Posted on 02/26/2006 8:25:29 AM PST by jraven
Moving toward a deal that could allow President Bush and congressional GOP leaders to save face and avert a prolonged confrontation, GOP officials said today that they were discussing the idea of having Dubai Ports World seek a new review of its acquisition of a British company's operation that runs several key U.S. ports.
House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King, confirmed in a phone interview early Saturday afternoon to TIME that officials were close to a deal involving the Congressional leadership, the White House and the Dubai company. The agreement would call for a 45-day “CFIUS-plus investigation,” King said, referring to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a Treasury Department-run interagency panel that probes proposed acquisitions in the U.S.
Although the Dubai deal had already been approved by CFIUS, "the rationale for reopening it is, once DP carved out the American ports from the rest of the contract it changed the nature of the agreement so it had to be reviewed again," says King, who had been among the leading GOP voices opposing the deal as first approved without the extra 45-day review process or briefing of Congress. King says will await final details before formally backing any such deal. King added "if we are going to hold back on legislation, I think there has to be continuous congressional review throughout the new CFIUS review.”
If approved by all parties, the new deal would allow Bush to avert a GOP-driven bill to overturn the Dubai deal with enough votes to override Bush's threat of his first veto. Republican sources tell TIME that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee proposed the basic terms of a deal designed to give the White House a graceful way out, while also allaying the concerns of the many lawmakers in both parties who have said the deal could be a threat to our security. Under the Frist plan, the deal could stand a good chance of ultimately going through after the extended review. Frist aides apparently proposed the terms to representatives of the company and the White House late Friday. Neither has formally responded but both seemed interested in the idea, according to a Senate Republican aide. "This avoids a direct clash," the aide said. "It solves everyone's problem. The President doesn't have to cancel the deal or veto anything."
Under Frist's plan, the company would voluntarily separate U.S. ports from the rest of the deal for 45 days, allowing them to continue to operate as they do while the deal is re-vetted. That would allow a new review through the administration's Committee on Foreign Investments in the U.S. (CFIUS). Administration officials remain adamant that their first review was thorough and proper, so the face-saving element was crucial, according to one Capitol Hill negotiator. Frist is proposing that this time, CFIUS do the extra 45-day review that the law calls for in transactions where there are national security concerns. That provision was not triggered last time because administration officials had no remaining concerns at the end of the first review. This approach would eliminate the need for new legislation now, the Republican sources said.
You are wrong on this and history will prove you wrong.
After our first phase of the war on Islamofascism, it is now necessary to change Islamic culture by adding a dimension of consumerism to Islamic society. They must enter the 21st Century through participating in the consumption of goods produced in America. We did the same thing with Germany and Italy after WWII. This initiative will change the Middle East as it allows the cheap transport of American produced goods and material into the Area.
Dubai is the modern equivalent of Hong Kong, a no holds barred transhipment point.
I trust the president and his record, not just on the Dubai/P&O deal. The Dems are trying to prevent Dubyah's successfully taking the war on terrorism further by creating a relatively free consumer society in Iraq and Afghanistan, just as Kuwait and Dubai are now. This strategy worked also for South Korea.
Look at the difference now. At night you can see sat photos of a black N. Korea while S. Korea blazes with light. That will be the difference also between Iran and our other Arabian Allies in the future.
You may fold in on yourself, and you may not want to abandon a shite kicking attitude to Islamofascists, but remember this neither do I. The difference between us is that I have the courage to step forward to the next phase needed , as led by our president, and you still want to hunker down behind fortress America. Prior to WWII, that Isolationism bought us the Second World War, and the Holocaust.
Take my point well, I do not mean to deman you or other republicans on their views against the deal. There is a lot a stake , so be very careful how you proceed. God Bless America, and may we have the courage to take our battle against Islamofascism to the next stage, when the grocery and hardware stores work along with our guns.
Apparently not. All this time and not one security breach that threatened America! We must be doing something right.
Lies, lies, and lies.
Lie # 1: The UAE did not SPONSOR the 9/11 attacks.
