Ports

[Nick Douglas]

This port controversy is embarassing. I hate to say it but my liberal bretheren (as well as a lot of conservatives) are looking like racists on this one. If U.A.E. isn't a friend of the U.S., what Arab country is?

I'll be shocked if Bush allows this sale to be blocked. He is a pretty pro-business guy (to unhealthy extremes at times IMO) and it would just seem antithetical for him to start all of a sudden restricting business just because the owners are from an Arab country.

 

[smurphy]

Not racism at all. Absolute security issue. This UAE company is state run - and has already been proven to be connected with financing terror groups and 9-11.

Nobody is suggesting not doing business at all with Arab countries. There wouldn't be any controversy at all if they were buying out 7-11 or Hanes or something like that. But to allow someone who already has shown a connection/sympathy with those out to destroy us to have any kind of control/ownership over our ports is absolutedly stupid. Should we not draw a line based on security to the country ever?

Don't play the race card. You can play religion if you like and I'll bash that backwards sexist murdering religion 24/7. I'm not fooled by the disguise of "Good Arabs". The only thing that makes them "good" is that they are rich, in control, and do business with us. Saddam was once "good", but then he got uppity with us and we decided he was now bad.

 

[Pujo21]

BUSH PHUCKING AMERICANS AGAIN

BUSH PHUCKING AMERICANS AGAIN

Well all the " STAUNCH "
bush supporters in this forum will try to tell you how this is an okay deal of having the arabs take control of the ports. :dizzy:

But don't worry about the arab terrorists taking over AMERICAN CITIES PORTS....GEORGE W. BUSH will take " FULL RESPONSIBILITY " :lol: :grins:


:fingerc:

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"Not racism at all. Absolute security issue"
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Glad I wasn't driving in my truck GW--after seeing above
When checking Muslims at airports or trains "inside U.S."--it's racial profiling.
--but now when country is involved and not even on U.S. soil its a security issue and not racism at all--

Hmm-Which is it?? Let me check the wind

My opinion is they both are prudent measures and security issues.

 

[smurphy]

Dude - I have no problem at all with racial profiling at airports. I'm all about what is logical - and so far it is only Middle Eastern males who have shown a tendency to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings.

This point is driven home even more when I see poor grandma Smith pulled aside for a full search, meanwhile I pass through all disheveled, unshaven and looking up to no good. Or the worst case I saw when a very shy Asian woman was practically strip searched in front of the rest of line. I was thinking what a farce this was. We know whose not going to blow up the plane. Until proven otherwise, I'm willing to play the "logic" card and not strip search grandma or Miss Saigon.

 

[djv]

Bush just on TV and still sticking with the line these guys are OK. As mentioned above Saddam was our buddy for years. And Bush said it's alright for a Brit company to own but not OK for a UAE company. Thats not fair? He's kidding he has to be. One is a private company and one from UAE is a state run. And Lets remember UAE does not recognized Israel. Who we want on our side if hell every really break lose.

 

[gardenweasel]

restricting business?....i`m getting a little tired of some(many in the republican party with whom i share similar ideology) thinking that we can sell our souls to attain a favorable bottom line...

jobs are leaving this country faster than mexicans are coming across the border.....

maximum shareholder value is great.....but the u.s. isn`t a fricking casino......

like all principles,it can be taken to far....

how many domestic assets will we sell off to foreign entitties before somebody says,"hey,wait a minute".....

we(mainly my conservative brethren)are going to have to,at some point,draw a line in the sand....

maybe that`s happening here...

as far as the racism issue...that`s downright silly....

uae has been "a good partner" over the last 6 or 7 years...with the exception of blocking our investigation of bin laden(they literally kept us from killing him during a golfing excursion in 99`when he was with the leaders of the uae)........letting the a.q. khan technology flow through their ports,recognizing the taliban,not recognizing israel......

as i said...the leaders of the uae may be fine...the port personnel may be fine...but,if 80% of the people in the uae are ex-patriots from all over the muslim world,that scares me.... they hate us...polls prove that...

infiltration...over time...

if you knew a guy was a rapist or a pedophile....but was straight for 6 or 7 years,would you allow him to care for your wife and daughter?.....

i`m much more worried about our security than walking on eggshells.....than worrying about offending people....who are damned easily offended,i might add...

 

[smurphy]

restricting business?....i`m getting a little tired of some(many in the republican party with whom i share similar ideology) thinking that we can sell our souls to attain a favorable bottom line...

jobs are leaving this country faster than mexicans are coming across the border.....

maximum shareholder value is great.....but the u.s. isn`t a fricking casino......

like all principles,it can be taken to far....

how many domestic assets will we sell off to foreign entitties before somebody says,"hey,wait a minute".....

we(mainly my conservative brethren)are going to have to,at some point,draw a line in the sand....

maybe that`s happening here...

as far as the racism issue...that`s downright silly....

uae has been "a good partner" over the last 6 or 7 years...with the exception of blocking our investigation of bin laden(they literally kept us from killing him during a golfing excursion in 99`when he was with the leaders of the uae)........letting the a.q. khan technology flow through their ports,recognizing the taliban,not recognizing israel......

as i said...the leaders of the uae may be fine...the port personnel may be fine...but,if 80% of the people in the uae are ex-patriots from all over the muslim world,that scares me.... they hate us...polls prove that...

infiltration...over time...

if you knew a guy was a rapist or a pedophile....but was straight for 6 or 7 years,would you allow him to care for your wife and daughter?.....

i`m much more worried about our security than walking on eggshells.....than worrying about offending people....who are damned easily offended,i might add...

Man, take away the NYT squabbles and we are pretty much on the same train of thought almost all the time.

Yeah - I'm as much in favor of business, capitalism, free enterprise as anyone. But even in the old days they knew there were boundaries to this. Monopolies, national security, and public conflict of interest are where you draw the line. There are certain things that you simply DO NOT leave vulnerable to the global market. Security of our ports should very obviously qualify as a national security issue MORE IMPORTANT than simply highest bidder gets the contract.

This should be obvious. I don't know why it isn't.

Racism? Not even. Take it from a bleeding heart liberal who bends over backwards for equality blah blah blah - it's not about race, hurt feelings or anything like that, it's about what makes sense for the country.

 

[SixFive]

smurphy, I seem to always find myself agreeing with you in regards to the muslims and middle easterners. No reason to check old women, American blacks, and asians at the airport when there are middle easterners in line. I've also found that if you have any piece of baggage or clothing that is camoflauged at the airport, you're going to be made to step out of line and nearly strip searched. I made that mistake one trip, lol, and I'll never make it again. I got taken out of line 3 out of 4 times.

"i`m much more worried about our security than walking on eggshells.....than worrying about offending people....who are damned easily offended,i might add..." I agree. Fock them and their feelings.

 

[gardenweasel]

and how about iraq?.....the danes post some cartoons and it`s ww3.....

zarqhawi literally razes several muslim holy sites and not a peep outside of iraq?.....

these people aren`t rational...they don`t care isf saddam murders and maims hundreds of thousands,,,,they don`t care if their societies are poor and failing...medieval....

is it an accident,that the most successful mideastern states...although still backwards,are somewhat westernized(at least by their standards....kuwait,uae,egypt,jordan)..

that`s what they hate...

isn`t it odd....it seems that whacking the "bolthole" of the revered 12th imam certainly doesn`t bother zarqhawi...does it?.



""One of the mosques attacked today in Iraq is not just any shrine, it’s the hiding place of the so-called “twelfth imam” who will return at the end of days to restore the world to a perfect Islamic society before Yawm al-Qiyamah—the day of resurrection: Al-Askariya shrine: ‘Not just a major cathedral’.


""Today’s attack on al-Askariya shrine marks the first time that Iraqi sectarian violence has targeted one of the country’s central religious symbols.

The Shia Muslim shrine has existed in the middle of the ancient city of Samarra, one of the largest archaeological sites in the world, since 944, when it was built to house the tombs of two ninth century imams, direct descendants of the Prophet Muhammad.

Ali al-Hadi, the tenth imam who died in 868 and his son Hassan al-Askari who died in 874, were buried at the end of the turbulent period during which Samarra was built as the new capital of the Abbasid empire, briefly taking over from Baghdad, then the largest city in the world.

But the continued and intense religious importance of the site is connected to the 12th imam, the so-called “Hidden Imam” who Shias believe went into hiding in 878 under the al-Askariya shrine to prepare for his eventual return among men.

According to Shia tradition, the Mahdi will reappear one day to punish the sinful and “separate truth from falsehood”. For many years, a saddled horse and soldiers would be brought to the shrine in Samarra every day to be ready for his return, a ritual that was repeated in Hilla, about 100 miles to the south, where it was also thought that Mahdi might reappear.""


you want these folks running our eastern ports?....what if something happens down the line that profoundly offends them...even more than they already are?...

 

[smurphy]

you want these folks running our eastern ports?.....

No - I don't. I don't understand how anyone does.

 

[gardenweasel]

please guys...read panel 10...then,read below....

.maybe i am an islamophobe....there`s a mental disconnect between civilizations... ........why on god`s green earth would we want a civil war in iraq?...why would the israelis?....

...i don`t want them near our ports......i don`t care how benevolent they seem..........................................................

""Iran blames Iraq shrine blast on foreign forces""


TEHRAN, Feb 22 (Reuters) - Shi'ite Muslim Iran said on Wednesday a dawn bomb attack which devastated a Shi'ite shrine in Iraq was orchestrated by Israel and U.S.-led foreign forces hoping to promote sectarian strife in Iraq.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the last word on all state matters in the Islamic Republic, urged Shi'ites not to take revenge on Sunni Muslims for the attack on the Samarra shrine.

"This is a political crime and its origins should be found in the intelligence organisations of the occupiers of Iraq and the Zionists," Khamenei said in a statement read out on state television.

"The dominating powers ... have ominous plans such as aggravating the insecurity and creating religious disputes ... Today's crime in Samarra added another page to the list of misdeeds by Iraq's occupiers," he added.

Announcing a week-long period of mourning in Iran, Khamenei urged all Muslims to avoid fanning the flames of sectarian rivalry.

"There are definitely some plots to force Shi'ites to attack the mosques and other properties respected by the Sunnis," he said. "Any measure to contribute to that direction is helping the enemies of Islam and is forbidden by Sharia," he added.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi also said U.S.-led forces in Iraq were ultimately responsible for the blast.

"This inhumane act, committed by terrorists when Iraq is insecure, is due to the presence of the (foreign) occupiers there," said Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi.

"It aims to insult religious sanctities, trigger turmoil, launch religious war, and create rifts among the Iraqi people," he added.

The United States has accused Iran of interfering in Iraq by encouraging radicalism among its neighbour's majority Shi'ites. ""

 

[gardenweasel]

on a lighter note....think about it....

this 12th imam has been hiding in this mosque for over 1000 years and nobody found him?

either he should be crowned hide-n-seek world champion or the folks there are real bad at seeking...

back to reality...if iran gets the bomb...we`re sunk....i really think we may be looking at the end of days...seriously...

"in the game of nuclear poker,the appearance of derangement is an apparent advantage"...

 

[StevieD]

Not to worry about ports. Bush said a secret deal was worked out with the UAE. Gee, I hope it works out as good as that secret energy deal they worked out. These guys are amazing.

 

[smurphy]

I don't understand how with all these secret deals going they actually feel the need to request even more executive power.

I think the political capital Bush was talking about last year has been spent. Many good Republicans have given him the benfit of the doubt for quite a while. It looks like this issue has finally put a lot of them at wit's end. There's no way they can stand by him and preserve their constituancy at the same time.

Advice to Dubya - go with that "I didn't know" excuse you were working on. It's your only chance. Most of us already know your not bright, but we will have major problems with you being anti-American.

 

[StevieD]

They must keep these things secret because they work in our best interest.......I don't think so.

 

[dawgball]

I could almost copy and paste most of my reply about the Halliburton deals on this subject. I simply don't like the smell, sound, taste, or look of it.

Do I know they ar doing something wrong? No.

But a little transparency here would do a world of good. I don't give two flying shits about most issues being behind closed doors. I actually think, we know too much most of the time. But this issue at this time in our history is as touchy as it gets.

I'm not liking where this is heading at all. God forbid that I am on the same side of an argument as the freaking liberal morons who protest in the streets around NYC and San Fran. I am actually shuddering at te thought of pictures on the front of the papers of these people and me nodding in agreement. :s2:

 

[StevieD]

Dawgball, very bi-partisan of you.

 

[gardenweasel]

i don`t have to tell anybody on this board that i defend the administration....and i`d almost consider give him the benfit of the doubt myself ........

if their record on border security hadn`t been almost non-existant....

i would be embracing the dems on this iissue if i didn`t believe that this was nothing more than another opportunity to "bash bush"....

unfortunately,i don`t believe that many of them give one whit about security...forget nsa...the record is clear...

"""It was Democrats who attacked the Bush Justice Department after the September 11 attacks for fingerprinting young male temporary visa holders traveling from terror-sponsoring and terror-friendly nations; temporarily detaining asylum seekers from high-risk countries for background screening; and sending undercover agents to investigate mosques suspected of supporting terrorism.....


It was Democrats who secretly attempted to remove funding for the National Security Exit-Entry Registration System — the Justice Department program that helped nabbed at least 330 known foreign criminals, 15 illegal-alien felons, and three known terrorists who attempted to enter the country.....


And just one week ago, it was failed Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore who was in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, attacking the Bush administration's profiling and immigration enforcement against illegal aliens from terror-friendly countries as "terrible abuses."""

not to mention...abu gharaib...abu gharaib....abu gharaib......

where do we turn?....rudderless nation..

 

[StevieD]

Once again GW you bring take this down to a Republican- Democrat or Conservative - Liberal stance and confuse the issue. The issue is not Al Gore and his ridiculous speech, the issue is do we want our ports to be run by the UAE with the deal being completed during secretive negotiations and the President saying he didn't even know about it. If you can tie that in to any of your other points I would like to see how they relate.
Don't forget, this is the administration that was so far off in it's estimates of post war Iraq?