Bush says Dubai ports deal not a security threat

[OKNancy]

Note: due to the unclear subject line and to avoid duplicates, I am posting this and combining the older thread. Thanks

Bush says Dubai ports deal not a security threat
http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=1098765§ion=finance&src=rss/uk/businessNews


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - US President George W. Bush insisted on Thursday that a deal to allow a Dubai company to manage six U.S. ports would not pose a security risk, despite an outcry of concern among both Republicans and Democrats.

Longer story here:
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/26-02232006-617203.html

President Bush on Thursday sought to calm an uproar over an Arab company taking over operations at six major American ports, saying "people don't need to worry about security."

Under a secretive agreement with the administration, a company in the United Arab Emirates promised to cooperate with U.S. investigations as a condition of its takeover of operations at six major American ports, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

The U.S. government chose not to impose other, routine restrictions.

"The more people learn about the transaction," Bush said, "the more they'll be comforted that the ports will be secure." He spoke to reporters at the end of a Cabinet meeting.

[JesterCS]

1. CNN News Alert, UAE Ports Deal

Referring to debate over foreign operations of U.S. ports, President Bush says "people don't need to worry about security."


on main page. nothing else yet

[Halliburton]

2. BREAKING

THIS IS HUGE

[JesterCS]

3. =p

wouldnt HUGH be more freeper-like? :P

[fasttense]

4. Thanks for posting JesterCS

We don't need to worry about security because bush is taking care of that for us. Just like he stopped 9/11 and helped all those Katrina victims.:sarcasm:

[Canuckistanian]

5. Oh, yeah

This well go over well. Way to throw gasoline on THAT fire.

[JesterCS]

7. The best part is

my parents are both repubs.. this morning my mom said something that surprised me

" this port thing is bullsh!t. They need to remove Bush from office. I think we just need to pull all our troops home and worry about our own damn country "

Needless to say. i was shoked lol. Both my parents voted for Bush both in 2000 and 2004

[wordpix]

11. good news, Jester, I am seeing lots of Repigs jumping ship over this, too

[JesterCS]

13. re:

Yeah, i've been quietly converting them. muahahaha. Actually I just link em to threads here and misc news sites. And I let them see how much they dont know.

[Canuckistanian]

23. When they lose your mom, they've lost everything

Not your mom specifically, but all the moms and dads who see this as a simple, uncomplicated problem.

Shrub is giving away the store, compromising national security and (finally) looking like the fool we all know he is.

And here's the important point:

IT'S ON THE NEWS!

[JesterCS]

24. im surprised

the news is actually covering it in such detail. Something like this would usually be kept as a 10 sec clip and tossed aside for olympic medal scores.

[Canuckistanian]

25. It's a classic media pile-on

They had to get out their playbooks from the Clinton/Gore/Kerry days.

When the first smear starts, it's over.

[cal04]

6. Bush says Dubai ports deal not a security threat

President George W. Bush insisted on Thursday that a deal to allow a Dubai company to manage six U.S. ports would not pose a security risk, despite an outcry of concern among both Republicans and Democrats.

"This wouldn't be going forward if we were not certain that our ports would be secure," Bush told reporters during a Cabinet meeting.

http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=1098765§ion=finance&src=rss/uk/businessNews

Bush said he was struck by the fact that people were not concerned about port security when a British company was running the port operation, but they felt differently about an Arab company at the helm. He said the United Arab Emirates was a valuable partner in the war in terror and cautioned against sending "mixed messages" as the U.S. works with countries in fighting terrorism. He said his administration would continue talks with members of Congress — Republicans and Democrats alike — who have rebelled against the takeover. He said the briefings were "bringing a sense of calm to this issue." "This wouldn't be going forwad if we weren't certain our ports would be secure," the president said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060223/ap_on_go_pr_wh/ports_security_65

[sabra]

9. BushCo has about zero credibility, and the "trust us" line doesn't

fly what so ever.

