The Washington Post says:
YOU KNOW THERE’S something suspicious going on when multiple members of Congress — House, Senate, Democrat, Republican, future presidential candidates of all stripes — spontaneously unite around an issue that none of them had known existed a week earlier.
As much as this story bores me, it has become a major story. Both Bill Frist and Harry Reid have come out against letting Dubai World Ports take over the contracts for running our eastern ports. George W. Bush has threatened the unthinkable…a veto. A veto? Yeah, a veto!!
Here’s my take on this: Bush has already lost on the issue politically. If it ever comes to a veto, his veto will probably get overridden. As an American, I have a visceral distaste for the idea of foreigners running our ports. Everytime I drive to the airport I am reminded that a Swedish company runs the old Philly naval yards. And it annoys me. If I really believed in a Global War on Terror then I would find the decision to allow a U.A.E. company to run our ports completely incomprehensible. To a true believer in Bush’s masterplan, this is like giving the keys to the Statue of Liberty to Admiral Karl Doenitz. It does NOT make sense.
But, it DOES make sense. It’s a normal business transaction. It’s not a big deal. Will it make us less safe? I doubt it. What I will say is that it does nothing to make our ports more safe. And I don’t think the optimum solution for port security would involve a foreign company with dubious allegiance to Bush’s jihad.
Take the poll.
Well said.
Well, there is something worthwhile coming out about that secretive group that rubber-stamps foreign deals like this, and is run by the Treasury Dept. which only cares about making money and not other issues.
And it’s annoying we can’t give the work to an American company.
BUT THIS:
YOU KNOW THERE’S something suspicious going on when multiple members of Congress — House, Senate, Democrat, Republican, future presidential candidates of all stripes — spontaneously unite around an issue that none of them had known existed a week earlier.
Don’t ya wish — Street Kid, this is for you — they’d get this riled about millions of needy people and students losing fed. gov’t help?
Another worthwhile aspect of ports uproar is that it is another reminder to the public of a confluence of issues wrapped up in the deal. Here are just a few:
(1) National Security: The ports have not yet been provided the security recommended by 9/11 commission, so the fact that any foreign government would have access to an already insecure point of entry may bring this issue to light.
(2) Deal shows that for Bush, global “free” trade corporatism and greed trump national security. This port deal may be the exchange that UAE is demanding for Bush’s simultaneous “free” trade deal to open UAE markets and assets to US corporations. It is very similar to the “free” trade deal Bush approved for British companies to build nuclear technology for China. The bottom line is that in the “war on terror” Bush is constantly wanting to limit Americans’ civil rights but nada for business interests.
(3) This one I LOVE: Deal shows Bush is reaping the fallout from playing the fear/terror card of Arab/Muslim countries and people since 9/11. Having played that card so well to win elections and political agenda/policies, Bush now wants to turn the faucet off just for the purpose of this deal. But, he has the public so afraid, they are throwing it back in his face. And, GOP rejects Bush’s claim of discrimination by throwing back in his face Bush’s mantra of “things must be different in post-9/11 world. It also plays to the hypocrisy of claiming to care about not discriminating against Muslims when his administration has done just that in the US and around the world since 9/11.
(4) Deal demonstrates again the arrogance, hubris and incompetence of cronies that run government with secret, closed door unelected, political appointees making decisions without public debate or knowledge in Congress, and apparently without even Bush or the Pentagon informed of the deal beforehand. Does not even sound like Bush was briefed on this issue beforehand as White House says Bush learned of the deal after it was completed. Bush now says deal is okay because he asked Cabinet secretaries if they were comfortable with deal. Again, Bush was probably not briefed of the substantive provisions of deal or any policy risks. So, who actually is running our government? Shows too much delegation and too little accountability. And, like NSA, Congress is left out of the loop.
Patriot Daily
Other factors come into this and cross multiple categories. TNT Express is a global company that has been advertising services such as door to door delivery in their network. One of their press release boasted the UAE-Iran network service. Another factor is the UAE support of Hamas and harsh language of Israel’s actions. Both of these show the double standard and ambiguity of Bush’s war on terror and threat assessment capabilities.
IMO, has NOTHING to do with the war on terror, though as political theatre, it has enormous possibilities as the final antidote to the Bush kool-aid that his base has been swigging.
Actually, the Ports deal is about the globalization of the economy. And guess what?
That’s a “war” we’re losing — big time.
Welcome to the beginning of the 21st century. It’s gonna be a long, tough slog for this country.
yup.
Your position is the same as mine. This is a poisonous issue for Bush. It puts him in a vice. The UAE is not going to appreciate having these contracts taken away from their company and they just might call bullshit of Bush’s official GWOT narrative if he ganks them.
But there is no way he can let this contract stand, given the narrative he has written.
Ewwwwww … Bish’s head in a vice reminds me of “Casino.”
It’s poisonous to Bush. It also paints in stark relief (1) the greed at the heart of globalization and the fact that (2) Bush’s allegiance to his international partners overrides his loyalty to his country. Much of his base is livid, and I love it!
When you’re easy to please, like me, you get pleased so often! Pour on the poison!
I happened to catch a small part of his speech this morning. It was the same old lines as usual, but I swear I heard him accidently use the word company for country, as in the infamous ,,,what this company(country) needs to understand…
It’s sooo much fun watching the White House try to spin their way out of this. Has to be one of THE most bone-headed political decisions of all times…
I still say this is all theatrical bullshit. Bush is smart enough to know his veto would be over ridden so he gets to look like he’s reaching out and being an equal opportunity internationalist, plus in the end, he’ll claim some bullshit bi-partisan compromise proves he’s willing to work with the democrats who in turn will look obstructionist somewhere down the road when he does something they have to stand against which means they won’t stand against it out of fear of looking like they’re weak on terror which basically means business as usual.
I think the point is that any foreign control over US ports is a bad idea. It has nothing to do with xenophobia and everything to do with common sense. But perhaps I’m being a bit reactionary. I suppose it doesn’t matter who moves the containers around, as long as we can be sure that said containers are inspected.
I have been wondering, however, whether or not the media is being played on this. This story erupted just as the Cheney snowball was beginning to gain momentum. I can see a White House strategy meeting in which Rove says, “come up with something — anything — to get the Veep story off the front page.” And lo and behold: The Port Security Boondoggle.
Just a thought.
I think you are giving Rove too much credit. The Cheney story lived its natural life. It hit the cover of Newsweek and Time, and unless an eyewitness comes up with something interesting to say, the story has been covered.
Plus, this is a very damaging story for the White House and one that I am not sure they even saw coming. They have a blind spot when it comes to doing business with the Arab princes.
Yeah, you’re probably right, Boo. But the story did (as far as I can tell) originate with Fox News, who occupy the number one slot on Karl Rove’s speed-dial.
Maybe someone with better Google skills can take a look and see if there were any earlier mentions of this deal. The fact that it came from Fox stinks to high heaven, if it is indeed the case that they were the first to run with it.
Either way, something is rotten in Newark.
Yesterday afternoon, Lou Dobbs claimed that it was HIS SHOW that first exposed this story, and that they did so last week… i think he said last Thursday.
And he said it was a hot topic all weekend on the talk shows.
The Fox News piece is dated February 16th. Dobbs is probably as full of shit on this as he is on everything else.
And then there’s this, via Atrios, via Hesiod:
March 25, 2004 12:04 IST
The Central Intelligence Agency did not target Al Qaeda chief Osama bin laden once as he had the royal family of the United Arab Emirates with him in Afghanistan, the agency’s director, George Tenet, told the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the United States on Thursday.
Had the CIA targeted bin Laden, half the royal family would have been wiped out as well, he said.
The 10-member bipartisan commission is investigating the events leading up to the September 11, 2001 attacks in the US.
A host of Clinton and Bush administration officials have testified before the commission.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Amritage told the commission that it was impossible to send troops to Afghanistan against the Taliban and Al Qaeda without Pakistan’s cooperation and building a new relationship with India.
“US sanctions against Pakistan on the nuclear and other issues complicated the matter and these had to be dismantled,” Armitage said.
He also suggested if the US Congress wanted to show displeasure with any country, it should think of other methods than imposing sanctions.
Former White House counterterrorism official Richard Clarke has charged that fighting terrorism was not the top priority with the Bush administration. The top priority, he suggested, was Iraq, not Al Qaeda, a claim refuted by the White House.
Clarke alleged that the White House delayed implementing the proposals he had made for eight months and adopted them only after 9/11.
Again, something very fishy is going on.
Isn’t the UAE where bin Laden received medical treatment and also the claim of an official visit by US agents not too long before 9/11?
yes, although that has never been authenticated. It did run in the French press though.
How about this one?
link
I dunno–really boils down to whether we as Americans would prefer taking the risk of being blown up by the Timothy McVeighs of the world or the Osama Bin Ladens. I guess if I had my druthers, I’d go for the “homegrown” terrorist types, just for the sake of substantiating my own belief that we actually produce the best terrorists all on our own (we did somehow manage to produce B*shCo, after all).
Must say, I find the story slightly less boring than the Texas Quailhunt Massacre–nice change of pace to start off the week!
You know, if there is a single thing that makes me nervous about Dubai having the run of our ports it is our shortage of Arabic speakers than can act as counterintelligence officers. I don’t like the idea of foreigners running our ports, but I’d feel better about it if we could at least understand them when they talk.
In principle, I agree with you 100% on this one, BooMan; that is, as I stated in comments yesterday, I don’t think ANY foreign company or power should have any form of control over the ports. This should be a NATIONALIZED thing.
The scarey part, at present: nationalized would mean that B*shCo would be in charge! Every time I see that s.o.b. I just want to scream: look motherfucker, I do NOT trust you. I wouldn’t trust you to take out my TRASH, and I certainly don’t trust your judgment on this major security issue.
(Maher suggested yesterday, if it’s going to be in foreign control, why not give Israel the contract: they’re pretty savvy when it comes to security!)
They can’t twist this into a “xenophobic” thing–as someone else stated in this thread–it is just basic common SENSE. And one main reason so few of us had our undies in a bundle about any foreign control of ports is that we didn’t know about it prior to the release of this information. I certainly had no clue.
So, finally, you and I are on the same page.
Now I wish I paid more attention to Seattle news stories about the Port of Seattle and the Port of Tacoma …
but I do know this: When I lived in Seattle, I voted for about six port commissioners. Ditto the people of Tacoma.
Government agency. But are the operations run by a private company in Seattle and Tacoma? I don’t know. I’ll ask some people on the SeattleKos mailing list.
but it’s window dressing that the American public can pay attention to. When they hear that two of the hijackers had links to the UAE, and that money to pay them came out of a UAE bank, they start to wonder, “Hey, this country had more ties to 9/11 than Iraq did, and we’re handing over our ports?”
Let’s follow the money — who’s going to profit from this deal? Who’s got vested interests in either the Dubai company or P&O? If we can tie the misAdministration into the “anything for a buck” mentality, that might turn off their base that’s bought into the “national security” bullbleep.
Ultimately, it could do more damage to BushCo. than a hunting incident involving the Vice President…
Google: Carlyle Group – Dubai World Ports: 23,200 hits (0.29 sec)
BushCo™ 41 and friends got their greedy little paws in everything and Poppy’s the main man in the ME, IIRC.
Peace
He’s got screen captures and vid-clips of yesterday’s CNN coverage of public reaction to this “normal business transaction.” Bush’s base is freaking out big-time and screaming for impeachment, for goodness sake.
Apparently, it’s big news to them that large parts of this country are owned by foreign-based corporations. Altho I do think this is the first time the operation of something vital is going to be owned by a foreign government and that does seem worthy of distinction. It should also be noted that UAE is not as reliable an ally as Saddam used to be. So maybe they’re right to be upset.
I wonder why you and I don’t think this is a big deal while Hastert, Frist, Reid and Kerry, among many other politicos, are froathing at the mouth in alarm.
Now I going to see if I can google up that classic rant Ned Beatty delivered in “Network”…
correction: the ports are currently run by a British company. You know, foreign.
I agree with the rest of your post though, and Americans don’t think of the Brits as untrustworthy.
it isn’t owned by the UK government. That’s the distinction that’s getting people riled up, I think. Well, that and it’s an A-rab government.
Here is the Ned Beatty rant and it’s worth clicking the link and reading the whole thing.
You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won’t have it!! Is that clear?! You think you’ve merely stopped a business deal. That is not the case. The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back! It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity! It is ecological balance!
You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multivariate, multi-national dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, Reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels.
It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and subatomic and galactic structure of things today!
is that P&O was a British company, but NOT owned by the British government or the Crown — but from what I’ve heard, Dubai World is controlled by the government. It’s one thing to have a foreign corporation in control (after all, our corporations have their fingers in a lot of international pies), but a foreign government is another kettle of fish…
Not at all that this IS a normal business transaction. ThE UAE Ports World is not a privately owned company but a foreign government-owned entity. Some months ago, China’s government owned CNOCC was not allowed to take over Unocal Oil.
I’m all for free market, private enterprise. This is a back-door decision, in exclusion of those needing to know and a blink and wink on alarming facts. Rumsfeld who sits on the review board, Pace Joint Chiefs of Staff is reported to have heard of the deal over the weekend, yet it was unanimously approved notwithstanding the fact it includes the handling of US Military Equipment.
The furor is over the secrecy, the list of cronies that are linked to the Bush gang who stand to benefit. And that porous borders, security of ports long a political issue, this preznit who likes to hoist himself as the one who’s focused on our security forgot about the phsycological impact.
But it gets better. Here’s the preznit threatening to veto any legislation to block the sale but “Bush was in the dark and was unaware of the pending sale. Huh!!! Hmmm.
Of import is that this decision opens the Bush War on Terror, (good), to deeper scrutiny revealing sheer hypocrisy, incompetence and the T word, or well call it what you will after reading these gems including link above at Thinkprogress?
“U.S.Didn’t Target Bin Laden in 1999 Because He Was Meeting With UAE Royal Family”
So Dubya, you did say, “Bin Laden, I’m not concerned about him.”
I like my port with a nice Cuban.
a nice Cuban? You don’t mean Armando do you?
A nice Cuban, Boo, nice.
Damn, you stole my comeback!
Perhaps I should have said aromatic. 😉
of Nascar, I couldn’t believe that Bush had allowed something like this to get publicized and then frankly put his foot down and said That’s the way it is! Please excuse me for being so informal but down here we are afraid…very afraid, and it is all about us and them and anybody who is a brown person of the desert is a terrorist. There isn’t “humanity” down here, there is only us and them and them is those who aren’t us! These people down here don’t understand global economics! Mississippi didn’t want Alabama to legalize gambling and become gambling competition, so they used their Christianity against them here in Bama and the imbeciles still don’t get that. They are still sticking ten commandment lawn signs next to the road…..if they get hungry here I guess they just tear off a corner and gnaw on that for awhile! Then the President lets the terrorists run our ports and tells everybody to shove off? You can’t brainwash people into a terror frenzy where they stop thinking rationally and then let people who look like the people they are terrified of or who may be distantly related to people that they are terrified of run our ports and expect them to understand a “business deal!” You can’t brainwash a populace into insanity and then expect them to understand rationality….but it can be fun to watch!
that could be a name for your very own blog, but I think we all have our <s>loonies</s> people that believe Fox News.
You’re absolutely right. Bush did a pretty good job right after 9/11 in tamping down anti-Arab sentiment, but since then he has not. And with shows like 24 and Sleeper Cell feeding the paranoia the America public is conditioned to see Bush’s veto as nonsensical.
A fresh, honest approach to defining terrorism threats could do the Democrats more good than anything. Part of the problem is that the Democrats have been feeding that ‘anti-‘ frenzy too.
Judge McKathen in Covington county actually has the ten commandments embroidered into his judicial robe. I know the man personally from several court cases and he doesn’t have any morals that I could discern. What do you think the odds are that this bastion of christianity runs for higher office within the next few years?
You’ve hit the ball out of the ballpark:
You can’t brainwash people into a terror frenzy where they stop thinking rationally and then let people who look like the people they are terrified of or who may be distantly related to people that they are terrified of run our ports and expect them to understand a “business deal!” You can’t brainwash a populace into insanity and then expect them to understand rationality…
This is exactly what that font of wisdom, Mrs. K.P., said last night, so you must be right, LOL:
“You can’t go get everyone stirred up to hate Arabs so you can go have your oil war, and then turn around and give one of their governments control of our ports. Sure, it’s 90% bigotry, but people aren’t going to stand for this one.”
BushCo. has goofed big time on this one; the only face-saving tactic they have open to them is to oppose bigotry, and swallow a veto override. The party won’t want to oppose the will of their base, but on the other hand congressional action will provide that much more ammunition to the Arab extremists, who will say: “See! Just as we told you! The Americans are bigots; they didn’t mind when it was the British running their ports!” Or they can say “Screw public opinion, there’s $$$ on the line here, and who are they to oppose us,” thus tearing open the curtains hiding the little man operating the levers behind the Great Oz. Just dumb, dumb, dumb. Was Karl on vacation this week or something?
Win-Win for BushCo™…jr. gets to cast his first veto, the congress over-rides it…Rover blames the D ‘obstructivists’…lunatic fringe=happy…D’s lose face…lovely.
Now, where is that passport?
Peace
Well, I think this could be a potentially interesting precedent for the future. What will Americans think when (and if) Iraqi companies start to become competitive and want American business. Will the politicians stand up and prevent such economic integration. If so, who will get the contracts? Russia, China?
I understand there are security issues, which I am not really qualified to comment on. But at the same time I wonder what implications this may have for the Middle East down the line. Although there are many of in the left blogesphere that are against globalization or at least neo-liberal, top-down globalization, if it is going to happen.. questions concerning foreign investment are important.
Why didn’t the powers that be just form a joint venture holding company with the UAE to hide the UAE flag from Joe Sixpack? Either dumb or arrogant, and certainly tone-deaf in either case. Having sown the wind of bigotry, now they get to reap the whirlwind.
As I said yesterday, this deal doesn’t bother me much because it really doesn’t change anything. What seriously does bother me is that a tiny fraction of the cargo coming into this country is inspected. We aren’t even remotely safe from terrorism and lax port security is a major reason why. This seems like a good opportunity to force the media to focus on that and possibly accomplish something positive for a change.
Boy, and I tell you, anyone who’s ever spent any time in some of the foreign ports from which these incoming shipments arrive…..really has to be shaking in their boots over this.
I know I am, and I haven’t spent too much time in foreign ports, but just looking back at some major shipments I’ve made from West Africa, for example, …woooo Nelly.
If the American people only KNEW half—half–of what goes on in foreign ports (I’m thinking here in the ‘third world’ and can’t say too much about the rest, but still….)
If the confidence is placed in foreign ports and little is done when it reaches here, what protection from tampering does it have en route?
add that to the mix.
It’s an incredibly volatile situation, actually, no matter who’s in control. The potential for “shenanigans” is just so huge that it’s mind-boggling.
You all know that I am no great fan of Israel, but….frankly….I’ve been saying all along: we really could take a cue or two from them when it comes to security!
Had we done so b/f 9/11, we may or may not have been in a very different place today (depending, of course, on who you think was actually behind that whole incident).
