U.S. and UAE postpone free trade talks amid ports row
 
swissinfo   March 10, 2006 4:20 PM  

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States and United Arab Emirates have postponed free trade talks set for next week, the U.S. Trade Representative's office said on Friday.

The announcement came one day after state-owned Dubai Ports World, facing intense U.S. political opposition, said it would sell recently acquired U.S. assets to an American entity.

"The U.S. and UAE are strongly committed to making progress on our FTA negotiations. In order to get an agreement that both sides can successfully implement, we need additional time to prepare for the next round of negotiations," Neena Moorjani, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Trade Representative's office, said.

Moorjani downplayed the delay, saying they often happen in the course of free trade negotiations.

"This is not unusual. Just in the past few months, we've postponed rounds with Ecuador three times, Panama twice and Colombia once," Moorjani said. "We continue to work on our negotiating issues" with the UAE, she said.

The Bush administration began free-trade talks with the UAE in March 2005 as part of an effort to craft a regional free-trade deal in the Middle East by 2013.

The United States already has free-trade pacts with Israel, Jordan, Morocco and Bahrain.

Congress is expected to vote this year on a free trade deal with Oman, which neighbours the UAE.

Two-way trade between the United States and UAE totalled close to $10 billion (5.8 billion pounds) in 2005, making it the third-largest U.S. trading partner in the Middle East behind Israel and Saudi Arabia.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=105&sid=6539302

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Heard on Rush a little while ago that Dubai is threatning us w/ economic sanctions if port deal does't go through. Haven't heard it any where else but if this is true fuck-em! because Rush Limbaugh is the bastion of honesty...... Pretty much. Maybe you like the 'other side' better, eh? Dan Rather a pillar of integrity in your world? Eric The(Tee-Hee)Hun

Is making clandestine illicit drug purchases your definition of "honest?"

Limbaugh's just a Republican do-be.

Quoted: U.S. and UAE postpone free trade talks amid ports row   swissinfo   March 10, 2006 4:20 PM   WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States and United Arab Emirates have postponed free trade talks set for next week, the U.S. Trade Representative's office said on Friday. The announcement came one day after state-owned Dubai Ports World, facing intense U.S. political opposition, said it would sell recently acquired U.S. assets to an American entity. "The U.S. and UAE are strongly committed to making progress on our FTA negotiations. In order to get an agreement that both sides can successfully implement, we need additional time to prepare for the next round of negotiations," Neena Moorjani, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Trade Representative's office, said. Moorjani downplayed the delay, saying they often happen in the course of free trade negotiations. "This is not unusual. Just in the past few months, we've postponed rounds with Ecuador three times, Panama twice and Colombia once," Moorjani said. "We continue to work on our negotiating issues" with the UAE, she said. The Bush administration began free-trade talks with the UAE in March 2005 as part of an effort to craft a regional free-trade deal in the Middle East by 2013. The United States already has free-trade pacts with Israel, Jordan, Morocco and Bahrain. Congress is expected to vote this year on a free trade deal with Oman, which neighbours the UAE. Two-way trade between the United States and UAE totalled close to $10 billion (5.8 billion pounds) in 2005, making it the third-largest U.S. trading partner in the Middle East behind Israel and Saudi Arabia. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=105&sid=6539302

Oh well-shit happens.

Quoted: Quoted: Heard on Rush a little while ago that Dubai is threatning us w/ economic sanctions if port deal does't go through. Haven't heard it any where else but if this is true fuck-em! because Rush Limbaugh is the bastion of honesty......

Except in this case Rush was correct in his statement. This has been reported repeatedly in the mainstream media.

Quoted:

Is making clandestine illicit drug purchases your definition of "honest?"

Well, now see?

We have our resident doughnuts-on-a-bandalero JBT telling us that Rush has already been convicted!

You heard it here first!

Limbaugh's just a Republican do-be.

Your opinion < diddly squat.



Eric The(WipeYourChin!)Hun

Quoted: Quoted: Is making clandestine illicit drug purchases your definition of "honest?" Well, now see? ! You heard it here first! Limbaugh's just a Republican do-be. Your opinion < diddly squat. Eric The(WipeYourChin!)Hun

Um didn't he admit on the show that he had an addiction problem?
OJ wasn't convicted of murder, so in you little world I guess he's innocent?


