The latest on Dubia Ports World

[SmokinLowriderSS]

First off, here's the timeline of the "scandal" as it happened.
Timeline of events in proposed ports deal
The Associated Press
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2006
A timeline of events in DP World's proposed $6.8 billion takeover of major operations at six U.S. ports:
Oct. 17, 2005 - Representatives of DP World approach Treasury officials about its plans to purchase the British firm, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., that controls major operations at six U.S. ports.
Nov. 2 - Homeland Security Department asks U.S. intelligence agencies for information on DP World; they produce nothing "derogatory," according to DHS officials.
Dec. 6 - Staff from all agencies who sit on U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment (CFIUS) meet with company officials to review transaction.
Dec. 16 - Company files formal notice of deal with Treasury, which circulates the filing to all CFIUS departments and agencies, as well as the departments of Energy and Transportation.
Jan. 17, 2006 - CFIUS does not object to the transaction after a 30-day review in which Homeland Security gets DP World to agree to open its books and keep the current U.S. ports management intact.
Feb. 11 - The Associated Press reports the deal, including Dubai's ties to Sept. 11 terrorists.
Week of Feb. 13 - Lawmakers from both parties, including Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer and GOP Rep. John Sweeney, call on Treasury Secretary John Snow and Homeland Secretary Michael Chertoff to explain the deal publicly.
Feb. 16 - Aides inform President Bush of controversy and that administration had approved the deal a month earlier.
Feb. 20 - Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist says he will introduce legislation to delay the transaction if the White House doesn't do so.
Feb. 21 - Bush defends the deal, saying it "will not jeopardize the security of the country," and he vows to veto any congressional effort to stop it.
Feb. 23 - Senate Armed Services Committee holds hearing; Democrats charge Bush administration violated law by not conducting an additional 45-day security review and fully informing Congress.
DP World later suggests it will delay the transaction to give lawmakers time to be briefed fully.
Feb. 26 - DP World agrees to a 45-day review and promises to create a U.S. subsidiary that would operate independently of executives in Dubai until May. The administration accepts the offer and says it will begin the review immediately after the DP World offer is formalized.
See that last paragraph? They are now going to create an American subsidiary to run business here independant of Dubai management. Yes, we will have to see just how it goes, just how independant they will be, but isn't it a step in the right direction?
As it is, our 6 ports are less than 10% of DPW's business worldwide.
Round 2? :crossx:

[Seadog]

They are going to sell the port operation to an American company. It would be ironic, if an American company bought it, they outsourced it to India. Better still, if no one buys it and the ports get shut down.
The word is that Dubai has postponed free trade talks with the U.S. and that a major purchase of airliners may be lost for Boeing. Another case of politicians cutting off their noses to spite their face. I prefer U.S. ownership, particularly of sensitive areas, but there is nothing UAE would have done to endanger us, and our insults may just make us less safe.

[572Daytona]

Yep, congress is a bunch of self-absorbed bozos. All they care about is what is good for their re-election hopes, not what is good for the US as a whole. Of all the issues that they should be addressing (social security, health care, etc) they are wasting time with this cause they figure it is a slam dunk to oppose it. The media has already sold it to the public as being bad for the US so they can take a similar stance to boost their popularity without doing any actual research as to whether it really is a security threat or not.
One of the things that I like about Bush is that he makes his decisions based on what he believes is in the country's best interest, not based on whether or not it is a popular decision. That is refreshing and needed in politics today. In the next couple of decades there are going to have to be lots of tough decisions made on some major issues that are not going to be popular. I just hope whatever president is there at the time has the balls to make the right decisions.

[Jeanyus]

Why should the US take the chance of letting Arab countrys have anything to do with our ports ?
It would take only 1 spy to help get a WMD into America, the Arab companys would no doubt have several non Americans supervising operations. The problem I have with Dubia runing us ports is that there will be peole in supervisor positions, with free access to the ports, that speak the same language, and are the same religon as Bin Laden. Seems like it would be pretty easy for Al Quieda to bribe, or threaten these people and thier families, to get what they want.
As far as Saudi Arabia throwing the US military out, if they did that thier government would be overthrown the following day, and the Taliban, Hamas or other radicals would take over.
As far as insulting Arabs, they are ready to start World War 4 over a cartoon. Is there anything we do that dosen't offend them? the streets of Dubia are paved with American dollers, they are the ones who should be worried about offending us. A lot more money from the US going into Dubai, than Dubia dollers coming into the US.
I'm thankful the deal fell through.

