Mar 02 2006

Oh What A Tangled Web!

Published by at 7:54 pm under All General Discussions,UAE-DPW

What do China’s President, Sandy Berger and US Port Security have in common? More importantly, why should they have anything in common! Sandy Berger is a confessed thief of national security information which he claims he destroyed using scissors in his office (was the shredder not working?). China is not an ally of the form or nature of The UAE – not even close. So what is this all about [hat tip to our reader SBD for the comment/lead]?

Port Security International (PSI) is an international partner’s network composed of an array of financial, strategic, technological and in-country port industry related companies.

PSI has an alliance with the China-based Nuctech, a company that “possesses the largest manufacture base of Linear Accelerator X-ray inspection machines to inspect containers at ports in the world.”


Boasts PSI of partner Nuctech: “As a result of its valuable contribution in the security inspection application, Nuctech has earned its indisputable reputation within the cargo inspection industry.”

Chief Executive Officer of the 700-employee strong Nuctech is Hu Haifeng. That’s Hu Haifeng, the son of current China President Hu Jintao. It should surprise no one that Hu Haifeng is landing lucrative contracts in China.

“PSI has a strategic alliance with Stonebridge International LLC, a global business strategy firm based in Washington, DC that helps U.S. and multinational companies shape and execute strategies to solve problems and seize business opportunities worldwide.” (Security Ports International 2004).

Disgraced Sandy “The Burgler” Berger heads up Stonebridge International.

So Sandy Bergler is working with the son of Communist China’s President to provide the key element in our port security infrastructure: cargo carrier X-ray machines. Former Secretary of State Albright and other Clintonistas are also in the game regarding the UAE Port Deal. But this axis of China, Berger and the core of our Port Security is a very different issue than the DPW subject. If you can get by those machines anything is possible.

7 responses so far

7 Responses to “Oh What A Tangled Web!”

  1. Snapple says:

    I can’t get that Canadian article to come in.

    I read that former President Clinton has been helpful to the UAE company but his wife is against the port deal.

    I also read that the treasury guy who passed on this deal had some business interest with the UAE company.

    At the same time, I read that UAE has been helpful in the WOT.

    I would hope that these decisions are made because of national security and not because of some politician’s business ties.

    When we investigate this company, I will be interested to see if they are getting this deal because they are giving money to politicians.

    I am inclined to trust Bush, but I think some study is not a bad idea.
    I’d like to hear all the viewpoints.

    This is a very complicated issue. I don’t think it is fair to just say people who are against it are Islamophobes.

  2. Cooper says:

    Since I work in the cargo industry, I am not surpised in any way with the UAE port deal. This type of deal has been around the cargo business – air and sea – for years upon years. It’s a neccessary evil to get goods from point A to point B. Import or Export. It has an incestuous nature to it – always has.

    Why are some vociferous conservatives not as concerned (visibly speaking) about cargo-only airlines that are owned by arabs? Their aircraft fly into the US on a regular basis. Arabs own or invest in many cargo-only airlines. They all fly in and out of the US. Why is there no concern that these same arabs might fill a single 747, or other wide-body cargo aircraft from ten different cargo airlines with 56 Tonnes each of explosives, or nuclear devices, or chemical devices or other instruments of mass destruction and fly legally into US airspace?? 10 bomb filled planes that need not veer off course (hence no red flags) – they need only fly to their destination and detonate.

    Don’t even need security measures for that because they would not be violating our airspace, our ports or our airports. It will happen – there is no way of monitoring the overseas ports/airports/employees.

    The US does not control the airport/port security overseas, they rely on our allies to do so. So who do we want and need as an ally? Who can we really rely on to protect US interests by not allowing terrorism to foment at their port/airport? Who is the most strategically placed ally? Which Middle Eastern country is more interested in promoting and protecting the human race than destroying it? Who has been investing in the US – and has a stake in it’s future? Those are the countries we need on our side.

    I daresay we have come pathetically close to dismissing one of our biggests allies in the region. Ignorance is not always bliss.

  3. Larwyn says:

    Don’t skip the report that Bill Clinton was trying to Joe Lockhart
    on the gravy train. That was one of his suggestions to the
    Government of Dubai, to have DPW contract with Joe Lockhart.

    DPW did not take up the offer.

    Hillary starts her rants.

    Any more dots needed?

  4. Snapple says:


    Are you saying that Clinton didn’t get his share of the port money?


    Here is another port article by the same newspaper.

    This article is against the port deal.

    I am posting it not because I necessarily agree with it, but because it is from the same paper and may reveal agendas.

  5. Retired Spook says:

    AJ, your headline says it all — what a tangled web indeed.

    Snapple, I’m inclined to trust Bush too, and I’d like to think that he’s surrounded himself with a bunch of really good, decent people. I just hope we don’t all live (or not live) not regret it.

  6. Snapple says:


    You mean that we might be wrong? I really like Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. I just trust them. I think there is a lot they aren’t telling.
    Later, maybe some things will make better sense.

    I hope I am not misplace in my confidences.

    Still, I always read across the political spectrum.

    The truth is never just hanging ready-made on the rack.

    If you are a spook, you know that.

    Look at this:

    Bill Clinton’s involvement with the U.A.E. may spring from his apparently chummy relationship with the country he calls “a good ally to America.” Clinton in 2002, after leaving the White House, was paid $300,000 to address a summit in Dubai.


  7. sbd says:

    The Jerusalem Post
    Exclusive: Dubai ports firm enforces Israel boycott

    The parent company of a Dubai-based firm at the center of a political storm in the US over the purchase of American ports participates in the Arab boycott against Israel, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

    The firm, Dubai Ports World, is seeking control over six major US ports, including those in New York, Miami, Philadelphia and Baltimore. It is entirely owned by the Government of Dubai via a holding company called the Ports, Customs and Free Zone Corporation (PCZC), which consists of the Dubai Port Authority, the Dubai Customs Department and the Jebel Ali Free Zone Area.

    “Yes, of course the boycott is still in place and is still enforced,” Muhammad Rashid a-Din, a staff member of the Dubai Customs Department’s Office for the Boycott of Israel, told the Post in a telephone interview.

    “If a product contained even some components that were made in Israel, and you wanted to import it to Dubai, it would be a problem,” he said.

    A-Din noted that while the head office for the anti-Israel boycott sits in Damascus, he and his fellow staff members are paid employees of the Dubai Customs Department, which is a division of the PCZC, the same Dubai government-owned entity that runs Dubai Ports World.

    Moreover, the Post found that the website for Dubai’s Jebel Ali Free Zone Area, which is also part of the PCZC, advises importers that they will need to comply with the terms of the boycott.