Posted on 02/24/2006 10:18:56 PM PST by Reagan Man
“This Dubai port deal has unleashed a kind of collective mania we haven’t seen in decades ... a xenophobic tsunami,” wails a keening David Brooks, “a nativist, isolationist mass hysteria is ... here.”
The New York Times columnist obviously regards the nation’s splenetic response to news that control of our East Coast ports had been sold to Arab sheiks as wildly irrational. In witness whereof he quotes Philip Damas of Drewry Shipping Consultants, “The location of a company in the age of globalism is irrelevant.”
But irrelevant to whom?
Why is it irrelevant, in a war against Arab and Islamic terrorists, to question the transfer of control of our East Coast ports from Britain to the United Arab Emirates?
Our cosmopolitan Mr. Brooks lives in another country. He has left the America of blood and soil, shaken the dust from his sandals, to enter the Davos world of the Global Economy where nationality does not matter and where fundamentalists and flag-wavers of all faiths are the real enemies of progress toward the wonderful future these globalists have in store for us.
“God must love Hamas and Moktada Al-Sadr,” snorts Brooks, “He has given them the America First brigades of Capitol Hill.”
To Brooks there is little distinction between Islamic mobs burning Danish consulates and America First patriots protesting some insider’s deal to surrender control of American ports to Arab sheiks.
But the reflexive recoil to this transaction between transnationals is a manifestation of national mental health. The American people have not yet been over-educated into the higher stupidity. Common sense still trumps ideology here. Globalism has not yet triumphed over patriotism. Rather than take risks with national security, Americans will accept a pinch of racial profiling.
Yep, the old America lives.
Like alley cats, Americans yet retain an IFF, Identify-Friend-or-Foe radar that instinctively alerts them to keep a warier eye on some folks than on others.
But in rejecting a deal transferring control of our ports to Arabs, are Americans not engaging in discrimination? Are they not engaging in ethnic prejudice?
Of course they are. But not all discrimination is irrational, nor is all prejudice wrong. To discriminate is but to choose. We all discriminate in our choice of friends and associates. Prejudice means prejudgment. And a prejudgment in favor of Brits in matters touching on national security is rooted in history.
In the 20th century (if not the 19th), the Brits have been with us in almost every fight. It was not Brits who struck us on 9/11, who rejoiced in the death of 3,000 Americans, who daily threaten us from the mosques of East and West, who behead our aid workers, bomb our soldiers and call for “Death to America!” in a thousand demonstrations across the Middle East. And while not all Muslims are terrorists, almost all terrorists appear to be Muslim.
As Mother Church has a “preferential option” for the poor, there is nothing wrong with America’s preferential option for the cousins.
Does this mean all Arabs should be considered enemies? Of course not.
The folks from Dubai may detest the 9/11 murderers as much as we do, for those killers shamed their faith, disgraced their people, and bred a distrust and fear of Arabs and Muslims that had never before existed here.
Yet, just as sky marshals seat themselves behind young Arab males, not grannies taking the tots to Disney World, so, Americans, in deciding who operates their ports, naturally prefer ourselves, or old friends.
Why take an unnecessary risk? Just to get an A for global maturity on our next report card from the WTO?
The real question this deal raises is what happened to the political antenna at the White House? Did it fall off the roof about the time President Bush named Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court?
Anyone in touch with Middle America, especially after 9/11 and endless warnings of imminent attacks on U.S. soil, would know this country is acutely sensitive to terror threats. Surely, before approving this deal with Dubai Ports World, someone should have asked:
“How do you think Bubba will react when he’s told sheiks will take over the port of Baltimore where, in Tom Clancy’s ‘Sum of All Fears,’ Arab terrorists smuggle in an a-bomb and detonate it?”
Apparently, no one bothered to ask, or the question was brushed off in the interests of hastily greasing the deal.
Now this episode is going to end badly. Bush, who has denied advance knowledge of the deal, is being ripped by liberals for living in a pre-9/11 world and being out of touch with his government.
As for our remaining friends in the Middle East, they have been given another reason to regard Americans as fickle friends who, down deep. Don’t like Arabs.
Unquestionably, this will result in a victory for those who wish to sever America’s friendships in the Arab world. But it is Bush and his unthinking globalists, not the American Firsters whom Brooks cannot abide who engineered this latest debacle.
If we want to tighten up security, inspect more cargo impose more rules fine, I don't have problem with that, what i have a problem with is alienating the people who we need in the WOT.
Who should determine if America engages in Free Trade?
Because we do not have 1 American company doing the job that P & O does. Until then its either you want imports & exports or you dont .
We may not agree on this issue - but, you do make some cogent points on this post. Congratulations!
Here is the UAE's desired plan for the US and other UN member states:
"UN member states, particularly nuclear powers should also cease their technical , financial, scientific and nuclear-related assistance to Israel, she said."
for more info go to this link:
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=113831
Long before Sept 11, I was of the mind that we needed, as a country, to do something dramatic to curb the ability of so many dictatorial islamic regimes to deflect the anger and unhappiness of their own populations toward the United States, instead of at their own corrupt governemnts.
After September 11th, I knew that we were faced with only two choices. We would have to (1) Kill a billion muslims, or (2) Try to fundemantally change them by changing their forms of government, and thus at least some of their ideology.
UAE is not what any of us would really consider to be a "freindly" nation, no matter what business they already do here in America, and no matter how much money they gave to Katrina victims. If this was Norway, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
That said, we haven't decided that it's time to kill them all either. DPW is a business. I am a believer that international business ties make the world a safer place. After all, what business would want to destroy thier own cash cows, unless they are all truly insane?
We have to ask ourselves, do we, as a nation, beleive that ALL muslims are terrorists? If the answer is no, not all, then we should support this transaction. Otherwise, we are doing an injustice to the free market, and a majority of the UAE, who are most likely just people trying to make a buck. If the answer is "yes", then pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan and spark up the nukes! Because, we're just wasting time and strategic advantage.
But, I don't believe that. I couldn't support Bush, or the idea that spreading democracy was at all a practical solution if I did.
Therefore, I fully support the idea of tighter security requirements on DPW, and more Homeland Security involvement at the ports. To do otherwise would be criminally negligent. But, the deal should happen.
ping
With all due respect, the UAE shoudln't be given special treatment in the area of US homeland interests. Special considerations over there, fine, not over here. We can offer the UAE sweetheart deals all the time. Just not on US soil. The federal bureaucracy is out of control. The right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. Come on, Red China managing US ports of entry. Islamic UAE managing US ports of entry. This is the type of status quo that undermines our security and our sovereignty. It needs to stopped ASAP!
You need to settle down, China nor the UAE are managing our "port of entry" US Coast Guard does that. And I have no idea what your talking about when you say the UAE is getting special treatment, we are treating them like anyone else.
Since you brought up managing ports--port security--you might want to read this on the weakness of it all:
"Port Security Still A House of Cards"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1584982/posts
After 9-11 we had many options open to us. Not just two. We don't have to wipe out a million Muslims. I supported PresBush`s efforts in the WOT, first in Afghanistan and then Iraq. I believe the US military should keep a base of operations somewhere in Iraq and Afghanistan on a long term basis. But I'm of the opinion that trying to force western democracy on the Islamic world, is an effort in futility. Other then our great friend and ally Israel, half of the ME hates America and everything we stand for. The other half isn't too thrilled with us either. Jihadists and Islamofascists want to destroy western civlization. These people are barbarians, who have no humanity. They don't care about mankinds future. They care only about their fundamentalist religion and radical spread of terrorism.
who would want to trade with us after kicking the whole world
out? They would see us as the Soviet Union only worse, a Soviet Union with no equal!
#26 I like that typo, pious rattlesnakes, kinda like pious Islamic terrorists.
On a more serious note. Tonight's news pointed out that one port in Texas they would take over is a predominantly military supplies shipping point. I think they said Beumont? The question was raised as to whether we want any Arab country to be able to keep track of the type and timing of our military equipment movements. Is this a valid concern? Perhaps we could go ahead with the others and handle this one separately.
you can be an isolationist thats fine.
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.