UAE Port Deal

[sandnsea]

I just don't get it. I don't get the benefit in US politics. I don't get the global political benefit. I don't get the BFEE benefit. I don't get why they would risk what they had to know would be a horrific backlash in this country to give this port deal to the UAE. And to stick to it the way they are. This one has me completely and totally baffled.

Anybody have any ideas why the Bushies would be so adament about this.

[whometense]

1. Filthy lucre?

It baffles me too. I keep wondering what they have up their sleeve, to be so in-your-face about this. Bush is willing to VETO any bill that tries to slow or stop the deal?? WTF? Lapdog Frist is against it? Such a big political risk for money? Maybe they think the repukes will yelp, but in the end cave. Why not? It's what they always do, isn't it?

I don't get it.

Digby: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_02_19_digbysblog_archive.html#114055653343760298

Empty Veto

by digby


So Bush says he'll veto any legislation to block the port deal. He says that his government knows what it's doing and wouldn't have ok'd the deal if it would harm the nation's security. This is the same government that did such a great job with Hurricane Katrina and the aftermath of the Iraq invasion.

Assuming that we aren't seeing some sort of kabuki here, it appears that the Eunuch Caucus is getting an earful from their constituents and see no margin in working with the lame albatross right now. He's threatened vetoes before and the invertebrate Republicans have always fallen into line. This time appears to be different.

If this is true, the Bush administration may be effectively over.

[blm]

2. You think Poppy Bush woke up one day and decided to STOP dealing arms,

running drugs, and laundering money with terrorists and the international financier buddies funding them?

This is EXACTLY what BCCI was all about. The Bushes are fascists and they intend to control the world's resources and powerstructures with their chosen allies.

[sandnsea]

4. Well they kind of let the cat out of the bag

That's the part I don't get. Is it like the mob trying to go legal through buying casinos in Vegas?? I just don't get the blatancy of this thing at all. Unless it's just a step in going from underground to in our faces with their global power grab.

[ProSense]

28. My take is that Bush

and the Republicans were doing just that, but believing they could pull a fast one and spin it in their favor. It backfired. Notice McCain is completely absent from this discussion? In recent weeks, the MSM has been playing up Democratic infighting (with some Democrats buying into it), which has been played up more than Cheney and his crimes. The polls show that the public trusts Bush and the Republicans on fighting terror, so they saw this as a prime opportunity to go for it. Big mistake.

A theory, but I'm still trying to figure it all out.

[wisteria]

3. Well, Bush is a lame duck,security and safety are

Republican strong holds, there is an election coming up and the Republicans are vulnerable. What better to take our mind off of corruption and the Iraq War and Iran than something like this. Here comes the Republicans to save us from the terrorists and be strong enough to defy the President when they think he is wrong. If I understand correctly, Bush wasn't even aware of this deal until very recently and he seems so "resolute" that for the first time in five years he will veto any bills interfering with this deal going through. That is until Frist or Graham or Specter or Warner or all of them have secret talks with him and he decides to compromise. IMO anyway! There is just way to much protesting and opposition going on.

[globalvillage]

8. That was my thought exactly.

bush* is done, time for the other repubs to come to the rescue and save the good ol' USA from the terrists.
Very Rovian. And it's likely to work, too.
All I've seen on CNN is repubs arguing against this deal.
Schumer for 'balance', a little Menendez, even less Hillary.
We're not looking strong enough.

[ProSense]

9. Bush wanted his deal, but if that's what the Repubs are thinking

the veto set up an awkward situation shows they're not that smart. Democrats should get them all on record:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2473893&mesg_id=2473893


His veto threat here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2473848&mesg_id=2473848

[Island Blue]

5. My guess is that someone is getting stinking, filthy rich

(or richer) off of the deal somehow. Do these people do things for any other reason? This is what happens when you sell your soul to the Devil, which the entire * Administration did many, many years ago. IMO, Bushco = Pure Evil.

[sandnsea]

6. Yes - global power

That's the real reason they do most things. To keep the power in the hands of the captains of industry, to control all the resources in the world. Global power. They know what they're doing, but I never thought they'd let the American people see it until it was too late for us to stop it. That's what scares me most. Are all the resources and industries in place and they're making their final power plays???

Yeah, I know I sound like a raving lunatic, but this is what I've seen coming for at least 10 years. Corporate control, the investor class and those who serve them.

[ginnyinWI]

7. haven't read the other replies yet, but on first impression:

They want to make a big pile of money and are so drunk with power and/or heedless of the consequences either politically or to national security that they are pushing this forward.

They are betraying the Repubs in Congress, but they do not care. As far as security--they'd actually like another attack (LIHOP) because they feel it will empower the party. And they believe their own spin. They feel they have the Dems cowed and the Repubs made into a rubber stamp.


Where's that blowback?? (taps foot, impatiently)

[sandnsea]

10. US - UAE Free Trade Deal

Third largest trade partner in the ME. Free trade equals global control of resources by the richest few. It is just a blatant move towards global power, the New World Order. And I guess it's far enough along that it's time to show America what's behind door #3.

http://www.davidsirota.com/2006/02/dirty-little-secret-behind-uae-port.html

[Island Blue]

11. Does anyone else fear

that one way or the other these fuckers will refuse to give up power when the time comes to do so? I'm sure the '08 Repuke candidate will be a hand-picked puppet, but my fear is that the media (such as it is) will keep right on supporting the regime by not investigating or reporting the truth on any number of subjects ranging from Diebold to what is really going on with this UAE deal. (Why should they be bothered to start reporting the truth now?)

Maybe my tinfoil hat has just gotten way too tight, but sometimes I honestly get scared. I know there are a few people out there fighting for us (John Kerry comes to mind), but there are many more people who either want to destroy this nation (and I'm not talking Osama and Al Queda here), or are so fucking blind that they don't really see a problem and just want to keep the status quo (there are quite a few Democrats in that last category). People need to wake up NOW! 2008 will be too late, I'm afraid.

Today I saw a truck with a "Viva Bush" sticker on it. I'm really running out of patience with anyone who would still have such a sticker on their vehicle. I have a feeling by the looks of the woman driving the truck (yeah - I was profiling), she feels that supporting the Bush Regime is her ticket to heaven. He's a Godly man, don't ya know. :sarcasm:

When does the Revolution begin? I'm ready. :patriot:

Sorry for that semi-incoherent rant. Sometimes you just gotta let it out!

[TayTay]

12. This has been the stated goal of the Rethugs since the Reagan Admin

They believe that freedom means that no one has any protections from government at all and that all people are 'free' to pursue their own goals in life, without pesky little things like government regulation, safety laws and labor law to 'protect' them. According to the doctrine of the pure 'free enterprise' people, those things are chains that hang on the feet of business and derail the real purpose of America: making money. Making money is the reason America exists and anything that blocks that is, by definition, not free. All their programs and people bend to this, it's their end goal and dream, an America in which everyone is 'free' to fail, to be unemployed, to have no health care and have no protection from predatory practices by those who 'have.'

We went through this period in our history before. We did it in the late 1800's and again in the Roaring Twenties. The Rethug Party has harnessed the xenophobia that has always been close to the heart of America and used that to paint 'the liberals' as the party that shelters the unproductive in America. (You know, those people who come in and take your jobs, commit the crimes, move into 'your' neighborhoods and pervert 'your' values.) This strain is hardly new to this era of American history. We have been here before, several times. The Rethugs have harvested the ugly underbelly of populism to make people believe that being compassionate and caring about more than just the winners in the economic lottery of 'free enterprise' means that the undeserved poor and 'foreigners' are getting more than real 'muricans.

Again, this is a repeated theme in American history. See Asians all throughout history, African-Americans, Hispanics and so forth. This also happened with Europeans who came from Catholic countries and it happened with Native Americans. In fact, it is still happening with most of those groups. And we can even toss in women with that. After all, aren't most women happier in the home and not out chasing careers? This is the very ugly side of populism.

It doesn't last because it becomes top-heavy. The gap between rich and poor becomes unsustainable and the whole thing begins to crumble. That is a very, very dangerous time for a democracy. We passed the test in the 1930's when Franklin Roosevelt came to office. He made a lot of mistakes and wasn't pure in protecting minority rights, but he basically saved the nation from it's own worst impulses. He did this by making disparate sides see that they had to stick together in order to advance their agenda. This is what we have to do again. We can't fail in this, the consequences are potentially catastrophic for democracy and for our country.

This portion of an article in Rolling Stone about Senator Sam Brownback shows the fusion of the Rethug religious and big business philosophy. This is what the enemy believes and is working to have take place in America:

Tonight, Bredesen has come to breathe that power into Brownback's presidential campaign. After little more than a decade in Washington, Brownback has managed to position himself at the very center of the Christian conservative uprising that is transforming American politics. Just six years ago, winning the evangelical vote required only a veneer of bland normalcy, nothing more than George Bush's vague assurance that Jesus was his favorite philosopher. Now, Brownback seeks something far more radical: not faith-based politics but faith in place of politics. In his dream America, the one he believes both the Bible and the Constitution promise, the state will simply wither away. In its place will be a country so suffused with God and the free market that the social fabric of the last hundred years -- schools, Social Security, welfare -- will be privatized or simply done away with. There will be no abortions; sex will be confined to heterosexual marriage. Men will lead families, mothers will tend children, and big business and the church will take care of all.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/9178374/gods_senator?rnd=1140572805562&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.1040

They have been very upfront about this for years. This is their goal. This is what must be stopped. We gought a Revolution a couple of hundred years ago to get away from this sort of thing and the very idea that God should be at the head of the State.

[wisteria]

13. Frightening isn't it? For personal liberties and our county too. n/t

[Island Blue]

14. Sam Brownback makes * look sane.

Heaven help us all if this man should find his way to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. We will all be truly fucked. He is a scary, scary man.

I wish I had more faith in the American people than I do right now. There are glimmers of hope every once in a while, but there are still a lot of sheep.

[Mass]

22. I disagree - Brownback is as far from me as possible, but he is sane

He can articulate his opinions clearly and knows what he stands for. He is scary because of that.

Some of the most scary people in the Senate (Sessions, Coburn,...) are scary because they are sane and competent. They are just way too much on the far right side, but they are certainly sane and intelligent. That is the scary part.

[sandnsea]

15. Except we're going global with it now

The Marianas "petri dish". Mexican guest worker program. H1B visas. Outsourcing. Multi-nationals who have no allegiance to any country. Blurring the lines even more by selling things like control of our ports. I don't know how you get a Roosevelt to make laws to guarantee the country benefits the people when half the country is owned by foreign companies and the companies that were US companies have taken their headquarters offshore. Our Constitution is going to become worthless because there's going to be nothing the government does that the people will need redress for; multi-national corporations wlll be in control and accountable to no law at all.

[rox63]

16. Letter about UAE ports deal from JK to Treasury Sec Snow

I'm glad that JK has finally said something about this deal.

http://daoureport.salon.com/synopsis.aspx?synopsisId=8db9a3ff-5656-4fed-8f16-3bb1e40894e9

February 21, 2006
The Honorable John Snow
Chair
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States Office of International Investment
Department of Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Room 4201 NY Washington, DC 20220

Dear Mr. Secretary: I write to you in your capacity as Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) regarding the review and approval of the sale of Peninsular and Oriental Steamship Navigation Company to Dubai Ports World (DP). As you know, this sale would give DP, a company owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates, significant operational control over six major US ports.

Specifically, given the national security implications of this sale, I am concerned about the process by which this transaction was approved by CFIUS. First, it appears that CFIUS approved the sale as expeditiously as possible, without even using the additional 45 day investigation process that was clearly warranted under the circumstances.

Further, several media reports have cited ties between Administration officials and DP that raise questions about the basis for the approval of this sale by CFIUS. As you know, the CSX rail corporation, where you previously served as Chief Executive Officer, sold its port operations to DP in 2004. Moreover, the President’s nominee for Administrator of the Maritime Administration, David Sanborn, was DP’s Head of Operations for Latin America while this transaction was being reviewed by CFIUS. In light of these connections, Congress needs to learn more about the relationship between CFIUS members and DP, and whether Administration officials could have unduly influenced CFIUS’s approval process.

Therefore, in the interest of full disclosure and the transparency appropriate under these circumstances, I request that you provide to the relevant committees in Congress all documentation and information relating to contacts between Administration officials, CFIUS members and staff, and DP, including any lobbyists or registered foreign agents working on behalf of DP.

Given the national security implications surrounding this transaction, it is essential that lawmakers have access to this information so that Congress can conduct meaningful oversight.

Sincerely,

John F. Kerry

[Mass]

17. Thanks for posting that.

[TayTay]

18. Good job by JK

But Rox, finally? The story just broke. I should think JK should be allowed a day to produce something lucid and that has 'meat' in it.

ROX, I think you should break this out into a separate thread. Also, post on GD. (Thanks!)

[rox63]

21. Several dems and repukes have already released statements

over the last few days. And since JK has been so adamant about port security, I thought it was a natural subject for him to speak up on. So I was suprised we didn't at least see an official statement released before today.

[Mass]

23. May be because he recognizes that the risk is not that high and that there

is a lot of political noise in there. He may be willing to study the facts. An Arab company bought a foreign company that was operating American ports. Should we condemn all Arab people because a handful are terrorists?

It strikes me that the same people who object now (talking about pols, of course) never objected before. If something should have been blocked, it was when the contract was given to a British Company in the first place.

I am more interested by the eventual connections this company may have to Halliburton or Bechtel.

[wisteria]

19. Thank you for posting!

Reading this letter requesting the documentation and such, I get the impression he is proceeding with this cautiously and not jumping
to conclusions like so many others. I find it interesting that Kerry, Carter, McCain and Bush are either for this or "playing it cool". I also noticed that Hillary hasn't made anymore statements about this since Friday.

[Mass]

20. He is asking for the information to make his opinion.

This is what the other ones should have made. Some people are clearly opening themselves to racism accusations. They did not protest when it was a British company operating the ports and all of a sudden they protest, without even asking for the information.

[Mass]

24. For once, DiFi is the one who says the truth - Ports should be run by the

government, not by private companies.

Feinstein: Ports 'ought to be governmentally operated'

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/national/13929392.htm

SAN DIEGO - U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Tuesday it was fortunate that California's major ports are run differently than the six big ports on the East and Gulf coasts embroiled in controversy over whether their shipping operations should be taken over by a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates.

"My reaction is that it is a mistake to let ports be privately owned, period," the California Democrat said during a news conference in San Diego.

[karynnj]

30. Does anyone know how long ago the ports became privately owned

That was a shock to me - even when the story first came out, I thought it was over a contract to operate the port. Naively, I thought the PORT AUTHORITY of NY/NJ owned the port of Newark and New York. (The Port Authority had the money to build the trade center in the early 70s, which it sold to a private company shortly before 911.)

[ProSense]

25. This is all about money.

Every thing Bush does is about money. The man isn't running the country, he's position his cronies to get even richer.

See the revolt (check out the Kos thread):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2474677&mesg_id=2474677

[rox63]

26. Osama is close buddies with the UAE royal family

Check out this item from March of 2004:

http://in.rediff.com/news/2004/mar/25osama.htm

<snip>
UAE royals, bin Laden's saviours

March 25, 2004 12:04 IST

The Central Intelligence Agency did not target Al Qaeda chief Osama bin laden once as he had the royal family of the United Arab Emirates with him in Afghanistan, the agency's director, George Tenet, told the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the United States on Thursday.

<snip>

[Mass]

27. Ports should not be operated by private companies in the first place.

I dont care if the company is British or Arab. It should be operated by the US govt.

You cant hope that a private company that has to answer to its shareholders will do whatever is necessary for national security. This is plain silly.

[wisteria]

29. I agree! n/t

[rox63]

31. UAE and BCCI

Check it out: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x490176

[karynnj]

32. That thread is absolutely amazing

It will be interesting how much of this ever makes it's way into the mainstream. What is mind boggling is how close Kerry came to being in a position to stop so much of this. It also oddly makes the likelihood that the media and the Republicans allowed the election to be stolen.

I can see why Kerry had to soft pedal it mentioning it only as knowing how to track down terrorists and their financing. The majority of the country would think that Kerry was insane if he spoke of all of this. (And I couldn't believe the simpler bringing cocaine into the country).

[rox63]

36. More on the UAE/BCCI connections

in this DKos post: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/23/14935/2494

It even links to Kerry's BCCI report. Kerry knows more about this mess than he's talking about publicly.

[ProSense]

33. Bush says he didn't know about the deal until it was a done deal

I posted in GD-P


Bush is a liar.

[ProSense]

34. OMG! Update

Snow supposedly didn't know either (but Bush is going to veto any attempt to kill the deal???). This is beyond ridiculous. This has got to be the dumbest and most crooked administration ever.

Bush, Snow Didn't Learn of Port Deal Before Approval (Update6)

Feb. 22 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush didn't know of the sale of six major U.S. port facilities to a Dubai company until after the deal was agreed to and federal approval was granted, his spokesman said. Treasury Secretary John Snow said he learned of it ``by reading it in the newspapers.''

Bush was made aware of the $6.8 billion sale of London- based Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. to DP World, a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates, in ``the last several days,'' White House spokesman Scott McClellan said. By that time, congressional opposition already was bubbling up.

``This didn't rise to the presidential level,'' McClellan said at the White House.

The president checked with his Cabinet secretaries to see if there were concerns and there were none, McClellan said. Bush yesterday defended the deal in the face of opposition from Democrats and Republicans and threatened to exercise his first veto on any legislation that would block the transfer.

More...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aTwWWrjyryEk

[fedupinBushcountry]

35. This is ridiculous

I can't take the spin on this. First he says he will veto any stoppage, then he says he found it out in the paper (yeah give me a friggin break), now he says he may extend to explain (spin) the situation to the Congress.

How much more of this secrecy of big matters are we going to take.

You know my son told me over the holidays that the reason they did not let Kerry win is because they knew he would turn this government inside out and there was no way in hell they could hide all their cronyism and corruption from him. I think my son was right.

[rox63]

37. Just when I thought it couldn't any more f*cked-up...

...I read something like this:

Jihadi Turns Bulldog
The Taliban's former spokesman is now a Yale student. Anyone see a problem with that?

Read all about it here: http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110008020

[emulatorloo]

38. John Fund, the WINGNUT author of the piece is a big liar

He has a book out on how Democrats are stealing elections. He is not to be trusted.

Do a search on him at http://mediamatters.org/