Posted on 03/10/2006 10:28:49 AM PST by RWR8189
PROTECTIONISTS, REJOICE! The dastardly United Arab Emirates company that would have presumed to unload containers of underwear and toothpaste on U.S. soil has backed down, and it will now divest its U.S. port interests to an American entity. Rest assured, the nation is now safe from dangerous Middle Eastern accountants and port logistics specialists.
Dubai Ports World did what was necessary, if not necessarily fair, on Thursday by agreeing to give up the U.S. operations of its newly acquired British ports company. The House Appropriations Committee had voted 62 to 2 on Wednesday to block the deal; a similar bill was pending in the Senate.
Although President Bush rightly stood by the acquisition and vowed to veto any bill that stood in its way, he was fighting a losing battle that only deepened a growing rift in the Republican Party. Dubai Ports World officials wisely recognized that they had to put some distance between themselves and their new U.S. assets. The company probably will sell its U.S. assets or create a U.S. company with a separate board to run them.
Much as we wish it would go away, the fight may not be over yet.
For one, the terms of the divestiture remain unclear, and some members of Congress are demanding more details. Will it be enough for Dubai Ports World to create a U.S. subsidiary? Will it have to open headquarters in the United States? Pay its employees in dollars?
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Thanks.
You're welcome.
The good guys have to stick together ;)
And you have a wonderful weekend, too.:)
Thursday, September 22, 2005
Funding Palestinian Terror
The U.S. government has exempted itself - and gone against its established policy on terror, again - from requirements to stop terror financing by giving $50 million to the Palestinian Authority, which continues to incite and support terrorism and provide sanctuary for known and established terrorist organizations.
In June 2003, the U.S. Agency for International Development demanded that all U.S. tax-exempt organizations partnering with Palestinian NGOs obtain from the Palestinians an antiterrorism certification which, among other things, guarantees that: "The Recipient has not provided, and will take all reasonable steps to ensure that it does not and will not knowingly provide material support or resources to any individual or entity that commits, attempts to commit, advocates, facilitates, or participates in terrorist acts, or has committed, attempted to commit, facilitated, or participated in terrorist acts."
The U.S. government has exempted itself from these requirements by ignoring the PA's continuing violations of the agreements they signed to stop terror activities and incitement for terrorism, as demonstrated by PA Minister for Civil Affairs Muhammad Dahlan's Aug. 13 statement in the midst of the Israeli disengagement from Gaza. Dahlan stated, "This is a day for the people, so it can celebrate in honor of the sacrifice of the shahids [martyrs]."
The PA also funds incitement against the U.S., calling for attacks against American soldiers in Iraq.
And to you and the other Bush-bots, The Deal is Off,....get over it!!!
Might I remind you of THIS 'intelligent' post of yours?
You lost the debate on all sides with this, HEY. You refused to answer the question while lashing out with sarcasm.
Then you used the insipid, worn-out "Bushbot" attack..........both meaningless, and in this case, wrong..........to put an exclamation point on your loss.
Dominic beat you up with logic. You lost.
That's why I congratulated him. It was fun to see his victory of logic unfold.
Yes, we DO! :)
Ditto to you Ma'am.
Perhaps the word 'fear' is distracting this debate then.
Isn't it accurate to say that when you don't trust someone, you fear that they will do you wrong?
Now, if it's based on evidence, then your fears are considered justified. In this case, there was no evidence that DPW would do us wrong, so it would be an unjustified fear. A 'gut feeling', so to speak.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but, wasn't the military comfortable docking in port of Aden, Yemen, where the USS Cole bombed? Was the Pentagon comfortable having Marines in Beirut when 241 of them were murdered in their barracks.
The pentagon ain't always right.
It's a serious problem when your words are right here in black and white and you deny them.
These are the questions that Dominic asked you......
Are you saying you're not afraid they're a danger to us? Yet you opposed this deal?
Don't trust them to do -- what?
And to this, you told him to 'figure it out yourself, Einstein' and then called him a 'Bushbot.'
I'd call that 'refusing to answer' the questions...........and good questions at that.
RE: "Your personal desire (i.e. FEELING) that we should not have anyone outside the U.S. own anything inside the U.S. is economically unsound, and completely unrealistic."
Projecting a bit are we? You seem to be rather emotional and not able to carefully read what I wrote. Here, I'll try it again using 8th grade English.
I do not agree with foreign GOVERNMENTS owning things in this country.
I have no problem with foreign CORPORATIONS owning things in this country. By CORPORATIONS I mean in the American sense, government owned don't count.
You know, the one where you said you were the only one in the world who understood Reagan (the god) and Bush (the demon), and all that stuff?
Is it writen yet? Cause I'd love to know if you sell more than 30 copies (btw, how many do you have in your family? ;).
Bump.
RE: "Your second point, is once again based on your FEELING about 'how far' the UAE has come. People with far more factual information than you have (e.g. the U.S. military) have determined that there would have been no added threat to our national security."
Actually, I based it on the actual economic structure of the UAE and the way that they partition things into a "friendly to the West zone" where there are more or less normal business rules, and a "baksheesh zone" where the old tribal ways rule. In the latter zone, there is still considerable laundering of suspect funds and movement of aid to the sponsoring states and to terrorists themselves.
As I said, quite calmly and unemotionally before...........your reasons are based on feelings. That's OK. It's good to have feelings. Feelings are good. You don't have to be ashamed of them. I just prefer to base my decisions on facts........that's all.
Now, was there anything else?
(Where exactly is the capitol of DPW, anyway? Who is the President of DPW? What kind of government does DPW have? Does the government of DPW have a king? :)
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.