Qaeda Claim: We 'Infiltrated' UAE

[brooklynite]

February 25, 2006 -- WASHINGTON — Al Qaeda warned the government of the United Arab Emirates more than three years ago that it "infiltrated" key government agencies, according to a disturbing document released by the U.S. military.

The warning was contained in a June 2002 message to UAE rulers, in which the terror network demanded the release of an unknown number of "mujahedeen detainees," who it said had been arrested during a government crackdown in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.

The explosive document is certain to become ammunition for critics of the controversial UAE port deal, who fear the Dubai-based firm could be used by terrorists to sneak money and personnel into the United States.

...snip...

"You are well aware that we have infiltrated your security, censorship and monetary agencies, along with other agencies that should not be mentioned," the message said.

http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/64126.htm

[Dunvegan]

1. Well, well. Look who's come to play politics.

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

[Wordie]

35. LOL: "Little is known about the origins or authorship of the message. "

It's an unsubstantiated communication, people!

The NY Post strikes again! :rofl:

(Pass the popcorn...this is becoming really amusing!)

[cantstandbush]

39. Neocons at work digging up all they can to get back at Bush for being

so incompetent as to allow this thing to throw a monkey wrench in their PNAC plans.

[CoffeeCat]

42. I truly have the same thoughts...I believe the neocons are thru with Bush.

After the Harriet Miers and Katrina fiascoes--I think the neocons felt that they had had enough of Junior.

He was a nice little face man--a kindly poodle jumping through the hoops--who helped the PNAC players secure positions of power. However, I think that they're sick of him.

Junior can't speak his mother tongue. He's bankrupt this country and those in his party that want smaller government have been pissed off at his Medicaid plan, as well as his unparalleled deficits.

Remember when Scooter Libby wrote to Judith Miller about the "Aspens are Turning?" He encouraged her to come forward in that letter--and all of a sudden she did. Another DUer (I'm sorry I can't remember the name!) noted that there was a conference of big-dog conservatives in ASPEN that had been held shortly before Scooter wrote that note to Judith. In addition, Robert Novak, who attended the swanky ASPEN conference, wrote a scathing column on Junior--and flat out told him that the people he assumed were his friends--really weren't his friends anymore. Novak said that press reports from the conference were strictly prohibited. However, someone gave Novak the green light to write that column--which was a message to Junior that he is through. As Libby's note to Miller stated..."The Aspens are turning....and they turn together at the roots." Translation...the conservatives in Aspen are turning against Bush and they all turn together, in lockstep, due to their roots and loyalty toward true conservatism. In effect, Scooter was saying that coming forward was safe, because Bush is no longer liked, and she didn't have to protect the administration anymore.

I think they've planned his demise. He claims he didn't know about the ports deal. I bet he didn't either. Now he knows and he must defend it.

[0007]

45. junior is just a front for the neocons, he is doing their wishes

and nothing comes from him without they're approval.

[Frank Cannon]

2. heh heh heh

This keeps getting better and better.

As I'm convinced that they are an arm of the Bush White House, I wouldn't trust al-Qaeda any further than I could throw them. But this is just going to make a few more Freepers' heads explode.

[JuniperLea]

4. I'm convinced that they are an arm of the Bush White House

Pardon me if I get all tinfoil-hatty... but I've often thought that OBL was a myth, as was al Qaeda... a fairy tale created by the Bush Regime...

[megatherium]

17. Yes, he was created by us, when we needed mujahadeen to fight the Soviet

Union for us in Afghanistan, in the 1980s. But he is real now, and now UBL thinks having defeated the USSR it's now our turn. He thinks a little skillful terrorism on top of a guerrilla war can bring down decadent western societies, or at least get them to abandon the middle east.

[Frank Cannon]

22. But don't you find it odd that OBL only turns up when it's...

to Bush's advantage? That's the way it's been for the last five years. We NEVER hear from this guy unless:

1) Some new scandal comes out that causes Bush's numbers to further tank.
2) It's the day before our national election.

And don't you find it odd that the Bush family has been in business with Osama's family for DECADES?

I believe in amazing coincidences when they happen once. When they happen several times, they are no longer coincidences. They are part of a definite pattern.

[megatherium]

28. No coincidence at all: Bush's numbers are always tanking and

scandals are always breaking out, so no matter when UBL or his lieutenants have something to say, it is during a scandal or when Bush's numbers are tanking. (I'm not a believer in MIHOP or LIHOP, but I am a believer in "exploited it on purpose": they took advantage of 9/11 to sell their pre-existing agenda to do Iraq.)

[CJCRANE]

20. IMHO there's more than one al-Qaeda:

there's the real fundamentalists, then there's the double-agents, then there's the branch that does coalition psy-ops.

[Beetwasher]

3. LOL!

Oh brother...

[buddysmellgood]

5. So much for a 45 day review. All we needed was 45 minutes.

[Double T]

6. bushco will always overlook terrorism and security when...........

there is money to be made by his supporters, the rich and powerful. It has become painfully obvious that bushco doesn't give a damn about America and its people, the elite members of the corporate and political culture are his only concern regardless of country of origin.

[femrap]

41. Bingo.....the only God that w prays to is the .....

almighty $$$$$. That's what that entire ilk care about...they don't care about nationalism, religion, ethnicity.....they care about $$$$$ and power.

[sattahipdeep]

7. State Department deputy spokesman

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Where is the little turd

[rucky]

8. But it's not a security problem.

and anybody who says otherwise is a racist.

obligatory - :sarcasm:

[sarcasmo]

14. The sad thing is your sarcasm is the right wing talking point.

The Repuke debating Lou Dobbs last night on Wolfies show used that exact talking point as his defense.

[Inspector77]

9. I am more worried about the infiltration of the U.S. Gov that led to

the rip-off of a trillion dollars of the peoples money.

[xchrom]

10. infiltrated or invited?

[file83]

31. EXACTLY. "infiltrated" like Ali Mohammed did the U.S. Special Forces?

Here is just one article about Ali Mohammed - the guy that worked for both the U.S. Special Forces at Fort Bragg and the al-Qaida at the same time:
http://www.angelfire.com/ny5/libertystrikesback/AliMohammed.html

So, infiltrated or invited? EXACTLY.

[lovuian]

11. This is no surprise... Anybody can infiltrate for a price

no one can buy loyalty...

[goforit]

12. Considering Bush is AlQaeda.......yes this is a given.

Money does talk.

[sattahipdeep]

19. Cunningham lawyers ask for mercy n/t

[Wordie]

38. But the document hasn't been authenticated!!!!

Who knows who really wrote it, or for what purpose!

For all we know, it could have been the neocons, trying to destabilize things. And even if it was ObL, how do we know it was a real threat, and that it wasn't a bluff, meant to create a crisis in confidence between the US and the UAE? It's clear that ObL didn't like the developing relationship between our countries.

But if people do believe this, if anything, it should dispel any ideas that ObL and the royals are buddies. Have you noticed that the misinformation is coming so fast and thick that one spin is starting to contradict another???

[Toots]

13. disturbing document released by the U.S. military.

Does this mean the Military is guilty of Treason. They are pissing on Bush*'s Parade..They must be guilty...

[sattahipdeep]

15. QUESTION: Was the State Department involved in discussions

QUESTION:  Was the State Department involved in discussions over the UAE taking over
management of six ports -- six U.S. ports?

MR. MCCORMACK:  The State Department is part of an interagency process which is led
by the Department of Treasury.  We did participate in it.  This interagency process did a
thorough review of all aspects of this proposed sale.  And the bottom line finding was that
there was no basis on -- no national security basis on which to block the sale going
forward.

http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=February&x=20060217172404xjsnommis0.3468439&t=livefeeds/wf-latest.html

:silly: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[WePurrsevere]

16. How does this doc show "that the UAE really is trying to cooperate...."?

From the OP's NY Post link:

"If it's real, the document shows that the UAE really is trying to cooperate with the U.S. in the war on terrorism, because they were being threatened by al Qaeda," said terrorism expert Lorenzo Vidino.

