Ya just gotta wait of it!!

[Rooster7]

I can ingest and provide rejoinders to arguments that are founded on reason. This thread is not about reason. Its merely a vehicle to bash Bush. Thats the way I see itbut hey, who am I just another ultraconservative Republican thats trying push my bigoted and repressive Right Wing Christian values on the likes of Backpacker.

[OldGreyEagle]

Amd the fact we can all express our views of each other and our goverment is what makes America great.

 

 

[John-in-KC]

OGE:

 

Backpacker: Each of us has to make his own calls. If your read of George W Bushs' actions is that they are outside the law, ask your Congresscritter to initiate a Bill of Impeachment That is truly and wholly within your 1st amendment rights

 

2 B/G banquets and an FOS presentation this weekend. Outta here!

[funscout]

As a conservative, right-wing Christian Republican female human (I think those are enough descriptors for now!,) I have to say that I am ashamed that my first reaction to this situation was completely prejudiced. (I am, after all, human!) I was horrified that ANY Arab country would have anything to do with our ports. Being a somewhat sane and rational human, I forced myself to withold judgement until I knew all of the facts. I still don't know what to think of this, and I am having difficulty over-coming my prejudice against Middle Eastern countries.

 

My sister had a wonderful college room-mate who was from Iran, and my father did business in Kuwait and Jordan in the 1970's, so my early exposure to Arab countries was quite positive. After, 9/11, however, my fears have allowed prejudice to creep in. I certainly do not believe ALL Arab people are to be feared, but it is hard to not make generalizations when you are afraid.

[wyomingi]

Backpacker,

 

I checked the USDA web site. The most recent information I could find was from 1997. At that time about 1% of all agricultural land was foreign owned. Maine had the most foreign owned acreage. That was nearly all forest owned by Canadian and French companies.

[LongHaul]

From everything I've been hearing and reading about the Dubai company it is part of the UAE government. It's fully owned and operated by the UAE government. The other "foriegn" companies are based overseas but this time we are actually turning our ports over to a foriegn country. I don't see this as just Bush bashing. Congress can set whatever rules they want relating to port management it doesn't mean they will be followed. Last time I heard hijacking and murder were against the law everywhere in the US and that didn't stop those determined to inflict harm upon U.S. Giving the UAE inside track just doesn't seem like a really smart idea.

LongHaul

[packsaddle]

Kahuna, I think you misunderstood me.

After all, I said "WE" did all those things, just trying to maintain an inclusive spirit. But I wasn't clear about the lie part. That, it is certain, applies to only those who told us there was "no doubt" about WMD, the reason we invaded. And quite a few people did say "no doubt". And if what we did to their government (ability to govern) and to their army (ability to defend) doesn't amount to conquest, I don't know what does.

 

I suppose that the debt thing can be spun to apply to Congress. Remember, I said "we" did it. Our representatives, correct? Where am I wrong here? And it's almost as if that thereby makes the debt OK? I may not have many more years in this life but I care deeply about the well-being of the boys and other young people who will be handed that burden. But, hey, that's ok, Congress did it.

 

I concede your point. The Patriot Act is the best thing to happen to our personal liberties since the Bill of Rights. Actually I've gained a new opportunity: Now when I write to my colleagues overseas, I am now able to add my P.S. "Anyone from my government who is spying on me and reading the above message, please tell George Bush to kiss my butt." It's unprofessional but it accurately reflects my attitude. I do wonder, sometimes, how that translates in Bulgaria.

 

I am afraid we'll just have to disagree on the destruction of thousands of American families. I am never going to see that as a good thing.

 

And the part about not feeling guilty about hypocrisy, well that speaks for itself.

 

But this is about port management and I'm on your side. My point was that because even the most ardent opposition has failed to prevent all of the above things, our failure has already led to far greater harm than the imaginary things that could possibly come from the change in management. And we seem, as do you, to spin all manner of rationalizations to make those failures OK. The port issue will be the same. I am completely fatalistic about this...in support of your view.

[Kahuna]

I guess conquest is in the eye of the beholder. After all, had the American Revolution failed, the Founding Fathers would have been disgraced traitors to the King. To me, conquest represents an intent to keep, although the dictionary doesn't define it that way. We have no intention of keeping power over the Iraqis and have already allowed them to establish their own government.

 

I would also point out there is a difference between lies and something which is not true. The intelligence that our government and other governments, back to the Clinton administration, had indicated WMDs were there. And there is a lot of evidence that they were there. I will agree, however, with those who say that isn't the reason that Bush wanted the war. I don't know in fact why he wanted to, but it's obvious to me that he did.

 

It isn't my position that the Patriot Act is an entirely good thing, but we obviously have to have some unusual procedures in place to deal with this kind of conflict (War on Terror, not Iraq). I just think people are pretty indifferent to the kind of liberties given up in the name of the war on drugs, which we are losing anyway. It scares me to death that police can stop me and confiscate money in my car simply because I have a lot of cash in there. It scares me more that, if I were Hispanic or Black, it would be much more likely to happen to me. If George Bush wants to read my love letters to Osama bin Laden, that's fine with me.

 

[Backpacker]

I hope all of you who felt that the port debacle was no big deal have read the just released news story that Homeland Security not only strongly advised Bush against the sale of the ports to UAE but stated that "this deal presented a huge potential security risk to the safety of our country and that they were not properly equipped to deal with this threat."

 

Just like we learned with the attacks on Pearl Harbor and the twin towers we can falsely believe that no one can harm us on our own soil. NO ONE can insure that this deal will not have severe consequences. The very agency in charge of our nations security states they are convinced this will open new avenues for terrorists. Is it even worth taking the risk with more American lives to ensure economic trade with the Arabs ? I don't think so.

[Rooster7]

You know what really burns my butt - Folks who purposely tell only half the story. Folks who are so intent on being right that theyre willing to mislead others just so they can claim their victory. Case in point:

 

From the AP -

 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Homeland Security Department objected at first to a United Arab Emirates company's taking over significant operations at six U.S. ports. It was the lone protest among members of the government committee that eventually approved the deal without dissent.

 

The department's early objections were settled later in the government's review of the $6.8 billion deal after Dubai-owned DP World agreed to a series of security restrictions.

 

I suppose the third sentence was not relevant to Backpacker. Most others like those who have not covered their eyes and screamed I hate Bush might feel differently.

 

[Lisabob]

Rooster, here's the rare political point on which we can agree. And by the way, even those of us who do go around muttering about our distaste for Bush ought to read the full story before jumping to conclusions. I don't know yet what I think about this port deal; I'm not sure if I can bring myself to trust the administration's analysis since I believe they've been so wrong in their analysis of so many other foreign policy issues. But I do know that trying to make the case against it by relying on half-stories, stereo typing and fear mongering isn't the right way to go about it, and that's what it seems a lot of folks are doing.

 

Lisa'bob

 

 

[Rooster7]

Lisabob,

 

To tell you the truth, Im not sure where I stand on this port deal myself. Unlike you though, I feel the administration has done an excellent job of analyzing this countrys enemies, as well as its allies, and have made good decisions in response to the same. In regard to this particular issue, I am waiting to hear more. Most of this thread has not been very informative unless you believe cherry picking headlines and quotes from equally uninformed, yet speculative reporters and overexcited political commentators is an effective way of getting an intelligent synopsis. Frankly, I doubt that we the general public will get to know what the administration knows. And even if we did, we dont have the advantage of dozens of intelligence agencies guiding us through the nuances. There comes a time when you have to trust your leaders.

 

Too bad some folks dont seem capable of doing that. Let me ask you something If we took the collective knowledge and wisdom of every individual posting to this forum and compiled a report for the President, so that he can make informed decisions to guide us through the War on Terror, how useful do you think it would be. It is ridiculous how much speculative nonsense is being thrown about in this thread. If this story was three months oldor even three weeks old, there might be enough information out there for folks to conjecture about what we should have, or should not have done. As it is -most are using this story as a springboard to get their jabs in on a President which they still cannot get behind. Their loss, but I grow tired of it. The criticisms are printed in editorials, blogs, and forums such as these before the facts can be fully determined, or some in cases - manufactured.

(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

[frankj]

Dubai Ports World operates 22 ports worldwide and with their acquisition of Peninsular and Oriental they will add another 27 ports to their portfolio. The US ports represent only a small part of the P&O operations: In 2004, profits from US port operations were one-tenth of the overall profits of P&O. This info was in the Wall Street Journal, 2/23/06.

 

My point is, the administration touched off a firestorm and should now cut its losses by cutting a deal. Tell Sultan bin Sulayem to spin off the US ports -- quickly -- or we will kill the deal. The company I work for leases a few properties here and there. Every lease contains a clause that says the lessee (the entity we lease to) cannot assign the lease to anyone else without our prior approval. Duh?

 

For those who are keeping track, I have been a supporter of the President, but the administration is tone-deaf on this issue. It is ironic that President Bush has not yet vetoed a single piece of legislation but he threatened to veto any legislation that would kill this deal. We live in interesting times, don't we?

 

[LongHaul]

     Rooster7 thinks this is all Bush bashing, I wonder what he would be saying about this had Kerry won the election and was proposing allowing the UAE to operate ports of entry.  We know that 2 of the 911 terrorists were from Dubia and that most of the funds connected with the 911 strike were funneled thru Dubia can anyone tell me they have heard of any follow up on that? Anyone brought to answer? Frankj tells us that Dubia Ports World operates 22 ports around the world and will increase that to 49 with this deal. If I was a paranoid person I might see this as an opportunity to move materials around the globe without interference. Allowing the people in control to prepare for an agenda. Of course we are not worried about anything like that..we have the Patriot Act to protect us. Watch the people inside and allow the people outside ( a government that politically recognizes the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden) to control what gets inside. But this is just Bush bashing so in the words of Emily Latilla Never mind.

LongHaul

[John-in-KC]

I would rate my conservatism level as "O'Reilly is comfortable, Hannity and Limbaugh are pedants." I'll say it; I gave him my vote in Y2K and in 2004.

 

Bush DESERVES this particular round of bashing. DON'T SURPRISE YOUR FELLOW PARTY MEMBERS IN CONGRESS!!! Is that really a tough rule of thumb to remember?

 

Bush has DeLay and Frist lined up against him on this issue, in part because they can make political hay of it, in part because they were blindsided.

 

Don't blindside your own party in Congress. Sheesh!