UAE no longer purchasing US Ports!

Forums: Politics, Political, American Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Quote:

A United Arab Emirates-owned company said Thursday it would give up its management stake in a controversial ports deal that has taken Washington by storm and has caused massive upheaval in the president's own party.

The Thursday announcement came just hours after Republican leaders warned President Bush that the House and Senate appeared ready to block Dubai Ports World from taking over some terminal operations at six U.S. ports.

"Because of the strong relationship between the United Arab Emirates and the United States and to preserve that relationship, DP World has decided to transfer fully the U.S. operation of P&O Operations North America to a United States entity," DP World's chief operating officer, Edward H. Bilkey, said in a statement, read on the Senate floor by Sen. John Warner, R-Va.

The company said its decision was "based on an understanding that DP World will have time to affect the transfer in an orderly fashion and that DP World will not suffer economic loss."

The announcement was somewhat of a blow for Democrats, who were pushing for a Senate vote on an amendment that would halt the deal. The Senate later voted 51-47 to ignore GOP requests to wait until a 45-day review of the deal is completed before they try to stop it. Republican leaders needed 67 votes to stop debate on the measure.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,187307,00.html

Thank goodness cause you know what, that really pissed me off that Bush could be so utterly stupid to try to sell our ports off to a country based out of the Middle East.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,800 • Replies: 14

No top replies

@Brent cv,

But it's ok when we sell them to the chinese? No one said **** about that? We have been at it with them far longer then the arabs. We allow them to buy our dept. But there not good enough to own a port business. The nay sayers waited way to long to announce there dismay.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

The only reason Bush was for the deal is someone told him to be for it. He didn't know :dunno: about it until we did.

If Bush and company would have been up front about the deal, it might have been different.

1 Reply

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed wrote:

The only reason Bush was for the deal is someone told him to be for it. He didn't know :dunno: about it until we did.

If Bush and company would have been up front about the deal, it might have been different.

And who would that some one be?

Quote:

He didn't know :dunno: about it until we did.

Sounds like Congress was in the same boat, but bush should of known but congress shouldn't off?

Quote:

If Bush and company would have been up front about the deal, it might have been different

And monkeys can fly.

0 Replies

@Brent cv,

Just because they didn't make a big deal about China doesn't mean that is ok for them to outsource security to the UAE

1 Reply

@Brent cv,

Brent wrote:

Just because they didn't make a big deal about China doesn't mean that is ok for them to outsource security to the UAE

Where did they outsource "security" to the UAE. they contracted them to operate the port, nothing else? Just like they didn't oursource security to the chinese.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Drnaline wrote:

Where did they outsource "security" to the UAE. they contracted them to operate the port, nothing else? Just like they didn't oursource security to the chinese.

Quote:

Nonetheless, the FBI has also concluded that the UAE's banking system filtered much of the money used for the operational planning before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and many of the hijackers traveled to the United States through the UAE.

Saying that he hopes Bush will overrule the committee and disapprove the deal, Foley pointed out that the UAE on Wednesday moved to improve bilateral trade ties to Iran.

"When the international community is attempting to bring Iran's nuclear abilities to a halt, the United Arab Emirates are talking about expanded trade opportunities with Iran," he said, wondering aloud whose side the UAE would land on if tensions escalated between the United States and Iran.

"This is, after all, a country that still sees the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan and still fails to recognize Israel as a sovereign state," Foley said.

"For a country that recognized the Taliban, as one of only three, the last thing you want is a country like this to have control of ... our ports," added Shays.

If that isn't giving the UAE easy access to our ports I don't know what is! The fact that they manage the ports opens up all kinds of oppurtunities for terrorists. To simply say that it does not is crazy. The UAE does not need to be in control of our ports and this is something both republicans and democrats agree on.

I have yet to see you disagree with one thing Bush does on this site or give credit to one good thing Clinton has done! Can we be a little more open minded here?

Given our port control to a company that is in the middle east and has less than adequate security is STUPID

1 Reply

@Brent cv,

Brent wrote:

If that isn't giving the UAE easy access to our ports I don't know what is! The fact that they manage the ports opens up all kinds of oppurtunities for terrorists. To simply say that it does not is crazy. The UAE does not need to be in control of our ports and this is something both republicans and democrats agree on.

I have yet to see you disagree with one thing Bush does on this site or give credit to one good thing Clinton has done! Can we be a little more open minded here?

Given our port control to a company that is in the middle east and has less than adequate security is STUPID

Quote:

If that isn't giving the UAE easy access to our ports I don't know what is!

I believe the word you used was "security". We are not handing them over our security. The company is owned by the Emirates, not run by it. The CEO is an american.

Quote:

The fact that they manage the ports opens up all kinds of oppurtunities for terrorists.

The fact that we have a pourious border and only check five percent of the containers will atribute to an attack more then any thing. And that has nothing to do with this deal.

Quote:

To simply say that it does not is crazy.

They will not be handleing the security. The company just unloads ships. Any one wanting to work in the US has to follow our standard security screening. They are not exempt.

Quote:

The UAE does not need to be in control of our ports and this is something both republicans and democrats agree on.

But it is ok for the chinese? Your discriminating/racial profiling. China is on it's way to be a super power and last year alone spent 90 billion on there military and your not affraid of them? Seems to me they would be willing to help the terrorists as well.

Quote:

I have yet to see you disagree with one thing Bush does on this site or give credit to one good thing Clinton has done! Can we be a little more open minded here?

I disagree with Bush on a of alot of things. You've never asked about them untill now. Clinton on the other had is a very good example to creat a double standard because most of the time he has done it before at least once or twice. Then i research the MSM on that proir story and don't find any rebutle from them. I am forced to believe they think it's ok for clinton to do it but not bush, Double Standard. Open minded would be giving a company a chance like we did china. Where is your open mind on the subject? It is not with the company.

Quote:

Given our port control to a company that is in the middle east and has less than adequate security is STUPID

Stupid would be giving a contract to china as well but nothing from the opposing senators or the nay sayers? The UAE's banking system may of filter moneys through for terrorists, like there supposed to do even with normal citizens of there prospective countrys, it also does not mean they new who they were doing it for. Just like our banks filter moneys for the Mafia and like criminal organizations. This company did not do any of that but yet you have a built in stigma about them. This only leads be to believe you are profiling them as a whole, can we be a little more open minded, some thing you accuse me the lack off?

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Drnaline wrote:

I believe the word you used was "security". We are not handing them over our security. The company is owned by the Emirates, not run by it. The CEO is an american.

I used security because giving them operating control over our ports would open up a whole slew of security issues given their location and track record with terrorists. They may not be in control of it but when you manage the port it is a lot easier for the terrorists.

Quote:

The fact that we have a pourious border and only check five percent of the containers will atribute to an attack more then any thing. And that has nothing to do with this deal.

So what? I agree we have pourious borders but that does not excuse selling our port management to someone smack dab in the middle of a terrorist haven.

Quote:

They will not be handleing the security. The company just unloads ships. Any one wanting to work in the US has to follow our standard security screening. They are not exempt.

Quote:

But it is ok for the chinese? Your discriminating/racial profiling. China is on it's way to be a super power and last year alone spent 90 billion on there military and your not affraid of them? Seems to me they would be willing to help the terrorists as well.

Except when was the last time a chinese man blew up 3 of our buildings? I don't like the Chinese part of it either. I am speaking out against UAE because this is something happening NOW.

Why have you assumed I like the idea of the chinese controlling our ports? We are not talking about China we are talking about UAE.

Quote:

I disagree with Bush on a of alot of things. You've never asked about them untill now. Clinton on the other had is a very good example to creat a double standard because most of the time he has done it before at least once or twice. Then i research the MSM on that proir story and don't find any rebutle from them. I am forced to believe they think it's ok for clinton to do it but not bush, Double Standard. Open minded would be giving a company a chance like we did china. Where is your open mind on the subject? It is not with the company.

