Posted on 02/22/2006 9:00:17 PM PST by Kaslin
Politicians across the political spectrum are raising their voices against the arrangement which would allow a United Arab Emirates company to manage six U.S. seaports, and on Tuesday's Situation Room, CNN's Jack Cafferty acted as a rabble-rousing activist as he encouraged his viewers to rise up against any politician who doesn't act to block the deal and he highlighted two viewer e-mails which advocated the impeachment of President Bush over the matter. Cafferty excoriated: "If our elected representatives don't do everything in their power to stop this thing, each of us should vow to work tirelessly to see that they are removed from public office....Here's the question. What should be done to stop a deal that would allow an Arab company with ties to terrorism to run U.S. ports?" Cafferty soon read from one e-mailer who argued that "this deal is nothing short of collusion with a foreign power of unknown intent during wartime. The President should be impeached." And another: "Putting George Bush in charge of our country was a huge mistake, and my fellow citizens finally realize that it was a disaster. Time to impeach this President."
The MRC's Megan McCormack caught the "Cafferty File" about 16 minutes into the 4pm EST hour of the February 21 Situation Room: "Wolf, this may be the straw that finally breaks the camel's back, this deal to sell control of six U.S. ports to a company controlled by the United Arab Emirates. There are now actually Senators and Congressmen and Governors and Mayors telling the White House you're not going to do this, and it's about time. No one has said no to this administration on anything that matters in a very long time. Well, this matters, matters a lot. If this deal is allowed to go through, we deserve whatever we get. A country with ties to terrorists will have a presence at six critical doorways to our country. And if anyone thinks the terrorists in time won't figure out how to exploit that, than we're all done. Nothing's happened yet, mind you, but if our elected representatives don't do everything in their power to stop this thing, each of us should vow to work tirelessly to see that they are removed from public office. We're at a crossroads. Which way will we choose? Here's the question. What should be done to stop a deal that would allow an Arab company with ties to terrorism to run U.S. ports? E-mail us at CaffertyFile@CNN.com or go to CNN.com/CaffertyFile."
At 4:58pm EST Cafferty returned with the feedback he got as he read some selected viewer e-mails with the text displayed on screen: "The question, Wolf, is what should be done to stop a deal that would allow an Arab company to operate six U.S. ports. We are getting tons of e-mail. Alan in Silver Springs, Maryland, 'The U.S. Congress must stand tall and united against the administration's plan. They must force the President to withdraw the government's approval.' Em in Barrington, Illinois, 'This deal is nothing short of collusion with a foreign power of unknown intent during wartime. The President should be impeached.' Mike writes, 'This administration has been going in the wrong direction. They've now turned a trot into a mad dash toward oblivion. This C grade President and his cronies are threatening our existence. This port deal must be stopped.' J.R., or excuse me, J.B., Raleigh, North Carolina, 'Jack, give someone enough rope, he'll hang himself. The arrogance of the Bush administration has finally caught up with it, and we're united at last. Putting George Bush in charge of our country was a huge mistake, and my fellow citizens finally realize that it was a disaster. Time to impeach this President.' Eric in Medina, Ohio, 'Congress must act to bar turning port security and operations over to foreign governments or foreign companies. Not merely Arab governments and companies, any foreign authority. American ports must be under the control of our citizens.' And David writes from Hawaii, 'The last time we had a government that was non-responsive to the wishes of the people they governed, we had a revolution.' Wolf?"
We got the FACTS; perhaps you should, too.
I call them as I see them.
Knuckle-draggers like Cafferty want to close down Gitmo, close down Abu Ghraib, stop screening at airports but, he'll spit in the face of the only country who is actually working to help stop terrorism and stop their American workers from managing the paperwork at US ports.
Xenophobic numb-nuts.
That's readily apparent.
Blind leading the blind.
I'm so sick of that term. "Knee-jerk." It's used whenever Bush does something monumentally stupid and people on this site speak out against it before Rush has his say. Please tell me how it makes sense that a foreign entity with known ties to terrorism should be able to control ports in the United States.
Whatever...lol.
Perfect.
Cafferty actually made the comment "If this sale goes through, we deserve whatever we get."
Those opposed to this sale (not me) say we are setting ourselves up for a nuke, so I guess Cafferty thinks we deserve getting nuked.
Yes but we don't want to impeach the president every time we disagree with him.
Ask anyone in the United States Navy what there favorite Port is and 8 of 10 will tell you Dubai.
The UAE might have made some questionable decisions in the past when it comes to recognizing the Taliban, but WTF, We were the Taliban's number one supporter when it comes to humanitarian aid, (Democrats made a big deal about this before we removed them from power as they objected to the U.S. invading Afghanistan). The last point is this... If we stop this deal, the most likely company to replace DPW will be an Indonesian Company.
I think once all the propaganda clears (that Chuck Schumer initiated) calms down, we will see just how much the UAE has been our friend since 9/11.
Also, I find it offensive that you characterize the American people as "dumb-as-stumps." Sounds like something Michael Moore would say himself...
Now? Show me some proof.
When this first broke, everyone was against it. Really, it seemed like everyone. But then Rush starts blabbing about it and now most people are suddenly for it? Whatever...
No, some of us actually investigated what this deal was about, and now see that it is totally innocuous.
Most of those who oppose it are ill-informed or simply using anti-Arab sentiment for political gain.
Looks like it.
I don't think we should either. Cafferty is a moron. However, I couldn't let some of the comments in this thread go unchallenged.
He solidified his left-winged lunacy by excusing the appalling incompetancy and apparent corruption of the Lousiana state officials like the Governor Blanco and Schoolbus Nagin after Katrina.
All day people have been saying to those on my side of this debate 'You agree with Jimmy Carter!'
I'd rather have that useless, and ultimately harmless nuisance, on "my side" than be on the side of idiots like Hillary, Chuckie, and this guy, who are taken seriously, are in the current media, and are shaping opinion. Jimmy only talks to the converted; Cafferty talks to...
Well, Wolf Blitzer and their families, who are probably 50% of the CNN audience...
But, you know what I mean!
How recent does this have to be? Shortly before 9/11, we were prevented from attacking Bin Laden because UAE officials were visiting him. I've read that several places today and I'm pretty sure I remember reading about that in the 9/11 Report.
LOL, No truer words have been spoken :-)
Where's the proof of CURRENT ties to terrorism in the UAE?
And, as a sign you're ill-informed, DPW will not be "controlling" ports. They'll be managing terminals at the ports.
I ask any thinking person, how is GWB doing anything that meets an impeachable offense? His administration is following the laws enacted by Congress for CFIUS. What has he done about this port deal that warrants even discussing impeachment???
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.