Posted on 03/10/2006 8:16:05 PM PST by crushelits
or do you thinks we're lucky we have not been the victims of another attack?
Do you have better intel than the President? or the intel you receive comes in a magic bowl?
Oh nooo! Horror...I know now, Hitlary and her villains chuckie, reid, durbin, etc. know better?
I'm not sure why you replied to me, since I really don't have anything to say about the ports controversy. I think the whole thing is incredibly boring and most people are very badly informed about this issue -- so I have always avoided commenting on this matter.
What you don't know is that the UAE itself has been targeted by Osama's ragheads since 9/11. They have captured many terrorists. And they are never seen or heard from again. They don't have a Camp Gitmo. It's sort of like Spain under Franco. Scumbags are kicked out of the country and bad criminals just disappear.
On the other hand, it's a true pleasure to come across posts which are eye-opening and add to my view of the world.
I do know. So changing the subject, won't make it go away. Everyone is well aware that Osama/AlQaeda has targeted every Islamic nationstate in the ME, at one time or another. More importantly, the UAE remains a sponsor and supporter of terrorism themselves. The dichotomy is striking. The UAE openly funds Hamas and still has an active policy for the destruction of Israel. Here in the US, the UAE/Dubai gives funds to CAIR, Council on American-Islamic Relations. Many Americans consider CAIR a frontgroup for "jihadiism" in the US. On top of all that, the UAE/Dubai have an extremely poor human rights record. In the UAE there is no freedom of speech and no political dissent allowed. Women have no rights and child slave trade is tolerated. The UAE may offer the US military bases from which to operate our Navy and Air Force, but that doesn't mean the Feds have any right to grant sweetheart deals that allow the UAE/Dubai/DPW to manage commercial terminal operations at US ports of entry. Period.
So what? The question isn't whether people inside the bank are crooked. The question is whether crooked people can use an honest bank to move money. And the answer obvious to anyone who knows even a little about banking is "yes", as demonstrated by criminals in this country using honest banks to move money. People in this country used U.S. banks to move money to the IRA all the time, despite laws to the contrary.
Just because you condone a society and culture that has theocratic oil rich Sheiks operating wealthy, third world kingdoms, doesn't mean the rest of us hold the same set of beliefs.
What makes you think I "condone" their society? Like 80% of the other nations of the world, there are things about their society I find to be repulsive.
What I care about is whether they cooperate with us in the particular matters for which we've requested cooperation. They provide us with very valuable intelligence in the WoT. They have been outstanding hosts to our fleet assets. And they've been more cooperative in terms of meeting U.S. standards for shipping security than any other country in the world.
Do you think the FAA and security officials at Logan airport were part of the terrorist conspiracy on 9/11? I don't. But that didn't matter. Terrorists exploits incompetence in our system. They don't need active cooperation. DPW is the most efficient and well-run company out there, and likely would have provided far fewer holes through which terrorist activities could slip than the U.S. companies that will now run those terminals. Rejection of this deal likely has made our ports less secure.
Comparing the USSR with the UAE shows a serious lack of sound judgment on your part. There is no comparison between the two.
Huh? Reagan's willingness to work with the USSR despite its avowed dedication to our destruction shows that you don't simply toss out all cooperation just because you may not like the other guy. And the UAE has been far more friendly to us than the USSR ever was. That doesn't necessarily mean that this deal was a good one for the U.S., but it does mean that we should not have rejected it out of hand just because it happened to be a deal that involved an Arab country. The House's action in rejecting the deal even before the investigation was disgraceful.
The outcome of this deal was actually good for America. It woke up the American people and gave them an insight into how poorly the federal government considers US sovereignty when making certain bureaucratic decisions. It informed many Americans like myself, how deeply entrenched foreign entities are in the managment and operations related to distribution and logistics activities at our ports of entry.
In the grand tradition of our Founding Fathers, the American people stood up and spoke out. They exercised their right to free speech and political dissent, and told the GOP led Congress, this decision by the Bush administrations CFIUS agency, was a bureaucratic blunder of the first order. We must always hold to account the actions of our elected officials and appointed public servants.
"So he's saying, if this deal doesn't go through, the UAE will side with the terrorists?" Uhhhhh....there is a long way to between helping us in the war on terror and siding with the terrorists. They could cancel contracts with us or refuse to let us use their base. I suspect you understand that, but, like many who exploited the issue don't really care. Diplomacy is obviously not something you care about.
Do you have the ability to forecast which ones will become terrorists?
One of the basic tenants of Islam is to exterminate all Infidels. We on the other hand we are in the Rodney King era. Consequently Islam will win this war, it may take another 100 years but they will win.
We wouldn't have hesitated to kill 200 million Soviets under the right circumstances. Islam is a bigger threat than the USSR ever was and we shudder at the numbers that need to be killed to win. After the first one it is just math. One of our Generals said this week we are making them faster than we are killing terrorists. His career is over. I said the same thing on FR four months ago, and even as long as a year ago.
"Everything is different, but the same... things are more moderner than before... bigger, and yet smaller... it's computers...uh...uh...San Dimas High School football rules!"
It might be too late now, but the Red Chinese should be made to compete like eveyone else.
More important than trading, they provide the US Military with more American port calls than any other overseas port. They allow our ships to tie up, even aircraft carriers and our planes to use their airfields. All this in a very strategic part of the world. I am sure that neither they nor President Bush wanted the rest of the middle east to have these facts made so widely known. They also trade with Israel, even though, officially, they boycott them.
Terrific post, RM, with some wonderful reminders. Apparently in our current state of affairs, some would have us believe that we are still subjects of the King and that we should not question taxation without representation. Just shut up and pay and follow the piper even if he's headed over a cliff.
Amazing.
You post references that directly and explicitly back up every single point I have made, then pronounce me wrong.
As I have said, it must be wonderful to possess a mind that can entertain 20 dinstinct and mutually exclusive ideas at once without pausing for so much as a breath.
So, let me ask you this: If our government was set up with the purpose of protecting individual rights (or liberty as your references suggest), then why was it necessary to add provisions to protect these very rights from the government itself?
Dwell on that for a while, my socialist friend.
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.