West coast ports are just run by the Chinese. Its one way traffic for containers! Actually, I think the port of long beach is run by a Chinese company.

This Arab company would posess all of the security secrets to our ports. One defector in their upper ranks could spell disaster. Or the fundies could take over the UAE government, like they did in Iran, and a new right wing Islamic government would gain our port operation secrets overnight. Even a work slowdown or outright stoppage could be used for blackmail.

How do you Christain taxpayers out there feel about Bush promising to rebuild the Golden Mosque, with your hard earned tax dollars? How much health care would that purchase?

Steve, I agree. It is just beyond me that we would allow any Country to manage our ports, including the Chinese. We all know what is going on. The Company has declared they will wait (until the furor settles down), before the deal is signed, sealed and delivered behind our backs.

This man has three more years to destroy 'his' Country. Every fucking week it is something new. What in the hell is an impreachable offense to the assholes in Congress?

Actually there was a middle eastern country that handled security at ports of entry a few years ago. The Israeli owned ICTS serviced all the 9/11 airports.

Well, it was not until this latest revelation that I knew about any American port being managed by another Country. I also bet that many Americans did not know this piece of information. Just proves that old saying about assuming.

I wish and I pray (and I'm not religious) that the U.S. House of Representatives does what tiny Arcata, CA. did and pass a resolution to impeach George W. Bush before he can commit the next crime against the American people.

Enough of this criminal asswipe.

Actually, David Sirota was on Olbermann the other night and made more sense to me than anyone else on this topic.

In his view, this issue brings to the fore the contradictory policy aims of "security" on one hand and "corporate globalization" on the other. And while that is the essence of the issue, no one in D.C. Rep or Dem wants to talk about it, since they are almost all committed to a "Thomas Friedman" type free trade orthodoxy.

You can read more here.

A bigger question: Why is Bush still president over four years since 9/11? Bin Laden still on loose, Mullah Omar, Anthrax bomber, Nukes in N. Korea and soon Iran, chaos in a country we invaded for nothing more than Bush's ego, Homeland Security created as the biggest government agency in history proven to be a devastating flop, secret government intervention in our private lives, treason at the highest levels of the White House. There, Steve, is your question.

This little Dubai incident is exposing an interesting little aspect of our fabulous new global economy---foreign firms run enormous numbers of our ports of entry.

I don't know the history of this, but it appears from news reports that our ports have been "privately operated" for a long time. With globalisation, this often means operated by foreign entities.

"9/11 changed everything", the Reactionary Right bleats at every turn----well, OK, maybe it changed this little development of globalisation. At least it should have.

With the continual US trade deficit foreign countries end up with lots of dollars. Some get used to by US treasury bonds, but lots are used for purchasing US assets. This has been going on for decades. Remember when Chrysler used to be an American company, for example?

So the port deals are just part of a regular pattern. When you borrow money with no hope of paying it back the borrowers start to ask for something tangible in return. It seems unlikely that a company buying into a port deal would do anything to damage its investment, so the security fears seem misplaced.

Perhaps, people should start focusing on what the US will look like when we are all working for the Chinese...

This has been my thought since the beginning of the revelation around the ports. I don't want any of our infrastructure being owned, managed, operated, whatever by a foreign company. I'd rather see a tax increase that puts government workers in charge. This trend is all part of deregulation, globalization, and corporatization at the expense of those who can't share in the profits and ultimately in the utility of our national resources. There is no value place on the 'commonwealth' by this Administration and others who support these deals.

The tiny number of supporters circling Bush's pinhead have tried (badly) to play the race card against critics of the port deal.

FOXNews(GOP-TV)'s Neil Cavuto and MSNBC's Chris "Tweety" Matthews come to mind.

We're treating the United Arab Emirates (UAE) differently -- they claim, than we would treat a European nation because they're Arabs.

Like, duh.

Two of the 9/11 hijackers came from the UAE; the government of the UAE refuse to recognize the state of Israel; the UAE still recognizes the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan; gay UAE nationals are regularly arrested and jailed for their sexual orientation.

This is NOT a nation we want in charge of 6 of the USA's largest ports with access to American port security. There's nothing remotely racist about opposing the deal. Sorry wingers.

Battered Wife Syndrome: America, Trust Us!

That's exactly the question that should be asked? Why should any foreign company or foreign power have control over our ports? Do we have to outsource that too?? Does America have the expertise and the gumption to take care of its own ports??

Where were you guys when the same firm brought up the CSX American ports contracts last year? And aren't y'all racial profiling here? And why does Jimmy Carter support this deal? And are both Dems and Reps in Congress on the same side of this issue?

Peter, Get a life you fool. This is not about racial profiling as your talking points overlords have you repeating. This is about the privatization and corporate control of what was once America. You're right about one thing though. We were all totally uninformed about any of this until this recent story hit the media. It is fascinating though to watch just how far the extreme right wing Bush cult will go to march in the Bush parade. Just what would it take for you to find any flaw or fault with your Deer Leeder? Anything? Appearently 100,000 murdered Iraqis is enough. Where DO you draw the line?

Appearently 100,000 murdered Iraqis isn't enough.

peter,

And what exactly is wrong with having a healthy debate of the issue?

Racial profiling? Get over it. Imagine management of some of our major ports being turned over to a Bulgarian or Polish government owned company during the height of the Cold War. George Bush has spent the past four years telling us how we are engaged in a war with the radicals in the Middle East. War, 24/7. War all the time. We've been told it's a war with an ideology completely incompatable with our way of life by this administration. Who's fault do you think it is that people in this country are reacting the way they are? My own father amazed me with his reaction to this deal. He's a lifelong Democrat and his response was "Aren't these the people who are trying to kill us?" Who has spent the past 4 years building up the big Arab/Muslim bogeyman? George Bush make this bed and now the entire country has to lie in it. George Bush and "his" government have lead this country down the xenophobic path that we are now on. I hope you're enjoying the results.

So take your race baiting and shove it up your ass.

Steve, we now know that the DPW deal will allow them to operate 21 ports, not just 6. Bush is lying when he says he didn't learn about this until last weekend. Snow and Sanborn were clearly given their appointments due to their close ties to DPW. The Bush administration has been caught, yet again, in trying to push a deal under the radar and defy the law. CFIUS clearly states that a 45 day review is mandated in this case. Why are we writing new legislation to address this? There is a law on the books. What the hell does it take to enforce it?

I will say it again; America is being sold off, privatized and will soon mean nothing.

America was once identified for her ideals and integrity and the possibilities within her shores. These have been pissed away and the rest of the world knows it.

UAE are bad guys not because they are Arabs, but because of their slave trade and human trafficking and drug trafficking and support of radical terrorists. This is why I do not like the idea of doing business with them. This is not a UAE corp it is a State Owned Co - the State itself would operate our ports.

Above and beyond this is the fact that I do not want any foreign co or state operating any of our ports. Before this deal broke, I did not realize that 90% of the ports on the West Coast are operated by foreign corps, primarily Chinese. Just one more mortgaging of America.

I am of the opinion that all of our ports should be US Govt owned and turned into a new WPA. Put our people to work and have complete control over them.

However, even if this were the case, DHS still does not do shit to protect the ports. Bu$hCo will not authorize the money.

All of the "Homeland Security" budget has been squandered and misspent. These assholes could not manage a three-legged race. Incompetent pukes.

Enough rant.

In other news, 27 House Members support impeachment. 27 and growing.

What will it take.

snark, it's obvious the RNC blast fax has given the nutjobs the "racial profiling" talking point, which means that since they have no way to actually defend the move, they're going to try to confuse the issue with the laughably insincere whining about racism. Hilarious that they think they have any credibility when just last week they were championing the Republican spokesvestite dAnn Coulter for calling arabs "ragheads." Yep, we'll take their howls of racism seriously.

Again, where were y'all when Dubai Ports World brought the CSX American Ports contracts last year? They are already here running some of our ports. No big noise last year. Were you not paying attention last year. Something else had your attention?

Again, where were y'all when Dubai Ports World brought the CSX American Ports contracts last year? They are already here running some of our ports. No big noise last year. Were you not paying attention last year. Something else had your attention?

One reason that there was no "big noise" last year was that this got no press. It should ave gotten press. Ports are a form of border. They should be operated by Americans.
A question for you Peter is when are you going to hold your party responsable for the deficets that are creating a condition where this kind of sell off of national assets is going to be demanded by our creditors? Or do you buy the line that as long a the cronies near the top benefit it is in the national interest?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
thread title (2-20-06 GD): Carlyly Group's involvement in port security company
Comment/excerpt: Same main article as the GD-P thread about sale of CSX lines to Carlyle, appointment of former CSX CEO as Sec of Treasury. Reply 24: DUBAI PORT WORLD – THE ONES BUYING THE AMERICAN PORTS – OWN CSX!!! CSX also owns biggest rail in the east, plus trucking.(Reply #30) But Reply #34 says DPW bought the terminal business from CSX for cash and does NOT own CSX, only a business CSX once owned.
Much needs to be clarified, but there are lots of dots there to connect, and it all comes back to sellout by the Bushies for money and to please their MidEast patrons.

Where were y'all when this occured? When DPW brought the CSX Terminal business? No peeps.

The above is me, I hate typekey.

Again, where were y'all when Dubai Ports World brought the CSX American Ports contracts last year?

Gee. I guess I wasn't reading the Wall Street Journal that day.

Is that how your world works Peter? If you aren't aware of something that happened in the past you can't express displeasure with present events? Is that part of the whole "non-reality based" thing?

Can't you do any better then that?

Where were y'all when this occured? When DPW brought the CSX Terminal business? No peeps.

So apparently the answer is yes. That's all you've got. How sad.

peter,

I congratulate you on conceeding the point that this is about private profets over public safety. Unfortunatly, your link doesn't work. The very fact that we're trying to find the background on this issue using news stories that are a year or more older and which didn't get pushed in the public media points at the true problem, things that harm the public good are not being reported as long as the "right" private profets off of it.

No, I'm part of what Zogby says "Conservatives "accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself.”

Married people and religious people – typically self-identified as conservatives – are especially disposed to happiness, with "red state” Southerners showing the sunniest dispositions of all.

I'm happy, enjoying life as a free American in 2006.

That last line should read "right people" make private profets off of it.

It in this case being harm to the public good. We need a new Teddy Roosevelt to bust up the private trusts that are harming America.
And Teddy once proposed national heatthcare too. : )

Non-response.

And Peter has declared himself irrelevant.

wonder if it would have went through if it had been a venezuelan company. of course, chavez isn't a tireless champion of democracy like the emir of dubai.

This Arab company would posess all of the security secrets to our ports.

Sorry, but these ports all run in a similar fashion. It is industrial goods movement and there is nothing secret about their operation. Containers are trucked to yards where they are amassed, then processed and loaded onto massive container ships. They sail to a port get offloaded and stored in a yard, then disbursed by truck or rail. Security at our ports? The secret is it's provided by the government.

Again, where were y'all when Dubai Ports World brought the CSX American Ports contracts last year?

In his view, this issue brings to the fore the contradictory policy aims of "security" on one hand and "corporate globalization" on the other.

fabulous new global economy---foreign firms run enormous numbers of our ports of entry.

All of the "Homeland Security" budget has been squandered and misspent. These assholes could not manage a three-legged race. Incompetent pukes.

And that's the story, kids. It has nothing to do with UAE and terorism. It has everything to do with America being for sale to the highest corporate bidder with the aid of massive cash payments to congress through lobbyists. I have great difficulty with hearing it's about "a country from which two terrorists came" when any number of the operating companies have the same claim to fame.

Accept the fact that the peoples business is no longer done in congress. Accept that this is Reagan's legacy. Accept that one simple fact, and all of this comes into perspective.

Claiming that this is about "them" stealing our port secrets, or "them" being bad, or "them" wanting bad stuff for us, are very similar to the newpaper accounts of why cocaine should be made illegal in the early 1900's. You know, them "Negro Cocaine Fiends" or "Cocainized Niggers." The point is not the raghead terrorists of the UAE owning a port management company. The point is much larger, and it it is being missed.

Married people and religious people – typically self-identified as conservatives – are especially disposed to happiness, with "red state” Southerners showing the sunniest dispositions of all.

That's because they live in a bubble, unaware of the realities of the world, content to trust their President without ever verifying. They are basically oblivious, living in their gated communities, watching Fox News, shopping at Wal-Mart and keeping themselves in lockstep with the government. They surround themselves with people just like themselves and never consider that not everyone has exactly what they have.

phid, i'm surprised you're buying into the chimp's "racism" angle. it's not about arabs, it's about a particular oligarchy that has always been soft on terrorism (and coincidentally is joined at the hip with bushCo)

I have great difficulty with hearing it's about "a country from which two terrorists came" when any number of the operating companies have the same claim to fame.

saudi (15)
UAE (2)
egypt (2)

that's it

are especially disposed to happiness, with "red state” Southerners showing the sunniest dispositions of all.

As long as you discount the highest suicide rates, highest drug and alcohol abuse rates, highest spousal abuse rates, highest teen pregnanacy rates, highest depression rates, highest murder rates, highest child abuse rates, highest child murder by parents rate, highest sex abuse rates, highest divorce rate, highest STD rates, lowest level of education...as long as you discount these things, them fucking red staters are just a peach. A stupid knuckle-dragging white cracker peach, but still a peach.

I laugh at the gated community tag line. I live in a house brought in 1979 for $22,250.00 with an appraised value of $70K. Gated community, yeah right. I see gates at the nearby storage center accross from our Wal-Mart. Latinos living in the two houses next to me on the right. African-Americans living two houses down on the left. A sanitation worker and prison guard worker living next to me. Yeah I'm in a bubble unaware of whats going on. Don't think so. Look in the direction of the three fingers pointing your direction on your hand pointing at me. No cable in this house, no Foxnews, wife will not pay for TV. Try something else dear Ann.

Married people and religious people – typically self-identified as conservatives – are especially disposed to happiness, with "red state” Southerners showing the sunniest dispositions of all.

Braindead lemmings with Stepford-like pathology results in the wide-eyed, lumbering about behavior seen in most wingers.

Just herd them into a corral and give them some hay to munch.

Just to expand on peter's argument:

Sorry, but these ports all run in a similar fashion. It is industrial goods movement and there is nothing secret about their operation. Containers are trucked to yards where they are amassed, then processed and loaded onto massive container ships. They sail to a port get offloaded and stored in a yard, then disbursed by truck or rail.

But as per Scottie MC, checking the manifests is 95 percent of port security, the other 5 percent being actually inspecting containers. And by checking manifests, I believe they mean, matching up what one piece of paper says with what another piece of paper says. And that complicated and complex process would be handled by port management, no?

So if a container says "Truck engines" and the paperwork agrees with that, even if the container actually has a suitcase sized nuckuler bomb in it, we have security. And if the company that loaded the container with the bomb is owned by the guy at the US port's family, we have security, right?

And Peter has declared himself irrelevant.

When was it ever relevant? You'll notice the troll still does not defend the sale, it only complains about a response no one has actually offered.

As for happiness, ignorance is bliss, which explains why trolls are deliriously happy.

You're the one that brought up your personal life Peter. The rest of us could give a fuck.

Do you have any interest in discussing the issue at hand or are you just here to sidetrack the conversation so you can come back two months from now and say "Where were you guys when the whole port deal thing was going down? Dsicussing who is happy and who isn't?"

That was me. This typepad thing is a bit wonky.

If Jimmy Carter likes it, why shouldn't I. He's a great American, he would never back losing America's security to some unknown now would he? Jimmy Carter has been a great ex-president hasn't he? American union labor will still load and unload the ships. Coast Guard will still do their duty. All regulatory agencies will still function normally. Virtually nothing changes. Just as nothing changed with the CSX deal last year. No big noise out of that transaction, nobody noticed any changes.

phid, i'm surprised you're buying into the chimp's "racism" angle.

Go back and read the posts slowly. That will help with your misunderstanding. 2 of the terrorists were nationals of the UAE. So? Terrorists come from Ireland. So? There are muslim terrorists in England. So? It's as ludicrous as saying Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist so no American company can manage a port. So if you think I'm buying the Chimp's line, I'm not, and you can go fuck yourself for so thinking. I'm being perfectly rational.

I have difficulty seeing the people here fall into the Lou Dobbs race baiting trap. I've heard sheer lunacy from the liberals on this issue. Only the UAE is not allowed to manage a port because two nationals were terrorists? Please! And it's really interesting to see liberals batter about media lies as if they are shuttle-cocks in a badminton game. The UAE did not finance the terrorists, and anyone with google on their computer would understand that. I've seen too many disingenuous arguments that don't even begin to get beyond the surface details of this issue. Everything I hear and read is the same logic used by the neo-cons to say Iraq was an appropriate response. Many here appear to be using the exact same line of reasoning in this instance.

I don't ask or desire that you think as I do, understand the issue as I do, or even agree with me. But, fuck me silly, I don't understand why it's in any way important that I believe as you do.

If Jimmy Carter likes it, why shouldn't I. He's a great American, he would never back losing America's security to some unknown now would he? Jimmy Carter has been a great ex-president hasn't he?

He doesn't think it poses a security risk. That's not the only reason people are questioning this deal. And the fact that a former Democratic president doesn't think this is a problem while the Republicans in Congress have got themselves all aflutter about it because they believe the public sees it as a security problem is also part of the issue. The only reason the Reps think it's a problem is because they're worried about backlash at the voting booth. The reasons that will happen are because George Bush has the American public so afraid of the Arab menace that they can't think straight and because this is just another example of Bush's good old boys making a killing off of Middle Eastern connections.

Sirota is partially right but he ignores the obvious.
It all stinks of cronyism and corporate greed with PNAC again leading the way to profit with the Carlyle Group thrown into the mix. Albright is even lobbying on DP World's behalf (yes, she is a major investor in Carlyle).
In other words, bu$hco will fuck the American people to protect their corporate cronies...again.

Just heard an interesting stat on Thom Hartmann; since Bu$hCo entered office $1.7 Trillion in US assets have been sold off.

America no longer is owned by Americans.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is old news now, folks.

Welcome to the American Fucking Nightmare.

Judith: (A) Name the year that the Chinese took over management of the Port of Long Beach. (B) Name the President at that time.

Robert says Perhaps, people should start focusing on what the US will look like when we are all working for the Chinese...

Yes, we spend too much on social programs and defense. We don't have the money, so we have to borrow it. In addition, our education system is producing too many graduates who proudly display their diplomas that they can't even read...

Regarding higher taxes, which the libs think are a "cure all" for everything, during Kerry's 2004 campaign he promised to raise taxes on people making more than $200,000. But when a study went through his math, they found in order to get the income he wanted, he'd have to raise taxes on everyone making more than $40,000. Which is why he only won the $50K category. Wasn't even close.

Muck, how many Chinese were among the 9/11 murderers? How many UAE countrymen were?

Yes, we spend too much on social programs and defense.

Defense, yes. This is merely about transferring the taxpayer money to defense contractors who are buds with the current administration.

Social programs, are you on crack? We spend, what is it, between 1 and 2% of the annual budget on social programs. Try another talking point.

So if a container says "Truck engines" and the paperwork agrees with that, even if the container actually has a suitcase sized nuckuler bomb in it, we have security.

And what makes you think you have this security now?

You ought to see em! All containers go through radiation detectors. It's the only thing DHS got correct.

When they come up with a suitcase bomb (and, BTW, the smallest suitcase nuke ever developed was 165 lbs. Only the U.S. could get one that small. The next smallest was the Russians at 650 lbs. Otherwise, the suitcase nuke you're afraid of --and fear appears to be the operant meme in these threads-- weighs a couple of tons) without radiation in it, then you can be very afraid.

And that complicated and complex process would be handled by port management, no?

Security is handled by the Feds.

I'll tell you folks what scares me absolutely witless is that two of the terrorists came from Egypt, and Egyptian airlines -Air Sinai, EgyptAir, Lotus Air, Midwest Airlines, Scorpio Aviation- over-fly the United States several times each day! Oh God! Think of what could happen if one of those airline employees was related to a turr'rest! They could fly into the Tastee Freeze in Pocatello, Idaho!

Fear! By God, all we lack is the appropriate level of fear! It's good to see that the fearful things we should fear are driving our fear. When in doubt, be afraid. Nothing like a little epinephrine, nor-epinephrine, adrenaline and nor-adrenaline to drive cogent thought through the sympathetic nervous system and the flight-or-fight response.

how many Chinese were among the 9/11 murderers

Tough to say. Al Qaeda is in China, though. Who knows who is connected to Chinese port management now. But I guess it's only if you're born in the country that matters. You know, I'm a born American so ergo I support torture at Abu Ghraib.

It is amazing to see Muck bring up pre-9/11 stuff to defend Bush on the Dubai ports deal. Hasn't the GOP been telling us for four years that the world changed on 9/11? I don't hear the sycophants disagree with that, as they denigrate Democrats for not having a post-9/11 view of the threat and the world we live in. So when Democrats raise a point about foreign government ownership of our ports of entry, what's the first thing the sycophants like Muck do?

They try and act like what was done in the 1990's matters in a post-9/11 world, and lump the Chinese in with a country that has aided Al Qaeda and Bin Laden.

Sorry, no sale. Things changed on 9/11, right? I mean, that's what you guys have been telling us for four years, right? So live with it.

phid,

I was being facetious man!

I know the Feds "handle" security, but doesn't checking manifests fall into the realm of port management too,o they know where to send trucks and whatnot?

Maybe I shouldn't have been so specific in my weapon of choice. Perhaps I should have said one of those balsa wood rubber band powered flying bioweapon spraying death weapons that bush said Hussein had before we invaded, coz that wouldn't show up on x-ray, right?

I ain't afeared of them terrorists, I'm pissed off at whatever stupidity that makes us less secure that bush will do for profit. Plus I'm pretty sick of them selling us off to their criminal cronies.

And legislation isn't the answer to that problem.

Nor is productivity.

Married people and religious people – typically self-identified as conservatives – are especially disposed to happiness, with "red state” Southerners showing the sunniest dispositions of all.

Ever since I saw the editorial on this in WAPO, I had this nagging memory of numerous studies I had seen reports on over the past few years. What stood out to me was that in looking at married couples, the men tended to be happier and have better mental health while married women were just the opposite. In fact, "Those who seem to be most likely to experience depression are married women, women in poverty, adolescents, and unmarried men."

I think the administration should award the ports contract to the Sho tribespeople of the Kalahari desert.

As their most advanced technology is the bow and arrow, and they speak a peculiar 'clicking tongue' language no on else on Earth speaks, they would be completely safe in terms of security breaches of our ports.

They are inherently honest, do not go to war with anyone, and could not possibly f*ck things up any worse than Bush and drones do on a regular basis.

In addition, the Kalahari is becoming uninhabitable thanks to global warming, so it would be a huge boost to the Sho economy, which is firmly based on goats. They would work for a goat a day, without a doubt.

The only down side is that we would be exposing a morally uncorrupted people to the American (especially Repug) way of life and doing things. They may never recover.

One other consideration is allowing Jack Abramoff run things for a year. After that little experience, I suspect we would beg the UAE to take over. Even Al Quada would probably be an improvement.

Time out, man! When did p-dippy become a 'pube troll? Did I miss something?

Watched a phenomenal docu last night, from Netflix, called "Unconstitutional". 2004, Director Nonny de la Pena

It was about the UNPatriot Act and what occured after 9/11 with the round up of all kinds of Arabs and Muslims and their renditions and deportations.

I highly recommend it.

The original UNPatriot Act was changed in the middle of the night from the one voted on in conference. At 3:45 am the WH printed up their own version and the vote was forced at 11 am before anyone had a chance to read it.

These people are Nazis - truly - I had no idea how many people were rounded up and thrown into lock up for no reason other than the color of their skin or their racial background or where they prayed.

It was an eye-opener.

jeez, phid, it's not about the nationality of terrorists. i was just responding to your erroneous statement:

I have great difficulty with hearing it's about "a country from which two terrorists came" when any number of the operating companies have the same claim to fame.

if by "any number" you mean "2."

as i said before:

it's about a particular oligarchy that has always been soft on terrorism (and coincidentally is joined at the hip with bushCo)

has the government of dubai changed hands recently? of course not. do we just accept their redemption in the wake of the iraq war? forgive my skepticism.

I don't ask or desire that you think as I do, understand the issue as I do, or even agree with me. But, fuck me silly, I don't understand why it's in any way important that I believe as you do.

i imagine by being surprised at your reaction and arguing against it i'm guilty of some sort of rhetorical totalitarianism, but more likely you're just on the rag. i don't expect or desire that you feel that way.

phid's not a troll. he just doesn't think this story has any substance.

phid's not a troll. he just doesn't think this story has any substance.

Posted by benjoya at February 24, 2006 10:18 AM

****
Huh?

Maybe I am just blinded by the orb that has entered my sky for the first time in several days - but I have not gotten that from a single thing Phid has written...

I believe, and what I have thought that I have read, is that the real issue is not what country is buying/leasing our ports - it is that we are allowing any country to buy/lease our ports.

The real issue, IMO, is that we are allowing America to be sold off. Again, $1.7 Trillion of American assets sold off to other countries, or corps from other countries.

I believe that I am on the same page as Phid. I have not at all read that he thinks it is a "non-issue" - just that it is a much bigger issue than the UAE buying these ports.

Am I blinded?

Anjha, i think we all agree that it's bigger than this one port. but the us relationship with such states is worrisome when it puts governments with bad track records in the position to hire and fire port workers. i don't think it's racist to say the government of dubai isn't as trustworthy as the government of, say, britain. okay, bad example.

Uh, I recall p-dippy announcing that he's registering as a 'puke just a little while ago, I think in response to Alito, but I'm too lazy to go back. Seems like his progressive roots didn't sink too far if it's that easy to convert, but then, I don't really know what how progressive he really is/was.

Obviously, our dear p-dip fancies himself a contrarian, which is fine, he still makes me laugh. And since the bulk of the proles out there in tv land have already internalized Bush's betrayal of his promise to protect them, the damage is done. Since they don't really run on facts, they're led by emotions, they won't care what the details are now, only that they're scared of the swarthies, who now have "free access to our ports! Danger, Will Robinson!!." If p-dippy wants to argue amongst the wonks that this deal is no biggie just to be the provocateur, good for him.

We all know it's not about the swarthies, it's much more complicated than that. But if the proles are disillusioned with their hero, who cares?

Is anybody disbanding the Port Authority of NY? Does this new contract do that? All port authorities will still have the same authority over the ports as they had before. I'm with Phid up there. This is a non story. It's also one that should have run its course last week, but, y'all were so worried about shotguns last week.

If p-dippy wants to argue amongst the wonks that this deal is no biggie just to be the provocateur, good for him.

I think you have misunderstood phidipides position. No where did he say it wasn't a biggie. He takes exception, in my reading of his comments, with the argument that this deal is bad because of the Arab connection. He believes, as do I, that the real problem is that our national assets are being sold off to the rich and well connected right under our noses. As Peter so helpfully pointed out, these deals are happening and the majority of Americans have no idea its happening. If people really understood who was involved in the Carlysle Group, for example, and what they are doing it would be a huge story. But the sheep don't care. They are consumed by their fear of the Islamic menace. Bushco. has conditioned them all for the past 4+ years and that's what they react to.

This is a non story.

Which is why you have been pounding it since 6am like Rover pounds his leather slave, huh?

(thanks, Rude Pundit)

Oh, hey, speaking of shotguns:

'This was a South Texas hunt...Of course there was drinking. There's always drinking. Lots of it.'

snark, I went thru the entire thread and the only person arguing about the "arab connection" was TIKI, at 1:23am. Some have argued against a foreign country running the ports; some against a country involved in smuggling, slave trafficking, even the assassination of the Lebonese Prime Minister, as Digby mentioned yesterday; some against globalization in general. The point is, the only ones really arguing about racial profiling are p-dip and the troll, both accusing us of doing it. I know the troll is mainlining koolaid; I'm just wondering if benjoya's right; is phidipides ragging or has he succumbed to the dark side?

Ann, social programs (including Social Security, medicaid and medicare), are the bulk of the US budget. Link.

Do you ever look anything up before you mention it? Try a google search sometime, eh?

Steve, just pointing out your struggles to damn president bush while praising president clinton. Kind of flip-floppity. It's okay that Clinton outsourced ports to China; but it's not okay that Bush is outsourcing ports to the UAE.

Guffaw.

Ann, social programs (including Social Security, medicaid and medicare), are the bulk of the US budget.

I wasn't including SS, Medicare or Medicaid. Kind of like how you don't include the cost of food or gas in the inflation rates. And like how Bush leaves the war costs out of the budget.

Cut the corporate welfare and the corporate tax breaks and subsidies - that's where the real bulk of the US budget goes.

snark, I went thru the entire thread and the only person arguing about the "arab connection" was TIKI, at 1:23am.

Ummmm,

Muck, how many Chinese were among the 9/11 murderers? How many UAE countrymen were? -Steve Soto, 9:25AM.

Two comments before phidipides' comment.

12:49 PM was me. Change is hard.

Also, I was thinking that muck meant spending on programs for the poor, welfare, etc. That is what is approx 1 - 2% of the budget. Whereas corporate welfare (aka: welfare for the rich) is an astronomical portion of our budget.

Muck, you're so pre-9/11 in your thinking. According to Rove, that makes you a Democrat.

snark, okay, so two comments out of 70, as well as benjoya's clarification, but whatever. I like p-dippy as well as the next guy, but he's been in a cranky funk since the Alito thing, and I'm just calling him on it. Like I said, as long as the proles have become disillusioned with the prick in the whitehouse, I really don't care how it happens. We'll never know the truth of what happens, we'll never be able to stop it, because logic or fact-flinging is no match for billions of dollars. All this holier than thou "get the facts right" bullshit hasn't helped one damn bit in changing the minds of the blind followers. This issue has. And if the proles want to believe Bush has betrayed them, let them believe it - I say: stop trying to dissuade them with facts that they don't care about anyhow.

Uh, Muck, do you think that China funds Osama?

I was being facetious man!

K. Kinda thought so. But still gave me an opportunity to rant.

but more likely you're just on the rag.

What do you mean it's me! I talk and talk, and all I get from you are those silly damn looks! You don't know what it's like to be me! (Suddenly very aggressive) Don't you walk away from me! Sometimes I could just kill you!! Gheesh! These cramps are killing me!

Uh, I recall p-dippy announcing that he's registering as a 'puke

Nope. Stopped being a Democrat. Thought about republi-con as a protest so I could photocopy cards and send it to my Congressman, but he wouldn't care. As a democ-rat he's more republi-con than the neo-cons here.

I think you have misunderstood phidipides position.

Yup. This is much much bigger than the UAE. I don't think the UAE operating a port is the issue -I think they would do as good a job as anyone.

I really hate to see the unhealthy "us and them" sentiments. It's pretty easy to point a finger in this country and hit some multinational connected to a "terrorist country." If you gas your car anyplace other than Citgo you are purchasing from a company with contracts and symbiotic relationships all over the "terrorist" map.

As I said previously, the UAE deal is only reflective of the real issue. The People's business stopped in the United States during the Reagan administration when everything in the United States, including the government, went to the highest bidder -a lobbyist for a corporation or government. Foreign govenments are amazed! They can come here and pass around some cash and get anything they want (unless they are Hamas...for the next few months...when Palestinian cash going to the neo-cons will rehabilitate Hamas). The amazing thing is it's largely illegal to do this in other countries.

As I said previously, the UAE deal is only reflective of the real issue.

Ya think? For my part, I was harsh on you today because you acted as if we didn't get that. We do. (all of us except for your new best friend, peter, that is) Port security was a concern before this story came out, wasn't it? And it was being ignored, wasn't it? Now, not only is it not being ignored, the fact that most of our ports are run by foreign countries is suddenly in the spotlight; as well as the lack of movement to secure the ports and by extension, other vulnerable targets like chem plants, as well as the selling off of American assets, as well as the Bush ties to Middle Eastern money, and on and on. There's no shame in being pleased that finally, the admin's lack of seriousness about national security has finally seeped into the consciousness of the masses.

What do you mean it's me! I talk and talk, and all I get from you are those silly damn looks! You don't know what it's like to be me! (Suddenly very aggressive) Don't you walk away from me! Sometimes I could just kill you!! Gheesh! These cramps are killing me!

So you admit, you were being a dick. (heh) And while you did mention the registration card scheme when you first declared yourself no longer a Democrat, you have threatened, in subsequent comments only recently, to vote Republican. Sometimes, in a fit of pique, I hurl this threat at my car radio, but I don't think I could bring myself to do it.

Finally, I can only guess as to what this means:

I really hate to see the unhealthy "us and them" sentiments. It's pretty easy to point a finger in this country and hit some multinational connected to a "terrorist country." If you gas your car anyplace other than Citgo you are purchasing from a company with contracts and symbiotic relationships all over the "terrorist" map.

Are you saying that unless we buy our gas from Chavez, we're complicit in the whole Middle East oil addiction reach around and therefore we shouldn't complain about the things we have to do to feed the addiction? Or are you saying that because of the hold that ME oil has on our economy, it's best not to rock the boat? I'm really interested in your meaning here, because I feel like this is where most of your angst today is coming from, but I'm not getting your true meaning. C'mon, spill. What's really bugging you?