"But it also reveals that even though they are our friends, al Qaeda seems to have people on the inside in the UAE, just as it has in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Qatar and Kuwait."

So just because the supposedly real letter is supposedly threatening them it means they're "trying to cooperate" and therefore we can trust them? Oh yeah right... sorry but all it means to me is, "al Qaeda seems to have people on the inside in the UAE, just as it has in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Qatar and Kuwait."

Quite frankly my problem with this whole port issue is that I don't feel ANY foreign country should be handling our ports, allies CHANGE, heck Saddam was our "ally" at one time. Sorry but from what I can see there are a few very good reasons to not allow this deal to go through... overall it just plain stinks like 2 week old used cat litter in a multi-cat household and increasingly so as more "info" comes out.

[Paradise]

18. "infiltration!"

that was the one word that came to mind, immediately, when i first heard of all of this.

[Canuckistanian]

21. Nice timing of this document!

The US Military, eh? I see another pogrom coming....

And kudos to the NY Post!

[niallmac]

23. I have this weird mental picture of OBL operating a dock crane.n/t

[Paradise]

32. lol... i just love it... thanks.... :) n/t

[Seen the light]

24. If true and if this gets play in the media, it's over

Bush isn't getting this one through. It's about damn time too!

[Generator]

25. Found two other sources for this

http://counterterror.typepad.com/the_counterterrorism_blog/2006/02/al_qaeda_claime.html

Al Qaeda Claimed Infiltration of Key UAE Agencies in 2002

Lorenzo Vidino, on travel and unable to post, sent me one of the DOD Harmony database documents released by the West Point CTC last week (and publicized for the first time anywhere here). It's a communication in May or June of 2002 from Al Qaeda to "Officials in the United Arab Emirates and especially the two emirates of Abu-Dhabi and Dubai," warning them to cease the detainment of "Mujahideen" for handing over to "suppressive organizations in their country." Al Qaeda warns the officials, "You are well aware that we have infiltrated your security, censorship, and monetary agencies along with other agencies that should not be mentioned." Al Qaeda also pokes at the perceived weaknesses in their intelligence and security operations and at American counterterrorism programs: "Also, we are confident that you are fully aware that your agencies will not get to the same high level of your American Lords. Furthermore, your intelligence will not be cleverer than theirs, and your censorship capabilities are not worth much against what they have reached. In spite of all this Allah has granted us success to get even with them and harm them. However, you are an easier target than them; your homeland is exposed to us." The communication ends with a demand that the UAE release its detainees or face its wrath.

~ It has a PDF link to the document

And Fox news

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185876,00.html

Looks like all right wing sources, but interesting seeing the other side buck the Bush.

[sattahipdeep]

26. Sibel Edmonds knows

Al Qaeda also pokes at the perceived weaknesses in their intelligence
and security operations and at American counterterrorism programs
....
"Sibel Edmonds: Absolutely. And I cannot go
into any details. But even the AIPAC spy
scandal, as far as I'm reading today, is just
touching the surface of it. It's going only to a
certain degree. It doesn't go high enough, in
what it involves and how far it goes, and that's
as far, and the best as far as I can explain."

http://www.justacitizen.com

:hi:

[Octafish]

27. Like the BFEE doesn't know.

The late Robin Cook spelled it out nicely.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/London_attack/former_blair_minister_points_out_alqaeda_cia_ties.htm

[ConcernedCanuk]

29. Some very perceptive comments in Robin Cook's article

.
.
.