"We have our resident doughnuts-on-a-bandalero JBT telling us that Rush has already been convicted..."  ETH

Wow, another original witticism from the Confederate hat wearing bloated redneck resident drunken ambulance chaser.

Quoted: Wow, another original witticism from the Confederate hat wearing bloated redneck resident drunken ambulance chaser.

I believe this is a CoC Violation: Name Calling, insults, possibly from both of you.

Too bad we people can't have a discussion without resorting to name calling and petty insults. Kind of reminds me of junior high (as long ago as that was).

Quoted:

Um didn't he admit on the show that he had an addiction problem?

An 'addiction problem' is NOT the same thing as a 'felony conviction', is it Counselor , Sir?

Of course, I suppose such legal niceties escape you.

OJ wasn't convicted of murder, so in you little world I guess he's innocent?

Unless you wish to stand the US Constitution which you have sworn to uphold on its head, then OJ is not guilty of the crime that he was charged with, period.

That certainly doesn't mean that he didn't murder Nicole and Goldman, for he absolutely did.

But he is not, though he should be, a 'convicted murderer.'

Wow, another original witticism from the Confederate hat wearing bloated redneck resident drunken ambulance chaser.

At least I will be sober in the morning, Madam.

Where can one go to be cured of idiocy?

Trust me, if we could find a place, I'm certain that the DFW Crew would take a collection to send you there.

(Preferably somewhere way up North)

Eric The(LikeCanada,Maybe)Hun

Quoted: Quoted: Wow, another original witticism from the Confederate hat wearing bloated redneck resident drunken ambulance chaser. I believe this is a CoC Violation: Name Calling, insults, possibly from both of you. Too bad we people can't have a discussion without resorting to name calling and petty insults. Kind of reminds me of junior high (as long ago as that was).

Yeah as long as Eric boy's tossing out the insults, nobody notices;  when he gets the shit back that he dishes out, suddenly "I believe this is a CoC Violation: Name Calling, insults, possibly from both of you."

Quoted: Quoted: Um didn't he admit on the show that he had an addiction problem? An 'addiction problem' is NOT the same thing as a 'felony conviction', is it Counselor , Sir? Of course, I suppose such legal niceties escape you. OJ wasn't convicted of murder, so in you little world I guess he's innocent? Unless you wish to stand the US Constitution which you have sworn to uphold on its head, then OJ is not guilty of the crime that he was charged with, period. That certainly doesn't mean that he didn't murder Nicole and Goldman, for he absolutely did. But he is not, though he should be, a 'convicted murderer.' Wow, another original witticism from the Confederate hat wearing bloated redneck resident drunken ambulance chaser. At least I will be sober in the morning, Madam. Where can one go to be cured of idiocy? Trust me, if we could find a place, I'm certain that the DFW Crew would take a collection to send you there. (Preferably somewhere way up North) Eric The(LikeCanada,Maybe)Hun

"At least I will be sober in the morning, Madam. ..."  ETH

Maybe for awhile in the morning you'll be sober, but you'll still that 9 months pregnant looking gut, and you'll still be.........you.

Ad hominim attacks, Deputy Fife.
You lose the argument.

But Bush told us the sky would fall if the US didn't back the port deal and immediately let it go through.  He said it would ruin our relations with the UAE if we tried to block it.  Now we find out the UAE was more than willing to work with us to keep everyone happy.  I swear Bush has lost it and has no clue what he is doing any more.

Sir, I don't think the President ever said blocking DPW from acquiring control of these six ports would "ruin" our relations with UAE, but it most certainly is not helpful.  DPW, and the investigating committee that approved the acquisition in the first place all said from the start that "UAE was more than willing to work with us to keep everyone happy".  That's why all this congressional posturing is just that, it makes the President look bad which has been the underlying motivation of the whole controversy from it's inception.  

Organized crime has played an unofficial but major role in the operations of our ports long before the days of Al Capone.  Convicted murderers, rapists, thieves, extortionists, etc. are routinely given access to our ports without any type of background check, just who do you think are driving those trucks in and out the gate everyday.  Many of our ports have been owned and operated by foreign interests for decades.  Just because P&O is brittish owned don't believe for a minute that there aren't a lot of Indian and Pakistani nationals actually doing the work.  Does it really give you a warm fuzzy feeling to think that Communist China has our national interests at heart in their day to day port operations in California and Washington?  It's widely viewed outside the US that this is all about prejudice against Arab states.  To say that UAE supports the terrorists in Iraq is equivalent to saying Germany sanctioned the nineteen Sept. 11 hijackers.   JMHO, 7zero1.

Quoted: www.radioblogger.com/images/barney.JPG Ad hominim attacks, Deputy Fife. You lose the argument.

Does your daddy know you're posting his picture on the internet junior?

Well look at President Cottontail-hoppin' down the money trail.
Look at all the big business interests involved in this, and now
these jack-off's have stooped to using Oprah to convince us
to believe them instead of our lying instincts.  
I'm fuckin' ashamed to have voted twice for this administration, selling
our national security out for business interests.
I'm starting to wonder how much worse Commie Kerry coulda'
been.
Oprah fucking Winfrey is gonna educate us rubes!!!!!


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=asS...

U.S. Businesses in U.A.E. to Invite `Oprah' to Dubai (Update1)

March 12 (Bloomberg) -- A group representing U.S. companies in the United Arab Emirates said it will invite ``The Oprah Winfrey Show'' among other talk shows to the Gulf to alter American public opinion which helped block Dubai's takeover of five U.S. ports.

The American Business Group of Abu Dhabi, which has more than 500 members including Boeing Co. and Exxon Mobil Corp., wants Winfrey to host a show from the Persian Gulf sheikhdom as it seeks to convince Americans that the country isn't a threat to national security, Kevin Massengill, a board member of the group said in a phone interview yesterday from Abu Dhabi.

``We want to reach out to the average guy in the U.S. and explain why the U.A.E. is important,'' the former adviser to the U.S. Embassy in Abu Dhabi, who is among a delegation from the group that plans to visit Washington this month to discuss the blocked deal with lawmakers, said.

DP World, a ports company owned by the Maktoum family that rules Dubai, one of the seven sheikdoms in the United Arab Emirates, was forced to sell the U.S. port operations of Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. after Congressional leaders said it could open the U.S. to terrorist attack.

Quoted: Well look at President Cottontail-hoppin' down the money trail. Look at all the big business interests involved in this, and now these jack-off's have stooped to using Oprah to convince us to believe them instead of our lying instincts.   I'm fuckin' ashamed to have voted twice for this administration, selling our national security out for business interests. I'm starting to wonder how much worse Commie Kerry coulda' been. Oprah fucking Winfrey is gonna educate us rubes!!!!! http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=asS... U.S. Businesses in U.A.E. to Invite `Oprah' to Dubai (Update1) March 12 (Bloomberg) -- A group representing U.S. companies in the United Arab Emirates said it will invite ``The Oprah Winfrey Show'' among other talk shows to the Gulf to alter American public opinion which helped block Dubai's takeover of five U.S. ports. The American Business Group of Abu Dhabi, which has more than 500 members including Boeing Co. and Exxon Mobil Corp., wants Winfrey to host a show from the Persian Gulf sheikhdom as it seeks to convince Americans that the country isn't a threat to national security, Kevin Massengill, a board member of the group said in a phone interview yesterday from Abu Dhabi. ``We want to reach out to the average guy in the U.S. and explain why the U.A.E. is important,'' the former adviser to the U.S. Embassy in Abu Dhabi, who is among a delegation from the group that plans to visit Washington this month to discuss the blocked deal with lawmakers, said. DP World, a ports company owned by the Maktoum family that rules Dubai, one of the seven sheikdoms in the United Arab Emirates, was forced to sell the U.S. port operations of Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. after Congressional leaders said it could open the U.S. to terrorist attack.

Better check yourself before ya wreck yourself. Sorry but your all backwards with your facts and your rage is misplaced. This has nothing to do with security and everything to do with media fear mongering with a splash of political opportunism. Consider for a second that you find yourself on the same side of an argument as Chuck Schumer. Danger Will Robinson.

Quoted: Quoted: Well look at President Cottontail-hoppin' down the money trail. Look at all the big business interests involved in this, and now these jack-off's have stooped to using Oprah to convince us to believe them instead of our lying instincts.   I'm fuckin' ashamed to have voted twice for this administration, selling our national security out for business interests. I'm starting to wonder how much worse Commie Kerry coulda' been. Oprah fucking Winfrey is gonna educate us rubes!!!!! http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=asS... U.S. Businesses in U.A.E. to Invite `Oprah' to Dubai (Update1) March 12 (Bloomberg) -- A group representing U.S. companies in the United Arab Emirates said it will invite ``The Oprah Winfrey Show'' among other talk shows to the Gulf to alter American public opinion which helped block Dubai's takeover of five U.S. ports. The American Business Group of Abu Dhabi, which has more than 500 members including Boeing Co. and Exxon Mobil Corp., wants Winfrey to host a show from the Persian Gulf sheikhdom as it seeks to convince Americans that the country isn't a threat to national security, Kevin Massengill, a board member of the group said in a phone interview yesterday from Abu Dhabi. ``We want to reach out to the average guy in the U.S. and explain why the U.A.E. is important,'' the former adviser to the U.S. Embassy in Abu Dhabi, who is among a delegation from the group that plans to visit Washington this month to discuss the blocked deal with lawmakers, said. DP World, a ports company owned by the Maktoum family that rules Dubai, one of the seven sheikdoms in the United Arab Emirates, was forced to sell the U.S. port operations of Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. after Congressional leaders said it could open the U.S. to terrorist attack. Better check yourself before ya wreck yourself. Sorry but your all backwards with your facts and your rage is misplaced. This has nothing to do with security and everything to do with media fear mongering with a splash of political opportunism. Consider for a second that you find yourself on the same side of an argument as Chuck Schumer. Danger Will Robinson.

Well if you support the Dubai deal, you're on the same side as Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

Can't tell the players without a program

Anyone here remember Venezula back when they nationalized their petroleum?  Probably not because most here are far too young and those older people don't have a clue on what happened.

Before the nationalization, the oil fields were highly productive, rivaling Arabian/Middle East oil production.  Foreign investment, namely Shell, Texaco and Esso had major operations there.  Each paid royalties as in any country.  But when the corrupt government decided these royalties weren't enough, they kicked out the foreigners and took over control...effectively killing the goose that was laying golden eggs.  Output fell, safety was ignored and the result was LESS income than before.  Production fell, all out of greed.

Likewise, some here feel the need to nationalize our port operations, at least to the point of excluding foreign management.  And just like the Venezula case of nationalized petroleum, the state cannot effectively manage the industry.

Quoted: Quoted: www.radioblogger.com/images/barney.JPG Ad hominim attacks, Deputy Fife. You lose the argument. Does your daddy know you're posting his picture on the internet junior?

Do you know your daddy?

DUBAI THRATENS US WITH SANCTIONS
What are they going to do, not send any cab drivers to New York City?

Quoted: Quoted: it's like letting the mexicans load a truck in mexico, and accepting their word on what's in the truck. why not just eliminate customs and just politely ask the mexicans what's in the trucks??? What are you talking about? We check manifests and, in some cases, CARGO before the ship leaves a foreign port. When the containers arrive in the US they are screened either via the documentation trail, via technology (x-ray, etc), or via phyisically opening the container. Nothing changes when the UAE runs the ports. Not one thing.

Well, I think the real problem is port security. Less than 5% of the cargo containers are checked for contents. It doesn't matter who is paying the longshoremen, be it British, Dubai or a US company if we don't know what's coming in.

Fuck Dubai

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: it's like letting the mexicans load a truck in mexico, and accepting their word on what's in the truck. why not just eliminate customs and just politely ask the mexicans what's in the trucks??? What are you talking about? We check manifests and, in some cases, CARGO before the ship leaves a foreign port. When the containers arrive in the US they are screened either via the documentation trail, via technology (x-ray, etc), or via phyisically opening the container. Nothing changes when the UAE runs the ports. Not one thing. Well, I think the real problem is port security. Less than 5% of the cargo containers are checked for contents. It doesn't matter who is paying the longshoremen, be it British, Dubai or a US company if we don't know what's coming in.

It is actually closer to 1% that are checked.
Bingo.

Quoted: Less than 5% of the cargo containers are checked for contents.

Want to know the best way to bring the US economy to a screeching halt: search every cargo container that comes into the country.

I love it when people apply micro thinking to a macro world.

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction...

Quoted: Quoted: Less than 5% of the cargo containers are checked for contents. Want to know the best way to bring the US economy to a screeching halt: search every cargo container that comes into the country. I love it when people apply micro thinking to a macro world.

Micro thinking?

And if the ROPers succeed in getting a suitcase nuke into a US port and detonate it, you think the US economy will not come to a "screeching halt"?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Less than 5% of the cargo containers are checked for contents. Want to know the best way to bring the US economy to a screeching halt: search every cargo container that comes into the country. I love it when people apply micro thinking to a macro world. Micro thinking? And if the ROPers succeed in getting a suitcase nuke into a US port and detonate it, you think the US economy will not come to a "screeching halt"?

So your recommendation would be a "pre-emptive" shut down of our economy?  Your nuke scenario would stop one port for a while, your "solution" would bring them all to a crawl indefinitely.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Less than 5% of the cargo containers are checked for contents. Want to know the best way to bring the US economy to a screeching halt: search every cargo container that comes into the country. I love it when people apply micro thinking to a macro world. Micro thinking? And if the ROPers succeed in getting a suitcase nuke into a US port and detonate it, you think the US economy will not come to a "screeching halt"? So your recommendation would be a "pre-emptive" shut down of our economy?  Your nuke scenario would stop one port for a while, your "solution" would bring them all to a crawl indefinitely.

No, a new way of doing things is in order. Put the 400 BILLION we are wasting on Iraq every year into hiring enough customs officers to inspect these containers.  It would slow things down, but like anything, it can be done. You could AT LEAST inspect every container coming from Islamic and third world countries.

You either secure your ports, or you play russian roulette.  Our INS, Border patrol and Customs are so inefficient right now it's only a matter of time before it happens if something does not change.

Quoted: No, a new way of doing things is in order. Put the 400 BILLION we are wasting on Iraq every year into hiring enough customs officers to inspect these containers.  It would slow things down, but like anything, it can be done. You could AT LEAST inspect every container coming from Islamic and third world countries. You either secure your ports, or you play russian roulette.  Our INS, Border patrol and Customs are so inefficient right now it's only a matter of time before it happens if something does not change.

I disagree.  Defensive-only posture is just asking for trouble.  Haw many ports of entry does the US have?  How many illegitimate ports of entry (air or sea)?  How about ICBMs?

You say we are wasting money in Iraq?  Are we wasting money everywhere else we are engaging the enemy in this war - or just the one you see on TV every day.

If history tells un anything, every fortress can be pentrated.  Disengaging from the world and attempting to build a hermetically sealed nation will be disastrous in many ways, and will not make us any safer.

Quoted: Quoted: No, a new way of doing things is in order. Put the 400 BILLION we are wasting on Iraq every year into hiring enough customs officers to inspect these containers.  It would slow things down, but like anything, it can be done. You could AT LEAST inspect every container coming from Islamic and third world countries. You either secure your ports, or you play russian roulette.  Our INS, Border patrol and Customs are so inefficient right now it's only a matter of time before it happens if something does not change. I disagree.  Defensive-only posture is just asking for trouble.  Haw many ports of entry does the US have?  How many illegitimate ports of entry (air or sea)?  How about ICBMs? You say we are wasting money in Iraq?  Are we wasting money everywhere else we are engaging the enemy in this war - or just the one you see on TV every day. If history tells un anything, every fortress can be pentrated.  Disengaging from the world and attempting to build a hermetically sealed nation will be disastrous in many ways, and will not make us any safer.

Who said anything about defensive posture? Are we not in Afghanistan and just about everywhere else in the World? The reason Iraq is a complete waste of money now is because we are doing nothing good except sitting on top of an ethnic civil war. Iraq has done nothing to enhance our defense or offense on terrorism. At home we have been negligent, and have secured NEITHER our borders nor our ports.

I am not advocating isolationism or protectionism, I am simply saying spend the money that is being pissed away to the tune of several million a day in Iraq, where it is needed most. That would be here, securing our borders and ports, and improving our own infrastructure which is sorely need of repair.

The ethnic groups in Iraq have been feuding for more than a thousand years before the US existed.
You think we are going to waltz in, pour money on it and everything will just go away?

Think again. We can't fix what is broke in that particular shithole. At this point we are just flushing cash down the big toilet thet is the Middle-East.

Quoted: Who said anything about defensive posture? Are we not in Afghanistan and just about everywhere else in the World? The reason Iraq is a complete waste of money now is because we are doing nothing good except sitting on top of an ethnic civil war. Iraq has done nothing to enhance our defense or offense on terrorism. At home we have been negligent, and have secured NEITHER our borders nor our ports. I am not advocating isolationism or protectionism, I am simply saying spend the money that is being pissed away to the tune of several million a day in Iraq, where it is needed most. That would be here, securing our borders and ports, and improving our own infrastructure which is sorely need of repair. The ethnic groups in Iraq have been feuding for more than a thousand years before the US existed. You think we are going to waltz in, pour money on it and everything will just go away? Think again. We can't fix what is broke in that particular shithole. At this point we are just flushing cash down the big toilet thet is the Middle-East.

Sorry - I misinterpreted your remarks as a call for isolationsim.  Quite a few folks on this board have made such calls.

The only difference between your opinion and mine is that I don't see an alternartive to our current plan in Iraq.  One, this civil war stuff was in the news when I returned home just under three weeks ago, but I saw nothing in the area I was to make me see any validity to it.  Two, any pull out would increase the chance of a civil war - we are the last best hope for sable government.  Three, a civil war is  what happened in Afghanistan after the Soviets pulled out.  We all know the end effect THAT one has on our national security.

I don't like the situation in Iraq any more than you do.  Unlke you, though, I don't see any other alternative.  We are in the early years of a world-changing clash of civilizations, and Iraq, (to quote from Babylon 5 ) "is our last best hope for peace."

Quoted: Quoted: Who said anything about defensive posture? Are we not in Afghanistan and just about everywhere else in the World? The reason Iraq is a complete waste of money now is because we are doing nothing good except sitting on top of an ethnic civil war. Iraq has done nothing to enhance our defense or offense on terrorism. At home we have been negligent, and have secured NEITHER our borders nor our ports. I am not advocating isolationism or protectionism, I am simply saying spend the money that is being pissed away to the tune of several million a day in Iraq, where it is needed most. That would be here, securing our borders and ports, and improving our own infrastructure which is sorely need of repair. The ethnic groups in Iraq have been feuding for more than a thousand years before the US existed. You think we are going to waltz in, pour money on it and everything will just go away? Think again. We can't fix what is broke in that particular shithole. At this point we are just flushing cash down the big toilet thet is the Middle-East. Sorry - I misinterpreted your remarks as a call for isolationsim.  Quite a few folks on this board have made such calls. The only difference between your opinion and mine is that I don't see an alternartive to our current plan in Iraq.  One, this civil war stuff was in the news when I returned home just under three weeks ago, but I saw nothing in the area I was to make me see any validity to it.  Two, any pull out would increase the chance of a civil war - we are the last best hope for sable government.  Three, a civil war is  what happened in Afghanistan after the Soviets pulled out.  We all know the end effect THAT one has on our national security. I don't like the situation in Iraq any more than you do.  Unlke you, though, I don't see any other alternative.  We are in the early years of a world-changing clash of civilizations, and Iraq, (to quote from Babylon 5 ) "is our last best hope for peace."

Agreed. But I think we would be better off pulling out to Kuwait and waiting to see which way it goes, with the threat of bringing down the hammer again if terrorism flourishes in the Native state. I don;t think we are helping things at the moment. Part of the problem is I think there are quite a few corporate entities that are profitting handsomely from our involvement there.