[cal04]

16. it's the brain dead sheep we have to hope wake up

it amazes me how they remind us of 911 every other sentence and then expect everyone to jump for joy about this

[JesterCS]

17. re:

my thoughts exactly. Ive always been one for federalizing stuff like that. Keep it in American hands.. otherwise you are asking for trouble

[rodeodance]

40. oh come on...Be a sport---you can trust us.

te he.

[dchill]

42. "Trust us" has worked so well before...

wonder why it's not flying now. Maybe it's just the proverbial straw. I have always seen, in my mind, these neocon bastards sitting around laughing about the crap that they can shove down the throats of the average Republican (Joe Six-Pack) - like "No, not just one, but we'll have THREE skyscrapers collapse into their own footprints, and they'll still miss it. Yuk-yuk-yuk." And "We'll get them to believe that exit polls are never used to predict election outcomes, they're not accurate. The press will back us up."

It's like a football team that tries the same sneak play three times in one game. It works once, maybe twice, but that third time the opposition has caught on. I guess maybe their "Be Very Afraid" meme is coming around to bite them in the ass. Even the dumb ones and the crooked ones don't like this Dubai deal.

[SillyGoose]

15. Last time I checked the UK royal family didn't hang out with Osama

like the UAE royals did. Bush can go pound salt on this one.

[Occulus]

37. What the idiots crying about "bigotry" don't get is-

WE DIDN'T KNOW before now that the British were controlling the security of the ports. That pisses me off JUST AS MUCH.

Good GOD, though, to hear some people talking about this, you'd think we're all just a bunch o' bigots.

Sure.

Whatever.

[sarcasmo]

52. It was a British company not the British Government themselves.

This is a UAE company owned by the country of the UAE a big, big difference.

[daleo]

50. There are differences between Britain and UAE

I haven't heard of the British royal family visiting Bin Laden. I haven't heard of Bin Laden being treated in a London hospital. The chances of the British government being overthrown by a coup are remote.

On the other hand, M16 expertise would be pretty handy in a false flag operation on a U.S. port.

If this really is a war, then it seems obvious that U.S. ports should be overseen by the U.S. government. Otherwise, it is clear that it is only a war when that interpretation is convenient - e.g. taking away civil rights.

[BlueStateBlue]

71. The * quote has been altered. I heard him with my own ears say

"If we were concerned about the security of the ports, this deal would not be going forward." I yelled "EXACTLY!!" at my tv. They scrubbed it.

[wordpix]

8. another Bubbleboy statement showing how out of it he really is

[twaddler01]

10. He's not getting off so easy on this

Nice! :rofl:

[Mithras61]

12. I have read (yesterday) that UAE has accepted some...

less than onerous requirements (like "stop blocking our investigations") and restrictions (like not associating with terrorists and no longer sending them or their known affiliates money) on this operation for the deal to go through, but that the deal doesn't include some pretty standard provisions (like storing documents related to the operations in the U.S.A. and having a US citizen be responsible for several functions relating to the port operations, etc.) that are required in all other cases. The more I read about this deal, the less I like it and the more it stinks of cronyism and corruption.

[JesterCS]

14. I dont like the fact

that the UAE company will have foreknowledge of military shipments going through any of those 6 ports. I mean.. talk about highly suspicious.

[Mithras61]

18. That combined with the fact that the Pentagon...

knew NOTHING about this deal before it was approved and that the required 45-day review period didn't happen, and the hiring practices review was not conducted, and that (depending on which story you believe) the WH didn't know about it beforehand or that there was a secret WH/UAE deal, or...


In fact, the whole thing stinks like last week's fish dinner...

[CJCRANE]

19. ...cos if an attack's gonna happen, he'll know about it...

and let it happen.

[jayfish]

20. Wheew! Thank Deity For That.

The War On Terra must be over then, huh? I can stop worrying about the gub listening to my phone conversations. I can get on a plane without strangers strip-searching me, groping my wife and sniffing my shoes. I can shop at Wal-Mart secure in the fact that all that crap that was on shipping containers last week is certified terra-free by Bob Dole and Dubai Ports World.



Jay

[slor]

21. He does not see himself as a security threat either...

but he is.

[TacticalPeek]

22. I feel so sorry for all the NSA snoops that will be laid off now.

:cry:

:sarcasm:

[sattahipdeep]

26. Michael Ledeen and Frank Gaffney have also denounced the deal.

Among the GOP officeholders joining King and Myrick at the port deal barricades
are Bill Frist, Dennis Hastert, George Pataki, Michael Bloomberg, Susan
Collins, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and Tom Reynolds, chairman of the National
Republican Campaign Committee -- who clearly knows a losing issue when he sees
one. Conservative commentators John Kasich, Cal Thomas, Hugh Hewitt, and
conservative national security analysts Michael Ledeen and Frank Gaffney have
also denounced the deal.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20060222/cm_huffpost/016187;_ylt=A86.I2ROX_1DimABvxf9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--

[Tamarin]

27. How can he be certain?

He just found out about it.

[Canuckistanian]

28. Now tell me again this is all a Rovian project

This is going horribly wrong for him, tremendously well for the country.

[sattahipdeep]

34. Cheney does not care how he is viewed by the public

A Department of Homeland Security staffer said mid-level officials who assess
proposed deals generally do not want to waste the president's time by asking him to
review corporate transactions, said a participant in the meetings.

"This didn't rise to the presidential level," McClellan said.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/02/23/MNG7UHDAU01.DTL

Why were there no witnesses from the private hunting
party of 10 and Cheney's considerable Secret Service detail?
And why did Cheney believe that he could keep his boss and
the president out of the loop? Was the president unaware of
other activities?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1713305,00.html

:hi:

[Canuckistanian]

38. Ha ha, yes you've got a point

The store-front mannequin can't be expected to deal with these matters.

Just send him out on another speaking tour.

[kayice]

70. Wasn't 'Poppy Bush' once considered 'out of the loop'? well.....

looks like the apple doesn't fall far from the tree with Junior.

[sinkingfeeling]

29. Hallelujah! The 'War on Terror' is over! No need to renew the Patriot

Act and Bush can stop his ease dropping on American citizens!!

[tabasco]

30. PDB: "Bin Laden Determined To Strike Inside US"

Based on his track record, jackass Bush doesn't know a goddamn thing about security.

[Dover]

31. Bush is telling the truth. As Michael Moore points out...

9/11 was NOT an outside job, and therefore THEY knew that our borders were safe. That's why Michael Moore and others found little evidence of any real security concern or action. Homeland Security is just a clearing house for those security contractors friendly with the Bushies to line up for a check.
Create a crisis (real or artificial) and collect your check.

[twaddler01]

45. So now are we CREATING a threat so we can

raise the threat legitimately? I'd hate to think we'd do such a thing so low, and I don't quite frankly believe that we would. It either must be that or the Bushies are doing it for money as some of us have seen links between UAE and the Bush family...

[Dover]

49. They create artificial crisis all the time. Remember the millions of

dollars that changed hands on the stock exchange (put options, airline stock and others that would be affected) just prior to the 9/11 attack? That should have beenthe first clue that they are creating crisis for profit. The 9/11 Commission concluded that a single U.S.-based institutional investor was responsible.

In the month prior to the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, unusual trading activity involving American and United Airlines stock was noted by market analysts who at the time had no idea what to make of it. Wildly unusual discrepancies in the put and call ratio — 25 to 100 times normal — were reportedly observed in stock options of the two airlines. In one case, Bloomberg's Trade Book electronic trading system identified option volume in UAL (parent of United Airlines) on 16 August 2001 that was 36 times higher than usual.

(Options are wagers that the price of a 100-share block of a particular stock will rise or fall by a certain date. "Puts" are "shorts" — bets the stock price will fall. "Calls" are bets the price will rise. Thus, one who has reason to believe a particular company is about to suffer a terrible reversal of fortune would purchase "puts" against that entity's stock.)

But it was during the final few trading days (the market closes on weekends) that the most unusual variances in activity occurred. Bloomberg data showed that on 6 September 2001, the Thursday before that black Tuesday, put-option volume in UAL stock was nearly 100 times higher than normal: 2,000 options versus 27 on the previous day.

On 6 and 7 September 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange handled 4,744 put options for United Airlines' stock, translating into 474,000 shares, compared with just 396 call options, or 39,600 shares. On a day that the put-to-call ratio would normally have been expected to be roughly 1:1 (no negative news stories about United had broken), it was instead 12:1.

On 10 September 2001, another uneventful news day, American Airlines' option volume was 4,516 puts and 748 calls, a ratio of 6:1 on yet another day when by rights these options should have been trading even. No other airline stocks were affected; only United and American were shorted in this fashion.

Accelerated investments speculating a downturn in the value of Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch (two New York investment firms severely damaged by the World Trade Center attack) were also observed.

[twaddler01]

51. If it is artificial it isn't so bad,

but what if they created a "real" threat purposely for the *ies sake? If this is so, I have no doubts the WTC towers were purposely allowed to happen for the administration's benefit....If that is true, we are living in VERY sad days....

[BlueEyedSon]

32. Bush says sky is green and up is down.

[BlueInPhilly]

33. Time for Morning Freep Quote

I'm absolutely repulsed that Fox News and the GOP congressman have acted so incredibly stupid and naive when talking about this transfer. (as well as people on this forum who just don't have all the facts about the deal).

Very low point for GOP. Thank god we have GWB.

5 posted on 02/23/2006 7:27:49 AM PST by Stoooopendous

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1584099/posts

Just in case you haven't spit on your coffee yet.

:silly:

[Megahurtz]

73. ...

:spray::wtf::banghead:

[antonialee839]

35. Dumb ass, you've never been right about anything since you

stole your way into office.

[dchill]

36. I guess he wants us to just...

take his word for it. We've got NSA spying on us, FBI watching what books we read and buy, people locked up without due process, and on and on...

But outsourcing port security to a nation that helped finance 9-11? Not to worry, it's not a threat. Sounds like what I've thought all along - the real risk to US security is right here at home. More specifically, in Washington, DC. And Texas, of course.

[rodeodance]

39. nyt Treasury-led committee cleared Dubai ports deal

posted in LBN.

Thu Feb-23-06 09:47 AM
Original message
Treasury-led committee cleared Dubai ports deal


http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/23/news/ports.php

Treasury-led committee cleared Dubai ports deal
By Elisabeth Bumiller and Carl Hulse The New York Times

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2006


WASHINGTON The Bush administration decided last month that a deal to hand over operations at major American ports to a government-owned company in Dubai did not involve national security and so did not require a more lengthy review, according to administration officials.

The decision was made by an interagency committee led by Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert Kimmitt. The group included officials from 12 departments and agencies, including the departments of Defense, Justice, State and Homeland Security, as well as the National Security Council and the National Economic Council.

In a telephone interview Wednesday, Kimmitt said the company, Dubai Ports World, had been thoroughly investigated by the administration, including by intelligence agencies, and that on Jan. 17 the committee members unanimously approved the transfer.

...

In September, the Government Accountability Office, an investigative arm of Congress, said the Treasury Department, as head of the interagency review committee, had used an overly narrow definition of national security threats because it wanted to encourage foreign investment.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

41. "Now watch this drive"...

No thanks, Junior. If you're in charge, I'll keep worrying.

:grr:

[BlueInPhilly]

46. Why do I even bother?

Freepers now in FULL SUPPORT of this dumbass.

I've tried not to go to that site, as their ignorance and hatred really upset me.

[T_Matamoro]

43. They Changed the Story! Yahoo had a more controversial one two hours ago.

Huh,this is weird. At 6:01 AM I posted in the General discussion -politics forum the original yahoo article off the AP wire. It's headline was "Arab company, white house had secret deal" and now a few hours later my link goes to a new article that is watered down! I could'nt paste all the original article as per DU rules but it explained much better that bush had this secret deal BEFORE the Port news scandal broke!! So when he denied he knew anything about the deal until after the news story broke he is FLAT OUT LYING! WHAT A BIG FAT LIAR! oh what a tangled web we weave.........

