[Vision2020] Lies, Ports, and Saudi Arabia Yet Again!

[Pat Kraut]

Some seem to believe that I have no qualms about the ports being owned by
foreign countries...I just need much more information about the whole
system. I now have some questions after listening to a talk show today...if
the Chinese were allowed to 'buy' the ports in LA during Clintons time and
he seemed to be close to the Chinese why not the hue and cry about that
because I don't think we are very close to them either. Or, maybe Clinton
didn't know about any of it anymore than Bush did because it is handled by
staff and not brought to the president at all, normally. How soon did the
foreign countries start getting into the ports? How long has this been going
on? Is it indeed a way for a president to 'reward' another country for
'good' behavior? Or is it just about who made the highest bid after all is
said and done?? Joan wants to see the money and my question is how far back
do we have to go and how many of our adminstrations have been invovled? I
have more questions than answers as you can see so will wait to hear more
and learn more.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Phil Nisbet" <pcnisbet1 at hotmail.com>
To: <starbliss at gmail.com>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 3:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Lies, Ports, and Saudi Arabia Yet Again!


Ted

If you get a chance go back into the Terminal opeators lockout of the
Longshoreman.  With all the just in time systems that we have insisted upon,
the capacity for both storage and for loading and unloading has become a
huge problem.  Back in 2002, a single days lock out cost shippers a billion
dollars a day for the Port of Los Angeles alone and it was estimated at the
time that if US ports shut down for just 6 weeks, all US industry would have
to close its doors for lack of raw materials.

We have just about sold off the US Strategic Stockpile for metals and
minerals and out own mines and forests do not provide what it takes to make
what we do make here in the US.  There are no US companies that can even
think of bidding as Terminal Operations groups for most of the Ports,
becasue they do not have the equipment and expertise to manage those
facilities.

What happens on the Palouse if we can not get our Ag products to market?

Phil Nisbet


>From: "Ted Moffett" <starbliss at gmail.com>
>To: "Joan Opyr" <joanopyr at moscow.com>
>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Lies, Ports, and Saudi Arabia Yet Again!
>Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 15:07:28 -0800
>
>Joan et. al.
>
>I'm not sure my post was "thorough," but thanks for the comment.  And given
>that Vision2020 is a voluntary non-profit public forum freely accessible to
>all, I don't think you need my permission merely to read a Vision2020 post,
>that makes no claim to any "copyright," on non-profit public service
>oriented KRFP for your show, but you have my blessing anyway, and thanks
>for
>asking.  However, if you and Brother Carl go big time, I want a cut!   Air
>America, maybe?
>
>One concern I had, though, was about my comment that "port security has
>gone
>so long without public demands for improvement."  This is not quite
>correct,
>or fair.  Families and friends of the 9/11 victims have been among the most
>vocal in raising the issues of domestic security from terrorist attacks,
>exposing how lacking the response has been on domestic security since 9/11,
>a fact made glaringly obvious after Hurricane Katrina.  Indeed, the 9/11
>Commission, which was resisted by the Bush administration, was pushed
>aggressively by 9/11 victim relatives.  Here is a web site associated with
>families of 9/11 victims, that reminds us that today twelve years ago the
>WTC was bombed, with commentary on the Dubai Ports World deal:
>
>http://www.voicesofsept11.org/#
>
>And here below is an article on 9/11 families reaction to the Dubia Ports
>World takeover, a rather negative reaction, "surprise, surprise, surprise,"
>as Gomer Pile once said.  Cronyism in the Bush administration?  Impossible!
>After all, they brought decency and high moral values to the White House.
>Read excerpt below from this article:
>
>http://sev.prnewswire.com/homeland-security/20060222/DCW04322022006-1.html
>
>"Doyle charged the administration with a conflict of interest in supporting
>the deal, noting that the White House's nominee for administrator of the
>U.S.
>Maritime Commission is David Sanborn, a top executive of Dubai Ports World.
>"Cronyism in the war on terror is no better than surrender," he said."
>-----------------
>
>Ted Moffett
>
>
>
>
>On 2/26/06, Joan Opyr <joanopyr at moscow.com> wrote:
> >
> > My apologies to Ted and the list. I posted my piece in response to Pat's
> > comments before I read Ted's more thorough and thoughtful analysis. (I'm
> > reading my email backwards, most recent post first. Think I'll stop
>that!)
> >
> > I'll only add this to the detailed analysis and information Ted has
> > provided: I should think that the anti-statists among you (to borrow a
> > phrase from Dale Courtney) would immediately see the difference between
> > private company management and United Arab Emirates management of the
> > ports in question. Private company versus dictatorship, private company
> > versus dictatorship . . .
> >
> > I believe that the "war" on terror is a sham and a bust, but surely
>George
> > W. Bush doesn't believe that. Why then should he approve and fight for a
> > multi-port management sale to a country that remains a persistent burr
> > under our counterterrorism saddle?
> >
> > Too bad we killed Pablo Escobar. Perhaps we could have outsourced that
> > other great sham and bust, the "war" on drugs, to his
>highly-sophisticated
> > operation.
> >
> > Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment
> > www.joanopyr.com
> >
> > PS: I'm appending the whole of Ted's post below because I think we would
> > all do well to read it again. With Ted's permission, I'd like to print
>it
> > out and read it on the AE and BC Show next week. I only wish I could
>hold
> > George W. Bush down and read it to him. Maybe if I glued it between the
> > covers of My Pet Goat . . .
> >
> > > DC, Joan et. al.
> > >
> > > Most US ports are run by foreign based private sector businesses at
>this
> > > time, but the turnover of port operations to the UAE involves a
>foreign
> > > government owned company, not a private corporation, operating
>critical
> > US
> > > ports.  This raises different concerns, given the UAE's conduct and
> > > connections in the Islamic world.
> > >
> > > Dubai Ports World is acquiring London-based Peninsular and Oriental
> > Steam
> > > Navigation Co., a company that operates the port of Miami (yes, the
> > "limeys> "
> > > already operate some US ports), which in effect means that this very
> > active
> > > US port is already associated with this state owned UAE company, and
> > this
> > > fact is being fought in court now.  Excerpt below from this
> > link/article,
> > > that explains the objections to the UAE takeover:
> > >
> > > http://wjz.com/topstories/local_story_049154722.html
> > >
> > > A company at the Port of Miami has sued to block the takeover of
> > shipping
> > > operations there by the UAE owned business. It is the first American
> > > courtroom effort to capsize the sale.
> > >
> > > The Miami company, a subsidiary of Eller & Company Inc., presently is
>a
> > > business partner with London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam
> > Navigation
> > > Co., which Dubai Ports World purchased last week. In a lawsuit in
> > Florida
> > > circuit court, the Miami subsidiary said that under the sale it will
> > become
> > > an "involuntary partner" with Dubai's government and it may seek more
> > than
> > > $10 million in damages.
> > >
> > > The Miami subsidiary, Continental Stevedoring & Terminals Inc., said
>the
> > > sale to Dubai was prohibited under its partnership agreement with the
> > > British firm and "may endanger the national security of the United
> > States."
> > > It asked a judge to block the takeover and said it does not believe
>the
> > > company, Florida or the U.S. government can ensure Dubai Ports World's
> > > compliance with American security rules.
> > > --------------------------------------
> > > Although the UAE has troubling links to terrorism and terrorists, the
> > fact
> > > that two UAE nationals were among the 19 9/11 hijackers is
>overshadowed
> > by
> > > the Saudi 9/11 connections, with 15 of the 9/11 hijackers of Saudi
> > > nationality, and the ominous funding trail for the 9/11 attacks that
> > > flowed from within the Saudi borders:
> > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks
> > >
> > > Fifteen of the hijackers were from Saudi
> > > Arabia<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia>,
> > > two were from the United Arab
> > > Emirates<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Emirates>,
> > > and one each came from Egypt <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt> and
> > > Lebanon <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanon>.
> > > ----------------------------------
> > >
> > > The lack of a full well publicized government investigation into Saudi
> > > terrorist links to 9/11 and other terrorist activities, and the
> > influence
> > o> f
> > > the 100s of billions of Saudi US investments and US reliance on Saudi
> > fossi> l
> > > fuels, on the US economy and government, is far more of a critical
>issue
> > > than the UAE terrorist connections, though I agree it is good that
>port
> > > security and the terrorist links of so called Middle East "allies" is
> > now
> > > more on the media and congressional radar.
> > >
> > > One critical question is how the sad state of US port security has
>gone
> > so
> > > long without public demands for improvement, while we invade other
> > nations
> > > spending hundreds of billions ostensibly to keep the US safe from
> > > terrorism?  The lack of necessary improvements in US port security in
> > recen> t
> > > years raises serious questions regarding the truth behind the agenda
>of
> > the
> > > "War on Terror" and the functioning of the Homeland Security Dept.
> > >
> > > More info on the UAE below:
> > >
> > > http://www.thinkprogress.org/2006/02/17/ports-uae/
> > >
> > >
> > > Some facts about the
> > > UAE<http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Dubai_Ports_letter.pdf>
> > > :
> > >
> > > - The UAE was *one of three countries in the world to recognize the
> > > Taliban*as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.
> > >
> > > - The UAE has been a *key transfer point for illegal shipments of
> > nuclear
> > > components* to Iran, North Korea and Lybia.
> > >
> > > - According to the FBI, *money was transferred to the 9/11 hijackers
> > thro> ugh
> > > the UAE banking system*.
> > >
> > > - After 9/11, the Treasury Department reported that the UAE was *not
> > > cooperating in efforts to track down Osama Bin Laden's bank accounts*.
> > >
> > > -----------------------------------
> > >
> > > Ted Moffett
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > This message was sent by First Step Internet.
> >           http://www.fsr.com/
> >
> >
> >


>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

_____________________________________________________
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