Speaking of Hunting Accidents...

[Nbadan]

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2006/02/23/PH2006022302320.jpg
Where's the outcry over Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum's relatioship with Bin Laden?

Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum is currently the Prime Minister and Vice President of the United Arab Emirates, as well as the leader of Dubai.

It turns out that in early 1999, after the August 1998 bombings of the US embassies in Africa that made bin Laden the most well known and wanted terrorist in the world, UAE royals were still falcon hunting with bin Laden.

February 1999: Bin Laden Missile Strike Called Off for Fear of Hitting Persian Gulf Royalty


Intelligence reports foresee the presence of bin Laden at a desert hunting camp in Afghanistan for about a week. Information on his presence appears reliable, so preparations are made to target his location with cruise missiles. However, intelligence also puts an official aircraft of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and members of the royal family from that country in the same location. Bin Laden is hunting with the Emirati royals, as he did with leaders from the UAE and Saudi Arabia on other occasions (see 1995-2001). Policy makers are concerned that a strike might kill a prince or other senior officials, so the strike never happens. A top UAE official at the time denies that high-level officials are there, but evidence subsequently confirms their presence. (9/11 Commission Report, 3/24/04 (B))

CIA Director George Tenet later said this in explaining why the US did not go through with the missile strike:

"The third complicating factor here is you might have wiped out half the royal family in the UAE in the process, which I'm sure entered into everybody's calculation in all this."

Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20349-2004Mar24.html)

More:


In the book Ghost Wars on page 448, there is a similar quote: "In the American military, recalled one person involved, 'Nobody wanted to say, "Well, you blew up a camp full of U.A.E. princes and half of the royal family of the U.A.E.'s dead - and you guys didn't get him."'"

So, while the exact names of the UAE royals who were with bin Laden on this occasion have not been publicly released, it is highly likely al Maktum and his friends and family continued to personally associate with bin Laden after the embassy bombings (not the mention the early 1998 fatwa where bin Laden gave his blessings to any attack on US civilians anywhere in the world).

It has been claimed in recent days that the Dubai royal family has no connections with the port company except owning it, which sounds a bit strange on its face. In any case, according to this recent New York Times article, the chairman of the port company works directly for al Maktoum:

"We're pleased by this development and remain encouraged by the P&O board's unanimous recommendation to its shareholders of our offer," said the DP World chairman, Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, who works directly for the crown prince of Dubai, Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum. "It would be inappropriate for us to say anything more ahead of the shareholder vote."

IHT (http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/10/business/port.php)

[Nbadan]

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Sections/Newsweek/Components/Photos/Mag/122004_Issue/041211_bout_vl.vlarge.jpg
Viktor Bout

February 23, 2006
The UAE and Viktor Bout


One way to determine how a person or entity will act in the future is to see how they have acted in the past. As the debate over the UAE ownership of ports heats up, it is worth looking at how the leaders there have handled another important security issue related to radical Islamic terrorism—Viktor Bout. The response is deeply troubling.

Viktor Bout, the world’s largest illegal weapons dealer, made $50 million selling weapons to the Taliban, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. He continues to feed murder and mayhem across Africa by selling weapons to rogue regimes and nonstate actors. And he continues to maintain several dozen aircraft, registered to different and constantly changing companies, IN THE UAE—one of only three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Bout and 30 of his companies are designated by the U.S. Treasury Department and the United Nations Sanctions, meaning every country is bound to freeze the assets of those companies and individuals. Yet the UAE has made no move to go after Bout’s aircraft, even though one of his designated companies, IRBIS, continues to fly openly, and has not even bothered to change its name. His aircraft sit on the runways of Sharjah, and his pilots continue to fly daily from there, including recent flights for the U.S. military and its contractors.

The United States, for the past EIGHT YEARS has been asking the UAE to crack down on Bout’s illicit activities there, with no results. The latest high-level U.S. delegation was in UAE last week, asking the rulers to please shut down IRBIS, as required by UN charter. The answer was that the rulers would continue to study the issue.

Not a very auspicious way of handling a know aider and abettor of terrorist organizations, one with an outstanding Interpol red notice and one designated by the United Nations. It does not build confidence in the ability of UAE rulers to handle future problems.

One of the reasons is that Bout has a partnership with a member of the UAE’s ruling family, a prince who ran an airline with him and has reportedly helped insure that Bout’s operations are untouchable. If it happens with Bout, one can only imagine other terrorists with business or family connections receiving the same kind of protection, perhaps with deadlier results.

More:

Blacklisted Russian's planes tied to U.S. contracts in Iraq
Stephen Braun, Judy Pasternak, T. Christian Miller, Los Angeles Times
Tuesday, December 14, 2004


Washington -- Air cargo companies allegedly tied to a reputed Russian arms trafficker have received millions of dollars in federal funds from U.S. contractors in Iraq, even though the Bush administration has worked for three years to rein in his enterprises.

Planes linked to Victor Bout's shadowy network continued to fly into Iraq, according to government records and interviews with officials, even though the Treasury Department froze his assets in July and placed him on a blacklist for allegedly violating international arms sanctions.

Largely under the auspices of the Pentagon, U.S. agencies including the Army Corps of Engineers and the Air Force, and the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority, which governed Iraq until last summer, have allowed their private contractors to do business with the Bout network.

Four firms linked to the network by the CIA and international investigators have flown into Iraq more than 195 times on U.S. business, government flight and fuel documents show. One such flight landed in Baghdad last week.

The list of the Bout network's suspected clients over the years includes the Taliban, which bought airplanes for a secret airlift of arms to Afghanistan. The Taliban is known to have shared weapons with al Qaeda.

San Francisco Gate (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/12/14/MNG71ABKAV1.DTL)

Still more:

Bout: Dealing with the U.S.?
By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek


Dec. 20 issue - In an effort to crack down on one of the world's most notorious international criminals, President George W. Bush last summer signed an order barring U.S. citizens from doing business with Russian arms trafficker Victor Bout. But not long afterward, U.S. officials discovered Bout's tentacles were wider than anticipated: for much of this year, NEWSWEEK has learned, a Texas charter firm allegedly controlled by Bout was making repeated flights to Iraq—courtesy of a Pentagon contract allowing it to refuel at U.S. military bases. One reason for the flights, sources say, was that the firm was flying on behalf of Kellogg Brown & Root, the division of Halliburton hired to rebuild Iraq's oilfields.

U.S. officials say Bout—once dubbed a "merchant of death" by a British foreign minister—built an empire in the 1990s flying weapons to the Taliban and African dictators and rebel groups, in violation of international sanctions. Bush's order banning business with Bout, a former Soviet military officer, was for supplying guns to the rogue regime of ex-Liberian president Charles Taylor. "Our ultimate goal is to shut down his network," says Juan Zarate, assistant Treasury secretary.

But U.S. officials feared they were being undermined recently when they got evidence that Bout's aircraft were spotted in Iraq. A Pentagon official confirmed that, until last summer, a Texas carrier named Air Bas had a "fuel purchase agreement" authorizing its planes to refuel at U.S. bases there. Air Bas planes landed 142 times at U.S. bases this year, says Jack Hooper of the Defense Logistics Agency. The flights began months after a U.N. report identified Air Bas as a suspected Bout "front company." Sources say Treasury officials recently recommended naming Air Bas to a list of Bout-connected firms to be covered by Bush's order. (Air Bas president Richard Chichakli acknowledges he was in contact with Bout, but says Bout is not an owner of the firm.)

