Posted on 02/22/2006 5:48:52 AM PST by saveliberty
The PR dealing with this should be smacked upside their heads in the way they handled this
They blew it
:) Stole it off someone's picture!
As usual, I'm going to have to go back after the show and do my homework.
That is just the point, FFV....I voted for President Bush because I DO trust him..
I would NEVER vote for Hillary, or Bubba, because I don't trust them..
THAT is part of this...and I don't think that I should have to feel guilty because one of the criteria I would use to form my opinion, would be the trust I have in the POTUS...
Big time. I don't understand which part of public relations they don't get, but this was as bad as it gets. And with results that literally COULD hurt us by making our ally so angry with us.
It's not as though it's unprecedented for UAE to chose the wrong side of the terrorist spectrum and so how many people have we ticked off who won't forget?
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1583262/posts
The operative sentences:
"Dubai Ports World executives plan to visit Washington this week to brief congressional leaders and staffers and administration officials on the deal. Girding for a battle, the company is tapping well-connected consulting firms for help: Downey-McGrath Group, founded by former congressmen from both parties, and Alston & Bird LLC, whose advisers include former Senate Democratic Leader Thomas Daschle of South Dakota.
In the background is Albright Group, a firm founded by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. The Albright Group doesn't lobby but has provided strategic advice to Dubai Ports World, specifically on expanding the company's presence in China."
from the wsj article.
Micheal Reagan was hostile on this issue last night. He jumped to conclusions and started sprewing before he knew the details. I think M Reagan needs to retrack on his words of anger last night. I will be listening to see if he does.....
I'm trying to find a curious op-ed written in the WaPo in 2004 by Dashcle re: Dubai ports...
Peter King coming up and I know he's opposed to this deal; I respect him very much and will be interested in waht he has to say.
Another freeper has freepmailed me and wondered if the reason so many democrats are opposed to this deal isn't because of national security concerns but rather they would like to see port issues unionized! And we all know why democrats like unions.
How about the Danes?
This morning, she said, "now more is coming out" about the story and it's not security. What intellectual laziness. She doesn't see that it's HER JOB to be informed before she pops her mouth off?
I've been told that the Danish company is like British Airways. They do their own thing and don't really compete in the global marketplace.
'the administration is defending the port transfer... even though Dubai was an important base for the Sept. 11 plot,
Now read that last sentence again and tell me why this deal does not demand close and open scrutiny!
Do we know who these senior analysts are? We know that Secretary Chertoff signed off on it. Whatever you may think of him about Katrina, he was put where he was because he is a recognized Terrorism expert from his judging work with FISA and in previous lives. I would not want to be pinning my argument on unnamed secret bureaucrats who may have their own alliances with the DUmmies and be fighting a total other battle.
I wonder what some element in the UAE feel on their side on this deal (the civilians, not big business)?
Thanks for the info. I do remember now Tony mentioning the Denmark company.
Tony .. I realize we need to build up a relationshio with the moderates in the Middle East .. but couldn't we have found another way to do it ???
I need to rest again .. my headach is back .. but here 2 posts I made on another thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1583262/posts?page=196#196
To: Lakeshark
"Pulling for the deal because we need the UAE as an ally in this war, and we need Muslim moderates to win against the radicals"
I do realize that
But it's one heck of a gamble .. one that I have a hard time accepting and dealing with
Is it a fear that is running through my mind??
yes it is .. I fully admit it
But it is a legitimate fear .. not a tin foil hat fear
196 posted on 02/22/2006 9:39:35 AM EST by Mo1
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1583262/posts?page=207#207
To: Lakeshark
"What did you think of the guy's proposal?"
Like I said .. it's gamble
I may work in the short term ... but I don't know about the long term
207 posted on 02/22/2006 9:51:08 AM EST by Mo1
IMHO this is a bit of a difficult issue to get our arms around and understand, especially since their is so much mis-information on the subject. It's requiring a lot more ferreting of info to try to get a deeper understanding of what's involved, including any underlying issues very few are talking about. Thanks goodness Tony is a sane voice on this.
Too bad the Pubbies in congress that are coming out against this, didn't do some research and get a clearer understanding of all the issues before coming out uninformed and half-cocked. Makes me think they're just doing it so they won't let the Dims get a leg up on the issue, problem is they all may look like fools when all the truth comes out.
Outside of the Dims trying to take Nat'l Security over as an issue and a few others that have been mentioned, I think another main issue of this is some in congress trying to tie the President's hands on yet another issue - - CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT - -they're screaming yet again - - they seem to want to have oversight on everything he does lately, including every time he blows his nose.
Desperate for any issue that will harm the Bush Administration, the Dems have latched onto this Dubai/port issue because they think it has legs to run Republicans out of office and put themselves into control.
Thanks.
As Ronaldus Magmus said, "Trust but Verify".
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.