Port in a Storm

Gov. Bob Ehrlich has been known to cloak himself, quite literally, in homeland security.
After Hurricane Katrina, the Republican governor held a news conference dressed in a homeland security blazer. During his state of the state address last month, he invited a Louisiana parish official to address the legislature and thank Ehrlich for his support during the catastrophe.
So when he headed to the Port of Baltimore this afternoon, amid a growing national furor over an Arab company's takeover of operations at six U.S. ports, Ehrlich was ready to talk about homeland security.
"Job one is public safety," Ehrlich said to reporters. It is "paramount during a time of war, a terror war, a non-traditional war."
The governor took a detour before starting his meeting with port officials to stroll the windswept docks, flanked by top aides, pausing beneath a mammoth blue crane to watch men loading containers onto a Panamanian cargo ship. A port police boat bobbed just off shore, within view of television cameras.
He was one of several Maryland politicians to weigh in on the controversial deal Monday.
At a later news conference, Ehrlich was joined by Lt. Gov. Michael Steele (R), who is a candidate for U.S. Senate this year. An independent film crew, the sort typically identified with campaign work, was on hand. But the cameraman would not identify why he was filming.
In a statement today, Steele said "There should be MANDATORY investigations of any foreign entity that would take over the operations of a U.S.-operated port, and Congress should have an active role in approving transactions that are ultimately an issue of national security. We must increase the transparency of this process."
Another Senate candidate, Democratic Rep. Ben Cardin called on Ehrlich to consider cancelling the contract and " reassess privatization of these operations at the Port of Baltimore.
"Management of the longshoremen's loading and unloading of ships could be handled by the Port of Baltimore directly, as it has been in the past," he said in a statement.
He also suggested that Congress consider reversing federal approval of the sale and conducting oversight hearings of the agency that signed off on the deal.
The Republicans were outflanked on the port issue Saturday, when Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley, a Democratic challenger for governor, objected to the deal and called on state leaders not to "roll over and play dead."
Montgomery County Executive Douglas M. Duncan, another Democrat running for governor, said Monday that he considers the arrangement "clearly misguided and wrongheaded."
At issue is the purchase last week of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. by Dubai Ports World, a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates. The London-based company runs major commercial operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.
Matt Mosk and John Wagner
By Phyllis Jordan |
February 21, 2006; 4:18 PM ET
| Category:
Governor
Previous: Prince George's: Do the Math |
Next: Ethics Education
Posted by: Mr. K | February 21, 2006 4:55 PM
I find it amazing that the security of the US is outsorced to a British company in the first place. Why not a homegrown security company?
Posted by: Slick | February 21, 2006 5:22 PM
Better yet, why not turn security over to the MOB. Everyone knows who is in control of the ports. Why not let the guys and gals who know what is coming and going take care of security?
Posted by: Slick | February 21, 2006 5:24 PM
"I don't understand why it's OK for a British company to operate our ports but not a company from the Middle East when we've already determined security is not an issue," Bush said.
This guy is so stupid he's repeating the Iranian guy's argument. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad argument was why Israel can have nukes and Iran cannot?
Answer to Mahmoud: because we don't see Israel handing theirs to terrorists any time soon.
Answer to Bush: because we dont's see Brits sneaking nuke into NY harbor any time soon.
Posted by: Too close to Baltimore | February 21, 2006 5:31 PM
Good call Too close to Baltimore. How can the Federal government have oversight of a company situated in the UAE? It only takes one nuke to show what a bad idea this is.
Posted by: Slick | February 21, 2006 5:34 PM
==>>How can the Federal government have oversight of a company situated in the UAE?
Surely you joked? The Federal goverment does not even have oversight of FEMA - the FEDERAL Emergency Management Agency.
But this is no joke. These six ports pretty much cover the entire eastern seaboard of the United States, home to half its population. If we the people and Congress let this go thru, we deserve whatever happens to us in the future. And don't even count on the Feds to come to your aid if anything happens. Just look at New Orleans today.
Btw there must be more to this story for them to threaten veto and all. Wouldn't surprise me if this Dubai company has ties to Haliburton or the Bin Laden family even. Also read somewhere before that Dubai's current boom is financed by big chunks of Iranian money. So you have it Bin Laden and Iran will get to run American ports soon!
Posted by: Too close to Baltimore | February 21, 2006 6:07 PM
It comes to no surprise that the so called President of OUR United States will allow this company to cover security at our ports.
After all, he is not interested in OUR United States. If he were, he would not have AMERICAN citizens going through one of the most devistating events in our history alone and homeless and totally forgotten after Katrina.
What will it take to get the Government to realize we must take care of our own.
May God help us.
Posted by: Anonymous | February 21, 2006 6:43 PM
Why should anyone be suprised? Bush on the environment. Bush on energy. Bush on FEMA. Bush on Iraq. Bush on the poor. Bush on Black America. It's just another empty suit idea.
Posted by: Uwe Pickering | February 21, 2006 7:40 PM
It should come as no surprise that the Bush Administration would insist on this deal because they don't work for the American people. They work for BIG OIL and the Arabs. They're only doing what their Arab masters tell them to do. How much more political intrigue will it take for Americans to wake up and realize that the Saudi's have had their hand in 9/11, Cheney's secret energy policy, and now our nations security. We've borrowed so much money from the Saudi's that maybe now we can't pay them any longer. The Saudi's have blackmailed the Bush Administration and the Bush Administration in turns blackmails the congress and the people of the US. It's time we oust this administration by whatever means possible and tell the Saudi's that if they want our ports to come and try to take them.
Posted by: Steve | February 21, 2006 7:42 PM
I really don't see what all the surprise is about. Our country is on the way out. It's probably proper that we end with a King George, inasmuch as we started with one. George, the 3rd, wants us to see him only holding the bullhorn with the 911 tragedy behind him while he lets the country be ravaged by the oil barons, Holiburton, yes, I said, Holiburton, the one that probably behind the port deal. At least, maybe when the Arabs take over our ports, dead-eye Dick will patrol them with his trusty shotgun.
Posted by: JP | February 21, 2006 11:28 PM
After all this time of Bush preaching scare mongering, it finally back fires. The administration has turned us into quivering wrecks, but if the money's right...
Posted by: British Gentleman | February 22, 2006 7:08 AM
Follow the money! My bet would be the whole Bush clan/cronies are deeply involved with this Dubai company and others. Haliburton, the Carlyle group, you name it.
(Just don't send Bob Woodward this time).
Posted by: Follow the money | February 22, 2006 8:10 AM
The selling of America, Indiana sells Toll road to Austrailian/Spanish Group for 3.85 billion, Bush makes a deal with United Emirates, maybe we should consider selling Dulles National Airport, lets start the bidding at 911 billion. Then we can all retire to another country. When this administration gets done , we won't have one. Makes sense to us, just how gullable is the average American?
Posted by: graymatter | February 22, 2006 10:13 AM
I'm sure this could be solved over a couple cold beers and a smoke. But alas we can't because we're more worried about people having a cigarette then the country being taken over by foreigners. No need for WMD. Just buy what you can and walk in through our open boarders and take the rest.
Posted by: JD | February 22, 2006 10:37 AM
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)
... McClellan also defended David Sanborn, the White House's choice to run the U.S. Maritime Administration. Sanborn is currently an executive at DP World, a position critics say raises conflict of interest issues.
"He was nominated to run the Maritime Administration because of his experience and expertise," McClellan said, adding that Sanborn has worked for the company for the last 10 months. "My understanding also is that he has assured us that he was not involved in the negotiations to purchase this British company."
Nonetheless, Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., says he'll block the Sanborn's nomination unless he returns to the Senate Commerce Committee to testify again. At his first hearing earlier this month, lawmakers didn't yet know about the port deal.
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
Oh my gosh! 'They' don't just run the ports! 'They' run OUR goverment!
Posted by: Dude what happens to my goverment? | February 22, 2006 11:11 AM
Fellow Americans. I suggest that you follow my strategy and move to who ever wins the Winter olympics. Move to the country with the most medals. Don't sell your house, you will be able to rent it out to a foreign national. Maybe an oil sheik.
Posted by: Slick | February 22, 2006 11:22 AM
The Post says the port security issue is humbug!
Once again the Editorial Board of the Post is on the wrong side of the American people and history, just like in the Iraq war case.
First, that Dubai company may be legit but why give a potential hostile group of people the key to our security? In running our ports sooner or later they will pick up on our security procedures, their weaknesses and their strengths.
Second Dubai is known as a anything goes port in the ME. Iranian money is pouring in according to the Economist. A Q Khan is known to operate from there according to today NY Times. A few millions from Bin Laden will buy access to any cargo ship there heading to Dubai controlled ports here.
Who's to say if some of these company officials are not sympathetic to Bin Laden's cause even if their govt is not?
Humbug Wash Post!
Posted by: Washington Post Humbug! | February 22, 2006 11:31 AM
From today NYT:
But Dubai's record is hardly unblemished. Two of the hijackers in the Sept. 11 attacks came from the United Arab Emirates and laundered some of their money through its banking system. It was also the main transshipment point for Abdul Qadeer Khan, a Pakistani nuclear engineer who ran the world's largest nuclear proliferation ring from warehouses near the port, met Iranian officials there, and shipped centrifuge equipment, which can be used to enrich uranium, from there to Libya.
Posted by: Washington Post Humbug! | February 22, 2006 11:57 AM
A rattlesnak in the desert is not much of a threat unless you bother it but if you leave the door to your house open and give rattlesnakes free access it is only a question of time till you get bit. there is an opld arab saying "kiss the hand you can't stab."---011 could never of happened if our goverment had been selective of whom they gave free access to our country.
Posted by: dave | February 22, 2006 12:04 PM
This ports issue is not really about the security of the ports. In the minds of many it is the selling of America that is the real issue. We've gone through this before. Rockefeller Center was sold to a Japanese firm years ago and many people were upset. Steel mills closed down due to imports. Textile mills closed down due to cheap imports. Many of our nations businesses and properties are being sold to overseas interests. We've gotten upset by this before. We've only been reminded by this latest sale. Its a wakeup call that America is being sold overseas and its jobs moved overseas. Kerry warned people about this during the election (remember outsourcing?). So what are those who voted for Bush saying now?
Its just another step to the whole globalization of corporations which you will eventually work for if you don't already. The world's population is their workforce and they will move production to wherever they please. Your security or freedoms are not their concern.
Add to this the obvious security issue with Bush's framing of his presidency on security and you have one big political screwup. I can't believe Rove let this happen. I wonder if he's running things anymore. If not, the ship of state is now being run by Bush for the first time. We're all doomed. We could impeach Bush but then we'd have Cheney. We're all doomed if we do and doomed if we don't.
How many wanna bet Congress lets this go like the warrantless wiretaps? What a spineless group these congressmen are. Its time for statesmen to stand up, scream out the truth and lead the USA back to its Constitution and national security.
Posted by: Sully | February 22, 2006 12:54 PM
Hey, I'm no fan of the current Administration, but I think the furor of the Dubai port company may be much ado about nothing. Contrary to several of the comments above, port security will not be outsourced by the deal.
Sure, I am sure each port operations company has security personnel, but primary physical security at all US ports is the responsibility of the US Coast Guard. This will not change. Cargo inspection/security is the responsibility of the Customs and Border folks of the Homeland Security Dept. This will not change. The transaction in question (DPW buying POSN) involves the holding company that leases portions of some of the US ports listed in the article from the various port authorities (they're not "buying" the port).
The longshoreman who actually do the unloading, loading and all will be the same employees regardless of the holding company. They are primarily hard-working, unionized Americans. Perhaps a few executives from Dubai will come to the US, but I would imagine that does not pose a major security threat with our existing immigration/border screening procedures in place. We're not talking about a mass influx of people from the UAE.
A more valid concern would be if the Dubai government were using profits from the port operations to fund terrorist groups. That deserves to be checked out, but if the company is clean then on what basis do we block the sale? Simple discrimination - we don't want any Arab companies operating in the US? That's not free, or fair, trade.
Posted by: Russ | February 22, 2006 4:10 PM
One more point....
The real threat to our nation's port security is the Administration's reluctance to fully fund security operations at these vital locations. Why are we not inspecting more than a tiny fraction of the containers that come in to our country through the ports? Why don't we have more robust weapon/threat detection equipment and procedures in place?
Posted by: Russ | February 22, 2006 4:20 PM
Russ,
I agree with your second point, but I think you are missing something on your first point. The UAE may not be providing the security itself, but they certainly will gain the information of how the ports are operated, who is working in what areas, what ships are coming in/out, what cargo, how the inspections are conducted, etc... All a terrorist needs to do is infiltrate someone into the Dubai port company and begin spying at first, then opening up opportunities for terrorists next.
Frankly I do not understand why such strategic operations are outsourced. We don't outsource FAA operations, nuclear plant operations, and since 911 we prescreen all foreign pilots flying into the USA. Why bush is adement on allowing foreign companies to run US ports at a time of war and terrorism is beyond me.
Posted by: Sully | February 22, 2006 7:45 PM
Have a healthy debate! Let wisdom prevail. Change of policy will frankly be a good option.
Posted by: GA | February 23, 2006 10:32 AM
Rebuild New Orleans. www.wwoz.org
Spread the good news, brotha!
Posted by: Slick | February 24, 2006 9:44 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.











Despite commenting on the purchase of Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. after both O'Malley and Duncan, I have to commend Ehrlich for his opposition to this sale. I rarely agree with the man, but sometimes there are issues we can all agree on.