Posted on 02/24/2006 4:57:39 AM PST by When_Penguins_Attack
George W. Bush is about to fritter away his party's last advantage. What Republicans have had going for them is that they aren't Democrats. Over the past few days we've seen the men at the top of the Grumpy Old Party drifting toward something that looks suspiciously like an Old Boys' Party. When he hears applause only from Jimmy Carter, who gave away the Panama Canal (now controlled by the Chinese), and Bill Clinton, his newly adopted little brother, George W. should be looking for the panic button. Once they're no longer regarded as the toughest party on national security the Republicans will be burnt toast.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
You don't spring something like this on Americans after 9/11, and after having their sons and daughters slaughtered in Iraq and Afghanistan by 12th century muslim mutants without preparing them with positive information and proving that you have done a thorough background check and have established US sovereignty and security matters!
Whether it goes through or not Bush has surrendered the greatest conservative advantage over liberals, that of being strong on national defense. When you hand a bitch like Hitlery Crintoon a chance to step up to the mike and excoriate conservatives for having surrounded our national security by insanity, you have just slit the throats of every GOP politician running in 2006.
Why do you imagine all these GOP pols have divorced themselves from Bush on this and run for the hills? Because they have to run again and he doesn't.
It's not a question of right or wrong, but a question of future survival, b ioth politically and culturally.
The biggest problem I have is that the liberal intelligentsia and RINOS don't grasp the fact that Muslims are savages still living in the 12th century. That their goal is kill all Christians and Jews. That they are NOT able to coexist peaceably with other cultures and religions. That they are genetically mutated to violence, evil, and sadism. And that they will continue this violence against us, out children and all future generations forever. They will not rest until they have murdered you and your family.
That nice friendly Muslim family down the block will be the first ones at your door with scimitars the day these savages take over the US. Act now, or bear the consequences of your inaction!
In the industry however it's very common for a commercial operator to refer to their operations as simply port operations; it's like short hand but everyone in the industry know what it means. One of these brilliant loonie was actually quoting from a DP World mission statement regarding "port operations". As I said, it's short hand within the industry...they don't write for the loonies.
No matter how safe the port deal may be, the American people oppose it by a huge margin because of a negative gut-instinct response, and they aren't going to be convinced otherwise by anything a few retired generals and administration loyalists say. Most voters get their news via 5 minute station breaks on their drive to and from work, they don't read or watch tedious explanations of complicated details by obscure analysts. They only know what the AP or SEE.B.S tells them about the issue, and what they're seeing and hearing isn't doing anything to help them better understand the issue.
I share the same fear that Pruden expresses in this article. That being, the political damage is already done, and even if Congress somehow stops or delays finalizing the deal it's not going to repair much of that damage.
NO, I did not mean to imply that the UAE are our mercenaries. I believe that we are allies in the war against people who want the world to remain in he 12th century. The citizens of the Emirates want to participate in the 21st century.
When someone makes a prediction like that -- on either side -- I gotta say, "Show me the races!"
Also, if you lived in one of the port cities, like I do, you'd see that people care very much about who's running the ports.
There is very little about this which is unknown, except for those who know nothing about the issue and are too damned lazy to do some research on it.
The answer to every question you've asked can be answered with about 20-30 minutes of research on the internet. To make matters easier, you can find all those answers right here on FreeRepublic -- by looking through the hundreds of well-informed posts on various threads about this subject over the last two weeks.
The AQKhan connection was actually a Sri Lankan living in the UAE who provided support.
Did you know the UAE caught and turned over the guy who headed the USS Cole attack?
I would suggest that your co-workers and parents -- bless them all -- are too ignorant about this subject to have a relevant opinion on it.
No offense intended, of course . . . I've been saying the same thing about nearly every person in media and in government who has weighed in on this issue over the last two weeks. The level of idiotic, ignorant hysteria on this topic is absolutely astonishing.
All well and good, but in my mind this has nothing to do with the process. As I said earlier, you can have a thorough, honest, informative discussion of this issue without disclosing classified information. I'm not comfortable with just taking Congress's or the CFIUS's word for it. I want to understand the deal and take an informed position on it, not just rely on a politician's or bureaucrat's vague assurances. Congress, President Bush and the CFIUS all work for us. We're entitled to know the facts about this deal. Not explaining it further only makes it look like there's something you're trying to hide.
You should reflect back to 2000. The anti-Bush posters were much more dedicated than pro-Bush freepers. Threads were intense with Buchanan, Keyes, and McCain supporters.
Amazing how so many people are so suddenly interested in the facts who never gave a whit about this issue before? Well, not funny...more convenient.
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns one of the major ports where the UAE-owned company would operate one of seven container terminals, filed suit yesterday in New Jersey to block this acquisition over "security concerns." This same Port Authority also owned the World Trade Center, which seemed to give them a lot of credibility on this issue.
The fact that this same Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has been doing business with a Saudi-owned terminal operator since 1983, and didn't express similar "security concerns" after: 1) the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; or 2) the 2001 terrorist attack that destroyed the World Trade Center, tells me that these people are either dumber than bags of rocks or are nothing more than opportunistic, self-aggrandizing @ssholes.
But the problem is, they aren't too ignorant to know how to pull the lever for Democrat candidates next November. The danger posed by the deal isn't to port security IMHO, it's to the GOP's control of Congress and to the effectiveness of Bush's last 2 years in office.
And I suppose this is all BS?:
"Joseph King, who headed the customs agency's anti-terrorism efforts under the Treasury Department and the new Department of Homeland Security, said national security fears are well grounded.
He said a company the size of Dubai Ports World would be able to get hundreds of visas to relocate managers and other employees to the United States. Using appeals to Muslim solidarity or threats of violence, al-Qaeda operatives could force low-level managers to provide some of those visas to al-Qaeda sympathizers, said King, who for years tracked similar efforts by organized crime to infiltrate ports in New York and New Jersey. Those sympathizers could obtain legitimate driver's licenses, work permits and mortgages that could then be used by terrorist operatives.
Dubai Ports World could also offer a simple conduit for wire transfers to terrorist operatives in the Middle East. Large wire transfers from individuals would quickly attract federal scrutiny, but such transfers, buried in the dozens of wire transfers a day from Dubai Ports World's operations in the United States to the Middle East would go undetected, King said."
Colonel Oliver North - loonie with a political agenda?
Damn, I'm sorry Sparky...I'm going to go with the adults.
I found the second link particularly interesting and thorough. Cuts through a lot of the emotion and makes some enlightening and persuasive points. Thanks!
RE: Port operations.
Look at the first paragraph of post #161.
If we had a responsible media people would not be in fear that we are going to be "taken over by Arabs" - as I just heard on the radio.
Quite frankly, that's the kind of sh!t I would expect from Democrats . . . which is why some jack@ss like Peter King looks far more foolish in this case than Chuck Schumer does.
Thanks for so thoroughly addressing the points raised in the quoted portion of my post. Really, thanks.
They have to rely on emotions when they don't have the facts.
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.