US Democrats plan bill to block Dubai-US port deal

[UpInArms]

http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2006-02-17T153506Z_01_N17197464_RTRIDST_0_SECURITY-CONGRESS-PORTS.XML

WASHINGTON, Feb 17 (Reuters) - Two U.S. Democratic senators said on Friday they would introduce legislation aimed at blocking Dubai Ports World from buying a company that operates several U.S. shipping ports because of security concerns.

Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Hillary Clinton of New York said they would offer a measure to ban companies owned or controlled by foreign governments from acquiring U.S. port operations.

"We wouldn't turn the border patrol or the customs service over to a foreign government, and we can't afford to turn our ports over to one either," Menendez said in a statement.

P&O (PO.L: Quote, Profile, Research), the company Dubai Ports World plans to buy for $6.8 billion, is already foreign-owned but the concern is that the purchaser is backed by the United Arab Emirates government.

The UAE company would gain control over the management of major U.S. ports in New York and New Jersey, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New Orleans and Miami, sparking national security concerns.

...more...

It's about damn time!

[skooooo]

1. i think they can win this battle....

[rodeodance]

12. God, I hope so.

[jsamuel]

2. Democrats are stong on National Security!

:patriot:

[Xenotime]

18. Repugs could care less about the security of the country...

they are more worried about the security of Iraq.

[wordpix]

31. good ad for Dems: Repukes approve UAE connected with Taliban to purchase

ports

[babylonsister]

3. Where have all the other Dems gone; we're waiting... nt

[wordpix]

32. We will probably have to campaign again to ask them to do their jobs

[no_hypocrisy]

4. This issue should be 100% bipartison. Port security is paramount to

our alleged "war against terror". This sale is the fox guarding the henhouse. If there were ANY time for republicans in the House and Senate to be independent of the White House, this is it.

[Quakerfriend]

5. Thank you Dem Senators!

We need to make more of a stink about this.

No good American would see this as a wise thing for our gov't to do!

[Mitt Chovick]

33. Thank you Schumer and Clinton

for standing up for national security.

[Rose Siding]

6. Good news. This is a perfect issue for them to take up

:thumbsup:

[formerrepuke]

7. This bothers me far more than the Quail-hunt incident.. I hope they

(Dems) push hard on this. Homeland Security Department, my ass.

[Atman]

8. DAMN! Now the republicans are guaranteed to pull some shit to make it pass

No point in having unchecked corrpution if you're not going to profit from it, right GOP boys?

[nickinSTL]

9. Let them. If the Dems would actually work against it...

and do it LOUDLY...I think this is an issue LOTS of people will oppose the Bush Admin on. The freepers are already upset about it...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

10. We need to talk this up

My husband works on a construction crew whose boss is an apologist for the Bush Administration. His belief in Bushco was shaken by the way in which Cheney hunted quail (the fellow is an avid hunter and trapper, and you DON'T hunt out of a car). Knowing this little tidbit about the ports ought to shake him up some more.

[rodeodance]

14. you bet.

[antonialee839]

36. I did just that yesterday morning. It was the change of shifts

and my rabid, Faux News watching, foaming at the mouth, coworkers were finding
out for the first time that the Bush Crime Family is trying selling our ports to terrorists.
They were none too happy. Usually they will try to find some way to defend these killers, but
today was a different story. One of them just mumbled something nonsensical along the lines of "that's the government for you", trying to lump the whole government in with Bush Inc. It was half-hearted and pretty pathetic. Nobody else backed him up either. So there is some hope.

[rosesaylavee]

11. The RePugs are amazing.

I have never seen anything like their gall - anywhere at anytime. I am continually amazed at how more amazing their decisions can be.

:wow:

Good for the DEMS. This is something they can stand 100% behind. I hope.

[rodeodance]

13. Don't they need a Repug on this to even have it brought up?

.....The UAE company would gain control over the management of major U.S. ports in New York and New Jersey, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New Orleans and Miami, sparking national security concerns.

"I will be working with Senator Menendez to introduce legislation that will prohibit the sale of ports to foreign governments," Clinton said in a statement.

Officials with the United Arab Emirates Embassy in Washington could not be immediately reached for comment.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a U.S. inter-agency panel that reviews security implications of foreign takeovers of strategic assets, has already reviewed the transaction and did not object.

[rodeodance]

15. "Despite Fears, a Dubai Company Will Help Run Ports in New York"

This was posted in GD but it related to this issue.


Despite Fears, a Dubai Company Will Help Run Ports in New York

By PATRICK McGEEHAN
Published: February 17, 2006

The Bush administration dismissed the security concerns of local officials yesterday and restated its approval of a deal that will give a company based in Dubai a major role in operating ports in and around New York City.

Dubai Wins Bidding Battle for P.& O. (February 11, 2006) Representatives of the White House and the Treasury Department said they had given their approval for Dubai Ports World to do business in the United States after a rigorous review. The decision, they said, was final.

Dubai Ports World is buying the British company that currently operates the cruise-ship terminal on the West Side of Manhattan, one of the biggest cargo terminals in New York Harbor, and terminals in Philadelphia, Baltimore and other big ports.

..................

"In the post-9/11 world, there should have been a presumption against this company," said Mr. King, a Republican. He added that people in the intelligence community had told him they had concerns about how the company operated the port of Dubai, one of the United Arab Emirates

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/17/nyregion/17ports.html

[54anickel]

39. Another * appointment involved. Seems the guy at least has a

knowledgeable background, it's that tie to DPW that's got to raise a few eyebrows. Was his appointment meant to somehow "reassure" those who question this buyout now?

snip>

In mid-January, President Bush nominated a senior executive of Dubai Ports World, David Sanborn, to run the Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration. Mr. Sanborn had been running the company's operations in Europe and Latin America.

[LiberalEsto]

16. Repugs: Threat to Domestic Security

The one issue B*sh and his nazi-thugs have always polled better on is protecting the US from terrorism.

Democrats need to stress this and make it a huge issue to show how little the rethugs actually care aboue protecting our nation.

[MrPrax]

17. Probably illegal...

under WTO and other foreign agreements to restrict ownership.

But then again, Democrats are protectionists

[Vidar]

19. Good luck to them

[High Plains]

20. This just looks like nativist xenophobia to me.

As one poster above noted approvingly, the freepers are up in arms about this. That should be setting off loud warning bells here.

While we could, I suppose, make an argument that only US companies should have these concessions, that's not the way it is now. A British company currently has the gig, and the Dubai company is buying the British company. Does anyone have any reason to be concerned about the Dubai company? I mean a concrete reason--not "they're from the Middle East."

Menendez and Clinton are pandering to fears of the Middle East bogeyman, trying to look "tough" by crying "Arabs, Arabs!" This is pretty sleazy, fear-driven politics.

[cornermouse]

23. Do you really, sincerely, honestly believe what you posted?

At this point in time, no one but Americans should be in charge of our ports, airports, or other method of legal entry.

[High Plains]

26. Yes, I believe what I posted.

Port security has been in the hands of foreign companies for some time. We haven't blown up.

DP is a business. They're in it for the money. If we want to restrict bidding to US companies, I guess I don't really care too much. But's that's not the status quo.

[54anickel]

24. But, as the Repugs like to remind us daily, 9-11 changed everything.

At least they can't throw that "Democrats have a pre-911 mentality".

Anyone know how long the British company had "the gig" and how they originally got it? To be honest, I didn't know our ports were run by a foreign company until this came up. Guess I've been a slacker.

[muriel_volestrangler]

28. P & O started running US port facilities in 1999

# USA Acquired ITO – multiport stevedore/terminal operator, June 1999.
...
# New Orleans, USA Acquired Gulf Services, also in May 2000.
...
# New York, USA November 2000, entered into joint venture (PNCT) with P&O Nedlloyd in Port of New York and New Jersey with terminal capacity of 1M TEUs.
...
# Baltimore, USA Awarded 6 year contract to manage two facilities in May 2001.

http://portal.pohub.com/portal/page?_pageid=36,1,36_31151:36_32105&_dad=pogprtl&_schema=POGPRTL

P & O and its partner bought the Port Newark Container Terminal from Maersk (a Danish company) and Universal Maritime Service Corp.

[Bacchus39]

27. yeah, you nailed it

the headline is deceiving that Dubai is going to run the port. not true, just a company from there. I fail to see the problem. we should be taking adequate precautions everywhere.

[fujiyama]

30. While I personally

would rather not have either country control the ports, it IS worth keeping in mind that several of the 9/11 hijackers were from the UAE, and the UAE did recognize the Taliban as the government of Afghanistan while in power.

The UAE isn't quite Saudi Arabia, but it's record on fighting terrorism isn't all that impressive. There are many wealthy shaiks from that country also giving money to terrorists.

I'd say there is a rightful cause for concern here.

[seafan]

21. More nuggets: No background checks, no outside source information!

Representatives of the White House and the Treasury Department said they had given their approval for Dubai Ports World to do business in the United States after a rigorous review. The decision, they said, was final.

In mid-January, President Bush nominated a senior executive of Dubai Ports World, David Sanborn, to run the Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration. Mr. Sanborn had been running the company's operations in Europe and Latin America.

Anthony R. Coscia, the chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, also wrote to Mr. Snow, seeking information about the security review that was conducted. Mr. Coscia said in an interview that he sent the letter after a few attempts to get answers drew no response.

"Clearly, we would expect that information relative to a facility that we operate would be shared with us," Mr. Coscia said. "It is not our role to review and approve this transfer," he said, but added that "given the fact that this is our port and these are employees for whom we feel responsibility, there are issues we would like to become comfortable with."

The Dubai purchase was approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, of which Mr. Snow is chairman and which does not usually disclose information about its deliberations, said Brookly McLaughlin, a spokeswoman for the Treasury Department. Ms. McLaughlin declined to say when the committee began or ended its review of the deal or what national-security implications it considered.

"We as a general rule do not comment at all on any specific transactions," Ms. McLaughlin said. She added that the review could not be reopened unless the company provided false information or omitted important facts.

Stewart Baker, assistant secretary for policy at the Department of Homeland Security, said his department had no information about Dubai Ports World that justified an objection to the deal. Indeed, he said, the company has cooperated with the department in its efforts to secure American ports and ships in foreign ports.

"We did not find derogatory information in our review," he said.

But that review, Mr. Baker said, did not involve gathering information from outside sources, like the Port Authority, because the committee must keep a proposed transaction secret. He said the committee's investigation began in November and ended in mid-January.

The investigation did not include background checks on the senior managers of the company or an evaluation of how the company screens its own employees, Mr. King said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/17/nyregion/17ports.html

[wordpix2]

41. secretive deal, no background checks of managers or employees? WTF?

This committee has committed TREASON.

[Up2Late]

22. Great, let the ReThugs go on the record of opposing or supporting...

...this stupid port deal.

[sarcasmo]

25. Maybe this is a story our Dem lites can use to grow a backbone.

Kick and Nom

[fujiyama]

29. Good for them

This is beyond stupid.

Selling strategic assets to foreign countries is mind boggling. I'm convinced that Bush is the Manchurian candidate, well except for that war hero part.

[NVMojo]

34. good

[Nothing Without Hope]

35. ***More threads on this issue, with TWO on the Dem senators-LINKS

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2454971
thread title (2-12-06 GD-P): 911 Bankers to Run SIX Major U.S. Ports—Dubai(UAE). IMPEACH NOW!!!
Comment/excerpt: “Six ports will be run and protected by a Dubai based port management company (DP World): New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia. The deal was approved by a “U.S. government panel coordinated out of the White House. Just prior to the deal, David C. Sanborn of Virginia was appointed as administrator of the Maritime Administration of the Transportation Department. Sanborn worked as DP World's director of operations for Europe and Latin America.…. A company in the United Arab Emirates is poised to take over significant operations at six American ports as part of a corporate sale, leaving a country with ties to the Sept. 11 hijackers with influence over a maritime industry considered vulnerable to terrorism.“

Even the freepers are upset about this outrage:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x446111
thread title (2-16-06 GD): Freepers JUST AS MAD About the Port Control Issue... Common Ground?
Comment/excerpt: Free Republic posts expressing concern/outrage over Dubai operating 6 major US ports.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x446003
thread title (2-16-06 GD): OK!!! I think the Pres. just cut his own throat!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2113537
thread title (2-16-06 LBN): White House Defends Port Operations Sale
Comment/excerpt: Yahoo News/AP. “The Bush administration on Thursday rebuffed criticism about potential security risks of a $6.8 billion sale that gives a company in the United Arab Emirates control over significant operations at six major American ports. Lawmakers asked the White House to reconsider the deal. The sale to state-owned Dubai Ports World was ‘rigorously reviewed’ by a U.S. committee that considers security threats when foreign companies seek to buy or invest in American industry, National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones said….”

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x453502
thread title (2-17-06 GD): Freeper and neocon websites unable to put a spin on the UAE port takeover
Comment/excerpt: COMPILATION post with many links and good explanation, for example of the role played by GOLD in the money trail to al Qaeda. Also that the United Arab Emirates were one of the TRHEE COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD THAT RECOGNIZED THE TALIBAN AS THE LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT OF AFGHANISTAN. Muh more on the obvious security disaster this deal would be and why.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x452192
thread title (2-17-06 GD): Excellent! "Democrats plan bill to block Dubai-US port deal"
Comment/excerpt: Reuters: “Two U.S. Democratic senators said on Friday they would introduce legislation aimed at blocking Dubai Ports World from buying a company that operates several U.S. shipping ports because of security concerns. Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Hillary Clinton of New York said they would offer a measure to ban companies owned or controlled by foreign governments from acquiring U.S. port operations.” Hillary is calculating that the GOPs and Dems will like this position and it will boost her presidential chances, but I wouldn’t care WHO was calling for sanity in this.

[ourbluenation]

37. Have you seen who's on the committee that approved this? Holy Shit!

The committee is comprised of the following ...

Assistant to the president for Economic Policy: Allan Hubbard (Bush's college buddy)

Secreatry State: Condi

Secretary Defense: Rumsfeld

Homeland Security: Chertoff

Secretary Commerce: Carlos Gutierrez, Appointed 2/7/05 by Bush

Attorney General: Alberto Gonzales appointed 2/3/05 by Bush

Director of Office of Management & Budget: Joshua Bolton (Director Bush/Cheney presidential campaign)

US Trade Rep/WTO Rep: Robert Jones (Republican/Ohio), app 4/23/05

Director of Science & Technology: John Marburger, appted 10/01/Bush

National Security advisor, Stephen Hadley, appointed 2005 Bush

Chairman of Council of Economic Advisors: Katherine Baicker & Mattehw Slaughter/appointed by Bush.

[wordpix2]

40. On the Treasury Dept. website, Sec. John Snow is listed as comm. chair

[niallmac]

38. Politically this is poison for the repugs and they need

to re think. The world is so interdependent it's hard to draw a line between 'them' and 'us' anymore.
I am just saying I wouldn't spend too much time trying to explain the lack of logic contained in this issue. Facts are perceptions and perceptions only. The perception
in this country is that Bush is two faced about his waronterrer and honors his oil buddies more than war dead or national security.

[ourbluenation]

42. many conservative boards are being lit up over this. they're pissed. eom

[NashVegas]

43. I'd Like to Know How Shipping Industry Leaders Feel About This

Before getting too excited.

Shipping is one of the most powerful industries in the world, perhaps more powerful than energy, even.

The earth revolves (not literally, but most of our daily lives) because the shipping industry brings the goods to market. If shipping industry leaders are okay with this, I wouldn't be so bothered.

It's possible this company could do a great job. I just don't like the idea of any non-Americans controlling our ports.