PDA

View Full Version : Lawmaker: Port deal never probed for terror ties



Hardrock69
03-02-2006, 11:04 PM
Wednesday, March 1, 2006; Posted: 11:01 p.m. EST (04:01 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A review of a United Arab Emirates-owned company's plan to take over a portion of operations at key U.S. ports never looked into whether the company had ties to al Qaeda or other terrorists, a key Republican lawmaker told CNN on Wednesday.

Rep. Peter King of New York, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said officials from the Homeland Security and Treasury departments told him weeks ago that their 30-day review of the deal did not look into the question of links between DP World and al Qaeda.

King said the officials told him after he asked about investigation into possible terrorist ties: "Congressman, you don't understand, we don't conduct a thorough investigation. We just ask the intel director if there is anything on file, and he said no."

"There was no real investigation conducted during the 30-day period," King, who has been a vocal critic of the deal, told CNN. "I can't emphasize this enough,"

King's comments appear to contradict testimony by administration officials before Congress this week that a through review of any terrorism ties had occurred during the initial review of the deal.

After King and other lawmakers raised concerns about the deal, the company agreed to a 45-day review by the investigation. King said the administration should use the time to investigate the firm rather than trying to convince lawmakers that the deal should be approved.

"When I hear the administration saying they want to educate the Congress and the American public, they should be educating themselves," King said. "They should do the investigation they should have done after the 30 days."

A wave of concern has swept Capitol Hill over news of the deal to allow Dubai-based DP World to assume management of some cargo terminals at six U.S. ports on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. (Interactive: Who is minding the ports)

Critics note that two of the suicide hijackers involved in the attacks of September 11, 2001, came from the United Arab Emirates and that money for the plot was funneled through banks in Dubai, the banking hub of the Persian Gulf.

Supporters note that the UAE is an ally and home to major U.S. military bases, and that port security would be handled by the Coast Guard and other law enforcement agencies after the merger, just as it is now.

The $6.8 billion merger is set to close Thursday in Britain, home of current port operator P&O, but DP World agreed not to assume control of P&O's port operations until a 45-day security review takes place.
Port security defended

Also Wednesday, the U.S. Coast Guard's vice commandant defended the state of U.S. port security after facing tough questioning from lawmakers on Capitol Hill, but acknowledged that more work remains to be done.

"I don't think there's any question that our ports are far more secure now than they were prior to 9/11," Vice Adm. Terry M. Cross told a congressional subcommittee.

His testimony came a day after Department of Homeland Security deputy secretary Michael P. Jackson told a Senate committee he was unaware of a Coast Guard memo that warned of "intelligence gaps" in its review of a proposed merger that would put a company owned by and based in the United Arab Emirates in charge of several U.S. cargo terminals.

The Coast Guard, which is part of Homeland Security, said the document has been taken out of context since its disclosure.

The document's existence was revealed Monday by Sen. Susan Collins, chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee. (Read the Coast Guard memoexternal link)
Chertoff promises changes

Collins, a Maine Republican, asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff on Wednesday what measures he would take to improve communication within his department after the Coast Guard memo went unnoticed.

Chertoff said his department was taking measures to "flatten the organization" in an effort to streamline communication between department heads.

Chertoff addressed the committee Wednesday in a wide-ranging hearing on his department's proposed budget.

In his testimony, Cross expressed confidence in domestic port security, noting that ships now must give 96 hours' notice before entering a U.S. port, up from 24 hours before September 11. Cross said the additional time allows port security officers to vet a ship's crew, passenger list, cargo manifest and vessel history before it arrives.

But Democratic Rep. Corrine Brown of Florida faulted the Bush administration for not doing enough. She said $4.4 billion has been spent on aviation security, "but only $36 million in all surface transportation."

Also Wednesday, a federal judge refused a request by the state of New Jersey to investigate the ports deal, according to The Associated Press. The judge also refused to order the release of the documents relating to the deal, saying they were confidential and that the state failed "to show an immediate need for those documents," the AP said.

CNN's Ed Henry contributed to this report.


LINKY (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/01/port.security/index.html)

Hardrock69
03-02-2006, 11:07 PM
U.S. Reviewing 2nd Dubai Firm Israeli Deal Also Faces Security Check

By Jonathan Weisman and Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, March 2, 2006; Page A01

The Bush administration, stung by the public outcry over the Dubai port deal, has launched a national security investigation of another Dubai-owned company set to take over plants in Georgia and Connecticut that make precision components used in engines for military aircraft and tanks.

The administration notified congressional committees this week that its secretive Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) is investigating the security implications of Dubai International Capital's $1.2 billion acquisition of London-based Doncasters Group Ltd., which has subsidiaries in the United States. It is also investigating an Israeli company's plans to buy the Maryland software security firm Sourcefire, which does business with Defense Department agencies.


Administration officials are privately briefing leaders of half a dozen House and Senate committees this week about the two planned transactions, concerned that both deals could stir controversy in a political climate that remains supercharged over the Dubai port deal.

Republican and Democratic lawmakers angrily protested after learning late last month that the administration had approved a $6.8 billion deal to allow a maritime company based in the United Arab Emirates to take over significant operations at six U.S. ports without a thorough investigation and without consulting members of Congress. Last weekend, the Dubai maritime company agreed to a 45-day investigation to stem the protest and allay concerns of a possible breach of U.S. port security.

In the past, the foreign investment committee rarely told Congress of such inquiries. Wary of another misstep, administration officials decided to inform lawmakers of the two other pending transactions with national security implications for the United States.

There have been suggestions in the trade press that the publicly traded Israeli firm, Check Point Software Technologies, has been subjected to more scrutiny than Dubai Ports World, the state-owned Arab company that was initially cleared to take over operations at the six major U.S. ports with no security investigation. That inquiry was initiated only after an outcry about turning over port security to a country that has been cited for ties to terrorism. Sources familiar with the Israeli investigation said cybersecurity officials at the departments of Defense, Justice and Homeland Security all raised serious concerns about the purchase before the port controversy erupted.

Dubai International Capital's acquisition of Doncasters could present some of the same political problems created by Dubai Ports World's purchase of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. Once again, a state-controlled Dubai company with deep pockets is purchasing a British firm with U.S. holdings. Doncasters has operations in nine U.S. locations and manufactures precision parts for defense contractors such as Boeing, Honeywell, Pratt & Whitney and General Electric.

A spokesman for Doncasters' corporate office in Connecticut said the company had no comment on the security investigation.

Although many foreign companies manufacture parts used in U.S. military equipment, in this instance CFIUS members decided to look more carefully at the Doncasters transaction. The CFIUS met last week and tentatively decided to subject that proposal to a 45-day investigation, and it finalized that decision in a conference call late Monday. The decision came on the final day of the regular 30-day review period. Aides on the Senate banking committee said the panel was notified late Monday that the CFIUS had initiated both national security inquiries.

"The CFIUS process is charged with determining if there are national security concerns in any transaction, and it takes that role very seriously," said Tony Fratto, spokesman for the Treasury Department, which leads the interagency committee. "It looks at each transaction on a case-by-case basis, and if security concerns are raised by any member of the committee at the end of an initial 30-day review, the case goes into investigation."

The 45-day investigation of the Israeli deal began in early February, several weeks before the controversy erupted over the Dubai port deal, administration officials said. The investigation of the Dubai-Doncasters deal began this week, at the height of the political turmoil over the port issue.

Yet Fratto said that neither of the new investigations were started "because of public reaction to some other transaction."


LINKY (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/01/AR2006030102192.html)

FORD
03-02-2006, 11:11 PM
Could you repost this in one of the existing port threads?

I told Munson not to spam the board with the topic, and I'm sure he's got the short-bus team looking out for "left wing bias".

Roy Munson
03-02-2006, 11:14 PM
Double mother-fucking standard.

Adios.

Roy Munson
03-02-2006, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Could you repost this in one of the existing port threads?

I told Munson not to spam the board with the topic, and I'm sure he's got the short-bus team looking out for "left wing bias".


What a lovely tone you have in response your bun-buddy.

FORD
03-02-2006, 11:16 PM
How did I know you were lurking? :rolleyes:

FORD
03-02-2006, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by Roy Munson
Double mother-fucking standard.

Adios.

Jumping to idiotic mother-fucking conclusions