Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Welcoming Terror to U.S. Ports (From David Horowitz's Frontpagemag.com)
Frontpagegmagazine.com ^ | 2-23-06 | By Rachel Ehrenfeld and Paul E. Vallely

Posted on 02/23/2006 12:59:55 AM PST by Stellar Dendrite

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 last
To: raybbr
Wow! Look at all those bush-bots. When will they wake up?

Good one raybbr. And I can still hear their now fading chant:

glo-bal-ism, new-world-order,
glo-bal-ism, new-world-order,
glo-bal-ism, new-world-order,

81 posted on 02/23/2006 11:25:43 AM PST by Colorado Buckeye (It's the culture stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW
My problem is that everyone on FR should be able to give an opinion and not suffer insults because someone else disagrees. FR isn't a "group think" forum. Silencing the opposition is Clintonian.

You weren't really silenced, were you? You got your say and Clemenza got his shot in. I don't agree with him and I do agree with you on this issue. Calling names and attacks are a sure sign of a failed argument. Look at it that way and you will feel better about it.

82 posted on 02/23/2006 12:40:58 PM PST by raybbr (ANWR is a barren, frozen wasteland - like the mind of a democrat!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark

Thanks to info


83 posted on 02/23/2006 12:41:23 PM PST by knighthawk (We will always remember We will always be proud We will always be prepared so we may always be free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite
"...the private British company that manages six U.S. ports...

LOL! There hasn't been a U.S. PORT managed by a British company since we gained our independence. They can't even get the basic facts right.

84 posted on 02/23/2006 12:44:35 PM PST by CWOJackson (Tancredo? Wasn't he the bounty hunter in Star Wars?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
You weren't really silenced, were you?

Others have been. And there are some who will not even enter the fray. I've done that before...........read but not posted, because it degenerated into viciousness instead of debate.

85 posted on 02/23/2006 12:52:37 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (If you think you know what's coming next....You don't know Jack.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

Comment #86 Removed by Moderator

To: iraqikurd
Ok, so the UAE is no supporter of our foreign policy, big deal!

I got that far in your post. I remember some guy saying "Either you are for us or you are against us". It was true then and it is now.

87 posted on 02/23/2006 2:55:29 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (If you think you know what's coming next....You don't know Jack.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Dane

Much as I love Gen. Franks, I think he does not want to risk the bases in Dubai.
This is appeasement.


88 posted on 02/23/2006 3:27:04 PM PST by meema (I am a Conservative Traditional Republican, NOT an elitist, sexist , cynic or right wing extremist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: meema

Yep, General Franks is an appeaser. He even relied on the UAE to provide logistical support and dock facilities for U.S. Navy ships to appease them.


89 posted on 02/23/2006 3:29:16 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite
"...the President threatens to veto any legislation to block the deal and challenges lawmakers to “step up and explain why a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard" than the British company that ran the ports before.

There are many important differences. To begin with, a private company based in the U.K. a Western democracy with troops fighting along with U.S. soldiers in Iraq, contrasts sharply with the UAE, which supported al-Qaeda, sent 9/11 terrorists and funding, and continues to support Palestinian suicide bombers and particularly HAMAS, which President Bush calls “a terrorist organization.”

As good an answer as any I've seen to the question, "why not?".

90 posted on 02/23/2006 3:53:00 PM PST by Czar (StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson

His life, and his 'living' is different now.


91 posted on 02/23/2006 4:02:03 PM PST by meema (I am a Conservative Traditional Republican, NOT an elitist, sexist , cynic or right wing extremist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: meema

Not for someone who wore the uniform as long as he did. Not for someone who lost close personal friends in wars. Not for someone who has personally ordered the troops that he cares for into combat where he knows some will not live.


92 posted on 02/23/2006 4:04:29 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

Comment #93 Removed by Moderator

Comment #94 Removed by Moderator

To: iraqikurd
they are backing their Arab/Muslim brothers like all groups of people do in a common cause.

That's the point.

The UAE is just as much a target for Osama as any other Arab nation for doing business with the west

Prove that. They were buds in 99, even hunting in Afghanistan together.

He clearly laid out the Axis of Evil, and the UAE was no where near being in there.

The money for 9/11 was funneled through their bank. There are links all over these threads showing Dubai sells weapons to our enemies. They are NOT our buddies.

Did you read the article?

Welcoming Terror to U.S. Ports (From David Horowitz's Frontpagemag.com)

The HAMAS statement included a special tribute: "One can never forget the generous donations of the late Sheikh Zayed Bin Sultan,” the father of the current UAE president. Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan al Nahayan of Abu Dhabi, was the first Arab leader to understand the importance of waging economic Jihad against the West

What do you suppose economic jihad means?

95 posted on 02/23/2006 4:25:43 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (If you think you know what's coming next....You don't know Jack.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: iraqikurd
Both the United States and the United Arab Emirates both signed into a defense cooperation agreement in 1994.

Wow! That worked on 9/11 didn't it.

Meanwhile, in 99, they hunting with Osama.

Complete 911 Timeline: The hunt for bin Laden

February 1999: Bin Laden Missile Strike Called Off for Fear of Hitting Persian Gulf Royalty

Intelligence reports foresee the presence of bin Laden at a desert hunting camp in Afghanistan for about a week. Information on his presence appears reliable, so preparations are made to target his location with cruise missiles. However, intelligence also puts an official aircraft of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and members of the royal family from that country in the same location. Bin Laden is hunting with the Emirati royals, as he did with leaders from the UAE and Saudi Arabia on other occasions (see 1995-2001). Policy makers are concerned that a strike might kill a prince or other senior officials, so the strike never happens. A top UAE official at the time denies that high-level officials are there, but evidence subsequently confirms their presence.

[9/11 Commission Report, 3/24/04 (B)] People and organizations involved: Osama bin Laden

96 posted on 02/23/2006 4:31:53 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (If you think you know what's coming next....You don't know Jack.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: ballplayer
Speak for yourself. Many of us have been decrying this for years. Calling people who object to this deal racists is as much a non sequitor as calling people who were pointed out Harriet Miers' lack of qualifications for SCOTUS sexist.
97 posted on 02/23/2006 7:53:54 PM PST by MarcusTulliusCicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite

My point was that the UAE was one of a number of countries which funded the PLO. Included in that number is the US and the EU. That is why The UAE funding them is not a big deal.

Of course you knew this - Still dont let logical debate get in the way of a "they killed jews" deflection eh?


98 posted on 02/23/2006 11:34:08 PM PST by weegie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: weegie
i didnt mention the PLO, you did-- _i_ mentioned hamas.

UAE fund hamas...which the US is NOT doing. is that "no big deal" too?


UAE, Palestine to set up a joint investment firm (Hamas)
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/business/2006/February/business_February391.xml&section=business



An anti-Israeli foundation run by the crown prince of Dubai owns the deed to CAIR's headquarters in Washington DC. The foundation has held telethons to support families of Palestinian suicide bombers. (Cair is a HAMAS front group and got michael graham thrown off of talk radio)
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:BgAAE3vM-q8J:www.discoverthenetwork.org/Articles/Z-CAIR.htm+cair+dubai&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3&client=firefox-a


i have more info on my homepage which shows they support hamas-- among other startling revelations
99 posted on 02/23/2006 11:42:29 PM PST by Stellar Dendrite (UAE-- Anti-Israel and funds CAIR, check my homepage for more info)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

Comment #100 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson