Clusterheadaches.com Message Board


    
      
        Clusterheadaches.com Message Board
        (http://www.clusterheadaches.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        New Message Board Archives >> 2006 General Board Posts >> 6 Ports = 21 Ports
        
(Message started by: floridian on Feb 25^th, 2006, 10:27am)

Title: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by floridian on Feb 25^th, 2006, 10:27am

The 6 US ports to be taken over by a United Arab Emirate company are just the first installment of the 21 ports they are approved to buy! I guess the White House figure no one would notice.

http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20060223-051657-4981r

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by karma on Feb 25^th, 2006, 10:42am

Floridian,
The deal stinks but lets be clear. This deal is for the managment of locally owned terminals not the purchase.
I assume any port owner ie local govt. can review the managemnt contracts and decide if they will continue or not.
It may actually be a smart move if the Bush cronies say sure go ahead to save face with the UAE and then let the local boys be the bad guys.
But I doubt it!

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by chewy on Feb 25^th, 2006, 11:35am

Bush recently had a revelation. He said we are addicted to oil and need to explore alternatives. (Welcome to planet Earth)

This is a quote from Lee so take it for what its worth.

Quote:

Guess what, UAE / Dubai is setting on the largest known natural gas reserve in the world. Oil and gas companie's from the USA have spent billions to produce this gas and they haven't even scratched the surface.

Suddenly we are getting into bed with the UAE. Connect the dots.

Assuming Lee's quote is true then if you check the NYSE I'll bet you will find a lot of the old guard republican oil men have recently made some big investments in natural gas.

This isn't about national security or providing alternative energy sources. Its the same old thing. Making the almight dollar. Money going to money.

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by burnt-toast on Feb 25^th, 2006, 11:35am

It's just more reason to question what backroom deals this administration has cooked with the UAE.

The obvious plan
- Conduct secret meetings and preapprove a deal
made in hell with (regardless of what this
administration insists) a potential enemy to manage a
vital asset of this country and key security point.
- Report smaller initial components of the deal
- Address issues associated with the smaller
components of the deal
- Force the deal through under these false pretenses
- Inform us that the deal was really over three times
larger than initially reported
- Blame everyone for not understanding the entire
deal and insist "we assumed everyon knew this"
- Force the entire deal forward right under our noses

The fact that this administration would hide the true details of the entire deal from both the American people and other government officials should be reason for serious concern that lead to calls for resignations and maybe even impeachment proceedings.

Any American still believing that this country isn't being sold out by elected representatives (for whatever they or their parties receive for their treason,) has really got their head buried in the sand.

Our national debt is out of control - and climbing. Our trade deficit has reached disasterous levels - and climbing. Out tax burden is absurd. National Security is gathing intelligence on American citizens while our boarders are not secured, illegals from all over the world are permitted to roam freely throughout our country.

Our manufacturing base is essentially gone - primarily outsourced to communist nation using their new massive flow of capital to build one of the worlds largest/most sophisticated armies during peacetime? Potential enemies are being deemed worthy of managing our ports - vital economic/security assets of our country. If U.S. finds itself forced into a large scale war - we'll need to import from our most powerful potential enemy using ports managed by a nation that at best is a National Security risk. Honestly this average Joe is seriously confused and frightened.

The American people have become the laughing stock of the rest of the world. We are the so-called "free people" who allow our elected reprersentatives to sell us and our futures out for personal and/or politiucal gain with barely a whimper.

It time for the American people to end the careers of every "Career Politician"

Tom

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by BMoneeTheMoneeMan on Feb 25^th, 2006, 11:43am

Karma, I could be wrong, but i though it was the purchase of the actual port, and then the owner can choose how its managed. If they want to manage it themselves they can, or they can hire some other company to manage it.
Is that wrong?
BMonee

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by floridian on Feb 25^th, 2006, 1:13pm

on 02/25/06 at 10:42:56, karma wrote:

If you opened a store in a mall somewhere, and decided to sell it, the mall would still own the physical space. If you extend the port analogy, you don't really own the business and couldn't sell it, you would just be selling your inventory and rights to manage the business! But I think that is stretching things. And it doesn't really deflect from the fact that running day to day port operations are sensitive in terms of national security. I am not confident that the local governments will have any significant say in how the company is run.

The UAE doesn't get high marks for cooperating on terrorism, but this deal has a clause where they promise to cooperate in the future if they are allowed to buy the company that manages the ports.

Administration officials said the deal was approved without the required review because there were no concerns raised as different departments were notified of the deal - that turns out to be another lie: the Homeland Security Department objected at first to the deal, but that objection was 'smoothed out' by the White House.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1661530

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by burnt-toast on Feb 25^th, 2006, 6:19pm

FOR SALE

One Slightly used country - still a lot of good miles left in it.

Available in parts or in whole, too many features to list.

Current leaders eager to to negotiate - make offer and we'll see what we can work out.

Current tennants generally reserved with just periodic and short lived bursts of pride and dignity. Any reasonably skilled dictator should have no difficulty maintaining control.

Interested parties with cash only please.

Call 1-USA-FOR-SALE to obtain complete asset listings or to reserve your opportunity to bid on choice parcels. Don't miss out call 1-USA-FOR-SALE now, there won't be much left tomorrow.

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by MJ on Feb 25^th, 2006, 8:26pm

Heres how I heard it.

The FBI objected strongly to the Dubai ports deal.

Homeland Security then took over and objected to some security issues in the deal
.
The security issues were the fact that all port records would not be stored in the USA but in Dubai.

The white house then took over and smoothed out the security issues by allowing the records to be stored in Dubai thus smoothing out the deal for the management and control of 2/3rds of the access to this country.

Controlling the flow of the majority of military equipment, sensitive goods and commodities. Oil and natural gas into the country as well as a large percentage of our economy will soon rest in the hand of the United Arab Emirates.

In the end local goverments will have no say as this involves national security and they will be powerless.
The only hope then really does lie with the labor unions which are trying to be busted as we speak.

In defense of the U.A.E. it was they who put a temporary delay on the deal due to the unprecedented furor that has risen, not the government of the USA that we have all come to know and trust.
The delay is in the hopes that like Katrina we will become bored with it and then the deal will complete unnoticed.

I count 23 ports plus the largest independent port service, stevedoring and terminal operator on the east and gulf coasts. Control of this portion of the business will vastly extend the reach and oversight of the deal.

•Corpus Christi, Texas
•Freeport, Texas
•Galveston, Texas
•Houston, Texas
•Beaumont, Texas
•Port Arthur, Texas
•New Orleans, Louisiana
•Lake Charles, Louisiana
•Baton Rouge, Louisiana
•Gulfport, Mississippi
•Norfolk, Virginia
•Newport News, Virginia
•Portsmouth, Virginia
•Wilmington, Delaware
•Miami, Florida
•Camden, New Jersey
•Newark, New Jersey
•Davisville, Rhode Island
•Baltimore, Maryland
•Boston, Massachusetts
•Portland, Maine
•Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
•New York

Much of our allready outsourced manufactured goods will be returning to the USA through these ports.

However Japan and the pacific rim goods wont be affected too much as most of their goods and commodities arrive on the west coast wich is controlled by ????

Now that I think about it what the hell do we control anymore? Agriculture? Nope. Transportation? Nope. Military? Nope? Textiles, Toys, wool, religion, oil, pharmacia, entertainment, steel, minerals, skiiing, shopping malls, etc...? Nope, nope and more nope.

The only thing we seem to have a pretty good handle on is financial services and the flow of money by ownership of credit and debt for every american.

Oh yeah we still have some american ownership in one of our beers. Thats Coors beer cause noone else in the world will drink the stuff.

Looks like Bill Fords family owns the last american conglomerate. (or at least 40% of it)
Buy a Ford wholly made in america. Bet ya cant find just one.

Just my humble opinion.

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by Lizzie2 on Feb 26^th, 2006, 2:07am

This stuff makes me pretty damn nervous!

Philadelphia plans to place a bid to host the Summer Olympics in 2016 (I think??) And we're going to be one of these open ports... Say we put events in the Link - the link has one side wide open to 95 - a cop friend of my dad's was explaining how the design of that stadium and it's proxmity to 95 could actually be a homeland security disaster.

Makes ya nervous just to think about all the things that could go on in one place!!

Regardless of exactly how much control Dubai would have over our ports - I think one issue is, without question, very clear. We have tons of people who are entrepreneurs (sp?) in this country. Lots of people interested in becoming CEO's or even starting up small/large businesses and running with it. Very motivated and creative people.

Yet we've outsourced so many jobs to other countries for cheap labor. What has that done for us? Kill morale? Steal jobs?

There are plenty of people HERE who could have run with this deal, if given the opportunity. Why do we have to give away yet one more thing that should be owned by us?

This whole thing just stinks....

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by Melissa on Feb 26^th, 2006, 8:19am

Out of curiousity, doesn anyone know how many ports U.S. companies own in other countries?

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by BarbaraD on Feb 26^th, 2006, 9:24am

-0-

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by Melissa on Feb 26^th, 2006, 9:41am

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june06/ports_2-21.html

I can see it from both sides here, but I can also see that neither "side" knows WTF side is UP in regards to the whole situation.

In RJ style, Cheesus H.!!!!

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by maffumatt on Feb 26^th, 2006, 11:02am

I bet halliburton could do the job.

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by TomM on Feb 26^th, 2006, 11:46am

To quote Gov. Arnold from Meet The Press this AM: "We live in a global economy and part of this economy involves terrorism." This may over simplify it but I think the media is fanning the flames of fear. It's not a selling of the port to foreigners it's the operation of it. BTW---I believe the previous 'owner' of these operations were foreign, too.
From Military.com http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,89378,00.html
TomM

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by burnt-toast on Feb 26^th, 2006, 12:41pm

I see the old posi-spin machines reving up again folks. This isn't your average business deal involving indepent corporations. It's a deal that sells strategic port management to a nation with direct ties to terrorists and organizations deemed terroristic by the very same administration that now claims the deal is a non-event.

It's Bull$hit, historically the UAE was never a trustworthy U.S. ally, but recently began playing nice-nice with this administration and using it's greed to gain favor. The UAE's motives and more importantly committment to protect U.S. interests are questionable at best.

As for our so-called leaders.

Dubai Ports World (DPW) – owned by the United Arab Emirates invested 8 billion in the Carlyle Group. George Bush Sr. was a senior advisor in Carlyle and lots of little Bush’s own interests in Carlyle Group.

Neil Bush reportedly received funding from the UAE for his software company. Treasury Sec John Snow was chairman of CSX a company that sold its port operations business to DPW for over 1 billion.

G.W. Bush’s new appointee as U.S. Maritime Administrator, a position overseeing U.S. port operations is David Sanborn. Sanborn was most recently a DPW executive. DPW hired Bob Dole and two other Republican ex-senators to lobby Congress and paid over $750k to lobbying firms in the last year.

Is it any wonder that G.W. Bush insists he didn’t know anything about the deal until it was done? Considering he and his family’s extensive financial ties to the UAE and DPW, admitting he was aware of the deal would be a disaster. Sounds like the famous line by Sgt. Schultz “I know nothing”. Old G.W. needed to keep some distance between himself and this deal. To avoid scrutiny it became a secret review - so that he could claim ignorance.

Whether it’s Halliburton or Carlyle Group this deal, like so many other recent deals simply generate personal wealth for many of our so-called leaders who are capitalizing on their political power.

Again it appears that the good of our country and National Security must take a back seat to our industrious leader’s desires to make more money.

Tom

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by BarbaraD on Feb 26^th, 2006, 12:43pm

We've got to get people out to vote and get these people out of politics before we don't HAVE a vote to cast!!!

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by Charlie on Feb 26^th, 2006, 7:21pm

Port security isn't what a corporation does. That's what governments are for. You have to wonder what a corporation owned and managed by a country with a less than terrible record relating to its terrorist history, would have in our port security. http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/Mondeiu Smiley.gifhttp://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/nailbiting

It's like relying on Columbia to handle drug trafficking or Mexico to keep its eye on illegal immigraiton.

