MD Gov. Ehrlich Takes Measures to Stop Arab Port Deal

[Bonnie]

Has anyone heard justifiable reasons why this deal should go thru?????

Ehrlich seeks to delay Arab deal on port

By S.A. Miller and Jon Ward
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
February 21, 2006


Maryland Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. said yesterday that he is considering legal moves to either delay or "simply void" the federally approved business deal that would give an Arab company control of operations at the Port of Baltimore.
"We are obviously very concerned about security at the port," said Mr. Ehrlich, a Republican seeking re-election this year.
New York Gov. George E. Pataki, also a Republican, made a similar threat last night, saying he was "very concerned" about the purchase, which also would cover five other ports, including New York.
"I have directed the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to explore all legal options that may be available to them in regards to this transaction," he said.
In Washington, Democratic Sens. Robert Menendez and Hillary Rodham Clinton assailed the deal and said President Bush should stop it to better protect the U.S. from terrorists.
"We wouldn't turn over our customs service or our border patrol to a foreign government," said Mr. Menendez, of New Jersey. "We shouldn't turn over the ports of the United States, either."
Mr. Menendez said he and Mrs. Clinton, of New York, will introduce legislation prohibiting the sale of port operations to foreign governments.
Mr. Ehrlich said he was not necessarily opposed to the business arrangement in which state-owned Dubai Ports World (DPW) of the United Arab Emirates purchased the company that runs the cargo operations at Baltimore and five other U.S. seaports -- New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Miami and New Orleans.
However, he said Maryland needed to study the deal, and he called the state's long absence from the months-long approval process "very troubling."
"We fully understand that 12 different federal agencies have signed off on this particular deal," Mr. Ehrlich said. "Nevertheless, we are in charge of Maryland. We are in charge of the Port of Baltimore."
Critics of the deal, which was made public late last week, sounded off yesterday in Maryland and on Capitol Hill.
Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley slammed Mr. Bush for approving DPW's acquisition of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., the port operator.

http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20060221-122944-3254r.htm

 

[dilloduck]

The one I heard was that UAE is willing to invest the billions of dollars it will take to do the job and the company has an excellant track record. The UAE is one of the most progressive Arab countries in the mideast. We would be absolutely thrilled if Iraq comes out looking anything like UAE. I'm still in the middle of the road on this one on this one because thier is so much we don't know.

 

[Abbey Normal]

The one I heard was that UAE is willing to invest the billions of dollars it will take to do the job and the company has an excellant track record. The UAE is one of the most progressive Arab countries in the mideast. We would be absolutely thrilled if Iraq comes out looking anything like UAE. I'm still in the middle of the road on this one on this one because thier is so much we don't know.

I wish the White House would come out and tell us their rationale for this. Silence is bad in these situations. Or have they, and I missed it?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Bush just came out and said it's going through and he will veto legislation to block it.

 

[dilloduck]

I wish the White House would come out and tell us their rationale for this. Silence is bad in these situations. Or have they, and I missed it?

I agree--they are handling this poorly--so far. They have been challenged and need to explain ( for the sake of political wisdom if nothing else).

 

[rtwngAvngr]

This is strange.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Bush just came out and said it's going through and he will veto legislation to block it.

Did he give any explanation?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Did he give any explanation?

Just that the company is good, the vetting process is fine , blah blah, "YOu're doin a heck of a job, brownie!"

 

[dilloduck]

This is strange.

Not really----The mid-term elections are right around the corner and the left and those Republicans who feel a need to distance themselves from the president are taking this issue and running with it. It's a chance for them to pretend that they are REALLY interested in national security when in all actuality they are against everything the administration puts out in the interest of national security. Politics as usual. Smoke and mirrors.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

President Bush said Tuesday that a deal allowing an Arab company to take over six major U.S. seaports should go forward and that he would veto any congressional effort to stop it.

The Senate's Republican leader had promised just such an effort a few hours earlier, and the House's top Republican called for "an immediate moratorium" on the deal.

"After careful review by our government, I believe the transaction ought to go forward," Bush told reporters who had traveled with him on Air Force One to Washington. "I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company. I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We'll treat you fairly.'"

Bush took the rare step of calling reporters to his conference room on the plane after returning from a speech in Colorado, addressing a controversy that is becoming a major headache for the White House. He said the seaports arrangement had been extensively examined by the administration and was "a legitimate deal that will not jeopardize the security of the country."

Source.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Just that the company is good, the vetting process is fine , blah blah, "YOu're doin a heck of a job, brownie!"

Lol on the Brownie quote.

Those points may explain why the company passed muster and was considered, but they do not explain why they were chosen over other contenders. President Bush must know that it doesn't look like a good idea. I had hoped that he could give reasons why the UAE company is so superior, that he just had to choose them despite their being an Arab holding.

 

[dilloduck]

Lol on the Brownie quote.

Those points may explain why the company passed muster and was considered, but they do not explain why they were chosen over other contenders. President Bush must know that it doesn't look like a good idea. I had hoped that he could give reasons why the UAE company is so superior, that he just had to choose them despite their being an Arab holding.

I haven't even HEARD anyone mention an American company that is willing to do the job.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I haven't even HEARD anyone mention an American company that is willing to do the job.

Not to mention capable.

 

[dilloduck]

Not to mention capable.

Exactly----who are the alternative companies here??? UAE may look like a great choice after we find out the other options.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Exactly----who are the alternative companies here??? UAE may look like a great choice after we find out the other options.

That would be great information to have. We need something concrete.

 

[dilloduck]

That would be great information to have. We need something concrete.

I really have no idea what who the best company is for this job but am highly suspicious when prominent democrats suddenly leap out in " the interest of national security". Now they are suddenly FOR profiling ?? WTF?? IMHO Bush IS being a bit secretive about this and would fare MUCH better politically by tossing the facts out there and ask for suggestions. Let's see who has a better idea. You think the dems have one?? :rotflmao:

 

[Abbey Normal]

I really have no idea what who the best company is for this job but am highly suspicious when prominent democrats suddenly leap out in " the interest of national security". Now they are suddenly FOR profiling ?? WTF?? IMHO Bush IS being a bit secretive about this and would fare MUCH better politically by tossing the facts out there and ask for suggestions. Let's see who has a better idea. You think the dems have one?? :rotflmao:

Dillo, I know you aren't asking me that question. :cof:

 

[nosarcasm]

one of Bush's man, came out and said that the security of the ports
would not change at all. Still run by the US government and that
there is no reason to discriminate against the company from the UAE.

I am still openmindend and wait for more information before I shout
fire.

 

[Bonnie]

The one I heard was that UAE is willing to invest the billions of dollars it will take to do the job and the company has an excellant track record. The UAE is one of the most progressive Arab countries in the mideast. We would be absolutely thrilled if Iraq comes out looking anything like UAE. I'm still in the middle of the road on this one on this one because thier is so much we don't know.

The only thing I can't puzzle out is why Bush is being so secretive? I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt and think maybe he has some very good reasons, but can't say so right at the moment.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I really have no idea what who the best company is for this job but am highly suspicious when prominent democrats suddenly leap out in " the interest of national security". Now they are suddenly FOR profiling ?? WTF?? IMHO Bush IS being a bit secretive about this and would fare MUCH better politically by tossing the facts out there and ask for suggestions. Let's see who has a better idea. You think the dems have one?? :rotflmao:

Don't pick on Abbey, Dillo. :cof: