Homeland Security initially opposed port deal.
By on Feb 25th, 2006 at 10:55 am
Homeland Security initially opposed port deal.
“The Homeland Security Department objected at first to a United Arab Emirates company’s taking over significant operations at six U.S. ports. It was the lone protest among members of the government committee that eventually approved the deal without dissent.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Hannity
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Who cares? Chertoff is not a patriot. He is a criminal.
February 25th, 2006 at 11:05 amWell after reading…senior vice president Michael Moore…
I now see why so many republicans are against this deal. When the likes of Michael Moore are running the show fow DWP there is bound to be problem… right Gary R.?
February 25th, 2006 at 11:22 amWONDER WHAT “INITIALLY OPPOSE” MEANS?
DID THEY PROMISE CHERTOFF A FEW BUCKS TO DROP HIS OBJECTIONS?
OR DID CHENEY AND BUSH JUST PUT THE HAMMER DOWN?
“DON’T F*CK WITH OUR INVESTMENTS, SKELETOR.”
February 25th, 2006 at 11:23 am“Bush’s national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, said there was no going back on the deal.”
If Mr. Hadley worked for me I would only have one thing to say:
“Write when you find work.”
Come to think of it he does work for us. It is time come November to tell all Repug incumbents: “Write when you get out of jail.”
February 25th, 2006 at 11:28 amChertoff is a flip-flopper.
February 25th, 2006 at 11:49 amYou mean they were against it before they were for it?
February 25th, 2006 at 11:55 amBush cannot go back on this deal. The bribes have already been paid, 1 mil here, 10 mil there.
It is interesting to not that Bush knew of the bribes being paid before he knew about the deal.
February 25th, 2006 at 11:59 amI don’t understand the statement “it was the lone protest” that “eventually aproved the deal.”
February 25th, 2006 at 12:08 pmThere has been reporting overseas from the time this was announced that the government had approved the deal. What the US media has consistently failed to reveal is that the “deal” in the sense of DPW purchasing P&O is done and will close March 2. The necessary regulatory approvals have all been received.
February 25th, 2006 at 12:16 pmUnless the various port authorities negotiated a change of control clause into their leases,they’re going to lose any suit they file.
At this point, DPW is being conciliatory about actually exercising management control. Once the P&O shares are paid on March 2,they will have a legal right to operate the terminals.
What I don’t understand is how Bush can scare the hell out of us for 5 years with terror alerts, talks of mushroom clouds, fighting over there so we don’t fight over there.. yadda-yadda. And now all of a sudden he feels it is OK to let Arabs in on a little business deal. It’s like “We are only scared of the none- business arab terrorists.
Is it just me or does this whole port deal make his terrorist threats look fake?
February 25th, 2006 at 12:28 pmChuckles/Charlie?Cheney: …none ready to take over these terminal on March 2nd – let’s all get with this reality-based thinking, you know.
Here’s some reality for you, Chuckles. The DP takeover has been delayed at U.S. terminals. Miss that, did you? Plus lawsuits have been filed, which would have dragged down the takeover as well.
Let the congressional investigation fully vet the DP deal. No more slam dunks.
Scrutiny for shoring up port security will now get the top priority that it deserves as result of this story. And that’s long overdue.
February 25th, 2006 at 12:31 pmNothing gets in the way of business deals with crooks.
February 25th, 2006 at 12:42 pmI agree with mudkitty.
February 25th, 2006 at 1:05 pmmr ho,unless the various port authorities have a right in the leases to approve any change in control their lawsuits will be dismissed rather quickly. In the case of the 6 major ports discussed where the lessee is P&O,there is some chance of stopping it,in the others where a subsidiary of P&O was the lessee,it’s not clear that the lessee is being changed at all.
February 25th, 2006 at 1:07 pmHadley is correct,the government has already approved this deal.Congress can pass a piece of legislation affecting future deals,but it doesn’t look like they can retroactively alter this deal anymore than they could change the Schiavo case.
Done is done.
They voted against it before they voted for it.
-GSD
February 25th, 2006 at 1:25 pmIs it just me or does this whole port deal make his terrorist threats look fake?
Comment by Colorado Jyms — February 25, 2006 @ 12:28 pm
Sorta makes those of us who have been saying so (progressives) wanna say “Told you so” to the walking dead who voted for Peeping George Part II because they felt he could best handle national security.
The only thing he’s handling is our wallets… maybe indirectly via the tax system, but I say a pick pocket in a fancy suit is still a thief.
February 25th, 2006 at 1:42 pmTJM,
I totally disagree with you. This is the United States, it was the United States before Bush, and it will be the United States after Bush. If Congress (House and Senate) passes a bill that says by law no foreign entity will run the ports of this country and overrides Bush’s veto if necessary the Arabs can go pound sand, complain to the UN and blow up a few mosques but they ain’t running our ports until they get rid of all the Marines, which isn’t likely. You are like all the other trolls–you start your argument from a position of fallacious logic. We are not talking about the lease on the corner filling station, we are talking about the country that belongs to the true American Citizens, not the Repug ass-kissing sheep. If necessary just the Longshoreman’s union could stop this deal from going through by not allowing traffic through the ports. The History of this Country is filled with many schemes by crooks that thought they were smarter than the average American. They may last for awhile but they never last forever. Some fool saying it is a done deal doesn’t make it a done deal by any means and some fool saying the Country will lose the law suit is suffering from a rectal-cranial insertion. An act of Congress can never lose a law suit because Congress writes the law eventually in the manner in which the thinking majority of the citizens of this Country want the law to be written. Fools like Bush Jr. and crooks like Daddy Bush may keep on ticking but thet will get their licking. SOON!
February 25th, 2006 at 1:54 pmWho is actually running this country? From the top down, we hear that the chiefs in the departments “don’t know” about various deals, events, crises, etc.
February 25th, 2006 at 2:38 pmIt sounds like the inmates are running the asylum at the White House — Bush’s appointments of contributors and friends are causing his house of cards to fall down.
Homeland Security was against it before they were for it?
Who was that person? Chertoff is playing dumb. Rumsfeld is playing dumb. Bush is playing dumb.
Well, we know they are totally incompetent, and now they admit so in public.
I’m jumping into the pool again. First off I watched the hearings and there was no mention of Chertoffs bunch being against it.According to their testamony’s there were no dissenters in any of their phony groups. Second there so called comitees that were suposto look into this deal bounced the paper work around for a month and one short meeting rammed it through. Last and not the least, my opinion’s. Bush’s new fast holding hand’s best friends are linked to all the bad guys just like daddy
Bush, carlile group, BenLauden, Cheney. bla, bla, bla. The track record of being the good guy’s at best is a baught by big money, probably most of our own tax money sent to Bushco. I have a little short true story to give you all.
I manage a tiny resort, where I live. R.V park or mobile homes only. We are all here because it is quiet, beautiful and cheap lot rent. Most of us are retired, disabled or working poor. If a person want’s to sell their unit, R.V. they can do that, but if the people buying it do not meet the rules of the resort they must move the unit out somewhere else. Plane and simple. I had the rule put into effect 6 years ago when a nut we were evicting wanted to sell his unit to another nut (worse) and thought he could just move in. With this little rule I got rid of the wife beaters, drunks and druggies. On a larger scale let us review and eliminate the sale of this pending lease and send Bushes new best friend packing. I don’t give a rat’s ass who it is, Arab or other wise. No government owned foreign company should have control of our ports, rail’s or over our skys. Period. This mess is just huge foreign pay off’s for the Bush regime big business..Lastly I hear all these neocons spouting how bad we will look and how terrible it will be for us around the world and with the Islamic people. I say tough shit. It’s about damn time we stop this huge sell of by this bunch and selling us all into servitude. So what if gasoline costs us $10.00 a gallon and we can’t buy more crap than we need, downsize, bring the troops from all over the world home, seal our borders and become good neighbors not sell out dictators. Where and when are we going to let other countries handle their problems and leave them alone. When are we going to buy their oil at their price or not instead of stealing it from under their sand. I thought this war was going to only last a few lieing months, they were going to pay from the sales of their oil not our soldiers lives. We have killed hundreds of thousands of Iraq citizens. Our own government has built bases there for permanent use. Bushco and all in charge have interment camps here for all of us. What the hell is it going to take.? I knew in 2000 this was coming and have been keeping food water and amo handy, how about every one else.?…Blessings
February 25th, 2006 at 2:43 pmThe conditions for cancelling the US portion of the deal are included in the UK filing documents that were posted on the P & O web site on December 20, 2005. Essentially, the deal can be stopped if CFIUS had performed the 45 day investigation (which it didn’t) and the findings of that investigation resulted in the President announcing a decision to take action against the U. S. portion of the acquisition. So you can see that the “delay” is meaningless. If I close on a house on March 1 but don’t move into the home until April 15, I still own that house.
Here is the information from the UK filing:
2. Conditions of the Offer
P&O and the Offeror have agreed that the Offer is conditional upon the following matters, and,
accordingly, the office copy of the Deferred Court Order will not be delivered for registration to the
Registrar of Companies unless such conditions (as amended if appropriate) have been satisfied or waived:
2.1 the Offeror having made all necessary .lings (‘‘EFA Filings’’) pursuant to the Exon-Florio
Amendment, Section 721 of Title VII of the Defence Production Act of 1950, as amended, 50 U.S.C. App. Section 2170 (the ‘‘EFA’’) and:
2.1.1 the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (‘‘CFIUS’’) having advised the
Offeror in writing of its determination pursuant to Section 800.502 of the United States
Department of the Treasury’s regulations implementing the EFA (31 C.F.R. Part 800) (the
‘‘Regulations’’) not to investigate the acquisition by the Offeror of P&O’s United States
operations (the ‘‘U.S. Acquisition’’); or
2.1.2 if CFIUS determines to investigate the U.S. Acquisition pursuant to Section 800.503 of the
Regulations, the President of the United States having not announced a decision to take
action against the U.S. Acquisition by no later than midnight on the .fifteenth (15th)
calendar day after the completion or termination of the investigation by CFIUS or, if the
fiffteenth (15th) calendar day is not a business day, no later than the next business day
following the fifteenth (15th) calendar day, pursuant to Section 800.504 of the Regulations;
or
2.1.3 ninety (90) calendar days have elapsed since the Offeror submitted an EFA .ling which
CFIUS has accepted as complete;
2.2 all required filings having been made under the United States Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust
Improvements Act of 1976 (as amended) and the rules and regulations thereunder and all or any
applicable waiting periods with respect thereto having expired, lapsed or been terminated as
appropriate, in each case in respect of the Offer;
AND THERE ARE PORT OPERATIONS IN 21 CITIES, NOT SIX!!
February 25th, 2006 at 2:43 pmIndeed, the actual number of ports is 21…
February 25th, 2006 at 3:13 pmWhy they initially only reported, and continue to only report 6 ports…?
Maybe they know, maybe they don’t…
Fact is…we, the American people weren’t supposed to know.
Anita, thank you for your information. Where are the rest of the ports and how come the Byrd amendment was ignored and the entire deal was rubber stamped and rammed through.? Can you explain for us please. Thank You again…I still say this should not be allowed. No other government or gov. owned business should be allowed to do this…Blessings
February 25th, 2006 at 3:20 pmClyde,not everyone who disagrees with you is a troll.Stop being paranoid.
February 25th, 2006 at 3:23 pmYour reaction,which arises from the reaction by so many on the talk radio,has I think ruined the ability to have a discussion about something like the port deal. So try to calm down and if you have some information which you think can stop this deal from happening,I’d like to see it.
If the stevedores want to stage a walkout,it will be after the deal is done. I think somebody in the administration with signatory authority has inked the deal and as a result,the government has signed off on it.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/23/news/ports.php
Sharon,this isn’t a trailer park. If the government has approved the deal,then the DPW is being somewhat conciliatory by holding off exercising their legal right to manage these terminal.
February 25th, 2006 at 3:28 pmPassing a law that no foreigners can manage shipping terminals isn’t going to fly or sail.
It’s a big world,with lots of differing risks. We put up with thousands of traffic deaths and injuries a year,and Congress hasn’t banned driving.
TJM, your simplification and mine are one in the same. All things are relative. The Byrd amendment was ignored by cyfus or what ever they call them self. They did not allow anyone to know about another Government aquiring these leases untill a leak happened. In the past it has been companies that handled these businesses, all be it they were from other countries they were not Government owned. From the hearing I saw, yes indeed we will probably get screwed again and nothing will happen, the deal will go through.It still does not change the fact’s that Bush’s new best friends since 9/11, maybe, have a terrible track record and this should not go through. For that matter Bush should be impeached and then jailed. Does it make it right.? No . Has the law been broken.? Yes sir it has. Did you watch the hearings.?….Blessings
February 25th, 2006 at 3:52 pmmaybe Bush is ahead of everybody here . Bush plans to steal Iraq Oil and Bush has no intention of occupying Iran. Rather, the goal is to occupy a sliver of land on the Iraqi border called Khuzestan that contains 90% of Iran’s oil wealth.
http://www.craigmurray.co.uk/archives/2006/02/battle_plans_fo_1.html
what happens if Maybe Charvez cuts your supplies of Gasoline off.
The only option is Supertankers coming to these ports to fuel Americas need for oil
February 25th, 2006 at 4:01 pmSharon and TJM,
I have had a philosophy for many years that has served me well: Don’t tell me it can’t be done just help me do it or get out of the way. I believe that you too, Sharon, share the same belief. TJm your convoluted logic just doesn’t make sense. You aren’t helping, you are having a pouty fit in the middle of the road. “I think somebody in the administration with signatory authority has inked the deal and as a result, the government has signed off on it.”
February 25th, 2006 at 4:09 pmThere is only one “somebody” in the “Government” that has the final autority to sign off on the deal and that is the President (if we had one) with the approval of congress. Anything else is a scam, a con, a fraud, a theft, a crime.
There is a law in this Country that prohibits the enforcement of a contract for an illegal act. The selling out of our ports by your “somebody” is an illegal act because the “somebody” didn’t own what he was selling. If you buy my house from I Right I without me knowing about it and it closes on 1 March, I don’t care when you start to move in, you will get your dumb ass shot. If the people of this Country say the Arabs will not invade our ports and get mad enough about it you damn sure better not be sitting in the way crying your poor mouth song because those dumb ass Arabs are going to get their dumb asses shot.
Good point Smedley, then put into the mix tankers like the Exxon Valdeze leaking all over the place and never paying for the clean up. May I add let Bushes resident attorney in the white house, James Baker, handle the law suits for the Arabs, saudis, china who ever, against american citizens. Woulden’t want to make a Bush friend mad. For more fun and viewing who is holding hand’s with the dictator in charge this week….Oh I forgot, now he want’s us to love dubi like he loves their money. And we are suposto believe one word out of this lieing neocon dictator;s mouth. Not!!!!!! My parent’s didn’t tell me to keep quiet if I didn’t have anything nice to say, they said stand up for what’s right and seek to change the wrong’s…Blessings
February 25th, 2006 at 4:19 pmBravo Clyde. Thank You and yes we do agree 1000%. This old woman is standing her ground and going to continue to scream or shoot if necessary…..Blessings
February 25th, 2006 at 4:27 pmClyde The Ripper I like your logic ! Yep! Let anyone invade Our Country even the bushccabal and America will go Balistic but is that what bushcabal is maybe hoping will happen that way he can hit us with a Martial Law smack Down?
We’ve just heard what they wanted us to hear about the New Homeland Secuirty Paln ,More Military Please!
Just had this emailed to me ,why isn’t the MSM’s plus our great unlawmakers taking about this..
http://tinyurl.com/q9o8t
UAE terminal takeover extends to 21 ports 24 Feb 2006 A United Arab Emirates government-owned company is poised to take over port terminal operations in 21 American ports, far more than the six widely reported. The Bush administration has approved the takeover of British-owned Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. to DP World, a deal set to go forward March 2 unless Congress intervenes.
February 25th, 2006 at 4:41 pmClyde,you seem to think I’m having a pouty fit because you disagree. I’m saying what company spokespeople have said on behalf of both P&O and DPW. The President is hardly the only person in the country who can commit the government to a transaction. He doesn’t ok mergers or approve FCC licenses or a host of other things that require government approval.. Nobody in this transaction is buying something from the government. DPW is acquiring a number of leases to operate terminals which used to be between the port authorities and P&O. Assumption of leases is very common.
