Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is this a great idea or what?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is this a great idea or what?

    Bush faces pressure to block port deal

    Lawmakers voice concerns about takeover by Dubai-based firm

    Tuesday, February 21, 2006; Posted: 3:57 a.m. EST (08:57 GMT)

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush is facing political pressure to block a deal that would give a United Arab Emirates-based company management of six major U.S. seaports.

    The Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security panel said the deal should not go through without a complete investigation.

    "I would urge the president to freeze the contract, hold this contract, until a full and thorough and complete investigation can be conducted," said New York Rep. Peter King, who has been briefed on the transaction.

    King said Monday that Americans can't have faith in the company involved because "there was never a thorough investigation done of Dubai Ports."

    The deal -- which will affect the ports of New York and New Jersey; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Baltimore, Maryland; Miami, Florida; and New Orleans, Louisiana -- has triggered security concerns among some members of Congress and the public.

    The Bush administration has said the UAE is a key ally in the war on terror.

    Others, however, point out that two of the September 11, 2001, hijackers were from the UAE. In addition, most of the hijackers received money channeled through various sources based in the UAE, according to the Justice Department and the 9/11 commission. (Watch UAE's role in war on terror -- 1:57)

    Earlier this month, shareholders of the UK-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company (P&O) approved the company's acquisition by Thunder FZE, a subsidiary of Dubai-based Dubai Ports World.

    P&O directs commercial operations at the six U.S. ports. The takeover by DPW means that the Dubai company will be in charge of those operations.
    Deal 'by the book'

    Administration officials Monday sought to downplay the deal, saying it was done properly and that they would not jeopardize the security of American ports.

    Bush was unaware of the deal until he heard reports of the congressional uproar, presidential adviser Dan Bartlett told CNN.

    "The process was done by the book," Bartlett said. "If you start deciding these issues in a guilt-by-association method, you will have a situation which has deep and harmful ramifications to the economic interests of this country."

    A Dubai Ports World spokesman told CNN that the firm has received all the necessary regulatory approvals, and that the security systems in place at the ports would only get better under the new management.

    "All DP World ports are [International Security Port System] certified, as are any P&O ports in the U.S.," the spokesman said. "We intend to maintain or enhance current security arrangements, and this is business as usual for the P&O terminals."

    Michael Seymour, the president of P&O's North American operations, said the company "has long worked with U.S. government officials in charge of security at the ports to meet all U.S. government standards."

    "We are confident that the DP World purchase will ensure that our operations will continue to meet all relevant standards," he said.
    Industry official alleges 'racism'

    A port security expert, meanwhile, told CNN that fears that the agreement will reduce U.S. security are based on "bigotry" and that "shameless" politicians are creating an issue they think will resonate with the public.

    Kim Petersen, head of SeaSecure, a U.S.-based maritime security company, and executive director of the Maritime Security Council -- which represents 70 percent of the world's ocean shipping -- told CNN, "This whole notion that Dubai is going to control or set standards for U.S. ports is a canard ... is factually false."

    Dubai Ports World, like all port owners, must abide by the Maritime Transportation Security Act passed by Congress in 2002 and International Ship and Port Facility Security codes enacted in 2004, he said. Both sets of security measures are enforced in the United States by the U.S. Coast Guard.

    Petersen said DPW will be under "identical" security obligations, and said opposition to the purchase "comes down to bigotry [against] Arabs."

    Petersen said the company has an "exemplary" record of security compliance certification.
    Ridge: 'Legitimate' concerns

    Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff defended the deal in appearances on talk shows Sunday. He said federal law required a review of the sale by a committee that includes officials from the Homeland Security, Treasury and Commerce departments, along with the FBI and the Pentagon.

    "We look at what the issue of the threat is. If necessary, we build in conditions or requirements that, for extra security, would have to be met in order to make sure that there isn't a compromise to national security," Chertoff said on CNN.

    Sen. Robert Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat, pounced on Chertoff, who is already under fire for his agency's response to Hurricane Katrina.

    "You can't just simply tell us, 'Trust us,' " Menendez told reporters. "We trusted the government response to Hurricane Katrina -- and the people of the Gulf were largely left on their own."

    Menendez has proposed a new law prohibiting the sale of operations at U.S. ports to companies owned by international governments, noting 95 percent of cargo reaching U.S. ports is not inspected.

    Chertoff's predecessor, Tom Ridge, said that during his tenure as secretary from October 2001 to February 2005, he sat in on deals with similar national security concerns, and that he believes U.S. officials would not jeopardize national security.

    But he also told CNN: "I think the anxiety and the concern [over the deal] that has been expressed by congressmen and senators and elsewhere is legitimate."

    "The bottom line is, I think we need a little bit more transparency here," Ridge said. "There are some legitimate concerns about who would be in charge of hiring and firing, security measures, added technology in these ports that we'll need to upgrade our security.

    "So I think it's very appropriate for the administration to go to the Hill and explain why they think they have not compromised security and, in fact, as they've announced, they will enhance and improve security," he said. "It's tough to see that right now on the surface."
    Blah

  • #2
    Menendez has proposed a new law prohibiting the sale of operations at U.S. ports to companies owned by international governments, noting 95 percent of cargo reaching U.S. ports is not inspected.
    Back to the Medieval rules, eh?
    -- What history has taught us is that people do not learn from history.
    -- Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.

    Comment


    • #3
      If this is such a concern, then nationalize port operations. Otherwise, deal.

      -Arrian
      grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

      The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

      Comment


      • #4
        Hey thanks for the "clear" thread title Bebro so I didn't make an ass out of myself.
        A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

        Comment


        • #5
          Protectionism eh? There's a surprise...despite the US administration's insistence on its pro-market ways, they are one of the most protectionist around...
          Speaking of Erith:

          "It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda Smith

          Comment


          • #6
            Learn how to read. The administration is not opposing a foreign takeover.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by MrFun
              Hey thanks for the "clear" thread title Bebro so I didn't make an ass out of myself.
              Your "I'm not so sure this is a good idea . . . . ." line was a great response to this thread though
              Blah

              Comment


              • #8
                Hopefully this will bring increased scrutiny on CFIUS, it needs it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  We should discriminate based on nationality?
                  Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    absolutely.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Arrian
                      If this is such a concern, then nationalize port operations. Otherwise, deal.

                      -Arrian
                      I'm assuming that the ports are already owned by the government, and some idiot thought it'd be a great idea to outsource the management of them.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        "The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them."
                        -- attributed to both Lenin and Stalin

                        See, it is the new Cold War...
                        "I have as much authority as the pope. I just don't have as many people who believe it." — George Carlin

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          That was Lenin who said that, the bastard.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by chegitz guevara
                            We should discriminate based on nationality?

                            The UAE companies that seek to manage these port operations -- are those companies privately owned in UAE or does the UAE government own those companies?

                            If they're government owned, I would think that that would increase our security risk even more.
                            A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Geez...what's this great thread doing way down here?? BUMP!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X