Former Blair Minister Points Out Al-Qaeda Cia Ties

London Guardian July 09 2005
By Robin Cook

/snip/

"So long as the struggle against terrorism is conceived as a war that can be won by military means, it is doomed to fail.

The more the west emphasises confrontation, the more it silences moderate voices in the Muslim world who want to speak up for cooperation. Success will only come from isolating the terrorists and denying them support, funds and recruits, which means focusing more on our common ground with the Muslim world than on what divides us."

/snip/

President Bush is given to justifying the invasion of Iraq on the grounds that by fighting terrorism abroad, it protects the west from having to fight terrorists at home.

Whatever else can be said in defence of the war in Iraq today, it cannot be claimed that it has protected us from terrorism on our soil."

Whatever else can be said in defence of the war in Iraq today, it cannot be claimed that it has protected us from terrorism on our soil."

No shit!!

[Octafish]

33. His perception may be why he's the "late" Mr. Robin Cook.

The guy absolutely pegged what the war was about. He also knew what strata of society benefits most from Perpetual War:

Disarmament Diplomacy
Issue No. 80, Autumn 2005
In the News

Worse than Irrelevant:

Replacing Trident is Against both our National Interests and our International Obligations

Robin Cook MP

Down at Aldermaston they are spending hundreds of millions of pounds of your money on a refit of the production line for nuclear warheads. We are assured this does not mean that any decision has been made to replace the Trident nuclear system. Dear me no, the investment is merely intended to keep open our options.

If we want to exercise the option of producing more weapons, we are told we must make up our minds in this parliament. This is not because Trident is in imminent danger of going out of service. The British submarines can keep on diving and surfacing for another two decades. The problem is that it will take that long to order, build and commission another expensive fleet to replace them.

This is an excellent opportunity for Tony Blair to prove that he is a real moderniser. It is a fixed pole of his political pitch that he represents a clean break from old Labour. It was the Wilson government of the 60s that built, launched and named the Polaris fleet. It was Jim Callaghan who first struck the Trident deal with President Carter, eccentrically in a beach hut on Guadeloupe. There could not be a more convincing way for Tony Blair to break from the past and to demonstrate that he is a true moderniser than by making the case that nuclear weapons now have no relevance to Britain's defences in the modern world.

The justification for both Polaris and Trident was that we faced in the Soviet Union a great, hostile bear bristling with nuclear claws. The missiles were put on submarines precisely because the ocean bed was the only place they could hide from Russian firepower. But those are calculations from a long-vanished era. The Soviet Union has disintegrated, its satellites are our allies in the European Union, and the west is now sinking large funds into helping Russia to defuse and dismantle the warheads that we once feared.

No other credible nuclear threat has stepped forward to replace the Soviet Union as a rationale for the British nuclear weapons system. To be sure, two or three other nations have emerged with a crude nuclear capability, but none of them has developed the capacity or the motivation to attack Britain.

CONTINUED...

http://www.acronym.org.uk/dd/dd80/80doc03.htm

It's odd what happens to those who oppose the War Party.

[NYC]

30. Recommended.

People who think foreign port control is okay ought to ask themselves if this letter was part of the investigation. If so, what was the determination?

We all know the decision was based on money, but I would like this information to get around, so everyone can think about it.

[sattahipdeep]

47. If Bush gets away with this, then it's simple:

Harvey Wasserman
Are you ready to be bugged and tortured by George W. Bush?
January 19, 2006

This isn't about war: It's about dictatorship.

It’s about making power permanent by using private information
against you, and by terrifying you with torture.

Team Bush believes it rules by Divine right.
It has already re-defined "terrorist" to mean anyone who questions its power.
It will use "anti-terrorist" wiretapping as a tool against anyone who dares oppose it.

So ask yourself: if granted the power to torture, do you trust the Bush
Administration---or any regime- - to refrain from torturing its political opponents?
If granted the power to record private phone conversations, do you trust Karl Rove
to not use this material against his political opponents?

If Bush gets away with this, then it's simple: if you are too outspoken in opposing
this regime's destruction of social security, or the natural environment, or the
economy, you will sooner or later be subject to torture.

http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/7/2006/1303

[NickB79]

34. Has this been posted on FreeRepublic yet?

I thought I heard a faint booming sound outside, like the sound of Freeper heads detonating :evilgrin:

[Nothing Without Hope]

36. UAE is also big in drug-trafficking, arms shipments, and terrorist support

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x490176
thread title (2-22-06 GD): UAE and BCCI >>>
Comment/excerpt: The Bank of England shuts down Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), the largest Islamic bank in the world. Based in Pakistan, this bank financed numerous militant organizations and laundered money generated by illicit drug trafficking and other illegal activities, including arms trafficking. Bin Laden and many other militants had accounts there. <Detroit News, 9/30/01> One money-laundering expert claims, “BCCI did dirty work for every major terrorist service in the world.” <Los Angeles Times, 1/20/02> American and British governments were aware of its activities yet allowed the bank to operate for years. The Pakistani ISI had major connections to the bank. However, as later State Department reports indicate, Pakistan remains a major drug trafficking and money-laundering center despite the bank's closing. <Detroit News, 9/30/01> “The CIA used BCCI to funnel millions of dollars to the fighters battling the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan” according to the Washington Post. A French intelligence report in 2001 suggests the BCCI network has been largely rebuilt by bin Laden (see October 2001). <Washington Post, 2/17/02> The ruling family of Abu Dhabi, the dominant emirate in the United Arab Emirates, owned 77 percent of the bank. <Los Angeles Times, 1/20/02>
And there is also the Ariana Airlines and massive DRUG & WEAPSONS TRAFFICKING: Comment/excerpt: “In 1996, al-Qaeda assumes control of Ariana Airlines, Afghanistan's national airline, for use in its illegal trade network. Passenger flights become few and erratic, as planes are used to fly drugs, weapons, gold, and personnel, primarily between Afghanistan, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Pakistan. The Emirate of Sharjah, in the UAE, becomes a hub for al-Qaeda drug and arms smuggling. Typically, “large quantities of drugs” are flown from Kandahar, Afghanistan, to Sharjah, and large quantities of weapons are flown back to Afghanistan. <Los Angeles Times, 11/18/01> … A former National Security Council official later claims the US is well aware at the time that al-Qaeda agents regularly fly on Ariana Airlines, but the US fails to act for several years. The US does press the UAE for tighter banking controls, but moves “delicately, not wanting to offend an ally in an already complicated relationship,” and little changes by 9/11. <Los Angeles Times, 11/18/01> Much of the money for the 9/11 hijackers flows though these Sharjah, UAE, channels…..“

The drug-smuggling in the UAE is no secret. It's in the CIA online handbook:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x478454
thread title (2-21-06 GD): CIA: UAE is a DRUG transhipment point (& money laundering) / PORT SALE
Comment/excerpt: From the CIA web site: “The UAE is a drug transshipment point for traffickers given its proximity to Southwest Asian drug producing countries; the UAE's position as a major financial center makes it vulnerable to money laundering….”

Of course, the Administration prefer we forget about all this, especially the terrorist connections.

[Wordie]

37. Hi, Nothing Without Hope...can we talk?

I have some questions, because I'm uneasy with some of what you've posted.

First, wasn't BCCI completely closed down in the mid-80s? I seem to recall that's when the scandal struck. Most of those articles have dates which make it seem like the scandal was much later. When was BCCI really closed down? Or was it banned in the US in the mid-eighties and then later banned or shut down completely by the BOE? OK...now I've gotten curious. Here's some of what I found from the BBC in a brief search; it's from a much longer timeline showing the history of the UAE:

Last Updated: Wednesday, 4 January 2006, 10:08 GMT

1991 - UAE forces join the allies against Iraq after the invasion of Kuwait.

1991 July - Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) collapses. Abu Dhabi's ruling family owns a 77.4 % share.

1993 December - Abu Dhabi sues BCCI's executives for damages.

1994 June - 11 of the 12 former BCCI executives accused of fraud are convicted in Abu Dhabi, given prison sentences and ordered to pay compensation.

1996 June - Two BCCI executives are cleared of fraud charges on appeal.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/828687.stm

So, were the UAE royals the perpetrators or the villains in the BCCI scandal? I really don't know. It appears that they prosecuted them, although it was a Pakistani bank. They must have gone to some effort to do that. There's just not enough information for me. I need to do more research, I think.

And I also wanted to ask if you read the material about changes in the UAE's laws regarding terrorism and money laundering that have taken place post-9/11? You can read about some of that here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=504839&mesg_id=517238

Here's the thing that seems to me to need consideration: the US was supporting ObL all through the 80s, too! It seems to me that we can hardly blame the relationship that the UAE royals had with him, when he was our ally as well.

There are lots of things for which I don't trust our government, but I'm just not clear what effect this deal would really have. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on the questions I raised.

[Nothing Without Hope]

43. In reply to your thoughtful post:

First, there has been a massive lack of any kind of due diligence on this sale. Virtually no oversight at all, no investigation of the security consequences and other potential fallout, and the people in charge are not free of blatant conflicts of interest.

THere are plenty of reasons why the corporate backers of Bush Administration would want this sale that have nothing to do with the good of this nation. For example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=495537
thread title (2-22-06 GD): VIDEO- David Sirota on Countdown
David Sirota interview with Keith Olbermann, talking about what “free trade” has to do with the ports deal: it’s at the greedy black heart of it. He also talks about this (“The dirty little secret behind the UAE port security” in his blog:
http://www.davidsirota.com/2006/02/dirty-little-secret-behind-uae-port.html
and also here: http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=8F0C2C26-E5A6-B306-55BE87948B44A59C
Also reported in a DU thread here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x484387
thread title (2-21-06 GD): The Dirty Little Secret Behind the UAE Port Security Flap (David Sorata)
Link to Can-o-Fun page with this VIDEO: http://www.canofun.com/cof/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=17075

The Bush Administration has given us no reason whatsoever to TRUST them, as they demand. There is plenty of reason to expect projects of theirs - especially the secret ones involving huge amounts of money and family connections - to NOT be in the national interest.

Without any real investigation, there is NO REASON WHY THIS TRANSACTION CAN BE TRUSTED TO BE TO THE BENEFIT OF THE COUNTRY.

Further, the UAE are notorious as having little control over smuggling and money laundering and terrorist connections in their own country. Why would we expect them to be more assiduous in the US? Indeed, port security has been a huge, ignored failure and danger for years, and the Bush Administration has basically ducked the entire issue. After all, it's not that they're actually concerned about terrorism, it's the fearmongering that they are after. John Kerry, from a state with a busy, vulnerable port at the heart of its population and business centers, has been emphasizing the danger of poor port security for YEARS:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x472697
thread title (2-20-06 GD): Port Security - Kerry warned us!
Comment/excerpt: COMPILATION POST on Kerry statements about extremely lax security in US ports and their vulnerability to terrorists.

