Bush has approved A Middle Eastern Company in Dubai to take over U.S Port security
POSTED BY: piratejenny
UPDATED: Wednesday, November 5, 2025 17:29
VIEWED: 8053
PAGE 5 of 6
Cartoon, I'm glad for Hannity. He used to be a good investigative reporter, and lately he's been a propagana minister. He should go back to what he does best. I still can't fathom a position that agrees with Bush. Maybe 1/2 the time. But I think at least half of what Bush does is basically kill the kids and steal the money, without really a solid political agenda behind it outside of the we're-all-insanoes political agenda of global social revolution.
I think that when you look at Bush, and where he stands politically, if you can call it that, he's off in the corner of a padded cell in comparison with the spectrum of elected republicans. When Hannity or O'Reilley supports the president after the president has said something that is patently false, that's not reporting, it's propaganda. Hannity very well knows the level of Al Qaeda and Saddam is zero, he knows we have made the world less safe, I've even seen him say it, on CSPAN, but not on Fox. This is because when he's Fox commentator, he's addressing the mindless public, and those facts don't meet the agenda. If you only report what supports the agenda, and you don't report the facts, as you know them to be, then that is propaganda.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
First off I want to say hello to the various Pirates, in name or spirit, that congregate in threads like. I love reading all of your "tinfoil hat" posts, because after a few years of more or less obsessive studying of every source I can find on every topic pertinent to life in this world, I no longer have the luxury of pretending things aren't often the opposite of what they are made to seem. I no longer have the luxury of simply rationalizing away comments like yours, and in part I have people like you to thank for. Keep fighting the good fight, just be careful what you’re fighting for, how you’re fighting, and why. To para-paraphrase, if one gives up a little truth in the name of a Big Truth, he ends up with neither.
Many here regularly write posts that amount to highly informative, well organized, and well thought out blogs. The point counterpoint between the “kooks” and “the kooks with another opinion” is what democracy is all about. It bothers me when someone with otherwise cogent points get facts wrong or come to obviously flawed conclusions, because they stand out more by contrast. So keep conversing, everyone. This is my hobby, and it’s free. I don’t even have to do anything but comprehend, think, and respond. Shiny!
I can’t help but suspect that this port issue is a way for Republicans to oppose Bush on a popular issue in order to gain popularity before the ’06 elections. They need to do some serious PR to keep Democrats from taking their momentum, and this is as good a start as any.
I also can’t help but suspect that there are more sinister motives at work here. More sinister than just money, or a little power. Rigorous Intuition ( http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/) has a decent recent post about it.
Originally posted by dreamtrove:Quote:
I think it's just gone out of their control. They (Cheney, PNAC et al) thought they were geniuses, but in reality they're just B students.
Here's just a few things off the top of my head that I think haven't gone as planned: ...
Dreamy, it seems to me your basic flaw in reasoning here is assuming that their stated/commonly assumed interests coincide with their true interests, or at least the interests of those that are more influential. I've taken a more holistic approach to things like this. While it may look bad for them, if you look at the big picture (the BIG picture) you will find ways in which very important, powerful, influential, rich people will benefit. I can't accept on faith that they are the ones with the ultimate power just because they're the ones who are supposed to be. I believe that Bush has been set up for a fall. He's a scapegoat and doesn't even realize. Soon nearly everyone will "hate Bush" and we'll move on to our next scapegoat. Bush doctrine and actions looks like insanity, but it is even more disturbing when one realize it’s actually a doctrine of cold, often murderous self-interest.
I suspect that if someone or something has large scale attention cast on it, then it's some type of cover for what's really going on. On stage, the puppetmaster takes care to hide himself well to enhance the illusion of autonomous puppets. The strings may be showing, but they're easily forgotten or rationalized away when engrossed in the show. The problem is, most people forgot that the world we live in is one big puppet show and it's important that you know how to pull your owns strings. "All the world's a stage, and the men and women merely players."
I'm a real boy now! Later Gepetto, so long and thanks for all the fish.
Without a trace of sarcasm, God bless America. It needs it.
PS- Speaking of tinfoil hats, a recent MIT study found that they enhance rather than prevent the kind of electromagnetic waves the government/aliens/DEROs use to harrass/control/kill those they see as a threat/ally. Damn disinformation. Who can a respectable tin-foil hat wearer trust these days?!
"So me and mind gotta lay down and die so you can live in your better world?"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
StillFree wrote:
Quote:
I can’t help but suspect that this port issue is a way for Republicans to oppose Bush on a popular issue in order to gain popularity before the ’06 elections. They need to do some serious PR to keep Democrats from taking their momentum, and this is as good a start as any.
I also can’t help but suspect that there are more sinister motives at work here. More sinister than just money, or a little power. Rigorous Intuition ( http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/) has a decent recent post about it.
hello StillFree, Glad to see that there are still some ''outspoken"" open minded people on this forum, I'm basically here to say what I have to say and people can take it or leave it as they choose. I really admire Piratenews not because I see everything the same way, but because he's putting information out there that needs to be out there and to hell with what anyone thinks. There are no games with him , it is what it is.
when it comes to this administration they are so dishonest and manipulative, that the thought has crossed my mind also, I think the reps or whatever they are or call themselves- not so much the ones in office, but the average Joe out there has been looking for an easy out on something to oppose the Bush administration, and this issue does seem to work.
As for the this whole issue with Port security and letting the company in Dubai take over, I too can't help but think its something more sinister to it. I don't know wether were going to go another round with Jeb Bush cheating his way into office in 2008 or if Bush and Co are going to try to create another big diseaster to stay in power. if they are this whole port security issue could tie into whatever they have planned.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Dreamy, it seems to me your basic flaw in reasoning here is assuming that their stated/commonly assumed interests coincide with their true interests, or at least the interests of those that are more influential. I've taken a more holistic approach to things like this. While it may look bad for them, if you look at the big picture (the BIG picture) you will find ways in which very important, powerful, influential, rich people will benefit. I can't accept on faith that they are the ones with the ultimate power just because they're the ones who are supposed to be. I believe that Bush has been set up for a fall. He's a scapegoat and doesn't even realize. Soon nearly everyone will "hate Bush" and we'll move on to our next scapegoat. Bush doctrine and actions looks like insanity, but it is even more disturbing when one realize it’s actually a doctrine of cold, often murderous self-interest.
Stillfree,
You're a clever guy. I know you get this. I too, get it. I'm not shooting from the dark. Cheney's being VP is overzealous, but he's actually a powerplayer. Not probably head, I grant. I know Bush is being set up for a fall, it's obvious. Just saying that I know what the master scheme is, more or less, and I never mistake it for the state goal. But even so, I can't credit that thing are going their way. To believe that, you'd have to believe that Osama Bin Laden was the intended benificiary of Bush policies, which he may be, but even so, not everything is perfect. A lot of things look like they might happen now, that shouldn't if all if going accounrding to plan: Bush and Co could end up in jail, and they could take the Clintons with them. The old GOP might resurface, off chance, someone like Feingold might get the democratic nod. Mavericks, not McCain, real mavericks, are having far more influence in senate hearings, and about a quarter of the Senate is on to them hardcore. I heard John Warner today tearing into the Bush secretaries over Dubai. I think that things are spinning dangerously out of control, even for Team Evil.
Who is the head? I would say, Core Shachtmanites are probably up there, as well as key arabians.
Wolfowitz, Perle, Bolton, these guys have a lot lot lot of power. Cheney, Libby, JEB, these are the Knights of the Warped Table. Clinton is Sir drops-his-Pants-a-lot. But there are outside players, Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, and his supporters, the Bin Ladens and others, they're like More-Dread, and the Dubai crowd is Morgan la Fey, I couldn't think of anything to do with the name. Or how ever you want to play it, but Blair is in the mix, and his people, but we're actually seeing the edge of the circle, the actual circle.
The goal is very clear, because they used to write about their evil master plan back in college. On world state, with a giant compound democracy, 3% of votes needed to rule, I've posted all this before. No decent, no independent enterprise, or not much, just a little, but 90% of control at the top. Big plan, but big plan calls for a Mid East Union, and they actually do want that. It's not just a feed Bin Laden game, I don't think. The like to feed Bin Laden, because that gives us a real enemy, keeps people in fear.
But these guys paid a lot of attention to the Nazis, the Soviets, the Chinese Communists, and they read 1984 like it was a how to manual. They've been studying what works. But I think they've missed the biggest what works. Regular old hands off America kicked those other societies asses. Too some degree. But still, the proper solution for a society is clear to me... 'Just let go.'
But these guy don't get that, and I think they screw up a lot. When they are Hillary, the people will think they've defeated them, but the Senate will still know. I watch those old guys hem and haw over their words, and it's very clear to me. They know, they really know, they know more than we do, if they could talk about it they'd say 'oh, it's jack at the top, and then sam and suzy are the next in line in the great conspiracy, and after Iran and syria, we're going to war
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Interesting background articles in today's Washington Post.
One about how the Port of Baltimore works, and who does what there:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/25/AR2006
022501740.html
Quote:
Mark Montgomery, who oversees P&O operations at the Baltimore port, said little would change after the purchase. The New Jersey native and his staff of 65 administrative employees who run the docks would remain in place, he said, same as the last time their corporate parentage changed, in 1999. He reports to bosses in New Jersey; they report to London; and after the deal, the Londoners will report to Dubai.
Another, in a discussion of the Bush Administration's flawed response (this is the Washington Post, after all) Had this:
Quote:
Homeland Security officials, especially in Customs and Border Protection, had high regard for the company, which is owned by the government of Dubai and operates terminals in 19 ports in Asia, Europe and South America. It was the first in the Middle East to participate in a post-Sept. 11 program in which Customs agents are posted overseas to screen containers before they are loaded onto U.S.-bound ships. U.S. intelligence agencies -- who were asked on Nov. 2 for any information they had on the company -- produced nothing "derogatory" about it, Baker said.
Even so, the department had enough qualms to insist on a number of legally binding conditions for approving the deal -- a frequent CFIUS practice. The company pledged to maintain its participation in the Customs program, "and they agreed to open their books, and give us access to records, without any formal legal process," Baker said.
The department also wanted to ensure that the personnel at the U.S. terminals to be taken over by the company would remain almost entirely American. So it extracted a pledge that the company intended to keep the current management of U.S. operations in place.
At the Pentagon, meanwhile, officials were well aware of the United Arab Emirates' checkered history in combating terrorism; it was the home of two of the Sept. 11 hijackers and home of the banking system through which some of the hijackers' money flowed. But far overshadowing those concerns were the country's current role as a key U.S. ally in the Persian Gulf region, said Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon R. England, who noted at last week's hearing that more U.S. Navy ships dock at UAE ports than any port outside the United States.
Accordingly, once Dubai Ports World had agreed to the conditions required by Homeland Security, none of the agencies on CFIUS objected to the transaction when the 30-day review was completed on Jan. 17. If even one agency had objected, the matter would have gone to a 45-day investigation -- which would have required a presidential decision at the end. Moreover, a single dissent would have meant bringing the matter before higher-ranking officials in each department.
But instead, the matter stayed with assistant secretary-level officials, who told the company the transaction could go forward. Treasury officials planned to inform congressional leaders at a regularly scheduled quarterly meeting on Feb. 17. By then, however, the Associated Press had already reported a statement from the firm trumpeting its approval.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/25/AR2006
022501579_2.html
Unfortunately, the Post requires you to log in with them before you can read the entire stories.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Administration OK With UAE Running Six Major U.S. Ports
www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184599,00.html
BULLSHITE!
Quote:
UAE terminal takeover extends to 21 ports
UPI
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.
P&O is the parent company of P&O Ports North America, which leases terminals for the import and export and loading and unloading and security of cargo in 21 ports, 11 on the East Coast, ranging from Portland, Maine to Miami, Florida, and 10 on the Gulf Coast, from Gulfport, Miss., to Corpus Christi, Texas, according to the company's Web site.
President George W. Bush on Tuesday threatened to veto any legislation designed to stall the handover.
www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20060223-051657-4981r
NEOCONNED: Jewish CITIZENS OF ISRAEL sell US ports to Arabs in British stock swindle to NUKE USA
Quote:
Chertoff, And Fellow Neocons, Are Behind Arab Port Deal
Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co
A 200 year-old British Company Is Sold to Arabs
The Arab Company Who Bought The British Company
It Manages Ports In Dubai
Dubai Will Control These Ports
Dubai Is A Key Mossad Center In The Mideast
What Is Going On?
A British company, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., who runs major commercial operations at shipping ports in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, Miami, New Orleans and Philadelphia, has been sold to a UAE company.
The UAE Company, Dubai Port World, is state-owned, and now inherits their businesses.
Who Is involved
Lord Sterling of Plaistow, CEO of Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., consummated the swindle, which will reward his Zionist investors with $7 billion.
Head Of Homeland Security
Michael Chertoff , who is a dual-citizen Israeli/American (born in Communist Czechoslovakia), ok's the deal (while leaving US borders wide-open to 100-million illegal alien terrorists).
Jew Lenin and Jew Chertoff - Separated at Birth?
Bob Dole
Dole, the 85 yr old ex-speaker, was a lobbyist for Dubai in this deal.
www.rawstory.com/news/2005/Former_Senate_chief_Dole_hired_to_0222.html
What Is The Scheme?
The core of the deal is a stock swindle. A group of Zionist stockholders inflated the stock price 300%, then sold it to the citizens of the UAE for $6.8 billion. Basically all the Arabs get are ‘Port Service Contracts’, and some marginal loading equipment
P&O the British company, that has been running six U.S. ports, is now a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates.
Actual Value
P & O's profit from their port operation was $153 million pounds. PE's run between 5 and 15, so Dubai should have paid $765 million to $2.2 billion.
Why An Arab Country?
Port managers are a dime a dozen. You have 10 in the US, and there are others in Japan, China, Australia, etc.
These are political contracts worth a fortune, and are the reason $60,000 a year politicians have fat Swiss bank accounts.
Neocons Take An Odd Stance
These are the same Bush Neocon/Zionist Advisors, who bombed Iraq to the stone age because Saddam was evil. They told us, 'They are bad, and we are good', but today the Zionists are 100% behind this port deal.
Who Are These People ?
These are Neo-Cons (new conservatives), and they are all Dual Citizen Israelis. Not a single one served in the US armed forces. They basically are a lobby that pushes for Israeli-oriented bills.
www.propagandamatrix.com/180903neocons.html
All these men are Zionist warmongers, who adore and obey Israel, and who view America chiefly as Israel's financial sugar daddy and mercenary slave. Their aim is global power for the ZionistNOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by piratejenny:
can you stick with the topic, and not try to make this about something it isn't , my guess is you've been listening to Oxycotin Limbaugh and Hannity's talking points all day long, lets just stick with Bush has approved a company in Dubai with ties to Al qaeda to take over the security of U.S ports, I know this is the kind of thing you support, ( you probably think this will make the rapture happen or something)
its a disgrace
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
just wanted to point something out: Dubai is not a country. It's a corporation based out of the United Arab Empirates. By the way, according to a very good friend of mine, who works forn homeland security, making sure certain technologies are not exported to China or the Middle East through U.S. ports, this is not even an issue. The company Dubai would control only the finantial side of running the port. They would fund its maintenance and woyuld profit from the port's use, but, as always, security would be run by the U.S. Government. If Dubai or the U.A.E. does something we dont like, it is standing government policy to confiscate all of their stateside assets, so, really allowing them financial responsibility for the port gives us some leverage over the U.A.E. and Dubai, not the other way around. Just thought everyone should know so we could go back to arguing over something important.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
just wanted to point something out: Dubai is not a country. It's a corporation based out of the United Arab Empirates.
This is not technically true. I know someone who works for Dubai. The structure of the UAE is different from that of other govts.
In most of the world before the modern era, nations were almost all the size of delaware or new jersey. If you couldn't send men and horses to defend in an instant, it was out of your kingdom. Then large nations were set up usually as colonies by conquering powers. The Vikings, Ghengis Khan, the Roman Empire, etc., set many of these up.
The UAE is different in that it allows its member countries to remain in tact as political entities, it's just basically a defense alliance. So, actually, Dubai is a country, a kingdom, a nation state, just not one recognized by anyone but the UAE, *BUT* the UAE in turn is recognized by everyone else, so the effect is the same. The company Dubai Ports World, is actually a branch of the government of Dubai.
Dubai is not a top ranked national ally, and it's not the United States of America, or any part of it, so that should end the discussion. In fact, that is *ALL* that the discussion should be about.
The ports of the US are the responsibility of the US, actually, they are the responsibility of the States, and there's a major state's rights issue here.
The ports in New York and New Ark were controlled and owned by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the company which also own the World Trade Centers. It shares a similar ambiguous relationship with the govt. of NY, and if it controlled ports on the arabian peninsula, and they complained, I would think that they had a point. I think they have a point when countries complain about US firms shipping oil out of their countries without due compensation. But if the Federal govt of the United states came in and said "Port authority can't run these ports, we're taking over" people would be up in arms and rightfully so. But there would be no security risk, hopefully. If they then said "We're giving it to our top ranked ally Japan" people would be more upset, but they would know that realistically, Japan is at least as trustworthy as their own govt. But if they said "We're giving it to Madagascar" people would say "WTF?" and yet, Madagascar, though it might not be as secure, would not have direct links to Al Qaeda. If they said "We're giving it to Saudi Arabia" they would say "But but but" and you would have to prove the lack of connections to Al Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks. The case here is not even an independent company in Dubai, but the govt. owned company, the same govt. owned company on whose property the specific Al Qaeda terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 operated, with assitstance from people within that organization, knowing assistance including according to our own CIA, that they notified Osama bin Laden that we were looking for him and about to find him and that he should leave and hide. So, on a grand scale, from the point of view of the people of NY, the port authority of NY and NJ owner of the WTC, and the people who actually attacked them, how about a big NO WAY. and I'll throw in a NEVER.
And it's important when the govt. of the US in the executive is attempting to create a victory for terrorism through an act of treason like this.
And, PS. I have nothing against Dubai. But reason man, think. I mean seriously. I have nothing against Russia either, a nation that had nuclear bombs pointed at our heads for decades, but I'm not about to give them control over our nuclear facilities.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:Quote:
just wanted to point something out: Dubai is not a country. It's a corporation based out of the United Arab Empirates.
This is not technically true. I know someone who works for Dubai. The structure of the UAE is different from that of other govts.
In most of the world before the modern era, nations were almost all the size of delaware or new jersey. If you couldn't send men and horses to defend in an instant, it was out of your kingdom. Then large nations were set up usually as colonies by conquering powers. The Vikings, Ghengis Khan, the Roman Empire, etc., set many of these up.
The UAE is different in that it allows its member countries to remain in tact as political entities, it's just basically a defense alliance. So, actually, Dubai is a country, a kingdom, a nation state, just not one recognized by anyone but the UAE, *BUT* the UAE in turn is recognized by everyone else, so the effect is the same. The company Dubai Ports World, is actually a branch of the government of Dubai.
Dubai is not a top ranked national ally, and it's not the United States of America, or any part of it, so that should end the discussion. In fact, that is *ALL* that the discussion should be about.
The ports of the US are the responsibility of the US, actually, they are the responsibility of the States, and there's a major state's rights issue here.
The ports in New York and New Ark were controlled and owned by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the company which also own the World Trade Centers. It shares a similar ambiguous relationship with the govt. of NY, and if it controlled ports on the arabian peninsula, and they complained, I would think that they had a point. I think they have a point when countries complain about US firms shipping oil out of their countries without due compensation. But if the Federal govt of the United states came in and said "Port authority can't run these ports, we're taking over" people would be up in arms and rightfully so. But there would be no security risk, hopefully. If they then said "We're giving it to our top ranked ally Japan" people would be more upset, but they would know that realistically, Japan is at least as trustworthy as their own govt. But if they said "We're giving it to Madagascar" people would say "WTF?" and yet, Madagascar, though it might not be as secure, would not have direct links to Al Qaeda. If they said "We're giving it to Saudi Arabia" they would say "But but but" and you would have to prove the lack of connections to Al Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks. The case here is not even an independent company in Dubai, but the govt. owned company, the same govt. owned company on whose property the specific Al Qaeda terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 operated, with assitstance from people within that organization, knowing assistance including according to our own CIA, that they notified Osama bin Laden that we were looking for him and about to find him and that he should leave and hide. So, on a grand scale, from the point of view of the people of NY, the port authority of NY and NJ owner of the WTC, and the people who actually attacked them, how about a big NO WAY. and I'll throw in a NEVER.
And it's important when the govt. of the US in the executive is attempting to create a victory for terrorism through an act of treason like this.
And, PS. I have nothing against Dubai. But reason man, think. I mean seriously. I have nothing against Russia either, a nation that had nuclear bombs pointed at our heads for decades, but I'm not about to give them control over our nuclear facilities.
Oh, okay, so I was wrong about the Dubai thing then. Sorry folks
. However, something I think you dont realize is that almost all of our ports are run by foreign countries, along with several other things. That is why we have a policy of confiscation if they piss us off. Also, as I said before, the foreign countries only have financial authority in the port(Which saves the U.s. a boatload of tax dollars).
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME