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

Skip to comments.

Harbouring prejudice... (Dubai ports deal)
Gulf Daily News, Bahrain ^ | 27 February 2006 | Dr. James J Zogby, President Arab American Institute

Posted on 02/26/2006 9:45:48 PM PST by Cornpone

During the past week we witnessed a virtual frenzy with Senators, Congressmen, and then Governors jumping over each other to take the lead in bashing the 'Dubai port deal', the UAE, or the Bush administration. It's all being done, critics say, in the name of national security. In reality, however, what is taking place here is nothing more than crass political posturing and an irresponsible and ill-informed attack on an Arab country that has been a strong ally of the United States.

At its essence, there are three factors that are driving this ruckus: It's an election year, the public has a continued concern about national security, and there's an Arab country involved. Elected officials are preying off the public's fear by exploiting an Arab 'bogeyman'. The language they've used is shameful, irresponsible, and downright false.

But in election year politics, it doesn't matter.

Because it involves an Arab country, members of Congress assume that they won't be called to account for a falsehood. Smearing all things Arab remains the last acceptable form of ethnic bigotry in America. As a result of this mindset, the UAE, one of America's closest Mideast allies in the war on terror - a country that has sent troops to fight alongside ours in Afghanistan, complied with all of our anti-terrorism initiatives, and provides the largest base port for American military ships - is being called a 'rogue government', an 'Islamic fascist' state, and 'home of terrorists'.

In the Middle East, people are scratching their heads. If the UAE which has stuck its neck out to support the US can be treated with such scorn, then, some ask, "what's the point of being a friend of America?" It is ironic and troubling that just a week ago US public diplomacy czar Karen Hughes was in the UAE to promote America and this week, UAE and US trade teams enter yet another round in their talks towards establishing a US-UAE free trade agreement. Ms Hughes must feel like packing it up and going back to Texas. If this anti-UAE campaign succeeds, there is no public diplomacy campaign that can salvage the damage. Arabs, you see- not unlike any other people - react not by what you say about yourself but by how you treat them.

Having said all this, the current exercise in Arab-bashing is, in fact, nothing more than election year politicking at its worst with Democrats feeling that Bush is vulnerable and piling on, and Republicans feeling vulnerable and joining the fray. If it weren't so serious and dangerous, it might be comical. We've seen scenes like this before, as Congressmen and Senators literally trip over each other, risking injury on their way to the microphone, calculating just how outrageous they need to be to guarantee that their sound bite will be the one on the evening news. In this game, facts don't matter. Instead, hyperventilating on their own rhetoric, exaggerations abound.

Especially disturbing in all of this, is that the legitimate issue of port security has been lost in the melee. If Congress really wanted to have a debate about port security and the failings of the current system, they would be talking about increasing funding for hiring more customs officials, beefing up our coast guard presence, and providing additional equipment to screen more of the containers that enter our country. This is what is needed.

None of these issues will be affected, neither adversely or positively, by the acquisition under consideration. Regardless of what company owns the management of our ports, the security issues remain in the hand of the Department of Homeland Security. Instead of a real debate, we're given scapegoating. Instead of making us more secure, politicians engage in the exercise of making us more isolated in the world and damaging our relationship with an important ally in the Middle East. They ought to be ashamed. They owe an apology not only to the UAE, but to the American people. But since politics and shame are estranged bedfellows, I'm not holding my breath.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: american; arab; dubai; institute; jameszogby; ports; uae; zogby
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: Echo Talon

What I don't get is why no one raised an eyebrow on that one????????? Yes, it was during Clinton.


21 posted on 02/26/2006 10:26:50 PM PST by Ptarmigan (Proud bunny hater and killer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone
Smearing all things Arab remains the last acceptable form of ethnic bigotry in America. As a result of this mindset, the UAE, one of America's closest Mideast allies in the war on terror - a country that has sent troops to fight alongside ours in Afghanistan, complied with all of our anti-terrorism initiatives, and provides the largest base port for American military ships - is being called a 'rogue government', an 'Islamic fascist' state, and 'home of terrorists'.

Well, I think the Arab world itself provides plenty of fodder for those who want to hate all things Arab.

Nevertheless Zogby raises a good point when he asks, "what's the point of being a friend of America?"

Seems UAE has evidenced partnership with us in key areas. Making Hillary look stupid may be the best outcome from this port fiasco.

22 posted on 02/26/2006 10:27:44 PM PST by ThirstyMan (hysteria: the elixir of the Left that trumps all reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ptarmigan
What I don't get is why no one raised an eyebrow on that one????????? Yes, it was during Clinton.

Actually people were worried about it in Congress, I read the floor speech from disgraced Duke Cunningham from back then and he was upset about it, but the deal went though anyhow.see they hired that PR firm to smooth the deal over.

23 posted on 02/26/2006 10:30:59 PM PST by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone

What is the voting record of the UAE in the UN? Why was the Emir and the other high officials on a hunting trip with Osamma Bin Laden in 1999, thereby screwing up a chance to take him out? Why is it necessary for ANY country, to have a single boat or pier or wharf or warehouse in our country? If they want to operate in this country, let them do so under our TOTAL control. Doesn't the pilot of a ship give up command when the ship enters US waters? This is not a private company, based in the UAE, it is the extension of the UAE government. You people get your head out of your stinky hole, and figure this out. If this is a common occurence in American business, it needs to stop. If this is a new thing, it needs to be stopped. This is the U S of A, we do not need other countries to run our port operations. We are selling our very birthright, for a little bit more bodily comfort. Again, I reiterate, this is not a private company from the UAE, it is in fact an arm of the UAE government.


24 posted on 02/26/2006 10:34:39 PM PST by jeremiah (The biggest threat to Americas survival today, meth usage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone; All

Gosh what are we going to do next week. I secretly hoping perhaps one of the Bush Daughters will announce her engagement to one the eligible Princes of the UAE. Imagine Islamic Princeess Jenna. An Islamic White House wedding. That would have FR in an uproar for weeks. Well I would like to thank personally the UAE and the few Thousand Cartoon protestors for getting poor ole LOuisiana off FR front page. We were the "They" of the month on FR for almost two months. Well there are always those damn anchor babies I guess that is always threatning to bring American civilization crumbling down into a heap. THere a good ole stand bye.
Personally, I wouldnt mind the "they" being the good ole communist of China that have about 44,000 missles pointed at Tawain. Yes, I know Tawain is not Israel(the only country that seems to be important to be recognized via all our trade partners) but its still toubling. I mean its great to rage about people protesting cartoons or rage at the fact that working Muslims are not taking time out to protest people protesting cartoons but I often think we should direct our attention East for a while.


25 posted on 02/26/2006 10:36:53 PM PST by bayourant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
Congress who raced to the microphones thinking they had to respond to Chuck Schumer's demagoguery should be held to account.

The issue was handed to him on a plate, served up hot. It isn't at all unreasonable, nor is it demogoguery, for any American statesmen--even a blow-hard like Chuckie Schumer--to ask whether security is impaired by an Arab country supervising the 97% of container loads the Coast Guard and the Customs service can't get to. (And don't start the nonsense about personel not changing; it only takes one UAE middle manager, in the wrong place, to allow his radical cohorts access.)
26 posted on 02/26/2006 10:41:46 PM PST by farmer18th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288

I truly believe that we would better represented if we kicked out all 535 members of Congress and randomly selected 535 people to replace them from each States Phone Book.



Better to randomly select 535 TAXPAYERS.


27 posted on 02/26/2006 10:46:42 PM PST by onyx (IF ONLY 10% of Muslims are radical, that's still 120 MILLION who want to kill us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: farmer18th
"(And don't start the nonsense about personel not changing; it only takes one UAE middle manager, in the wrong place, to allow his radical cohorts access.)"

Don't worry! I won't be responding to you. Pick a fight with someone else!

28 posted on 02/26/2006 10:47:03 PM PST by MJY1288 (THE DEMOCRATS OFFER NOTHING FOR THE FUTURE AND THEY LIE ABOUT THE PAST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Echo Talon

APCO engaged with the U.S. Congress and U.S. federal agencies to build relationships among key decision makers. APCO also developed arguments and key messages to justify COSCO's request for an exemption from discriminatory trade laws and to reposition the company in the eyes of policy makers and the media. Points of emphasis included COSCO's commitment to the following: practicing free market principles, using private financing to spur business growth, partnering with U.S. and multinational companies, maintaining a U.S. presence, cooperating with the U.S. government on security issues and facilitating U.S.-China maritime relations."


How many millions of dollars did APCO funnel into willing pockets?


29 posted on 02/26/2006 10:51:46 PM PST by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: philetus

COSCO is probably the one that was throwing the money around.


30 posted on 02/26/2006 10:56:53 PM PST by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288

That would be wonderful. Give the government back to the people.


31 posted on 02/26/2006 11:47:17 PM PST by Just Lori (To everything, there is a season.........Ecclesiastes, 3:1-8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ptarmigan
My only beef is it is a government owned comapny.

Is your beef that DPW is a government-owned company (in part, I believe), or that it is an ARAB-government-owned company? There are a LOT of gevernment-owned companies out there, especially in Europe. Do you have the same concerns abou them? What about the Saudi-owned company operating terminals in the US? What about the Chinese - same deal?

32 posted on 02/27/2006 12:04:52 AM PST by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jeremiah

I've heard that UAE votes against the U.S. of A about 80% of the time in the UN, but I haven't seen any records. I've also just read that this entire transaction is being funded by a sharia law compliant financial gimmick called a sukuk. Our good "allys" don't want to dirty themselves with nasssty infidel capitalist practices like trading in interest after all. So, if they follow only Koran mandated financial practices, why would they not follow other Koran directives such as those that say that we are dhimmis and that the infidel (that's us dhimmis again) should be slaughtered?