Lie # 2: The UAE never supported Al Qaeda, ran cover for Bin Laden, or gave refuge for terrorists.
LIe # 3: The UAE recognized the Taliban government because of the huge number of Afghani imported labor to the UAE. Recognizing does not mean supporting. We recognize the existence of many governments that we do not support.
That is one excellent post.
"Do you know this UAE company works with an Israeli company named Zim? Maybe geopolitics are a little to complicated for you to understand."
You're probably right that geopolitics are a little to(sic) complicated for me to understand but I think I know a true ally from a globalist monarchy.
Since you're an expert on geopolitics, if Jordan and Egypt can recognize Israel, why can't the UAE and why can't recognition be a condition of a state owned UAE corporation operating ports in the US?
So on FR, a site exclusively composed of strong Bush supporters, and with discussions dominated by people pushing the White House talking points, there's still 36% opposition? How would you expect that to translate to the broader public? That same poll with 64% opposition shows 16% support. The Republicans opposing the deal are listening to their constituents.
I am a funny guy and you are one hell of a fart smeller, er smart feller.
US corporations make a lot of stuff outside of the USA in the Pacific, China makes a lot of stuff and ships it here in container ships, and US companies still make a lot of consumer goods and FOOD FOOD FOOD. ALL OF IT WILL GO INTO DUBAI... THE MODERN HONG KONG OF THE MIDDLE EAST.
Whats wrong with sending pork bellies to starving Taliban and Al Qaidans in the Montains of Pakistan? Have you perchance visited your local supermarket lately, or are you raising yourself on my gas?
Regardles of my comedy, you are one hell of a fart smeller , and you have a rather large nose which seems to block your foresight. Good luck with it, D'Artagnan.
Or will it be smart feller? You choose, not I.
---How would you expect that to translate to the broader public?---
We lead, they follow.
It's politics.
Thank you, you are kind and this debate is worth the effort , yes?
I support the President's overall actions in the WOT following 9-11. Both in Afghanistan and Iraq. But I differ with the aftermath policy of those invasions. I don't support staying in Afghanistan or Iraq in an attempt to bring democracy to the ME. That is an effort in futility. We're in Afghanistan and Iraq to KILL terrorists and "jihadists". The US military needs to keep bases of operations in both Afgahnistan and Iraq. We need to keep open an avenue open for a first strike capability against terrorism at a moments notice.
I don't have faith in the Islamic world coming around and joining western civilization and our way of life. Most of the people in the ME don't care about the human race or mankind. At least half of all people in the ME hate the USA and what we stand for in the world today. The other half aren't that thrilled with us either. I think the US govt can have a good relationship with other govts in the ME. But Islamic jihad is a way of life for most people in the region. The Islamic religion comes first and foremost in then lives of the worlds 1.2 million Muslims. PERIOD! The Bush administration isn't going to change that in three years, or 300 years! The religion of peace is not much different today, then it was at the the time of Mohammad. Comparing the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to Germany, Italy and Japan after WWII is ridiculous.
Comparing the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to Germany, Italy and Japan after WWII is ridiculous.>>>>
Fartsmeller it is.
Denial, denial, denial. Not just a river in Egypt. Alive and well in the minds of some people. You must own stock in DPWorld. LOL
That's right, don't debate the issues, just offer a cheap juvenile response. Ad hominems don't work, kiddo.
Obviously. I can feel that in your posts.
You have taken sides with the DPWorld/UAE contingent. So be it. Americans hold different opinions on this issue. We all have a right to free speech and if I want to excercise my right to disgaree with this sweetheart deal, so be it. Sometimes even Republicans and Democrats agree on certain issues. This maybe considered one of those times. As with most leveled headed folks, conservatives like myself reach conclusions based on the evidence and the facts. Not on what we hear from others. I don't wait for talking points to be printed or posted, nor do I don't wait around to be told what to think and what to say. And I don't take the rants of FReepers at face value, as you do.
I agree, FR has turned into DU
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.