This Is Nuts

[Gold9472]

Ports deal to close by Monday: official

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060302/..._ports_deal_dc

3/2/2006

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Dubai Ports World's $6.85 billion acquisition of Britain's P&O will close on Friday or Monday, despite an additional 45-day review by the U.S. government in response to security concerns, a U.S. Treasury Department official said on Thursday.

"My understanding is that the deal will not close today," Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert Kimmitt told a Senate panel. "Although they had announced March 2 as the closing date ... that deal will not now close until tomorrow or Monday."

Kimmitt made his statement in response to a question from lawmakers on the Senate Banking Committee.

[Gold9472]

UAE warns of threat to investments in political row

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/mai...ixcitytop.html

By David Litterick in New York (Filed: 02/03/2006)

The US could lose a host of much-needed inward investment as foreign countries disturbed by the row over the control of US ports look elsewhere to invest money.

The economy minister of the United Arab Emirates, the country at the heart of the row, said that while political pressure to block the deal would not prevent the Gulf state from seeking further investments in the US, it would likely give other countries pause.

Sheikha Lubna al-Qassimi said other markets in Asia and Europe would now prove more attractive to wealthy Arabs and other investors.

"There is no hesitation, this will not deter the UAE from investing further. This is a business deal that somehow got politicised. But when you have deals that are prolonged by interference of a political nature, it may encourage many countries to go into investments in other places." She said India, China and some countries in Europe would be the likely beneficiaries.

The US is running a massive current account deficit and relies on inward investment to finance it. It has been able to count on petrodollars from countries like Saudi Arabia as a result of the booming world oil market. However, Middle Eastern investors are thought to be becoming jittery.

Hany Hussein, fund manager at Mashreqbank in Dubai, said: "Political risk is there in varying degrees in any transaction. But in this case one can ask 'Would this have happened if Dubai Ports World had not been an Arab company?'"

President Bush has been a staunch defender of the deal, which would see DP World assume control of operations at six US ports following its takeover of P&O. However, politicians have claimed it would be a threat to national security.

The sides have agreed to a fresh 45-day review but DP World has pledged to complete the deal, subject to a ruling in the High Court in London today. "It has certainly reinforced the perception here that Arab investors can be singled out," said Steve Brice, head of Middle East research at Standard Chartered bank in Dubai.

Ironically, the comments came as US commerce secretary Carlos Gutierrez travelled to Saudi Arabia to urge the country to be more welcoming to foreign investment.

The High Court is expected to rule on whether to allow the scheme of arrangement that will seal the $6.8bn merger, after hearing arguments from Eller & Co, a Miami joint venture partner of P&O which claims the deal will adversely affect its business.

Federal courts in the US are due to hear representations from the port authorities of New Jersey, which want the deal blocked.

[Gold9472]

Israeli Software Company Faces U.S. Probe

http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/...ap2564113.html

By TED BRIDIS , 03.02.2006, 12:28 AM

Days after the Bush administration approved a ports deal involving the United Arab Emirates, the same review panel privately notified an Israeli software company it faced a rare, full-blown investigation over its plans to buy a smaller U.S. rival.

The company was told U.S. officials feared the transaction could endanger some of the government's most sensitive computer systems.

The objections by the FBI and Pentagon were partly over specialized intrusion detection software known as "Snort," which guards some classified U.S. military and intelligence computers.

Snort's author is a senior executive at Sourcefire Inc., which would be sold to publicly traded Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. in Ramat Gan, Israel.

The contrast between the administration's handling of the $6.8 billion Dubai ports deal and the Israeli company's $225 million technology purchase offers an uncommon glimpse into the U.S. government's choices to permit some deals but raise deep security concerns over others.

The 45-day investigation into the Israeli deal still under way is only the 26th ever conducted in 1,600 business transactions reviewed by the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States. The panel, facing criticism by Congress about its scrutiny of the ports deal, judges the security risks of foreign companies buying or investing in American industry.

In private meetings between the panel and Check Point, officials from the FBI and Defense Department objected forcefully to permitting any foreign company to acquire some sensitive Sourcefire technology for preventing hacker break-ins and monitoring data traffic, an executive familiar with the discussions told The Associated Press. This executive spoke on condition of anonymity because government negotiations are supposed to remain confidential.

Under the sale, publicly announced Oct. 6, Check Point would own all Sourcefire's patents, source-code blueprints for its software and the expertise of employees. Sourcefire is based in Columbia, Md.

William Reinsch, a former senior U.S. official who participated in reviews under President Clinton, said the Israeli sale involves more dire security issues than the administration's recent approval for a Dubai-owned company to take over significant operations at six major American ports.

"This raises a lot more important issues," said Reinsch, a former Commerce Department undersecretary. "The most important case is where we're making an irrevocable technology transfer to a foreign party. Port operations raise security issues, but the ports are still in the United States."

Check Point and Sourcefire declined to comment. Officials at the Defense Department, FBI and Justice Department also declined to comment.

[Gold9472]

House panel votes to block ports deal

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060308/...NlYwN5bmNhdA--

41 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A House of Representatives committee on Wednesday voted to block the Bush administration's plan for allowing a Dubai company to manage six U.S. ports.

By a vote of 62-2, the House Appropriations Committee approved the amendment to stop the state-owned United Arab Emirates company Dubai Ports World from managing terminals at the American ports.

The legislation, which could be voted on by the full House next week, was attached to an emergency spending bill providing more funds for the war in Iraq and rebuilding southern states hit last year by hurricanes.

[Gold9472]

State Dept. trashes UAE rights record

http://www.nydailynews.com/03-09-200...p-337325c.html

BY RICHARD SISK
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
3/9/2006

WASHINGTON - The State Department's human rights report ripping the United Arab Emirates landed with near-perfect bad timing for the White House yesterday in the middle of the ports sale debate.

Opponents of the deal quickly seized on the report as yet another strike against the sale of terminals at six major U.S. ports to a firm owned by the government of Dubai, one of the seven emirates.

Rep. Peter King (R-L.I.), who raised the initial alarms that have now been taken up by the GOP House leadership, said the report knocked down the White House's argument that the UAE was a reform-minded nation.

"This shows that they're a very regressive, very oppressive, nondemocratic regime," King said.

"This is another reason that we shouldn't allow Dubai to own our ports," said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

The section on the UAE in the State Department's annual survey of human rights worldwide cited UAE abuses ranging from the flogging of prisoners to international trafficking in prostitutes and in young boys used as jockeys in camel races. The report also charged, "There are no democratically elected institutions or political parties. There are no general elections."

[Gold9472]

Dubai withdraws from ports deal

http://rawstory.com/news/2006/CNN_Du...down_0309.html

Published: March 9, 2006

Dubai Ports World International has announced it will divest itself of its U.S. operations, after House and Senate Republican leaders declare the deal 'dead' in Congress.

Senator John Warner (R-VA), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, announced that the United Arab Emirates company had withdrawn efforts to take over control of 21 U.S. ports on the Senate floor.

CNN: Reading a statement from DP World on the Senate floor, Warner, a Virginia Republican, said the reason is "to preserve" the strong relationship between the UAE and United States.

AP: "Warner, the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he had received the statement from DP World's chief operating officer Edward Bilkey."

The announcement came shortly after House and Senate leaders declared the deal dead, and House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) delivered the news to Bush during a meeting at the White House.

Dubai Ports World closed its $6.8 billion takeover of Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. Thursday, the British company that was managing the U.S. ports, turning it into one of the world's three largest ports operators.

[Gold9472]

Ok. I'm done maintaining this crappy thread.

[Gold9472]

Bush warns over port row 'signal'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4794230.stm

3/12/2006

President George W Bush has said opposition in the US to a deal giving a Dubai-based company control of six US ports sends a bad signal to allies.

Mr Bush said the United Arab Emirates was a "valued and strategic partner" in the US-led war on terrorism.

Dubai Ports World has agreed to cede control of the ports to a "US entity" after an outcry from lawmakers worried the deal would harm national security.

Meanwhile, US-UAE trade talks set for Monday have been postponed.

Officials from both sides downplayed the delay and said it was unrelated to the ports row.

Spokeswoman for the US Trade Representative's Office Neena Morjani said both sides were committed to the free trade talks but needed "additional time to prepare for the second round of negotiations".

The US and the UAE have been discussing a free trade deal since March 2005.