33 posted on 02/27/2006 12:09:07 AM PST by milemark (Proud to be an infidel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone

You don't need a container ship to bring a nuke into a harbor. A 25 foot ski boat would be more than enough. Only the power of prayer and fasting to the one who has "all power in heaven and earth" can abate the forces of evil. Everything else is an illusion and delusion.

Ephesians 1
19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:

Ephesians 6
10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;



34 posted on 02/27/2006 12:11:05 AM PST by HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath (My Homeland Security: Isaiah 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone
I rarely see the parallel of the Chinese being represented here..

The People's Republic of China.. ( the "red" chinese ) operate about 5 ports in the US, and also facilities at the Panama Canal.. ( 4 are on the West Coast and 1 is New Orleans..)

Has everyone forgotten?
This was a "big deal" back during the Clinton years.. ( that's when all this happened..) at least on conservative websites, FR included..

You never hear about the Chinese anymore.. They are "trading partners"...
Even so, someone was recently (charged, arrested, convicted ? ) for attempting to smuggle jet engines to China..
Jet engines used in US military jets.. F-16's..
That's like,... espionage ??

The Chinese have been stealing, or attempting to steal technology from the US for a couple of decades now, ( when Clinton wasn't giving it away ) and yet we allow them control of 5 US shipping ports..

So now we've got the arabs, the UAE..

Granted, they may have some faults, and some of the complaints may be justified..
I'm not sure it's enough to deny them the contract to run a few ports on US soil though..
And I can see the merit in the economic ties of mutual interests providing the UAE with "incentive" to work with the US even more vigorously, which would give us another major foothold in the Middle East..
If the UAE has literally Billions tied up in these ports, they are unlikely to let anything go wrong..
Even to a rich arab nation like the UAE, that's a heck of a financial loss if a terrorist attack could be tied to them, or traced back through their port operations..

I understand the complaints, and the fears..
I have concerns as well..
I am taking a "wait and see" attitude on this one..

35 posted on 02/27/2006 12:13:54 AM PST by Drammach (In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeremiah

In 2004 the UAE voted with the USA 12.5% of the time in the UN.

Sources: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/Arab_freq04.html

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/votetoc.htm


36 posted on 02/27/2006 12:17:45 AM PST by milemark (Proud to be an infidel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: milemark

oops missed an "l" on the last link: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/votetoc.html


37 posted on 02/27/2006 12:21:32 AM PST by milemark (Proud to be an infidel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone

My letter to The Godd Doctor {author}...
Dear Sir,
You & much of the elected US government are misreading what worries my fellow US Citizens.
We suffered the Enron collapse. We watched the " Enron Country Club Set" shaft their employees, their Stock Holders & their Country. We watched Enron's top management use every trick to avoid punishment, in this Life.

American TV viewers have been told {for decades} in News , Dramas & Comedys; of abuses of "Diplomatic Immunity". If a "Royal" will use "immunity" to avoid a Traffic Ticket, a Parking Ticket or a Shop Lifting charge; We worry about any Foreign Government on our soil. We worry that Our Government won't be able to investigate, arrest or convict the True Bosses, if they can claim Diplomatic Immunity.

This purchase needs a Treaty. Treaty supercides Law, in the USA. The Treaty would deny "Diplomatic Immunity" in All Maters involving the proposed new port ownership & operation. It would prevent any Dubai owner or employee from using "Immunity" as a defense for any transgressions.

John K. Wilson
Omaha, NE, USA


38 posted on 02/27/2006 12:31:31 AM PST by PizzaDriver (an heinleinian/libertarian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backhoe; piasa; Godzilla; All
ON THE NET...

SAAG.org - Paper no. 1709 - "INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM MONITOR: PAPER NO. 26 PORT SECURITY IN US" by B. Raman (February 25, 2006)

UPI.com - Security & Terrorism: "UAE TERMINAL TAKEOVER EXTENDS TO 21 PORTS" by Pamela Hess (February 24, 2006)

WASHINGTON TIMES.com: "CONSIDERED AN ALLY NOW, UAE BACKED BIN LADEN" by Rowan Scarborough (February 23, 2006)

WASHINGTON TIMES.com: "SECURITY FEARS ABOUT INFILTRATION BY TERRORISTS" by Bill Gertz (February 22, 2006)

JINSA.org - Report #551: "PORT INSECURITY" (February 22, 2006)

INTERNET-HAGANAH.com: "TERRORIST WEBSITES AND PORT SECURITY" (February 22, 2006)

FOX NEWS.com: "BUSH SAYS HE WILL VETO ANY BILL TO STOP UAE PORT DEAL" (February 21, 2006)

TRAVEL.STATE.GOV - Consular Information Sheet: "UAE"

39 posted on 02/27/2006 2:26:43 AM PST by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farmer18th
Politics of Ports
40 posted on 02/27/2006 2:36:48 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Our enemies act on ecstatic revelations from their god. We act on the advice of lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 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