UAE Port Deal

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Only 3 countries in the World supported the Taliban. The other 2 were Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Looks like 3 countries that support terrorist to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

3 (at least nominal) American allies.

Again, the widespread and emotional opposition to this deal makes very little sense to me. Sounds like a bit of "Guilt by Arab Association Game", which you play by naming as many Arab countries as you can and claim they're state sponsors of terrorism against Americans, be they allies or not, and without citation.

If you've become convinced Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Pakistan, etc. are all supporting terrorism against the US, fine -- but what specifically about THIS deal is so egregious; shouldn't anyone who feels this deal is absolutely disastrous also be shouting from the rooftops about American foreign policy in general? This deal is merely a drop in a very big [censored] bucket in regards to overarching American foreign policy, if we could somehow objectively deduce that the Pakistans, Saudi Arabias, and UAEs of the world were clandestinely plotting against us.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A lot of Republicans are against this deal, however I am not one of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you approve of the UAE supporting the Taliban?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hello non sequitir. But Ill humor you. First off, define support? Recognizing the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan (regardless of what you or I think of the Taliban), is much less egregious then outright support of terrorism. Which one was it? Cite your sources please and then tell me what this has to do with this port deal.

[ligastar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we can all agree that this was a bad decision by our president. No WMD and all. No connection to 9/11 and all.

[/ QUOTE ]

You admit earlier in this thread you don't know the scope of work this company is contracted to perform yet you've already concluded its a bad decision. Don't you see anything wrong with your thought process?

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm like the president, I go with my gut feeling and let the chips fall where they may. The difference is I'm sitting in a cubicle and W is sitting in the White House. Which is more dangerous?

[ChipWrecked]

[ QUOTE ]

A French company owns Target, when you walk into a Target store you don't see French employees. You see American employees from the CEO on down.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you clarify this? Target is traded on the NYSE under the symbol TGT. Headquarters is in Minneapolis. Is a French company the controlling owner?

/hijack

[vulturesrow]

Target is an American owned company.

Here are some facts on the UAE port deal.

[ QUOTE ]
Under the process conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), officials carefully reviewed the national security issues raised by the transaction and its effect on our national security. Twelve Federal agencies and the government’s counterterrorism experts closely and carefully reviewed the transaction to make certain it posed no threat to national security.
DP World, a UAE-based commercial entity, is purchasing the U.S. subsidiary of the London-based P&O Steam Navigation Company. The announcement of DP World’s bid for P&O was made in November 2005, and the news was widely reported in the press and international financial trade publications. The formal CFIUS process was set into motion in December, and the Federal government conducted a thorough review to ensure that port security would in no way be compromised by the deal.

The President has made clear that he stands firmly behind the decision to allow the DP World transaction to move forward. Preventing this transaction by a reputable company to go forward after careful review would send a terrible signal to friends and allies that investments in the United States from certain parts of the world are not welcome.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Is Always In Charge Of The Nation’s Port Security, Not The Private Company That Operates Facilities Within The Ports. Nothing will change with this transaction. DHS, along with the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and other Federal agencies, sets the standards for port security and ensures that all port facility owners and operators comply with these standards.

The Transaction Is Not About Port Security Or Even Port Ownership, But Only About Operations In Port. DP World will not manage port security, nor will it own any ports. DP World would take on the functions now performed by the British firm P&O – basically the off- and on-loading of cargo. Employees will still have to be U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents. No private company currently manages any U.S. port. Rather, private companies such as P&O and DP World simply manage and operate individual terminals within ports.

DP World Has Played By The Rules, Has Cooperated With The United States, And Is From A Country That Is A Close Ally In the War on Terror. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has been a solid partner in the War on Terror. The UAE has been extremely cooperative on counter-terrorism and counter-proliferation and has provided considerable support to U.S. forces in the Gulf and to the governments and people of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The UAE Is An Established Partner In Protecting America's Ports. Dubai was the first Middle Eastern entity to join the Container Security Initiative (CSI) – a multinational program to protect global trade from terrorism. Dubai was also the first Middle Eastern entity to join the Department of Energy's Megaports Initiative, a program aimed at stopping illicit shipments of nuclear and other radioactive material.

Port Security Begins Abroad. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) created the CSI to enable CBP to inspect 100% of high-risk containers at foreign seaports before they are loaded onboard vessels destined for the United States. Dubai was the first Middle Eastern entity to join CSI. Cooperation with Dubai has been outstanding and a model for other operations.

DP World currently manages 19 container terminals and has operations in 14 countries. The United States government has a strong working relationship with DP World.



[/ QUOTE ]

This an excerpt from an email sent out by the administration. I found it here.

[Exsubmariner]

A I learn more and more about this, it seems like a blunder that just caught a lot of people off guard. There is an agency that investigates deals like this and has done so for some time. They vetted everything before the story broke. Perhaps that process should be more transparent and that is the lesson here.

This could be a signal, provided it goes through, to our allies in the M.E. that cooperation with us is a good thing. I don't know if it was my racism, bigotry, sexism, or homophobia that caused me to react as I did. I think this caught a lot of people completely unaware and GWB took a big big risk of pissing off his own party, making the statement that he did. I see he has not backed down. There are Republicans who are now using this as a platform to begin to distance themselves from him for the next election. I would very much like to see truely fiscal conservatives get some points for their stand on this issue.

Thanks for that link, Vulture.

[Nepa]

Vulturesrow,

I have just one question for you. Here is what Pres. Bush said about the deal.

" I can understand why some in Congress have raised questions about whether or not our country will be less secure as a result of this transaction. But they need to know that our government has looked at this issue, and looked at it carefully."

Here is my question. Do you have a problem with Congress looking into this deal?

***Breaking News**** Karl Rove is ready to do another flip flop.

[vulturesrow]

"Looking into" is a rather nebulous phrase. The deal was already vetted through a process that is already in place for situations like this. I find this issue to be very interesting because it has highlighted political grandstanding at its finest. On one side you have the kneejerkers who react negatively to every single thing that President Bush does. On the other side you you have Republicans eager to distance themselves from the Bush administration and also a possible subset of people who dont want us to have anything to do with "A-rabs".

So back to the question, what do you mean "look into"? Does Congress not have access to the records of the group that already vetted the deal? Do we really need to duplicate this effort?

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
Do we really need to duplicate this effort?

[/ QUOTE ]

Congress must look into this! Everything that the President says shouldn't just be a go without any oversight.

I'm guess the point is mute now because the President and Karl Rove are really to FLIP FLOP on this issue. The virgin Veto pen will stay in the jar as I predicted earlier.

[vulturesrow]

Cant Congress just review the findings of CFIUS? Do they need to launch some other investigation?