Posted on 02/21/2006 6:35:23 PM PST by jdm
President Bush called reporters at about 2.30 ET aboard Air Force One to issue a very strong defense of port deal... MORE... He said he would veto any legislation to hold up deal and warned the United States was sending 'mixed signals' by going after a company from the Middle East when nothing was said when a British company was in charge... Lawmakers, he said, must 'step up and explain why a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard.' Bush was very forceful when he delivered the statement... 'I don't view it as a political fight,' Bush said.... DEVELOPING...
And since it's impossible to know which are which, the best policy is to suspect them all when it comes to national security interests. That may sound 'intolerant' in these multi-cultural times, but even the liberals of the 1940's understood the concept that precious few Japanese could be really trusted until the war was over. But Americans still had brains and common sense back then, something that seems in short supply today.
Just because a country is from the ME doesn't mean they are terrorists.
Can you give me a cite on that, because that would be in stark contrast to all other Muslim nations in that area. For one thing the Christian number seems low in respect to the "other". Jews only make up about 3% of US pop.
And, while you are at it, if you can give numbers for the other emirates that make up the UAE.
As my mom used to tell me, it's not knowing, it's knowing where to find out.
The point is national survival. And it's not "Arabs" we worry about, it's Arab Muslims, and the UAE is an Arab muslim sheikdom who support people who kill our soldiers, the Taliban. They also side with Iran in their belief that Isreal has no right to exist as a nation.
What more "evidence" do you need that they cannot be trusted? Maybe another 9/11 type attack where we discover afterwards that the UAE helped them, AGAIN???
Bill thinks Muslims can be our true allies?? Bill ought to read the Koran and Hadiths.
Koran: 5.51: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
Exactly what do you think port-terminal security is? They will hire their own civilian security personnel, and they will work alongside our Coast Guard and Customs inspectors. They will see how the Coast Guard security operates, they will discover what gets inspected, how it's inspected, what containers don't get much scrutiny, etc.
They will also know what's in the containers of every ship that enters and leaves the ports, and they will know their destination. This includes ships that leave with military hardware being shipped to other nations. This information would be literally invaluable to al Queada, whom will almost certainly find a way to install a few operatives into this huge operation being RUN by Dubai. In the middle east, especially in Dubai, money is king. One of these "friendly" sheiks who now owns P & O will sell us out, just like Saudi and Turkey sold us out by refusing airbases for the Iraq War, count on it.
"The United Arab Emirates (UAE), more than any other small Persian Gulf monarchy, was frequently used by terrorist plotters to move funds around the globe, acquire foreign visas and passports, and shelter terrorists moving between Afghanistan and the Middle East." http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL32518.pdf
From the 9/11 Commission Hearings; William Cohen, Former Secretary of Defense:
"During the winter of 1998-99, intelligence reported that bin Laden 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 Laden was reportedly located there, and apparently remained for more than a week."
"Intelligence… showed the nearby presence of an official aircraft of the UAE. The CIA received reports that bin Laden regularly went from his adjacent camp to the larger camp where he visited with Emiratis…"
"On February 10th, [Terrorism Czar Richard] 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."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing8/9-11Commission_Hearing_2004-03-23.pdf
From the 9/11 Commission's report:
"Early in 1999, the CIA received reporting that Bin Ladin was spending much of his time at one of several camps in the Afghan desert south of Kandahar."
"On February 8, the military began to ready itself for a possible strike. The next day, national technical intelligence confirmed the location and description of the larger camp and showed the nearby presence of an official aircraft of the United Arab Emirates… No strike was launched…"
"According to CIA and Defense officials, policymakers were concerned about the danger that a strike would kill an Emirati [UAE] prince or other senior officials who might be with Bin Ladin or close by…"
"The United Arab Emirates was becoming… a persistent counterterrorism problem… UAE [was]… one of the Taliban's only travel and financial outlets to the outside world."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch4.pdf
From the 9/11 Commission's report notes:
"Days before overhead imagery confirmed the location of the hunting camp, Clarke had returned from a visit to the
UAE, where he where he had been working on counterterrorism cooperation and following up on a May 1998 UAE agreement to buy F-16 aircraft from the United States. His visit included one-on-one meetings with Army Chief of Staff bin Zayid…"
"General Shelton also told us that his UAE counterpart said he had been hunting at a desert camp in Afghanistan at about this time."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.pdf
And if one was hunting in Afghanistan at this time, it was with bin Laden. From the Times of London on September 23, 2001:
"Bin Laden loves falcon hunting and had captured all the local falcons for his own pleasure."
Moreover, Shelton’s UAE ‘counterpart’ as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the U.S. Armed Forces would be the Chief of Staff of the UAE Armed Forces, Mohammed bin Zayid.
