Posted on 07/20/2007 7:19:48 PM PDT by plain talk
Former Inside the Ring co-author Rowan Scarborough has written a new book revealing a key reason the Bush administration pressed hard for the 2006 deal for the United Arab Emirates-based Dubai Ports World to take over management of several U.S. ports. According to Mr. Scarborough, the administration wanted the deal to go through because the UAE government had agreed to let the United States post agents inside its global port network who could report on world shipping.
Dubai Ports currently runs port facilities at key U.S. intelligence targets, including Venezuela, China, Pakistan, India and Saudi Arabia. "Dubai Ports, in essence, was going to become an agent of CIA," Mr. Scarborough said in an interview. "The arrangement is helping us detect whether any kind of terror contraband was being moved around." The management deal to run ports at New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans and Miami was initially approved by the Treasury Department-run Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, but was eventually scuttled in 2006 after pressure from Congress. Both Republicans and Democrats raised concerns that the deal would affect U.S. port security since al Qaeda had used UAE as a major financial base for its terrorist network.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
I have a feeling that the CIA may have hung Bush out to dry.
Or at least elements within the CIA did.
Or at least elements within the CIA did.
That could be. It definitely wasn't very smart of him to leave Clinton's people in the CIA.
IIRC, she still has the same job, vetting judicial candidates.
If it’s “Iran World” or “Venezuela World”, the outrage would be understandable. Even “Saudi World” would be enough for concern. Along with Kuwait and Israel, UAE is one of the most reliable country in this messed-up region.
They even have many of our naval bases there.
BTTT
IIRC, she’s the president’s personal attorney, a different and separate job from White House counsel. She’s a close advisor. And she writes such sweet cards and notes. She’s probably very easy to work with, very accommodating, knows his moods, competent but not a brilliant jurist.
Sorry, I do not believe that to be true. This is the first I have heard this about the Dubai deal. That's what I mean about not stating the facts to the American people.
Considering she vets all of the President’s judicial nominees, I have no doubt that she shares many of the PResident’s ideas on judicial restraint and Constitutional originalism.
But then again, even though I have confidence in her ability, the fact that the interview process in the Senate would compromise the PResident’s executive privelege would mean that the process could proceed in only two ways:
1) Miers go ahead while exposing the President.
2) Miers withdraws to protect the President’s privilege.
I have to admit, the President didn’t quite think this nomination through. It’d be the equivalent of say nominating a CIA agent (someone like Johnny Spann, Wild Bill Donovan, or Cofer Black not Plame or any of those politics before nation traitors) as UN Ambassador:
“Tell us your qualifications, Mr. ...uh... “Smith.”
“Well, in [redacted] I was responsible for [censored] and conducted meetings with [eyes only]. For that action I recieved the [classified] and a jar of eyeballs.”
Come on. We have a disfunctional CIA which is so inept it is useless. When was the last time you have heard of the CIA really doing their job. Let me see, when did the CIA become a player for the democrats? In the Carter era or was it in the Clinton era? Whichever, the U.S. would be billions ahead to employ Duane "Dog" Chapman in place of the whole CIA. Your "Secret Agent" stuff is from comic books. The real CIA has a hotline to the New York Times and any time they can spike the Bush administration they dial up their pals at the Times.
I left to go to the store, and happened to catch a repeat of Sean Hannity ( http://www.hannity.com/index/bookclub ) on the AM dial.
I heard him refer to a book, ‘SABOTAGE’,(http://www.amazon.com/gp/quickclick/1596985100/ref=ac_bb6_,_amazon/105-1194477-3798829?ie=UTF8&tag=hannitycom-20&link%5Fcode=qcb&creativeASIN=1596985100 ) which talks about the very thing we are discussing!
From the Sean Hannity website - “Book Description -
Using his first-rate sources in all levels of national security-from field officers to high-ranking analysts to former intelligence heads-bestselling author Rowan Scarborough reveals how CIA bureaucrats are undermining President Bush and the War on Terror through disinformation, incompetence, and outright sabotage.”
Has he talked about the DPW situation?
Hannity was one of the most vocal opponents. He may have had a change of heart.
No. About the CIA. Whether they’re reliable. It kind of dovetails into the DPW situation, since this story is basically from the CIA.
The big quesion is - Is the CIA trustworthy??
But the important thing is that talk show hosts are foreign policy experts and they know best.
“Our side of the aisle”? Are you on Hillary and Schumer’s side of the aisle?
Well-made point and the bottom line, despite all the re-hashing going on. In fact it was handled clumsily.
“So I guess Rush was right once again and the knee-jerk xenophobes around here were wrong...again. I didn’t think that being knee-jerk reactionary and being Conservative went hand in hand very well. “ Personally, I don’t rely on Rush or any other host to validate my thoughts, but you nailed this one!
No, as I recall Rush supported the Dubai ports deal. And, while I don’t remember his exact words, I’m betting the phrase “whipped into a frenzy” was employed.
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.