I dunno, Rumi, I just can’t wrap my brain around it (how many times have I said that….).
The politics of this are very odd in that it appears UAE basically supports Hamas, which is condemned by the US and used as an excuse to punish innocent Palestinians.
This standard is what shut down and will prosecute humanitarian foundations in the US recently. How many sets of double standards are allowed by the admin?
I have to ask why you are upset that a Swedish company runs the ports in Philly. Is this something that all “Americans” should feel on a visceral level?.
You are an American because you were born here. That’s all there is to it. It really doesn’t mean anything unless you create a fantasy about it’s importance and then you live under a myth. A shared myth of the importance of America and the idea of American Ownership.
You really shouldn’t travel outside the country because you might encounter people with your own sentiments in other countries whose businesses are under the control or influence of the United States.
Patriotism and Pride are nothing more than institutionalized forms of manipulation. It’s been used by governments since day one.
It’s one thing to love your country, it’s culture (music, art etc.) , the land, what’s familiar, but to take pride in it is ridiculous. It is especially ridiculous in this year of 2006 when the United States has simply become a disgusting predator of nations and self consuming in it’s hatred of itself symbolized by the leadership of the self hating, self destructive Bush.
I think an American company should operate the Philly Naval Yards. It has nothing to do with pride. It has to do with jobs and sovereignty.
It’s not a big issue for me. I know I live in a global economy, and I know most of the employees at the docks are Americans.
I’m not real smart, but I always thought that the ports were under contract with Soprano-style associates for generations. It’s not my place to tell them how to run their business IF that might be relevant, so I defer to others on that issue. I can be happy not knowing many things in this life.
No problem.
Yeah, I agree this whole thing with the ports is just bullshit. So much else is going on. But that’s what happens all the time. They focus on this non-sense because it’s safe to. The Democrats are really on this.
Have you heard about these 3 terrorists in Toledo? Oh man. 6 years from now they will be acquitted. That’s 6 years in jail. It’s another case blown out of proportion.
Take a good look at the UAE support of Hamas and how that connection has to be hidden or it contradicts nearly all of the ‘success’ of the gwot of bushco. Hell, even Holy land and Kind Hearts that just got shut down have that same connection as the basis for the accusation.
Besides some impossibly Machiavellian legislative/executive conspiracy theory, the only thing that this threatened veto tells us is that for SOME reason, the port is very important to BushCo.
Since BushCo runs on profit, then it is a PROFIT motive of some kind.
A deal among the big players.
Oil rights, military access rights, influence in the highest places…something along those lines.
Or of course…the UAR people have something really big on them.
Blackmail. 9/11 info, bin Laden info, Saudi info, secret bank account info…something.
Any way you cut it, you see that it must be some sort of big tits for big tats.
Among the biggest of big rats.
The ONLY other possible motive…and given the history of the last 6 years of BushCo, let alone the policies of Reagan and other BushCo-operated entities and affiliates it is not entirely inpossiible….is that the sole goal of this group is to bring the United States down.
As I have said before here…if it consistently acts like a treasonous duck, there is ample reason to seriously consider that it might very well be a treasonous duck.
For what reason?
To impose a new, corporatist, super-national system upon the world.
I mean…if you are going to get conspiracist, why not go whole hog? It certainly fits the facts.
For WHATEVER reasons, these people are risking political suicide within their own party. Now, grant them this. So far, they have not been politically inept.
So…either they:
1-KNOW that they will win the political battle.
2-Have indeed made a monumental political error
Or
3-The stakes are so high that they have no choice in the matter and have to go all in.
Any possibility makes this a big, BIG story.
Go with it.
AG
P.S. Booman…so this story “bores” you?
And Cheney’s excellent shooting adventure story did not?
Time to look up the word “prioritize” in the ol’ left-wing dictionary, ‘bro…
The economies of Dubai and Abu Dhabi have been based on smuggling since the invention of boats.
I’ve got it diaried at some other blog