From The Gulf News March 21, 2002:
“Lt. Gen. Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Chief of Staff of the UAE Armed Forces…”
From a Department of Defense Briefing, October 13, 1999:
“[UAE] President [King] Zayid and also with the chief of staff, who is the president's son, Mohammed bin Zayid…”
Link
Shelton is therefore revealing that Prince bin Zayid was the high level UAE official visiting bin Laden at his hunting compound.
Mohammed Bin Zayid is the very person Richard Clarke called (some would say tipped) on February 10th regarding UAE officials at Bin Laden’s hunting compound. Small World.
But did bin Zayid’s ties to al-Qaeda end after September 11th? Some habits are hard to break.
From The Boston Herald, October 7, 2001:
"Saif Salem al-Mehairbi… [is wanted] in connection with the probe of the terrorist hijackings. Al-Mehairbi's name is one of more than 300 contained on a list compiled by FBI and intelligence agencies that has been sent to banking officials in Europe..."
'"This is a pretty major thing and I can't comment in the middle of an FBI investigation," said McDonald, vice president for operations for Corcoran Management Co., which operates the 285-unit complex."
"A few days after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, five FBI agents and a state trooper also went to 4 Canal Park in Cambridge, where al-Mehairbi lived until mid-July, according to building superintendent Richard Huber. FBI agents and a Boston police officer also spent several hours searching an apartment at Charles River Towers in Watertown, where al-Mehairbi's name is listed on a building directory."
"Al-Mehairbi also apparently operated two Internet sites, one called "WolfofDarkness.com," which were devoted to Islam and contain eerie statements about the "peace of death." One of the sites details al-Mehairbi's love of Islam, poetry writing and falcon hunting. He… also states: "Real love is not knowing the difference between death and life,"…"
The Herald left out this quote from al-Mehairbi’s website:
“Life is art of fight and learn, I heard those words from someone "Give me the peace of death, and I will give you the joy of life". This is the way how I work with life, my day is my day, the past I throw it away the future I don't care about it.”
Link
Mehairbi hit the terrorist trifecta. His address is labeled as al-Qaeda’s ‘drop box location’ on the FBI’s 9/11 suspect list. He speaks of the ‘peace of death’. And, of course, he puts his love of falcon hunting just after Islam (as you can see in the photo above).
You can just tell that al-Mehairbi would get along splendidly with the UAE’s Chief of Staff & King’s son, Mohammed bin Zayed, who enjoys falcon hunting and hanging out with the leader of al-Qaeda -- at the same time.
From The Gulf News March 21, 2002:
“A young UAE national… spent two months in jail after the FBI suspected he was involved in the September 11 attacks…”
“He packed up his belongings and drove to Washington, DC, where he had many friends. "I left Boston on September 16. The following day, I got a message from a friend telling me that a team of 15 or 16 FBI agents had come to our building looking for me," he said…”
“On October 10, the UAE Ambassador to the U.S. paid him a visit… Al Mehairbi… was released. The UAE embassy posted the $ 100,000 bail…”
Gulf News March 21, 2002
Copyright 2002 Financial Times Information
A young UAE national, who spent two months in jail after the FBI suspected he was involved in the September 11 attacks, is looking for a local university where he can resume his studies.
Saif Salem Al Mehairbi, 26, was released from custody on the first day of Ramadan, and returned home a week before the Eid Al Adha holidays.
Al Mehairbi's ordeal began shortly after the collapse of the Twin Towers, when a series of circumstantial evidence and false accusations put the FBI on his trail.
The young UAE national was studying at Suffolk University in Boston. He had closed his bank account a few days after the attacks.
"It was a coincidence," he explained. "I used to receive money transfers from my family in Abu Dhabi - sometimes through my bank account, sometimes through Western Union. But the people who were involved in the attacks were also found to be receiving money transfers..."
Al Mehairbi's move to close his account prompted the bank manager to contact the FBI and indicate that something was amiss. According to Al Mehairbi the bank manager went a step further.
"This guy called the FBI and claimed I had told him the reason I was closing my account was because 'it had served its purpose on September 11'. I never said that. He also claimed I threatened to do the same thing to the bank as I had done to the Twin Towers. I never said that either. These are all groundless allegations," he maintained.
The bank manager's 'tip-off' was enough to classify the young Arab student as a terrorist suspect.
At around this time, Al Mehairbi received a call from his father urging him to stop attending classes and to come home.
"He had heard of many incidents of Arabs being attacked by Americans, " he said.
Al Mehairbi had only six courses left to graduate. He decided to heed his father's advice. He would return to the U.S. and complete his degree once the clamour had subsided.
He packed up his belongings and drove to Washington, DC, where he had many friends.
"I left Boston on September 16. The following day, I got a message from a friend telling me that a team of 15 or 16 FBI agents had come to our building looking for me," he said. "There are many UAE nationals who live in that building. They questioned everybody for seven hours."
Al Mehairbi had already shipped his belongings back to the UAE, and he had booked a flight home on September 20. But on the day of his scheduled departure, he was contacted by an agent in Washington DC who asked him to come to the FBI headquarters.
What ensued was an interrogation that lasted nearly 14 hours.
"They asked me all kinds of questions. They asked whether I had ever received training in Afghan-istan, Pakistan or Sudan. I told them 'no'. They asked me my opinion of Osama bin Laden. I told them 'I don't know the guy to judge him'. They asked me what I did in the United States from the first day I arrived, up to that moment."
Al Mehairbi was ordered to cancel his flight, and to stay in the U.S. for an additional three days. He was going to be detained at the Arlington County Jail.
A few hours later, he was transferred to another jail where he was detained in a solitary cell.
During this time, Al Mehairbi claims he was mistreated. He was not given any food for the first three days. He was denied the right to take a shower for the first month - 'no toothbrush, nothing!'
When he prayed, Al Mehairbi said he was taunted by the guards.
Finally, on October 10, the UAE Ambassador to the U.S. paid him a visit.
"He told me that I was cleared of suspicion over involvement in the September 11 attacks. He told me not to worry, and that I would be out soon. But I had to stay a little while longer because I had overstayed my tourist visa."
On November 15, Al Mehairbi, who had lost 15 kilos by the end of his detention period, was released. The UAE embassy posted the $ 100,000 bail.
The conditions of his release forbade him from leaving the country until the case against the guard had been resolved. These conditions were guaranteed by two representatives of the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, Mohammed Al Hamlie and Saif Al Shamsi.
On February 14, Al Mehairbi was free to return to his country. Despite the traumatising experience, he holds no grudges, and would have no qualms returning to America for study, business or leisure.
"Everywhere, you have good people and you have bad people. My lawyer was an American lady, and she was very good to me," he said.
Al Mehairbi is especially grateful to President His Highness Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan.
"I would never have left jail if it were not for him. He is a true leader who takes care of his people wherever in the world they may be. May God bless him and keep him in good health."
He is also appreciative of Lt. Gen. Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Chief of Staff of the UAE Armed Forces, who took a personal interest in the case. "He supported me throughout, step by step."
In that region you're not saying much.
The "moderate" UAE supports the Taliban and Iran's belief that Israel should not exist as a country, and have taken communist China's tac of government imposed restriction of Internet use. Their "moderate" form of government is an islamic Skeikdom, just like Saudi Arabia.
"I just heard O'Reilly on FOX pushing heavily for the UAE ports deal. He said it would be "a disaster" for the US if we alienate "our allies" over this. He also said it smacked of racism and practically guaranteed we will lose the War on Terror if we nix the deal. "
That last part about losing the WOT is almost treasonous.
- The UAE was one of three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.
- The UAE has been a key transfer point for illegal shipments of nuclear components to Iran, North Korea and Lybia.
- According to the FBI, money was transferred to the 9/11 hijackers through the UAE banking system.
- Two of the 9/11 hijackers were from the UAE (Fayez Banihammad and Marwan al-Shehhi)
- After 9/11, the Treasury Department reported that the UAE was not cooperating in efforts to track down Osama Bin Laden’s bank accounts.
WOW, good post, jdm!
Given the above facts, I think that every U.S. President from this point on should be forced to take a yearly I.Q. test and psychological evaluation. His adamant stand to allow a terrorist country to be in charge of and have access to our security methods is totally insane.
BTW.....where are all the Bush-bots?
Here's the problem: Currently the UAE allows our Homeland Security to inspect 100% of all containers that go through their ports headed to the US (and probably quite a few that are headed elsewhere). Do you want that to stop? Especially since the same situation would be taking place at OUR ports (for the first time!!!!)
No, its not just like Saudi Arabia. The differences between UAE and Saudi Arabia are more pronounced than the differences between, say, the United States and France.
And you should say that the UAE "supported" not "supports" the Taliban, and even then, you'ld bwe skirting the truth. The fact is that they RECOGNIZED the Taliban when they ruled Afghanistan. That's a long way from "support".
And they do neither now.
BS Repellant
MULLINGS.com An American Cyber-Column
Port Insecurity http://www.mullings.com/index.html
Rich Galen
Wednesday February 22, 2006
This port deal is not a national security issue. It is an issue of this administration having a continuing problem with understanding how these things will play in the public's mind and not taking steps to set the stage so these things don't come as a shock and are presented in their worst possible light.
Let's try that again.
The Administration has no demonstrated capacity to brief allies on its activities so, when a public announcement is made, they have friends ready to explain to the public, either through or in spite of, the news media, what is really going on.
When the National Security Agency's intercept program became public, it was immediately called "domestic eavesdropping" or "domestic spying."
That went on for two weeks before the White House finally had the President refer to it as "terrorist surveillance."
As H.R. Haldeman was reported to have written atop memos he thought lacking: T-L-Squared.
Too little. Too late.
I have been watching this port thing develop over the past 72 hours and a common theme among Members of Congress is: We can't have foreign companies operate US ports.
Robert Menendez (D-NJ), according to the Liberal website Democratic Underground said, "We wouldn't turn the border patrol or the customs service over to a foreign government, and we can't afford to turn our ports over to one either."
This is the key to the problem. None of these goofballs knew that the ports of New York, Newark, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami, and New Orleans were ALREADY run by a foreign-owned company.
The Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, a British outfit, has the contract to operate these ports. P & O (as it is known to those of us well-schooled in the port-operations game) is being sold to another company - Dubai Ports World (DP World) which will take over P & O's existing contracts.
All right, so this deal, which has been known to the financial community since November, gets approved by one of those alphabet commissions which happens to involve SIX Cabinet Departments including Treasury, State, Homeland Security, Commerce, and Justice; which they did.
But the Administration didn't think it was necessary to lay the groundwork for the announcement the other day that the sale of one foreign company to another foreign company had been approved.
So, the cable news programming geniuses have been talking about the US outsourcing "port security" to Dubai.
This is like saying the company which operates your local airport - which is to say it decides how much you pay for parking and where in the terminal the Starbucks will be located - is responsible for airline security.
It isn't.
Nor will DP World be responsible for port security. That remains with Customs and the Coast Guard.
The reason the President bristled about this today is because he doesn't think he deserves to be doubted on his commitment to the national security.
It is one thing for Chuck Schumer or Hillary Clinton to complain. It is something else again for Dennis Hastert or Bill Frist to doubt whether the President is strong enough on terrorism.
The Left has been wailing about George W. Bush being, if anything, TOO aggressive on his anti-terrorism efforts using the NSA intercepts as their example. Now those same people are complaining the President is not being tough enough.
Want to know what's really behind all this?
It's an even numbered year and we are 253 days from election day.
It's not about port security; It's about incumbent security.
On the Secret Decoder Ring page today:
A link to the Fox News summary of the issue written largely by Major Garrett; http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185479,00.html
A link to a history of P & O (which is pretty interesting); http://portal.pohub.com/portal/page?_pageid=71,212168&_dad=pogprtl&_schema=POGPRTL
A link to a history of DP World (which is less interesting, but includes a listing of all the countries in which they do this kind of work); http://www.dpiterminals.com/subpages.asp?PSID=1&PageID=21
a Mullfoto showing how I was showered with affection during my trip to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; and a Catchy Caption of the Day. http://www.mullings.com/dr_02-22-06.htm
bttt
The damage that would be done by nixing this purely commercial deal sends a very bad message; one that would hurt us very badly. Itwould be far worse that any damage done by the Abu Ghraib photos, for example, because while that provided ammunition to our enemies, this will alienate our friends.
While I don't agree with him most of the time, O'Reilly is right about this.
Has Britain threatened us or any of our Allies with their nukes? Has Israel, or France?
The government of the UAE has not threatened us, and the company that will take over the running of the ports has been doing this same thing all over the world. They have a track record that is available for anyone to see.
The SECURITY at the ports will not change. Homeland Security is in charge, the workers will remain in their jobs. Only the names at the top of the ownership roster will change. DPW is in this to make money. If they screw up and allow something bad to happen, they will lose contracts all over the world. This is BUSINESS, and they won't mess around. I think they'll be even MORE conscious of the possibility that terrorists might try to send weapons through the ports, and work to stop that.
Say What?! Duh! Was he serrious with such a stupid question statement?! Let me count the ways, many of which mentioned in this thread.
Bush's handlers are either on vacation in the midst of our 'war on terror,' or have also lost it.
Sure,
While I am not defending all of UAE let me clear one misconception up. The UAE openly discriminates against Israel and holders of Israel passports. They do not recognize them. As far as I know, they do not discriminate against "Jewish" people with passports from other countries such as the US.
So when they say "no Jews" are allowed they are talking about Israeli citizens. At least that is my understanding.
A lot of people were also surprised that there are 30,000 Jews living in Iran. I know I was.
Here is the source for my info.
http://www.khaleejtimes.co.ae/ktarchive/270102/uae.htm#story5
"Explain why a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard"...
Karl Rove MUST have something up his sleeves!??!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.