Fears grow over new Dubai revolt

Financial Times ^ | March 21 2006 20:58 | Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Washington and James Boxell in London

[mr_hammer]

Arab and US officials are growing nervous at the prospect of a second congressional uprising against the acquisition of American assets by a Middle Eastern-controlled company in the wake of the Dubai Ports World debacle.

Snip ...

[justshutupandtakeit]

The Useful Idiots were entirely those republicans blindly led by the LYING Rats. They never bothered to determine that everything the Treason Media/Party of Treason said was a LIE.

The democRATS were not useful idiots but manipulators of the Ignorant.

[AxelPaulsenJr]

Ignorance of people like you frighten me.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The President was right in this. The Lying RATS and stupid republicans were beyond contempt.

[Old_Mil]

Islam's revolting history is not the issue here particularly since the UAE seems to have turned its back on those excesses.

First, it's not just a question of Islam's revolting history, it is a question of Islam's revolting present and future. Second, the UAE has not turned its back on those excesses - it merely is engaging in business dealings which are beneficial to a ruling class. Have democratic elections in the middle east and I'll bet you $100 that 80% of them turn out like Iran.

This WoT cannot be turned into an anti-Islam effort if we hope to win in Iraq.

You're assuming that our strategy in Iraq (turn a Muslim nation into a prosperous, peace loving, democracy) is a possible, let alone wise, one. Take a look at "our" people in Afghanistan. They're getting ready to execute a man for converting to Christianity. If we are to engage in true nation building, we must approach it as the Romans did and castrate their philosophical beliefs first.

You need to recall the meaning of "tactics" and "strategy" since your posts indicate NO awareness of their requirements.

A wise strategy begins by understanding what you're up against, not making naive assumptions.

[Rte66]

From the Fact Sheet you posted:

"As a result of the transaction, DP World will own and operate terminals at some U.S. ports, which means they will be responsible for physically operating the cranes that move cargo."

Even this fact sheet says "own and operate" where it should say "lease and operate" SOME terminals at some ports. P&O didn't own ANY terminals, thus, DPW will not own any.

[CowboyJay]

"Globalisation = Capitalism"

Nope. Globalization = Corporatism. The individual no longer matters in the collectivist corporate scheme. Make individual shareholders subject to prosecution under the law for wrongs committed on their behalf, and capitalism once again becomes a positive influence, rather than negative upon society as a whole.

[Ben Ficklin]

"China's massive purchase"-"Bush the drunken sailer"

Apparently you don't know the difference between the trade deficit and the budget deficit.

[jpl]

I predict this second, sneaky back door go-round attempt will be about as successful as the first attempt was.

[CowboyJay]

"The Klan is alive and well."

All across the Muslim world.

[jec41]

Most Americans do however, have a problem with Islamic dictatorships buying up private American companies.

The UAE was never owned by the people. It was owned by one family and private. The family split the land into 5 portions and each is overseen and managed by a member of the family. They determined the method by which the UAE is governed or managed. They chose United Emirates not a dictatorship. They did not elect to simply turn over all ownership of the land simply to any of the masses that would settle in the UAE and demand a vote that they be deprived of their holdings. They sell the land as it benefits the UAE. They have a clear message ,If you like it here please stay, if you don't like it here please leave. Go buy your own land.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Double standard against Americans? LoL not me I am, however, against ignorant Americans too dumb to realize that Lying RATS lie. Too unconcerned to actually FIND out the TRUTH before following the lying RATS over a cliff.

Another LIE is that the UAE was financing terror. That sort of reasoning will also claim the US or Florida was helping the terrorists since they gave them bank accounts, drivers licenses, taught them to fly etc. In other words it is STUPID.

Nor do the other accusations have much bearing on reality but do well illustrate the desparation to make opposition appear rational rather than hysteria.

[FBD]

Is this company (Dubai Holdings) publicly traded, or is it solely owned as an entity of the Dubai government?

[jec41]

Even this fact sheet says "own and operate" where it should say "lease and operate" SOME terminals at some ports. P&O didn't own ANY terminals, thus, DPW will not own any.

I agree, however I didn't write the fact sheet. In case you didn't notice its a White House publication from the White House. I simply pasted it. It appears the White House made a mistake in its own publication. I am very aware of how ports work. I was a importer, exporter for quite sometime. I learned how ports work in the sixth grade, something that is evidently not taught today.

[justshutupandtakeit]

It was only after the destruction of the Roman Republican that the mob became a factor.

It has almost NEVER been an issue in the US.

Nor was this a true mob but merely ignorant Republicans following Lying RATS. Republicans have always been the ones resisting mobs while the RAT whip them up.

NO republicans would have lost seats had they depended upon the truth but instead they panicked and acted like craven cowards.

If your view of our nation is correct it is finished. All that is left is the fall.

[justshutupandtakeit]

This is more ignorance than outright bigotry. LIES are excellent weapons in RAT hands and they achieved a tremendous victory over the Republicans, the President and the National interest.

[justshutupandtakeit]

So, that demonstrates to the claque screeching and whining about restrictions on foreign land ownership in the UAE as an excuse to kick our ally in the balls that the UAE policies are not that unusual.

Apparently that was too deep for you.

My only concern wrt the UAE or any other country is that they be supported when acting as allies. Just as I defend the UK, Italy, Australia, Poland, Bulgaria etc.

I do not sit silent while vital allies are lied about and slandered.

[jec41]

2/3 of America's budget is mandatory spending and cannot be vetoed or changed by the President. Without a line item veto he cannot veto any amendments attached to mandatory spending bills. Blame Congress and the President and learn how the budget is determined.


How Does the Government
Create a Budget?
The President and Congress both play major roles in developing the Federal budget.

The President’s Budget

The law specifies that, by the first Monday in February, the President submit to Congress his proposed Federal budget for the next fiscal year, which begins October 1.

In some years, it is not possible for the President to adhere to the normal schedule. The law does not require an outgoing President to transmit a budget, and it is impractical for an incoming President to complete a budget within a few days of taking office. President George W. Bush submitted a summary budget plan, A Blueprint for New Beginnings—A Responsible Budget for America's Priorities, to Congress on February 28, 2001.

President Bush’s detailed budget—which includes a main book and several accompanying books1 —covers thousands of pages and provides an abundance of information. These books, which were submitted in April 2001, allow people from all walks of life to examine the budget from many different perspectives.

Action in Congress

Congress first passes a “budget resolution”—a framework within which the Members will make their decisions about spending and taxes. It includes targets for total spending, total revenues, and the surplus or deficit, and allocations within the spending target for the two types of spending— discretionary and mandatory—explained below.

Discretionary spending, which accounts for one-third of all Federal spending, is what the President and Congress must decide to spend for the next year through the 13 annual appropriations bills. It includes money for such activities as the FBI and the Coast Guard, for housing and education, for space exploration and highway construction, and for defense and foreign aid.

Mandatory spending, which accounts for two-thirds of all spending, is authorized by permanent laws, not by the 13 annual appropriations bills. It includes entitlements—such as Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ benefits, and Food Stamps—through which individuals receive benefits because they are eligible based on their age, income, or other criteria. It also includes interest on the national debt, which the Government pays to individuals and institutions that hold Treasury bonds and other Government securities. The President and Congress can change the law in order to change the spending on entitlements and other mandatory programs—but they don’t have to.

Think of it this way: For discretionary programs, Congress and the President must act each year to provide spending authority. For mandatory programs, they may act to change the spending that current laws require.

Currently, the law imposes limits, or “caps,” through 2002 on annual discretionary spending. The budget proposes to revise these caps beginning in 2001 to recognize changing fiscal conditions, and extend the caps at appropriate levels through 2006. Within the cap, however, the President and Congress can, and often do, change the spending levels from year to year for the thousands of individual Federal spending programs.

In addition, the law requires that legislation that would raise mandatory spending or lower revenues—compared to existing law—be offset by spending cuts or revenue increases. This requirement, called “pay-as-you-go,” or PAYGO, is designed to prevent new legislation from reducing the surplus or increasing the deficit. The budget also proposes extending the PAYGO system.

Once Congress passes the budget resolution, it turns its attention to passing the 13 annual appropriations bills and, if it chooses, “authorizing” bills to change the laws governing mandatory spending and revenues.

Congress begins by examining the President’s budget in detail. Scores of committees and subcommittees hold hearings on proposals under their jurisdiction. The House and Senate Armed Services Authorizing Committees, and the Defense and Military Construction Subcommittees of the Appropriations Committees, for instance, hold hearings on the President’s defense plan. To consider the budget’s proposed changes in taxes, the House Ways and Means and the Senate Finance Committees will hold hearings. The Budget Director, Cabinet officers, and other Administration officials work with Congress as it accepts some of the President’s proposals, rejects others, and changes still others. Congressional rules require that these committees and subcommittees take actions that are consistent with the budget resolution.

If you read through the President’s budget, the budget resolution, or the appropriations or authorizing bills that Congress drafts, you will notice that the Government measures spending in two ways—”budget authority” and “outlays.”

Budget authority (or BA) is what the law authorizes the Federal Government to spend for certain programs, projects, or activities. What the Government actually spends in a particular year, however, is an outlay. To see the difference, consider what happens when the Government decides to build a space exploration system.


The President and Congress may agree to spend $1 billion for the space system. Congress appropriates $1 billion in BA. But the system may take 10 years to build. Thus, the Government may spend $100 million in outlays in the first year to begin construction and the remaining $900 million over the next nine years as construction continues.

Monitoring the Budget

Once the President and Congress approve spending, the Government monitors the budget through:

agency program managers and budget officials, including the Inspectors General, or IGs;

the Office of Management and Budget;

congressional committees; and

the General Accounting Office, an auditing arm of Congress.

This oversight is designed to:

ensure that agencies comply with legal limits on spending, and that they use budget authority only for the purposes intended;

see that programs are operating consistently with legal requirements and existing policy; and

ensure that programs are well managed and achieving the intended results.

Prodded by Congress, the Executive Branch has begun to pay more attention to good management of late, starting with the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act. This law is designed to improve Government programs by using better measurements of their results in order to evaluate their effectiveness.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Islam in this day and age is not monolithic. OBL is trying to recreate that monolith but it ain't going to happen. We will take advantage of the differences when possible rather than just take the "hate them all" approach beloved by the KNow Nothings.

But the crucial point is that all this opposition has been based upon LIES about what was involved. Even if your objection to Islam is valid there was still NO Danger to US security by the port deal. There was still NO security turned over all was STILL to be run by the Coast Guard, Customs and Homeland Security.

But you and your coharts would rather believe Treason Media headlines claiming Ports were being sold and to be under the control of Arabs. All false.

Our stategy in Iraq will not produce a democratic federal republic like ours but it has destroyed the regime of a man who has killed millions who forced our intervention and who trained, paid and recruited terrorists. Even Iraq in a state of civil war will be an improvement over allowing the King of Terror to remain on his throne.

No one will be executed in Afganistan either. But since you prefer panic keep at it.

It is precisely those supporting the UAE who have learned what it is and what it has done for us. The Antis are the ones determined to remain mired in ignorance.

[maryz]

I was a importer, exporter for quite sometime. I learned how ports work in the sixth grade,

I wasn't and didn't, so I'm very grateful for your informative posts. :)

[justshutupandtakeit]

Gee that warm and fuzzy view would be quite acceptable to the Leftists who also don't understand economics.

So now capitalism is a NEGATIVE, eh? Little wonder you cannot comprehend strategic interests and international finance.