Right-wing hysteria v the Dubai ports deal

BrookesNews.Com ^ | Monday February 27 2006 | Dick McDonald

[Brian Allen]

I relentlessly criticize the left-wing media for lies, deceptions and omissions (LDOs). I take a back seat to no one smacking the left up side the head. So I wake up this morning with this tragic right-wing propaganda:

Because of the heightened concern over keeping America safe, it's amazing to think the federal government would put management of major U.S. ports in the hands of foreign companies.

Who do you think operates our ports now, you dimwit? And who would turn security of our ports over to a mere owner? Please.

Like the "emotional" "unpatriotic" left, our blindingly patriotic conservatives were first in line to savage our President, Secretaries of State and Treasury as political idiots for "turning our port security over to a terrorist organization" like the UAE (a totalitarian state of Muslims). As most knowledgeable patriots have come to realize, Muslims march to another tune. Theirs is a patient march toward the evangelical conversion of humanity by ANY MEANS to the cult of Islam and their "prophet" Mohammed.

It is easy to see why conservatives are upset. It took 4 entire years for the Republican administration to identify the "terrorist" enemy as Islamofascists preferring to "believe" like our liberal media still does that there is a mass of Muslims who have no interest in turning the world into a Caliphate. Such naive thinking doesn't warrant credibility at any level. Conservatives are well served to keep the pressure on an Administration that stumbles with a Harriet Miers when a Samuel Alito was in the wings.

There are two things wrong with our instant rejection of the UAE takeover of the present British management. First is the belief that intelligent and patriotic ministers of democracy like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice, John Snow as well as George W. Bush would turn our very vulnerable target-rich ports over to our enemy. When you think about it, don't you question your knee-jerk rejection of their decision? Is there something you don't understand?

Second is the fact that the shipping business in the world is run by foreigners. Our brain-dead Congress has made so many restrictions on the business; everyone avoids flying the American Flag like the plague. With a "leftist-like" inflexibility is it any wonder that no American company ever bids for the management of the subject ports? And with customers like Wal-Mart cutting your profit margins to survival levels, why even bother.

I have been a subscriber to the Journal of Commerce, the bible of the shipping business for several years. It has informed me that the worldwide shipping business is world unto itself. When John Kerry was pounding on the electorate that he would protect Americans jobs, the JOC featured Kerry's picture on their cover and the accompanying article that blatantly stated that Kerry was "one of us" and to ignore his political pandering because “he is in our pocket”. Free trade from a "bought and sold man".

Shipping is the grease that makes the world's economic engine purr. Expenditures are measured in trillions not in millions or billions. To be competitive, governments the world over approve any expenditures to facilitate trade. As a result, you can ship products around the world cheaper than loading them on a truck and shipping them to the next town.

The rejection of Dubai Ports as the owner of the previously British management company sends a shot across the bow of Islam. It is too convenient to believe that some subtle management of this issue isn't involved. It is a remarkably convenient response to the militancy of an Islamic population gone berserk over cartoons. Hey fellas, you can't buy America even if you have the cash; because you are MUSLIMS. It is quite a message.

The propaganda, however, is an overblown response. Our ports operate under American laws. Our longshoremen are a patriotic mafia with millions of eyes searching for those who would jeopardize their $120,000-a-year jobs. Port security is overseen by the American Coast Guard and Homeland Security.

Plans, diagrams, electronic surveilance, security protection is available to all. Just visit any port and they will willingly show you how well-protected you are. Believe me there are no secrets. They are ready to blow a dingy out of the water that threatens a tanker. Dubai Ports would be out of that loop. Manipulating debits and credits is a far cry from manning the guns and radar.

Our ports are insulated from a passive management in Dubai. They operate under our laws with our people. What security secrets there are, are well known to world-wide port operators like Dubai already; security is a non-issue. However, conservative hysteria aside, what is the best course of action.

On one hand, if we approved the deal, we have an opportunity to demonstrate inclusion which could be used as a hammer over the Arab street. There is no doubt that such approval would be a priceless bit of Western propaganda. You have to believe W wants that tool.

Yet on the other hand, in the present clime, let's send a shot across Islam's bow. It would be a great counterpoint to the mushiness of our media and to our government's lingering inertia over publicly discussing the reformation of that political cult into a real religion. Let's reject the Dubai takeover.

But conservative’s best not jump out the window like their liberal opponents every time we are faced with a thorny issue. They always present opportunities. It is best to weigh the facts carefully and let the cauldron steep for a while. We don't want this conflict to last too long: we have an early tee time. And don’t be deceived, the operation of the ports would not change a whit under Dubai Ports, we would merely be sticking them with the bill.

[sayfer bullets]

BTTT

[OldFriend]

This issue will not be gone until Cheney shoots another fellow hunter or some similar activity tempts the America hating left.

This time the media had partners in the hysteria and that is unforgivable.

We made Hannity a household name and his hubris and lack of intellgience has led us to this point.

Now the piper must be paid.

[OldFriend]

It makes me wonder if you have been in an airport since 9/11

[OldFriend]

Do read post #14, right here on FreeRepublic!!!

[Darkwolf377]

Well put. But you know what I keep thinking about? Wiretapping. That story created an uproar and then the dems supported it, anyway, but they must be dancing at how well it worked as "part of a story", their attempts to paint the administration as Nixonian.

With the help of many Republicans this may very well be the story that cements that image.

[Graymatter]

A good article fatally injured by the use of "you dimwit" to refer to "dear reader."

[OldFriend]

I'd not over react to the prospect of permanent damage. At least now. The polls have to be over weighted with dems to get the desired results.

We have to be vigilant not to become deluded into thinking the media is winning. They only win if we allow them to win.

[angkor]

the federal government has already done something so stupid as permitting much of American port control to fall into foreign hands

I can understand that you'd still be alarmed given that you've bought in to the MSM and Rat refrain that P&O "controls the ports", which is a flat out lie.

In fact, P&O - along with hundreds of other foreign and domestic business entities - control *businesses within the ports*, not the entire port itself.

Examples: at the Port Of Portland, Maine, P&O runs the stevedoring operations, not the entire Port Of Portland (which includes huge petro operations including Exxon).

At the Port Of Miami, P&O retains 50 percent ownership (not 100 percent) of several terminals (not all) along with 50 percent of stevedoring.

You'll really need to do the legwork yourself, since the MSM cannot seem to distinguish between "running the port" and "running one of many businesses that operate within a port".

Go here:

http://www.aapa-ports.org/directory/corproster.htm

...or here:

http://portal.pohub.com/portal/page?_pageid=169,1,169_82863&_dad=pogprtl&_schema=POGPRTL

Click on each yellow ball to see what kind of business P&O runs within the larger operation of the port itself (to wit, to see that P&O does not in any manner whatsoever "control the port".

[wolfcreek]

With all the support the UAE has already given to WOT, I doubt the rest of the Muslim world could get any madder than they already are.

[meema]

Amen!

[Gritty]

Any time one begins to feel the Federal government can't make mistakes in judgment and execution - and HUGE ones - one need only reflect momentarily on Social Security, the Department of Education or a thousand other programs it runs.

Then ask "why" Homeland Security decisions favoring Arab Muslim billionaires should be considered flawless, in America's best interests, and beyond critical examination by the taxpaying serfs...

[OldFriend]

The dems are now demanding a special prosecutor to investigate NSA for illegal wiretapping.

They left will never stop undermining our national security, no matter the public posturing.......which is nothing more than union thug pandering.

[Willie Green]

Our brain-dead Congress has made so many restrictions on the business; everyone avoids flying the American Flag like the plague.

The problem is, instead of pursuing policies that would alleviate our domestic industries of those federal burdens, our brain-dead President has also abandoned the American Flag and has joined up with foreign interests in conducting a Trade War against the peaceful prosperity of the American Middle Class.

[reformedliberal]

Bush saying he didn't know about it before makes me think there are many more questions than answers at this point.

From all the reading I have done on this topic, it appears that the reason the POTUS didn't know about this deal beforehand was a law, passed by Congress, that is intended to keep political favoritism out of deals such as this. I haven't kept a list of links to this aspect. I expect someone else may have and will hopefully post it for us.

I gather these reviews/investigations are on a strictly need-to-know basis until and unless security concerns appear and/or the deal isn't approved. CG appears to have had initial concerns that were eventually dealt with to their satisfaction.

There are posters implying that adhering to this law means that the POTUS is getting a bribe of some sort. This is a man who is already a millionaire, will not ever again run for political office, who does not party, does not travel for pleasure, owns one property and evidences no desire for expensive toys outside of his boat and his truck, neither of which is all that pricey, considering his financial status prior to being elected. Neither have I ever read that he has crushing debts or seen anything to convince me he is power-mad. IOW, I see no motivation for graft.

The law was followed. Congress can present and pass a new law, if they so choose.

[mlc9852]

I'm more curious about John Snow's role in all of this.

[kinghorse]

don't be a dimwit. LOL

Trade isn't one way without disasterous results. These people are trying to diversify and purchase assets with their trade surplus. If we don't open markets for their investment dollars they are bound to end up somewhere else with probably MORE disastrous results than the worry that already wide open ports will be compromised. Poppy's will earn a return if ports don't. Iman need $$ to spread the gospel of darkness. Just go ahead and assume we get our energy from the energy tree and our money just disappears into the ether. But don't get made if someone elses points out you are being dimwitted.

[reformedliberal]

For what reason?

[Soul Seeker]

A Fair article.

[mlc9852]

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/393375p-333478c.html

[jeremiah]

Just because the federal govt has already put much of port control under foreign hands...does not make it any less wrong paraphrasing mine.

Thanks for writing this thoughtful phrase. A word from the wise is worth much more than many words from those that are in the hands of fools.