Congress opposition
Mr Bush told a conference of the National Newspaper Association that the US needed allies like the UAE.

"They are a key partner for our military in a critical region, and outside of our own country, Dubai services more of our military, military ships, than any country in the world," he said.

Mr Bush added: "In order to win the war on terror we have got to strengthen our friendships and relationships with moderate Arab countries in the Middle East."

But the president admitted Congress was "still very much opposed" to the deal.

Dubai Ports World is taking over P&O, which currently runs the ports. Lawmakers have threatened to block the takeover on security grounds.

They have called for a comprehensive review of ownership of key transport assets, despite the concession from Dubai Ports World.

The company has not explicitly said it will sell the subsidiaries responsible for US ports, although the White House has suggested that this will be the end result.

Trade experts agreed with Mr Bush that the Dubai Ports World saga would set a damaging precedent for other Middle Eastern firms planning to invest in the US.

"It is just assuming that if a company is from the Middle East it is de facto disqualified from investing in the United States, and I think that is a terrible message to send," said Daniel Griswold, director of the Cato Institute's Centre for Trade Policy Studies.

It has now emerged that a second Dubai-owned firm is already providing shipping services in the US.

The other company - Inchcape Shipping Services (ISS) - has been owned since January by the United Arab Emirates investment firm Istithmar.

ISS, whose clients include the US Navy, has had extensive interests in the US for many years.

It arranges pilots, tugs and dock workers for shipping companies and works with the US Customs to ensure the smooth arrival and departure of vessels at ports such as New York, New Jersey and San Francisco.

[Gold9472]

Troubled U.S. ports deal clears last hurdle

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...s-Security.php

The Associated Press
Published: February 16, 2007

WASHINGTON: Six major U.S. port operations will come under U.S. ownership after Dubai Ports World cleared a $50 million (€38.11 million) hurdle Friday to end a yearlong political conflict over security at the nation's cargo terminals.

DP World, based in United Arab Emirates, agreed in December to sell its U.S. ports operations to AIG Global Investment Group, following months of criticism that the UAE firm could not be trusted running the security-sensitive shipping apparatus.

That deal suddenly foundered this week when the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which must consent to the sale, asked the two companies for tens of millions of dollars in cash and future infrastructure work at the Port Newark Container Terminal.

The business brinksmanship led two U.S. senators on Thursday to dub the Port Authority's demands greedy and to threaten political payback if the agency did not back down.

Late Friday, officials said they had struck a deal to resolve the impasse, with AIG agreeing to make more than $40 million (€30 million) worth of infrastructure improvements, as well as a direct payment of $10 million (€7.6 million) to the Port Authority.

"We're pleased that we've reached an agreement that both protects our public investment and helps insure that AIG is a long-term partner in the health and growth of the ports," said Port Authority spokesman Stephen Sigmund.

DP World officials said the entire sale should be finalized in March.

AIG spokesman Chris Winans said the company was "extremely pleased" and looking forward "to a long and successful partnership with the Port Authority."

The latest standoff began when Port Authority officials asked for roughly $30 million (€23 million) in past improvements to the Port Newark Container Terminal — and a commitment from AIG for future infrastructure work. The companies said the agency originally demanded $84 million (€64 million), and that the Port Authority was the last obstacle to completing the sale.

At that, Democratic Sens. Charles Schumer Robert Menendez found themselves in an odd position: coming to DP World's defense after more than a year of publicly ripping the company.

Both senators on Thursday threatened the Port Authority with less federal aid if the agency did not back down.

Schumer called Friday's deal fair and said he was glad the Port Authority "has come to its senses."

DP World is the world's largest marine terminal operator with 51 terminals in 24 countries. The sale agreement struck in December includes major U.S. seaports in New York/New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami, New Orleans and Tampa, Florida.

AIG Global Investment Group is an asset management firm with more than $635 billion (€484 billion) in assets. Its parent company is the New York-based insurance firm, American International Group Inc.

The deal also involves stevedoring operations in 16 locations along the eastern seaboard and Gulf Coast and a passenger terminal in New York.

The U.S. holdings were valued last year at roughly $700 million (€534 million), but the companies did not disclose the sale price.

[MrDark71]

Our GWB appointed "Border Security Chief" is former CIA....how else does the heroin get in here.