[Schiada76]

Gee, no one at all seems to have a problem with Communist China (which has openly stated war with the US is inevitable) running multiple port operations here on the West coast. Oh yeah Klintoon brokered that deal for campaign contributions. No one had a problem with Jiminy Catuh (the filthy traitor) allowing Communist China to gain control of the Panama Canal.
Could it be.........maybe..........................they just hate Bush???????
Naw that couldn't be it. :220v:
Hey canucretard, where's those lies from the president you were going to post? Still waiting..............fag. :crossx:

[572Daytona]

I guess I'm less xenophobic than most, I don't lump all Arab countries into the same group. You could also argue that UAE would be more prepared to protect us from terrorists because of where they are. I'm sure that Al Queda would love to blowup some of UAE's oil and shipping facilities if they could. And would having some apathetic or left wing nut job American employee in one of those supervisor positions be any better than a UAE employee? I also don't recall seeing any violence from Muslim's in UAE over the Cartoon deal.

[Jeanyus]

After 9-11 video was shown from Saudi Ariba that showed people cheering and burning US flags. Bin Laden is from Saudi.
I'm not OK with these people in our ports.
I'll ask this question again what is it that we have to gain, by letting them run or ports? Does it outweigh what we stand to loose, if a nuke, or biological weapon gets set off in 1 of our major cities?
So far the argument is we don't want to offend them.
Are we so PC that we take a huge gamble like that.
One thing I do know is Bin Laden would be licking his chops, like the fox gaurding the hen house, if this deal went through.
Last time I checeked, the Chineese predominant religion was Budism, I could be wrong but I don't think Budism calls for the extermination of America. Also I dont recall any Chineese terrorists attacking us.
Anyone who trusts these people, should take a trip over there, don't bother wasting your money on a round trip ticket.
For the trip home Just bring a shoe box with you addresed to your family, after the friendly Arabs get done with you, your remains will easily fit in the shoe box,the shoe box could be shipped home, and your relatives will have something to bury in the cemetary.

[Schiada76]

"Last time I checeked, the Chineese predominant religion was Budism, I could be wrong but I don't think Budism calls for the extermination of America. Also I dont recall any Chineese terrorists attacking us."
They're communists. They are the enemy. They shouldn't have a presense in our ports either. So if you're going to bitch about the UAE bitch about the Chinks too! Don't give the fng liberal scum a pass on this.
Politicians as a whole really don't give a fawk about us, either side.

[572Daytona]

Saudi Arabia and UAE are separate and distinct countries, not the same by any means. UAE is a very capitalistic society much like the US in that regard. If the rest of the Mideast were like them I don't think they would be breeding grounds for terrorists. It's not just a matter of not offending them, we need mideast allies in the war on terror, no sense burning your bridges with the ones that you do have. I would have like to seen a more thorough investigation into the potential for security threats with this deal rather than the racist, knee-jerked reaction that we got from the media and the politicians.

[Jeanyus]

1 I'll ask this question again what is it that we have to gain, by letting them run or ports? Does it outweigh what we stand to loose, if a nuke, or biological weapon gets set off in 1 of our major cities?
2 If I take a man from The UAE and a man from Al Queda, and stand them side by side I will be able to see a distinct differance between the 2 ?
The UAE will never break it's ties to America, you said it yourself, " they are capitolistic" the get all thier capitol from America. If they stop selling oil to America, thier economy will fail instantly. They get all thier military equipment from the US and full military protection from the US, to break ties with the US would be suicide. Not going to happen.
Can anyone answer question 1 wihtout going liberal on me ( diverting to the problem of China or the border).
The answer to question 2 is. NO