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

Skip to comments.

Goodbye, Dubai (Protectionists Rejoice)
Los Angeles Times ^ | March 10, 2006 | The Editors

Posted on 03/10/2006 10:28:49 AM PST by RWR8189

PROTECTIONISTS, REJOICE! The dastardly United Arab Emirates company that would have presumed to unload containers of underwear and toothpaste on U.S. soil has backed down, and it will now divest its U.S. port interests to an American entity. Rest assured, the nation is now safe from dangerous Middle Eastern accountants and port logistics specialists.

Dubai Ports World did what was necessary, if not necessarily fair, on Thursday by agreeing to give up the U.S. operations of its newly acquired British ports company. The House Appropriations Committee had voted 62 to 2 on Wednesday to block the deal; a similar bill was pending in the Senate.

Although President Bush rightly stood by the acquisition and vowed to veto any bill that stood in its way, he was fighting a losing battle that only deepened a growing rift in the Republican Party. Dubai Ports World officials wisely recognized that they had to put some distance between themselves and their new U.S. assets. The company probably will sell its U.S. assets or create a U.S. company with a separate board to run them.

Much as we wish it would go away, the fight may not be over yet.

For one, the terms of the divestiture remain unclear, and some members of Congress are demanding more details. Will it be enough for Dubai Ports World to create a U.S. subsidiary? Will it have to open headquarters in the United States? Pay its employees in dollars?

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: appeasemuslimsnow; dpworld; dubai; dubaidubya; editoralintitle; frplaystheracecard; fuggedaboudit; godnotagain; muslims; portgate; ports; protectionism; sellingoutamerica; whineyglobalists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 341-343 next last
To: Dominic Harr

I'm a "she". :)


161 posted on 03/10/2006 12:51:27 PM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
Then we must agree to disagree on this, my friend.

In my view, national security should never be played on the defense alone. One must keep his friends close and his enemies closer. The more they withdraw from us, the less we know, the less we can prevent.

162 posted on 03/10/2006 12:52:51 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
Congratulations, Dominic.

Thanks, sometimes I get lucky!

Altho this seemed to be a pretty easy issue . . . I just can't believe so many Rs fell for the D media line.

  1. Media broadcasts the lie "Bush Selling US Ports To Arabs" (Something I would oppose!).

  2. The public who never read past the headlines turns agains selling ports to Arabs.

  3. R Congressmen up for re-election see a public outcry and rush to gain votes by capitalizing on the controversy -- "The public wants something done, this is something, therefore I'm for this!"


163 posted on 03/10/2006 12:54:43 PM PST by Dominic Harr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: GOP_1900AD; Alamo-Girl
There was no rational reason to be opposed to the port deal.

All the opposition was based on feeling, that the facts simply did not support.

Some of that 'feeling' is unfortunately quite evident on this thread.........and it's pretty ugly.

164 posted on 03/10/2006 12:54:54 PM PST by ohioWfan (PROUD Mom of an Iraq War VET! THANKS, son!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
I'm a "she". :)

!

Oh, I'm so sorry, I meant no disrespect!

Hoof n mouth disease is my only excuse . . .

165 posted on 03/10/2006 12:55:53 PM PST by Dominic Harr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: HEY4QDEMS
And to you and the other Bush-bots, The Deal is Off,....get over it!!!

It is? Bushborgs don't stop business they only promote political agenda. Maybe you should read below. I'm over it are you? DP will operate in our ports. Google up DPI and you will find they own CSX and have already been doing so. Thanks for being a political pawn.

SSA of Seattle planned to work with DP World
Seattle Times business reporter

SSA Marine, by far the largest U.S.-based port operator, appears to be in prime position to take a role in running the U.S. assets of Dubai Ports World (DP World), the company at the center of the port-security controversy.

Seattle-based SSA had been planning to accept DP World as its joint-venture partner at ports in Philadelphia, Wilmington, Del., and Camden, N.J.

SSA was a partner in those ports with London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation (P&O). DP World purchased P&O in a $6.8 billion deal that closed this week.

On Thursday, DP World said it would transfer P&O's U.S. assets "to a U.S. entity" either by selling them to another company or setting up a corporate structure without management links to its government-controlled parent in Dubai.

166 posted on 03/10/2006 12:57:36 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Which Christians have said we should kill the infidels? Billy Graham? I must have missed it.

I had an argument a while back on this forum (during the Fallujah episode in Iraq) with several self-proclaimed Christians who wanted to nuke Fallujah.

When I said, what about the innocents there........the women? the babies? they replied, there ARE no innocent Muslims.

I said, "Even the babies?" And they said we needed to kill the 'nits.'

If you haven't seen the many posts on this forum suggesting that we need to kill all Muslims, you have been reading selectively. And these people said they were Christians.

167 posted on 03/10/2006 12:58:53 PM PST by ohioWfan (PROUD Mom of an Iraq War VET! THANKS, son!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

Ugly indeed. And if it looks ugly to us, just imagine how it must look across the pond.


168 posted on 03/10/2006 12:59:49 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr
Exactly. And the R Congressmen........running for reelection..........in denying DPW the agreed upon 45 day waiting period, have proven to the world that we cannot be trusted.

Thanks to them, our word has become meaningless. And I find that very offensive. I don't like being a part of a political party that doesn't keep its word. Perhaps that's because I'm more conservative than my party, and to me, part of integrity IS keeping your word.

There is nothing to celebrate here. Not if you're a conservative, that is.

169 posted on 03/10/2006 1:03:28 PM PST by ohioWfan (PROUD Mom of an Iraq War VET! THANKS, son!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
(Protectionists Rejoice)

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

Hooray!

170 posted on 03/10/2006 1:04:43 PM PST by Jim Noble (And you know what I'm talkin' 'bout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
There is nothing to celebrate here. Not if you're a conservative, that is.

Agreed.

171 posted on 03/10/2006 1:05:01 PM PST by Dominic Harr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: GOP_1900AD

Thanks! :-)


172 posted on 03/10/2006 1:06:04 PM PST by syriacus (The stench of hypocrisy hangs heavy. Beijing smugglers can run our terminals, but Dubai can't)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
I am aware that the whole thing was a method to siphon of money for politicians but thanks.
173 posted on 03/10/2006 1:06:06 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr

Don't apologize - I take it as a compliment when people assume I'm a man. LOL Well, on here at least - not in real life!

I will say this issue has definitely aroused passions on both sides of the issue. It has been very interesting.


174 posted on 03/10/2006 1:06:51 PM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Indeed. Any time emotion controls reason, we get ourselves into deep trouble.

As I said in a previous post, it is disturbing that the R's in Congress made a deliberate decision to go back on their commitment to analyze the deal for 45 days.

By reacting emotionally, it encouraged racism and unwarranted fear (deliberately played upon by the Rats, and who knows how many Republicans?), and the result is an embarrassing mess.

175 posted on 03/10/2006 1:07:45 PM PST by ohioWfan (PROUD Mom of an Iraq War VET! THANKS, son!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

Well, I personally don't want to kill anybody - I just want to keep them out of our country. They are doing a fine job of killing each other (including women and babies) without any help from "Christians".


176 posted on 03/10/2006 1:07:59 PM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

My very rational reasons:
* I oppose any state owned firm from outside the US owning anything in the US as a matter of core principles. If we are a free nation, and believe in capitalism, then it is hypocritical to engage with non capitalist "businesses" that are not businesses at all, but are instead, fascist elements. I use the world fascist with care. I use it to depict an economic activity controlled by a government, not shareholders or private individuals.
* Although the UAE have come far vs their ways of the 1990s and appear to be cooperating in aspects of the WOT, I personally do not judge (OMG, there's that un PC word that drives liberals mad!) them to have a sufficiently long track record or sufficient transparency to fully trust them.
* The manner in which this has been handled leads to many questions, which even a 45 day investigation may not be able to answer. While I seriously doubt that there was any wrong doing, I also think that the due diligence may have been lacking.

How's that? Not very emotional, by my, oh here comes that word again, judgment.


177 posted on 03/10/2006 1:08:31 PM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr
You say you aren't afraid they're dangerous

I said that?
178 posted on 03/10/2006 1:08:42 PM PST by HEY4QDEMS (No animals were harmed during the creation of this post.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
But not a terrorist organization? Hmmm...

They can be both. Why does the US fund terrorists. If you pay taxes you must approve. Hmmmmm........

179 posted on 03/10/2006 1:11:27 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
You're talking about terrorists, mlc. All Muslims are not 'killing each other.'

In any form of debate, accuracy is important.

There are people who claim to be Christians who want all Muslims dead. That is the point that you claimed was not true, that in actuality is.

None of this changes the FACT that it was determined by those who handle the security of the ports, that the DPW deal provided NO security threat to our ports or our nation.

The bottom line is that the deal was scrapped because of demagoguing, ill-informed politicians, and not any real threat posed by DPW to this country.

180 posted on 03/10/2006 1:13:04 PM PST by ohioWfan (PROUD Mom of an Iraq War VET! THANKS, son!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 341-343 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