Dubai To Manage US Ports?

Not strange to have a foreign-owned country manage the ports so much, since the majority of our ports are managed by foreign companies anyway, but strange because of the home of this particular country.

Some mislabel it as racial profiling but I think a better term would be regional profiling.

And I don't really have a problem with it. Things are going to hell so fast around here all a person can do is just wait it out and see if we emerge from the ashes.

One started here D'art

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=69779&start=0

ps... have you signed up for fantasy baseball yet?

Aha, thanks jp, and Gustav for pointing out that this isn't so abnormal.

It's just that politicians, including my own senator, Patty Murray, have been saying for years that our ports are highly vulnerable to terrorism. If this is true, and it's hard to say she can't be right, why are US ports managed by foreign companies?

Lets not forget that most ships that enter our ports are foreign owned and operated.

A foreign owned company already runs the ports. Its just that right now its a British owned company and not the state owned UAE company

this article gives some background on "Dubai Ports World" , the corporation ready to take over operations of american ports.
the COO of the corporation , ted bilkey, was interviewed by wolf blitzer on CNN this afternoon. mr bilkey stated that DPW will do everything necessary to make sure the deal is closed.
mr bilkey is the son of former senator bilkey(now deceased ?).
mr bilkey stated that former senator dole has been retained as 'counsel' to DPW.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 20, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

"DUBAI PORTS WORLD" by jerome r. corsi
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerome R. Corsi received a Ph.D. from Harvard University in political science in 1972 and has written many books and articles, including co-authoring with John O'Neill the No. 1 New York Times best-seller, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry." Dr. Corsi's most recent books include "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil," which he co-authored with WND columnist Craig. R. Smith, and "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Dubai Ports World acquisition of the London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation is being portrayed as the operation of free markets in which the United States should have no objection or interference. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

DPW was formed by a September 2005 merger of Dubai Port Authority and Dubai Port International. DPW is 100 percent owned by the government of the Emirate of Dubai via a Dubai government holding company called the PCFC (Ports, Customs, and Free Zone Corporation). The government holding company is headed by the ruler of Dubai, Shiek Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, who took over on Jan. 4, 2006, following the death of his father, Sheikh Maktoum.


The financing for the transaction reveals even more clearly that DPW is a governmental agency fronted as a commercial entity. Barclays Capital, the investment banking division of Barclays Bank PLC and Deutsche Bank AG are organizing an international lending syndicate to create a $6.3 billion term loan and a $200 million revolving facility in a $6.5 billion loan deal to finance the acquisition.

This nearly-100 percent leveraged takeover is possible only because the debt will be backed by A1 Moody's rating of Dubai, one of the seven Emirates comprising the United Arab Emirates. The borrowing entity will be Thunder FZE (Free Zone Enterprise), an acquisition vehicle set up by DPW, with a 100 percent guarantee provided by PCFC. Some 30 international banks are expected to participate in the $6.5 billion acquisition, plus refinancing a $1.65 billion loan DPW raised last year. Debt issues are not foreign to Dubai - last month PCFC issued a separate two-year $3.5 billion Islamic bond, the largest Islamic bond ever raised.

DPW also appears wired into the Bush administration. Last month, George Bush nominated one of DPW's senior executives, David C. Sanborn, to serve as maritime administrator, an important transportation appointment reporting directly to Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta. Mr. Sanford, a graduate of the U.S. Merchant Maritime Academy, joined DPW in 2005. Before being nominated to be maritime administrator, Mr. Sanford served as DPW's director of Operations for Europe and Latin America.

Dubai has been far from faultless in the War on Terrorism. The 9-11 Commission Report documents how al-Qaida and the 9-11 terrorists who flew the airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon used Dubai as a banking facility and a country of transit. Dubai continues to work actively with the radical religious clerics ruling Iran, serving both as a vacation home and a capital haven to many of the wealthy mullahs and their families, including former Prime Minister Hashemi-Rafsanjani, who is the first mullah to be considered a billionaire while the Iranian per capita GDP continues to be calculated at around $1,800.

By the end of 2006, Dubai calculates that some $300 billion will have been moved from Iran to Dubai by over 400,000 Iranians. Iranians who travel to Dubai for business are estimated to constitute 25 percent of Dubai's population. The Dubai Chamber of Commerce shows that more than 6,500 Iranian-owned companies are now registered in the UAE under Iranian nationality. Some 10,000 Iranian students live and study in Dubai. Some 20 percent of the investments in Dubai shopping centers are now registered under Iranian names. In one week, at the end of June 2005, Iranians bought 31 percent of the luxurious villas of Al Hamra tourism-residential complex, located in Ras Al Khaimah, north of Dubai. The UAE is a popular tourist location for those Iranians lucky enough to have the funds to travel, with many visiting several times a year, spending considerable sums on shopping, hotels and the beach.

With Iran defiantly pursuing a nuclear program believed to be building weapons, and with Dubai having established financial connections with al-Qaida operatives, is President Bush having another "Harriet Miers moment" in allowing Dubai Ports World to gain operations control over American ports in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia?



Maybe the explanation is that President Bush takes seriously the idea of establishing a Bush-Clinton dynasty and he just seized the opportunity to allow Hillary Clinton to move to the center, leading with Senate hawks who see the Bush administration decision as risking our national security by turning over control of our ports to an Arab Islamic state that is obviously too comfortable with terrorists.

