Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ijaz: Un-American - A disappointing and damaging response to the Dubai deal.
National Review ^ | 2-22-06 | Mansoor Ijaz

Posted on 02/22/2006 11:50:17 AM PST by cgk

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-172 next last
To: bordergal

Tell them to stick their oil and gas then. Problem is if you do that, in a year or so it might be you and I going at it (in a grander sense), not us and them.


41 posted on 02/22/2006 12:12:28 PM PST by kinghorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: bordergal
If they are in charge of port operations, then that leaves the door wide open for some "special shipments" from our friends in the ME.

Do you have any idea how containers are inspected BEFORE they are put on ships? Do you? Clearly you do not.

42 posted on 02/22/2006 12:12:49 PM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: smith288

LOL... click on Keyword "portgate". I don't know which one is the best, just that there are a LOT of them.


43 posted on 02/22/2006 12:12:50 PM PST by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: cgk

Which country in the middle east holds free elections? Until that happens...no soup for them


44 posted on 02/22/2006 12:13:27 PM PST by MadeInAmerica ( - Tested in the Middle East)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Management affects risk factor.
Will risk go up or down under UAE?
Hmmm..
Tough one.


45 posted on 02/22/2006 12:13:29 PM PST by CygnusXI (Where's that dang Meteor already?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: bordergal

Q: Mr. Secretary, I'd like to ask you about government -- the U.S. government's decision to have a company from the UAE run six U.S. seaports. Is that a decision that the Defense Department weighed in on? And what, if any, national security issues do you think that raises?

SEC. RUMSFELD: First, let me say I'm not expert on this subject, and it -- my understanding that I've been told secondhand by others is the following: that there's a process that exists in the government; that six departments and agencies are involved, and five or six offices in the Executive Office of the President and the White House are involved; and there's a time limit of something like 30 days during which this process is to be executed; that the process worked; it was chaired by the Department of Treasury -- the deputy, Bob Kimmitt, is -- was the chairman -- and they -- in the normal order of things, what they do, as I understand it, is they select a lead agency or department based on the substance of it -- and in this case, it was Homeland Security, obviously, because the Coast Guard has the responsibility for the security of ports -- and that the process went forward; and in the course of it, the Department of Homeland Security and the interagency process negotiated a letter with the company that had purchased, I believe, a British company, setting forth exactly how security would be handled. I've not seen it, so I can't describe it, but that's my understanding.

And the -- I guess the only other thing I'd say is that we all deal with the UAE on a regular basis.

It's a country that's been involved in the global war on terror with us, it's a country that we have facilities that we use, and it's a country that was very responsive to assist in Katrina, one of the early countries that did that, and a country that we have very close military-to-military relations as well as political and economic relations.

Do you want to comment?

GEN. PACE: Sir, the military-to-military relationship with the United Arab Emirates is superb. They've got great seaports that are capable of handling, and do, our aircraft carriers. They've got airfields that they allow us to use, and their airspace, their logistics support. They've got a world-class air-to-air training facility that they let us use and cooperate with them in the training of our pilots. In everything that we have asked and work with them on, they have proven to be very, very solid partners. And as the Secretary said, they were the very first country -- a hundred million dollars is what they offered to Katrina victims.



46 posted on 02/22/2006 12:13:56 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

And containers are "tamper free" throughout their transit period? Right.


47 posted on 02/22/2006 12:14:35 PM PST by bordergal (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: commish
The attitude that Middle Easterners are all blood thirsty savages is really appalling to me, and a lot of very good FReepers have disappointed me with the kneejerk reactions the last few days.

It is a stunning an very sad thing to see. Just unbelievable.

48 posted on 02/22/2006 12:14:40 PM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DevSix
"We will be just as secure with a UAE company owning these ports as we are today with a British company owning them."

Why take that chance in a time of war? You may be 100% correct but this is not a decision you make in the middle of a war. You know, a lot of people are starting to say aloud what some have whispered for months. Just how serious are we about "Homeland Security", when we encourage deals like this and don't even get me started on the border. It's almost like we are determined to undermine our own security. Israel would never make itself as soft a target as this administration seems hell bent on making us.

49 posted on 02/22/2006 12:15:40 PM PST by blaquebyrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: hershey

If we don't want these kinds of deals, then we are going to have to overhaul a lot of the way we do things, and that won't happen overnight. In the meantime, what realistic alternative is there, other than to let the sale go through?

Sure it would be nice if we could just isolate ourselves from the entire Arab world, but it isn't realistic. We have to play the hand we've been dealt.


50 posted on 02/22/2006 12:16:06 PM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MadeInAmerica

Until they raise their standard of living you don't want free elections in most of these places. it's like giving post ww1 germany free elections. Oh wait they did and it was a bad deal. the fringe maniacs got control. right now this region is too "humiliated" to think straight.


51 posted on 02/22/2006 12:16:31 PM PST by kinghorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: bordergal
And containers are "tamper free" throughout their transit period? Right.

Please tell me that you are kidding. Its parody right?

52 posted on 02/22/2006 12:16:40 PM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: commish

In addition, the US Custom Service and the US Coast Guard will still be responsible for inspections and security, respectively.


53 posted on 02/22/2006 12:17:28 PM PST by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: hershey
It's the administration's fault for not explaining the deal to America, also explaining how important our relationship with the Emirates is, how they've helped us in the fight against terrorism...at considerable danger to themselves. Really stupid of the Bush administration.

Unfortunately, they are hopelessly mired in an attitude that all they need to do is say "TRUST ME" and the peasants should just shut up and sit down.

54 posted on 02/22/2006 12:17:28 PM PST by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

And you do?

Of those nearly eight million containers, only about six percent get close inspection. That’s a low number, say terrorism experts, who warn that this is where the United States is most vulnerable — and it may be the easiest fix.

That's just part of the Homeland security plan. The other is operational, but understaffed — putting agents in places like Rotterdam, Germany to inspect more containers. Only 100 agents are now in two dozen overseas ports.


55 posted on 02/22/2006 12:18:28 PM PST by bordergal (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: 95 Bravo

We are in the process of delivering 80 F-16s to the UAE. Should we stop selling them military equipment and using their airfields and ports in support of our armed forces? Should we stop all UAE investment in the US? Should we return the $100 million they sent to aid Katrina victims? Should we relocate the military equipment and supplies we prepositioned in the UAE after the Gulf War?


56 posted on 02/22/2006 12:18:58 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

I don't agree with that at all; I'm sorry. When even the conservative press is caught by surprise and can't initially support it because they don't have the facts, that's a blunder. There should have been talking points and the administration should have assigned a point person to make sure that people knew the facts, including the 9/11 families who must have initially been horrified to hear this.


57 posted on 02/22/2006 12:19:37 PM PST by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Certain_Doom

Mansoor has been wrong so many times that this article makes me more certain the deal should not happen.


58 posted on 02/22/2006 12:20:12 PM PST by lugsoul ("He didn't do anything he wasn't supposed to do." - Mary Matalin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cgk

This entire issue is one of the biggest Red Herrings to come down the pike in quite a while. Both sides are doing themselves no credit with the extreme views that are being bandied about all over the place.

At the same time, I swear I can detect the aroma of a possible fart blossom in there someplace...


59 posted on 02/22/2006 12:20:34 PM PST by Bean Counter ("Stout Hearts!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Certain_Doom
Wasn't Monsoor Ijaz quoted as a nuclear scientist a while back in a story about Iran?
60 posted on 02/22/2006 12:20:45 PM PST by Burf (I didnt leave the Republican Party, the Republican Party left me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-172 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson