this UAE money to Clinton, too.

Threatening a veto over this? Smells like a lot of family money at stake, sorry. Unless there's a real good reason for our Prez's strange reaction, I'm afraid Michael Moore was right in his movie.
33 posted on 02/25/2006 10:19:43 PM PST by Californiajones ("The apprehension of beauty is the cure for apathy" - Thomas Aquinas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: penelopesire
OBL is said to have 4-5 ocean going cargo vessels! What is to prevent ISLAMOFASCIST'S WMDS from being loaded in the middle of the damn ocean after leaving any port in the world?

He could do that even if this deal were canceled.

34 posted on 02/25/2006 10:19:47 PM PST by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Of course the headline is a lie...this whole campaign is a lie and now we're starting to see the price for that lie.

Imagine how this is going to play to our troops in the UAE who know they are our allies?

35 posted on 02/25/2006 10:21:13 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Dialup Llama
Call me a reactionary know-nothing but the unloading of cargo into the US just MIGHT have a teeny bit to do with security.



How, please tell me, how in the world will this suddenly change from status Quo, except from all the talking heads in the LSM as well as here on FR???
36 posted on 02/25/2006 10:21:37 PM PST by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Doc91678

That's a given. I did not forget it, but you are correct to mention it!!


37 posted on 02/25/2006 10:22:42 PM PST by GeorgeW23225 ("Grow your own dope. Plant a liberal.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288

It's like debating with liberals and frankly im getting sick of it! The President needs to have a prime time address to the nation and explain this because im getting tired.


38 posted on 02/25/2006 10:22:57 PM PST by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Californiajones
"350 billion"

Clinton built a Library, not a Fleet of Air Craft Carriers :-)

39 posted on 02/25/2006 10:23:03 PM PST by MJY1288 (THE DEMOCRATS OFFER NOTHING FOR THE FUTURE AND THEY LIE ABOUT THE PAST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
"The Company unloading the Cargo has NOTHING to do with security, all they do is physically lift the containers from the ships and load them on the Trucks that transport them to the Importers"

Then why don't we have the bin Laden company manage the remaining ports that we are dying to sign away?

Of course that would seem ridiculous because most people have some inkling that the unloading of ships does have something to do with security, especially if the person doing the unloading was actively trying to thwart security measures.
40 posted on 02/25/2006 10:24:14 PM PST by Dialup Llama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-226 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