Powered by TypePad

« The Rise Of The Cult, Day Five - Facts Are For Cowards | Main | Seven Wonders »

February 23, 2006



I've been monitoring the MSM coveage of the Port Brouhaha, and they CONSTANTLY refer to it as a CRISIS because Bush approved, "transfer of control of six of our largest ports to a foreign country."

This is such a BIG LIE that there's really only one word for it: BULLSHIT.

Here' are the FACTS:

(1) According to DHS testimony at today's Senate Armed Services CommitteeBriefing, the six ports in question have 829 TERMINALS - each LEASED by the LOCAL Port Authority to PRIVATE COMPANIES.

(2) These private companies ALREADY INCLUDE FOREIGN COMPANIES.

(3) P&O leases 24 of these 829 terminals, and ONLY these TERMINALS will now come under the corporate control of a corporation in part owned by Dubai - which is inarguably one of our very best allies in the LONG WAR.

(4) Our PORT SECURITY has NOTHING/ZERO/ZILCH/NADA/BUPKUS to do with who off-loads/on-loads containers in the terminals in our ports, and stores them and lades them on trucks.

Ports are owned by the locatities (like the NY/NJ Port Authority) - and they stay owned by them. The US Coast Guard and DHS are in charge of security of these prorts, and they stay in charge.

According to DHS, EVERY (as in 100%) container is screened before it is LOADED ON TO A SHIP HEADED HERE, and by the end of the year 80% of all containers will be checked for radiation and/or X-rayed.

This FORWARD-BASED security is what's essential to PREVENTING a terrorist from getting a container into our ports - and not checking cargo once it's in the port -THAT WOULD BE TOO LATE.

Dubai Port World ALREADY FULLY COOPERATES with this process.

The CFIUS Committeee was UNANIMOUS in determining that this transfer of leases (for only 24/829 terminals) from a British company to a holding company in poart owned by our ALLY Dubai presents NO SECURITY CONCERNS. This was UNANIMOUS; the CIA and DNI, FBI and DIA AND EVERY SINGLE INTELL' ASSET IN EVERY DEPARTMENT - Treasury, State, and DOJ and DHS ALL AGREED.

THEREFORE: This brouhaha is either PURE BS or simple DEMOGUERY. Take your pick.

Bush is right. Hillary, Schumer and Michelle Malkin are totally WRONG

If the MSM got the FACTS out - instead of merely repeating the BS - REPEATING THE BIG LIE, over-and-over, then the public would quickly agree.

Lew Clark

Bravo reliapundit for shedding more light on this "tempest in a teapot". And since inspections must be done at port of exit, shouldn't we turn back all oil tankers from OPEC countries and all container ships from China? Because we know we can't trust those people. Come on Hillary and Chuck, get that bill before congress before it's too late.


Excellent summary, thanks.

Your key point needs repeating: The terminals (not the damned ports) at six ports will be leased to a company owned by the UAE. They will not be owned or purchased. These are publicly-owned terminals. As I understand it, they cannot under existing law be sold.

That's it. Ports and terminals are two different things.

No ports are going be run by the UAE. No security of the ports will be done by the UAE.

Some of the terminals where the ships load and unload their cargo will be operated by a company owned by the UAE.



Truly, the problem of security remains identical no matter who runs the freight handling.


SMG...thankfully I read the thread before making the same point. The hearing today was very useful in clearing up a lot of crap. Reminds me of Sen. Simpson's coinage of "crap, confusion, controversy" with regard to the MSM. How can they get stuff so wrong all the time 24/7/365?

Patrick R. Sullivan

Powerline posted an e-mail from the Bush Admin spelling out some of the specifics too:


Btw, there might be more jihadists living in England than in the UAE. Isn't that where Richard Reed was from.


And why can't the Senators, Congressmen, governors, mayors, etc. take a little time to familiarize themselves with the facts before shooting their mouths off?


Where did the planes for 9/11 come from,it might be better checking container traffice across the borders with Canada and Mexico.

JM Hanes


"And why can't the Senators, Congressmen, governors, mayors, etc. take a little time to familiarize themselves with the facts before shooting their mouths off?"

Because in the daily sprint for the cameras, you'll never cross the finish line first that way.


Despite all the derisive catcalls from members of the "Cult" that Bush was a tone deaf loser on this one, I now think he's going to end up looking pretty good.


All your points are excellent and right on target. Reliapundit; thank you for separating the wheat frm the chaff or in modern terms the facts from B.S.

Lew Clark

Just watched the NewsHour and it was all like what's being said here. Boy did that go from "Chicken Little" to "Emily LaTella" in a few short days.

JM Hanes


Motion to dismiss Libby case includes the argument that the appointment of Fitzgerald was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Wow! It may well go down in flames, but boy, it looks like the fireworks, and surprises, may be worth watching for after all.

(per Olberman, of all people, who was only onscreen chez moi because I hadn't gotten around to changing channels)


The Brouhaha was caused by politicians this time - so busy running to get the first say in they did not bother to check facts. But that is the way politics goes nowadays - everything is a photo-op to keep their names as top-of-mind-recall for their constituents. Pure marketing.

What's curious is why the MSM didn't bother to dig for details - isn't that what they keep telling us they do.....

Thanks for the facts reliapundit. This is what I have been waiting for to make up my mind...

JM Hanes

Am I the only one? This whole port brouhaha positively overwhelms me with ennui.

Cecil Turner

I'm still a bit nonplussed by the ports deal. I agree the security ramifications are not earthshaking, and think the first Sanger quote hit it dead on: "who owns the management contract ranks near the very bottom." However, port security is very near the top of our national security concerns, and in the coming years--as nuclear weapons proliferate--that concern will only become more critical. Hence it doesn't make sense to open any possible vulnerabiity there (and while the IAEA one looks like moonshine, the cargo movement information does not). I think it makes sense to look at the tradeoffs if the deal is kiboshed; and at the least, more study is warranted.


Just imagine if a Democrat president - say President Clinton (either one) - had approved this deal. Ha ha ha ha ha! You guys would be frothing at the mouth and working the rugs over with your molars.


You guys would be frothing at the mouth and working the rugs over with your molars

And you guys would be accusing us of racism, xenophobia and nativism.

Granted, you folks on the left do that anyway (and still claim that unlike us, you're non-judgmental); but the volume would be slightly higher.

Care to add anything of substance to this discussion?



And that would be wrong too based on what I've seen so far?

I can't wait for someone like Joe Biden make an over-long speech about how this is not about racism and how some of his best friends are Muslim. Which Committee will hear this issue?

By the end of this we may see an increase in the President's approval ratings with a commensurate decrease for Congress and Dems in particular.


Where in the hell that first question mark come from?

Jim Rockford

The deal is dead.

Downside to any Congress critter who does not vote to kill this deal: a. Campaign ads showing seething Muslims burning the American Flag overlayed onto icons like the Statue of Liberty and ports; b. a nuked American city.

Upside: GWB likes you. Like I said the deal is dead.

Which is a good thing, and hopefully GWB will pay a heavy political price and Dems find some steel in their backbone. Bush needs to learn fire burns and it's not wise to put your hand in it. Unless he suffers he will NEVER learn.

UAE's princelings went hunting with Bin Laden after the 98 Embassy bombings, that got a Clinton missile attack called off before the Cole. They've already had their slack cut. UAE has an opaque, tribalistic autocracy which is as clear as mud. They fund and/or transit AQ Khan's nuclear network, Iran's nuke program, nuke tech for South Africa, Al Qaeda's finances, 2 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11, various terrorist groups operate their openly, and they are committed to the destruction of Israel and their Princelings whipped up Cartoon Jihad like the rest of tyrannical Muslim regimes.

UAE OWNS DPW. That means that the Princelings who go hunting with bin Laden and in at least one instance tipped him off to an attack by the US will be running the operational control of ports including vetting workers.

It's insane and an open invitation to bin Laden to smuggle an Iranian nuke or three into the US for explosion in NYC or DC.

I would hope that Congress does the right thing and formally censures GWB. For sheer stupidity if nothing else he deserves it.

Yes the UAE like Pakistan can be a sometimes useful ally. I also would not trust the government which is run by princelings who hang with bin Laden in ANY sensitive operations of the US.

JM Hanes


"Bush needs to learn fire burns and it's not wise to put your hand in it. Unless he suffers he will NEVER learn"

Silly psycho-babble has spoiled far better arguments than the ones you're making.


Who are you going to trust to run these facilities?

There's stuff to move. Let 'em get busy.


And I hope it loses Michigan for the Demagogues. Muslims are human, after all, and can smell hypocrisy from the cradle.


The licentiousness of it all! It appears that Maguire's First Law mandates promiscuous bedfellowing.


CNBC...had crawlers last night still proclaiming the imminent takeover of 6 ports. Sort of like the Plame outing...memes are hard to kill.


The UAE is a valuable ally in the war on terror. To stop this deal sends the wrong message. It tells arab countries that we're too xenophobic to trust them no matter what they do.

And for Democrats to complain is just too rich. After Clinton basically gave the Chinese military secrets in return for campaign donations.

Gary Maxwell

Does it seem very political unwise for Carl Levin with a juge ME population in the Dearborn area to be making such a public fuss about Arabs owning a company doing business in the US? What am I missing here? I would think the face person to be someone like Dodd or Kennedy. I am sure there is logic here, but I dont see it.


Saudi Shipping Company “Controls” 9 US Ports

Hope someone jumps on this for use
at next hearing - really makes the Schummy and Hillary more foolish.

That is to say the Saudis "control" these ports as much as the UAE’s Dubai Ports World ever will.But it’s funny that our one party media hasn’t mentioned this Saudi-owned company, NSCSA, or its operation in even more ports than the UAE will have a berth.Maybe the press don’t know about them, as the company’s only been around since 1979. And of course the longshoremen’s and DNC’s press releases, which they regurgitate verbatim, haven’t mentioned them:


Year of Incorporation: 1979
Owners: Government of Saudi Arabia, Saudi individuals and establishments
Head Office: Riyadh, KSA

The National Shipping Company of Saudi Arabia (NSCSA) was established in 1979 to meet the transportation needs of Importers and Exporters in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and other countries in the Middle East.
By 1983, NSCSA has established itself as a combination Roll-on/Roll-off (Ro-Ro), Container and Breakbulk carrier, operating 8 fully owned vessels. It had become one of the world's largest Ro-Ro operators, offering liner services linking the Middle East with North America, the Far East and Europe.
In 1991, NSCSA (America) Inc., was established to serve as the General Agent in North America for the Liner Service between U.S., Canada and the Middle East/India Subcontinent/East Mediterranean regions.
NSCSA specializes in Project, Heavy Lift and Ro-Ro cargoes, as well as containers.
In 1997, NSCSA began service between North America and Italy, Greece and Turkey. Our mission is two-fold: to establish close working relationships with our customers, and to offer them the most secure, most .....

Click here: Company Profile http://www.nscsaamerica.com/profile.htm#NSCSA%20Value%20Added%20Servic%20es

The comments to this entry are closed.