Dubai Ports World

The NY Times editors firmly straddle the Dubai Ports World question today:

Legitimate security questions have been raised that can be answered only by a genuinely fresh evaluation whose scope and results are transmitted to Congress and to a perplexed public as well.

At this point there is little hard evidence that Dubai Ports World is especially vulnerable to infiltration by terrorists or lax on security. The company's home country, United Arab Emirates, has rightly been blistered in the past for taking inadequate steps to close down terrorist financing and stop a renegade Pakistani scientist from shipping nuclear technology to rogue nations. But in recent years, the country seems to have cooperated with American efforts in the war on terror, and it was one of the first to join American efforts to check containers abroad for dangerous weapons before they are loaded onto ships headed for the United States.

That doesn't mean Congress is being irrational in wanting a closer look. The deal was approved by an obscure committee of second-level officials. The committee is headed by a Treasury official whose department focuses on promoting trade rather than on security requirements. When concerns were raised, they were never flagged for higher-ups.

...if the controversy is treated correctly, it should provide new security benchmarks that could be applied to any company that wishes to manage American ports. (The Coast Guard expressed concerns about intelligence even when a British company held the terminals contract.) A serious inquiry could also provide a basis for ensuring that port security, a notoriously weak spot in the nation's defenses against terrorism, is actually enhanced. The deal's opponents ought to use this opportunity to negotiate for additional, and much needed, financing for that purpose.

The WaPo tells us that Congress is strongly inclined to block this deal, or at least give itself the final say.  On the other hand, the AFP says that Congress has given up on this one and is looking to expand its oversight of future deals.

For a tiebreaker, let's turn to the NY Times - Carl Hulse and Scott Shane detect a lot of "angst" on the Republican side.

OK, then - Congress is currently planning to stay involved,

Comments

[Huggy]

The merits of the case are imaterial. This is to the Republicans what NAFTA was to the Democrats in 1993. If the Republicans don't block this deal they will lose control of congress.

[kim]

God, I'm sick of 'additional, and much needed'.
=================================================

[Jimmy's Attack Rabbit]

Dream on Huggy.

[MayBee]

What is the NYT to do? Hillary's working against it, Bill's working for it.
It's like Sophie's Choice.

[kim]

Kerry will be against it before he is for it.
=============================================

[kim]

Whatsa matta, John, didn't those emirs suck up enough to Kofi?

I nominate this kerfuffle as Exhibit 1 in the display of a polity unable to converse with itself.
========================================

[Sue]

I just loved the pundit I saw on this morning news show. When asked about Bill, she responded, uh, uh, it just shows Hillary has a mind of her own...uh, Bill doesn't vote on this, he isn't a representative of the government or anything. ::grin:: Hoisted by her own petard...where have I heard that lately?...I must think on this for a minute. ::grin:: I'm sorry. I'm having a David Gregory moment. But I'm not drunk. ::grin::

[hrtshpdbox]

It is, for all intents and purposes, impossible for the United States to completely prevent terrorist breaches of our extensive and porous borders and shorelines. Therefore, it's the terrorists themselves who need to be eliminated and the UAE, since 9/11, has been instrumental in helping us in that regard. To strike down a deal with a private company from the UAE would be needlessly bad precedent, indeed.

[Lesley]

WRT to the UAE ports conundrum encountered on both sides of the political aisle, this situation reminds me of a comment made by an highly irritated Victor Hugo about the critic Gustave Planche calling him "a poisoned mushroom waiting confidently to be bitten."

[hrtshpdbox]

We're all Pat Buchanan's now.
-(apologies to Richard Nixon, John Maynard Keynes, and Russ Smith at The New York Press).

[kim]

We really haven't gotten over building all those bomb shelters half a century ago. In this debate, sitting elegantly as the centerpiece, is a poisoned mushroom cloud.
==============================================

[maryrose]

Let the deal go through and put in some safeguards. Congress do the job you're paid to do. Stop using it as a political campaign tool. First one with an affirmative bipartisan deal gets automatically re-elected.

[SteveMG]

Well, give them (NYT) some credit for running this correction today (3/2):

Two articles on Saturday about the management deal for six American ports and its political fallout referred incorrectly to the role to be played by Dubai Ports World. It would run some of the terminal operations; it would not own the ports or take over all operations.

'Course, the question is why did this repeated misrepresentation of the facts get in the stories by Saturday anyway.

And the correction was a small paragraph in contrast to the two larger pieces.

Now, if we can only get Matthews and Olbermann and Blitzer and Williams and Couric and, well you get the point....

"Owning the ports" or "running the ports operations" is obviously what is causing most of the problems here. Until somehow the W.H. is able to correct this view, the deal has zero chance of being finalized.

SMG

[owl]

Ya know....this bunch of Overseers (both sides) makes crap smell good.

They should go ahead and run a campaign named the Official Finger Pointing Spot. Since we all know that whoever is on GO when the attack comes....gets to go directly...

It is, for all intents and purposes, impossible for the United States to completely prevent terrorist breaches of our extensive and porous borders and shorelines. ...hrts

Nonsense.....did you not notice the Overseers are on the job?

[JM Hanes]

Actually, Matthews was an unexpected pleasure last night. He had Barbara Boxer on to talk about the UAE, oops, Any Foreign Government running our ports. Then he asked her about the California ports, which weren't the same thing of course, and of course, as we know she was agin 'em, and well, she's so concerned she thinks we should revisit all those decisions. It was a nice little moment.

[JM Hanes]

P.S. Give it another week or two, and I don't think anybody will be able to work up anything even remotely interesting to say/make up about it. Cable will be covering college kids gone wild over spring break in Daytona (with sharks!) and there won't be a photographer in sight to snap DP unloading containers in NY.

[JM Hanes]

P.S. jr.

Just look at the wild enthusiasm for this thread, if you're still wondering where this story is going.

[JM Hanes]

Come to think of it, even if they did send a guy with a mini-cam down to the docks, where's he going to point it when he can't tell one stevedore -- or terminal -- from another?

[JM Hanes]

Somebody oughtta tell the Goddess we've got a perrrfect candidate for an un-American FNL covert activity thread. Nobody will EVER look for us in here! Sure beats a grimy parking deck all hollow.

Shoot, I could probably set my MUSES loose in here right now with HOURS left to go till the dark sharp pointed hands of the ominously ticking clock rendezvous for their pre-arranged, supersecret, weekly drop off. Not that I'd really do it, you understand.

[larwyn]

SBD left this at A J Strata's Port-Oh-Panic
Sandy Berger & son of China President linked to Port Security International

I’ve never had to reference a Canadian news report before, but this story just doesn’t seem to be reported by our MSM.

Here’s a new twist to port security!!

Port Security, Chinahttp

By Judi McLeod
Monday, February 27, 2006

Forget Dubai-based DP World poised to run commercial operations in six leading American ports, it’s the players in the chess game called Port Security that Congress members should be losing the most sleep over.

While it’s true that port security falls under the jurisdiction of Coast Guard and U.S. customs officials, agents of both entities will need a program just to recognize all the players.

Port Security International (PSI) is an international partner’s network composed of an array of financial, strategic, technological and in-country port industry related companies.

PSI has an alliance with the China-based Nuctech, a company that “possesses the largest manufacture base of Linear Accelerator X-ray inspection machines to inspect containers at ports in the world.” (www.secureports.com/partner.htm).

“PSI has a strategic alliance with Stonebridge International LLC, a global business strategy firm based in Washington, DC that helps U.S. and multinational companies shape and execute strategies to solve problems and seize business opportunities worldwide.” (Security Ports International 2004).

Disgraced Sandy “The Burgler” Berger heads up Stonebridge International..

I'll add further Clintonistas links.
It is now reported that Bill suggested to one of the emirs of Dubai that they should have
DPW hire Joe Lockhart to see the deal thru here.Report is conversation was several weeks ago, the fact is that the management of DPW didn’t accept and didn’t contract Lockhart.

Prior to this LSM reporting this as disagreement between Bill and
Hill - but not really. Bill stays aloof and Hill does dirty work of
showing what happens when one doesn’t hire a Clintonista!

Tonight one pundit said "Shows Hillary has a mind of her own!"

[JM Hanes]

So many politicians have been lining up with the polling on this, there's no one around to remind folks that both Daischle (Jeez, poor guy, I can't even remember how to spell his name!) and Madeline Albright are linked to the DP deal as well.

[clarice]

Dubai sheik who gave Bill $1.6 million is an unabashed supporter of the Israeli boycott.

Bill asked Dubai to hire Lockhardt to shill the deal.

Is Bill setting out to destroy Hillary ? (Theme song from The Grifters, please)

[JM Hanes]

Gotta love the irony. It would almost be worth a Hillary Presidency just to see if the White House could still hold both of them at the same time. I'd give 'em the 100 day honeymoon, after which the fun would commence -- although to tell the truth, the whole concept almost defies imagination.

[Rick Ballard]

Who in the world knows all the steps to the "Clinton Sheik" (down). It ain't the "Hokey Pokey" and it's got a beat that is very hard to dance to - unless you pay for lessons.

[larwyn]

Do you really think that Bill wants to be the "First Laddy"?

He want Kofi's job and if he gets that (Lord save us) how many even semi sane Dems or Independents would actually want Hillary to be the U S President?

A very scary thought, worthy of a John Carpenter flick.

[clarice]

DHS explains , inter alia, how we handle container security. http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/press_release/press_release_0865.xml It is astonishing how Kerry's distortion --only 5% are inspected--remains the meme.

[Hans Giesholt]

On the Dubai Ports World takeover of six major ports and 16 minor ports including Newport News and Beaumont TX which 1/3rd of all our military Hardware is shipped out of. Now you folks need to take a look at Inchcape Shipping Services which is now owned by a UAE Investment House. I also noticed that DPW has shut down its website. I wonder if DPW is going to go in the back door and give those 22 port operations to Inchcape and they will get a piece of the action. I do not think this thing is over yet. Now for all of you who want to know who is on the the Committee On Foreign Investments. It is basically Bush's Cabinet. Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Homeland Security, The Attorney General and a few more folks in the White House. Yet none of these people knew about it. Hmmmmmmmmm

[muhammad arshad]

i have no word about it
but i am poor and come in dubai
muhammad arshad
[email protected]oo.com