Dubai Ports World Now Control 23 US Ports 'til, at the earliest, Next Year

[elehhhhna]

The deal went through. It's 23 Ports, not 6 as widely reported. Haven't you wondered what happened...why no further news coverage? I have. Here's an update, dated July 23:


DP World had said it would take up to six months to identify a buyer. Four months into that time frame, the company sent a brief information sheet to prospective buyers last week. Potential buyers must adhere to a confidentiality agreement to see more detailed financial data. The newest information outlines its U.S. holdings, which includes contracts at the port of Baltimore and 22 others on the East and Gulf coasts. It said 2005 income was $39 million before taxes, interest, depreciation and amortization on revenue of $447 million.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bal-bz.dubai23jul23,0,4956619.story?coll=bal-business-headlines

[whistle]

1. That gives Dubai sponsored terrorists plenty of time to bring in WMDs

[Kagemusha]

3. ...excuse me? Dubai-SPONSORED? You wrote that seriously?

Ugh, I hate this topic.

[whistle]

5. Correct, they support the BushCo fascist terror network....

...allowing the events of pre and post 9/11 to unfold.

<snip>
The CIA met Bin Laden while undergoing treatment at an American Hospital last July in Dubai
by Alexandra Richard, Le Figaro, 11 October 2001

Dubai, one of the seven emirates of the Federation of the United Arab Emirates, North-East of Abi-Dhabi. This city, population 350,000, was the backdrop of a secret meeting between Osama bin Laden and the local CIA agent in July. A partner of the administration of the American Hospital in Dubai claims that public enemy number one stayed at this hospital between the 4th and 14th of July.
Having taken off from the Quetta airport in Pakistan, bin Laden was transferred to the hospital upon his arrival at Dubai airport. He was accompanied by his personal physician and faithful lieutenant, who could be Ayman al-Zawahari--but on this sources are not entirely certain--, four bodyguards, as well as a male Algerian nurse, and admitted to the American Hospital, a glass and marble building situated between the Al-Garhoud and Al-Maktoum bridges. <more>

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/RIC111B.html

[JCMach1]

9. Dubai does not support terrorism...

Within a few years, the majority of the economy will be based on tourism... they can ill-afford that kind of albatross

[midnight]

2. Just say no.

These are our ports.

[Horse with no Name]

4. That's the way it works

when people get upset at something and it's going to happen anyway, the complicit corporate media just stops reporting it.
That way, most people just assume it is over and don't realize it was done anyway.

[WePurrsevere]

6. True or the people get upset so they make like they're going to give in to

what the people want, wait a bit for everything to calm down and then slide it in (sometimes repackaged) when the people are looking at something else.

I wonder if this is part of a class that's taught an increasing number of businesses are also pulling this same "game", like ebay for one.

(edited to add a thought in that I forgot to :hangover:)

[Disturbed]

7. Is Lou Dobbs silent about this?

He was outraged when this was first uncovered and so were millions of Americans, even RWingers.

[WePurrsevere]

10. I can't get Lou Dobbs but if he hasn't it may be that he hasn't heard yet.

This is just another one of BushCo's end runs around what "we the people" want.

[JCMach1]

8. And then, there is a damn good chance a Carlyle Group

subsidiary will win the bidding...

The irony is that the bin Ladin family will more than likely own part of this now.

Now that is IRONIC...

Sometimes you get what you ask for... Carlyle being an American company and all of that...

[Ravenseye]

11. I still think opposition to the ports deal is racist

Nobody has ever shown, to my knowledge, a link between that company and terrorism. Not to mention that they'd simply be owning the control of the ports, and nearly everyone working there would still be American, or that we can do our own ports security in addition to DPW. It just seems that everyone was so opposed to it simply because it was DUBAI ports world, since nobody got up in arms about the other countries like England or China that control our ports (some did, but only afterwards, and not to the level they did against DPW).

It always to me felt like anti-arab racism. "oh an arab company controlling our ports? That's a bad idea...because they're arabs...therefore they have links to terrorists."

[w4rma]

12. I don't want anyone but Americans controlling our ports. This is a matter

of national security, imho. Folks from other nations could usually care less about the security of another country.

The same goes for the Dubai buying of oil drilling rights off the coast of America.

There are lots of other buisnesses that foriegn buisnesses can take over in America. Ports should not be one of them.

[Ravenseye]

13. I don't disagree with you, however

the issue was only raised when it was an Arab company. Nobody batted an eye when it was previously a chinese or a britsh company taking over the ports, and no new legislation was enacted to remove these other foreign national companies from their deals. Only the Arab company was blocked. Only the Arab company raised people's hackles.

We've been talking seriously about port security since 9/11, and rightly so as it's a dangerous hole that needs to be plugged, but I can't recall ONCE even one person calling to nationalize the ports, and even if they did, it certainly didn't resonate. It took an Arab owned company to enter the picture for people to get up in arms. That's my point. That's why I think it was racist.

It's like having a neighborhood made up of Italians. A few Irish move in and nobody really makes a peep. A few Polish familes move in, not a word. A nice Chinese couple moves down the block, and they're welcomed. A black family arrives and suddenly the Italians in the neighborhood are all up in arms about it not being an Italian neighborhood anymore. (I've seen this specific example occur personally)

[elehhhhna]

15. I think you have a siplistic view of this. 2 9/11 hijackers were from

Dubai. THAT factoid can't be denied.

[Ravenseye]

16. And how were the linked to that company?

You're sort of proving my point...

2 9/11 hijackers were from Dubai, therefore all arab companies are suspect? How is that not racism?

[w4rma]

18. This particular company is owned by the UAE government.

The UAE government is a non-democratic, unelected council of 7 wealthy "kings".

[Ravenseye]

21. So?

Why wasn't there outrage before about China which is a non-democratic one party state just as politically, if not moreso, oppresive?

The fact is that while a couple terrorists lived in Dubai for a bit, there is no connection between the Dubai Ports World company and terrorism, and they work ports in many other countries with no incidents. The emirates do own the company, but it's one of many holdings and they have no direct input, not that it matters, because even they have never been shown to have links to any terrorist groups. On top of that it wouldn't affect security because the security at the ports is, and always has been, the purvew of the U.S. government. They'd simply be managing the dockworkers, who would all be americans.

The only reason the issue was raised at that time over this company, is because it's arab. There are no ties that have been shown, just suspiciou because they're arabs. That's racism.

[w4rma]

24. Well I see that rather than protecting our nation's national security

you'd rather call everyone racists who try to secure our ports. I don't really care if securing our ports *starts* with getting the UAE out of control, as long as the ports get secured.

[Ravenseye]

27. I never said that

Nice way to put words into my mouth.

Maybe you feel the way you do, but I'm sorry, if a chinese company had been doing the buyout, it would have gotten a post in Latest Breaking News, with maybe 10 posts on it, at least one or two of them for the deal as it would extend democracy to china, and then it would have been gone.

For most poeple the main reason this 'woke them up' to who is controlling our ports, was a racist thought, which was 'arab company controlling ports bad'.

I'm not saying that I don't want secure ports. I've been calling for better port security since before 9/11. I'm just saying this recent hullabaloo was mostly instigated by people's generalizations that Arab companies are more dangerous than others. If you can't see that, then shame on you.

[elehhhhna]

30. Bullshit. Your china analogy is just some baloney you made up.

[Ravenseye]

39. Whatever

It's an analogy. Obviously it's made up. Nice way to dodge my points again.

[elehhhhna]

23. That's not racist. It's terroristist.

[Ravenseye]

28. You're not serious are you?

You're grouping together a whole nation of people as suspect because of the actions of a few? How is that not racist?

[elehhhhna]

29. You absolutely refuse to consider reason, so why should I bother?

Dictators &/or Foreign governments have no biz running out infrastructure. If Mugabe got the contract I would then have to shut up because he's black?
I hate Cheney & Bush. Guess I'm racist against white people, too.

[Ravenseye]

38. Why should you bother even once responding to a question

You haven't answered any questions in any of my posts. You're the one not listening to reason or even the points I'm making.

I agree that foreign governments have no business running our infrastructure. My point is nobody cared before it was an Arab country. If you were thinking or saying that before DPW began their buyout, then you're not racist. That's not my point at all.

My point, which you continue to avoid, is that almost nobody cared until it was an Arab company, and then everyone got all up in arms. Then people started saying things like it wasn't 'racist' but it was 'terroristist' or whatever...impling that of course, any arab company, or country must obviously have direct ties to terrorists. People got enraged because they thought an Arab company would have ties to terrorists and help them smuggle in weapons of mass destruction or more terrorists or something. That thought is inherently racist.

All arabs aren't terrorists. All arab companies aren't linked to terrorists.

Maybe you're not racist, but a whole heck of a lot of the reaction to that deal was purely based on racism. If you don't like that or can't see that, then you're the one who refuses to consider reason.

[elehhhhna]

41. You are equating "nobody cared before " with "nobody was AWARE"

WHat par of that diff do you not understand.

Now that we KNOW,WE CARE, ALREADY. Furthermore, I don't trust the Brits or anybody else (except maybe Holland and possibly Canada).

[elehhhhna]

14. DPW is owned & controlled by The Shiek who own & runs Dubai.

Would you sell your port contracts to , say, Vlad Putin? Hugo Chavez? KimJong Il?, the Saudi Royals? Mugabe? Israel? The Cheney or Buch families? Evidently so.

PLease think this through.

[Ravenseye]

17. Oh, ok I get it now

Sorry bout that. The company is owned by an arab, therefore it's bad. :sarcasm:

We had no problem with other foreign countries of dubious political stripe (ie China) controlling our ports, but the Arab one, well that's just a bad idea.

I personally think all ports should be nationalized for security reasons. The problem I had is nobody cared about it until it was an Arab country. Nobody would have batted an eye at Russia, Venezuela, or an Israeli company gaining the contract. The problem arose when it was an Arab company.

[w4rma]

19. Not "we had no problem". You had no problem. (nt)

[Ravenseye]

20. Oh so it was talked about here prior to the DPW issue?

I did a search and couldn't find a mention of people complaining about China working the ports prior to Dubai coming up. Do you have a link on that?

Or really anywhere from any media?

It was a non-issue until it was an Arab company.

[w4rma]

22. If I known that China was running ports in America

I would oppose that also. And I do oppose that. In fact I oppose the Chinese government running our ports more than I do these 7 unelected dictators.

And if going after the UAE helps to get rid of other foreign owners of ports then I am all for keeping the UAE away from our ports.

IMHO, these foreign owned ports are probably how *most* things get smuggled into the US, including human trafficking.

[elehhhhna]

31. Hey, folks liked Leiberman 6 years ago, too. I guess 911 really did

change "everything".

[TheMadMonk]

26. No, but a great deal of "terrorist" money has passed...

...through banks in Dubai and the folk who own those banks (the govt. of Dubai) are also majority stockholders in Dubai Ports World.

They turned a blind eye to the money, why would they not also turn a blind eye to certain items being moved through their facilities. They have all the plausible deniability they need in the US policy of checking only a fraction of the cargo etering the US.

Regardless, all of DPW need not be in on letting such shipments through. It only needs a handful of moles or suborned individuals in the right places to do the damage.

[LSK]

34. its about the Hypocricy of the Bush admin

Wasnt the War on Iraq sold as part of the War on Terror and that Iraq was central in the region??? Isnt Dubai nearby??

Dont half of the redneck freepers go around saying kill all the Muslims???

Didnt a lot of Al Queda money funnel through Dubai banks???

The Bush admin has been trying to sell us on a War on Terror with middle eastern terrorists, yet on the other hand lets middle easterners control what can enter our country.

Its all about what a FRAUD the War on Terror is when it comes to the Bush admin.

[elehhhhna]

25. I just emailed the OP to Lou's show. Keep your ears open & fingers

crossed!

[LSK]

32. someone send this to Olbermann

[elehhhhna]

33. DONE!

[LSK]

35. does he have an email address?

I can send this thread too I guess.

[elehhhhna]

36. I sent it to the "Contact the show"on the Contdown page at MSNBC

googled up him & Lou Dobbs in a flash!

[LSK]

37. ok - thx

[Marie26]

40. or Lou Dobbs

He was apoplectic over the ports deal when it first broke - he'd probably follow up on this.

[elehhhhna]

42. Emailed him the AM w/it.