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

Skip to comments.

US House to vote on ports despite company promise
Reuters ^ | Friday 10 March 2006 | Steve Holland and Susan Cornwell

Posted on 03/10/2006 2:21:04 PM PST by Stellar Dendrite

The U.S. House of Representatives will forge ahead with a vote on blocking an Arab-owned company from managing U.S. ports, to ensure the firm sheds its U.S. holdings as promised, a leadership spokesman said on Friday.

The Republican-run House's refusal to back away from the showdown vote was another blow to President George W. Bush, who suffered a stinging defeat on Thursday when Dubai Ports World said it intended to back out of the deal his administration had approved.

Reverberations from the political earthquake continued on Friday. The United Arab Emirates broke off talks on a free trade pact with the United States, although a spokeswoman for the U.S. Trade Representative's office said delays are common.

Bush said he was concerned the opposition sent a worrying message to Middle East allies.

"In order to win the war on terror, we have got to strengthen our relationships and friendships with moderate Arab countries in the Middle East," Bush told newspaper editors.

State-owned Dubai Ports World surrendered to unrelenting criticism from both Republicans and Democrats in giving up the management of some terminals at six major U.S. ports.

The UAE company said it would transfer the ports to a U.S. entity at the behest of Dubai's ruler, to allay concerns the deal posed a threat to American national security. Details of the transfer were not outlined.

The White House had hoped the announcement would resolve the unprecedented crisis between Bush and a Congress run by his own party in open revolt.

But Ron Bonjean, spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, said the House vote on a provision to bar the deal would go ahead on Wednesday or Thursday anyway.

"It's a smart move to keep it (the legislation) in there, in case the Dubai thing doesn't work out," he told Reuters.

NATIONAL SECURITY

The outlook for a Senate vote was less clear. Senate Republican leaders have been trying to avoid one in the near future. Deal critic Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, wants more information from the White House.

"If things are as they appear, this is a great victory for national security. But make no mistake, we are going to scrutinize this deal with a fine-tooth comb to make sure the separation between American port operators and Dubai Ports World is complete and security is tight as a drum," he said.

Dubai Ports Chairman Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, asked if the firm would sell the U.S. port management rights, told Reuters: "All this is being worked out by our parties in the States."

But David Hamod, president of the National U.S.-Arab Chamber of Commerce, said it would be hard to find a U.S. company to step in.

"The advantage that the overseas company has is economies of scale. They're doing this on a global level and so it will be very difficult to find a U.S. company in this business large enough to take over the operations," Hamod said.

He also said his group was hearing calls for retribution, including keeping Americans out of Arab markets. "But it's a tiny minority of people who are arguing that," he said.

Bush, who had vowed to veto efforts to block the deal, praised the UAE as a committed ally in the war on terrorism.

"I'm concerned about a broader message this issue could send to our friends and allies around the world, particularly in the Middle East," Bush said.

Treasury Secretary John Snow said his department's lawyers were in contact with DP World about its intentions. He also said the political furor was an isolated case, as he tried to limit damage to the U.S. free-trade image.

Larry Sabato, a political science professor at the University of Virginia, said congressional Republicans are running away from Bush this election year.

"In a way, the port deal was a godsend to them," Sabato said. "It allowed them to put a lot of daylight between themselves and a very unpopular president."

A new poll Friday registered another low of 37 percent in Bush's approval rating.

(Additional reporting by Thomas Ferraro, Doug Palmer and Tim Ahmann)


TOPICS: Breaking News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 109th; alwaysrighteverytime; cantstopwhining; elitism; everyonemustlisten; minorityopinionrant; nutheads; port; ports; uae; uaezot; wearealwaysright
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-286 next last
To: Txsleuth

Are this guys in tough relection campaigns? I dont get it. Are they planning on running for something? Have dreams of being on the short list for VP?


41 posted on 03/10/2006 2:50:35 PM PST by bayourant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: freema; Coop; Justanobody

Undermining the WOT and Troop hating BS ping.


42 posted on 03/10/2006 2:50:37 PM PST by Earthdweller ("West to Islam" Cake. Butter your liberals, slowly cook France, stir in Europe then watch it rise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rodguy911

With the current climate, this whole thing could so easily spiral completely out of control.


43 posted on 03/10/2006 2:50:39 PM PST by CFC__VRWC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite
But Ron Bonjean, spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, said the House vote on a provision to bar the deal would go ahead on Wednesday or Thursday anyway.

"It's a smart move to keep it (the legislation) in there, in case the Dubai thing doesn't work out," he told Reuters.

Yeah, just brilliant. A stunningly brilliant "strategy."

44 posted on 03/10/2006 2:51:26 PM PST by CDB (MSM = "controversy, crap and confusion" (based on a quote by Alan Simpson))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomNeocon
Anyway, I'm glad SO many, are SO eager to create a few more millions of enemies, in the name of national security. /rolleyes
45 posted on 03/10/2006 2:52:28 PM PST by FreedomNeocon (I'm in no Al-Samood for this Shi'ite.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3

This is not the end of the world (or even business). Please don't paint extreme doomsday scenarios. They are illogical and don't reflect well on our understanding of foreign trade.


46 posted on 03/10/2006 2:53:27 PM PST by indcons (The MSM - Mainstream Slime Merchants)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: FreedomNeocon

Oh yes, These congressman should go join the cartoon protestors in the street. Their grasp of this conflict appears to be about the same


47 posted on 03/10/2006 2:53:59 PM PST by bayourant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: calex59

I did read up on it. They said they would not cancel current orders. They hinted future orders would probably be elsewhere.

"Boeing estimated that the Middle Eastern airline companies, which are expanding with their booming economies, will buy around 869 aircraft, worth $115 billion, from all aircraft makers - primarily Boeing and European rival Airbus - between 2005 and 2024."


http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11766815/

"Two UAE airlines recently signed orders for Boeing passenger jets. Few observers believe that deal will be called off, but Boeing may have to look elsewhere to make sales in the future, said Youssef M. Ibrahim, managing director of Dubai-based risk consultancy Strategic Energy Investment Group.

Foreign Defense Sales Also At Risk
Military equipment sales, which represent more than half of Boeing's $60 billion in annual sales, could also be at risk from fallout over the ports deal."

You may want to read more about it before you spout off. Relying on Chuckie Schumer for information is never a good idea.


48 posted on 03/10/2006 2:55:30 PM PST by Republican Red ("How good is it? Al-Jazeera gave it 4 1/2 pipe bombs")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: rodguy911
The U.S. House of Representatives will forge ahead with a vote on blocking an Arab-owned company from managing U.S. ports, to ensure the firm sheds its U.S. holdings as promised, a leadership spokesman said on Friday.

I don't know why the House would go through with a vote on a bill that wouldn't even stand up to legal scrutiny in the U.S. Federal court system.

How ironic would it be for Congress to pass this into law by an overwhelming margin, for the President to veto it, for Congress to override his veto, and then for the U.S. Supreme Court to eventually decide by a 9-0 margin that the law is unconstitutional?

49 posted on 03/10/2006 2:55:58 PM PST by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: indcons

One $15 billion order lost to Airbus is not the "doomsday scenario" I'm thinking about - I'm thinking ahead a couple years - are you saying a massive global trade war is not even possible?


50 posted on 03/10/2006 2:57:07 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero

The Democrats are shameless Traitors. The Republican Congress is a bunch of feckless bastards, and the traditional mainstream media is intellectually dishonest, morally bankrupt, thoroughly biased, and a huge threat to our republic.

We have one hell of a mess.

I don't think it will change until people get real serious and the extremists start taking some of these people out. You think the Dana Milbank's, Ron Fournier's, and Pete Yost's of the world might take the truth a little more seriously when their fellow "journalists" start getting targeted?

I have never been this angry in my life. When the press feels it can lie to the public with impunity we will have no democracy, we will have anarchy. No Republic can survive the absence of some universal truths that bind citizens to institutions and each other. When we all become so cynical that we don't trust what anybody reports how will we agree on anything.

I am not a violent person nor do I advocate violence. Let's just say that were someone to take out a particular nasty liar at CBS or the New York Times....you are all invited to my house for chips and beer. Sound harsh? These bastards keep selling our citizens down the road then they deserve what they get. In another time some of them would have already been hung or shot.....by their own government.

The media needs to be dealt with and soon, before the harm is irrevocable. Remember, "extremism in the face of tyranny os no vice".



PresidentFelon


51 posted on 03/10/2006 2:57:54 PM PST by PresidentFelon (Reuters Reporter Adam Entous beats his mother)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rodguy911

Dubai was not exactly on our side earlier, but I think the sheiks probably want to keep the gold bathroom fixtures and "top model" call girls headed their way. They have probably decided this is how they achieve the above, and it would seem to me that it would have been safe enough to deal with them.

However, I don't see why anybody who expresses concern about this - since the UAE is a Muslim country and therefore part of an ideology that hates the West and has often expressed its desire to exterminate us - should be labeled a xenophobe nutcase. There are serious issues here; the unfortunate thing is that the actions of Congress may have prevented a thorough discussion of this.

On the positive side, it may be a message to Islamic countries that they have got to prove their bona fides. Why they should act like the aggrieved parties when they are the ones who have been attacking us, over many years, is a little beyond me. It's fine to let bygones be bygones, but I would like a little more proof.

Also, the fact that they were also making a bid for a US military supply offering did not strike me as random, but more as part of a strategy. I'd be perfectly willing to be convinced that I'm a paranoid nutball, but I'd like to have someone actually come out and give me the facts to convince me of that.


52 posted on 03/10/2006 2:58:54 PM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: CFC__VRWC; indcons

Not at all, CFC - didn't you see that indcons has given his / her personal guarantee?

/sarc


53 posted on 03/10/2006 2:59:34 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite

We just had Melissa A Hart from PA state that we can't allow the UAE take over our infrastructure. I didn't know that we had any PA Reps as stupid as Sen. Boxer, Collins or Representative Pelosi, but sure as hell we just fielded an equal right here in PA. What an embarrassment!!


54 posted on 03/10/2006 2:59:46 PM PST by mortal19440
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius
However, I don't see why anybody who expresses concern about this - since the UAE is a Muslim country and therefore part of an ideology that hates the West and has often expressed its desire to exterminate us - should be labeled a xenophobe nutcase.

/BOGGLE

You sound like the guy who called Rush today...

Rush: "I understand, you don't want arabs running the ports, but it doesn't have to do them being arabs"
Caller: "Right"
55 posted on 03/10/2006 3:03:31 PM PST by FreedomNeocon (I'm in no Al-Samood for this Shi'ite.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: PresidentFelon; All

An interesting view point from a UAE blogger
Want to get re-elected ? What better way to do that but to pick on the United Arab Emirates, a country which has saved plenty of American lives by supporting the war on terror?

By a vote of 62-2, the House Appropriations Committee approved a measure to stop the state-owned UAE company Dubai Ports World from managing six US ports.

The US Senate whose main objectives are getting re-elected, costs America Dearly. If the Americans are percieved to pay lip service to the values of free trade, then they have billions to lose in Terms of Gulf Investments, once valued in the Trillions.

"Anytime something that is purely a business deal gets stopped - whether for security reasons or any reason - it will raise a flag and make some people think twice.

But then again, DP world has only served to further the Ignorant batches of the US senate, more concerned with getting re-elected, than with serving their country.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The state-owned Arab company, Dubai Ports World, has pledged to transfer operation of U.S. ports it has acquired from the British company P & O to a U.S. entity, Sen. John Warner said on Thursday.

Warner, a Virginia Republican, read to the U.S. Senate from a document he said was a statement by Dubai Ports World's chief operating officer, Edward Bilkey. "DP World has decided to transfer fully the U.S. operation of P & O Ports, North America to a United States entity," Warner read from the document.

Who exactly among the Arabs stood with us on this deal ? I only noted Jordan Times publishing something about this. And Jordan is already one of our closest allies.

But where were the other Arabs ? Busy over Danish Cartoons ? Too busy with barking about other useless causes ? Where were the people who screamed our praises and cheered on Arab Nationalism? They were nowhere to be found

Guess who supported us ?

None other than the Israelis.

CNN reported Thursday that a prominent Israeli shipping company, ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd., wrote to a U.S. senator noting it does business with DP World and supports the U.S. deal.

"As an Israeli company, security is of the utmost importance to us and we require rigorous security measures from terminal operators in every country in which we operate, but especially in Arab countries. And we are very comfortable calling at DP World's Dubai ports," ZIM chairman Idan Ofer wrote, CNN said.

Where was the PLO ? Or HAMAS ? We built whole cities for the Palestinians. Where were they ? How about the Egyptians ? We churned Billions into their Economy.

This only gives the UAE more of a reason to open up an Israeli Embassy, and gives me more of a reason to accept such a move.

http://aethoughts.blogspot.com/


56 posted on 03/10/2006 3:05:03 PM PST by bayourant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Owen

Everyone wants to get on record as being agains this deal, so it can't be used against them politically.


57 posted on 03/10/2006 3:05:07 PM PST by TheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: TheLion
Everyone wants to get on record as being against this deal, so it can't be used against them politically.

And I'm looking forward to the delicious irony when record ends up becoming a liability.
58 posted on 03/10/2006 3:07:27 PM PST by FreedomNeocon (I'm in no Al-Samood for this Shi'ite.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3; CFC__VRWC
Not at all, CFC - didn't you see that indcons has given his / her personal guarantee? /sarc

LOL....is this ad hominem attack the best you can come up with?

I think I know a thing or two about international business and trade, clawrence3. Maybe not as much as you but I have written for a couple of books on global trade and have worked in several countries. And yes,I stand by my original statement. There will be some retaliations by the UAE but these retaliations will not create any long-term problems or disruptions in global trade.

Remember the UNOCAL deal with the ChiComs? That deal was not allowed to proceed either. Didn't cause a breakdown in trade between the USA and China, did it?
59 posted on 03/10/2006 3:08:57 PM PST by indcons (The MSM - Mainstream Slime Merchants)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: TheLion

BINGO


60 posted on 03/10/2006 3:09:58 PM PST by indcons (The MSM - Mainstream Slime Merchants)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-286 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