2/21/2006


WHEN SCHUMER IS LEADING THE MOB DON'T JOIN IT

The Ports Deal: first, I have learned by now that Senator Schumer from NY is the worst demagogue in the Congress and to side with him is almost always a mistake. Second, When the worst president in my lifetime likes something you know it's awful. Third, the political whore of all time, Hillary Clinton, is opposed to the deal because it seems to bolster her hawk on terror image.

So what to do?

The ports decision was made by unelected officials behind closed doors, as is usual with this tone deaf administration. Nobody thought about anything in the real world. We all believe that had the port of Miami not protested via law suit the deal would have become law with no one the wiser. None of the Administration geniuses thought about what would happen if the company that lost the bidding war for the Brit company in possession of the thirty year Port Contract decided to leak about the U.S. turning over our sensitive ports to the Muslims. Nobody among our best and brightest considered that somebody with an axe to grind would leak to a port city mayor and thus bring the entire deal to its knees. Nobody in the Bush Administration thinks about anything past tomorrow until it's five minutes before midnight.

We are left with the catastrophic prospect of kicking out a company only because they are Arabs and Muslims, an act of bigotry that will cause more than just cartoon riots among Muslims world wide. Our troops are in serious danger. I refer you again to the James Robbins piece in the NRO yesterday for the enumeration of the favors the UAE has done for us since 2002. Add to that the fact that Dubai is the most westernized of all Arab countries; the women wear dresses, the press is relatively free, it is about to become the Las Vegas of the Middle East and even worse for us, they are about to control banking in the entire Muslim world because they have gotten around Shiria Law prohibiting interest; their banks will be financing all growth in the Middle East with interest rates set by a government and not any markets.

The UAE has also assisted the Coalition effort in Iraq, in particular training Iraqi security forces and sending material assistance to the Iraqi people. As further reasons for awarding the contract to the company that won the bidding war against the Singapore company for the former Brit port operator, try these: Dubai and the UAE were alone in Middle East in refusing to join the cabal against Israel. They have shut down terrorist bank accounts wherever they could. They have been an undercover ally against the insurgents in Iraq and against Al Qaeda in the Middle East. They have allowed us to fly over their territory, provided safe haven when we needed it, and according to all reports they are the main source of intel to the CIA. They are a huge buyer of our Boeing aircraft which creates thousands of jobs here. They operate ports all over the world with no problems. Under this contract the U.S. would be responsible for all phases of security at the ports. Arab NATIONALS will NOT be employed at the ports in the U.S. as all employees will still be Americans. And the contract ONLY covers commercial cargo it does not cover military or defense cargo.

In fact the more you look at this "deal" the worse it looks for us if we cancel it now. Malkin is going over the top (what else is new?) rallying bloggers against this deal, conveniently forgetting that when an Arab loses face he is your enemy for life. Barring our friends at UAE will clearly be seen as racist by all the usual suspects, and they will be correct. The only reason to keep the port from the UAE is that they are Arabs and Muslims. We run catastrophic risks if we throw this deal out now. Once an Arab loses face in public he becomes your enemy for life. Making our friends into enemies is the only possible result if we cancel this deal, and when we have the UAE as an enemy in Iraq it is all over for us.

This entire stink is a result of our president not minding the store AGAIN. This fiasco is the result of Bush's incompetence, and there is no other word for the way in which it has been handled. It's about time we stopped blaming his advisors and blamed the guy who appoints them. He has appointed a group of incompetents to run key agencies and then refused to fire them. As I've said over and over again, we cannot afford an inarticulate political trust fund baby to be in office ever again. Nor can we elect a political lead head who can't sniff the air.

Getting to the facts on this deal is going to be very difficult. If you want some real insight on the country of Dubai, go here to the Air Cargo News and open your eyes and brain. Then go here to see all the tourist things in that country. Info of the move toward democracy is here. Don't go off like a maniac. Don't be a Michelle Malkin or a Chuck Schumer.

Think.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

This entire stink is a result of our president not minding the store AGAIN

Which store? Bush seems to be minding the foreign policy and international politics store.

It's domestic politics that George Jr. is ignoring or trying to ignore. If he really believed this UAE port deal needed to happen, he should have warmed the American public up for this. He ought to be trying harder now to sell the deal to the American public.

But no, little George takes the heartland American Republican base for granted. He may end up the lamest duck President of all time.

-- david.davenport.1@netzero.com

Anonymous said...

Once an Arab loses face in public he becomes you enemy for life. This is the only possible result if we cancel this deal and when we have the UAE as an enemy in Iraq it is all over for us.

But Howie, that may be the flaw in Bush's thought. He may think it more important to prevent UAE allies losing face than pleasing the American hearland.

However, if the heartland public turns against Bush's war, then Iraq is rilly rilly all over.

-- david.davenport.1@netzero.com

Xiaoding said...

Glad to see some sanity in this issue. Except for Rush and you, everybody is going off the deep end. In war, you have got to REWARD YOUR FRIENDS. We need the UAE, they are our portal into the middle east underworld. How are our spy agencies supposed to sneak around if we don't have a country over there friendly to us? They need covers, and business is the way to get covers.

Our prez has mis-handled this big time, though. I hope he goes down in flames. But the deal must go through.

Anonymous said...

Why should a foreign GOVERNMENT run our ports?

Anonymous said...

Barring our pals at UAE will clearly be seen as racist by all the usual suspects, and they will be correct. The only reason to keep the port from the UAE is that they are Arabs and Muslims.

That seems like a good enough reason for me.

Time to come out of the closet Howie. You're a globalist-internationalist liberal.


In addition to the Arab angle, part of the issue here is that any kind of foreigners are running American ports, instead of an American company. The subtext to this story is the decline of American business, with or without terrorists.

-- david.davenport.1@netzero.com

Anonymous said...

One of the jobs of FedGov as outlined in the Constitution is defense of the realm. Ports and borders seem to fall into that category. Allowing any foreigners to control them isn't defending our country. It's selling us out.

As of news earlier today (2/22) the number of ports isn't 6 it's 8. Two ports in Texas, both used by the miltary are part of the deal. Do we really want potential enemies access to miltary shipping manifests?

About as nuts as Clinton letting the Chinese run Long Beach harbor. That's in your neck of the woods Howard. You sure they have your best interests in mind?

We are at war. How do we run it when we are outsourcing it?

Howard said...

Foreign governments or companies run thirty of our ports. Check my latest link to Debbie Schussel who is kicking some big time Bush ass. This deal is like peeling an onion, layer after layer, with no end in sight.

Anonymous said...

Howard - good to read some intelligent remarks regarding this situation. You are absolutely correct on several points, especially the "friend or enemy for life" in regards to the Arab mindset.
Most of the bloggers I read have ranted on and on about this being a bad thing. And most of them appear to neither have a clue nor do they want to get one.

Yes, there are concerns here that should be addressed, but the short version is the damn ports are going to be run by some foreign owned corporation because there isn't an American one that wants/can do the job...

Anonymous said...

You are absolutely correct on several points, especially the "friend or enemy for life" in regards to the Arab mindset.

So what. Most of 'em hate us anyway.

Following that logic, it was a good idea not to publish the Muhammed cartoons.


Yes, there are concerns here that should be addressed, but the short version is the damn ports are going to be run by some foreign owned corporation because there isn't an American one that wants/can do the job


Why is that? Please explain. Is a right-thinking free market American supposed to think it's a good idea for foreigners to operate more and more American businesses? Who's colonizing whom?


-- david.davenport.1@netzero.com

Anonymous said...

Let me know when you get back to reality here, guy... THE REALITY IS THAT P&O IS ALREADY A FOREIGN OWNED COMPANY AND NO AMERICAN COMPANY SUBMITTED A WINNING BID TO OPERATE THE PORTS THAT IT OPERATES - or to buy the company for that matter. Just the way it is. Not my fault and I certainly wish it wasn't true but that's the way it is.

Most of the Arabs that I have known across a time span of 40 years don't in fact "hate" us, but many were/are in a situation pretty much like the people living in the gang-riddled gettos in the US. They mostly want to survive and improve their life and that of their children. When the gangs - either governmental and/or religious have all the guns, you can't talk to the cops unless you have a death wish. I would point out that more and more Iraqis seem to be coming forward with infor-mation regarding terrorist activity, though.

I have live and worked throughout in all the ME countries with the exception of Iraq, Iran and Lebanon. And with the exception of the UAE and to some extent Jordan what I said above is the way it is over there. On an individual basis I never had a problem with any of the people I met or dealt with. 'Course I'll also admit that as far as I know I never met any member of Hamas or Hezbullah and their ilk...

There aren't going to be any short simple solutions the cans of worms that have been opened in the ME, but there are solutions that won't require glass-paving large area of that region. (Not saying we won't end up paving some parts of it - I never said I wasn't a cynic.)

Anonymous said...

On an individual basis I never had a problem with any of the people I met or dealt with.

You sound like you've gone native. Are you yourself a Muslim?

Let me know when you get back to reality here, guy... THE REALITY IS THAT P&O IS ALREADY A FOREIGN OWNED COMPANY AND NO AMERICAN COMPANY SUBMITTED A WINNING BID TO OPERATE THE PORTS THAT IT OPERATES - or to buy the company for that matter. Just the way it is.

You're saying that if foreign entities can outbid an American firm, then we Americans must always submit to the foreigners? My reply is, if that's the free market at work, then the so-called free market is the enemy if Christian patriotic America.

Just the way it is, understand?

-- david.davenpoprt.1@netzero.com

Anonymous said...

Mickey Kaus in Slate says:

Just having a port operator that is more easily approached by people who speak Arabic vastly increases the risk, at least the risk from Arab jihadists, no? That's why it was absurd for Condoleezza Rice to declare on Wednesday:

We have to maintain a principle that it doesn't matter where in the world one of these purchases is coming from.

Really? So it's perfectly all right if Iran, say, decides to go into the port operating business? Don't tell President Ahmadinejad. What about Palestine, with its Hamas-controlled government? A good business opportunity for them! Or North Korea? No need to worry about those half-dozen nukes--we have the Department of Homeland Security and the Coast Guard handling security. Procedures are in place!

I'm sure the fuss about the Dubai contract is overstated. How could it not be? But that doesn't mean there aren't legitimate worries underlying it. The Bushies should address them instead of explaining, "Shut up, hicks." Fortunately, when Republicans try that ethnic guilt-trip trick (as Bush did with Harriet Miers, and continually tries to do on immigration) it's seldom effective. ...

http://www.slate.com/id/2136768/?nav=fix

-- david.davenport.1@netzero.com

Anonymous said...

Nope, just living my life a a field egineer. As I said, I wish there was a US company interested in biding and running the ports, just like I wish I could still buy electronic systems that were made in the US of US parts. I worry about US military systems that are being built of parts made in China, Korea, Mexico, etc. I've KNOWN what the problem is for years, tell me the solution.

Howard said...

Every time we have raised tariffs the result has been depression, the last time being 1930 which caused a complete shutdown of trade and commerce. Today, like right now, we have companies like Boeing that does 80% of its business with foreign airlines whose governments could shut down Boeing with high retaliatory tariffs thus causing an instant depression in Seattle. Our machine tool industry is in killer competition with foreign firms and the entire industry would be shut down as a result of retaliatory tariffs. Anyone who doesn't see this should be first in line for a brain transplant. The only people who want these protectionist laws are the anti-globalization labor unions, extreme left academics, and extreme Left reporters. I think this port deal will eventually pass but big damage is being done by the racist name calling over the deal

Anonymous said...

No disagreement on "protectionist tariffs" from me, Howard. Here comes the ole'"BUT", if a country is artificially keeping it's currency devalued(China) or putting high tariffs on the import of certain American products vis low or no tariffs on the import of that country's same products into the states(see autos/Japan) or ditto steel, and on other countrys/products, what is the solution? I realize that some industries got priced out of the market through high labor costs here, but if another country Which might or might not become a future adversary decides to seriously "go after" the machine tool industry here, what's the solution? I KNOW that without _that_ industry, this country stops being an industrial country and becomes just another third-world assembler country. Perfect example in my Isuzu which was assembled in Louisiana(?) but most of the parts were produced outside of the US. Sorry for the length here, I tend to ramble sometimes.

Anonymous said...

Hello ##name##, Las Vegas is still called sin city for its multiple reasonscasinosWe continue to look for things for our kids to do. Sometimes we are happy with Circus Circus and sometimes we can walk the strip during the day. let us know your thoughts on good family entertainment in vegas.

Anonymous said...

Wow, I was just messing around and found your page!
Very nice.
If you are interested, come and see my digital camera buying guide related blog.
It isnt anything fancy but you might still find something of interest.
http://cooldigitcams.blogspot.com