Bush Renews Port Veto Threat As Congress Crafts Legislation to Block Sale

  • Chip's picture
    Chip
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Update #2 - Save Our American Ports (SOAP) and SCRUB THE DEAL! Proposed operation of 21 American ports on the eastern seaboard, from Maine to Texas, by the United Arab Emirates' owned-company Dubai Ports World remains contested today, as Mr. Bush renewed his threat to veto any congressional action blocking the sale. Despite that, the Republican-dominated House Appropriations Committee voted 62-2 (only Reps. Jim Kolbe, R-AZ and Jim Moran, D-VA, voted against the measure) today to bar DP World from holding leases or contracts at US ports. House Republicans, attempting to gain the upper-hand on the aggressive Democratic legislative response over the past weeks to the national security concerns, plan to amend the must-pass $70 billion Iraq war-funding legislation scheduled for passage next week to address those concerns. Another Republican congressman went on record saying that the previous Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) review gave security matters only "a very superficial look." Mr. Bush's opposition to legislation aimed at insuring national security is at odds with our national experience and common sense, and he is running the risk of appearing weak on terror - which he is. It's odd that he would threaten to use his premier veto on this issue, parting company with both his own party and the American public, barely 4 months after a scathing 911 Commission Final report graded as "D" all these categories critical to national security:

  • "Critical Infrastructure Assessment"
  • "Intelligence Oversight Reform"
  • "Checked Bag and Cargo Screening"
  • "International Collaboration on Borders and Document Security"
  • "Maximum Effort to Prevent Terrorists from Acquiring WMD"

Four and a half years after 911, after millions upon millions of dollars appropriated (often without spending guidelines), little old ladies are frisked at air terminals while the cargo holds remain largely unscreened. Now, the scrutiny of the ports deal is displaying the absurdity of form over function, revealing how the cosmetic approaches actually divert scarce (and growing scarcer) resources from more effective prevention measures. We've seen the results of "compassionate conservatism" as we watched horrified while our fellow Americans on the gulf coast begged for assistance, for food, water, sanitation, medical care, and evacuation from Katrina. Recent videotape reveals that Bush knew the danger, knew the urgency, and simply didn't care enough to respond with meaningful action. It's said that past performance is indicative of future performance. By that standard, we are warned to be afraid, be very afraid – and isn't fear of the unknown one of the Bush administration's gambits?

Comments

Port Ownership is "secret"

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060307-115808-4050r.htm

I tried to find out who really owned many of the ports since the last discussion about their sale and could only find this.

One thing for sure it is not in our best interest or for our security. It is for profit and behind the scenes shipping, arms, drugs, etc.

The ports belong to us. How can they do this without our permission? It is robbery is it not? RICO type investigations should investigate this one.

Does this make you feel secure enough to sleep at night?

Just to clarify, "ownership"

  • Bill Harding's picture
    Bill Harding
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Just to clarify, "ownership" is very different from a management contract, or a lease/management arrangement. Just like airports, maritime ports are variously owned by cities, states, and in some cases, the federal government (both military and civilian).

There are also privately owned airports and marinas, but I am not aware of any privately owned ports-of-entry.

All publicly owned air and sea ports, however, normally receive some form of federal funding for their maintenance and operation.

Here is a listing of all US ports-of-entry, including information about their management and agents:

http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/toolbox/contacts/ports/

"Ownership"

IF they don't own them how come the big money involved?

"Foreign Management/Leasing" is a dangerous thing as far as I'm concerned regarding entry.

They "manage" them but we contribute tax dollars. Seems like a lose, lose situation for us.

The words the Neo Cons use always suggest they are stealing our Common Wealth and profiteering don't you think?

I lived many years near the Canadian border and know about the entry procedures, etc. Management by any other country than our own government many not do things for our best interest but look for a cut to profit. It's not a secure thing.