Dubai Ports selling out

[Controlled Chaos]

For me the issue has always been about the hypocrisy (sp?) of the adminsitration on this issue first and foremost.

 

The nations of the world are "either with us or against us."  We used suspected ties to terrorism as partial reason for the Iraq invasion.

 

Now, we're giving a lucrative deal to a company owned and controlled by a government that has provided funding to El Quaida, from a country that some of the 9-11 hijackers travelled throuugh to get to the US, and one of a handful of countries (Pakistan and Saudi Arabia being the others) that recognized the Taliban as the legitimate Afghan government.

 

How's that for ties to terrorism?

 

I truly don't think the move compromises our security in any way, and a good NPR piece this morning supported this belief.  But I'd like aomwone who thinks reservations aboutt this deal are unfounded to square the "with us or against us" rhetoric with the fact that we are giving a company owned by a state with KNOWN ties to terrorist organizations a $6 billion dollar contract.

 

First let me say that I don't like this deal, so I'm not arguing in favor of it.

 

I'm just saying blocking this company because they are Arab owned and from the UAE is the discrimination and racial profiling that is deemed reprehensible when used against an individual. Why is it ok for so many politicians to be discriminating against this whole country.

 

If 5 people from the UAE were to come to this country to work, a company could not say we can't hire you cause you came from UAE. The ACLU would be on that company in the blink of an eye. Just as American Airlines can't say, you came from UAE so we're going to have to check you a little more closely than grandma over here.

[southsider2k5]

Out of curiousity, how many companies in the world are in this kind of business anyway?

 

Anyone?

[BigSqwert]

First let me say that I don't like this deal, so I'm not arguing in favor of it.

 

I'm just saying blocking this company because they are Arab owned and from the UAE is the discrimination and racial profiling that is deemed reprehensible when used against an individual.  Why is it ok for so many politicians to be discriminating against this whole country.

 

If 5 people from the UAE were to come to this country to work, a company could not say we can't hire you cause you came from UAE.  The ACLU would be on that company in the blink of an eye.  Just as American Airlines can't say, you came from UAE so we're going to have to check you a little more closely than grandma over here.

It's a STATE-OWNED company. The UAE owns, or partly owns, this company. The UAE has had terrosist ties. There should be no reason that a terrorist-supporting government manages American infrastructure on our soil. It is ludacris. That's why an overwhelming majority of Americans and politicians are opposing this deal.

[kapkomet]

It's a STATE-OWNED company.  The UAE owns, or partly owns, this company.  The UAE has had terrosist ties.  There should be no reason that a terrorist-supporting government manages American infrastructure on our soil.  It is ludacris.  That's why an overwhelming majority of Americans and politicians are opposing this deal.

I hear you. And I'm inclined to agree, on the surface. However, again, on principle, we shouldn't be buying a DROP of oil then - Iran, Saudi, UAE, etc.

 

On southsider's question - I think there are about 3 or 4 major companys that do this. This is only from what I can remember when talking about this when I worked at the airline and talked about import shipments.

 

The British Company that has been doing it (now selling out to UAE) will take the British out of the business for good. There's another port company that is in the US (I think in MIA), but they are small potatoes.

 

The major companies that do this now are the UAE folks, and 2 from China, and the one here, the one here being by far the smallest of the group.

 

Again, this is off the top of my head, no research done.

Edited February 22, 2006 by kapkomet

[NorthSideSox72]

First let me say that I don't like this deal, so I'm not arguing in favor of it.

 

I'm just saying blocking this company because they are Arab owned and from the UAE is the discrimination and racial profiling that is deemed reprehensible when used against an individual.  Why is it ok for so many politicians to be discriminating against this whole country.

 

If 5 people from the UAE were to come to this country to work, a company could not say we can't hire you cause you came from UAE.  The ACLU would be on that company in the blink of an eye.  Just as American Airlines can't say, you came from UAE so we're going to have to check you a little more closely than grandma over here.

Are you trying to justify racial profiling? Or are you saying its wrong, including in this case? Or do you agree with those who say this is an apples/oranges comparison? What is the point you are really driving at here?

[NorthSideSox72]

Anyone?

It can't be very many.

[kapkomet]

Hey you know, this could be the opportunity of a lifetime. Any of you soxtalkers out there want to start a logisitics company that runs ports???

 

[BigSqwert]

I hear you.  And I'm inclined to agree, on the surface.  However, again, on principle, we shouldn't be buying a DROP of oil then - Iran, Saudi, UAE, etc.

Well you're talking to a tree-hugger who doesn't own a car. I would love that we didn't buy oil from that region and I would have supported a bold move like that after 9/11. But that's another topic all together.

[Balta1701]

Anyone?

Sorry for the delay, I was asleep!

 

I can at least tell you of 1 other...there's a company from Miami which has sued to block the sale.

[Controlled Chaos]

Are you trying to justify racial profiling?  Or are you saying its wrong, including in this case?  Or do you agree with those who say this is an apples/oranges comparison?  What is the point you are really driving at here?

 

That the people arguing against this are hypocrites. They are profiling.

[southsider2k5]

Hey you know, this could be the opportunity of a lifetime.  Any of you soxtalkers out there want to start a logisitics company that runs ports???

 

 

Can I borrow $6,800,000,000.01?

[BigSqwert]

For someone who is all gung-ho about vetoing any attempts to block this deal I'm starting to wonder how well informed he is on the matter. Turns out he heard about the deal after it was already made.

Bush Unaware of Port Deal Until After Approval

[kapkomet]

Can I borrow $6,800,000,000.01?

Hey - I have an "in" in Dubai...

[BigSqwert]

They are profiling.

That's bulls***. We dont think the UAE is supporting terrorism, we know it.

[Balta1701]

That the people arguing against this are hypocrites.  They are profiling.

How would you feel about the Chinese Government handling management and hiring security personnel at U.S. ports?

[kapkomet]

That's bulls***.  We dont think the UAE is supporting terrorism, we know it.

I don't have time to go into it right now, but I was somewhat serious when I said something about alluding to knowing some things about Dubai and how they operate.

 

I'm telling you - there's more going on here then we know. I'm not saying it's right, but there's a lot more to this then is being reported.

[Balta1701]

For someone who is all gung-ho about vetoing any attempts to block this deal I'm starting to wonder how well informed he is on the matter.  Turns out he heard about the deal after it was already made.

Bush Unaware of Port Deal Until After Approval

Which only adds to my bewilderment as to why he's so adamantly in favor of this deal going through.

[Balta1701]

Based on press reports today, it also seems that the proper procedures for approval of this deal were in fact not followed. Which in part would explain how a guy who seemingly voted for it in Rumsfeld claims that he didn't know about it until it was reported in the press.

 

In ordinary cases of foreign direct investment the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) first conducts a 30-day “review” of the transaction. After the review, the committee makes a judgment as to whether a 45-day “investigation” is necessary to address national security concerns.

 

The law, however, was amended in 1993. That amendment makes the 45-day investigation mandatory in cases like the Dubai World Ports transfer.

 

...

Yet, the investigation never happened. Bush administration officials “could not say why a 45-day investigation did not occur.”

(Yes, it's a partisan site...but the links are good)

[Balta1701]

911 commission staff report 4:

 

On February 8, the military began to ready itself for a possible strike. The next day, national technical intelligence confirmed the location and description of the larger camp and showed the nearby presence of an official aircraft of the United Arab Emirates. But the location of Bin Ladin’s quarters could not be pinned down so precisely…According to reporting from the tribals, Bin Ladin regularly went from his adjacent camp to the larger camp where he visited the Emiratis; the tribals expected him to be at the hunting camp for such a visit at least until midmorning on February 11…No strike was launched. By February 12 Bin Ladin had apparently moved on, and the immediate strike plans became moot. According to CIA and Defense officials, policymakers were concerned about the danger that a strike would kill an Emirati prince or other senior officials who might be with Bin Ladin or close by.....

 

On March 7, 1999, Clarke called a UAE official to express his concerns about possible associations between Emirati officials and Bin Ladin…The United Arab Emirates was becoming both a valued counterterrorism ally of the United States and a persistent counterterrorism problem.

[Controlled Chaos]

How would you feel about the Chinese Government handling management and hiring security personnel at U.S. ports?

 

This isn't about what I want. I would personally rather our governement handle all our ports. I think it was a London based company that was sold to the UAE...I wouldn't have liked that London company either...I didn't know s*** about our ports then though.

 

Why can't we manage our own ports?

 

I vote for Kapomet's start up company...he seems like a good enough guy and he's not from the UAE so right there is big plus for everyone.

Edited February 22, 2006 by Controlled Chaos

[BigSqwert]

This isn't about what I want.  I would personally rather our governement handle all our ports.  I think it was a London based company that was sold to the UAE...I wouldn't have liked that London company either...I didn't know s*** about then though.

 

Why can't we manage our own ports? 

 

I vote for Kapomet's start up company...he seems like a good enough guy and he's not from the UAE so right there is big plus for everyone.

Big difference between a privately held company and a state owned one.

[kapkomet]

Big difference between a privately held company and a state owned one.

All of the major companies in the Middle East and China are state owned. So, by extension, that means we can never have any of those interests in our country? That's indeed 'profiling'.

 

Again, maybe we need to 'profile'. Or maybe not.

[Balta1701]

All of the major companies in the Middle East and China are state owned.  So, by extension, that means we can never have any of those interests in our country?  That's indeed 'profiling'.

 

Again, maybe we need to 'profile'. Or maybe not.

As far as I know...we don't allow companies run by foreign powers to do a lot of things in this country...I believe they're not allowed to buy TV stations for example.

[BigSqwert]

All of the major companies in the Middle East and China are state owned.  So, by extension, that means we can never have any of those interests in our country? 

We don't need those types of companies controlling our infrastructure.

[kapkomet]

We don't need those types of companies controlling our infrastructure.

'racist'...

 

 

Yea, I hear you. I just wonder what's really behind all this.