Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (277226)	2/28/2006 11:23:46 AM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576893

That's the Coast Guard's way of saying the Dubai deal is a threat. Or at least a possible threat. Anyone with common sense knows that anyway. The Coast Guard is the expert on this. They should be listened to, not Bush's apologists like Rush Limbaugh, or Bush himself whose family is tied to Carlyle Group and CSX, two beneficiaries of this deal. Besides, if Bush only found out about this a week ago, how the hell is he supposed to know it's a good idea? Bush has a poor record in business transactions. Two companies he fronted for went belly-up. He also made very poor decisions regarding Iraq, Katrina, federal deficits, you name it.

To: Elroy who wrote (277226)	3/2/2006 12:14:09 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576893

Coast Guard issued warning on Dubai firm Agency concerned assets could be used for terror operations, Dec. 13 report says Jonathan Weisman, Washington Post Tuesday, February 28, 2006 Washington -- The U.S. Coast Guard, in charge of reviewing security at ports operated by a Dubai maritime company, warned the Bush administration it could not rule out that the company's assets could be used for terrorist operations, according to a document released Monday by a Senate committee. Dubai Ports World plans to complete its takeover of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. (P&O) on Thursday, assuming ownership of operations at six major U.S. ports even as it pledges to hold off on asserting control while the Bush administration reviews the national security implications of the deal. The White House has strongly argued that a preliminary review showed that the sale would pose no threat to national security. But in a Dec. 13 intelligence assessment of the company and its owners in the United Arab Emirates, the Coast Guard warned: "There are many intelligence gaps, concerning the potential for DPW or P&O assets to support terrorist operations, that preclude" the completion of a thorough threat assessment of the merger. "The breadth of the intelligence gaps also infer potential unknown threats against a large number of potential vulnerabilities," says the document, released by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. "Security measures were thoroughly reviewed, including intelligence matters," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said. She did not know whether the White House was briefed on the Coast Guard assessment. The Coast Guard document, completed about one month before the ports deal received government approval Jan. 17, is the strongest indication that members of the administration had expressed security concerns over the transaction. Officials from the departments of Treasury, Defense and Homeland Security told the Senate Armed Services Committee last week that the secretive interagency Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which reviewed the DP World deal, was unanimous in its position that no concerns had emerged to activate the 45-day national security review required by the law that established the panel. Among those who briefed the Armed Services Committee was Rear Adm. Thomas Gilmour of the Coast Guard, who said the agency had reviewed DP World's track record on port management but did not mention the document. "Given the red-flag questions that the Coast Guard raised, very serious questions about operations, personnel and foreign influence, how could there not have been the 45-day investigation that's clearly required by law?" asked Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine. Gilmour insisted Monday he could answer questions on the document only in a secret session to staff members with appropriate security clearances. The issue is sure to stoke political concerns that a deal brokered last weekend between the company, the Bush administration and congressional GOP leaders does not go far enough. That deal provided that the company could go forward with its $6.85 billion acquisition of P&O, but it would not assert control over U.S. properties while the administration conducts a 45-day review of the deal's national security implications. Senators from both political parties moved Monday to immediately stop the deal, pending the review's outcome. sfgate.com