February 25th, 2006 at 4:44 pmClyde,that’s a wonderful philosophy but it has little to do with this transaction. I asked you whether you had information that would show this deal wouldn’t close. You don’t have any so just say that. Some strange belief that only the President can commit the US to an approval is nonsense.
from DKos ,I found this a bite interesting ,is bushcabal wanting bin laden or another terrorist group to hit within the United Sates ,to me it seems that way.
The administration did not require Dubai Ports to keep copies of business records on US soil, where they would be subject to court orders. It also did not require the company to designate an American citizen to accommodate US government requests. Outside legal experts said such obligations are routinely attached to US approvals of foreign sales in other industries. [...]
Under the deal, the government asked Dubai Ports to operate American seaports with existing US managers “to the extent possible.”
It promised to take “all reasonable steps” to assist the Homeland Security Department.
February 25th, 2006 at 4:56 pmHay Toth’s, it does not work except for a babe in a tea shirt against Hillary …Funny….
February 25th, 2006 at 5:16 pmSay, TJM, did you watch the hearing on C-Span on the port deal.?…..Anita where are the other ports that are not spoken about in this deal.? Can I have the answers please and I have a few other questions for all the posters. Why were these leases sold.? What was wrong with the previous owners.? Wheres the money going.? Why wasen’t the dictator in charge informed,? like I believe that one. Cheney and Rove had to know. Like Marie, I want to know who the hell is running this regime.? ….Blessings
February 25th, 2006 at 5:26 pmTJM,
Your Buddy Scooter seems to think I am right. He claims Fitz can’t indict him because the President didn’t asSIGN him and Congress approve him. If that holds true of a lowly special prosecutor it must hold true for the invasion of a foreign Government occupying our ports. The argument that the Fox said it was alright for him to guard the hen house (”I’m saying what company spokespeople have said on behalf of both P&O and DPW.”)doesn’t make it so. P&O and DPW are not US Government Officials, they are not US Government Elected Representatives. The fact that they bought a few of the above does not make them the fox. Maybe Sharon and I are just too old to understand how the system that has worked for over 200 years is no longer any good because we now have a wannabe king. I don’t have any inside information but I will place my usual odds ($20 to a glass of warm pee) that this deal will not go down through, or if it does (double or nothing)it will guarantee the impeachment of Bush and then will be cancelled.
February 25th, 2006 at 5:36 pmSharon,P&O and their subsidiary have leases with port authorities in these cities to operate terminals. P&O is (soon to be was) a publically held company in the UK. Last October and November there was an offer for the stock of the company by DPW. Another bidder a state-controlled company from Singapore offered a higher price,whereupon DPW made a yet higher bid,the Singaporeans dropped out and so P&O agreed to be bought by DPW.
The leases were assets of P&O which would become assets of DPW once they received government approval here in the US. The CFIUS review of DPW had 12 US government agencies look at DPW.
P&O spokespeople as well as for DPW have announced that all required approvals have been granted including those in the US. The deal is expected to close on March 2.
There is no monet being paid by DPW to the US.The money is actually in English pounds and being paid to the shareholders of P&O.
Clyde,you must live in one sorry world where no one can disagree with you on any issue. I voted for Kerry how about you?
February 25th, 2006 at 5:54 pmYour impeachment fantasy is imperiling that part of your brain you need to think.
Another good response Clyde. I still have not heard the answers to my questions from TJM and Anita..Oh well! I have plans to watch a good movie…..Blessings
February 25th, 2006 at 5:56 pmOn CNN GOP and White House are working on “deal” to allow the DPW to operate the ports.
February 25th, 2006 at 6:10 pmThe policy of moving foreign control into domestic labor control needs a new term. If the movement of technical jobs to second tier countries is called outsourcing, can’t we call this insourcing? The next step, of course, is job loss. At least we have a term for that – depression.
