Dubai To Run Ports in US
As DP World gets set to take over 6 major ports in the US, Senator Charles Schumer is leading the opposition to the plan.
Schumer has asked for further review of the deal, while other lawmakers have shown how ignorant they are about the difference between companies, and a regime...
"Handing the keys to US strategic ports to a regime that recognized the Taliban is not a sound next step in our war against terror," said Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.
This is political maneuvering in its worst form. Anyone who has ever been to Dubai, or knows anything about the UAE knows that this is an anomaly of a place. An Arab country that hosts important business conferences, supports a modern "media city", and is generally recognized as one of the more important (and newest) business centers in the world.
I didn't notice who it was, but I heard a Democratic law maker try to stir fear in Americans hearts by suggesting how frightening it would be if Dubai handled our airport security. Having been to Dubai, I would be delighted if Dubai would handle airport securtity. Dubai airport was the cleanest, most efficient, highly secure airport I've ever stepped foot in. Every single bag (including stowed luggage) is x-rayed on the way in AND on the way out. That's right, when you arrive in Dubai, you pick up your bag, and they x-ray it before you can LEAVE the airport. When you fly out, there is no less than 3 security check points, and yet it still takes less than 30 minutes from check-in to the gate. Americans should be jealous of such a system.
To suggest that Dubai is a terrorist center and in effect its businesses be sanctioned is nothing more than political posturing, and borderline racism. The fact that a 911 hijacker was from Dubai, and drew money from a bank there is as significant as the fact that the Timothy McVeigh was from the US and drew money from banks there. Terrorists have drawn money from the UK, from Germany, certainly from Switzerland. Does this reflect on the business from those countries? Should, indeed, the corporations from a country be judged on the practices of the local banking industry, or rather the actions of the customers of a bank based in their home country?
Let me think about that for a minute.
The UAE, as Bush has suggested, has been a partner of the US in combating terrorism. The now infamous Dubai airport has served as a trap for unsuspecting terrorists. The CIA can request the UAE government to stop someone for questioning, and the requests are honored. Although there are terrorists that are UAE citizens, what country can say that none of their citizens are terrorists?
Schumer has asked for further review of the deal, while other lawmakers have shown how ignorant they are about the difference between companies, and a regime...
"Handing the keys to US strategic ports to a regime that recognized the Taliban is not a sound next step in our war against terror," said Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.
This is political maneuvering in its worst form. Anyone who has ever been to Dubai, or knows anything about the UAE knows that this is an anomaly of a place. An Arab country that hosts important business conferences, supports a modern "media city", and is generally recognized as one of the more important (and newest) business centers in the world.
I didn't notice who it was, but I heard a Democratic law maker try to stir fear in Americans hearts by suggesting how frightening it would be if Dubai handled our airport security. Having been to Dubai, I would be delighted if Dubai would handle airport securtity. Dubai airport was the cleanest, most efficient, highly secure airport I've ever stepped foot in. Every single bag (including stowed luggage) is x-rayed on the way in AND on the way out. That's right, when you arrive in Dubai, you pick up your bag, and they x-ray it before you can LEAVE the airport. When you fly out, there is no less than 3 security check points, and yet it still takes less than 30 minutes from check-in to the gate. Americans should be jealous of such a system.
To suggest that Dubai is a terrorist center and in effect its businesses be sanctioned is nothing more than political posturing, and borderline racism. The fact that a 911 hijacker was from Dubai, and drew money from a bank there is as significant as the fact that the Timothy McVeigh was from the US and drew money from banks there. Terrorists have drawn money from the UK, from Germany, certainly from Switzerland. Does this reflect on the business from those countries? Should, indeed, the corporations from a country be judged on the practices of the local banking industry, or rather the actions of the customers of a bank based in their home country?
Let me think about that for a minute.
The UAE, as Bush has suggested, has been a partner of the US in combating terrorism. The now infamous Dubai airport has served as a trap for unsuspecting terrorists. The CIA can request the UAE government to stop someone for questioning, and the requests are honored. Although there are terrorists that are UAE citizens, what country can say that none of their citizens are terrorists?
posted by Praguetwin at
6:38 AM
10 Comments:
Yeah, this one has a lot of fear mongering, youll be happy to know that Rush Limbaugh is on your side on this one (jk). It is my understanding that if the transaction goes through there will be zero opperational changes on the ground.
By
Anonymous, at 6:55 AM
Yea it feels great to be on Rush Limbaughs side. :). I suspect, however, that if a Democratic president had okayed the deal, the fear mongering would be coming from the right.
By
Praguetwin, at 10:30 AM
You must have drastically different news feeds in Europe, back here in the states negative sentiment is coming from both sides full bore. I don’t think it’s going to go through. Much like the Harriet Meyers nomination, the majority of the conservative mind-set is against this. Rush is in the minority on the conservative talk show circuit here, with very well respected conservatives like Hugh Hewitt against it. Hewitt is linked @ XDA, you should check him out as he is extremely credentialed and appears to be very intelligent.
By
Anonymous, at 5:54 PM
Will do. I do get very different news. I did see some republicans coming out on it, like Frist, but I don't get CNN during the week. I think the initial wave of discontent with the plan came from the Democrats. I guess the right had to decide if they would split over the issue.
Amazing how small minded people can be.
I don't need to rehash my position on this one. I think it is fantastic that the one time I land on the side of Rush and Bush, everyone else is against me. Seriously, I don't think Rush has ever gone against a sitting Republican president on anything, but I'm no expert.
By
Praguetwin, at 4:48 PM
As a pretty consistent Rush listener, I can attest to the amount of times Rush has departed from the positions of sitting Republicans. I think you would be surprised. The left has done a real amazing job of demonizing an incredible intellect from the right as a puppet of Republicans. As such it does not surprise me that you have not taken the time to at least see if what you have been told about the man actually adds up to what your perception might actually be. I invite you to hold your nose, open your mind, listen for 3 days and then pass judgment. Right wing? For certain yes. Puppet? I don’t think so.
Keep up the good works you are doing here. I wonder how many people read our exchanges and think to actually think about things instead of react to them?
By
Anonymous, at 6:28 PM
I don't really have the means to listen to Rush. I used to listen when I was in college. I never remember him contradicting President Bush Sr. on anything, and as the election approached, his support borderlined on fanatical (at least in my opinion). If you have a particular example to point to, I'd be interested.
I have no idea how to even check how many hits I'm getting on the site, much less on the comments. I'm quite a computer novice actually.
By
Praguetwin, at 7:19 PM
Senators McCain and Hagel made some good points on this issue. They said that the UAE company control will make no real difference with regards to security, but that the administration, like it so often does, botched how it was handled by keeping up a veil of secrecy.
By
Charlie, at 7:31 PM
Charlie:
I agree, they have botched it badly. Once again they failed to get ahead of the issue and got broad-sided by opposition.
They needed to be transparant, but still cognizant of what public reaction might be and thus prepare a message to accompany the policy.
By
Praguetwin, at 9:00 PM
Nice Blog :)
www.FriendsterForum.com
By
Anonymous, at 4:02 PM
There's nothing like first-hand (602) knowledge to form proper opinions. Thanks for the info. You give support to what was my opinion. Good work all around. And yes, you're with Limbaugh on this one.
By
Roger Fraley, at 3:43 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home