Arab Owned Ports?

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
It’s Latin for “does not follow.” It has a technical definition as a logical fallacy, but my point was more that your posts are often the answer to the question on that other thread about how threads cannot manage to stay on topic…

Responsiveness is an underappreciated quality.
[/quote]

You made the crack about Halliburton and I joked they were already busy.

Anyway in the end it’s all related to the war on terror. If it wasn’t there would be no concern over this deal.

But my opinion of the port deal – I’m more suspicious of why Congress has banded together in opposition then the actual deal itself.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
As soon as we shine the spot light of truth on the damned Jews the world will see I am right! Strike three.

You are out, you anti-semitic son of a bitch.
[/quote]

Let the spotlight shine Zap – although if your looking for vindication you may be very disappointed. By jailing David Irving, millions of people just went, hmmmmm.

Austrian Court Sentences Holocaust Denier to Prison
AP
February 20, 2006
The court convicted Irving after his guilty plea under the 1992 law, which applies to ‘‘whoever denies, grossly plays down, approves or tries to excuse the National Socialist genocide or other National Socialist crimes against humanity in a print publication, in broadcast or other media.’’
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Austria-Holocaust-Denial.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

  • Richard Lynn Professor Emeritus
    University of Ulster, December 5, 2005

Hmmmmmm?

It’s 21 American ports that are being sold, not just 6 ports:

“UAE terminal takeover extends to 21 ports”

The UAE funneled money to 911 hijackers.
UAE officials met with Bin Laden in 1999.
UAE does NOT recognize Israel’s right to exist.
However they DO recognize the Taliban as legitimate.
The UAE is one of the world’s worst human rights violators.

And the GOP thinks we should make nice with these people, and let them own 21 of our ports?

I just hope a vote count is taken in Congress, so everyone knows which GOP screwballs vote yes on this. I can’t see why anyone would vote for this, unless they’re getting bribed.

How do you guys think the UAE’s human rights record compares to China? Buying goods from China, which by the way also leases some of our ports, and allowing this deal to go through aren’t really different. Contrary to the garbage being thrown around, this doesn’t impact port security, which remains in US government hands.

This is being chruned up mainly because it’s an election year…

[quote]DeskJockey wrote:
How do you guys think the UAE’s human rights record compares to China? Buying goods from China, which by the way also leases some of our ports, and allowing this deal to go through aren’t really different. Contrary to the garbage being thrown around, this doesn’t impact port security, which remains in US government hands.

This is being chruned up mainly because it’s an election year…
[/quote]

Great points. The UAE is not a friend to Al Qaeda. Whoever says that doesn’t know what they’re talking about. It’s no democracy, but the UAE is the most liberal Arab country in the world. They are no friends of medieval-minded Wahhabis.

“Bin Laden’s operatives still using freewheeling Dubai”
written 9/2/2004

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-09-02-terror-dubai_x.htm

Awesome, dude! You’re right, nobody really cares about national security and nobody really cares about outsourcing our infrastructure. Please call your local elected officials and insist, no demand, that they come out publicly in favor of the ports deal.

No one is allowed to contradict Dear Leader!!! Toll free number for the capitol switchboard:
1-800-426-8073

Thanks in advance!

[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
As soon as we shine the spot light of truth on the damned Jews the world will see I am right! Strike three.

You are out, you anti-semitic son of a bitch.

Let the spotlight shine Zap – although if your looking for vindication you may be very disappointed. By jailing David Irving, millions of people just went, hmmmmm.

Austrian Court Sentences Holocaust Denier to Prison
AP
February 20, 2006
The court convicted Irving after his guilty plea under the 1992 law, which applies to ‘‘whoever denies, grossly plays down, approves or tries to excuse the National Socialist genocide or other National Socialist crimes against humanity in a print publication, in broadcast or other media.’’
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Austria-Holocaust-Denial.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

“Eisenhower’s ‘Crusade in Europe’ is a book of 559 pages; the six volumes of Winston Churchill’s ‘Second World War’ total 4,448 pages; and de Gaulle’s three-volume ‘Memoires de guerre’ is 2,054 pages. In this mass of writing, which altogether totals 7,061 pages (not including the introductory parts), published from 1948 to 1959, one will find no mention either of Nazi ‘gas chambers,’ a ‘genocide’ of the Jews, or of ‘six million’ Jewish victims of the war.”

  • Richard Lynn Professor Emeritus
    University of Ulster, December 5, 2005

Hmmmmmm?
[/quote]

Do you actually deny the Nazis murdered 6 million jews as well as 4 million gypsies, homosexuals, mentally and physically handicapped and other “undesireables”?

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Do you actually deny the Nazis murdered 6 million jews as well as 4 million gypsies, homosexuals, mentally and physically handicapped and other “undesireables”?
[/quote]

First of all most revisionists don’t outright deny the holocaust. Right off the bat the 6 million number is EASILY thrown out by the fact that 4 of the 6 million total died at Auschwitz. As the picture of the plaque at Auschwitz shows, that number has OFFICIALLY been revised down over the years from 4 to 1.5 – less than one million of those being Jews.

In one fell swoop the number is automatically cut in half. Add to that things like Eisenhower, Churchill and de Gaulle’s complete omission from their books, among many other things. And then there’s this…

David Cole Interviews Dr. Franciszek Piper, Director, Auschwitz State Museum
In a dramatic and unprecedented videotaped interview, Dr. Franciszek Piper, senior curator and director of archives of the Auschwitz State Museum admitted on camera that ‘Krema 1,’ the alleged ‘homicidal gas chamber’ shown off to hundreds of thousands of tourists every year at the Auschwitz main camp, was, in fact, fabricated after the war by the Soviet Union -apparently on the direct orders of Josef Stalin.

What Piper said - in effect and on camera - was that the explosive 1988 Leuchter Report was correct: no homicidal gassings took place in the buildings designated as ‘homicidal gas chambers’ at Auschwitz.
http://www.vho.org/GB/c/DC/gcgvcole.html

I’m just saying the official “6 million” story quickly loses credibility under the slightest scrutiny, to put it mildly.

Wow, it’s a good thing you’ve gathered all this stuff about the holocaust and have those digital pictures ready to roll… that’s normal.

Wow.

[quote]DeskJockey wrote:
Wow, it’s a good thing you’ve gathered all this stuff about the holocaust and have those digital pictures ready to roll… that’s normal.

Wow.
[/quote]

Right-click, save - same as porn.

Anyway if the topic suddenly turned to fat chicks and midgets I wouldn’t question your pictures…

Back on topic… The administration has backed themselves into a corner by playing the terror card nonstop for 5 years

An article in the London Independent makes a good point about where America’s foreign policy and over-the-top reaction to terrorism is heading.

Setting sail away from America: The world finds it’s too hard to do business with the US
26 February 2006
Lucrative opportunities taken away on a political whim; the danger of being locked up by an over-mighty government agency; the brick wall of protectionism - the business community expects to do battle with all these things in an emerging market.

Yet this suddenly seems to be a description of doing business in that most developed of all markets, the United States of America.

In the UK, in the cash-rich Gulf states and in fast-growing India, different incidents in the past week have made people ask the same question: is it worth doing business with the US?
http://news.independent.co.uk/business/analysis_and_features/article347680.ece

Also did you ever given thought to how our global policy and image is affecting US companies outside of the US?

An unsafe world for US companies
Nov 5, 2005
The woes affecting KFC go well beyond one fast-food chain - McDonald’s, too, has been attacked in Pakistan and Indonesia - and the torching of fast-food outlets is only the most dramatic sign of the new business climate being fostered by a changing American foreign policy. If Clinton’s diplomatic affairs could be described as a sustained effort to make the world safe for Mickey Mouse, Microsoft and popcorn chicken, the Bush/Cheney agenda represents something altogether more dangerous for business.

In short: if Bush is an oil president, he’s not a Disney president, nor a Coca-Cola one. If Cheney is working diligently to help Halliburton rebound, the war he helped lead hasn’t worked out nearly so well for Starbucks.

A bungled-brand America
Whether the administration’s bold gamble for US global dominance will prove profitable either in the near future or in the long run, the business costs of this approach are already becoming evident. For starters, the new wave of anti-Americanism sweeping the planet goes far beyond KFC bombings in South Asia or widespread hostility in the Middle East.

In Asia, the South China Morning Post has noted that a “strong, growing hostility” toward the United States has complicated Disney’s expansion plans in the area. The Bush imperial foreign policy, moreover, is inspiring consumer backlash even among traditional allies.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/GK05Dj01.html

" We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them."

George W. Bush, 9/11/01.

(Flip flop much?)

The more research I do on this port deal, the more I realize that it’s really not a big deal security wise for the country. Politically though it’s a real shit storm for the president due to America’s xenaphobia w/r/t Arabs.

It’s kind of funny though, aren’t the dems supposed to be the party of tolerance and acceptance? Aren’t they against profiling? even at airport security?

Too funny.


http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06057/660934.stm

[b]Jack Kelly: The phony fracas

Sorry folks, but United Arab Emirates is a key American ally[/b]
Sunday, February 26, 2006

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

What do the arrests of three suspected Muslim terrorists in Ohio have to do with the purchase by an Arab company of the firm that manages facilities at six U.S. seaports?

Nothing … and everything.

The Justice Department indicted Tuesday Mohammad Zaki Amawi, 26, of Toledo; Marwan Othman al-Hindi, 42, of Toledo; and Wassim Mazloum, 24, of Cleveland, on charges of plotting to kill U.S. military personnel.

A fourth person is mentioned in the indictment. He is “the trainer,” a U.S. military combat veteran and “respected member of the Muslim community” in Toledo from whom the plotters sought weapons training and bomb making advice.

The “trainer” reported the terrorists to the FBI, and agreed to work undercover to build the case against them.

So what does this have to do with the purchase by Dubai Ports World of the British firm that manages commercial operations at ports in New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami and New Orleans?

Bush administration approval of the sale has united Democrats and Republicans in fury. Conservative pundits are apoplectic.

“The Dubai ports fracas will become a flap, quickly swell into a firestorm, then become a debacle before settling into the history books as a ‘historic miscalculation’ – providing the Republicans only lose the Congress,” predicted James Lileks of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

On the left, Jack Cafferty, CNN’s resident bozo, opined the ports deal could be grounds for impeachment.

Distilled to its essence, the argument against the sale is that Dubai Ports World is an Arab firm, and it was Arabs who attacked us on 9/11 (including Marwan al Shehhi, a citizen of the United Arab Emirates, who flew United Flight 175 into the World Trade Center).

The argument is comparable to the one President Roosevelt used to send Japanese Americans from the West Coast to concentration camps.

If we are to win the war against the Islamofascists, we need to be able to distinguish our friends from our enemies.

In this war, there are good Muslims and bad Muslims. The Toledo conspirators are examples of the latter. The “trainer,” and the 1,715 Muslims currently serving in the U.S. Army are examples of the former.

We wouldn’t lump “the trainer” in with the terrorists he risked his life to catch, and we shouldn’t lump the UAE in with Iran or Syria, or even with Egypt or Saudi Arabia.

Among Arab nations, we have no better friends than the United Arab Emirates. The government (which owns Dubai Ports World) sponsors a U.S. Air Force base, services U.S. Navy warships and is assisting in our efforts to shut down terrorist funding. (Dubai is the banking, and consequently the money laundering, center of the Gulf.)

Unlike Saudi Arabia, the UAE is a modern, tolerant country. The British Financial Times describes it as “the Singapore of the Gulf.” The UAE is what we wish every Arab country were like. But we will not make more friends in the Arab world if we treat the friends we have as if they were enemies.

There are, of course, Islamists in the UAE. But not, so far as we know, in the management of Dubai Ports World, whose security record has been exemplary.

There are, as we have seen, Islamists in Toledo, too. And there are lots of Islamists in London, which is where Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Company, the British firm Dubai Ports World bought, is headquartered. Not even Jack Cafferty has yet suggested we stop doing business with Ohio and Britain.

Dubai Ports World bought P&O; it isn’t replacing it. Management of the ports will continue as before. The employees who load and unload ships – nearly all of whom are Americans – will remain the same. The managers simply will report to a different board of directors.

And P&O has nothing to do with port security, which remains in the hands of the Coast Guard and other federal agencies. U.S. intelligence agencies and the U.S. military reviewed the deal, and say they have no problem with it.

Opposition to the ports deal has been fueled by ignorance and prejudice. Blocking it will do no more to defeat the terrorists than Roosevelt’s concentration camps did to defeat the Japanese.

It is stupid as well as shameful to turn the war we must fight against Islamic extremism into an attack on Muslims generally.

DeskJockey wrote:
"Wow, it’s a good thing you’ve gathered all this stuff about the holocaust and have those digital pictures ready to roll… that’s normal.

Wow."

I am laughing out loud!!!

Keep up the good work, DJ.

JeffR

[quote]bradley wrote:

" We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them."

George W. Bush, 9/11/01.

(Flip flop much?)[/quote]"

You remind me quite a bit of Senator Leahy.

He has soundbites ready that he regurgitates. Watch when he talks, people look at their shoes. It is trully sad.

Anyway, your argument appears to go like this, “two of the 911 hijackers were from UAE. Therefore, the UAE supported terrorism. Therefore, they should be punished.”

You do know that we have home grown terrorists? Should we be punished.

Wait, don’t answer that. I think I know what YOU would say. Blame America!!!

JeffR

Bigflamer:

Please allow me to post the most important paragraphs (remember democrats think in VERY SMALL soundbites. They need to be countered with VERY SMALL soundbites)

"Among Arab nations, we have no better friends than the United Arab Emirates. The government (which owns Dubai Ports World) sponsors a U.S. Air Force base, services U.S. Navy warships and is assisting in our efforts to shut down terrorist funding. (Dubai is the banking, and consequently the money laundering, center of the Gulf.)

Unlike Saudi Arabia, the UAE is a modern, tolerant country. The British Financial Times describes it as “the Singapore of the Gulf.” The UAE is what we wish every Arab country were like. But we will not make more friends in the Arab world if we treat the friends we have as if they were enemies."

Read it dems/pseudo-Republicans/people running for President.

Think about the message we are sending with all this hot air.

JeffR

[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
Back on topic… The administration has backed themselves into a corner by playing the terror card nonstop for 5 years

An article in the London Independent makes a good point about where America’s foreign policy and over-the-top reaction to terrorism is heading.

Setting sail away from America: The world finds it’s too hard to do business with the US
26 February 2006
Lucrative opportunities taken away on a political whim; the danger of being locked up by an over-mighty government agency; the brick wall of protectionism - the business community expects to do battle with all these things in an emerging market.

Yet this suddenly seems to be a description of doing business in that most developed of all markets, the United States of America.

In the UK, in the cash-rich Gulf states and in fast-growing India, different incidents in the past week have made people ask the same question: is it worth doing business with the US?
http://news.independent.co.uk/business/analysis_and_features/article347680.ece

Also did you ever given thought to how our global policy and image is affecting US companies outside of the US?

An unsafe world for US companies
Nov 5, 2005
The woes affecting KFC go well beyond one fast-food chain - McDonald’s, too, has been attacked in Pakistan and Indonesia - and the torching of fast-food outlets is only the most dramatic sign of the new business climate being fostered by a changing American foreign policy. If Clinton’s diplomatic affairs could be described as a sustained effort to make the world safe for Mickey Mouse, Microsoft and popcorn chicken, the Bush/Cheney agenda represents something altogether more dangerous for business.

In short: if Bush is an oil president, he’s not a Disney president, nor a Coca-Cola one. If Cheney is working diligently to help Halliburton rebound, the war he helped lead hasn’t worked out nearly so well for Starbucks.

A bungled-brand America
Whether the administration’s bold gamble for US global dominance will prove profitable either in the near future or in the long run, the business costs of this approach are already becoming evident. For starters, the new wave of anti-Americanism sweeping the planet goes far beyond KFC bombings in South Asia or widespread hostility in the Middle East.

In Asia, the South China Morning Post has noted that a “strong, growing hostility” toward the United States has complicated Disney’s expansion plans in the area. The Bush imperial foreign policy, moreover, is inspiring consumer backlash even among traditional allies.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/GK05Dj01.html

[/quote]

Do you REALLY think the rest of the world is going to stop doing business with the US?

So, we care about the feelings of the Arab street when it comes to a business deal concerning Bush’s buddies and our national security, but when it comes to torturing people, running black-ops prisons, etc…not so much.

Try another argument; the “insulting the Middle East one” doesn’t work at all.

[quote]harris447 wrote:
So, we care about the feelings of the Arab street when it comes to a business deal concerning Bush’s buddies and our national security, but when it comes to torturing people, running black-ops prisons, etc…not so much.

Try another argument; the “insulting the Middle East one” doesn’t work at all.[/quote]

I don’t think we care as much about the “Arab Street”, whatever that happens to be (I know what it’s supposed to be, but it’s really just a big stereotype across countries and ethnicities), thinks. It’s more the upper-level folks in investments and governments, particularly those currently investing in the U.S. and helping us out with bases, intelligence, etc. in the War on Terror.

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
harris447 wrote:
So, we care about the feelings of the Arab street when it comes to a business deal concerning Bush’s buddies and our national security, but when it comes to torturing people, running black-ops prisons, etc…not so much.

Try another argument; the “insulting the Middle East one” doesn’t work at all.

I don’t think we care as much about the “Arab Street”, whatever that happens to be (I know what it’s supposed to be, but it’s really just a big stereotype across countries and ethnicities), thinks. It’s more the upper-level folks in investments and governments, particularly those currently investing in the U.S. and helping us out with bases, intelligence, etc. in the War on Terror.[/quote]

They are helping us (if they truly are, and that’s to be debated) in the so-called War on Terror, then they are doing so because it is in their best interests, not because they like or admire us.

It’s not personal, it’s just business.