Goodbye Dubai

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | March 14, 2006 | Joseph Farah

[Conservative Coulter Fan]

There is much hand-wringing over the collapse of the Dubai port deal.

There is much gnashing of teeth in Washington.

There is much finger-pointing going on – much blame being spread.

President Bush says he's troubled by the political storm that reversed the deal: "I'm concerned about a broader message this issue could send to our friends and allies around the world, particularly in the Middle East."

Then, of course, it stands to reason he should have thought this process through a little better. The political storm is of his own making. It was predictable – if only he didn't have a tin political ear, he should have realized the American people might not take this lying down. If only he had a realistic and pragmatic understanding of the kinds of people he is crawling into bed with in the Middle East, he might have made the right decision in the first place.

Then there was U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow, who said the United States is still "open for business." He continued: "I don't view this as anything but an isolated incident. We don't want to be isolationist. We don't want to turn our backs on the rest of the world." Here's a guy who doesn't get it. Here's a guy who is in denial. Here's a guy who chaired the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which approved the plan. Before accepting his Cabinet post, Snow was chairman of CSX Railroad. Shortly after Snow joined the Bush White House, CSX sold their international ports contracts to Dubai Ports World for over $1 billion. So when he says the United States is still open for business, this is evidently what he means.

I also don't care about what Pierce Bush, the president's nephew, or his father Neil Bush, the president's brother, have to say in their defense of the deal. Their company, Ignite Learning, has major investors in the United Arab Emirates. In fact, the Bush family and Cabinet is up to their eyeballs in conflicts of interest that should have disqualified their consideration of this front company for the oil sheikhs as a potential operator for U.S. ports.

I also don't care whether other Arab companies ever invest in the United States again. In fact, I hope they don't – at least until they join humanity by recognizing fundamental human rights at home. So, please, don't tell me how this is going to be bad for business here in the United States. I don't want the oil sheikhs to have any more influence on U.S. policy-making than they already have.

And I'm not losing any sleep over the fact that the UAE has "coincidentally" postponed trade talks with the United States. The oil sheikhs need to remember that they need us more than we need them. Maybe Americans need to remember that, too.

President Bush likes to portray the so-called "moderate" Arab countries as "good guys" in the war on terrorism. If he really believes that, he is incredibly naive.

Al-Qaida's war with the West would never have begun without their subsidies of hate and fear and terror. And those subsidies continue today.

Whenever I speak out bluntly like this about the reality of Middle East politics, someone always writes in accusing me of "hating" Arabs.

That is so funny.

I speak the truth because, as an American of Arabic ancestry, I have a deep fondness and love for Arabs. I want them to be free – just like I want all people to have a chance at freedom. But the sad truth is they will never be free as long as the oil sheikhs protect themselves by stirring up hate and resentment against "infidels" everywhere – as long as they continue to provide the people with scapegoats who are to blame for all their problems.

I never pull any punches in my writings. I tell people exactly what I believe – and why I believe it. In the case of the Middle East, my views are shaped by my experience on the ground as a correspondent as well as my worldview as an Arab-American Christian.

The United States cannot afford to be seduced by the money and the power of the oil sheikhs. They are not part of the solution in the Middle East. They are part of the problem.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Farah eloquently provides stupidity with a voice. There is nothing positive about the GOP stampeding under Party of Treason leadership and trampling National Security through blind ignorance.

[commonerX]

"""I invite you over for dinner, your kids spend the night with mine, your business buys items from mine and vice versa, our wives gossip about the family down the street, hell we're in the neighborhood watch program.

I decide to buy the house down the street, maybe rent it, maybe fix it up hell I might move in. You then kick me in the balls, call my wife a whore, try to get the kids expelled, and finally hit me up for a better price like nothing happened.

I can certainly understand the UAE's response.

The majority of Americans, probably aren't paying attention, were you aware that nearly every port terminal in this country was run by a foreign owned corporation? I knew several were, I had no idea basically all are, I do now. Obviously you are against DPW taking ove P&O,I ask how is DPW any worse than Red China?"""


one flaw to your analogy it should have read:

I invite you over for dinner, your kids spend the night with mine, your business buys items from mine and vice versa, our wives gossip about the family down the street, hell we're in the neighborhood watch program.

I decide to buy the house down the street, maybe rent it, maybe fix it up hell I might move in. Then my son decides that our religious writings says the neighbors are the devil and must die. He them drives a truck full of explosives into the neighbors house and kills half their family. They then kick me in the balls, call my wife a whore, try to get the kids expelled, and finally hit me up for a better price like nothing happened.

[Echo Talon]

This whole port issue was nothing more than a political stunt in an election year and had no basis in national security, again ask the Coast Guard, CIA, DHS, DOD etc.

[XJarhead]

I'm watching General Pace on CSPAN right now and he just answered this question:

We've used UAE ports more then any other ports in the world and they've given more support fighting terrorism since 9/11/01 then any other country. They are only 30 miles from Iran and have the only deep water port in the middle east where our large ships can dock for repairs etc..

Quit trying to confuse people with the facts of national security. They don't really want to be bothered with considerin whether rejection of this deal actually helped or hurt our overall security. They just want to feel like rejecting it improved security. Analysis is for RINO's. After all, its feelings, not reality, that matters. Right?

Here's what I can't figure out. Opponents of this deal went nuts because a UAE firm was going to be in charge of some port terminals in the U.S at which unloading would occur.

Exactly what is it about unloading items that already are sitting in ships in ports that is so dangerous? Are they going to smuggle in a nuke? Well hell, why not just blow it up in the port before it gets unloaded? By the time it actually reaches the dock, its a bit late to stop it, isn't it?

We let foreign flagged and operated airlines fly right into our major cities, and we already have ample evidence of what damage a fully loaded plane can do. Hell, if some government is complicit in a plot to bring in a nuke, stick the sucker in a jet that's scheduled to fly in. It's not like we search them before they enter U.S. airspace.

We let foreign flagged, owned, and operated ships get loaded in foreign ports, and then sail right into our harbors. Isn't that where the real danger is? Isn't what is getting loaded onto a ship in a foreign port far more important than what gets unloaded? Because once it is at a port terminal, it already is too late to stop it.

Given that we let foreign airlines fly right into our major cities carrying who knows what, and foreign ships enter our ports carrying who knows what, the feeding frenzy about the unloading of those ships was just irrational. It's like complaining about leaving a second story window unlocked, when all your doors are left not only unlocked but wide-open.

I'm not advocating banning foreign airlines or ships, but as long as we don't do that, concern over the unloading of goods at our terminals is almost pointless, and appears to be nothing more than irrational spite.

[hershey]

Lets the air out of the Dubai balloon.

[thinkthenpost]

I have commented on several threads concerning this sale, sometimes I think clearly and concisely, others times kind of rambling and unclear, but I think I will now let Post #104 speak for me.

I hope everyone has a great day.

[daybreakcoming]

Are they going to smuggle in a nuke? Well hell, why not just blow it up in the port before it gets unloaded? By the time it actually reaches the dock, its a bit late to stop it, isn't it?

And therein spotlights the lack of reasoning on the anti-port side. I have always thought if there was a nuke or dirty bomb on a ship at the Houston port - they could do as much or more damage in the channel before they ever dock for unloading.

The Heroes of Flight 93 and the Shoebomber Flight have given the enemy pause. What unholy warrior coward wants to be taken down by dirty infidels without finishing their murderous mission? The enemy lies in wait for the left and the media to finish us off. Thanks for a well-thought out post.

[Stellar Dendrite]

ping

[DTogo]

If the U.S. strived earnestly toward energy independence we wouldn't need Arab money, and they wouldn't have any left!

[indcons]

I don't read articles from WND, Newsmax, Agape Press, or Sierra Times anymore. These sources frequently provide misleading and made-up "news."

[ex-snook]

Thanks for ping. The battle of the Titan lobbyists.

The Dubai results was a case of one [so far]. What was unique in Dubai was the many references to the UAE relation with Israel.

What it may portend is a growing separation between the interests of Israel and those of the U.S. as expressed by the President. A gathering storm pits supporters of world trade as best for our country and supporters of combating Islam as best for our country. Bush has come down on the side of the traders. Congress did not.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Then the process of EUrabization will be complete.

[XJarhead]

Thanks, but well-thought out posts don't matter on this issue. If there's one thing I've learned in the past few weeks, that's it.

I can't remember how many times I asked opponents of the deal to describe specifically how control of unloading terminals threatened our security. Never got an answer that contained even a hint of reasoning. All I'd get was "Bushbot" or "RINO", or conclusory assertions based on false premises like "giving other countries control of our ports damages our security." It just gets old.

[daybreakcoming]

I understand but it still matters to me and will in the time to come. I never thought to see "conservatives" line up behind hillary and schumer in an emotional kneejerk response. And that includes congress, pundits, and FReepers. I shall beware of them as never before.
Thank you again.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Come on how could you avoid these fantastic sources of comedy?

[ordinaryguy]

Thanks, but well-thought out posts don't matter on this issue. If there's one thing I've learned in the past few weeks, that's it.

They rarely do. There is nothing special about this issue, in that regard.