What a bunch of whiners. Maybe they'll change their tune when Bush uses our permanent military bases in Iraq to air bomb Iran in July.

The sad truth is they are probably right..
However the US Congress listened to it's constituents and that is something the UAE and other Arab/Muslim country's don't understand and never will, leaders listening to the people. I don't expect them to get it, they have govt owned and operated media, limited access to international media and the mullahs at Friday prayer telling them what to think. If the US can't own major infastructure in their country, then they can't own/manage in ours. And that should go for everyone including China and Singapore. They can cry all they want WE don't give a S%&T. We don't start screaming and cying when they burn down KFC's and McDonalds or boycott Coke and create their own cola "Mecca" They should take a lesson, what they saw over the UAE port deals was a lesson in true DEMOCRACY, the AMERICAN people spoke loud and clearly and our elected officials listened.

Still and all, sometimes it's necessary that the US Congress do what's right rather than maybe what their constituents want. Take the laws enacted during the '60's during the civil rights movement, for example. Congress shouldn't march in lockstep with xenophobia.

we do understand what is DEMOCRACY if that what you want us to know we know that it showed the ugly face of it .. hiding the Racisim with in it

I agree with their statements and do think that it was a somewhat foolish decision (tho further awareness of our own lack of security is warranted)
The main responsibility belongs to the Bush Administration--5 years of CONSTANT FEARMONGERING--what do they expect?

Don't the Arabs "get it?" Things will improve from them once they welcome Israel as a full partner in their midst. Time for them to get with the program.

I find the Arab reaction very understandable. But as someone who is extremely angry at the behavior of Israelis AND Palestinians, I do worry that US continued uncritical support of Israel creates intense anger among many Arabs and Muslims. I know this is a world class company, but I don't know if it absurd to worry about people within the company getting caught up in the Israel-Palestine dispute and our role in it. With so much at stake, we have to be very careful.
But at the very least, US politicians should have been more considerate of Arab/Muslim feelings even as they said they couldn't support the transfer.

Actually it's no different than how Abu Dhabi treats US firms. There is no free-trade in Abu Dhabi. A US firm cannot own more than 49%, with a local firm owning 51%. They call it having a local "sponsor". The US has merely said the same thing. The UAE firm must have a US "sponsor" who must own 51% of their company in the US.

Kelly G has a good point.

Many countries require "off-sets" in order for foreign companies to sell goods in their countries.

This means that if a firm in country X wants to sell something to country Y, the foreign firm making the sale to country Y must create sufficient business in country Y (money come in) to off-set the amount of money going out of country Y to the firm in country X.

Now that is not quite on point with the port sale, since this is a purchase of assets as opposed to a sale of goods.

I am surprised however no one in Washington has raised this issue to address our foreign trade imbalances or maybe they have, but I don't know about it.

It is understandable if countries have laws that prohibt foreign ownerships of their assests. Has the USA Congress stated that the reason they are against this transaction becuase a US law prohibts it then everybody would have understood.

However; they used ARAB/Musltim bashing to kill the deal. I think a lot of these Arab people complaining about the way the deal was killed.

One more thing if We in USA keep saying that they Arabs countries do similar stuff and why are they now complaining, then all it tells me that we have lower our standards.

We cant inspire others by lowering our own standards.

With our usually myopic view, the US Congress has once again proven their intent to turn the US into some third world nation.

The P& O deal not only involved ports in the US but ports throughout the world. No other country has raised such a fuss about something so illogical that it would never come to fruition.

And on top of that... you can kiss Boeing's 787 order from Emirates Air good-bye along with other a host of other billion-dollar sales that Dubai will now gladly turn over to Europe or Asia.

Nice going guys....

Yeah right. The average Arab gets his news from state run newspapers and state run television, or at best al Jazeera. So if they believe that it was anti-arab behavior and not real concerns for security it was because they were told so by their government. Its no different than their reaction to some cartoons in a small paper in Denmark that they had never heard of nor cared about until their governments decided to tell them.

Besides does anyone seriously believe this damages US-Arab relations more than our relationships with Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and the fact that we just told India they could build unlimited nukes while we tell Iran that they can't build any. Give me a break!

Nick,

Having just travelled to Europe. I can tell you first hand that security in Europe is not a major concern. Even in the UK. The other countries where Dubai owns ports are not worried about it.

I am an American nationalist,and I respect the sovereignty of other nations. I therefore approved of President Eisenhower's policy during the Suez crisis. When Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, I regarded it as an Egyptian asset which was within their borders. I did not believe Great Britain, France, or Israel had the right to violate Egypt's sovereignty to take it back. I think the pressures that the Eisenhower brought to bear on these countries to get them out of Egypt as the best moments of American foreign policy in the Middle East.
As an American (Democrat) Nationalist, I believe our infracture, businesses, and standard of living must be preserved for Americans.
In deed, as with Americans, I would encourage very nation to dump "Free Trade", the WTO, and return to bilateral trade. Without trade barriers, you will be exploited by multinational big business and your people will become wage their slaves. You cannot control the world, but you can control your own countries.
I also believe Iran is a sovereign nation within its own borders.

In retrospect, having read all the articles about what a world class company Dubai was, the failure to permit this sale may well have been a mistake.

IMHO, it only goes to show how present international and national politics both in this country, the mideast (arab) and Iran (Persian) have created a dangerous level of hysteria.

We should all petition our leaders to move towards finding ways to reduce this hysteria.

We want and need for all of us to be cooperating.

All the Islam people I have met in my travels have always been very nice people. We also generally agree that Reagan is responsible for all our troubles today. Just a little editorial comment there, so I best let them speak for themselves.

So I apologize for my red neck friends and you too Will. They mean well.

Just My Opinion
Richard Katz

I thought the Dubai port deal was about national security and not about racism against Arabs. This is a valid concern and the people of Dubai I think understandthis decision. There are many other ways that Dubai and many other Arab companies do business in the United States anyway, this is not a deal so big that we are abandoning the Arab world either. We buy most of their oil for one.

The Dubai deal was done poorly and in haste, another secret deal by the Bush Administration, it should be called off. Plus I don't understand how Bush can bash the Muslim world and then go around all of his rhetoric and support this deal. This definatively proves that Bush is a hypocrite and a liar extrordinaire. Talk about flip-flopping, Bush and his ilk are the biggest flip-floppers of them all.

i would like to voice my agreement with stick, nick, and dick.

this deal could have been very beneficial for both sides. the "security" concerns were blown out of proportion by lou dobbs and instant polls, then exaggerated by congress for the sake of a re-election year. port security: that's what the dept of homeland security is for.
dubai is a strong ally in the war on terror. their support is necessary and their expertise in the shipping industry is most welcome. they support our troops every day, especially since 2001. i think this was a slap in their face and i hope america makes things right with them soon. it's a shame we couldn't handle this even slightly diplomatically.

thanks for covering the story.

Thanks to Washingtonpost.com for covering the story.

If the Bush administration was more upfront and open about this deal from the get go and educate us about this, then this would not be big of an issue as it is. Even after Congress brought it up, Bush remained defiant and said he was going to veto it. This Texas cowboy attitude only worsen our image abroad. This may be politicalized but the Bush admin could have handled it much better.

I find it interesting that those that were and are for this deal, call people with my "No Way" attitude, Hysteria.

I don't care if you classify it as Racism, Hysteria, etc. What I do care about is the fact that so many people want to undermine the effect of what the voices within our country had on our on political system to nix this deal and toss around the Republican party. It is the constituents that changed the progress of this deal. It is the American people that halted this deal. It is called Democracy and I was afraid we had lost it.

My only reason for screaming that this deal shouldn't happen has to do with the lingering image I have in my head of a arab women and her pre-adolescent child screaming and dancing and clapping that the world trade center had gone down. That is the vision that keeps me from trusting. When I hear of one well-know cleric that has a loud voice and denounces violence and terrorism, maybe that is when I will start the trust process.. It has nothing to do with racism, it has to do with trust.

Nicki:

I saw that too.

For what it is worth, and I do agree with what you are saying , I read (which does not make it true) that that shot of the howling women was stock film footage and not shot contemporaneously with the attacks on the WTC.

Maybe one of our esteemed posters can shed more light on that for us.

If this is true, we are being treated like mushroom by our MSM and the WH and the Republicans. They are keeping us in the dark and feeding us a lot of crap.

How can a democracy function without a free flow of truthful information?

And I do agree that there is alot of anti-american feelings out there as well as people who want to do the USA a lot of harm, but we all are responsible for that because of the way we responded to being attacked.

Just One Man's Opinion
Richard Katz

Questions for those of you who are worried about the UAE's committment to American security and the fight against terrorism: What do you want the country to do that it has not done? What help should the country give us that it has not already given us? The UAE has been an exemplary ally since 9/11. Do any of you have substantive security concerns, other than vague worries or bad immages of Arabs in your minds?

Is everything up for sale in the U.S.? If not, where do you draw the line?

I had just assumed Congress was already protecting our key infrastrutures from foreign hands - any foreign hand.

Just think about this - any government owned company has significantly more resources than most, if not all, privately held companies. This isn't a level playing field, is it? This is anti-capitalism, IMO and certainly works against American owned companies.

After flooding the world with dollars and devaluing their worth to an degree that would make Nixon proud, for the US Congress to block the investment is ludicrous. Will Hugo Chávez be next? Check out the oil price, people!

Can anyone really tell me why the Port deal should have gone thru? Unfortunately, we are in the beginning stages of a long, protracted religious war. Does anyone believe that the fine "gentlemen" from Dubai would be able to resist "Islamist" pressure, perhaps even risking the lives of their families, to pursue Western goals? Please pay attention to what the "Islamic Factions" are saying. These folks are plainly saying what they are going to do. Does anyone remember "Mein Kampf"? You see, history does keep repeating itself, and large numbers of people have to lose their lives in order to remind the survivors why national interests are paramount. When push comes to shove, Western Societies have historically shown that they will do ANYTHING to survive. So, when faced with a horror from the 7th century, those who aren't up to national survival are going to be forced to submit.

killerwhale, nicki,
what are you so afraid of? we are not in a war of any kind with the uae. last i checked, they were close allies. that's why the deal should have gone through. mr. nobody wrote that we have some real security concerns, that it's not just anti-arab behavior. ok, that's what the 45 -day discussion period was supposed to be used for. i still haven't heard of any security concerns that would make this a deal-breaker. dpw is a reputable company.

jordan,
good! you're thinking. but...
america stopped buying american a long time ago. the article said it's already a british company controlling the terminals. the uae deserves just as much chance as anyone here.

jon adam,
if anyone was bashing our friends in the muslim world, it's the fearmongers that stopped this deal.

sean,
you're right. i blame bush for this too. he was outgunned politically. we'll see if he can turn it around, like the harriet meiers situation.

Not a single member of Congress, not a single newspaper, not a single commentator on this page, has cited any single specific derogatory detail about the UAE company or its personell, that gives reason for the Congressional hysteria.
Absent reason, the hysteria is prejudice - here anti-Arab prejudice. Congress, being a populist organization, has re-iterated its capapcity to reflect populist prejudice, as it has many times in history.
It is this same populist prejudice, simply anti-Arab racism, that has strangled
argument about the US's role as co-sponsor with Israel of the Palestinian oppression.
This is not an issue of the "appearance" or "perception" of anti-Arab prejudice, any more than the burning of a cross on a lawn can be said to be a matter of "perception" of skin-color racism. This Congressional "burning" of a business relationship is an actuality of active prejudice as much as the burning of a cross. It was intentional and knowing prejudicial behavior, and it will have destructive results for international business realtions with Arab financiers and corporations, and certainly have repercussions inspiring Arab/Islamic counter-populism, i.e. prejudice against the US.
One reaps what one sows.

The logic used by people, talking about how the problems with this deal stemmed from the fact that it was conducted in secrecy by the Bush Administration and against procedure, makes me laugh. I thought this was a routine business transaction that was approved by the coast guard and the defense department and every other concerned agency. The Dubai Company even agreed to an additional 45 day review. I bet none of these people complaining about “secret deals” had any inkling that the ports in question were already being managed by foreign companies before the story broke. I am also sure that congress was never notified when that particular deal happened either. But wait it’s the Arabs!!! (Queue…. Hysterical, xenophobic, prejudiced statements and feelings). First, a little digression from the issue at hand, I think the reaction from the majority of Americans about this deal sort of illustrates that people regardless of culture or religion react the same way to perceived attacks to their culture/way of life/comfort level what have you. It also showcases that the Media in the West is just as guilty of inflaming anti Arab sentiment as is some of the Islamic Media. These people have fallen pray to the same emotions and subconscious prejudices to the”other side” that Mullahs in the Islamic world use to drum up illogical anti western sentiments. Its true that there were no riots or protest rallies, but I chalk that down to much better law enforcement and a completely different demographic in the West (50 to 70 percent poverty levels in the Islamic countries where riots happened along with 30 to 40 percent literacy rates. The cops in the West don’t suddenly go on extra long lunch breaks when the crowds show up either).
Some of the Americans who have taken the time to actually analyze the deal and what impact it would have on port security (none since U.S forces are still responsible for checking incoming containers etc.), have accepted that the reaction has been overboard and illogical.
To those complaining about business policies in the Mid East (local sponsors etc.), and using those as a reason for scuttling the deal, I ask, how do you expect moderates in the Muslim world to effect change in our countries policies when the U.S is regressing in terms of its own tolerance levels and freedoms both at home and abroad? Like someone else pointed out earlier, you can only lead by example. Thank you very much for pushing our efforts back another few years. If this keeps up we might actually have the Islamic world preaching to the West about tolerance and fairness (scary thought).

Its a shame that the US would rape the world resources no matter which soveriegn nation it is, (regardless of religion)to support an ever increasing use of their industrial war machine and also try to make the world a democracy to suit their own agenda. Bush was voted by the people for the people of the US. Stop whining and become accountable for your democratic system of govt, after all it is an american democracy that is destroying our world. Where is the UN??