Dear God, did anyone get a screenshot of the original AP article on Dubai?

[tom_paine]

It's been altered to hide the fact that Dubai will be owning the port but "turning over the management" to a Front Company, most likely Halliburton.

A link to the new story, which has been replaced EVERYWHERE (I have been clicking on the story multiple times today and between last time and this one, maximum of 2 hours, they ALL have changed to reflect this BushSpeak Version:

The new story...

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/14050636.htm

The new first 'graphs:

Bowing to ferocious opposition in Congress, a Dubai-owned company signaled surrender Thursday in its quest to take over operations at U.S. ports.

"DP World will transfer fully the U.S. operations ... to a United States entity," the firm's top executive, H. Edward Bilkey, said in an announcement that capped weeks of controversy.

Relieved Republicans in Congress said the firm had pledged full divestiture, a decision that one senator said had been approved personally by the prime minister of the United Arab Emirates.


Take careful note of the new wording, wich ignores the fact that they will keep ownership but sub-lease the ports to Busheviks.

Also take note of the modifed Bilkey quote with the ... in place of what was likely the words which stated that it was only the management they were going to give up. It's the same comment, but with a chunk taken out.

I've been reading the same damned story over and over. Right before my eyes, inthe span of no mroe than two hours...full replacement.

Ain't technology grand? The creeping Soviet-ness is no longer creeping, is it? Dear God, is that genuinely frightening.

I think we should (sadly) practice saying, "No one could have foreseen the (insert Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical Weapon here) getting into the country through our Halliburton Ports."

Does ANYONE have a screenshot or a copy of the pre-scrubbed story?

Damn, I should have been Totalitarianism-savvy enough to KNOW to get it myself. But I wasn;t. And now the Pravda has been rewritten for The Leader and the Party. The old story...down the Memory Hole.

Can anyone help me rescue it? Please post it here!

Did ANYONE have the presence of mind to save or screenshot the original story? PLEASE REPOST IT!

[Lars39]

1. I don't have it, but here's my notepad directions for screenshots:

How To Do Screen Shots:

Control +Print Screen
Open Word
Control + V

On edit: I think the "entity" aspect has been discussed today. I'd find it, but I'm starless. :blush:

[kaygore]

2. Did you try Google cache?

[kaygore]

3. Try this

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-5674236,00.html

Dubai Firm to Give Up Stake in U.S. Ports

Thursday March 9, 2006 8:31 PM


AP Photo MDSR101

By DAVID ESPO and ANDREW TAYLOR

Associated Press Writers

WASHINGTON (AP) - Bowing to ferocious opposition in Congress, a Dubai-owned company signaled surrender Thursday in its quest to take over operations at U.S. ports.

DP World said it would ``transfer fully'' the planned operations to a ``United States entity,'' according to Sen. John Warner, who read a company statement aloud on the Senate floor.

Other Republicans said the firm had privately pledged full divestiture.

The announcement appeared to indicate an end to a politically tinged controversy that brought President Bush and Republicans in Congress to the brink of an election-year veto battle on a terrorism-related issue.

A leading congressional critic of the ports deal, Rep. Peter King, applauded the decision but said he and others would wait to see the details. ``It would have to be an American company with no links to DP World, and that would be a tremendous victory and very gratifying,'' said the New York Republican, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee.

After weeks of controversy - and White House veto threats that spokesman Scott McClellan renewed at midmorning Thursday - the end came unexpectedly.

The House Appropriations Committee voted 62-2 on Wednesday to block the deal, and GOP congressional leaders privately informed the president Thursday morning that the Senate would inevitably follow suit. Senate Democrats clamored for a vote, increasing pressure on Senate Republicans to abandon the president.

[kaygore]

4. I Googled the phrase and then went back in time

and I think that the aricles from the original announcement are still there.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--portssecurity0309mar09,0,77286.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=businessNews&storyID=2006-03-10T000222Z_01_N09199845_RTRUKOC_0_UK-SECURITY-PORTS.xml

[tom_paine]

6. Nope, none of those have the full, original quote

The Reuters article is closest, but neither is it what I have originally seen.

Jesus, this is creepy. Like a Citizen of Stalin's USSR trying to remember Trotsky, but he's not in any of the old photos with Stalin and Lenin.

[Marie26]

9. Is this what you're looking for?

This article has the full quote from Bilkey:

"However, Edward Bilkey, chief operating officer of DP World, said in a statement last night: "DP World will transfer fully the US operations of P&O Ports North America to a United States entity. This decision is based on an understanding that DP World will have time to effect the transfer in an orderly fashion and that DP World will not suffer an economic loss."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2006/03/10/cndpw10.xml&menuId=242&sSheet=/money/2006/03/10/ixcitytop.html

[kaygore]

21. Well, you were certainly on target

Port Deal 'Pull Out' Is PHONY



Cheryl Seal
Port Deal 'Pull Out' Is PHONY - Dubai Will STILL Be Owner
Thu Mar 9, 2006 19:02
64.12.116.133



So we are all supposed to click our heels, grin and give Bush a big
ole thumbs up in the next approval poll because he tossed out a bogus
bone: The Dubai Port deal "pull out." The Bushie media are spouting
this story as if Bush had "given up" and Dubai Port World had
withdrawn from the deal. But look again. DPW is only turning
operations over to an American holding company. They are STILL the
guys "behind the curtain." This smells very much like a back rooms
deal worked out by Bush and his pals in Dubai/UAE. Just tell let
'em think they won - meanwhile, it'll be the same company, different
name on the door.

AP (A.merican P.ropaganda) and Reuters (Neo Con News) both immediately
cranked out misleading stories with even more misleading headlines to
aid Bush - their bilge was quickly picked up and smeared around the
world.this week] But fortunately, there are some publications where real
news can still be found. Here's the real story from Forbes:
"In what could be a last-ditch effort to salvage its deal to operate
East and Gulf Coast ports in the U.S., DP World told Congress that it
would agree to transfer control to a "U.S. entity," which could simply
mean a subsidiary of the Dubai operation.

"In a statement, first read on the floor of the U.S. Senate by
Virginia Republican John Warner, DP World said the decision was made
to "preserve the strong relationship between the U.S. and the U.A.E."
But in fact, it sounded suspiciously like a device carefully
crafted by DP World's huge team of lobbyists and lawyers to salvage
the deal in some fashion.

"The new entity is supposed to have an American board and American
managers, but the ownership was still questionable. Or, as New York's
Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer observed, "the devil is in the
details." If DP World is in fact merely planning to put its U.S.
assets under a U.S.-managed subsidiary with oversight from a
U.S.-staffed board, it would be following in a long line of foreign
suppliers of defense technology to the U.S.

"This looks like a variant of that," says Clyde Prestowitz of the
Economic Strategy Group in Washington. "
http://www.forbes.com/home/logistics/2006/03/09/dubai-ports-divests-cx_daa-0309autofacescan12.html

Compare this to the intentionally vague and misleading AP crap:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/terror/20060309-1223-portssecurity.html

Fortunately, not everyone in Congress is a clueless cluck. Rep. Peter
King (NY) wasn't so quick to swallow the bait and said he would
reserve any celebrations until he saw the details of the deal. And
he's wise to wait - one of the warning signs was Bush brown-noser
Bill Frist's too-quick observation: "This DPW]should make the issue go away."

http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?disc=149495;article=99558;title=APFN

[bananas]

5. Not exactly what you're looking for

but you might want it anyway:

http://www.forbes.com/logistics/2006/03/09/dubai-ports-divests-cx_daa-0309autofacescan12.html

Bye-Bye Dubai?
David A. Andelman and Jessica Holzer 03.09.06, 2:56 PM ET

New York -

In what could be a last-ditch effort to salvage its deal to operate East and Gulf Coast ports in the U.S., DP World told Congress that it would agree to transfer control to a "U.S. entity," which could simply mean a subsidiary of the Dubai operation.

In a statement, first read on the floor of the U.S. Senate by Virginia Republican John Warner, DP World said the decision was made to "preserve the strong relationship between the U.S. and the U.A.E." But in fact, it sounded suspiciously like a device carefully crafted by DP World's huge team of lobbyists and lawyers to salvage the deal in some fashion.

The new entity is supposed to have an American board and American managers, but the ownership was still questionable. Or, as New York's Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer observed, "the devil is in the details." If DP World is in fact merely planning to put its U.S. assets under a U.S.-managed subsidiary with oversight from a U.S.-staffed board, it would be following in a long line of foreign suppliers of defense technology to the U.S.

"This looks like a variant of that," says Clyde Prestowitz of the Economic Strategy Group in Washington.

<snip>

[Trillo]

7. Don't know which one you're referring to

Got it from search engine:

Dubai Ports World gives up on US

A US Senator has announced on the Senate floor that Dubai Ports World will sell off the management rights to six American ports after it completes the acquisition of the British company that now holds them.
...
The Senator said DPW would transfer ownership of its American rights to an unspecified American "entity" under terms that would not cause it economic loss.
...
The statement read by Senator Warner was apparently the same or nearly identical to one issued by DPW COO Edward Bilkey, which notes that the gesture -- which involves only 10 per cent of the value in DPW's takeover of P&O, the current holder of the rights -- was being made in recognition of the "strong relationship" between the UAE and the US.
...
Commentators have noted that finding a US-based "entity" to take over the American ports operations will be difficult since all but a tiny handful of port operations in the country are run by foreign-owned companies.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/home/column_article.asp?id=14604&cid=4&cname=Business%20Today

[tom_paine]

8. The original AP story, I think.

[Why Syzygy]

11. strong relationship indeed

enough to take down the towers and start another world war. And we call these friends? No wait. George does. His hands are filthy. Scum.

[Why Syzygy]

10. I haven't said this yet

But I'm pretty damn sure they own the ports. It isn't outsourcing. It is payback. For what? Oh money to ship off to Iraq (which is owned by Halliburton aka our vice president in thief, Dick). How's that for a round about.

Have any idea of how bushwacker has gotten us into so much debt? He is selling us, our land, our resources, the whole shabang. For Sale. Just wait until they take over our national forests too. And then the local schools. See it coming, folks. Be alarmed. Very alarmed.

[NVMojo]

12. didn't save it but I believe you ...

[muriel_volestrangler]

13. When you say"own the port", you presumably mean "hold the lease"

because P&O don't own the ports now. It has leases, of varying lengths (for instance, the lease at Philadelphia is up for renewal this year, while the one at Newark is a 30 year lease (signed in 2000).

So when you say "the fact that they will keep ownership but sub-lease the ports to Busheviks", what do you mean - and how is that a 'fact' compared with what the AP story reports now?

[leftchick]

14. here is reuters article i find curious

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/theuae/2006/March/theuae_March303.xml§ion=theuae

Dubai Ports World presses on with port takeover
(Reuters)

9 March 2006



DUBAI - Dubai Ports World is pressing ahead with a takeover that gives it control of six major US ports despite a Congress committee vote to block the deal, sources familiar with the deal said on Thursday.


Government and company officials in the United Arab Emirates declined comment on Wednesday's vote by US lawmakers to block the deal on the grounds that handing the ports over to a Gulf Arab state-owned firm would threaten US national security.

But the sources said the vote had not taken Dubai Ports any closer to relinquishing the six ports at the center of a political firestorm.

'The vote in the House of Representatives has not change anything in that respect. We are not at that point,' one Dubai-based source said.

Analysts said the political furor was bound to provoke businesses in the world's biggest oil exporting region, which is an increasingly important source of financing for the huge US current account deficit.

[Perky]

15. Look i n your browser history cache N/T

I don't havea link but I saw a post in DU last n ight saying Norm Ornstien was commenting on the Haliburton angle.

[PsychoDad]

16. I predicted something simular....

Only in my scenario DHS got management control, then handled the running over to Halliburton in some no-bid contract.

Good to see that this group is still predictable in their motivations. :(

Good morning, and peace.

[annabanana]

17. we have to keep hunting this...

The story is morphing right before our very eyes...

[fed-up]

18. I am trying the wayback machine/internet archives, but need more

coffee to figure out what to use for my search terms. I woke up a little too early here in California...It looks like I can only search archives starting in 2005. :(


http://web.archive.org/collections/web/advanced.html

edited to add this from their FAQ pages:

Sites are usually crawled within 24 hours and no more than 48. Right now there is a 6-12 month lag between the date a site is crawled and the date it appears in the Wayback Machine.


Sorry, it is a good site to add to your bookmarks.

[pat_k]

19. Text of press release

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2504337&mesg_id=2504337

[rman]

20. Goes to show that Halliburton, as many "US" corporations, is not

an American corporation, but rather a global corporation.

[Why Syzygy]

23. Oh please

global. They are a funnel. A front company. They can't even deliver the services they are contracted in Iraq. But they get the money! Bet on that. I'm in a bad mood today.

[librechik]

22. here's everything but the copyright notice

" AP Photos MDSR101-102
By ANDREW TAYLOR
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Dubai-owned company said Thursday that it was prepared to give up its management stake in some U.S. ports, a move made as congressional leaders warned President Bush that both the House and Senate appeared ready to block the takeover.

It was not immediately clear whether the announcement would be enough to cool widespread sentiment in Congress to pass legislation blocking the deal, which has become an election-year nightmare for Republicans."


I got it off the AP wire before it even got published in the Palm Beach Post.

it's here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2155938

My first Home Page post!

Also in the post (though not in the AP) is the fact that the CNN reporter speculated that meant
is that a front company would be named. Soon everybody was talking about it. But it wasn't in the very first bartebones AP article of 70 words.

[Why Syzygy]

24. They need an election year

nightmare. Turn about fair play. That almost makes me feel better.

[WiseButAngrySara]

25. See post #47 by NastyRiffraff on this DU thread from yesterday...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x617722

He/she replied: "Did a screen shot and saved to hard drive"

I remembered reading this last night. Maybe you can p.m. them. Hope this helps!