February 25th, 2006 at 7:03 pmTJM,
One more time and I will give up. According to what I can glean from your posts DPW bought out P&O which included some leases of US port facilities. I have no argument with that at all. You say the deal was approved by the US Government. I won’t agree or disagree as I don’t know. What is a fact is that King George the Dumb, the Duke of Dubai, told Congress and the American People that he had no knowledge of the deal but if Congress passed a bill interfering in any way with the invasion of our ports he would veto it. If you want to argue up to this point there is no point in proceeding because this has been the crux of your argument so far: that Congress does not have the power to prevent the Arabs from operating our port system. If you wish to proceed please answer these questions:
1. If Bush knew nothing about this deal then why is it legal when he is, by definition, the “Government” leader charged with the operation of the “Buck Stops Here” Country?
2. If the deal is legal why would Bush threaten the Congress if they did the job they were elected to do and provide oversight to those things Bush didn’t know about?
3. Obviously Bush knows the Congress has the power to quash the deal or why would he have threatened veto?
4. If Congress passes a bill and then overrides a Presidential veto does the bill not become a law?
5. If the law is passed is it the SCOTUS that much decide the constitutionality of the law?
6. Can any entity associated with DPW or P&O override the decision of SCOTUS and move into our ports without armed intervention with the operation of the legitimate government of the US?
Get over your little pouty fit and move down the road past the rest stop. Look at the big picture and answer the little questions. Give old Yogi credit because the Fat Lady don’t sing in Arabic.
February 25th, 2006 at 7:06 pm#32 thot’s
I, too, noted this little clause and I think that is the heart of the matter in the DPW deal.
February 25th, 2006 at 8:23 pmNo records here, no ability to employ FOIA, and no American appointed as liason/interpreter.
This is so apparently an under-the-table, pay-off/bribe,
dirty deal — what is amazing is that they nearly got away with it, because they sure didn’t plan for the firestorm coming when the public learned of it.
The leases hardly constitute an invasion of the ports although the estimates of the number of terminals operated by foreign companies or governments is as high as 80%.
Congress can pass whatever legislation they wish to,like they did in the Terri Schiavo case,but it doesn’t mean they know what they’re doing.
Why would it matter if GWB knew or didn’t know about the deal? But the reason he came out and said he would veto the legislation is that the deal had been approved.
If Congress does craft legislation,I don’t know that they can treat the UAE company differently than they can treat, say China (Cosco) which is operating a terminal on the West Coast. Equal protection applies I believe.
Clinton was talking about legislation that would forbid any foreign government holding a company that could operate any terminal. Perhaps she’s not aware that is already the case.
If a veto occurs and is then overridden,it could well go to the Supreme Court. The question is if one part of the government negotiated with a company and as a result approved the transaction,can Congress void that approval by passing an ex post facto law.
If you remember,that was one of the questions in the Terri Schiavo case.
So,the answers are 1) the president doesn’t have to approve a transaction of this type (or even have to know of it) in order for it to be legal;2)
February 25th, 2006 at 8:50 pmCongress has assumed a role in this otherwise routine business transaction because of the UAE government being the owner of the DPW company (although they didn’t seem to mind a Chinese Communist company operating on the West Coast);
He threatened a veto because Congress raised the possibility of passing legislation I think as an indication of his belief the deal had been approved.
Where you get this idea of invasion,armed intervention and the rest is beyond me,this is about a business deal. The fact that you don’t understand the deal,the process or the outcome other than you just won’t have no foreigners operating shows how far behind you are. The foreigners are all over.
Let me ask you if you would be comfortable if Turkish companies (with governemnt control) operated steel mills in the US. How about Brazilians?
What foreigners would you be comfortable with?
Yah Yah! GrrRr!!
February 25th, 2006 at 9:04 pmThe bear will screw you.!
None of you better vote against any of my things or get in the way, i’ll tap your phone im Dead eye Dikk and you better not block anything. remember we must get back to ‘reality based’ thinking. Reality being I want Oil, Rummy wants War, and George wants to be King and the Senators want money, lets Go! Thats your Job Go get me these things!
–Dikk Chenie
heckuva job Dikk
February 25th, 2006 at 9:05 pm–Georgie
Does anyone know how many shares of P&O are owned by The Carlyle Group, if any?
February 25th, 2006 at 10:17 pmTJM, did you see the hearing.? What foreign (government owned) companies have leases here,? Not what foreign companies. Of them how many are Bushes new best friends and tied to the terrorests pre 9/11 and funnelled the saudi royal funds to BenLauden and other groups aimed to do us harm. Canada is a long time good friend and neighbor. Dubi and the saudis are sketchy and a short term convient best friend tied into the Carlile, Benlauden, Bush new friend big money bunch. What are the names and locations of the balance of this give away……
February 26th, 2006 at 12:19 amClyde: That is exactly the scenario Bushlandia wants in this deal. To veto the bill, the bill becomes law on a vote over his veto, then he calls in the Supreme Court which he has packed with two more Catholics.
He Wins. The people lose. End of that story.
This ultra-large Department of Homeland Security needs to be busted up. It is nothing but a next of cronies, crooks and liars. Look at the people in charge of the various sections, security, FEMA, etc. Break it up and start all over. FEMA has no business being a division of this idiotic cabal. Neither does the CIA, and the other security agencies.
Remember, Bush was against it, before he was for it. Flip´-flop, flip-flop, flip-flop as we go riding merrily along. The mans IQ is the same as my shoe size but he saw the dangers of this agency.
Bury it, and hhim along with it.
February 26th, 2006 at 1:19 pmRegarding the questions about the location of the P & O North American port operations here in the United States, the link to the P & O web site with description of all port is following:
http://portal.pohub.com/portal/page?_pageid=169,87824&_dad=pogprtl&_schema=POGPRTL
Here’s a complete list of the port operations, directly from the P & O web site. In addition to the container operations at 5 major ports (counting New York/New Jersey as one entity), there are P & O operations in 16 other American cities. The recent news stories that say “deal has been extended to 21 cities” is misleading–it ALWAYS included those 21 cities.
Here’s the list:
Portland, ME
Boston, MA
Davisville, RI
New York/New Jersey
Philadelphia, PA
Camden, NJ
Wilmington, DE
Baltimore, MD
Norfolk, VA
Miami, FL
Gulfport, MS
New Orleans, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Beaumont, TX
Port Arthur. TX
Galveston. TX
Houston. TX
Freeport. TX
Corpus Christi. TX
Of special interest is the following (P & O transports military equipment for the Army!):
Port of Beaumont
The Port of Beaumont, situated 84 miles east of Houston and 270 miles west of New Orleans and is accessible from the Gulf of Mexico and Intercoastal Waterway via the federally maintained Sabine-Neches Ship Channel, 42 miles upstream from the Gulf. The channel is 400 ft. wide and maintained at a depth of 40 ft. with an air draft of 136 ft.
P&O Ports Texas provides the following at the Beaumont multi-purpose terminal:
· Stevedoring services at all Port facilities
· Contract stevedore for the U.S. Army
· Bulk stevedoring services at the Dreyfus Grain Elevator
The 45-day “cooling off period” is meaningless. According to the UK filing of December 20, 2005, the deal was conditional on US government approval. The only legal way the US component of the deal could be stopped was to have CFIUS do a 30 review, kick it upstairs for a formal, 45-day investigation. The results of that investigation would trigger a Presidential determination (binding in court) and mandate Congressional disclosure.
The 30 review “found no national security concerns”, so the fiction of a 45 day investigation is merely window dressing. The President is unlikely to stop the deal and, even if he did, DP World has indicated it may sue to enforce the US portion of the deal to close.
DP World will be the leaseholder as of March 2, but will not “take over” the ports until the results of the 45 day investigation are revealed.
If I close on my house in March, but don’t move in until May, I still own that house!
February 28th, 2006 at 11:57 amBusiness Paln
I enjoyed reading your blog. What a great thing it is to be able to share information like this on the Internet.
March 26th, 2008 at 8:24 amAss Tight Ass Ass Worship
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 7th, 2008 at 2:58 pmCatherine
I could not believe the amount of quality material on this site. The site is extremely eyecatching and pulls the reader straight it, the articles are great quality and are very professionally written. I have seen too many of these sites where it looks…
April 11th, 2008 at 3:10 pm