Chertoff Defends Review of Ports Takeover

Yahoo News ^ | FEB.19, 2006 | WILL LESTER

[radar101]

Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff on Sunday defended the government's security review of an Arab company given permission to take over operations at six major U.S. ports.

"We make sure there are assurances in place, in general, sufficient to satisfy us that the deal is appropriate from a national security standpoint," Chertoff said on ABC's "This Week."

London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., was bought last week by Dubai Ports World, a state-owned business from the United Arab Emirates. Peninsular and Oriental runs major commercial operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.

U.S. lawmakers from both parties are questioning the sale, approved by the Bush administration, as a possible risk to national security.

"It's unbelievably tone deaf politically at this point in our history," Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C. said on "Fox News Sunday."

"Most Americans are scratching their heads, wondering why this company from this region now," Graham said.

Added Sen. Evan Bayh (news, bio, voting record), D-Ind.: "I think we've got to look into this company. We've got to ensure ... the American people that their national security interests are going to be protected."

At least one Senate oversight hearing is planned for later this month.

"Congress is welcome to look at this and can get classified briefings," Chertoff told CNN's "Late Edition."

"We have to balance the paramount urgency of security against the fact that we still want to have a robust global trading system," he added.

Sen. Robert Menendez, who is working on legislation to prohibit companies owned or controlled by foreign governments from running port operation in the U.S., said Chertoff's comments showed him that the administration "just does not get it."

In a statement, the New Jersey Democrat said, "No matter what steps the administration claims it has secretly taken, it is an unacceptable risk to turn control of our ports over to a foreign government, particularly one with a troubling history. We cannot depend on promises a foreign government has given the administration in secret to secure our ports."

Chertoff said Dubai Ports World should not be excluded automatically from such a deal because it is based in the UAE.

Critics have cited the UAE's history as an operational and financial base for the hijackers who carried out the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

In addition, they contend the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist.

DP World has said it intends to "maintain and, where appropriate, enhance current security arrangements." The UAE's foreign minister has described his country as an important U.S. ally in fighting terrorism.

[LucyT]

Remembering this article is why I asked the question:

Homeland Security Chief nominee has ties to terrorists as defense lawyer; may have enabled attacks
libertarian oday ^ | 1 22 05 | Melissa Johnson and Sander Hicks

Federal Appeals Court Judge Michael Chertoff’s ties to the financiers of the Sept. 11 attacks may prevent his confirmation as Homeland Security Chief.

http://freerepublic.info/focus/f-chat/1327033/posts

[takenoprisoner]

"Added Sen. Evan Bayh (news, bio, voting record), D-Ind.: "I think we've got to look into this company. We've got to ensure ... the American people that their national security interests are going to be protected."

Recall this idiot. "Ensure the American people that their security interests are going to be protected?"
Yea, like they did on 911. No way to ensure us on this one senator. You are a dumba$$ and should step aside.

No need to review . Stop the takeover of our ports first and then our country by muslims. Why can't these idiots get it? How many of our govt folk sworn to protect us do the muslims own already?

[eskimo]

Chertnoff is once again wrong. Either he is clueless or . . .

...or he is on the wrong side?

[DJ MacWoW]

How is the Bush administration supposed to stop two NON-AMERICAN owned companies from consumating this business transaction (in which America holds no legal authority)?

The President actually can stop the UAE from doing this.

The intent of Exon-Florio is not to discourage FDI generally, but to provide a mechanism to review and, if the President finds necessary, to restrict FDI that threatens the national security.

Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS)

[hershey]

This is more globalism, and it stinks. The idea, presumably, is to make Arab countries feel as if they have a stake in the west, that we care. It makes as much sense as handing a mugger an AK47.

[takenoprisoner]

bttt

[eleni121]

Does everyone here realize that this is only a purchase of the contracts?
...................................................


Can you explain further? Thanks

[DCPatriot]

It has been pointed out that we need better intelligence and better spys in the field that can infiltrate our enemy's circle of influence.

Perhaps this company could be a good start to get that accomplished?

[Sally]

Right, Frank Gaffney also wrote about the David Sanborn connection.

Also, I hear rumors that there is a Neil Bush connection in this matter as well. Keep an eye open for incoming... That could be the reason Chucky and Hilly are jumping on this thing, because they know a Bush element is forthcoming.

[Just Lori]

"Most Americans are scratching their heads, wondering why this company from this region now," Graham said.

Most Americans just plain don't like it. Whether the admin. thinks our concerns are warranted or not, they had better be listening. Our borders are a sieve already, and they're not doing much about that. It's as though we're just begging for another attack.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

["We make sure there are assurances in place, in general, sufficient to satisfy us that the deal is appropriate from a national security standpoint," Chertoff said on ABC's "This Week."]

ASSURANCES?

Assurances brought by the same people who wouldn't investigate the three 9-11 al-queda cells which were discovered in 2000?

This is one of the most outrageous decisions yet by the obviously politically tone deaf Bush Administration.

[takenoprisoner]

"While I am no fan of the buyer of this 'port' business, seems that port security is already run by foreigners. I do not recall Congress whelping about security before now."

The issue is whether or not our ports should be run by muslims who hate us and intend to destroy us. And this not all muslims crap won't fly anymore. We don't want any muslims claiming to be moderate BS running our ports period.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[takenoprisoner]

"How is the Bush administration supposed to stop two NON-AMERICAN owned companies from consumating this business transaction (in which America holds no legal authority)?

Stroke of the pen law of the land for idiots. How many times did Clinton exercise this right?

[F16Fighter]

"The Al Qaeda Training Manual discovered in the UK describes recruiting seaport workers as making good recruits:

------ 'TWELFTH LESSON: ESPIONAGE '"

GREATLY informative post!

(Now if only someone in the globalist-obsessed Bush Administration would read it instead of attending to the more "important" business of "Nation Building.")

[Just mythoughts]

"Are you saying that there can be no distinction or differences between which foreigner one would allow to enter the USA?"

Is there a distinction now or NOT and if NOT why NOT?


"Would a British private company be run a bit different than say, a nationalized company from a nation that denies the right of Israel to exist?"

So you think private companies around the globe are sorting out terrorists from their ranks? Ha

"How about from a nation who supported the destruction of the WTC?"

From where I sit there were plenty of nations that sat idly by and allowed a whole lot of plotting and planning for the WTC destruction. The majority were not known terrorists homelands either.

"I think couching your opinion as saying you are no fan of this transaction seems to say that you actually would support GWB if he decided that nuking Manhattan would be good as long as it appeased the Islamists."

You are free to think whatever you choose to think, my point is that the global village is populated North to South and East to West with those who seek our demise, and why were we already contracting out port security before this deal? Maybe there is a whole lot of things we do not know about globalism and what little agreements made over the years entitle other nations to have access to.


"The USA is fighting for our survival. It is a border war, a cultural war, and the war to maintain our traditions of language and religion. GWB has demonstrated that he is not fighting this war, so which war is he fighting?"


We have a US Congress that passes any legislation to fund and fight any war, where the .ell are they? You want a tighter border allllll that bunch need do is pen the legislation and fund the activity. Instead what we find in Congress is a bunch of touring tourists traveling around this globe keeping their lobbyist fat and happy.

[eskimo]

Isn't Chertoff a clinton hold over?

Someone told me he was just one of those CFR Marxist types that envision themselves as socialist administrators of the planet. They seem to surround the presidential caricature no matter what party sign gets tattooed on it's but.

[DJ MacWoW]

Does everyone here realize that this is only a purchase of the contracts? The UAE wont be involved in the day to day operations at our ports

Then why is Eller & Company opposed? They are the stevedor company in partnership with Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. and are based in Miami.

Firm sues to block foreign port takeover

Dubai firm set to take charge of 6 U.S. ports

The committee earlier agreed to consider concerns about the deal as expressed by a Miami-based company, Eller & Co., according to Eller's lawyer, Michael Kreitzer. Eller is a business partner with the British shipping giant but was not in the running to buy the ports company.

[MineralMan]

Uffda! This is just plain wrong. I think it's time to start following the money on this deal. I'm a little afraid to find out where it leads, though.

I am opposed to this entire deal.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

While I am no fan of the buyer of this 'port' business, seems that port security is already run by foreigners. I do not recall Congress whelping about security before now.

You see no difference between a British-owned company running the ports and one owned by Arabs in UAE/Dubai?

I wonder why no US-based firm stepped up? We know a little about logistics.

Port of Los Angeles