The UAE has issued many statements and made laws about money laundering and terrorism - but how assiduously are they enforced? BEFORE THE PORTS SALE CONTROVERSY, back in December, this US News & World Report article gives some answers that should concern us very much:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x520862
thread title (2-25-06 GD): News article from 2 months ago: UAE: An Unlikely Criminal Crossroads
US News & World Report from December 2005. Excerpt: “But Dubai also serves as the region's criminal crossroads, a hub for smuggling, money laundering, and underground banking. There are Russian and Indian mobsters, Iranian arms traffickers, and Arab jihadists. Funds for the 9/11 hijackers and African embassy bombers were transferred through the city. It was the heart of Pakistani scientist A. Q. Khan's black market in nuclear technology and other proliferation cases. Half of all applications to buy U.S. military equipment from Dubai are from bogus front companies, officials say. "Iran," adds one U.S. official, "is building a bomb through Dubai." Last year, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents thwarted the shipment of 3,000 U.S. military night-vision goggles by an Iranian pair based in Dubai. Moving goods undetected is not hard. Dhows--rickety wooden boats that have plowed the Arabian Sea for centuries--move along the city center, uninspected, down the aptly named Smuggler's Creek.
U.A.E. rulers have taken terrorism seriously since 9/11, but Washington has a half-dozen extradition requests that they refuse to honor. The list includes people accused of rape, murder, and arms trafficking, and the last fugitive of the BCCI banking scandal. The country has put money laundering controls on the books but has made few cases. Interior Minister Sheik Saif bin Zayed Al Nahyan told U.S. News the U.A.E. has made great strides in cracking down, but he insists that the real problems lie elsewhere. ‘We are a neutral country, like Switzerland,’ he says. ‘Give us the evidence, and we will do something about it. Don't blame others.’ Not everyone agrees. ‘All roads lead to Dubai,’ says former treasury agent John Cassara, author of Hide and Seek, a forthcoming book on terrorism finance. Cassara tried explaining U.S. concerns about Dubai to a local businessman but got only a puzzled look: ‘Mr. John, money laundering? But that's what we do.’

In short, I believe that any terrorists would find our porous ports - where only 5% of shipping containers are inspected and it's extremely easy for non-citizens to enter the country, easy entry points for them and anything they wanted to ship in:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x481615
thread title (2-20-06 GD): The Dubai Ports World Deal - Through a Coast Guard Veteran's Eyes
Comment/excerpt: DU Coast Guard veteran Coastie for Truth details four ways of how the “Port Service Company” is in a unique and powerful position to either block or promote vulnerabilities to smuggling of contraband or secret entry without a passport (using “merchant marine documents” which function like a mini-passport). Poster concludes “Historically - in my active duty days - we were looking for drug smugglers. But these techniques could work with terrorists and dirty bombs. And Dubai is "A" cross roads of the world.”

In its own country, money laundering, drug-smuggling and terrorist-related activity is rampant. There is no reason to believe that they would improve US port security and many to be concerned that vulnerability would actually increase. There has been no due diligence, no investigation, and this has clearly been another Bushie money boodoggle, one they tried to keep secret from everyone. If it had been such a boon to US security, why would they keep it secret?

I agree that much of the national uproar is related to the anti-Arab xenophobia that has been the Bushies' route to power. But this time, there is very good reason to be deeply concerned and outraged. It's not that they're Arabs, it's that there is no reason to expect this deal to improve US security or anything else except the financial bottom line of Bush's corporate supporters who want "free trade" in their special perverse sense. With no investigation and such secrecy - and with the known record and present operation of UAE ports - why should we just skip all demands for controls, information, and real improvements in port security and just trust Bush as he wants us to?

I deplore the anti-Arab xenophobia. I also deplore the slovenly carelessness and greed that are behind the ports operation sale so far. I have seen no evidence so far that reassures that it's the right thing to do. The Bushies have never bothered with such things in all their other secret deals, and they've shown no indication that they are actually concerned about US port security.

I have not yet read all the material on the history of the BCCI and all the rest - there's ton of it. But what I can see isn't subtle and I stand by my opposition to the ports deal under its current guise.

[jn2375]

40. wonder if Lou Dobbs saw this

[madmark]

44. look if these people were falconing and going on camping

trips with OBL like just 5 years ago of course the place is vulnerable to Al Quada infiltration that's is the whole reason this port just sucks, its creating additional vulnerability and risk for what? For bush crony's to get to scratch another back?

[moondust]

46. Infiltrators unnecessary.

A sympathizer or two on the DPW payroll is probably all you'd need.

Good intentions are not enough.