Skip to comments.
Deal gives Dubai firm control of 23 U.S. ports - Eller lobbied Schumer - Causing this uproar
Buffalo News ^
| 3/4/2006
| Douglas Turner
Posted on 03/10/2006 7:37:43 AM PST by Solson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-120 next last
To: ARealMothersSonForever
41
posted on
03/10/2006 8:13:43 AM PST
by
Txsleuth
(Bush-Bot;WaterBucket Brigader;and fan of defconw)
To: Willie Green
LOLOL! Hey, you just said it's the American thing to do...an American company engaging in lobbying.
Fortunately, you don't get to determine what's "American" and what is not.
BTW, did ya see the report that IT oursourcing is leading to more job growth for IT folks in the US because of the money the outsourcing saves companies?? Check out the latest "Information Week" magazine.
42
posted on
03/10/2006 8:14:25 AM PST
by
Solson
(magnae clunes mihi placent, nec possum de hac re mentiri.)
To: Solson
They'll try to use it in that manner. It won't have much effect. It's a port management deal that went bad. It's not going to stick in the public's mind for more than a week.
The Democrats will start bleating about the horrors of wire taps on Al Qaeda and cold pasta at Guantanamo and totally erase any paltry gain this issue might have given them.
If you think that's naive, show me all the articles about the failed port deal that get printed in July.
43
posted on
03/10/2006 8:15:49 AM PST
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: Solson
44
posted on
03/10/2006 8:16:16 AM PST
by
shield
(The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instructions.Pr 1:7)
45
posted on
03/10/2006 8:18:16 AM PST
by
Mo1
("Stupidity is also a gift from God, but it should not be abused." Pope John Paul II)
To: dead
I will be happy to. We know, now, after two weeks of hysteria this was a business deal gone upside down. The media will continue to print that the Senate and Congress "saved" us from having dirty Ay-rabs running our national security...led by Schumer and Clinton.
This will end up as a 2006 election issue.
46
posted on
03/10/2006 8:19:05 AM PST
by
Solson
(magnae clunes mihi placent, nec possum de hac re mentiri.)
To: shield
"MAJOR UPDATE: The President is PO'd ..."
Good. I'm livid. For the first time in my life I was disrespectful in my comments to my entire Congress.(I called them all traitors and political whores yesterday and that is exactly how I felt.)
47
posted on
03/10/2006 8:22:56 AM PST
by
Earthdweller
("West to Islam" Cake. Butter your liberals, slowly cook France, stir in Europe then watch it rise.)
To: shield
That is pretty shallow; If that is all this President stands for then he stands for nothing. If he wants to take his ball and leave, then he should just quit and run off to Texas to play with his cattle.
48
posted on
03/10/2006 8:24:00 AM PST
by
ARCADIA
(Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
To: Solson
The media will continue to print that the Senate and Congress "saved" us from having dirty Ay-rabs running our national security...
Hyperbolic nonsense.
If the election is going to be fought on the issue of which party is stronger on national security, the GOP will be thrilled.
Hillary fights for civil rights for al Qaeda and illegal immigrants. And she brags about it! A failed port management business deal is irrelevant in the grander scheme.
49
posted on
03/10/2006 8:25:11 AM PST
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: debg; All
I don't understand....according to your link....
''We are certainly encouraged by what the statement said,'' said Eller attorney Michael Kreitzer. ``We think we are one of the companies [who could buy it]. We have been in the business for 70 years. We could do it.''
and there are others interested as well......If that's the case, why didn't any of these American companies bid on the deal in the first place? OR,
was the 'deal' , the entire P&O package, bigger than any American company could afford and so no American company bid on it, but the American portion ONLY is affordable? So 'causing' the American portion only to be for sale NOW makes the purchase more affordable to Eller?
Id also like to know why Schumer, given his position, was not aware of this deal prior to being confronted about it?
anyone?
To: dead
You obviously don't understand the implications. First, we have now insulted an Arabic Nation. Maybe you should look more closely at their culture. A slap in the face is very devastating..
Second, we need them. If we are ever going to win the war on terror, we must somehow create an evolution from the deep rooted ideology of the Arabs to a more understand and tolerance to Western culture. Very few Arabic countries have shown so much promise.
Third, the more economic ties we have with the Arabic nations, the more our security is guaranteed. Those that invest in us want, above all, to protect their interest. There is much more to consider, but this may have set the WOT back a few years. Wake up.
51
posted on
03/10/2006 8:34:56 AM PST
by
Logical me
(Oh, well!!!)
To: dead
"A failed port management business deal is irrelevant in the grander scheme."
Oh so the whole country was busting a blood vessel yesterday over just some little "soon to be forgotten" port deal......right.
Now it's just a "business deal". Yesterday it was "The Arabs are coming!! The Arabs are coming!!".
There was that little old lady from the nursing home who signed up just to post a entire thread in all cap locks who said," NO WAY AM I LETTING MY PORTS BE TAKEN OVER BY SOME STINKING MUSLIMS!!!"..well...she might forget, but it will only be the dementia setting in.
52
posted on
03/10/2006 8:39:17 AM PST
by
Earthdweller
("West to Islam" Cake. Butter your liberals, slowly cook France, stir in Europe then watch it rise.)
To: Logical me
Third, the more economic ties we have with the Arabic nations, the more our security is guaranteed.
It sure didn't help Israel with their Palestinian problem. What examples can you give for your rather impulsive suggestion?
This is a predominantly a religious and philosophical problem; the economics are not going to change any of the attitudes; and never have.
53
posted on
03/10/2006 8:39:46 AM PST
by
ARCADIA
(Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
To: ARCADIA
NO....I disagree with you....congress was disgraceful, IMHO.
54
posted on
03/10/2006 8:40:37 AM PST
by
shield
(The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instructions.Pr 1:7)
To: shield
The pages you cite are most telling. The articles quote the Council on Foreign Policy, the Economic Strategy Institute and Ned Walker. Yes, that Ned Walker, Clinton's former Ambassador, president of the Middle East Institute, a notorious pro-arab think tank and a U.S. basher in his own right.
If these are the people you are using to support your position you might be more comfortable at DU>
To: ARCADIA
Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are the top three trading partners with the US from the Middle East. Each represents about $10B in trade annually.
If the UAE trading diminishes or goes away, is that good or bad for US Security interests?
56
posted on
03/10/2006 8:43:05 AM PST
by
Solson
(magnae clunes mihi placent, nec possum de hac re mentiri.)
To: MNJohnnie
The more they stir it, the more it stinks!
LLS
57
posted on
03/10/2006 8:43:08 AM PST
by
LibLieSlayer
(Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
To: Logical me
You obviously don't understand the implications. First, we have now insulted an Arabic Nation. Maybe you should look more closely at their culture. A slap in the face is very devastating..
They can take it. They're big boys.
Global politics and global industry play hardball. Sometimes things dont work out the way you like. You need to get over it and continue to do business.
Dubai needs our military in their ports to provide security and stability in their country. This stability allows them to make billions in tourism and banking industries.
They are not the easily bruised girly men who seem to imagine. They are not going to cry and sulk in the corner.
And they are most certainly not going to kick our navy out of their ports in a pique of self-righteous insult. There are billions of dollars on the line, and they are not as stupid as you seem to think.
58
posted on
03/10/2006 8:46:01 AM PST
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: Solson
"If, in the end they get this deal, there should be a serious examination of the money trail from Eller to Schumer, Clinton, et al."
Ha, don't count on it the Republicans aren't about to investigate how they got snookered.
To: Earthdweller
I don't even know what you're talking about. You seem a bit hysterical.
60
posted on
03/10/2006 8:46:45 AM PST
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-120 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson