Arab control of ports?

[Nishlord]

I don't care that it was British. There are more radical Islamists in Britain than there are in the UAE.

Yeah, because all our radical Islamists own multi-million corporations, instead of dossing down in shitty Portakabin mosques in Hounslow.

What a frightened little spastic you are,

[Mister Bushice]

That is really not the point. There is enough bullshit going on worldwide with muslims that the less we have to do with them, the better. We keep sticking our necks into their shit, and they're too barbaric to handle it. Hell, they dont' even care enough about their own holy places. They just blew up one of their oldest shrines then proceeded to kill each other. They're worse than fire ants, because they can't even cooperate amongst themselves.

[RadioFan]

Radical Islamists don't own Dubai Ports World either, dumbfuck.

Perhaps not, but they've only helped finance it for years, until very recently. It also doesn't bode well for them that they get Thank You cards from Hamas.

Interesting takes here, from both sides.

[Diogenes]

That is really not the point. There is enough bullshit going on worldwide with muslims that the less we have to do with them, the better. We keep sticking our necks into their shit, and they're too barbaric to handle it. Hell, they dont' even care enough about their own holy places. They just blew up one of their oldest shrines then proceeded to kill each other. They're worse than fire ants, because they can't even cooperate amongst themselves.

Scratch a lefty, find a racist POS.

Big surprise.

You can make the exact same argument (and some here do regularly) that we should lock all blacks in the hood and let them) all kill each other.

[Mister Bushice]

Because some of those involved with the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks had ties to the emirate of Dubai,

Enough for me to say we need to look at every aspect of this very very closely.

One of the reasons 9-11 occurred is because we became too complacent.

[Diogenes]

Because some of those involved with the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks had ties to the emirate of Dubai,

Enough for me to say we need to look at every aspect of this very very closely.

One of the reasons 9-11 occurred is because we became too complacent.

That's because we had an administration in charge whose mantra was 'it's the stupid economy'. Well it seems that national security and foriegn policy matter too, stupid. And having a CinC who doesn't 'loath the military' is a big plus.

The UAE is one of the nations that took the real lessons of 9/11 to heart, namely that OBL's 'paper tiger' theory is just a tad off base. And Congress is going to take a step back, verify that this is a good and safe thing for America, and then proceed.

[PSUFAN]

The Bush Administration was not any more serious about security, before 9/11.

Complacency was not new with the Clinton regime. It certainly wasn't at an end when W took office.

[Mister Bushice]

and it isn't now. This administration is far more about putting on the makeup to cover the ugly than to actually deliver what it promises. Witness our porous borders, the fucked up situation in iraq, and every pie in the face episode that has happened to them so far this year. Bunch of self interested liars.

[Diogenes]

The Bush Administration was not any more serious about security, before 9/11.

Complacency was not new with the Clinton regime. It certainly wasn't at an end when W took office.

They had been in office 6 months at the time.

And even though this isn't the issue Bush wanted his administration to be about, what they have done since then is anything but complacent. Which is why if they have already investigated the company in question, I am personnally reasonably confident that there is little to worry about. We'll see what comes up at the hearings, but you delusional Bushhater types might not want to hold your breath for this to be the 'issue' that finally brings down Rove's Puppet.

Or go ahead, hold your breath.

[Diego in Seattle]

The Bush Administration was not any more serious about security, before 9/11.

Complacency was not new with the Clinton regime. It certainly wasn't at an end when W took office.

They had been in office 6 months at the time.

And even though this isn't the issue Bush wanted his administration to be about, what they have done since then is anything but complacent. Which is why if they have already investigated the company in question, I am personnally reasonably confident that there is little to worry about. We'll see what comes up at the hearings, but you delusional Bushhater types might not want to hold your breath for this to be the 'issue' that finally brings down Rove's Puppet.

Or go ahead, hold your breath.

It won't bring down Rove's Puppet. Just his party (at midterms if not '08 as well).

[RadioFan]

The chair of the 9/11 commission says the deal should never have happened, along with the former director of the CIA's Bin Laden unit.

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/ne ... 959039.htm

I guess they're full of shit, too, along with everyone else opposed to this deal.

Also, A DP World executive said the company would agree to tougher security restrictions to win congressional support only if the same restrictions applied to all U.S. port operators.

Now would be the time. If nothing else comes of this flap, hopefully that will.

[poptart]

If the deal goes through it is a political nightmare for the Bush admin.

Well hell, it's ALREADY a nightmare.
The dems are hot on this issue because they know they can deliver a nice kick in the 'nads to the prez.

Look, the deal may not compromise security in any way (I have doubts, btw), yet the knee-jerk reaction many/most Americans have to this is entirely negative, and not at all likely to be swayed by assurances from this admin.
Logic is out the window.
It's an ARAB nation.

It's just the way it is.


I thought the Harriet Miers fiasco was the ultimate 'you have GOT to be kidding us' situation, but this one is off the charts stupid.


Bush = complete and utter imbecile.

[Solo]

I thought the Harriet Miers fiasco was the ultimate 'you have GOT to be kidding us' situation, but this one is off the charts stupid.


Bush = complete and utter imbecile.

Yep.

It won't bring down Rove's Puppet. Just his party (at midterms if not '08 as well).

If the dems regain control of both houses of congress(a big if) at the midterms Bush is fucked.

[PSUFAN]

His staff cooked this one up for him, and spatula'ed it into his lap to deal with. "I knew nothing until last week" doesn't fly, but to a certain extent this may be more on his perfidious staff than on W.

[Diogenes]

The chair of the 9/11 commission says the deal should never have happened, along with the former director of the CIA's Bin Laden unit.

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/ne ... 959039.htm

I guess they're full of shit, too, along with everyone else opposed to this deal.

In this case, yes.

And in Mike Scheuer's case, who gives a fuck what Clinton's man in charge orf finding BinLaden thinks about anything?

As far as dumbfucks who think this is going to help them win the Congress in November or that Japan and Germany were our allies in the thirties (as the UAE is now)....

See above comments about Scheuer.

[Diogenes]

For the clueless anklebiters, I'm the first to admit when Bush and co. actually fuck up (as opposed to being firmly entrenched in your collective domes)....

BTW, this issue was reported last week by a guy named Frank Gaffney.

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/gaffney/060213

The bottom line is that the Bush administration fucked up (politically at least) by not consulting Congress before making the decision. This will end up being posponed for a month or so while they conduct a more exahaustive investigation of this company, and then probably go ahead with it.

[Dinsdale]

It's all a ploy.

Bush/Cheney are so far out of public favor, it can't get a whole lot worse. But...

there's a buncha elections coming up this fall, if'n I'm not mistaken.

If the GOP incumbents oppose this, and break party lines with the White House, and bash Bush for it, then they score runaway victories, and keep the majorities. They'd be showing the cajonies to oppose party leadership, which is going to score brownie points with Johnny Q.

If the sale goes through, don't think for one second that the DPW won't sneak a boatload of campaign contributions to the GOP, under the radar.

This is a win-win for the GOP.

[Diogenes]

It's all a ploy.

Bush/Cheney are so far out of public favor, it can't get a whole lot worse. But...

there's a buncha elections coming up this fall, if'n I'm not mistaken.

If the GOP incumbents oppose this, and break party lines with the White House, and bash Bush for it, then they score runaway victories, and keep the majorities. They'd be showing the cajonies to oppose party leadership, which is going to score brownie points with Johnny Q.

If the sale goes through, don't think for one second that the DPW won't sneak a boatload of campaign contributions to the GOP, under the radar.

This is a win-win for the GOP.

You must be confusing the GOP with a party that needs to collect illegal campaign contributions from foriegn nationals.

Wrong decade.

The sale will go through, and the only ones voting against it will be in swing states that need cover.




Do you fuckers have ANYTHING concrete to show DPW is a threat aside from xenophobia and shortsightedness?

[Dinsdale]

Do you fuckers have ANYTHING concrete to show DPW is a threat aside from xenophobia and shortsightedness?

Yeah. I've browsed these boards for the last 4 years, and I finally saw the light.

All Arabs are inherently evil. It took some work on you guy's part, but you won me over. I'm now convinced that every single Arab is out to kill me, DPW being no different.

I mean, mvscal is an expert on world politics, and he even has us believing that heads of state and ranking government officials actually consult him before making decisions, and mv has made it quite clear that it's a holy war, Us vs Them.

So I'm just basing this on what I've learned from this board...and common sense.

I'd like to see UAE prove themselves a little better as an ally, like maybe not letting terrorist attacks on US soil emanate from their country...that would be a nice start...but I'm sure the political climate in UAE has changed DRAMATICALLY because we asked them to help us extra-nice-pretty-please like.

[Diogenes]

I'm sure the political climate in UAE has changed DRAMATICALLY because we asked them to help us extra-nice-pretty-please like.


Either that or they saw what happened to the Taliban and Sadaam. They are all about buisness, and can tell which way the wind blows.

[War Wagon]

If the sale goes through, don't think for one second that the DPW won't sneak a boatload of campaign contributions to the GOP, under the radar.

That shot in the dark hits closer to home than you may have realized or intended, but perhaps for different reasons.

The UAE recently made good on it's pledge of $100 million for Hurricane Katrina disaster relief - four times more than all other foreign countries combined. Many countries who pledged cash haven't up a dime yet.

Me-thinks that may have had a little something to do with the Bush administration looking on this deal in a favorable light, and for good reason.

Money talks.

[Diego in Seattle]

I wonder what the guy nominated by Bush to head the maritime administration thinks of the deal.

BTW......who is that guy, hmmmmm?

[RadioFan]

The UAE recently made good on it's pledge of $100 million for Hurricane Katrina disaster relief - four times more than all other foreign countries combined. Many countries who pledged cash haven't up a dime yet.

Me-thinks that may have had a little something to do with the Bush administration looking on this deal in a favorable light, and for good reason.

Money talks.

Yep. That exact quid-pro-quo question was asked at a State Department briefing on Thursday. The answer: "Absolutely not."

What's wrong with you WW? Everything an administration spokesman says must be true. This has nothing at all to do with money nor favors.

Sincerely,

Sheep.

[RadioFan]

Either that or they saw what happened to the Taliban and Sadaam. They are all about buisness, and can tell which way the wind blows.

Bullshit.

Let me know when Hamas starts sending them "fuck you" cards, instead of "thank you" cards as they did last summer. Did you read the National Review link I posted earlier?

Here it is.

Washington claims that the United Arab Emirates is a reliable friend and ally of the United States in the war on terror. To the extent that Dubai Ports World is a UAE state-owned company, this may in fact be the key question to ask. The answer is not hard to find if you start looking at the role played by the UAE as an eager financier of the huge worldwide infrastructure of radical Islam built over the past three decades by Saudi Arabia. An infrastructure that’s the main breeding ground of extremism and terrorism.

From the very beginning in the 1970s, the UAE has been a key source of financial support for Saudi-controlled organizations like the Islamic Solidarity Fund, the Islamic Development Bank (IDB), World Council of Mosques, and the Muslim World League (MWL) as documented in The Muslim World League Journal, an English-language monthly. The IDB alone, for instance, spent $10 billion between 1977 and 1990 for “Islamic activities” and at least $1 billion more recently to support terrorist activities by the Palestinian Al Aqsa and Intifada Funds.

One of the most successful Islamist operations in the U.S. early on involved the Wahhabi ideological takeover of the Nation of Islam after the death of its founder Elijah Muhammad. Of the $4.8 million “presented” to W. D. Muhammad, Elijah’s son and successor, in 1980 alone, one million came from UAE’s president Sheikh Zayad, according to the August 1980 issue of the MWL Journal. Zayad continued his “philanthropic” activities by donating $2.5 million for a Zayad Islamic Center at Harvard University’s divinity school of all places. The donation had to be returned after it became known that a similar Zayad Center in the UAE was closed because it had become a hotbed of Islamic extremism. And this is likely just the tip of the iceberg. A reliable friend and ally? Perhaps, but hardly one of ours.

Moreover, while the UAE has become a war on terror partner, its history is checkered — to say the least. Critics claim that the UAE recognized the Taliban, and al Qaeda used it in 9/11 preparations. Dubai, a Middle Eastern banking “Mecca,” has long been the crossroads of money laundering and terrorist financing. In addition, the UAE has ties to Iran, and Pakistan’s Dr. Strangelove, A. Q. Khan, used the Emirates as a shipping hub for his nuke network.

December 2005: The UAE National Consultative Council called for declaration of an all-out war against terrorism and depriving any person who pledges allegiance to foreign extremist groups the right of UAE citizenship. The council proclaimed that it regarded links to such groups as high treason.

The UAE has also assisted the Coalition effort in Iraq, in particular training Iraqi security forces and sending material assistance to the Iraqi people.

There is a lot on the other side of the ledger too — particularly a thank you statement from Hamas to the UAE in July 2005 for all the support — but given the way relationships work in the Middle East I can see Dubai expecting favorable treatment in return for its recent cooperation in the effort to combat terrorism, and especially for supporting the war effort in Iraq. It is the way of things.

Like I said in my original post about this article (on page 7, in this thread), lots of good points on both sides.

mvscal's response:

Perhaps not, but they've only helped finance it for years, until very recently.

What a load of steaming bullshit.

This, of course, was after he played the pathetic bigot card, and decided to call me a Jew, for lack of an actual credible source(s),-based argument.

Such, is the bigoted shepherd of sheep. Baaa Baaa

[RadioFan]

Btw, in case anyone missed it, in the "Haaa Haaaaaahhhh!" thread, Fester nailed it:

The crux of the problem:

What is the islamic understanding about democracy, Is there any place for it in islam?

The common form of democracy prevalent at the moment is representative democracy, in which the citizens do not exercise their right of legislating and issuing political decrees in person, but rather through representatives chosen by them. The constitution of a democratic country will be largely influenced by the needs and wants of its people. Thus, if its people want casinos, bars, gay marriages, prostitution, etc. then with sufficient public pressure, all these vices can be accommodated for. From this, it becomes simple to understand that there can never be scope for a democratic rule from the Islamic point of view.

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best

Mufti Ebrahim Desai

http://islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=15522

Oh, but the UAE is different, right?

[Diogenes]

Either that or they saw what happened to the Taliban and Sadaam. They are all about buisness, and can tell which way the wind blows.

Bullshit.

Let me know when Hamas starts sending them "fuck you" cards, instead of "thank you" cards as they did last summer. Did you read the National Review link I posted earlier?

Actually I did.

And I'm more interested in what has happened since 9/11 than a laundry list of past problems.

James S. Robbins
I have to wonder if the approval of Dubai Ports World is payback for recent support by Dubai and the UAE in the war on terrorism. Some data points:

December 2004: Dubai was the first government in the region to sign on to the U.S. Container Security Initiative to screen all containers heading for the United States for security risks.

May 2005: Dubai signed an agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy to bar passage of nuclear material from passing through its ports, and install radiation-detecting equipment.

June 2005: The UAE joined the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings and the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism.

October 2005: The UAE Central Bank directed banks and financial institutions in the country to tighten their internal systems and controls in their fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. UAE banks routinely cooperate with U.N. and international law-enforcement agencies in supplying information about suspect accounts.

November 2005: In the wake of the terror bombings in Jordan, General Shaykh Muhammad Bin-Zayid Al Nuhayyan, heir apparent of Abu Dhabi and supreme commander of the UAE armed forces, stated that “Muslim scholars who live among us must adopt a stand toward this terrorism… If they do not declare [terrorists] to be infidels, they should at least consider them as non-Muslims. …If there are no honest stands toward these non-religious and inhumane operations, these [attacks] will continue.”

December 2005: The UAE National Consultative Council called for declaration of an all-out war against terrorism and depriving any person who pledges allegiance to foreign extremist groups the right of UAE citizenship. The council proclaimed that it regarded links to such groups as high treason.

The UAE has also assisted the Coalition effort in Iraq, in particular training Iraqi security forces and sending material assistance to the Iraqi people.

There is a lot on the other side of the ledger too — particularly a thank you statement from Hamas to the UAE in July 2005 for all the support — but given the way relationships work in the Middle East I can see Dubai expecting favorable treatment in return for its recent cooperation in the effort to combat terrorism, and especially for supporting the war effort in Iraq. It is the way of things.





James Jay Carafano
Foreign companies already own most of the maritime infrastructure that sustains American trade — the ships, the containers, the material-handling equipment, and the facilities being sold to the Dubai company. It's a little late now to start worrying about outsourcing seaborne trade, but congressional hearings could serve to clear the air.

Sure security is important. That’s why after 9/11, America led the effort to establish the International Ship and Port Security code that every country that trades with and operates in the United States has to comply with. And compliance isn’t optional—it is checked by the U.S. Coast Guard. And the security screening for the ships, people, and cargo that comes into the United States is not done by the owners of the ships and the ports, but by the Coast Guard and Customs and Border Protection, both parts of the Homeland Security department. Likewise overall security for the port is coordinated by the captain of the port, a Coast Guard officer.

What happens when one foreign-owned company sells a U.S. port service to another foreign-owned company. Not much. Virtually all the company employees at the ports are U.S. citizens. The Dubai firm is a holding company that will likely play no role in managing the U.S. facilities. Likewise, the company is owned by the government, a government that is an ally of the United States and recognizes that al Qaeda is as much a threat to them as it is to us. They are spending billions to buy these facilities because they think it’s a crackerjack investment that will keep making money for them long after the oil runs out. The odds that they have any interest in seeing their facilities become a gateway for terrorist into the United States are slim. But in the interest of national security, we will be best served by getting all the facts on the table.

[Diego in Seattle]

Diobeans;
Answer the question. Or are you afraid of that little tidbit of information coming to light?

[Diogenes]

What question, bitch?

[PSUFAN]

If the GOP incumbents oppose this, and break party lines with the White House, and bash Bush for it, then they score runaway victories, and keep the majorities. They'd be showing the cajonies to oppose party leadership, which is going to score brownie points with Johnny Q.

I agree with that. Little rolls out without the thumbprints of Rove.

[Diego in Seattle]

What question, bitch?

Who did Bush nominate to head the maritime administration, dumbfuck.

[Diogenes]

Ask someone who gives a flying fuck about your idiotic conspiracy theories.

[Diego in Seattle]

Ask someone who gives a flying fuck about your idiotic conspiracy theories.

I knew you'd be too much of a pussy to say who it was.

[Mister Bushice]

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.

No conflict of interest there. :roll:

Anytime this kind of crap is going on, a long hard look at the details of the deal are necessary.

[Diogenes]

Ask someone who gives a flying fuck about your idiotic conspiracy theories.

David Sanborn....

There you go.

[Diego in Seattle]

Ask someone who gives a flying fuck about your idiotic conspiracy theories.

David Sanborn....

There you go.

And I'm sure you would have had no problem with Clinton appointing someone from the PRC to his administration.

[Diogenes]

Sanborn's Chinese?

Thanks for the update.

[Mister Bushice]

The company is being very cooperative. I think the lack of trust that congress and a majority of America has in this administration is something they either ignore or are ignorant of.

I trust none of them to make decisions that aren't in some way self motivated. I'm sure this deal will go through, however there may well be changes during the process, and they'll only be for the better.

[Diogenes]

I think the lack of trust that congress and a majority of America has in this administration is something they either ignore or are ignorant of.

I already said that not letting Congress be involved prior to the decision being made was a political misstep. The leftist hypocrites who don't give a shit about national security that are now bellyaching over this wouldn't have said a thing if they had been informed ahead of time, the vast majority of republicans would have been (and will be) satisfied by a more in depth investigation, and the xenophobic fucks who think that we should nuke Mecca, put a moat at the border and revoke citizenship of Children of illegal aliens born in America are a distinct minority.

Even if they are the Leftists' last best hope of regaining Congress (talk about irony).

[Solo]

I already said that not letting Congress be involved prior to the decision being made was a political misstep. The leftist hypocrites who don't give a shit about national security that are now bellyaching over this wouldn't have said a thing if they had been informed ahead of time, the vast majority of republicans would have been (and will be) satisfied by a more in depth investigation, and the xenophobic fucks who think that we should nuke Mecca, put a moat at the border and revoke citizenship of Children of illegal aliens born in America are a distinct minority.

Even if they are the Leftists' last best hope of regaining Congress (talk about irony).

No hatred here, asshole. I'm just sick and tired of the mexican government thinking it's the duty of the American taxpayer to take care of their poor. If you want to spend your money to take care of foreigners who knowingly break our laws go ahead and do it. You and your cheap labor buddies can spend till you're up to your eyeballs in dept for all I care.....just don't make me to do the same. You may like the open border, borrow and spend big government of the Bush administration, but I sure as hell don't.

I may be in the republican minority, but it's a growing minority that's getting more and more frustrated with this administration (and congress) with each passing day. The party of fiscal conservatism, small government, and national security my ass. Fuck you and the big government elephant Bush rode in on.

[poptart]

RACK that, Solo.