We had a server outage, and we're rebuilding the site. Some of the site features won't work. Thank you for your patience.
imc indymedia

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

white themeblack themered themetheme help
About Us Contact Us Calendar Publish RSS
latest news
best of news




A-Infos Radio

Indymedia On Air

Dope-X-Resistance-LA List


IMC Network:

Original Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq kenya nigeria south africa canada: hamilton london, ontario maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg east asia: burma jakarta japan korea manila qc europe: abruzzo alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol brussels bulgaria calabria croatia cyprus emilia-romagna estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege liguria lille linksunten lombardia london madrid malta marseille nantes napoli netherlands nice northern england norway oost-vlaanderen paris/Île-de-france patras piemonte poland portugal roma romania russia saint-petersburg scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki torun toscana toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia latin america: argentina bolivia chiapas chile chile sur cmi brasil colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso venezuela venezuela oceania: adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne perth qc sydney south asia: india mumbai united states: arizona arkansas asheville atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado columbus dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca sarasota seattle tampa bay tennessee urbana-champaign vermont western mass worcester west asia: armenia beirut israel palestine process: fbi/legal updates mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer projects: print radio satellite tv video regions: oceania united states topics: biotech

Surviving Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: canada: quebec east asia: japan europe: athens barcelona belgium bristol brussels cyprus germany grenoble ireland istanbul lille linksunten nantes netherlands norway portugal united kingdom latin america: argentina cmi brasil rosario oceania: aotearoa united states: austin big muddy binghamton boston chicago columbus la michigan nyc portland rochester saint louis san diego san francisco bay area santa cruz, ca tennessee urbana-champaign worcester west asia: palestine process: fbi/legal updates process & imc docs projects: radio satellite tv
printable version - js reader version - view hidden posts - tags and related articles

The REAL Story behind Bush's Handover of US Ports to Dubai

by Cheryl Seal Thursday, Feb. 23, 2006 at 3:02 PM

Bush claims he knew nothing of the sale of US port operations to a Saudi company. But all of the evidence suggests he not only KNEW - he helped make sure the deal went through unchallenged.

The REAL Story Behind the Port Sale:
US Ports were Handed to Dubai Government with Bush's Knowledge Three Months Ago

By Cheryl Seal

So now Bush claims he had no clue that the operation of six US ports was being sold to the government of Dubai, d.b.a Dubai Ports World (DPW). Yeah, right, and Tinkerbelle ain't a fairy. The sale of US port operations by British company P&O to DPW was far from a sudden development. The company began having serious financial problems in 2002 and has been selling off assets and laying off workers for the past three years. It has been a major and ongoing story in the European news sources, including the BBC. Last fall, P&O even initated a highly publicized (in Europe, anyway!) bidding war over its ports! The deal between P&O and DPW was inked in November, 2005. One hopes that when such a major development occurs affecting US ports that SOMEONE in the US government is notifed.

Yet on Feb 21, Bush claimed he didn't know anything about the sale until the rest of us did.

This means one of two things, neither of them good:

1. That Bush is lying through his teeth and thus intentionally deceiving the American public.

2. That Homeland Security is so incompetent, clueless, and ineffectual that who is in control of US ports is a "detail" that is not even on their radar! I.e., in Homeland Security's twisted playbook, "fightin' terrorism" means rounding up bloggers and Muslims, but has nothing to do with securing US ports, America's primary gateways to the world!

In any case, ya can't have it both ways! If Bush is telling the truth, then Homeland Security is a joke. If he is lying, then that means he knowingly gave away control of US ports to a foreign entity that is not just connected to terrorism in general, but specifically to the Bin Laden family. And, he withheld that info from the American public until it was nearly too late.

The mainstream media and Bushies are now arguing that the DPW purchase of port operations is "no different" from foreign ownership of other business interests. But this is like saying there's no difference between renting out a spare room and renting out your own bed - with you in it. The reality is, some US entities should NOT be owned and operated by foreign interests. For example, private US tax information should not be processed (as much of it now is) by companies in India. And US ports should definitely not be operated by ANY foreign power. That the US did not seize on this opportunity to take control of her own ports is incomprehensible.

And, btw - the argument that any objections to handing over US ports to the DPW is somehow "racist" and "anti-Muslim" doesn't hold any more water than a leaky Swiss cheese. This argument requires us to believe that profiling and/or rounding up people because they are swarthy and probably Muslim and holding them under horrific conditions for years at a time without charge is NOT racist, but objecting to handing our ports to a nation known to have harbored and/or funded terrorists IS?

The evidence is overwhelming that Bush is lying. The primary smoking gun? On January 17, 2006, Bush nominated a senior executive at DPW, David C. Sanborn, to serve as the US Maritime Administrator of the US Dept. of Transportation. The White House press release mentioning the appointment is strategically designed so that Sanborn's appointment appears two-thirds of the way down the page, and is worded so that the connection to DPW is very much veiled: "The President intends to nominate David C. Sanborn, of Virginia, to be Administrator of the Maritime Administration of the Department of Transportation. Mr. Sanborn currently serves as Director of Operations for Europe and Latin America at DP World." "DP World? The use of the abbreviation of course removes any mention of "Dubai.." So we are supposed to believe that the DPW sale and Sanborn's appointment were all just a big fat coincidence?

Then, of course, there is that little issue of conflict of interest, with a senior exec of DPW ALSO the guy in charge of regulating marine transport! If Bush REALLY didn't know about the port deal, then he ought to immediately fire Sanborn for 1. failing to inform the White House of the DPW deal at the time of his appointment and 2. having an appointment that represents an outrageous conflict of interest. But the reality, of course, is that Bush appointed Sanborn KNOWING that the latter was a DPW exec.

Dubai Port Company formed as Front Company for the Dubai Government

The US media and Bush administration are also trying to portray the Dubai Port company as an independent commercial entity, when in fact it is not. Even the rightwing WorldNetDaily felt compelled to expose this misleading portrayal: "DPW (Dubai Port World) was formed by a September 2005 merger of Dubai Port Authority and Dubai Port International. DPW is 100 percent owned by the government of the Emirate of Dubai via a Dubai government holding company called the PCFC."What this means is that DPW was formed as a front company through which the Dubai government could acquire US ports - which it did just one month after the front company's creation.

During the P&O bidding war, had the US public and Congress realized what was happening, American could have acquired control of her own ports, either by subsidizing a bid by a private US company or by nationalizing the operation of the ports, which would have been an excellent move in terms of homeland security. But instead, Americans were never given the chance. In short, a chance to insure that America had complete control over her own ports - not to mention port jobs - was stolen.

But no spin is needed to make the case against Bush abundantly clear. The facts speak for themselves:

TIMELINE of Port Control Change

2002: P& O has bad year, losing considerable profits due to loss of ferry tourism

2003: P&O draws fire for misleading customers in effort to pump up profits

2004: P&O slashes job force in Europe

October 2004: P&O sells off Ferry routes in Northwestern Europe. A French company takes this opportunity to take over routes originating in France.

March, 2005 (pdf file): Bush enters into free trade negotiations with the United Arab Emirate, of which Dubai is the hub

August 2005 - P&O has sharp dip in profits, restructures, cuts jobs

September 2005: Dubai Port Authority and Dubai Port International merge, and are now owned 100% by the Dubai government via a holding company called the Ports, Customs, and Free Zone Corporation.

Early October 2005: P&O seeks to initiate bidding war over ports

Late October, 2005: P&O has preliminary takeover talks with DPW

November 2005: P&O agrees to bid offered by DPW This news is in all the international newspapers, including Asia. But no mention is made of this development by the Bush administration for over two months, nor does the US media mention it, even though its international wire sources without doubt transmitted this story.

January, 2005: Bush appoints DPW senior exec David Sanborn US Maritime Administrator

Second week of February, 2005: Sale of US Port operation to DPW announced to US public

Third week of February, 2005: Bush denies he knew anything about the sale.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments

Listed below are the 10 latest comments of 3 posted about this article.
These comments are anonymously submitted by the website visitors.
Does it matter what country the firm is in? Border Raven Thursday, Feb. 23, 2006 at 5:07 PM
I guess not Sheepdog Thursday, Feb. 23, 2006 at 5:40 PM
Or this... Sheepdog Thursday, Feb. 23, 2006 at 8:46 PM
© 2000-2018 Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy