Bush: Port Deal Collapse Sends Bad Message

Associated Press ^ | March 10, 2006 | LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer

[Prokopton]

Thank you for, again, posting these facts. The pro- anything-Bush-wants crowd never want to address these issues.
As you can see from the posts on this thread, the usuals are still out in force with there name calling and projections on others the very vices they exude; emotionalism; lack of logic; ad hominem attacks; refusal to even concede that there is another side.
Keep up the good (factual) work.

[nightdriver]

"Republicans and Democrats alike welcomed DP World's decision to give up its aspirations to manage significant operations at the six ports, but they warned that the move doesn't negate the urgent need for broad legislation aimed at protecting America's ports."

Does this mean that a review of the deal that X42 made to turn the Long Beach Naval Base over to the Chicoms in 1997 is in the works?

[bigeasy_70118]

As you can see from the posts on this thread, the usuals are still out in force with there name calling and projections on others the very vices they exude; emotionalism; lack of logic; ad hominem attacks; refusal to even concede that there is another side. Keep up the good (factual) work.

I second that.

[Coop]

I really have no idea what you are talking about.

I believe you.

[AntiGuv]

Thanks for the post. Very intriguing!

[Earthdweller]

If all those who were for the ports were BUSHbots what's that make those who opposed?

SCHUMMERgroupies?

[Stultis]

I didn't know we cared about sending bad messages to countries that support and harbor terrorists.

I didn't know that killing terrorist, or giving the CIA their coordinates so they can be taken down with predator launched hellfire missiles, counted as "supporting" terrorists.

[Coop]

Yes, details like that. Very good. Details such as those wouldn't concern any reasonable person when viewed in the context of proper vetting through the CFIUS (established by whom? Congress!!). But when viewed in the emotional context of "Arabs are running our ports!!" we end up with threads like this.

[PISANO]

I don't think you read the Presidents words, but then again gut instinct and visceral reaction is what MOVED this entire fiasco, not contemplative thought and investigation.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

NOTE : The following post does not apply to
those FReepers who are
1) Active Duty
2) Those with disabilities
3) Care givers of those with disabilities
4) Those with financial hardships
5) Those who actually support our troops in other ways.

---

IF people REALLY cared, they would get away from the computer and actually do something,
in the real world, to actually assist Homeland Security.

I've done it each and every week,
often more than once a week,
since Oct 2001

I don't receive a dime and even pay for my own uniforms.

The choice is either "listen" to all the pros and cons
or actually be part of the solution.

http://nws.cgaux.org/visitors/ps_visitor/index.html

PS You'll have to leave your "politics"
at the door while you wear the uniform.

[onyx]

I agree with you, Coop and love what Charles wrote:


To: Coop
Sanity did prevail, in the United Arab Emerites. They saw how important the war on terror was. They saw how important their relationship with the United States was. They valued that relationship, they want to defeat terroristm.

So they sanely decided that the best thing to do with the crazies in washington was to give in for the good of the countries.

Sad that the UAE, who the opponents are STILL calling supporters of terrorists right here in this very thread, acted in saner and better way than our own elected representatives.

I am proud today of John Warner, who was always on the right side of this deal, and George Allen, who was willing to hear all the facts before passing judgment. Both of my senators resisted the rush to judgment.



28 posted on 03/10/2006 10:40:00 AM CST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

[Coop]

He made a mistake and GOP congress fixed it and now it's time to move on to other things.

ROTFL!!! Since you're continuing the lie, I'm continuing the "insults."

Carry on, Lemming!

[prairiebreeze]

your tagline...lol

[Coop]

As you can see from the posts on this thread, the usuals are still out in force with there name calling and projections on others the very vices they exude; emotionalism; lack of logic; ad hominem attacks; refusal to even concede that there is another side.

What are you, drunk? There has been plenty of logic and facts provided by "my side" for the past many weeks. Your side may not have a monopoly on emotional rhetoric, but you darned sure cornered the market.

[jimbo123]

The Friends of Dubai lost. Get over it.

[Paul Ross]

The emir of Dubai has fully funded 24 christian churches, from what I've read on another thread. Since I have no source,....

You are right that there are Christian churches in the U.A.E., but wrong, in general about the funding. Except for the muslim establishments. There, the state funds subsidize 98% of the mosques therein. There is also some consideration for the non-Muslim churches, the 22 Christian ones are often permitted to operate "rent-free" on the land "given" to them by the Emirates...apparently they can't own them outright. They also get no charges from the state for utilities.

You should check the State Dept. for its Report on U.A.E. Human Rights record.

It states:

Non-Muslim religious groups do not receive funds from the Government. . However, those with land grants are not charged rental payments, and some of the churches constructed on land grants were donated by the local ruling families. Also, the Sharjah government waives payment of utilities for churches because they are religious buildings. Non-Muslim groups are permitted to raise money from among their congregants and to receive financial support from abroad. Christian churches are permitted to advertise in the press certain church functions, such as memorial services.

The conversion of Muslims to other religions is regarded with extreme antipathy; therefore, the Government prohibits non-Muslims from proselytizing or distributing religious literature under penalty of criminal prosecution and imprisonment. In March 2001, Dubai police arrested four visiting noncitizens for violating laws barring non-Muslims from proselytizing because they distributed Christian religious materials, including videos and CD-ROMS, on a public street. One of those arrested was detained for less than a week. Authorities held the passports of those arrested during the investigation. They were able to move freely about Dubai but not permitted to leave the city. The charges against the noncitizens were dropped on April 8, 2001, and they left the country on April 9.

The authorities have threatened to revoke the residence permits of persons suspected of missionary activities. In addition customs authorities have questioned the entry of large quantities of religious materials (such as Bibles and hymnals) that they deemed in excess of the normal requirements of existing congregations, although in most instances the items have been permitted entry. Customs authorities reportedly are less likely to question the importation of Christian religious items than non-Muslim, non-Christian religious items, although in virtually all instances importation of the material in question eventually has been permitted.

Immigration authorities routinely ask foreigners to declare their religious affiliation, however, the Government does not collect or analyze this information, and religious affiliation is not a factor in the issuance or renewal of visas or residence permits. In late 2001, Abu Dhabi inquired about religious affiliation in its first municipality-wide census.

Non-Muslims are tried for criminal offenses in Shari'a courts

[bigeasy_70118]

If all those who were for the ports were BUSHbots what's that make those who opposed? SCHUMMERgroupies?

Ummm, how about right? Just as the almighty George W. Bush can be wrong about something (Harriet Miers, the ports deal, Michael Brown doing a good job during Katrina); the evil Chuck Schumer is also allowed to be right about something once and awhile, even if his motives are suspect.

That's why it pays to think for yourself and not drink the Kool-Aid.

[sully777]

I'll try this old trick I learned from Bush on CFR, the prescription drug entitlement, bloating Dept of Education, pandering to illegal aliens, passing budgets in the trillions, etc.:

This strategy employed by Congress will allow us to maintain a majority in the House and Senate. It's a necessary action to maintain control from the Dems. Afterall, do you want Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Chucky Shumer, and Nancy Pelosi in charge? The perception taken from this battle tells the country the GOP is still on the job securing America and are not Bush's rubber stamp on foreign policies. It also tells the world we haven't forgotten 9-11, or the memories of those that died that day and in the days ahead fighting the Taliban (who were supported by the UAE).

Our historic allies will remain. Our new allies will remain the same, with the same biases. And since the US is the single greatest market for goods and services, the UAE would be committing economic suicide by pushing their rant. Everything will subside in months and people will forget.

We may have averted a political collapse next November. But seeing that most of the Bushbots are saying on other threads that they will not vote...we may have averted a political collapse next November. Protest votes from a small minority of the base is like shooting rubber bands at battleships.

Let's move on. Make tax cuts permanent. Start planning for the next battle with the leftists. And if needs be, start mapping out the Dem's hypocrisy on national defense and letting the ChiComs control port terminals. Let's bring up Lorel in Hillary's campaign. Let's win in November to continue our promise in the Contract With America.

---

Now back to the FR Dubai Flame Wars.

[Stultis]

United Arab Emirates officials and private companies have regularly waived-through or turned a blind eye to the shipment of nuclear triggers to Pakistan and nerve gas precursors to Iran.

As I recall is was information about nuclear triggers that lead to the cracking of the A. Q. Khan network. And Bush just said the U.A.E. contributed to that. One has to wonder if that eye was really as blind as you and Duncan suggest. (In any case the network operated through as many as 25 ports all around the world.)

[Coop]

The friends of Harry Reid won. America lost.

And it wasn't Dubya's fault. Get over it.