Quote:

Stupid would be giving a contract to china as well but nothing from the opposing senators or the nay sayers?

WHO CARES? Just because they let China do it does not mean we have to let the UAE do it. Stop the UAE from controlling our ports and then we can pressure the Senators on China? I do not understand this "Just because we let China do it we shouldn't stop UAE from doing it".

Quote:

The UAE's banking system may of filter moneys through for terrorists, like there supposed to do even with normal citizens of there prospective countrys, it also does not mean they new who they were doing it for. Just like our banks filter moneys for the Mafia and like criminal organizations. This company did not do any of that but yet you have a built in stigma about them. This only leads be to believe you are profiling them as a whole, can we be a little more open minded, some thing you accuse me the lack off?

I do not want a company in the middle east touching our ports. Outsourcing whatever you want to call it is stupid. It is about time we control our own ports.

1 Reply

@Brent cv,

Brent wrote:

I used security because giving them operating control over our ports would open up a whole slew of security issues given their location and track record with terrorists. They may not be in control of it but when you manage the port it is a lot easier for the terrorists.

So what? I agree we have pourious borders but that does not excuse selling our port management to someone smack dab in the middle of a terrorist haven.

Except when was the last time a chinese man blew up 3 of our buildings? I don't like the Chinese part of it either. I am speaking out against UAE because this is something happening NOW.

Why have you assumed I like the idea of the chinese controlling our ports? We are not talking about China we are talking about UAE.

WHO CARES? Just because they let China do it does not mean we have to let the UAE do it. Stop the UAE from controlling our ports and then we can pressure the Senators on China? I do not understand this "Just because we let China do it we shouldn't stop UAE from doing it".

I do not want a company in the middle east touching our ports. Outsourcing whatever you want to call it is stupid. It is about time we control our own ports.

Quote:

I used security because giving them operating control over our ports would open up a whole slew of security issues given their location and track record with terrorists. They may not be in control of it but when you manage the port it is a lot easier for the terrorists.

Given who's track record? The Emirite government or the port company? If you mean the government then you have an arguement, if you mean the company you have no legs. Either way it is easy right now to do some terrorist activity with or without the Dubai company. Security is our issue, some thing we will not be giving up whom ever is operating the port.

Quote:

So what? I agree we have pourious borders but that does not excuse selling our port management to someone smack dab in the middle of a terrorist haven.

What you forget to include in your statement is Arab. Insert it in between "someone" and "smack". I chose to insert "chinese" in the same spot.

Quote:

Except when was the last time a chinese man blew up 3 of our buildings?

They have done far worse, try starving millions, aiding North Korea in there atrosities, forcing Taiwan to submit. Much greater damage to mankind then three buildings.

Quote:

I don't like the Chinese part of it either. I am speaking out against UAE because this is something happening NOW.

Something now or something we have been fighting for fifty plus years. The greater threat to me is them aiding everyone against us.

Quote:

WHO CARES? Just because they let China do it does not mean we have to let the UAE do it. Stop the UAE from controlling our ports and then we can pressure the Senators on China? I do not understand this "Just because we let China do it we shouldn't stop UAE from doing it".

who cares is You. Your excuse is not good enough. We all live under our Constitution of which every one is created equal, it does not say except arabs. Or chinese or any one else for that matter. Next thing you'll say is it is ok for us to put arabs in camps maybe or deport arabs even though there citizens? You may not admit it but you are discrimination against them, some this that is against the constitution. Briton has terrorist, we have them, so does much of the rest of the world. But lets single the UAE out anyway, exspecailly an ally. We have to few these days but lets alienate them any way. Show them we don't mean what we say. Gives them alot to expect on how we deal with them.

Quote:

I do not want a company in the middle east touching our ports. Outsourcing whatever you want to call it is stupid. It is about time we control our own ports.

When do you start your new job. Unloading cargo for a buck seventyfive an hour, no benefits. I know your answer, go take a hike of a short peer. You don't want them there but you like i would not want to do it either. So who is next? Sell it to the Mexicans? In other words no american company even bid on the port deal. Who wants to work for almost free?

0 Replies

@Brent cv,

We have issues we need to address here if we can not pay our own people to work st our ports.

1 Reply

@Brent cv,

Brent wrote:

We have issues we need to address here if we can not pay our own people to work st our ports.

Explain that to the Long Shoremans Union and the Mafia.

0 Replies

@Brent cv,

I'm a bit out of touch with the ports deals but i must say i trusted the Bush administartion with this. If there is something I trust this administration with it's national security, if President Bush aprroved of it and had enough information to know that Dubai owned ports would not be a threat, then i had no opposition.

0 Replies

@Brent cv,

[SIZE="5"]"SELL UP YOU DIRTY ARABS"[/SIZE]

Quote:

[SIZE="3"]Dubai under scrutiny after debt payment delay [/SIZE]

Dubai World has fuelled the emirate's rapid economic growth of recent years
Dubai's financial health has come under scrutiny after a major, government-owned investment company asked for a six-month delay on repaying its debts.

BBC News - Dubai under scrutiny after debt payment delay

[SIZE="3"]" . . . . . . . .SELL UP! . . . . You fvcking dirty Arabs . . . . . . .before we change our minds and feed you to the Negroids. HAIL! the New Northern Alliance " Shouted the White Supremacist Racists.[/SIZE]

Quote:

Dubai default fears spook investors
By Jamie Chisholm, Global Markets Commentator

Published: November 26 2009 07:09 | Last updated: November 26 2009 13:04

13:00 GMT. Global stock markets endured heavy selling on Thursday as investors were spooked by the spectre of a default by Dubai and after a febrile foreign exchange market saw the yen surge to a 14-year high against the dollar.

The turmoil caused a flight to less risky assets. Gold, which had challenged $1,200 in Asian trading, fell back from its highs and money flowed into havens such as German government bonds.

FT.com / FT's rolling global market overview - Dubai default fears spook investors

Quote:

[SIZE="3"]Global markets hit by fresh bout of selling[/SIZE]
By Simeon Kerr in Dubai, James Drummond in Abu Dhabi and Jamie Chisholm in London

Published: November 26 2009 11:59 | Last updated: November 27 2009 10:00

FT.com / Middle East - Global markets hit by fresh bout of selling

[SIZE="5"]INDIA[/SIZE] :dunno:

Quote:

[SIZE="3"]Robert Fisk: India may hold whip hand in this power game[/SIZE]

Robert Fisk: India may hold whip hand in this power game - Robert Fisk, Commentators - The Independent

[SIZE="7"]KALI :headbang:[/SIZE]

http://www.conflictingviews.com/religion/christianity/unity-hinduism-islam-3915.html#post69350

1 Reply

@RESS,

[SIZE="5"]FLOODS IN A DESSERT?[/SIZE] :dunno:

Quote:

[SIZE="3"]Flood deaths in Saudi Arabia rise to around 100 [/SIZE]

Heavy rainstorms on Wednesday hampered the start of the annual Hajj pilgrimage in the nearby city of Mecca, but officials said there were no pilgrims among casualties of the flooding.

Apart from Jeddah, flood deaths were reported in Rabigh and Mecca.

BBC News - Flood deaths in Saudi Arabia rise to around 100

[SIZE="3"]
" . . . . . .Did you get the hint? . . . . . . ."

" . . . . . We can give you dirty Arabs a fvcking climate change showerin the middle of the dessert. . . . . . "

" . . . . .SELL UP or we fvck you up . . . . . " Boasted the White Supremacist Racists. HAIL the New Northern Alliance.[/SIZE]

0 Replies

UAE no longer purchasing US Ports!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know