Can't upset daddy's friends

[46zilzal]

President Bush on Tuesday strongly defended a deal that would let a United Arab Emirates-based company run six major U.S. seaports, telling reporters that he would veto any bill to hold up the agreement. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has threatened to introduce a bill aimed at holding up the deal. Critics cite a potential security threat arguing the UAE was a finance center for the 9/11 terror attacks, but the State Department said the deal has nothing to do "with the responsibility for security in American ports."

[PaceAdvantage]

I'll be the first to admit this stinks to high heaven.....

[GameTheory]

He's gonna use his FIRST veto on that?!

[schweitz]

There are no US companies in the port managing business---now there is no English company in the business. Anybody know of any other alternatives?

[hcap]

Cronyism? Or your doing a heck of a job Dubai
From the New York Daily News...

http://www.nydailynews.com/02-21-2006/news/local/story/393280p-333478c.html

The Dubai firm that won Bush administration backing to run six U.S. ports has at least two ties to the White House.

One is Treasury Secretary John Snow, whose agency heads the federal panel that signed off on the $6.8 billion sale of an English company to government-owned Dubai Ports World - giving it control of Manhattan's cruise ship terminal and Newark's container port.

Snow was chairman of the CSX rail firm that sold its own international port operations to DP World for $1.15 billion in 2004, the year after Snow left for President Bush's cabinet.

The other connection is David Sanborn, who runs DP World's European and Latin American operations and was tapped by Bush last month to head the U.S. Maritime Administration.

[hcap]

A few other details.

"I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company," Bush said. "I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We'll treat you fairly.'"

Forgetting for the moment about "Great British", (sheesh), I thought the diff was that the company is owned by another country.

And not a country like Great Britain, george
USA Today article from just 18 months ago..

Osama bin Laden's operatives still use this freewheeling city as a logistical hub three years after more than half the Sept. 11 hijackers flew directly from Dubai to the United States in the final preparatory stages for the attack.

The recent arrest of an alleged top al-Qaeda combat coach is the latest sign that suspected members of the terrorist organization are among those who take advantage of travel rules that allow easy entry. Citizens of neighboring Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia can come to Dubai without visas, which other nationalities can get at the country's ports of entry.

[Secretariat]

He's gonna use his FIRST veto on that?!

Speaks volumes.

[JustRalph]

still scratching my head..........

[mainardi]

still scratching my head..........
Interesting to note that the US Coast Guard is in charge of security at ALL US ports... so how does that make the company a threat? Also, understand that this company is owned by people from the Middle Eastern country most friendly to the US. By trusting a company that is ONLY owned by people from this country -- remember that they don't have any say over security -- it keeps the US safer in the Middle East. The alternative is to over-react ("all Arabs are BAD") and lose all hope of ending the Iraq situation with some thread of decency.

That being said, it seems like we should have at least considered opening up the contract to open bidding.

And, yes, the Great British quote was so GW... the Norm Crosby of Presidents! :blush:

[Secretariat]

Also, understand that this company is owned by people from the Middle Eastern country most friendly to the US.

– The UAE was one of three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.

– The UAE has been a key transfer point for illegal shipments of nuclear components to Iran, North Korea and Lybia.

– According to the FBI, money was transferred to the 9/11 hijackers through the UAE banking system.

– After 9/11, the Treasury Department reported that the UAE was not cooperating in efforts to track down Osama Bin Laden’s bank accounts.

[mainardi]

I guess that doesn't bode very well for our relations in the Middle East. It's always been an uneasy situation over there, as we have played both sides against the middle for decades. Only now we have no leverage.

Thank goodness I only live 7 miles from work... gonna have to peddle to work soon enough... unless I can stand $5 a gallon at the pump!

[Light]

Two of the 19 9/11 hijackers were citizens of Dubai, the Arab emirate.Yet Bush is so gung ho on his arabian port deal that he has announced beforehand that he will veto any objection.

I'm still wondering why on 9/11 when flights in the U.S. were grounded,dozens of well connected Saudis including relatives of Bin Laden were escorted by the FBI on specially chartered flights out of the U.S.. What was their hurry and why leave on that day? And why did the FBI bend over backwards for them?

Osama's eldest brother was one of Bush's sr. first business partners.

Bush Jr has inexplicably bungled attempts to catch Bin Laden. (Oops I missed)

Bush showed no surprise when told of the attack. Did he know something beforehand?

Bush lied about Iraq to go to war and continues to lie while sacrificing our young men. What is the real reason?

And as I said in the begining,Two of the 19 9/11 hijackers were citizens of Dubai, the Arab emirate Bush hired to run 6 of our ports where only 5% of the cargo containers entering these U.S. ports are inspected. Would you trust this man?

Bush is laughing inside at every idiot who ever believed he was fighting terror.

[Secretariat]

Joe,

There are other question marks with UAE. The guy who was king since 1971 in UAE died in 2004 and his son took over who is a question mark. To trust out port security to a country that actually had 911 hijackers and was a favorite banking location for Bin Laden doesn't make me feel more secure despite GW's promises.

[dav4463]

I still think having SOME Arabs on our side is better than all of them being against us.

[JustRalph]

Bush showed no surprise when told of the attack. Did he know something beforehand?

Come on..........!!! Next word out of your mouth is .........Zionist? right?

And Israel was involved.........right? Give me a break......

[lsbets]

Come on..........!!! Next word out of your mouth is .........Zionist? right?

And Israel was involved.........right? Give me a break......

Ha! You thought the same thing as me.

[Tom]

Where is Haliburton when you need them? :lol:

[JustRalph]

Where is Haliburton when you need them? :lol:

Halliburton was called by Tony Snow on Fox news. He asked why they weren't interested in this deal. They told him that the profit potential was way to small........only 6.9 bil over 5 years.................only?

[PaceAdvantage]

You know, it's funny how nobody was crying about British "control" of our ports when the shoe bomber from Britain was caught....

It's also funny that many buildings in Manhattan (which can easily house a dirty bomb, or whatever you may fear a terrorist from UAE may bring over here) are owned by Arab interests such as UAE, and nobody says a peep.

This is, once again, a way for the anti-Administration folks to whip everyone into a frenzy over something that has already been happening in this country way before Bush came to power.

They've caught a good number of Republicans in their trap as well, this time around, myself included (initially).

[Tom]

We live and learn. And react.I am still strongly in favor of interment camps, al WWII. There are sleeper cells already operating here, like the ones in Ohio and Buffalo (Tonawanda).
A war on terror suggest to me that we go to extremes where security is concered.
Phone taps, profiling, survelience, especially on mosques - proven hidding spots the workd over for terrorists - all are givens to me. It boggles my mind the lack of things we are doing and the amounts of money we are spending on it.
If Bush were to wage half the war on terror he is waging on the middle class, we would all be safe!;)

Although, I will give you this - the republican outrage is most likely ass-covering. They need to make a big show of thier independence and challenge Bush to keep thier re-election changes strong, But in the end, they will ultimatley do nothing. Republicans are so tranparent.

Actually, the last three things that mater to me have been addressed by - not conservatives, but (:eek: ) liberal democrats!

The shabby treatment of Vets and closing VA hospitals - Hillary and Schummer.
This port gargage - Hillary.
Making tunneling under our border a felony - Diane Fienstein.

I'm sitting here scratcing my head - where are the guys I voted for? What have the republicans done for me?
That little voting finger of mine ( we have mechanical machines) is drifting to the left......next time I vote, it is not on promises, it will be on performance. So far, the dems are leading 3-0.

[so.cal.fan]

"Bush showed no surprise when told of the attack. Did he know something beforehand"?


I remember seeing the President when they told him, he looked absolutely stricken......I don't know how people can believe this.....or the ridiculous "theories" about the Zionist connections.....I remember reading that all the Jews were told not to show up at the World Trade Center on the morning of 9/11......gee, several hundred must have not checked their messages that morning....because they ALL DIED in the ATTACK.

[Lefty]

light says two of the 9-11 terrorists came from the Emeritz. Yup, but does that mean any govt has control of every citizen? light, you and others like you are guilty of childish knee-jerk thinking. There's terrorists in Britain too and even homegrown terrorists right here.
We have made an ally of the Emeritz and prob getting valuable intel as well but now many want to slap this relationship in the face. During the election everybody saying we didn't get Kerry cause he was "nuanced' Looks like GW, the guy they kept calling dumb, has more nuance than everyone including some repubs.

[Tom]

"Bush showed no surprise when told of the attack. Did he know something beforehand"?


I remember seeing the President when they told him, he looked absolutely stricken......I don't know how people can believe this.....or the ridiculous "theories" about the Zionist connections.....I remember reading that all the Jews were told not to show up at the World Trade Center on the morning of 9/11......gee, several hundred must have not checked their messages that morning....because they ALL DIED in the ATTACK.

So much BS about 9-11, it's like they were living a differnent day than I did.
Facts we know to true...we know who they were, where they came from, what they looked like, what their names were.

Why we do not use this info as a template for security is beyond me.
why we fold risk anything by allowing any of these connections access to our ports is beyond me.

Why we consider Sorry Arabia an allie is beyond me.

Sadly, this country has no clue how to fight a war anymore.

[46zilzal]

Sadly, this country has no clue how to fight a war anymore.
You mean Rummy doesn't. He fired all the expereinced people in the Pentagon to test out his "pet theories" of warfare. Frontline had a great show on his ideas last night.

[Tom]

You mean Rummy doesn't. He fired all the expereinced people in the Pentagon to test out his "pet theories" of warfare. Frontline had a great show on his ideas last night.

"The Insurrgents?"
I taped it - hope to see it this weekend.
I though Rummy was a dispstick from the beginning and even posted about him long before we got to Baghdad. He has only reinforced my opinion of him.

[46zilzal]

"The Insurrgents?"
I taped it - hope to see it this weekend.
I though Rummy was a dispstick from the beginning and even posted about him long before we got to Baghdad. He has only reinforced my opinion of him.
there were two back to back: both good. Rummy's profile followed the insurgents which was very informative as the vareity of differing philosphies that make up these groups. Ultimately they are not too fond of troops occupying their country. Would one blame them?

[Tom]

I'm not too happy about occupying it, either.

I wanted to DESTROY it a long time ago. :bang:

[46zilzal]

I'm not too happy about occupying it, either.

I wanted to DESTROY it a long time ago.
for what reason? like it or not, Iraq has NEVER done anything to the west except deprive them or their oil

[rastajenk]

What about paying Palestinian suicide martyrs and lobbing Scuds at Israel? Is Israel not part of the "West?" It certainly has western civilization sensibilities, regardless of its geographic location.

[46zilzal]

Israel is in the midst of a geographic place called the MIDDLE EAST the last time I looked. If they have problems with their neighbors, that is their problem.

[so.cal.fan]

My favorite columnist, Tom Friedman (NYTimes) has a good article today.
February 22, 2006
Empty Pockets, Angry Minds
Too few young Muslims can aspire to success.


If any of you have access to the NYTimes or their website.....worth a read.
Sheds light on one of the problems....of course there are others.

[rastajenk]

Israel is in the midst of a geographic place called the MIDDLE EAST the last time I looked. If they have problems with their neighbors, that is their problem.
That is stupefyingly ignorant.

[46zilzal]

That is stupefyingly ignorant.
to YOU maybe

[Lefty]

there were two back to back: both good. Rummy's profile followed the insurgents which was very informative as the vareity of differing philosphies that make up these groups. Ultimately they are not too fond of troops occupying their country. Would one blame them?

46, amazing how you always come dn on the terrorists side. You mean they were happy with Saddam? These terrorists called insurgents are not happy with democracy.

[46zilzal]

46, amazing how you always come in on the terrorists side.
Only your impression. My remarks were related to just two, very informative FRONTLINE (PBS) shows that help people understand the situation. Read into what you always do.

[Light]

light says two of the 9-11 terrorists came from the Emeritz. Yup, but does that mean any govt has control of every citizen?

If the hijackers on 9/11 came from Saudi Arabia and UAE wouldn't that jive with Bush's speech about countries that harbor terrorists? I thought we don't do business with those types.

To add further contradiction,you award one of those countries with known hijackers from 9/11 a contract to run 6 U.S. ports.,while bombing the hell out of 2 countries who had no hijackers from 9/11.

This makes sense to you?

[Lefty]

46, MY impression? Anyone with a modicum of understanding of the English language would be left with that impression, given your remarks. Gave up on the Frontline yrs ago because of their liberal agenda.

[Lefty]

light, as I said, but let me make it clear, the govt did not sponsor the hikackers. Got it? Bin Ladin sponsored the hijackers.
We went after iraq because ALL the intel said they had wmd's and were willing to use em, and that's besides the 17 or so resolutions the broke and the terrorists they sponsored.

[Tom]

Here's my solution - the only reason China, Russia, Europe suck up to the muslems is thier oil.

So lets shake things up a bit - destroy the oil fields - dry up the wold's supply of oil.
Now, suddenly nobody on earth will have use for muslems, they will have no money, noting to trade for, no mosques left to store arms in, and sink back into the sand, no longer a threat to anyone.
Euorope, China, and Russia will be SOL while WE have good supplies here, and we have the technology to develope alternate energy sources - we have the scientists here to do it - they are all flipping burgers at McDonalds.

[46zilzal]

Gave up on the Frontline yrs ago because of their liberal agenda.
liberal like "open minded?" "factual?" "documented?"

[NoDayJob]

I see former President Jimmy Carter is in President Bush's camp now, so this port deal has to be good, eh? BTW isn't former presidential candidate Bob [sic] Dull now a lobbyist for UAE? Gosh darn, all the Viagra must have drained the blood from his brain[?]. :D

[Secretariat]

I see former President Jimmy Carter is in President Bush's camp now, so this port deal has to be good, eh?

That should seal it for Lefty.

[Lefty]

[QUOTE=Secretariat]That should seal it for Lefty.[/QUOTe
Wow, even Jimmy Carter can be right once in a lifetime.

[Secretariat]

[QUOTE=Secretariat]That should seal it for Lefty.[/QUOTe
Wow, even Jimmy Carter can be right once in a lifetime.

Wow, Lefty. You're supporting Jimmy Carter on this, and I'm supporting Tom Delay. Who's the lib?

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D8FUGLP05.html

"U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay said Wednesday that President Bush is making a big mistake backing a sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates.

The former Republican majority leader said the administration's approval of the deal is "pretty outrageous." DeLay made the remarks during a campaign event with Houston real estate executives.

Separately, U.S. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Humble, said he is concerned about Texas ports where military cargo is handled by London-based Peninsular and Oriental, the company to be purchased by the UAE's Dubai Ports World.

Poe said ports in Beaumont and Corpus Christi move military goods, materials and records of which he would not want UAE employees to have access."

[Lefty]

sec, guess you're mighty forgetful. You the lib, my man. One person of the opposite political spectrum agreeing with you or me on one issue doesn't change our overall political views. I'm proud to be called a conservative, but the way you write this, reads like you're not proud to be called a lib. Hmmm....

[46zilzal]

we understand your very limited vocabulary

[Lefty]

i'll match my vocabulary with yours anyday. But you're sticking with the lib playbook: Can't refute the argument, insult the person. Isn't that on page 101?

[Tom]

I'm still waiting for one reason why this is a good thing.

Does this enhance port security?

Bush didn't even KNOW about this - it was all done by underlings.

He signed the transPORKtation bill - a 50 pound bill if it weighed an ounce - without reading it.

One has to wonder what other duties unelected underlings are doing for Bush.

Georgie, there is homework required for this job.:eek:
The sad fact is that this guy has no idea what goes on day to day.

[Lefty]

Tom, I gave you the two reasons, but let's say it's not a good thing, but the situation is no worse than it was. But you are so intent on the negative, you prob can't be persuaded.

[Lefty]

Also, Gen Tommy Franks, says these people are allied with us, we have ships in their port and he has no problem with it.

[Light]

light, as I said, but let me make it clear, the govt did not sponsor the hikackers.

That's irrelevant if terrorists thrive there.

It's also a poor bet to expect a country that has produced terrorists(unsponored or not) to not produce them again especially in this volatile time.

[Lefty]

That's irrelevant if terrorists thrive there.

It's also a poor bet to expect a country that has produced terrorists(unsponored or not) to not produce them again especially in this volatile time.
Irelevent? There are terrorists in every county of the world, including ours.

[Tom]

Our own state department has travel warnings for UAE. As does Britian and Autrailia.

The gov'nt of UAE recognized the Taliban as legit one of only three nations to do so), they obstructed our attempts to follow OBL money trail, and they funded terrorism as well as supplying two death pilots.
Just how are these guys supposed to be allies???????
And the gov'nt OWNS this company - it is not like a private firm as was that case for Britian.
Why should we reward bad behavior and take any unnecessary risk on ports already vunerable ( 4 years after 9-11!)?

Would CHina and UAE allow US to own ports in THIER countries?
Of course not...why should we allow them to own ours?

Congress has got to pass a law making it mandatory that only US owned companies have this job.

How is that all these agencies signed of on the safety of this tings, yet Bush - BY HIS OWN WORDS - did not even know about it until AFTER the press started making noise???

SOMEONE'S LYING HERE!

[Lefty]

Tom, yest sec and all types of media types made these same arguments. I answered sec, so see that. But the past is past and this is now and they have been cultivated as a strong ally. Let's not poison the crop.

[highnote]

you are so intent on the negative, you prob can't be persuaded.


:D :D :D Lefty, talk about calling the kettle black. :lol:

[Light]

Irelevent? There are terrorists in every county of the world, including ours.


Then why are we bombing countries in the name of fighting terrorism. If it doesn't make any difference and there are terrorists here,why don't we bomb ourselves? You need to stop this doubletalk.

[Lefty]

light, you are too friggin dense for me to respond to; but damn me, i'll try. We can't hold govts responsible cause there are terrorists in their country. We can hold them responsible if they encourage or sponsor the terrorists. You think maybe you can grasp this pig-simple concept?

[Tom]

Then why are we bombing countries in the name of fighting terrorism. If it doesn't make any difference and there are terrorists here,why don't we bomb ourselves? You need to stop this doubletalk.

Who are we bombing?
We aren't bombing anybody.
We haven't bomed anyone in some time.
The only bombing going on anymore is being done by muslems.
The latest bombing being by muslems of a mosque.