In "Atomic Iran," I specifically chose the scenario that terror sleeper cells in America would seek to obtain an improvised nuclear device manufactured in Iran and shipped into the United States in a container delivered to a New York area port. The Bush administration has been lax in patrolling our porous border with Mexico. Evidently, the Bush administration proposes to deal with our ports with a similar lack of concern that we are turning over operations of key American ports to what amounts to the government of Dubai. The DPW deal is giving me serious concern that we might see yet another prediction I made in "Atomic Iran" become reality.
-----------------------------------------------------------

The real issue here is that the proposal would change port operation from a privately held foreign company to a state-owned foreign company. Clinton admin allowed one of our ports to be operated by a Chinese company without a big fuss, because it was not a state-owned company. Personally, I would feel the same way if the proposal was to have ports operated by a company owned by Great Britain - a foreign government shouldn't be operating our ports; a foreign-owned, privately held company is okay as long as all security measures are met.

I'm curious how the usual Bushie supporters are going to defend this one

It is interesting to me that the Bush administration is very quick to say they didn't "know" when things don't go well, so therefore it is not Bush's fault.

Bush didn't know about the memos regarding a possible terror threat that led to 9/11.

Bush didn't know the WMD intelligence was faulty.

Bush didn't know about the prisoner abuse at Abu Garib.

Bush didn't know that Hurricane Katrina was a bad storm.

Bush didn't know the medicare prescription plan had more bugs in it than a filthy restaurant.

Bush didn't know about this purchase, but he supported it????

Bush sure doesn't know much.

It's amazing to me that a little less than half the voters in this country knew that keeping this man in office for another four years was a bad thing. How come the rest of the voters didn't? Maybe they're like Bush...they didn't know. lol

Guess you haven't been following the news - nobody likes this deal.

Obscure US intelligence agency assessed ports deal

By David Morgan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A deal that allows an Arab-owned company in Dubai to manage six major U.S. ports was scrutinized for security risks by an obscure intelligence agency that has existed for only four months, American officials said on Wednesday.

The Intelligence Community Acquisition Risk Centre, or CARC, overseen by the office of intelligence chief John Negroponte, was asked by the government committee that vets foreign investments in the United States to look into the ports deal soon after it came to its attention in early November.

U.S. officials approved the sale of British-based P&O to Dubai Ports World of the United Arab Emirates on January 16, giving the Arab-owned firm a green light to take over port operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New Orleans and Miami.

But the deal has since unleashed a political firestorm from both Republicans and Democrats, who see it as a potential risk to national security.

The White House sought to stem criticism on Wednesday by saying the port takeover had been reviewed by intelligence agencies, including counterterrorism experts.

"The intelligence community did assessments to make sure that there was no national security threat," White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters.

But intelligence officials said CARC, which has little to do with counterterrorism activities, was formed just last October as the agency mandated to assess security risks posed by companies that do business with the intelligence community.

Only a small part of the center's resources are devoted to vetting commercial deals, officials said.

CARC's first director, William Dawson, was appointed in January, more than a month after the centre had been asked to begin work on the Dubai Ports World acquisition.

Dawson had been a senior information technology official for the intelligence community prior to his appointment.

A spokesman for Negroponte acknowledged the intelligence community provided an assessment but declined to discuss specifics.

Intelligence officials, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about CARC, said many of the center's functions were transferred to Negroponte's office from the CIA in 2005 as a result of congressionally mandated intelligence reforms.

BBB
With all the fuss over Dubai managing US ports, has everyone forgotten that as soon as the US turned the Panama Canal over to Panama, the Panamanians contracted out the canal management to the Chinese via a state-owned Chinese company?

BBB

Dubai Firm Accused of Breaking Pledge to Divest Itself of US Port Operations
By Doreen Hemlock
The South Florida Sun-Sentinel

Tuesday 14 March 2006

The weeks-long saga of Dubai Ports World's purchase of operations in Miami and five other US seaports took another turn Monday, when the company's Fort Lauderdale nemesis publicized a private e-mail and charged the note shows the Arab company has no intention of selling its US assets.

Eller & Co., now a partner with DP World in a Miami operation after DP bought out a British firm last week, shared an e-mail that said the Arab company's sale of US assets "would probably take a while."

The e-mail from Robert Scavone, a vice president for the port company now owned by DP World, also told managers in Miami to assume for now "ownership ... is not going to change."

Eller's lawyer Michael N. Kreitzer said Monday the e-mail proves the Arab company has no plans to meet Thursday's pledge to transfer US assets to a US entity. The move aims to quell political furor - much of it stirred up by Eller on Capitol Hill.

"We're making this public because we think Congress should do what it planned last week - to pass a bill to specifically disavow the Dubai company from owning a US port operation," Kreitzer said by phone.

But Scavone told The Associated Press that the e-mail instead was intended to reassure officials at the Miami unit that uncertainty surrounding ownership would not affect their work and operations.

Eller has been fighting for years against the British company that was its partner in the Miami ports venture and now has a lawsuit against DP World seeking $100 million in damages. It alleges both companies violated contract terms by buying and selling stakes without its consent. It also claims Dubai's ownership will hurt its operations.

The company has been pressing its case with fervor to Sen. Charles Schumer, D-NY. Schumer claimed the purchase of port operations by a United Arab Emirates government-owned company would compromise US security.

"It is the American people's understanding that Dubai Ports World promised to relinquish control of all US ports," Schumer told the AP on Monday. "If that is not the case, we will move our legislation immediately and force them to do just that."

His comments came a day after Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said a Dubai purchase could still go through. If a US buyer is not found, and a 45-day review finds no security risks, "I don't see how the deal would have to be canceled," Frist said on ABC's This Week