You offer 3 excellent reasons.
I blogged about 3 other reasons earlier this week:
1. The United Arab Emirates refuses to recognize Israel
2. The United Arab Emirates still recognizes the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan
3. Two of the 9/11 terrorists were from the United Arab Emirates and received their funding from the goverment of the United Arab Emirates
The list just keeps growing. Kinda' like Bush's nose.
The reason I like best about why this is a *bad* deal, is this this gang wrote up a "special" contract for their friends which basically says, "we hope you don't do anything bad, but remember if you don't have any paperwork in the US, you can't get in any trouble no matter what you do. Bushie's got your back." I wonder if that "Great British" company had the same deal.
Posted by Mary at February 25, 2006 03:52 PMwell, national propaganda radio's atc weekend edition is working on this one.
without identifying any of the port security experts, atc's correspondent[missed the name] broadcast that out of the 20 that he consulted, only 1 had any misgivings concerning dubai ports world managing 6 terminals in US PORTS.
he went far enough to label sen. schumer a liar. apparently schumer claimed to have consulted two port security experts who were opposed to dubai ports world's operating in us ports. he claims that he asked schumer's staff for the names of these two experts, was given them. he claims he telephoned them, talked to them, and was told that they had no concerns regarding dubai ports world operating in the usa.
the piece was interesting for these other facts that this atc reporter introduced. he asserted that in the major us ports[seattle, los angeles, long beach, san diego, san francisco, houston, new orleans, gulfport, miami, new york, boston, etc] there are approximately 100 terminals. less than ten are operated by indigenous us corporations. 80 are operated by foreign entities. though none of these 80 foreign operators are foreign govt-owned, certainly he was accurate in describing the chinese terminal operators on the west coast as notional prc entities.
he also uttered another interesting bit of commentary concerning foreign-owned, commercial aircraft flying into the usa. he introduced the notion that foreign-govt owned airlines[passengers plus cargo] were routinely flying into the united states with less scrutiny of their security/personnel than what the transoceanic shipping industry was being subjected to. i question that.
concluding, he asserted that terminal operators are only marginally involved in port security measures....that the principal protectors of us ports are the us coast guard and us customs.
he did not identify the uscg and the uscs as having been transferred to the totally brain-dead and underfunded dept of homeland "in"security.
closing his report, he state that in all his years he had never encountered a situation where all the opposition was so contradictory to all the facts. i suppose he has only been a reporter for the last two weeks.
so it goes......
Posted by albertchampion at February 25, 2006 03:58 PMI think Bush understands "The Enemy" quite well. It is the American public he misunderestimated this time.
I think one of the key issues to keep in mind about the Dubai deal is Bush's failing credibility. Moderates and liberals noticed some time ago the mismatch between what Bush says and what the reality is or what he later does. Then rational conservatives started noticing the many contradictions as well as the excessive grab of power. Now the entire Republican Party is noticing the many conflicting statements of Bush. When even the Republican Party can no longer reconcile the many contradictions of the Bush Administration, it can't be any clearer that the nation as a whole has a problem. The issue is trust and the nation is finding it more and more difficult to put trust into George W. Bush.
Posted by Craig at February 25, 2006 04:25 PMThe I'll Weasel and Babel company?
and the Lootah Group?
Someone had a sense of humor, they knew they'd be working for the same people as bushCo.
Posted by fly at February 25, 2006 05:12 PMWell shit...if these documents don't seal the proof for Congress I don't know what does!
Great job Steve and readers!
Posted by bbtb at February 25, 2006 06:59 PMThere is nothing new in any of this information. Just another rehash of what has been known for quite a while.
Here is how it plays out:
Regardless of the UAE port deal, every fuck-ball republi-con now has an issue to run with this fall so that they can claim they are stronger than the pretzledent on terra.
I don't think you realize it yet, but the Dems may have just kissed 2006 goodbye.
Posted by phidipides at February 25, 2006 08:31 PMQuite frankly, I'm disgusted by those on the left adopting the racist, bedwetting politics of the right and using this UAE thing to stereotype the Middle East. This is pathetic, progressive politics should be far more than just doing the opposite of the fascistas and Bushies and calling itself progressive. This is the most ressentiment-laden politics of kitsch and it is no wonder the democrats have little to offer when the bloggers who criticize the invertebrate left are so overdetermined by the right. C'mon guys, you can't do better than this?
Posted by Jody Ranck at February 26, 2006 05:53 PM