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.
"for those killers shamed their faith, disgraced their people, and bred a distrust and fear of Arabs and Muslims that had never before existed"
Horse pucky. History tells a whole differnt story of Islam. When, oh God when, are we all going to tell the truth?
Fact Sheet on Acquisition of P&O Ports by DP World American Association of Port Authorities ^ | Feb 2006 | American Association of Port Authorities
Posted on 02/24/2006 11:07:33 PM PST by endthematrix
The U.S. Public Port Industry
The American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) represents more than 80 public authorities in the United States. These state, county and city government agencies own and develop seaport facilities to handle both domestic and international maritime commerce being imported to or exported from the United States. U.S. ports and waterways handle more than 2.5 billion tons of trade annually. The majority of our nation’s overseas cargo flows through AAPA member ports’ facilities.
While some public ports operate their own cargo terminals, many serve as “landlord” ports, leasing portions of their facilities to private terminal operating companies. While some of the private companies operating terminals in the United States are U.S. corporations, many are non-U.S. businesses that operate terminals worldwide or are affiliated with the foreign flag steamship lines that carry the cargo. All terminal operators, whether public or private, must comply with Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA) and must have facility security plans reviewed and approved by the U.S. Coast Guard, as indicated below.
Port Security
Port security is the top priority for AAPA members. Protecting this vital part of our transportation infrastructure is critical to our nation’s economic growth and vitality.
The federal government takes the lead in protecting America’s ports. The Department of Homeland Security, primarily through the activities of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the U.S. Coast Guard, run many programs to secure our ports. The U.S. Coast Guard is responsible for maritime security and reviewing and approving security plans for vessels, port facilities and port areas which are required by the MTSA. Customs and Border Protection is responsible for cargo security, and screens and inspects cargo entering the U.S. through every U.S. port.
Other cargo security programs include the Container Security Initiative (inspection of U.S. import cargo by CBP prior to leaving the outbound foreign port), use of radiation detection equipment to screen for weapons of mass destruction, use of other non-intrusive inspection devices, and the Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) which encourages maritime stakeholders to verify their security measures. The Port Security Grant program and the pending implementation of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) are also important parts of America’s port security portfolio to provide layered security.
While the federal government takes the lead on waterside and cargo security, overall security is a shared responsibility with port authorities, facility and vessel operators, and state and local police providing additional security. The MTSA also establishes local security committees to evaluate and make improvements in each port.
DP World Acquisition of P&O Ports
P&O Ports is a terminal operating company that operates marine terminal facilities worldwide, including several terminals in the United States owned by public port authorities. Some press accounts have not accurately stated the nature of the business transaction involved or the resulting impact on U.S. port operations. DP World’s purchase of P&O Ports would involve the operation of specific terminals or provision of stevedoring services (vessel loading/unloading) at some ports, but DP World would not “own,” “control,” or “take over” those ports (which would continue to be owned by the port authorities). DP World would not be solely responsible for facility security at any of the involved terminals, and the federal government would continue to be primarily responsible for maritime and cargo security.
AAPA has not taken a position on the issue.
Careful; we might have to go through there some day.
Yea working with American Unions is such a sweet deal! LOL
ROFLMAO!
Everything I've witnesses from these jihadists/Islamofascists over the last 30-35 years, indicates a supreme willingness to sacrifice their own lives in the name of Allah. They don't care about humanity, mankind or civilization. You can trust them all you want. Not me. I've had enough of their crap. Unlike the average American, these people from the ME are not rational, levelheaded folks. They're not anything like us. Outside of Israel, we don't have any friends in the ME. Half of all people in the ME hate the good old USA, and the other half aren't too thrilled with us either. Especially not since we decided enough was enough, and it was time to lay down the law with these jihadists and Islamofascists.
Pat is anti-semite.
Notice the "pitchfork" in the title?
Is this a call to the "brigade" to lock and load?
ROTFLMAO!
I'm sure his friends over on MSNBC would like present him as a conservative, but the truth is he's just a big piece of scheisse.
It's like the D-Day Verlaine poem.
Mention of "pitchfork" in the title means d-day is imminent.
Mention of "torches" means the attack is on!
LOLOL
try to look at the bigger picture
I am afraid the people here who are against the deal don't want to hear comments like yours. They have hardenend in their postions and are no longer listening to reason.
Oh, yeah, I was wondering when we'd hear from the head moonbat. Onyx: So I guess Patty has his flintlock all loaded and ready to fire? : )
The sweetheart deal I speak of came from CIFIUS. You know that great American bureaucratic agency that has approved 1530 of 1531 deals over the years.
\LOL! I love that! Might even 'lift' it....lol.
Sure, wide open society and they really want to be like us No. They want us to be like them. http://www.freerepublic.com/^http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/8192.pdf 5. Significant Barriers to U.S. Exports The UAE maintains non-tariff barriers to trade and investment in the form of restrictive agency, sponsorship, and distributorship requirements. To do business in the UAE outside of one of the free zones, a foreign business, in most cases, must have a UAE national sponsor, agent or distributor. Once chosen, sponsors, agents, or distributors have exclusive rights. They cannot be replaced without their agreement. Government tendering is not conducted according to generally accepted international standards. Re-tendering is the norm. To bid on federal projects, a supplier or contractor must be either a UAE national or a company in which UAE nationals own at least 51 percent of the share capital. Federal tenders are required to be accompanied by a bid bond in the form of an unconditional bank guarantee for five percent of the value of the bid. Except for companies located in one of the free zones, at least 51 percent of a business establishment must be owned by a UAE national. A business engaged in importing and distributing a product must be either a 100 percent UAE owned agency/distributorship or a 51 percent UAE/49 percent foreign Limited Liability Company (LLC). Subsidies for manufacturing firms are only available to those with at least 51 percent local ownership. The laws and regulations governing foreign investment in the UAE are evolving. There is no national treatment for investors in the UAE. Non-GCC nationals cannot own land. Only one stock is currently open to foreign investors and is capped at 20 percent total foreign ownership, although limited participation by foreigners in a few mutual funds is permitted. There have been no significant investment disputes over the past few years involving U.S. or other foreign investors. Claims resolution is generally not a problem, because foreign companies tend not to press claims, believing that to do so might jeopardize future business activity in the UAE. 6. Export Subsidies Policies The government does not employ subsidies to provide direct or indirect support for exports. 7. Protection of U.S. Intellectual Property The UAE is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), a contracting party to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and has signed the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (patent, trademark, and related industrial property). In April 2001, the UAE was placed on the "Special 301" Watch List following the registration of a number of U.S. patent-protected medicines in violation of assurances from the UAE government that unlicensed copies of patent-protected medicines would no longer be registered. Discussions aimed at resolving this issue are ongoing.
Geez, you've been here over a year; learn to format.
Nobody's gonna read that.
Woof Woof! LOL
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.