Not long ago Congress authorized about $175 million for port security and Bush & Co. whittled it down to something like $46 million which is less than pre-9/11 levels. (Buffalo News) the other day. http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/read paper

Charlie

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by _Lee_ on Feb 26^th, 2006, 9:58pm

I would think we could kick there ass out for just about any reason we could come up with. This is the question, do we set here on our asses and run out of natural gas or do we play the game. I happen to be one of those old guard Democrats that invested in this UAE gas find the day I heard about it, why, there not making any more. Not likely to ever find a deposit like this again. Same reason your paying $2.50 for gasoline. maybe $3.50 next year. My natural gas bill went from $80-120 a month to $250-300 a month in 1 year. These Arabs aren't stupid, if we want there gas, they manage some of our ports legally by buying a foreign company. Big Deal. Their role is like paying a toll on the turnpike, that's about it. After they pay the local and federal taxes they make maybe $.50 on the dollar. Let them do it or we will really fuck up the environment burning wood to stay warm. By the way we are not the only market for their gas.

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/15ca7342-a6f1-11da-b12c-0000779e2340.html

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by Kevin_M on Feb 26^th, 2006, 11:48pm

Detroit wasn't on their list and isn't probably a big port nowadays anymore but it would be a good ploy now to sneak something destructive through there in one of them 40 foot shipping boxcars, and then have the new 21 port management say, "It wasn't one of the ports WE manage." Nice alibi.

even excluded it seems uncomfortable here. :P

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by Kirk on Feb 27^th, 2006, 7:09am

Without getting into conspiracy theories, or the natural gas bs.
This is a contract to run cargo terminal operations. No ups, no extras.
Hell, we have military bases next to their port.

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by burnt-toast on Feb 27^th, 2006, 8:33am

Lee - seeing how this is only about the possibility of making money on UAE natural gas resverves...

and

Kirk - seeing how this is simply your average business deal that turns major port operations over to a foreign nation...

Lets do it!

For a while there I believed National Security was the key issue. You're confirmation that the potential for wealth is there if we treat this as just another average business transaction has really helped me get my priorities straight.

Money can make any pig's ear look like a silk purse. Money is the key issue, everything else must take a back seat.

I hadn't realized it was so simple with so little is at stake. I'm glad you could set me straight on this little issue. For a while there I was concerned we were being sold out. Go Figure.

Tom

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by TomM on Feb 27^th, 2006, 10:42am

on 02/27/06 at 08:33:49, burnt-toast wrote:

Kirk - seeing how this is simply your average business deal that turns major port operations over to a foreign nation...
I hadn't realized it was so simple with so little is at stake. I'm glad you could set me straight on this little issue. For a while there I was concerned we were being sold out. Go Figure.

Tom

It's NOT a foreign nation owning the port! It's company from a foreign land, I.E. not withing our borders, running the port. My oh my, aren't we paranoid.
I see this like Verizon setting up communcation towers in the mid east. I ASSUME [dont' shoot me for this] Verizon is there and that's a good thing, right?
Have you ever bought BP gasoline? That's British Petroleum, right. A FORIEGNER!
I'm not a spin-doctor and I rarely agree w/ Dubya. I was watching Tim Russert, as I do every Sunday morning, and thought Arnold's statement was appropriate. We do live in a global economy.
I think you are paranoind.
TomM

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by imnotbub on Feb 27^th, 2006, 11:50am

My wife has been telling me for the past few years that we should be worrying about the state of the country. That we are setting ourselves up for a major dissruption in the way we are used to living. She being from Cuba, I took what she said with a grain of salt, I saying that it could not happen here, there are too many checks and balances built into the system. Well, as it turns out, the checks and balances are starting to crack a bit. I am starting to worry about what kind of country we are leaving for our children. With the only growing industries in the nation being Casino gambling and fast food, I shudder to think what can be in store. Maybe we can let India run the ports from offices in Bombay. Hell, they run everything else from there. [smiley=deal2.gif]

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by burnt-toast on Feb 27^th, 2006, 12:43pm

on 02/27/06 at 10:42:44, TomM wrote:

TomM - DPW is owned by The UAE - it is NOT a private enterprise. Comparing Verizon to DPW is like compairing Gorillas to Chimpanzees, they may have simular features and traits but clearly not the same creatures.

Our massive trade deficit leads me to belive that our so-called "Trading Partners" around the globe view "Global Economy" as nothing more than opportunity to dump on American markets.

Regardless of what Arnold and other misguided leaders believe, a strong economy requires fair and balanced trade. Someone obviously was asleep when covering this topic in Economics 101. Without balance between imports and exports the U.S. economy will be destroyed by this short sighted version of a "Global Economy".

Am I paranoid? Given the events of 9/11 and the current state of affairs in the entire Middle East combined with The UAE's past history - you bet I am. You don't offer the keys to your house to someone who threatens your family.

Tom

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by _Lee_ on Feb 27^th, 2006, 1:09pm

on 02/27/06 at 08:33:49, burnt-toast wrote:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

My investment was made long before the current debate over ports came about. However this huge gas deposit is vital to our continued economic growth. The United States would not be the same country without cheap energy. They trust us enough to park war ships in their ports with enough fire power to trash their entire country. I'm not sure they even have a Navy. This also serves as a deterrent to the Arabs upset with them for them helping us during this Iraq mess. I seem to recall some home grown terrorists, they don't all come from the middle east. It is also a perfect launching point if we have to give Iran a little spanking.

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by mynm156 on Feb 27^th, 2006, 1:42pm

YEah I heard that last night. What do you expect from a Pres. Who counts on his fingers and still gets a C. Another line of BS from our leaders. The killer is they are taking it away from a British controlled company. I Biggest supporter and friend. Tell me again how this isnt a Bush family money deal?!

MYNM156

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by Gena on Feb 27^th, 2006, 1:51pm

on 02/27/06 at 13:42:28, mynm156 wrote:

Are the British having problems? Because it is not just the ports they are selling. Toshiba is all set to by Westinghouse from them. Besides all the appliances and so forth did you know that Westinghouse owns the largest % of Nuclear power plant in the United States?

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by TomM on Feb 27^th, 2006, 2:11pm

on 02/27/06 at 12:43:55, burnt-toast wrote:

TomM - DPW is owned by The UAE - it is NOT a private enterprise. Comparing Verizon to DPW is like compairing Gorillas to Chimpanzees, they may have simular features and traits but clearly not the same creatures. ...
Regardless of what Arnold and other misguided leaders believe, a strong economy requires fair and balanced trade. Someone obviously was asleep when covering this topic in Economics 101. ...
Am I paranoid? Given the events of 9/11 and the current state of affairs in the entire Middle East combined with The UAE's past history - you bet I am. You don't offer the keys to your house to someone who threatens your family.
Tom

Well, I've read differently. See this from http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,89437,00.html:
Port Deal to Get Broader Security Review
Associated Press | February 27, 2006
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration will conduct a highly unusual second review of potential security risks in a business deal it previously approved for a United Arab Emirates-based company to take over significant operations at six leading U.S. ports.

Explain your comment further about far and balanced trade. What does operation of the port have to do with fair trade? Seriously, you lost me.
If indeed, the company is a UAE owned company, I understand the paranoia and see that maybe I should be more concerned.
TomM

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by MJ on Feb 27^th, 2006, 2:29pm

on 02/27/06 at 14:11:49, TomM wrote:

If indeed, the company is a UAE owned company, I understand the paranoia and see that maybe I should be more concerned.
TomM

Dubai Ports World.
It is owned by the goverment (kingdom, Emirate) of the United Arab Emirates.
And you should be concerned.

I have no real doubts in their ability to run the ports.

I do have serious doubts in our governments intentions however.

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by TomM on Feb 27^th, 2006, 2:56pm

on 02/27/06 at 14:29:34, MJ wrote:

1) I've googled DP World http://www.dpa.ae/index.html and find no connection to it being owned by the government of UAE. Please enlighten me.
2) So, let me play devils advocate here. I have no doubts in your ability to do this job but based on the color of your skin [you are black], your gender [a Woman!?!?], your marital status [single mom], I REJECT you? So much for the US Civil war and civil rights movement.
3) The governments intentions [Dubya?] is whole nother ball of wax. And, I might add, the Bushes are tied to Saudis and oil so this does smell fishy.
TomM

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by karma on Feb 27^th, 2006, 3:00pm

The second review and 45 day waiting period is simply a way to take advantage of Americans' notoriously short attention span.
45 days = forgotten about = quietly approved!
Smart move!
45 days is more than enough time to make your displeasure known. How many will actually do something about it?
I wonder?

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by MJ on Feb 27^th, 2006, 4:11pm

Tom M

I would hope that you are not insinuating racial issues here. Because I am sure they are not relevant in any way though some will raise that claim.

Thought it was common knowledge as to who owns DPW.

As far as ownership of DPW, being a state owned corp it is hard to gain access to actual ownership records.
The deal advised by citigroup, largest owner/investor is also of UAE.

From The council on foreighn relations.; a non governmental "private organization" formerly Trilateral commission for you conspiracy buffs. (supporters and approvers of the deal.)

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9918/uae_purchase_of_american_port_facilities.html#4

Excert "Who runs DP World?
The company is a state-owned entity of the UAE, a Persian Gulf monarchy. Yet many of its senior leaders are Americans, including the Chief Operating Officer Edward "Ted" H. Bilkey, who was sent to Washington to assuage fears over the company’s recent acquisition. A former DP World executive, David Sanborn, was recently nominated by the Bush administration to be the U.S. Maritime Administrator. With the $6.8 billion purchase of P&O, DP World is now the third-largest port-operator in the world."

From the records of aquisition;

"OFFEREE: Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company (The)

100p deferred
ISIN: GB0006800485
NSI: 755,644,675

100p 5.5% concessionary redeemable non-cumulative preferred
ISIN: GB0006799943
NSI: 66,638,327

100p 5% cumulative preferred
ISIN: GB0006800261
NSI: 3,344,000

OFFEROR: Thunder FZE (a wholly owned subsidiary of Ports, Customs and Free Zone Corporation, Dubai)

Disclosure of dealings in this offeror is not required."

DPW website; (Scant mention of ownership but can be found in org. structure.)

http://www.dpiterminals.com/dpworld_main.asp

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by burnt-toast on Feb 27^th, 2006, 5:24pm

TomM -

© 2005 - DP World - UAE. All rights reserved.
DPW’s copy write says it all but…

Media Matters for America
On the February 22 edition of CNN's American Morning, CNN anchors and reporters repeatedly described Dubai Ports World -- the company set to assume control of six U.S. ports -- as an "Arab company" or a "Dubai-based company." But in simply describing Dubai Ports World as a company based in an Arab country, CNN obscured the source of the bipartisan controversy surrounding the takeover deal, in which Dubai Ports World acquired the British company that used to manage the U.S. ports. Members of Congress, governors, and other lawmakers have objected to the White House's approval of this transfer specifically because the company is owned by a foreign government with what The New York Times editorial board referred to as a "mixed" record on fighting terrorism.
Dubai Ports World is a state-run business in the United Arab Emirates.

NPR (National Public Radio)
Dubai Ports World at Center of Ports Debate
A much-criticized deal would give the UAE-owned company control over terminals at six major U.S. ports.

Defense.news
U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld praised the United Arab Emirates Feb. 21 as a valuable military ally but said he knew little about a decision to let a UAE-owned company run key U.S. ports.
Rumsfeld said he was not aware until this weekend of the decision to approve Dubai Ports World’s takeover of a British company that currently runs six major U.S. ports from New York to New Orleans.

From my earlier post – talk about fishy
Dubai Ports World (DPW) – owned by the United Arab Emirates invested 8 billion in the Carlyle Group. George Bush Sr. was a senior advisor in Carlyle and lots of little Bush’s own interests in Carlyle Group. Neil Bush reportedly received funding from the UAE for his software company. Treasury Sec John Snow was chairman of CSX a company that sold its overseas port operations business to DPW in 2004 for over 1 billion. G.W. Bush’s new appointee as U.S. Maritime Administrator, a position overseeing U.S. port operations is David Sanborn. Sanborn was most recently a top DPW executive. DPW hired Bob Dole and two other Republican ex-senators to lobby Congress and paid over $750k to lobbying firms in the last year.

TomM
Quote:

I'm not a spin-doctor and I rarely agree w/ Dubya. I was watching Tim Russert, as I do every Sunday morning, and thought Arnold's statement was appropriate. We do live in a global economy.

My reference to fair and balanced trade and our massive trade deficit was in response to your quote. Arnold saying we live in a “Global Economy” doesn't change how I view this deal. I'm fairly fed up with folks like Arnond allow the U.S. economy to be destroyed for what some insist is a "Global Economy".

Massive U.S. trade deficits and alarming National debt brought about by so-called global trading partners who use American markets as dumping grounds, and greedy corporations, politicians and investors making money hand over foot on cheap labor/imports will not create a strong U.S. Economy.

Hiding the effects of our trade deficit and National Debt is what currently forces elected U.S. representatives to court endless foreign investment and loans to shore up the economic disaster one-sided "Free Trade" agreements have been for the U.S. economy. Sorry if I lost you on this issue.

Tom

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by TomM on Feb 27^th, 2006, 5:33pm

Thank you, Tom and MJ. I appreciate your comments.
I am going to bow out of this discusion. Web posting and e-mail threads are forums which require more skill than I posses to express my opinion as eloquently as I would like.
TomM

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by Charlie on Feb 27^th, 2006, 6:52pm

It's mostly ultra free trade zealots in Washington that think this should fly. These guys don't care about much else. We get the short end of the stick every time. They will sacrifice everything for it.

For the most part, we have not pursued empire. The United States didn't need one like Britain. England had a real reason for it. We have been, until now because of oil gluttony, a pretty self-sufficent nation. It's just not viable anymore and we are learning the hard way.

We know that a foreign country isn't directly running the ports but none of that matters. A LOT of people picture Arabs running around Hudson River docks and taking in the sights adjacent to ground zero.

It just looks, and is, so damned stupid, on so many levels. http://www.schildersmilies.de/schilder/badidea.gif

Charlie

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by _Lee_ on Feb 27^th, 2006, 7:27pm

on 02/27/06 at 18:52:35, Charlie wrote:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Charlie, do you burn natural gas or heating oil?

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by _Lee_ on Feb 27^th, 2006, 7:30pm

on 02/25/06 at 11:43:34, BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote:

I'm fairly sure the are called Longshormen. BM

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by _Lee_ on Feb 27^th, 2006, 7:37pm

on 02/27/06 at 13:51:01, Gena wrote:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Westinghouse designs, builds and installs nuclear reactors worldwide, as far as owning the finished power plant, I have never heard of that, they are always owned by some sort of utility co.

http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by TomM on Feb 28^th, 2006, 10:01am

Wow! I did not realize that Westinghouse® was so involved in nuclear power. My dad retired from Westinghouse® and was very proud of the Circle Underscore Double U.
http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/NewW/logo.jpg
His invovlement was w/ undersea sonar and torpedo development during the late Cold War era. The book Blind Man's Bluff revealed information about my father I did not realize; the names in the book were changed but I knew, hell I grew up with, most of the characters. Some remain very good family friends. The book revealed how a group of Westinghouse® engineers and Navy officials "tapped" the soviet naval fleet's communication cable. A picture showed the device clearly stamped "Property of the United States".
Ah, fond memories of my father. Thank you.
TomM

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by Charlie on Feb 28^th, 2006, 5:09pm

Quote:

Charlie, do you burn natural gas or heating oil?

The first gas well in the US was 30 miles from here. Pretty dry by now. Ours comes from all over now of course. Lots of oil in the country though. If I had some real gumption, I'd get an all electric system.
http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/Plug in.gif
My light bill here runs about 20 bucks.

Charlie

Title: Re: 6 Ports = 21 Ports
Post by _Lee_ on Feb 28^th, 2006, 11:24pm

I don't know about that Charlie, I thought it was when Jed shot the rabbit and up came the bubbling crude, where there is crude there is gas. Are you as old as Granny? [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif]