Replies

I am interested in this argument-- though I do think that anti-port advocates are being racist and nativist.

Do you have evidence that the Dubai coporation would enforce such a ban at a US port? Your article seems to suggest that they conform to local laws in Arab ports. Such laws are stupid and anti-semitic but I am not sure the Dubai corporation can change those laws.

The writer doesn't really care if Israel made products are imported to UAE or not ~ he'd probably engage in it himself if he were rich enough and thought we wouldn't catch him ~ because, after all, he's a modern progressive.

So, how do I know that? Well, he used the expression "is seeking control over six major US ports" in his article. Since that's not really what is going on, that identifies his piece as essentially propaganda, and leftwing propaganda at that.

These guys want to brew up a rift between the USA and UAE such that we have to withdraw our forces from there. Inasmuch as UAE is our major marshalling yard to support all of our forces, including two fleets, in the Middle East, that would be an unmitigated disaster for the United States.

In short, this is just more enemy talk.

When is "W" going to show some cojones and toss these people in the clink for the duration just like Woodrow Wilson?

I do think that anti-port advocates are being racist and nativist.

It is hard to cut through the fog on both sides. Here's the issue -- and it is neither racist nor 'nativist'-- this is a corporation wholly-owned by one of the few governments in the world that actively supports Wahabi Mohamedanism -- the strain of this primitive religion which actively supports 9-11 style attacks on non-Mohamedans.

By means of this deal, the corporation will gain access to several hundred new visas for their 'managers' by reason of their new role as 'managers' of the ports. While it is true that they will still have to play 'catch us if you can' with US Customs and DHS, their ability to station Wahabist Mohamedans in the infrastructure of our major ports will at a minimum complicate the Customs/DHS task.

It is not their 'race' (ie your 'racist' charge) or their country of origin (ie your 'nativist' charge) which gives concern, it is their government's active support for the very philosophy which caused the loss of life on 9-11.

This is not the NFL or MLB where we give the last place team the first draft pick to make the contest more competitive. We do not want the Mohamedan terrorists to become more competitive. If the UAE government were to openly renounce Wahabism in favor of some 'live-and-let-live' form of Mohamedanism, I would allow the deal to go through. But they won't and so I wouldn't either. I believe in self-defense.

My screen namesame once defined a 'liberal' as one so broadminded that he could not take his own side in a quarrel. Let us hope we will not be so 'liberal' in this instance.

Your article seems to suggest that they conform to local laws in Arab ports. Such laws are stupid and anti-semitic but I am not sure the Dubai corporation can change those laws.

But Dubai Ports is owned by the government of the UAE, so the people "conforming" to the laws are in the end the same ones who make them.

If it truly is against US law to deal with companies which boycott Israel, then no one in the US can deal with these people. However, it's also said that the Navy buys fuel and services from them, Dubai Ports that is, so there is a bit of a conflict there.