[sattahipdeep]

44. No input from Cheney? n/t

[wordpix]

47. "WH Tone Deaf or Brain Dead?" by Joseph Farah, Arab American

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White House: Tone deaf or brain dead?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 22, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com


I heard Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., describe Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff's defense of turning over managing U.S. port operations to an Arab company as "tone deafness."

That would seem to be a charitable description.

I don't know what's crazier and more politically inept – the original decision to contract the management of six major U.S. ports in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Miami and New Orleans or the White House's continued defense of the idea in the face of overwhelming criticism.

You tell me: Is Bush tone deaf or brain dead?

"We have a very disciplined process, it's a classified process, for reviewing any acquisition by a foreign company of assets that we consider relevant to national security," explained Chertoff.

Disciplined?

Classified?

Does that make you feel any better about this "process?"

Someone needs to tell the Bush administration it's not the process that bothers clear-thinking Americans – it's the decision.

You don't need discipline to determine it's not such a good idea to turn over port security to Dubai Ports World. It's so self-evident even Democrats can see it.


It's insanity. It's political correctness gone mad. Only a suicidal nation, or one that has lost touch with reality, would take such an irresponsible step.

Need I remind the Bush administration of what it already knows? That our port security even now is less than stellar. If terrorists are determined to bring nuclear weapons into this country, and if they don't already have enough of them here to destroy American cities, entry through ports are the most likely means of entry.

Of course, they could also drive them across the unguarded border, more proof – four-and-half years after Sept. 11, 2001 – that the Bush administration is irresponsible, suicidal, insane or incompetent. Politically tone deaf doesn't begin to explain such lapses in judgment.

But you remember, of course, the Bush administration's rationale for keeping the border open? It's because we have too much work in this country that Americans just won't do. We need the cheap labor. Americans won't harvest crops. Americans won't build homes. Americans won't mow lawns. Americans won't flip hamburgers.

I guess Americans also won't run ports.

That would be the only explanation I have for why we would turn over the most sensitive security measures to a company from the United Arab Emirates.

Stunning. I'm practically speechless. Words fail this writer.

"It's unbelievably tone deaf politically at this point in our history," said Graham. "Most Americans are scratching their heads, wondering why this company from this region now."

Yes, Americans are scratching their heads. They're also wondering if the Republicans are still the party of national security. Historically, this has been one reason Americans had for choosing Tweedle Dum from Tweedle Dumber. But this decision has got to give Americans pause to consider if that is still the case.


When Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., can see this national security issue with clarity and a Republican administration cannot, it's time to question whether it really makes a difference. It's time to wonder if America's political leadership can really protect this country. It's time to wonder whether the federal government has abdicated all responsibility of its constitutionally mandated role of defending the homeland.

Bush has no cover on this.

Even those who would, under other circumstances, say it is "ethnic profiling" to disallow an Arab company from guarding and administering our ports are ready to ride the wave of popular opinion on this one.

And this American of Arabic ancestry is joining them.

It's quite simple.

Would we turn over border patrol operations to an Arab company to supervise?

Would we turn over airline security to an Arab country to supervise?

Then why on earth would we even consider turning over port security to an Arab country?




Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate. His latest book is "Taking America Back." He also edits the weekly online intelligence newsletter Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, in which he utilizes his sources developed over 30 years in the news business.

[Mr. Mojo Risin]

48. 2004 UAE Zogby International Poll

How they view America. 14 Favorable / 73 Unfavorable

Simply put, they don't like us. And that was 2004. Imagine what it is today.

Nothing to worry about. Sure. Let us all put our blind faith in George Bush.





http://www.aaiusa.org/PDF/Impressions_of_America04.pdf#search='UAE%20Attitudes%20toward%20america'

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

53. Bush calls the U.S. government "my government"

It might be a slip of the tongue in that he might have meant to say "my administration", but it also might be a significant revelation about how he feels about the Presidency. ('The government is mine, Mine, MINE and what we do behind closed doors is no one's business but mine, so trust me') Never in my 56 years have I ever heard a U.S. President call it "my government", instead of "my administration". The President is a caretaker and administrator of the government on behalf of the people. He doesn't own it -- at least, not yet.


From the second article:

"The more people learn about the transaction that has been scrutinized and approved by my government," Bush said, "the more they'll be comforted that our ports will be secure." He spoke to reporters at the end of a Cabinet meeting.

[wordpix]

54. "my cabal," is more like it

[CoffeeCat]

55. Bush: "No need to worry about port security " (CNN)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/23/port.security/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Thursday defended his administration's decision to allow a company from an Arab country to operate six major U.S. ports, saying, "People don't need to worry about security."

"This deal wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security for the United States of America," Bush told reporters during a Cabinet meeting. He emphasized that "port security will be run by U.S. customs and the U.S. Coast Guard."

Dubai Ports World is set to finalize a $6.8 billion purchase next month of the British firm Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., which manages the U.S. ports, including those in New York and Miami, Florida. (See where the ports are)

The administration's blessing of its purchase by the United Arab Emirates firm has triggered an avalanche of criticism on Capitol Hill.

(more)

[onehandle]

56. Big checks coming in 2009 for the Bush Junta. nt

[seafan]

57. "An' don't you people fer-git it."

[The Wielding Truth]

58. New world order// United Saude Affiliates. So long America.

[wicket]

59. Ummmmmmm.......

"This deal wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security for the United States of America,"

So he finally admits he's not concerned about the security of the U.S?!

[Don Claybrook]

60. right....the first truth we've heard in a long time from him

What a staggering sentence, even if it was just typical Bush gibberish.

[wicket]

67. He only tells the truth when he makes a slip of the tongue

It's very telling, eh?

[antiblazer]

61. Fear or no fear?

It's ironic that the Bush mantra during his reelection has been about "fear, fear, fear". Now he says we don't have to be afraid!

When his pocketbook goes head-to-head with national security and his Repuke agenda, guess which one wins out???

[KansDem]

62. It's not about "security," it's about rewarding the UAE...

A terrorist-supporting government. They are party to the worst terrorist attacks in our history, and you want to reward them with these contracts?

I can't figure out who is more grey-matter challenged: Bush or his supporters...

[eagler]

69. Bottom line - Why even take the risk?

nt

[Ilsa]

63. Don't worry, we're still spying on YOU! eom

[LizW]

64. Is this the speech where he said "MY government"?

Lynn Samuels was just talking about that. She about exploded over Bush calling the United States "MY government."

[ConcernedCanuk]

65. Bush wasn't worried about security before 911 either

.
.
.

He was busy planning to attack Iraq, waiting for an opportunity to incense the American populace.

911 did just that

NOW Bush is itching to attack Iran, waiting for an incident to incense the populace

Guaranteed it will be "Iranians" blamed for the next attack

And there WILL be another attack with Junior at the helm

Count on it . .

(sigh)

[kurth]

66. Shut up already, goddamned lying traitor!

Is this moron the president of the UAE or the USA?

[UpInArms]

68. Message to the Wack-o Sack-o:

We weren't worried about "planes flying into buildings" on 9/11 - but you did not do your freakin' job then!

Now we are watching and know that you do not have the security of this country first and foremost in your mind - since you said that you "don't think about bin Laden" as a problem ( :wtf: ), this "ownership society" that you have created makes everyone else "worry about the security of our ports".

So STFU and crawl back under your rock!

[Megahurtz]

72. I can just see it now........

Bush et. al. pushes Ports Deal through after cutting a deal with Bin Laden
to orchestrate another attack on U.S. soil...........
then Bush gets to declare his Marshall Law that he so badly wants
and then blames it on Al Queada again and the sheep believe him.

Ya think?:tinfoilhat:

:scared:

[robbedvoter]

74. W: "This is a hard country to defend" Help wanted.