Posted on 03/01/2006 4:59:32 AM PST by FerdieMurphy
Last week, I skewered Democrat opportunists who have turned into tough-sounding profiling advocates to exploit the White House ports debacle.
Today, I must express bottomless disgust with those on the Right who have turned into mush-mouthed race-card players to shift blame away from President Bush for his miserable mishandling of the situation.
It's one thing for feckless grievance-mongers on the Left to accuse Americans genuinely concerned about national security of Islamophobia. It's quite another for the Right to sink to such a level in accusing all good-faith critics of demagoguery. Reasonable people can disagree on the process pitfalls and security implications of the deal. But the elite Right has simply lost its marbles:
Here's GOP strategist and Muslim voter outreach architect Grover Norquist in the Los Angeles Times dismissing critics of the deal: "The only whiners left by next week will be the registered bigots."
Conservative commentator Larry Kudlow: "This whole brouhaha surrounding the Bush administration's green-light to a United Arab Emirates company slated to manage six major U.S. ports has nothing to do with protecting homeland security. Allow me to give it its proper name: Islamophobia."
New York Times columnist David Brooks: "This Dubai port deal has unleashed a kind of collective mania we haven't seen in decades. First seized by the radio hatemonger Michael Savage, it's been embraced by reactionaries of left and right, exploited by Empire State panderers, and enabled by a bipartisan horde of politicians who don't have the guts to stand in front of a xenophobic tsunami."
The UAE is our "friend," we are told, and to question that assertion, we are scolded, is to engage in reckless prejudice and life-threatening insult. Yes, well, some friends are more equal than others. To instinctively trust a longtime, stalwart Western democracy more than an Arab newcomer with a mixed record on combating terror, international crime and Islamic extremism is not "Islamophobia." It's self-preservationism in a time of war.
We are at war, aren't we?
President Bush himself is ultimately responsible for encouraging the race-card players, thanks to his stunning comment that "those who are questioning" the deal need to "step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company."
Yes, there are countless homegrown terrorists across England, where Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., the maritime company purchased by state-owned Dubai Ports World, operates. So what? So, now, a peaceful Western democracy that is infiltrated against its will by al Qaeda is on the same plane as an Arab federation whose ruling emiratis ran interference for Osama bin Laden before Sept. 11, which continued to be a logistical hub for al Qaeda for years after, which refuses to recognize the existence of Israel, bans our textbooks as "racist" because they point out Syria's state sponsorship of terrorism, and is boycotting Denmark over the Mohammed Cartoons?
Now, all the proselytizers who tell us to collect the dots and connect the dots want us to throw them all away lest we give offense?
Yes, the UAE has taken steps to cooperate in the War on Terror after the Sept. 11 attacks. Give them a pat on the back. But don't tell me that their actions over the past four years elevate them to the same level of partnership and trustworthiness as Great Britain.
That's offensive.
Perhaps Bush should consult with his own Justice Department, which understood the need for heightened scrutiny of Middle Eastern illegal aliens in the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, and instituted temporary targeted fingerprinting and registration policies for Middle Eastern tourists, businessmen and students.
Bigots!
Perhaps he should ask his own Border Patrol, which is on heightened alert for illegal Middle Eastern border-crossers.
Bigots!
Perhaps he should ask his own FBI, which is zeroing in on mosques and Muslim charities instead of Lutheran churches and the March of Dimes in the domestic War on Terror.
Bigots!
(But don't bother asking Transportation Department Norm Mineta anything -- well, other than "Why the heck are you still here, Normie?")
The sad lesson of Portgate: Scream "racism" loud enough, and people will blame the messengers and back down. By the Bush standard, we who put American security above Arab sensitivity are all bigots now.
How dare you criticize Queen Michelle, off with your head.
Israeli shipping company supports UAE port deal. To be on CNN later today.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1588559/posts
When has Michelle Malcontent not played the harpy card?
Wife of Bath.
thanks for the info
No, you dimbulb; Dane was the first one to "discover" that Malkin leaves out things that don't fit her rants; that was Dane's post I copied and pasted.
Oh, dear; that's going to upset a lot of the pot stirreres, isn't it?
Just amazing to witness.
>"Israeli shipping company supports UAE port deal."<
-Maybe the concerns people some of us have about the UAE and the DP World port deal appear to be irrational.
But in that part of the world, the irrational seems to be the order of the day.
-Who would have ever thought that a family member of a five-billion-dollar-a-year global corporation, (that includes the largest construction firm in the Islamic world), with offices in London and Geneva....could turn out to be the world's most wanted terrorist?
So maybe concerns about the UAE Dubai port deal are not so irrational...
Sorry to jump in here, but the fact that Queen michelle malkin, started with the name calling.
You're the one who started it by accusing me of having to call in help.
A long, long time ago.
I don't think fears about this deal are irrational at all. I'm not happy about it, but for a variety of reasons, I don't hate it either.
http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2005/46616.htm
U.S. State Dept Trafficking in Persons Report, June, 2005 (snips)
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES (TIER 3)(worst of tier1,2,3)
The United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) is a destination country for women trafficked primarily from South, Southeast, and East Asia, the former Soviet Union, Iran and other Middle Eastern countries, and East Africa, for the purpose of sexual exploitation. A far smaller number of men, women, and teenage children were trafficked to the U.A.E. to work as forced laborers. Some South Asian and East African boys were trafficked into the country and forced to work as camel jockeys. Some were sold by their parents to traffickers, and others were brought into the U.A.E. by their parents. A large number of foreign women were lured into the U.A.E. under false pretenses and subsequently forced into sexual servitude, primarily by criminals of their own countries. Personal observations by U.S. Government officials and video and photographic evidence indicated the continued use of trafficked children as camel jockeys.
Widely varying reports, mostly from NGOs, international organizations, and source countries, estimated the number of trafficking victims in the U.A.E. to be from a few thousand to tens of thousands.
The Government of the U.A.E. does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and is not making significant efforts to do so. Despite sustained engagement from the U.S. Government, NGOs, and international organizations over the last two years, the U.A.E. Government has failed to take significant action to address its trafficking problems and to protect victims. The U.A.E. Government needs to enact and enforce a comprehensive trafficking law that criminalizes all forms of trafficking and provides for protection of trafficking victims.
During the reporting period, the U.A.E. made minimal efforts to prosecute traffickers. Despite the ongoing trafficking and exploitation of thousands of children as camel jockeys and women in sexual servitude, the government made insufficient efforts in 2004 to criminally prosecute and punish anyone behind these forms of trafficking.
However, the number of rescued and repatriated children through these efforts is insignificant compared to the huge number (estimated in the thousands) openly exploited at camel racetracks throughout the country. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the government investigated, prosecuted, and punished anyone for trafficking, abusing, and exploiting children as camel jockeys.
The U.A.E. Governments efforts to prosecute crimes relating to trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation were equally disappointing. Despite a few arrests and prosecutions of those involved in such crimes, including travel and employment agencies that reportedly facilitate the trafficking of victims, U.A.E. law enforcement efforts during the year focused largely on the arrest, incarceration, and deportation of over 5,000 foreign women in prostitution, many of whom are likely trafficking victims. The police do not make concerted, proactive efforts to distinguish trafficking victims among women arrested for prostitution and illegal immigration; as a result, victims are punished with incarceration and deportation.
The governments efforts to protect and assist victims of trafficking for sexual and labor exploitation have also been minimal. U.A.E. police continue to arrest and punish trafficking victims along with others engaged in prostitution, unless the victims identify themselves as having been trafficked. The U.A.E.s numerous foreign domestic and agricultural workers are excluded from protection under
U.A.E. labor laws and, as such, many are vulnerable to serious exploitation that constitutes involuntary servitude, a severe form of trafficking. The government does not have a shelter facility for foreign workers who are victims of involuntary servitude, but relies on housing provided by embassies, source-country NGOs, and concerned U.A.E. residents.
You have yet to provide evidence of that assertion.
Instead, when challenged, you switched the subject to Malkin being a name caller, that she was guilty of omitting facts, and pinged someone else to back you up. Talk about obfuscation.
Then you call me a "dim bulb".
Have I called you any names?
Do you always behave in this manner, when called to back up a statement that you have made?
Please try to be factual, or else retract the charge, if you can't back it up.
well, let's hope this port deal works out well for the U.S., and the fears are unfounded!
Regards
>"Sorry to jump in here, but the fact that Queen michelle malkin, started with the name calling."<
-Yes, you've never done anything like smearing people with names like "covert hillary supporters", have you?
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1306895/replies?c=3
Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Michelle Malkin ping list...
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.