Hooper says his agency had been unaware of the Bout connection and cut off the agreement in August after the firm "repeatedly" rebuffed requests to identify what business it was conducting for the U.S. government. Chichakli says Air Bas had subcontracted with another firm, Falcon Express in Dubai, that was hired to haul cargo for two big Iraq contractors—FedEx and Kellogg Brown & Root. "I'm like Hertz or Avis," he says. "You rent my planes, you go from point A and point B." A FedEx spokeswoman says the firm recently told Falcon to drop Air Bas when it learned of the alleged Bout link. Halliburton spokeswoman Wendy Hall says the firm had "no knowledge" of Air Bas's role, but that the firm stopped using Falcon Express "six months ago." Still, Lee Wolosky, a former National Security Council official who tracked Bout, says it's "seemingly inexplicable" that the U.S. government could have been "doing business with an international criminal organization."

If K&R are involved, you can pretty much bet that Bout wasn't just shipping in illegal weapons into Iraq and Afghanistan for the Taliban.

[Nbadan]

Why is Dubai Ports trying to silence Lou Dobbs?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/img/06/0228_dobbs.jpg


Lou Dobbs reported today that "Dubai Ports World" officials have tried to silence him and get CNN to suppress his reports.

Mark Dennis, spokesman for Dubai Ports World: " CNN won't shut up Lou Dobbs."

They are refusing to give any more interviews to CNN or allow them to video tape their operations overseas. To CNN's credit they have refused to comply with their demands.

Crooks and Liars (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/02/27.html#a7324)

[Nbadan]

Maybe this is one reason?

Paper: Coast Guard Has Port Co. Intel Gaps


WASHINGTON - Citing broad gaps in U.S. intelligence, the Coast Guard cautioned the Bush administration weeks ago that it could not determine whether a United Arab Emirates-based company seeking a stake in some U.S. port operations might support terrorist operations.

The disclosure came during a hearing Monday on Dubai-owned DP World's plans to take over significant operations at six leading U.S. ports.

The Bush administration said the Coast Guard's concerns were raised during its review of the deal, which it approved Jan. 17, and that all those questions were resolved.

The port operations are now handled by London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.

"There are many intelligence gaps, concerning the potential for DPW or P&O assets to support terrorist operations, that precludes an overall threat assessment" of the potential merger, the unclassified Coast Guard intelligence assessment said.

"The breadth of the intelligence gaps also infer potential unknown threats against a large number of potential vulnerabilities," the assessment said.

The Coast Guard said the concerns reflected in the document ultimately were addressed. In a statement, the Coast Guard said other U.S. intelligence agencies were able to provide answers to the questions it raised.

"The Coast Guard, the intelligence community and the entire CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States) panel believed this transaction received the proper review, and national security concerns were, in fact, addressed," the Coast Guard said.

That multi-agency government panel reviews foreign purchases of vital U.S. assets.

The report raised questions about the security of the companies' operations, the backgrounds of people working for the companies, and whether other foreign countries influenced operations that affect security.

Yahoo News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060227/ap_on_go_ot/ports_security)

Why does the WH want to turn over 21 of our nation's ports to a country that has a poor record of following through on its commitments on the war on terror, and harbors and supports known terrorists?

[xrayzebra]

Give me a break dan, the WH isn't turning over 21 of our nations ports. How come
it doesn't worry you that china has control of some docks. You are such a
dumb butt, and expect everyone else to be like you. Where were you when Clinton
did that?

[Nbadan]

A writer at Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/23/14935/2494) ties together the NeoCon, Dubai, James Baker love affair, or love of money, even over our nations national security..


On December 12, 2003 President Bush called on Russia, Germany, and France to forgive Iraq's debts. Embarrassingly this was just a day after the Pentagon announced The White House-approved policy excluding those nations from bidding for Iraqi reconstruction projects. A secretive "committee of officials" agreed that the most lucrative contracts must be reserved for political or military supporters such as Baker Botts client Halliburton and those within the Carlyle Group portfolio.

Shortly thereafter Baker acted as US Special Envoy for Iraq debt toured debtor countries eventually winning agreements from Great Britain, Germany, France, etc. to forgive billions of dollars. At the same time, Iraq has paid out to Kuwait a staggering $1.8 billion in reparations--substantially more than the battered country's 2004 health and education budgets combined, and more than the United States has so far managed to spend in Iraq on reconstruction. Hmm, how could that happen? One word: Baker.

via The Nation: James Baker's Double Life (a must-read if you haven't already):
"Carlyle has sought to secure an extraordinary $1 billion investment from the Kuwaiti government, with Baker's influence as debt envoy being used as a crucial lever. The secret deal involves a complex transaction to transfer ownership of as much as $57 billion in unpaid Iraqi debts. The debts, now owed to the government of Kuwait, would be assigned to a foundation created and controlled by a consortium in which the key players are the Carlyle Group, the Albright Group (headed by another former Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright) and several other well-connected firms. Under the deal, the government of Kuwait would also give the consortium $2 billion up front to invest in a private equity fund devised by the consortium, with half of it going to Carlyle. ...The consortium's proposal spells out the threat: Not only is Kuwait unlikely to see any of its $30 billion from Iraq in sovereign debt, but the $27 billion in war reparations that Iraq owes to Kuwait from Saddam Hussein's 1990 invasion 'may well be a casualty of this U.S. [debt relief] effort.'"

Brandishing a mighty "lever" indeed in Baker as envoy, this deal is structured so that Baker & co. get $1 billion up front regardless of the outcome. Nice work if you can get it. It's worth noting also that while the Europeans have been extremely generous in this debt forgiveness process (up to .90 on the dollar), there is precious little info on how much, if any, Iraq debt the U.S. has forgiven. It is crystal clear that the Bush administration does not hold the US or their Arab economic allies to the same standards that they do the rest of the world including our #1 military ally, Great Britain.

Back to Dubai...Carlyle bought CSX World Terminals in 2003 for $300 million and just two year's later flipped it to the company now known as Dubai Ports World for a near 400% profit at a cool $1.12 billion. Again nice work, and a sweet price. Especially since John Snow had all but ran CSX into the ground. Since 1991 CSX's profits have shrunk drastically with its stock underperforming its rivals' by more than 65%.

sic


Additionally, Dubai is historically and currently not only a major worldwide transshipment portal for illegal drugs (mostly heroin), but also the sale of nuclear technologies (even prior to Bush prezzy debate fave Pakistan's "the A Q Khan"'s use of Dubai as a conduit to fulfill the nuke ambitions of Iran, North Korea and Libya), and prostitution, too. The $20 billion+ 1991 Bank of Credit and Commerce International collapse and subsequent scandal managed to combine money-laundering, drug smuggling, child & adult prostitution, the sale of nuclear technologies, terrorism, arms trafficking, the Mujahideen, bribery, training of Medellin Cartel death squads, etc., (Kerry/Brown BCCI Report. pt. 4) all with the active participation of the UAE's emir of Abu Dhabi and quite likely the CIA. BCCI was the world's worst ever financial scandal (see: wikipedia BCCI).

Even if the government of the UAE no longer actively participates in the wide variety of major crimes still committed via their ports and through their banking system, they don't seem to be terribly committed to preventing them. Since the UAE fails to stop such illegal activities in their backyard and they continue to show at best a luke-warm interest in enforcement, why should we believe that the UAE would in any way serve as a deterrent in preventing them from reaching us in some catastrophic way here? If in fact the UAE government continues to actively participate in these illegal activities, we're really fucked. If the integrity of one various individual government departments involved in either DP World or UAE security is compromised, we're well fucked. This is where the threat to our National security lies not with the ethnicity of the principals involved given that our ports are the exhaustively well-documented weakest link in the brittle chain that is Homeland Security.

[Peter]

So basically politicians of both parties have been afraid to pull the trigger when the country would have been better served.