How Do YOU Feel About The Possible Port Purchase and Why?

[rickjump1 0]

Quote

Quote

I'd hear the dz.com server groaning from all the "Payoff!" posts all the way over here in Kosovo!

Hmm I was under the impression that was the new way our administration and members of congress on the right side of the aisle were dealing with the K street people..... we are back to the if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... it probably is really an elephant.

Just because CNN just reported that Dubai Ports World hired Bob Dole as a lobbyist (really),doesn't mean they couldn't have gotten Bill Clinton cheaper.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[JohnnyD 0]

Quote

I thought it was a state run company. If the case is that it is a state run company then we have some issues

It is a state owned company.
The same state that supplied 2 of the Sept. 11 hijackers, a constant supply of money to Hamas and was one of the three nations to officially recognize the Taliban as an official governing entity.
What could go wrong? The Dept. of Homeland Security will be around and we all know how well they protect our borders, not to mention how well they have already proven to be at natural disasters.
The Lybian government has renounced terrorism. I wonder how long it will be before we allow them to manage our airports?

[airfury17 0]

well I can Understand why people are freaking out here. However. the UAE absolotly hates terrorists of all kind. I am very close family freinds with the Sharrif's a Royal family in the UAE. I went to high school with Borkan Mohammed Sharrif. I have been to the UAE many times including Dubai and Abu Dabi. I can assure you that the UAE is a very kind and generous nation. I can also assure you thats just becuase they are Arab does not mean they believe in terrorism or would help them in anyway. The general Company has great habits and works hard in security. Most likely the company will have and can assure better security then we do currently. So before anyone freaks out understand that the UAE is not jsut another Iran. UAE has amazing technology and parts are extreamly wealthy. They could better manage and make our ports a more safe and better overall run place. Also the United State Coast Guard will still be in charge of overall security of our ports. So i believe this is not such a big deal and dangerous and most believe.

[wmw999 2,544]

I'm not sure how I feel about this in a lot of ways. It seems like a good opportunity to bash GWB (who generally goes and finds his opportunities).

I'd like to rewrite this post, in an attempt to think about world viewpoints.

---

well I can Understand why people are freaking out here. However. the UAE USA absolotly hates terrorists of all kind. I am very close family freinds with the Sharrif's a Royal family in the UAE. I have a friend who went to high school grew up in the same neighborhood with Borkan Mohammed Sharrif George W. Bush. I have been to the UAE many times including Dubai and Abu Dabi live in Texas, close to George HW Bush. I can assure you that the UAE USA is a very kind and generous nation. I can also assure you thats just becuase they are Arab American does not mean they believe in terrorism world dominion or would help them in anyway. The general Company vast majority of the US military has great habits and works hard in security. Most likely the company US military will have and can assure better security then we do currently. So before anyone freaks out understand that the UAE USA is not jsut another Iran USA (). UAE USA has amazing technology and parts are extreamly wealthy. They could better manage and make our ports a country a more safe and better overall run place. Also the United State Coast Guard will still be in charge of overall security of our ports. So i believe this is not such a big deal and dangerous and most believe.

---

Interesting. Sometimes one's viewpoints need a step back.

Of course, the person I know who grew up in Midland down the street from GWB said he was an asshole then. But Jeb was a nice guy.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[bob.dino 1]

Quote

The United States is for sale to the highest bidder. To much of this country is owned by other countries. One of these days they are going to hit us with an eviction notice.
America should be owned by Americans and Americans only.

Yep. Parts of the USA are owned by foreign companies. And parts of other countries are owned by US-based companies. It's part of how capitalism, free markets, and the unencumbered movement of capital work.

Personally, you should stop complaining. Those markets are one of the things that's made the USA the preeminent world power of the last few decades.

Things are pretty rosy for y'all. This is like complaining when you're winnning a basketball game 88-3.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Yep. Parts of the USA are owned by foreign companies. And parts of other countries are owned by US-based companies. It's part of how capitalism, free markets, and the unencumbered movement of capital work.

Personally, you should stop complaining. Those markets are one of the things that's made the USA the preeminent world power of the last few decades.

Things are pretty rosy for y'all. This is like complaining when you're winnning a basketball game 88-3.

I'm all for a free market, however, I think certain things, such as our ports, should be U.S. owned no matter what. It just makes sense.

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

As I said in the other thread -

Port operations != customs/security inspections.

I do find it amusing how the same people that were screaming about Bechtel and others not getting the base support contracts are now screaming about a non-US company getting this one...

As for the people muttering about payoffs... show me the money. If you've got proof, trot it out.

Show you? If you wanted to put Chester the Molestor, Inc. in charge of child care, could I show you it is bad? Sometimes you just have to open your eyes and think (even just a little bit) to accept or reject an idea.

The problem with common sense is that it ain't all that common ...apparently.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[billvon 3,076]

>If you wanted to put Chester the Molestor, Inc. in charge of
>child care, could I show you it is bad?

Now that's just silly! Michael Jackson would be a better example. After all, he was PROVEN innocent of those charges.

[JohnnyD 0]

Quote

wethe UAE absolotly hates terrorists of all kind........
just becuase they are Arab does not mean they believe in terrorism or would help them in anyway.....
They could better manage and make our ports a more safe and better overall run place.....
this is not such a big deal and dangerous and most believe.....

Excerpt from 9/11 Commission testimony of CIA DIRECTOR GEORGE TENET, Eighth Public Hearing, Wednesday, March 24, 2004, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC
CHAIRED BY: THOMAS H. KEAN

MR. FIELDING: Well, yesterday we talked about the three events in '98 and '99 where there were occasions that it looked like there might be an opportunity, which then in each instance was deemed not to be operational. And the one that I find the most intriguing and the one that's been labeled as perhaps the lost opportunity more than any was the February '99 hunting camp, I guess it's been described, and the desert camp. And yesterday in the staff statement that was read, we were told about that and we were told that the intelligence seemed pretty strong, and that the preparations were made and then the strike was called off, and -- although the lead CIA agent in the field felt that it was very reliable intelligence. I guess, was there anything unique about the intelligence or the circumstances that necessitated that decision, and who made that decision?

MR. TENET: I don't have a recollection of the uniqueness of the intelligence in question at the time. I'm going to go back and provide that for you. In fact, I'd like to go back and try and package up all the data at my disposal when we were thinking about these issues.

I believe this was a collective decision. I also believe this target went away because the camp was ultimately dismantled. So in reading through your staff inquiry, your staff notes on this, I can't recall who made the call, but I know we were all in the same place about it, Mr. Fielding.

MR. FIELDING: Yeah. Well, I would appreciate that on behalf of the Commission if you could do that because it seemed that this -- when the intelligence was so good, and that by the time the camp was dismantled days and days had passed.

So I would appreciate --

MR. TENET: There's also a question, I believe, as to whether bin Ladin was inside or outside the camp --

MR. FIELDING: Of course.

MR. TENET: -- it was a complicating issue in this whole thing -- and whether he was there or not. So there's a second complicating factor here.

The third complicating factor here is, you might have wiped out half the royal family in the UAE in the process, which I'm sure entered into everybody's calculation in all this.

But in any event, I would like -- I will try and reconstruct the data as best I can, in terms of what I had in my possession at the time.

MR. FIELDING: I would appreciate it. Thank you. And thank you for your testimony.

I see that little red light is on. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Click Here for the full transcription: http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing8/9-11Commission_Hearing_2004-03-24.htm


Excerpt from 9/11 Commission Staff Statement #6, Eighth Public Hearing, Tuesday, March 23, 2004, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC
CHAIRED BY: THOMAS H. KEAN:

The Desert Camp, February 1999. During the winter of 1998-99, intelligence reported that Bin Ladin frequently visited a camp in the desert, adjacent to a larger hunting camp in Helmand Province of Afghanistan, used by visitors from a Gulf state. Public sources have stated that these visitors were from the United Arab Emirates. At the beginning of February, Bin Ladin was reportedly located there, and apparently remained for more than a week. This was not in an urban area, so the risk of collateral damage was minimal. Intelligence provided a detailed description of the camps. National technical intelligence confirmed the description of the larger camp, and showed the nearby presence of an official aircraft of the UAE. The CIA received reports that Bin Ladin regularly went from his adjacent camp to the larger camp where he visited with Emiratis. The location of this larger camp was confirmed by February 9, but the location of Bin Ladin's quarters could not be pinned down so precisely.

Preparations were made for a possible strike, against the larger camp, perhaps to target Bin Ladin during one of his visits. No strike was launched.

According to CIA officials, policymakers were concerned about the danger that a strike might kill an Emirati prince or other senior officials who might be with Bin Ladin or close by. The lead CIA official in the field felt the intelligence reporting in this case was very reliable. The UBL unit chief at the time agrees. The field official believes today that this was a lost opportunity to kill Bin Ladin before 9/11.

Clarke told us the strike was called off because the intelligence was dubious, and it seemed to him as if the CIA was presenting an option to attack America's best counterterrorism ally in the Gulf. Documentary evidence at the time shows that on February 10th Clarke detailed to Deputy National Security Advisor Donald Kerrick the intelligence placing UBL in the camp, informed him that DOD might be in a position to fire the next morning, and added that General Shelton was looking at other options that might be ready the following week. Clarke had just returned from a visit to the UAE, working on counterterrorism cooperation and following up on a May 1998 UAE agreement to buy F-16 aircraft from the United States.

On February 10th, Clarke reported that a top UAE official had vehemently denied that high-level UAE officials were in Afghanistan. Evidence subsequently confirmed that high-level UAE officials had been there.

By February 12th, Bin Ladin had apparently moved on and the immediate strike plans became moot.

In March, the entire camp complex was hurriedly disassembled. We are still examining several aspects of this episode.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

I'd hear the dz.com server groaning from all the "Payoff!" posts all the way over here in Kosovo!

Hmm I was under the impression that was the new way our administration and members of congress on the right side of the aisle were dealing with the K street people..... we are back to the if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... it probably is really an elephant.

Sort of how the Left gets that welfare vote, hmm?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Show you? If you wanted to put Chester the Molestor, Inc. in charge of child care, could I show you it is bad? Sometimes you just have to open your eyes and think (even just a little bit) to accept or reject an idea.

The problem with common sense is that it ain't all that common ...apparently.

Ah, I see.... so innuendo and accusation trump fact again....nice....and about what I expected, to be honest.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

Show you? If you wanted to put Chester the Molestor, Inc. in charge of child care, could I show you it is bad? Sometimes you just have to open your eyes and think (even just a little bit) to accept or reject an idea.

The problem with common sense is that it ain't all that common ...apparently.

Ah, I see.... so innuendo and accusation trump fact again....nice....and about what I expected, to be honest.

What might that fact be? Come on. Trot it out!

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Show you? If you wanted to put Chester the Molestor, Inc. in charge of child care, could I show you it is bad? Sometimes you just have to open your eyes and think (even just a little bit) to accept or reject an idea.

The problem with common sense is that it ain't all that common ...apparently.

Ah, I see.... so innuendo and accusation trump fact again....nice....and about what I expected, to be honest.

What might that fact be? Come on. Trot it out!

The fact that you don't have any PROOF of wrongdoing is very plain to see.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Show you? If you wanted to put Chester the Molestor, Inc. in charge of child care, could I show you it is bad? Sometimes you just have to open your eyes and think (even just a little bit) to accept or reject an idea.

The problem with common sense is that it ain't all that common ...apparently.

Ah, I see.... so innuendo and accusation trump fact again....nice....and about what I expected, to be honest.

What might that fact be? Come on. Trot it out!

The fact that you don't have any PROOF of wrongdoing is very plain to see.

Sooo, about those 'facts' you claim to have ...just blowing hot air????

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

The fact that you don't have any PROOF of wrongdoing is very plain to see.

Often an investigation is started when there is the appearance of wrong doing. From that investigation flows wether or not there are facts/proof of any wrong doing.

Are you of the opinion that no investigation should ever take place without first having proof?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Often an investigation is started when there is the appearance of wrong doing. From that investigation flows wether or not there are facts/proof of any wrong doing.

Are you of the opinion that no investigation should ever take place without first having proof?

Isn't this analogous to searching someone's house?
I mean, why care if you have nothing to hide?

(Just a comment on the post, I'm not taking a position on the port purchase as I don't know the facts and don't care to research it)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Are you of the opinion that no investigation should ever take place without first having proof?

Nope - I could run around saying "Clinton was spying for the Chinese" but that doesn't make it true.

Again, since Jenfly can't seem to grasp the idea - if you have anything besides innuendo that there's some sort of payoff to the Bush family on this, let's see the proof.

Otherwise, it's all hot air.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[JohnnyD 0]

How much more do you need, or do you think the 9-11 comission report is one big lie as well?
It is clearly stated in the report that members of the UAE royal family - the same family we are proposing to manage our ports - were in terrorist training camps with OBL himself 19 months before 9/11. We also know that the family has and continues to funnel money to Hamas through "charity organizations".
I will concede that the Bush family has a lot of influence with the UAE royal family at the moment, but the royal family is also known to support terrorists. What happens when that influence is gone?
- In hindsight, it was a bad idea to finance and supply OBL.
- In hindsight, it was a bad idea to finance and supply SH.
- It is a bad idea to finance and supply any entity that supports terrorists.
When are we going to learn?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Again, since Jenfly can't seem to grasp the idea - if you have anything besides innuendo that there's some sort of payoff to the Bush family on this, let's see the proof.

Otherwise, it's all hot air.

Well, not necessarily.

Bush has never threatened a Veto.
Bush's family has very strong (business) ties to the middle east.
Supposedly Bush didn't know about this, yet he feels Very strongly about it. Strong enough to use a veto to get this through.
it is an odd thing to do in the current climate.

Granted none of this is proof of anything untoward happening. However, for some people, including me, it is enough to start wondering what really might be going on. Not accusations, just possible other scenarios.

Your standpoint seems to be that unless there is proof, you are not willing to consider anything else.

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Show you? If you wanted to put Chester the Molestor, Inc. in charge of child care, could I show you it is bad? Sometimes you just have to open your eyes and think (even just a little bit) to accept or reject an idea.

The problem with common sense is that it ain't all that common ...apparently.

Ah, I see.... so innuendo and accusation trump fact again....nice....and about what I expected, to be honest.

What might that fact be? Come on. Trot it out!

The fact that you don't have any PROOF of wrongdoing is very plain to see.

It's the penalty Bush is paying for running the most secretive and furtive administration in recent history. If he has nothing to hide, why the secrecy? (I actually stole that line from some right wing source who was writing in favor of warrantless wiretaps).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[JohnnyD 0]

Also, part of the deal is that the records would not have to be maintained in the US and be subjected to US authorities.

??????????

How can people be perfectly ok with illegal wire tapping as a measure to ensure national security and yet be ok with not having records of what is coming into and going out of our own ports.

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!

[mnealtx 0]

My standpoint is "if you don't have proof, why are you yelling 'payoff'?"

THAT is the sole point I'm trying to make.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

It's the penalty Bush is paying for running the most secretive and furtive administration in recent history. If he has nothing to hide, why the secrecy? (I actually stole that line from some right wing source who was writing in favor of warrantless wiretaps).

Tell me again how many FBI records Mrs Bush has "misplaced", will you?

Also annotate the number of illegal IRS audits of Bush's political / personal opponents, if you would.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[SkyDekker 1,465]

I am not yelling it. I am suggesting as one of the plausible reasons he feels so strongly about something he supposedly didn't know about, to ensure it happens at all costs (ie veto), is that either his family or those close to it stand to gain financially from it significantly. I suggested that you follow the money in the end.

People still yell that OJ Simpson killed his wife. Though he has been acquitted in a US court of law. people still yell Michael Jackson is a child molestor, yet he has been aquitted too. Why do you think they are yelling that?

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

It's the penalty Bush is paying for running the most secretive and furtive administration in recent history. If he has nothing to hide, why the secrecy? (I actually stole that line from some right wing source who was writing in favor of warrantless wiretaps).

Tell me again how many FBI records Mrs Bush has "misplaced", will you?

Also annotate the number of illegal IRS audits of Bush's political / personal opponents, if you would.

You are missing the point (deliberately, I'm sure).

Operating behind a veil of secrecy in a supposedly open government society is ALWAYS going to make people suspicious. And, with the few exceptions of folks like yourself who apparently believe the Sun shines from Bush's a$$, they are suspicious.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.