http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/17/104325/112
Bush Administration Sells Port Security To Highest Foreign Bidder by georgia10 <http://georgia10.dailykos.com/> Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 08:43:25 AM PDT The Bush administration has granted access to <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/17/nyregion/17ports.html> our most important ports to the government of the United Arab Emirates: The Bush administration dismissed the security concerns of local officials yesterday and restated its approval of a deal that will give a company based in Dubai a major role in operating ports in and around New York City. Representatives of the White House and the Treasury Department said they had given their approval for Dubai Ports World to do business in the United States after a rigorous review. The decision, they said, was final. Dubai Ports World is buying the British company that currently operates the cruise-ship terminal on the West Side of Manhattan, one of the biggest cargo terminals in New York Harbor, and terminals in Philadelphia, Baltimore and other big ports. Dubai Ports World is controlled by the UAE royal family. The decision to grant the $6.8 billion sale to Dubai was made by the <http://www.treas.gov/offices/international-affairs/exon-florio/> Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States . Who sits on the committee? The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, the Department of Homeland Security, the Secretaries of State, Defense, and Commerce, the Attorney General, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the U.S. Trade Representative, and the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. The Committee is chaired by the Secretary of the Treasury. So Gonzales, Rice, Rumsfeld, Snow, and an other Bush administration officials conducted a security review and decided--unanimously--that the sale did not post a national security threat. How thorough was their investigation? They did not conduct background checks on senior managers of the company, nor did they ask how the company screens its own employees. You know, just in case a terrorist wants to infiltrate the company that now has unprecedented and unfettered access to our ports. More below... * :: * Outrage at the deal is bipartisan <http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.asp?feed=FT&Date= 20060216&ID=5515390> : In a letter to Treasury secretary John Snow, Senator Richard Shelby, an influential Alabama Republican, stopped short of calling for the deal to be blocked, but said the transaction merited further scrutiny, potentially raising complications for DP World's bid. Mr Shelby is expected to call for a hearing to discuss the issue in coming weeks. In a separate letter to Mr Snow, New York senator Chuck Schumer and others said US ports were "the most vulnerable targets for terrorist attack". They questioned whether DP World, which is owned and controlled by Dubai, should be allowed to take over P&O, charging that Dubai was a "key transfer point" for shipments of nuclear components bound for Iran, North Korea and Libya. And from yesterday's <http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060216-1.html> press briefing: Les. Q Scott, I have a two-part. The government's Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States has approved a deal that will put six major ports in the United States under the control of a state-sponsored company based in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates. And my question: Knowing, as we do, that the Arab Emirate was tied in many ways to the 9/11 hijackers and their deeds, and knowing the critical nature of port security and protecting the nation, will the President step in and stop this deal from going into effect March 2nd? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, my understanding, Les, is that this went through the national security review process under CFIUS, at the Department of Treasury. That is the agency that is responsible for overseeing such matters. And this includes a number of national security agencies -- the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, the Justice, among others, and there is a rigorous review that goes on for proposed foreign investments for national security concerns. And in terms of specifics relating to this, Treasury is the chair of this and you should direct those questions to Treasury. That question, by the way, wasn't asked by Helen Thomas or David Gregory. It was posed by Les Kinsolving, right-wing reporter for WorldNutDaily. Republicans feel betrayed that their President would make such a foolish national security move. Even Rick Santorum (R-PA) has sent <http://santorum.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.View&Con tentRecord_id=1681&Region_id=0&Issue_id=0> a letter to the President protesting the deal. Also, Republican <http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=5908> Congressman Mark Foley had this to day: "Six of our largest commercial ports are being handed over to a country that is seeking to be Iran's free trade partner and has been linked to the funding and planning of 9/11. If our ports are the most vulnerable targets for terrorism and if we are at war, as the President says, we should be overly critical of handing over management of our ports to any foreign countries, post 9/11. Instead, this was done in the dead of night." Besides Schumer, (who was quoted above and who sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Snowe), other Democrats are shocked at the deal--and are taking <http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/feeds/ap/2006/02/17/ap2534556.html> action: Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., told The Associated Press he will introduce legislation to prohibit companies owned or controlled by foreign governments from running port operations in the United States. Menendez said his proposal would effectively block state-owned Dubai Ports World from realizing gains from its purchase of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. [...] We wouldn't turn the border patrol or the customs service over to a foreign government, and we can't afford to turn our ports over to one, either," Menendez said. So conservatives, moderates, liberals, and basically everyone on the political spectrum opposes this deal. About the only people who like the deal are those who enjoy walking <http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/04/images/20050425-8_hw9v0295j asjpg-1-515h.html> in wildflower meadows hand in hand with super-rich royal families whose countries may incubate terrorists. Ahem. The bipartisan concern here is that we are handing the key to our nation's security to just such a foreign government. Not to a private corporation, but to a company controlled by a foreign state. No matter how good our relations are with that country, how can we ever justify letting another government control the security of our citizens? Anthony R. Coscia, the chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, has repeatedly contacted the administration to get answers to his concerns. The Bush administration has refused to respond. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
