Posted on 02/21/2006 12:32:20 PM PST by Brian Mosely
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE (AP) — President Bush says the deal allowing an Arab company to take over six major U.S. seaports should go forward and he will veto any bill that would stop it.
Why draw the line at UAE? Why not ban any Muslim based company from doing anything in the United States? Its just funny how the lefties have no problem cozying up to the Palestinians no questions asked, but apparently, other Arabs are guilty till proven innocent.
I doubt it, but I'm more than willing for a third party to test that out for us. How many Christian or Jewish churches or synagogues in Dubai?
Oh, well, itzlzha is such a font of truth, I guess that does it!
Can I be SURE you won't post anything else to me? I just had the carpets cleaned and your posts leave a stench for days.
The Republican coalition lies in shambles because of people like you, sinkspur.
This latest inept move by this White House is like a 6.0 aftershock...one that takes down whatever buildings still happen to be standing.
Congratulations to your guys...
/gallows sarcasm
Your post is misleading. Money flowed through Dubai and Citibank. Who is the culprit here?
This might lead to some insight as well:
Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI)
Reaching out to the broader Middle East
http://www.nato.int/issues/ici/
NATO's Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, launched at the Alliance's Summit in the Turkish city in June 2004, aims to contribute to long-term global and regional security by offering countries of the broader Middle East region practical bilateral security cooperation with NATO.
It focuses on practical cooperation in areas where NATO can add value, notably in the security field, starting with the individual members of the Gulf Cooperation Council: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.
Based on the principle of inclusiveness, the Initiative is, however, open to all interested countries of the broader Middle East region who subscribe to its aims and content, including the fight against terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
It is understood that the words “country” and “countries” in the document do not exclude participation, subject to the North Atlantic Council’s approval, of the Palestinian Authority in cooperation under this initiative.
That's funny. What I can't figure out, is why this is so important that he would use the veto. They doubled the budget of the DOE and he didn't bat an eye lash. Now this. Wierd!
Who is a culprit? Lets start with the two UAE hijackers.
I hardly think that it is kicking anybody in the teeth to NOT give control of our ports to a mideast nation.
The one thing this President had credibility on has now been thrown away. For nothing. Carville and Begala are popping corks tonight, I'm sure.
Yeah. Makes sense to me, too. They help us pursue terrorists, we tell them to pound sand because they're brown.
Uhhhh....!
Politically correct grandstanding is what the bots have been reduced to on this issue.
Pathetic.
You said Dubai, Doughty One. Now, you're trying to weasel into some general statement about traveling openly in the middle east.
You're the one being dishonest. You're the one making BS claims you can't back up.
I called you on it and you're apparently not man enough to admit you made an error. It's right there for everyone to see.
Calling me stupid and dishonest for your dumbass false statement is beyond absurd.
The opposition stems from their religion, not their skin color.
Very well said. It amazes me how so many adults believe that through sucking up to the middle east that the will suddenly "see it our way".
The administration already tried suck up to the Islamists a couple of weeks ago when the danish muslim cartoons came out. The state department went out of their way to come out against the notion of a free press in order not to offend the muslims.
In return, the Islamists burned down American restaurants and anti-American sentiment increased even though it was a cartoon that originated in Denmark and denounced by the US government.
These guys don't respect weakness - I know that liberals don't understand that but I thought that conservatives mostly did.
I have no argument with this really. Except that "they" need "us" more than "we" need "them". Therefore, it is "they", IMHO, would should be assuring "us" that "they" agree that , for example, islamist terrorism is wrong for the world and should be repudiated and prevented at all cost.
And the guy gave the democrats a get out of jail free card, concerning national security.
Rush was saying that this outed the democrats, because now they're admitting there is a threat, something they've been loathe to admit. I don't see how that aids our guy if he's seen to be complacent regarding an Arabian firm running our ports.
At the very best it's a push, and at the worst is undercuts our supremacy on national defense in the same manner he's already destroy conservatism's claim to fiscally sound policies and objecting to the DoE's destruction of our education system.
This guy is one effective genius.
Bush is a wuss on enforcing illegal immigration laws but a tiger on this. What is the deal with that?
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.