Posted on 02/21/2006 10:45:28 AM PST by Sabramerican
Good for you, I too believe the Word, and do not fear the future, but cannot help myself from trying to keep this country away from the wrong side of history. When they say peace, peace, peace, look to the heavens, for your redemption draweth nigh.
Everyone is moaning and groaning about this and all I want to say is that I believe it deserves a closer look. I am more interested in the level of secrecy of this deal. If it was on the up and up, why all the hushness? This deal was said and done with no disussion with those who would be most affected. I'd like to see the contract? How much did we really profit from this deal? It was a Brit company (why are we outsourcing our port infrastructure to ANYONE outside the U.S.?) so what was our kickback? And does the Dubai company have the right to "outsource" their work to other companies? Can they sell the rights to our ports if they wish? Is there a cancellation clause? Can we get out of this contract at any point in time if we feel it is not in our best interest? Was the sale offered to any U.S. companies? It doesn't sound like it. It sounds as if there was something going on underneath the table, a tit for tat - scratch my back, I'll scratch yours kind of deal. It stinks. I don't like it.
And even though this company will supposedly have nothing to do with security in the U.S., do you really trust their security? Do you realize how many illegal people are slipping into this country through our ports? Too many. A lot of them apply for asylum applications under the pretense of torture. And you really don't want to know how many illegals are here in this country from Syria, Iran, Iraq, Egypt and Morocco.
This is a double-edge sword. If we don't trust our Arab "friends" then that will cause tension and will show that the US has no trust in the Arab nation or muslims - confirming Bin Laden's rhetoric. We trust them and something bad happens - well, it will be Bush's fault. If we, as Americans, don't do something to stop this or at least get some sort of guarantee from our President other than "I said it's ok, therefore it's ok", and something bad happens, then we will blame ourselves for not doing what we should have as a country to protect ourselves. We do nothing, then we appear weak, apathetic - which is a very appetizing and delicious dish to our enemy. They like weak very much. They also like seeing that they have played a very important card and there is not a damn thing that this country can do about it.
And Bush says he'll veto any bill that goes before him to stop this contract. Why is he so hell-bent on this? My gut tells me that there is something rotten here. And I always trust my gut.
Very good question.
And even though this company will supposedly have nothing to do with security in the U.S., do you really trust their security?
This notion that security will not be the responsibility of Dubai Ports World (DP World) as the buyer, and indeed the notion that terminal operators generally have no responsibility for security, has been repeated on a number of occasions. It is not only false, it is ridiculously false, and I for one would like to know who started this brazen lie.
Operator cooperation is integral to effective port security. The Canadian PIP program, the US Customs CIS program, the Container Seal Verification Regime (CSVR), and the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC), are just a few of the security regimes that require operator initiative, cooperation, and reporting.
As a small example, TWIC, a uniform personnel credentialing procedure, will vet the identity and background of individuals with access to cargo and to secure areas of a marine cargo handling facility. It is implemented by the operator pursuant to explicit operator duties under the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002. The duties under the 2002 Act include requirements that marine cargo handling facility operators submit facility security plans designating "secure" areas of the facility for control of access by vessels, vehicles and individuals.
These procedures (PIP, CIS, CSVR, TWIC) are designed with the intention of operator participation, and include essential site security procedures and mandates directly imposed on the operator. Properly vetted personnel at domestic facilities, secure rail and land connections with terminals, container content verifications, etc. are nothing to be sneered at or lightly dismissed.
Heck, even DP World stated explicitly that "We intend to maintain and, where appropriate, enhance current security arrangements," (very reassuring, eh?) making this claim that DP World will have no responsibility for security a truly dastardly little piece of spin.
The UAE and Dubai have been unable (or, more likely, unwilling) to police their domestic companies and financial institutions, which have an ignoble history of providing terrorism funding, transit, and logistics. There is no good reason to believe that a state owned company of the UAE will be somehow free from the same manipulations.
The more difficult it is to smuggle or deliver devices, materials, or fungibles to an end destination, including a port itself (which is, after all, a perfect target in many instances due to immediate proximity to chemical and petroleum storage and refining), the better off we are. That's the whole point of efforts to assure container, site, personnel, and land transfer security, and the whole point behind integrating domestic, trustworthy operators into these security procedures.
Well, the U.S. is not supposed to be a dumbo in this scenario and try to be everybody's buddy, just Israel's. But everybody else can take a hike, and they are essentially on their own. If them folks are going to continue being selfish, little scoundrels, they are sealing their own fate.
While this should concern Congress, there have been other foreign buyouts which should have concerned them a whole lot more (one can search FR for some of them).
All the fuss now over a deal that's relatively easy to police doesn't make sense when compared with some of the stuff that's gone down almost unnoticed.
Still, politics doesn't have to make sense. The Adminstration should have foreseen that this would upset people.
The ports are not sold!
This company allready secures much of the cargo that comes into US ports from other ports that they run.
They will not be running security at US ports.
This is strange politically and gives the left leverage, but the overall result is probably not a problem.
Did you know that there are more ports involved than the original 6? Did you know that DPW will be responsible for moving U.S. Army military vehicles in the ports in Corpus Christi AND Beaumont? Do you know that the Port of Tampa accepted the one and only contract given to them by DPW? It was run by SAS out of Seattle but not anymore. It was a no-bid contract - gone straight to DPW. Do you know that they could have extended the contract with SAS for 45 days to review the contract but did this rather quickly yesterday?
You know what I think? I think we are globally positioning ourselves for war with Iran. Call me crazy but I can't think of any other reason why Bush is so adamant about this, why everything has been kept in secret except among the coast guard, homeland security, our military and the Counsel on Foreign Relations. Think about it. When we go to war with Iran, which we will if the Prez of Iran does not come to his senses, who will we need in the middle east? Who in the middle east stands to lose the most if Iran gets nuclear weapons? And now the UAE will be able to move our military equipment? They'll be privy to who does what, when, where. They'll be able to move our equipment in a heartbeat, in secrecy and efficiently. And with the developments in the Port of Tampa - well CINCOM is located here. MacDill is here. Coincidence????
And what did Bush mean yesterday when he said he was trying to "conduct foreign policy" and he did not like being questioned over this. "The government has looked into it and the government said it is ok." Heck, even Gen. Pace has signed off on this thing.
hmmm - what foreign policy, Mr. Bush? I though DPW was just a port terminal management company???
Money, money, money, money...M-O-N-E-Y!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.