| Home | About Us | Login/Register | Email News Tips |

A liberal dose of news, national and local politics, commentary, opinions and common sense conversation…

Is There a Cronyism Link with the Dubai Port Takeover Deal and the Bush Administration?

by Pamela Leavey

A curious bit of information popped up yesterday regarding the issue of a Dubai company taking over 6 U.S. ports. It seems that Bush has annointed an executive from the Dubai company, DP World to a cushy government post:

Dubai, 24 January 2006: – Global ports operator DP World today welcomed news that one of its senior executives, Dave Sanborn, has been nominated by US President George W. Bush to serve as Maritime Administrator a key transportation appointment reporting directly to Norman Mineta the Secretary of Transportation and Cabinet Member.

The White House has issued a statement from Washington DC announcing the nomination. The confirmation process will begin in February.

Mr Sanborn currently holds the position of Director of Operations for Europe and Latin America for the Dubai-based company.

Interesting coincidence?

7 Responses to “Is There a Cronyism Link with the Dubai Port Takeover Deal and the Bush Administration?”

  1. Coincidence? Ya, sure.

  2. Jeffery

    You don’t think that this is more Bush cronyism do you? After so many accussations of him doing this you would think he would not insult the American people this way.

  3. Why shouldn’t he insult the American people with more cronyism? He hasn’t suffered any consequences of previous cronyism.

  4. Evacuee

    Unfortunately he suffered any consequences as of yet. Hopefully more people will wake to the mess we are in.

  5. Why do they hate us? Western culture, with an underscored respect for reason, capitalism, and individual rights for all members of society is diametrically opposed to the virus of Islamic extremism which is escalating a battle for greater control of the Arab world and beyond. Any progress in lifting the Arab world into modern western standards is not going to be achieved by bribing these regimes to not attack us or capitulating to the demands of the extremists. Our greatest weapon is appealing to the self-interest of Arab companies and workers with the mutual benefits thankfully available through cooperation in modern global markets. Shared interests and shared fortunes with the Arab world will create equal incentives for security both on our shores and theirs. An attack on America by Arabs becomes a self-inflicted wound and sets off internal forces overseas to eradicate the virus.

    In the long run, free trade is a more effective diplomacy tool than any number of guns. We are open to working with the Arab world as equals, not as terrorists. Money knows no borders or race or religion.

    If these Clintonian political postures are successful, we will send a clear message to the Arab world that America is xenophobic – Arabs need not apply to the modern world, leaving options such as Hamas the seemingly only viable alternative. Assuming the deal is accepted, we send the message that America responds positively to peaceful cooperation and our wrath is only reserved for attacks on the rights that make such free trade available at all.

  6. Well MPH,

    In theory, sending the message that America responds positively to peaceful cooperation …is all well and good but would DP World have been the choice if it were not for Senior Exec Dave Sanborn’s nomination as Maritime Administrator?

  7. Perhaps the U.A.E. and Arab nations might be interested in opening up themselves to Western trade and religious self-expression as a good faith measure.
    There are many people who will say one thing to get leverage, and buy-in for their own agenda, all the while plotting nefarious activities of their own.