Posted on 02/28/2006 1:44:53 PM PST by Paul Ross
|
 |
||
| UPDATE 1-Amid dispute, Bush still backs Dubai ports deal
(Adds comments from Frist, new legislation from Bayh) By Caren Bohan and Susan Cornwell WASHINGTON, Feb 28 (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Tuesday stood by his support for allowing a Dubai-based company to run terminals at six major U.S. ports, as lawmakers raised concerns about a Coast Guard report on security issues. "If there was any doubt in my mind or people in my administration's minds that our ports would be less secure or the American people in danger, this deal wouldn't go forward," Bush said, as the U.S. Congress held another day of hearings on the contested takeover bid. Facing a bipartisan uproar over the agreement to have state-owned Dubai Ports World manage terminals at ports including New York and New Jersey, the White House agreed on Sunday to a new, 45-day security review of the deal. At the end of it, Bush will have to authorize or reject the agreement. As of Tuesday afternoon, the new review had not begun, a Treasury Department spokeswoman said. Bush did not repeat his threat to veto any legislation to block the takeover deal, but aides said his position had not changed. The takeover by the United Arab Emirates-based company pushed Bush's approval rating to an all-time low of 34 percent, according to a new CBS News poll. U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican who asked that the deal be put on hold last week, said he felt "a greater comfort level" with the takeover now that he had received more information. He also said he would not let any related legislation on the Senate floor while the new inquiry is under way. But other lawmakers continued to voice concerns about the deal, which critics say could make it easier for militants to attack the United States. Sen. Evan Bayh, a Democrat from Indiana, introduced new legislation requiring greater scrutiny of business deals involving foreign countries. A bipartisan group of senators had introduced legislation on Monday to give Congress the power to block the deal.
INTELLIGENCE REVIEW Senators at an Armed Services Committee hearing pressed top intelligence officials about a U.S. Coast Guard report late last year that said "intelligence gaps" made it hard to assess if the takeover presented security concerns. Vice Admiral Terry Cross, vice commandant of the Coast Guard, said in a statement on Tuesday that his agency's initial review had identified the gaps but additional information and assurances it had received confirmed the takeover did not pose a significant threat. "In fact, the Coast Guard will have more information about the affected terminals under DPW ownership than it currently does under P&O's ownership," he said. Intelligence chief John Negroponte told the hearing that his own team's intelligence review was submitted Dec. 5, 2005, about a week before the Coast Guard report. "On the basis of our inquiry we assessed that the threat to U.S. national security posed by DP World to be low. And we did not see any red flags come up during the course of our inquiry," Negroponte said. Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, said senators had heard from several sources that U.S. Customs also had expressed security concerns. He declined to identify the sources. Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican and chairwoman of the Homeland Security committee that made the Coast Guard document public on Monday, said she thought the administration had rushed to judgment in deciding in the company's favor. (Additional reporting by Caroline Drees)
|
|
|
|
|
||
H'mmm.
The UAE still rejects all cooperation with the U.S. in turning over Bin Laden's financial records.
Guess that isn't a red flag.
Must be some OTHER color.
I can think of 3,000 reasons why they shouldn't.
Take a ride to our border, Mr. President. How much proof does one man need, I wonder?
Take a ride to our border, Mr. President. How much proof does one man need, I wonder?
I think I have the hickups......sorry.
I'm curious if anyone has access to any archive footage of the people in the UEA streets on 9/11/01??
"...and we didn't see any red flags come up...
H'mmm.
The UAE still rejects all cooperation with the U.S. in turning over Bin Laden's financial records.
Guess that isn't a red flag.
Must be some OTHER color."
UAE still honors the Arab boycott of all Israeli-made products too....but nothing to worry about there either.
Sen Birch Byeh said "the Democrats need to vote themselves more power."
"Scotty, I need you to give me MORE POWER!"
Well there were reports of people dancing in the streets in THIS country after 9/11.
How many shipping container facilities do they have along the Texas/Mexico border?
President Bush has been adressing the Tex/Mex border situation consistently ever since he took office. More money, more manpower is being pored into it, but following the LAW, which Congress does control. They limited how much, how quickly, not the President.
Happy hour start early for you?
UAE works with Zim Co, which is an Israeli-owned company. Guess they don't boycott their products, huh?
John Kerry, Jimmy Carter.
The UAE was supporting OBL.
So was the United States.
After 9/11 and the USS Cole, the UAE provided us with info and helped us catch the conspirators.
Some of OBL's financial records that the UAE has, have nothing to do with terrorism, and the UAE has the right to protect them if they wish.
Dubai hosts one of our largest ME NAVAL ports, and is a major crux on the war on terrorism. Dubai is in the 'perfect' position for us to defend the straights of Hormuz.
We are already doing so (just MARCORP exercises, not the real thing. (I never lie))
"UAE works with Zim Co, which is an Israeli-owned company."
The only article stating this was posted here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1585841/posts
This posted article quotes a DP World representative, and then states:
"Dubai Ports World, the combined United Emirates (UAE) port management company for the Gulf, has stepped up its challenge to win the operating rights of six major ports in the US, by claiming it has strong business ties with Israeli shipping company Zim Integrated Shipping Services Ltd."
Other than DP World's self-proclamation here, I haven't been able to locate any independent sources for this. It wouldn't be really surprising if DP World was the freight handler for a Zim container ship somewhere (given the ubiquity of both), but I'm wondering whether you have a link to some other source that confirms this.
Uh, don't forget who else is lining up with the "deal."
Don't you get it yet my friend?
It is already a done deal. The investigations were done. Security was the topmost issue and Dubai offered support over and above our requests.
They are one of our allies. They were in Desert Storm as well as in Iraq.
The politicos are flapping their jaws due to upcoming elections, and both the DEM and REPUB officeholders that have high union support (donations) are the most vocal and anti-deal. Because Dubai mgmt is anti-union.
That is what the stink is really all about.
So, the UAE (and not necessarily Dubai individually) has a boycott against Israeli-made products. That does not mean they do not ship them all over the world. Just that they do not allow them for sale in their country.
How does that affect you or I?
How many products or nations products, do we boycott?
Really. And you know this how?
And in what way are these innocent financial records unrelated to terrorism, the tracking of Bin Laden's financial sources and outlays, or the tracking of Bin Laden himself?
I honestly never I thought I would see a post on FR coming to the defense of anyone hiding any information about Bin Laden (and coming darn close to apologetics for Bin Laden himself).
"Take a ride to our border, Mr. President. How much proof does one man need, I wonder?"
Indeed...indeed.
Our country is being invaded by criminal illegal aliens and the president still wants to go through with this Dubai deal. Unbelievable!
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.