Interesting perspective on the UAE ports deal

[WilliamPitt]

http://www.jeffvail.net/2006/02/ports-petrodollars.html

Ports & Petrodollars
By Jeff Vail

I've been amused and intrigued by the recent flap over the sale of P&O, and with it the operations of several major US ports, to the UAE company Dubai Ports World. For a change, I fully agree with President Bush--well, at least with what he is saying to the media--that this is not a security concern, and that the sale shouldn't be blocked. The US government is still in charge of the security, and to borrow from John Stewart, our ports will enjoy the same incompetent government security no matter who we sell them to. The bi-partisan opposition to this smacks of nothing but racist, reactionary populism. Sure, foreigners can own the ports, just not Arabs--they scare us. If anything, DP World (owned by the UAE government) will be a better partner with US Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) than P&O was, because while P&O was a publicly traded, for-profit company, the UAE government has strong political interests to protect, and will ensure that DP World bolsters security to prevent major blowback, even at the expense of the bottom line...

But the real question here is why Bush is making such a stand on this issue, when it would be much easier, and more beneficial to his "public agenda," to stand behind his campaign promise and be "a uniter." There are several theories, each of which deserves some thought:

1. A Marketplace for Petrodollars: OPEC sells oil in dollars, and in turn invests those petrodollars in dollar instruments like US government bonds, US equities, US property, etc. This boosts the "growth" of the US economy and bolsters the US dollar, which in turn finances our trade deficit. They--by which I mean "Arabs"--have lots of petrodollars to spend, and to spend large quantities effectively you can't just buy mutual funds or shares of GM. You need to buy large chunks, often whole companies--just ask any i-banker. DP World (which is a petrodollar investment player) wanted to by P&O. This is a very smart move, because rather than just buying a few billion dollars in stock in P&O but keeping a politically benign minority share, they want to control the company. This creates synergy with their existing ports investments, and leverages the value of that money spent. It also leverages UAE's long-term strategy to become a regional, non-oil economic powerhouse through the wise investment of oil revenues. When the US says "no" to what is otherwise a very wise move (at least by the "generally accepted" wisdom of globalization), then the value of the OPEC's gentleman's agreement to sell oil in dollars declines. At some point it becomes necessary to divest some of your dollars to an alternative--say the euro, or even to sell oil directly in euros. That would be a major blow to the US economic system. This argument, in my opinion, holds some water, but is not entirely convincing.

2. Boeing/Airbus Reciprocity: Emirates Airlines just contracted for $8 billion with Boeing to buy their new 787 dreamliner aircraft. They could have bought the new Airbus instead. Maybe they will if DP World can't buy US ports for $7 billion. Quid pro quo is classic geopolitics for a good reason--it makes sense. I haven't seen any direct evidence of Boeing lobbyists involved in the DP World sale, but I'm always suspicious of coincidences.

3. Strait of Hormuz & Iran: Bush has mentioned that the UAE is a key partner in the "War on Terror," by which, of course, he means the geopolitical chess game to continue oil-based US economic hegemony. The UAE is also critically situated relative to the Strait of Hormuz, the key oil chokepoint at the end of the Persian Gulf through which 25% of all global oil exports pass. The US already has significant bases in the UAE, mainly al-Dhafra Air Base. It is my analysis that, in the face of a concerted Iranian effort to close the strait, a land invasion of the northern edge would be necessary to re-open it. At a minimum, the US would need to occupy the several Iranian controlled islands in the strait: Abu Musa, Greater and Lesser Tunb, just to name a few. Interestingly, these islands were seized from the UAE a few decades ago. While the strait itself is bounded by Iran and an exclave of Oman, the UAE is the better staging ground for any operation by US forces. It's a critical insurance policy to be able to base out of the UAE, and it is a prerequisite to almost any valid plan to invade Iran. With the Marine Corps Intelligence Activity (MCIA) recently contracting with SAIC to "study" ethnic minorities in Iran for possible points of leverage, this is, at a minimum, a serious long term consideration of the Bush administration. Of note, the UAE is also the bypass point of choice for an oil pipeline from the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea--which could minimize any Iranian trump card gained by their ability to shut down the strait. To my knowledge, no such pipeline is currently planned, although a natural gas bypass does exist. Overall, this argument seems to hold some water, but it is not yet fully formed.

...more, with stuff on the Iran oil bourse...

[GeorgeGist]

1. More food for thought...

Thanks.

[mdmc]

2. very inteligent

:kick:

I wish I could write like this...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. As usual, follow the money and watch the posing polticians.

Amazing how many alleged "progressives" have been stampeded by the Arab bogeyman into xenophobia and thinly veiled racism.

[Inland]

4. All we know is that it isn't a stand alone business deal.

If it was a stand alone deal where a private corporation buys out a bunch of management contracts, Bush wouldn't be asserting national security reasons for keeping it.

If it was, Bush wouldn't be pointing out how the UAE government is an ally on terror.

If it was, the defenders wouldn't be asserting that somehow Arab allies would take it as a black eye, as it would be one corporation's problem.

If it was, THE US COULD CUT A FRICKEN CHECK IN COMPENSATION FROM THE PETTY CASH ACCOUNT AND BE DONE WITH IT. A private corporation just wants the profit. It doesn't care if it gets cash from breach of contract damages or actually does the work.

So something else is going on. Something big. Something the WH won't talk about. Something it would rather not have congress, much less the public, know about.

So all we have is the tip of the iceberg of the Bush skulduggery.

[NoMercy]

20. U.S. Assets is a small part of this deal

[northzax]

27. yes, it's called public diplomacy

at least one aspect of it. It is about telling a population that, in many cases, thinks we are at war with an entire ethnic/religious group that this isn't the case. Do we want to tell the entire Arab world that we don't trust them, that we would rather have communist China running our ports than an Arab ally? that'll pour some more fuel on the fire of anti-americanism, don't you think?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

38. What have the NeoCons been telling the American people.....

...over the past six years? Hate the Arab...distrust the Arab....Middle Easterners can't be trusted...the Muslims are making WMDs...terra, terra, terra.

Do you really believe the reaction to this port deal is just something that's coming out of the blue?

[Inland]

40. "Diplomacy"? With whom and for what purpose?

If the US doesn't want to appear to be at war with the entire Arab world, it might stop being at war, period. What "trust" has to do with that, I have no idea. Because, frankly, I don't trust the Arab world, the Chinese world, or the United Kingdom world with the ports, not until we get on our feet with port security. It really wasn't necessary to turn over security in order to show "trust" of a feudal oil state with a sad record on terror and human rights.

No, it's about a quid pro quo for something that the Bush administration cannot name. Gee, our government helps a UAE corporation get some American business, and the mirror image of that would be a US company getting it's foot in the door in the Gulf. Or a tie up for the Iran invasion.

Whatever Bush is trading our security for, he won't tell us.

[senaca]

5. regulation vs. deregulation

I may be wrong but the UAE deal is part of the end game of deregulation game. First it was a grand expirement regarding U.S. companies. Now with this deal we have a government owned company that does not have to supply a second copy of paperwork on U.S. soil thereby foregoing the courts. How do you regulate a company without full accountability should something go awry? Then there's that old game of Risk that brought home how America's borders are protected by ocean's on the East Coast and West Coast. I wonder what Canada and Mexico thinks of this sale? P & O being British would be part of actually would be more of a company that is national to Canada, but what of UAE?

[pauldp]

6. Very interesting. BUT I'm getting sick of the "racism" horse shit.

"smacks of nothing but racist, reactionary populism."

Al Qaeda has proved to be an equal opportunity terror organization,
with black, white, asian, and middle eastern members.
Who really sponsors Al Qaeda and what its purpose is debatable,
but to oppose or be concerned about Al Qaeda is not racist in the least.The UAE has a long history of laundering money from drugs and weapons for Al Qaeda not to mention partying with Bin Laden after the East African embassy bombings. To believe everything is different now after 911 because they passed a few laws and threw some people in prison is ridiculous.

So to anyone on the left or right trying to frame this as a racist issue I say
there are many reasons to be concerned about UAE connections to Al Qaeda so
F*ck off!

[yodermon]

8. It is the Jewish/Israeli anitsemitism model

applied to the Arab U.A.E.

"If you are against the port deal you are a thinly veiled racist"

"If you are critical of Israeli policy you are a thinly veiled anti-semite"

Both arguments, of course, are horseshit.

[pauldp]

9. Exactly. Good analogy.

and unfortunately it often is effective in silencing
the opposition. We CANNOT allow this nonsense.

[Blue_Roses]

10. I agree

"I'm getting sick of the 'racism' horse shit."

This has absolutely nothing to do with this issue, as far as many of us are concerned. If Bush feels so secure with the UAE owning our ports then he should fire the secret service and let the UAE do his security detail.:eyes:

There is so much more to this issue than what is being discussed. Try $$$$$$ and I hate to see Dick Cheney and Halliburton reap the benefits AGAIN.

[pauldp]

11. The whole issue of how are ports are operated

needs to be scrutinized. It's been known for a long time that our ports are vulnerable.
So IMHO, rather than saying "it happens all the time" we need to consider revamping the whole system.

After all, we are in a life and death, never ending war on the human emotion called TERROR.

[northzax]

12. ok, fine

as of midnight tonight, all ports are nationalized. When 10 thousand jobs are lost, overnight, and the price of a t-shirt goes to $30, at least you'll be safe, knowing the government is in charge, right?

When the government turns over port operations to Haliburton, who promptly overrules all local authorities and states that due to security needs, union labour is no longer needed, at least you'll be safe, right? When every other nation boots US companies out of their ports, at least you'll be safe, right? When every nation starts buying Airbus, instead of Boeing, since our contracts are meaningless, you'll be safe, right? When US manufacturers can no longer get supplies on time and shut down, you'll be safe, right? when farmers can no longer sell products abroad, at least you'll be safe, right? when the price of a microchip doubles, at least you'll be safe, right?

cause the gubmint will protect us, right?

[pauldp]

13. I agree with Schumer on this one.

The way we run our ports needs to be completely reviewed. This issue just underscores what we already knew.

edit:typo

[senaca]

14. How are the 10 thousand jobs lost if the unions are incorporated in this?

[northzax]

15. the government does not employ unions in national security jobs

or they break them to the point of meaninglessness. It is practically illegal to strike against the Federal Government (ask the railroad unions and the Air traffic controllers). Goodbye longshoremen.

[senaca]

16. How about the Postal Union. It's a pretty strong Union.

It couldn't work without a Longshoreman's Union as a check.

[northzax]

17. not national security

and believe me, the minute they strike, they will be crushed like bugs. Without the power to strike, a union is pretty meaningless, ain't it?

You really think the gubmint wants to deal with the ILA, with the incredible radical history of that organization?

[senaca]

19. Perhaps because the ILA is a strong union it could work.

If they were part of the process. The effects of union busting are now being felt by workers as their rights degenerate. The backlash against Walmartization is starting. What other ideas would be possible?

[KnaveRupe]

33. Unions that can't strike...

...generally are accorded automatic binding arbitration after a token effort at negotiating. The FOP (Police) can't strike, nor can the IAFF (Firefighters), yet they are still pretty powerful Unions.

I dunno about you, but our local AFSCME union (which HAS the right to strike) would JUMP at the binding arbitration decisions that the Police and Fire departments get around here. And yet those Unions can't strike. Go figure.

I can't remember - is what you're putting out here referred to as a "red herring", or a "straw man"? It's late, and I can't really figure out where you are coming from in stating that the ILA will have more leverage with a foreign-owned port than with a government-owned port.

[northzax]

41. ask the railroad union

they'll tell you. and the Air Traffic Controllers.

you know why police and firefighters have stronger unions? because they negotiate with municipalities, not the Feds. The Mayor of town A wants the endorsement of those cops and firefighters in the next election, so he is more respectful of the power of the union. The Feds don't really give a shit.

Right now, the unions negotiate with the Ports to get access and exclusive labor rights, and I guarantee you that the mayor of Baltimore is going to care more about the ILA in Baltimore than George Bush is.

allow me to put it in plain english. the negotiations are with the port, not the terminal operator for the most part. The terminal operator has to use approved labour. the port mandates that, in writing. imagine hiring a contractor to redo your kitchen. if you tell him, "i only want union labour' then he's going to use union labour, right? it's part of the deal. the herring i coming from you, I think.

Ask any union if they would rather negotiate with a municipality or the Feds.

[Joe Fields]

7. I read long ago that the euro will most likely replace ....

the U.S. dollar as petrodollar currency. This is most likely an inevitable situation, given the global economy, the rise of europe as a trading partner with the middle east, their politics, which aren't as inflammatory as ours, coupled with our huge trade deficit and our current geopolitical state.

Eventually, the oil in the middle eat will turn back to sand, and it will become of no strategic significance to us anymore. If you believe in the theory of "Peak Oil," those days may be coming sooner than many people think.

Right now, we are politically and militarily convenient for the Kuwaiti's and other "allies" in that region. What will happen if we continue to rely on middle east oil, when China's appetite becomes all-consuming? Suppose the Chinese government is willing to make a better deal with these countries in the region? I would much rather haver China as an ally than an adversary. I just hate to see our appetite for oil dictate our foreign policy. It could end up throwing us into a war with China. We have already alienated much of the Muslim world because of this. So, what would be the ultimate price of continuing these failed policies? I'm not sure I want to find out.

I don't subscribe to any theory that postulates a Bush success in any type of foreign policy pursuit. He has done nothing but make a shambles out of policy making to date, and frankly, I believe we need to do an about face, quit the "quid pro quo" with governments such as Dubai, and re-think our global foreign strategy. But of course, to do that we will need to re-think the ways we consume energy here at home, get really serious about finding a way to wean ourselves away from the crude oil teats of middle eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

Granted, from a business and strategig vantage point, the ports deal may make sense. But I look upon it as nothing more than a convenient deal to provide a short-term solution to doomed long term strategy.

[bigtree]

18. in all of the defenses from the administration there are two themes

business and assistance in the 'war on terror'

the business angle is obvious.

the 'war on terror' rhetoric follows the logic expressed in the article that the Dubai deal compromises our ports, but ensures US access to the UAE ports, which, in the Bush plan, would serve as a staging ares to invade, bomb, or upset Iran. There's quite a U.S. military infrastructure in place there.

I caught the Marine muckraking story a couple of days ago. Seems like it should be seen as one of the factors which contributed to the unrest and violence surrounding the mosque bombing:


US marines probe tensions among Iran’s ethnic minorities
February 23 2006

US intelligence experts suggested the marines’ effort could be evidence of early stages of contingency plans for a ground assault on Iran. Or it could be an attempt to evaluate the implications of the unrest in Iranian border regions for marines stationed in Iraq, as well as Iranian infiltration. Diplomats in Washington expressed shock at the possible implications of the marine research. The FT interviewed several Iranians in the US who were invited to help. Some refused, seeing it as part of an effort to break up Iran. But several exiled politicians representing minority groups opposed to the Islamic regime did take part, although they said they wanted a peaceful transition to a democratic, federal Iran and were opposed to any US military action. Mauri Esfandiari, US representative of the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan, which ended its armed struggle in 1997 and is based mostly in northern Iraq, said he believed the Pentagon was acting on its long-standing distrust of CIA and State Department analysis. He thought the Pentagon was looking to counter the prevailing administration view that US support for Iran’s minorities would create a disastrous backlash.

“They want to study and see if the State Department’s chaos theory is a valid hypothesis,” he said. The US could not look to the Kurds to support an invasion as they did in Iraq, he said.

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/25a4dbf8-a49f-11da-897c-0000779e2340.html

[DemReadingDU]

21. It's all about Big Business

More money for the wealthy.

Bush won't let this deal get away. First thing he said is that he would veto any bill to stop it, no doubt to ensure that his wealthy cronies would gain in the profits.

[bahrbearian]

22. And we all know boeing has our best interest at heart !

being a lay ed off Boeing worker.

[many a good man]

23. We don't need "perspective," we need DEMAGOGUERY!

Having scruples is a horrible political handicap!

This is just another in a long line of public diplomacy disasters and geo-strategic blunders. The UAE?! One minute they're drinking tea with Osama and the next minute they're our bosom buddies. I don't trust these guys any more than I do Bush** and Cheney!

[JCMach1]

25. You don't understand Arab culture... they would have tea with ANYONE

it's part of the open-tent policy...

If you want to visit Shk. Maktoum at the palace, fly over and visit next week.

[JCMach1]

24. Emirates also does business with Airbus, this is just the most

recent deal.

The petrodollars aspect is true. In fact the UAE dirham is currently 'pegged' to the U.S. dollar...


As for Iran, you are exactly right... Almost nothing can be done against Iran without the UAE on board for at least logistical support...

[BeFree]

28. Good

So we stop an atack on Iran by pissing off the UAE?

Works for me.

The UAE can go fly a kite. I don't want them having anything to do with our ports. They are thieves of the highest order and would like to see the US hurting. Only thing is: They NEED our petro-dollars.

[JCMach1]

32. There you are wrong... the US needs the UAE far more than vice versa

A shift in UAE policy could lead to an energy alliance with China and/or India... Hey, and don't forget Europe.

The US disses the UAE at its economic and strategic peril (vis a vis the Middle East)

[BeFree]

35. Good Lord!

You think we are at the mercy of the UAE? WOW!

If it wasn't for the US Navy, all those friggin little nations would be plundered. As it is, we are the plunderers.... we just do it nicely, or, we did before * was made king.

I find the rhetoric around here that is trying to establish the UAE's righteousness quite disconcerting. Especially so since it all seems to be helping * get out of the mess he's in over the ports deal.

Don't yall have better things to do?

[RazzleDazzle]

26. I can't get past the factual errors in the first paragraph

There was someone here yesterday poeddling -- or should I say shoveling -- this same steaming pile of bullcrap too. Obviously, there are some well-placed DEMS involved in lobbying for this. In fact, I read a few names of Dem lobbyists, former Clintonites.

FUCK THE DLC. Got that? FUCK THEM. Supporting this crap is DLC-mentality and it doesn't matter whether or not the DLC is literally and officially behind this or not. OR, if you prefer: fuck the corporatists no matter which party they say they're with.

Here's what I posted for the other jerk who came here to try to tell us the ports will still be under US Govt security and other such crap:

Scramble to Back Port Deal: Making of Political Disaster
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2482117&mesg_id=2482117
(several links)


The Dubai Ports World Deal - Through a Coast Guard Veteran's Eyes
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x481615

Homeland Security Protested Ports Deal
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060226/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/ports_security

The Assertion The Dubai Co. Would Not Be In Charge Of Security Is FALSE!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x498780

Who the hell cares what YOU think?
(good early compilation with links)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x474465

Village Voice: Ports: All 'Bout a Dealer Named Bout
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2128568
Link: http://villagevoice.com/news/0609,ridgeway,72294,2.html
and: http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0609,ridgeway,72286,2.html

OMIGAWD!! Dubai: "Visit the USA: Streamlined Visa Processing"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x497794
Link: http://uae.usembassy.gov/visit_the_usa.html

Obscure US intelligence agency assessed ports deal (NEGROPONTE INVOLVED)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x496497
and: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2476019
Link: http://www.commoncause.org/ProtectNetNeutrality
and: http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNew

Kristen Breitweiser:Coming to a Port Near You-where Dubya stands for Dubai
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2476915
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kristen-breitweiser/coming-to-a-port-near-you_b_16218.html


Sen Levin: Bush Admin Ignoring the Law On Port Deal
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x501703
Link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060223/ap_on_go_co/ports_security

US Relationship with UAE seems shrouded in secrecy....some facts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x501707
Link: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/PrintStory.pl?document_id=2002823048&zsection_id=2002107549&slug=portsemirates23&date=20060223

US Called Off Air Strike on Osama Because UAE Royals Were Visiting Him
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x488962
Link: http://in.rediff.com/news/2004/mar/25osama.htm

DEO - Bush and his UAE Pals (Dobbs)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x494300
Link: http://www.canofun.com/cof/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=17073

Slavery of baby boys in the United Arab Emirates
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x495756
Link: http://www.iabolish.org/slavery_today/country_reports/ae.html

Bush to Kerry "I'll NEVER Hand Over America's Security to Foreign Leaders"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x490641
Link: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0410/06/se.01.html
via: http://www.digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_02_19_digbysblog_archive.html#114062718127636312

"We will make no distinction between the terrorists ..." (some facts about UAE)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2475354
Link: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/17/ports-uae

WTF! Tampa Approves Port Deal To UAE
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x490661
Link: http://www.local6.com/news/7327461/detail.html

Daily Record: N.J. will sue to stop Arab company's port takeover
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2124240
Link: http://www.dailyrecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060222/NEWS01/602220325/1005

The UAE Has been providing U.S. Port Security since March 2005
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x491375
Link: http://www.customs.ustreas.gov/xp/cgov/newsroom/press_releases/archives/2005_press_releases/0032005/03282005.xml

By law Dubya had to know about the port deal, Exon-Florio statute says so
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2475129
Link: http://www.treasury.gov/offices/international-affairs/exon-florio/

STOP. Rewind. Go back to 9/11, re-examine. We have lost our way.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=490064&mesg_id=490064

Time Machine 2004: UAE royals, bin Laden's saviours
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x490213
Link: http://in.rediff.com/news/2004/mar/25osama.htm

UAE and BCCI
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x490176
Link: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/searchResults.jsp?searchtext=%22abu+dhabi%22&events=on&entities=on&articles=on&topics=on&timelines=on&projects=on&titles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on&search=+Go+

The fact that your enemy agrees with you does not always mean that you're wrong. (Plaid Adder)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x485038

July, 2001, UAE: Osama Bin Laden stays at hospital in Dubai, UAE
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x485845
Link: http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/RIC111B.html

There's something odd about the recent deaths in the UAE ruling family!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x487452

NY Daily News: Did John Snow smooth the port deal for his former company?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x489293
Link: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/393579p-333744c.html

The UAE - Halliburton connection/"Trading With The Enemy"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x489315
Link: http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2004/0412/086_2.html

The Dirty Little Secret Behind the UAE Port Security Flap (David Sirota)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x484387
Link: http://www.davidsirota.com/2006/02/dirty-little-secret-behind-uae-port.html

SCANDAL: Bush nominated PORT DEAL exec as Maritime Admin in January
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x484495
Link: http://www.dpiterminals.com/fullnews.asp?NewsID=39

Caferty, CNN - Over 3000 emails on Port deals - WOW!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x483743#483750

Hedz up: Lou Dobbs to discuss "interesting relationships" on port
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x483755

Port deal = Airport security outsourced to the Saudi's!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x482425

BREAKING: Rumsfeld & Pace Not Consulted On Transfer Of Port Ops To UAE
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x482089
Link: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/21/rumsfeld-not-consulted/

[sendero]

29. I'm amazed and amused..

.... that so many people are so surprised at this reaction. For 5 fucking years we hear that those bad bad AAAA-rabs are all terrrrists and that we have to spend all our money and our blood fighting them.

And then when we want to turn our ports over to a country with a much stronger record of supporting terrorist than fighting them, everyone is so effing surprised that Americans don't sit well with it.

Anyone who doesn't get this is a moron, a drooling, simple, god-bless-their-heart fool.

[buddysmellgood]

30. Nice arguments, but only a fool would pass on this opportunity. The deal

does not pass the smell test. The public hates it. We should own and run our own ports.
That is all you can say. The arguments presented in the post will never reach the public's ears. This is Bush's blowjob, only he is the one on his knees.

[JCMach1]

31. Yet another reason Will, Mid-East Free Trade Zone

that the Bushies want to establish...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x534769

[LibertyorDeath]

34. Lawyers, Guns, Money and Drugs

From Rigorous Intuition

Lawyers, Guns, Money and Drugs

Regarding the cuts to operational capacity of the Coast Guard and the inadequacy of Customs, James Ridgeway writes:

This is a dream setup for any arms or dope dealer, and that's exactly what the United Arab Emirates is all about.The ties between its top officials and royal family with the Taliban and Al Qaeda go back at least a decade.

The UAE is not only the center of financial dealings in the Persian Gulf, it is switching central for dope and arms dealing. The dope comes out of Afghanistan into the UAE where tax monies are collected and used to buy arms, which were sent back in for the Taliban. Some of this money is thought to have helped finance the 9-11 attacks. A money trail is set forth in the government's filings in the Moussaoui case.

Long at the center of this operation is the mysterious Russian arms dealer, Victor Bout.... His planes are registered to various companies all operating out of the United Arab Emirates.

In fact, the United Arab Emirates have been viewed as hub for trade going and coming to Afghanistan, with drugs coming from Afghanistan on their way to the West, and weapons from Bout, going back. While transportation was via Bout's different air cargo interests, it also involved the Afghan state airlines, called Ariana Airlines. The airline was controlled by Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda agents masquerading as Ariana employees flew out of
Afghanistan, through Sharjah, one of the emirates, and on to points west.

http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/

[proud patriot]

36. That is interesting

Thanks :hi:

[threadkillaz]

37. al-Dahfra Air Base

CNN - Bases for Coalition Operations
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/deployment.map/al.hafra.html




Al Dhafra Air Base, UAE
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/dhafra.htm

[JanusAscending]

39. Well guess what guys!!

With all of your discussions, and Bushes agreement to a 45 day extension for Congress's security investigation, the closing on the deal is going to take place this Thursday!! So someone please tell me, why bother with the investigation? Congress needs to convene, and stop these bastards in their tracks TOMORROW and vote on WED. to stop it!( and by enough to over ride a veto!!!:nuke: