United Arab Emirates to Control our Ports??

Let me remind you all that one of the reasons bin Laden wasn't killed in 1998 was Klintoon didn't want to wax a UAE prince. Yeah, we knew where bin Laden was, we had Tomohawks ready to fly up his ass, the problem was there was a UAE prince chilling with him.

So lets examine the evidence. The UAE supplied 2 of the 9/11 hijackers. While we cannot fault the country for turning out 2 whackos, we CAN fault them for fostering an environment friendly to Islamism. While we can't fault them for having part of the bankrolls for the 9/11 plot flow through their banks, it's still pretty damning when you consider they don't really bother to watch out for these things, even though we supply them with better tanks and aircraft than we have...

And we COULD HAVE KILLED UBL in '98 if it weren't for that jackass UAE prince. As far as I'm concerned, we should have gresed the prince too and said "Hey, you play with the enemies of America, you're gonna get burned." But we're too far up UAE's ass to do that.

If you ask me, we shouldn't be selling them better tanks than we have, we shouldn't be selling them better planes than we have, and we CERTAINLY shouldn't be letting the fox run the security for the chicken coop!!!

I can't wait for the day when America decides we've had enough with licking Islamic ass for oil and we switch to something like corn alcohol. That way, we can tell them all to shove off, and they'll be back to raiding their camel trains, and we won't have to deal with them...
 
Hey brocker, ever hear any speculation about why ole binladen's still alive? I'd heard some things to the effect that we made a deal with his parent to get a nice fat pipeline through afghanistan in exchange for letting him live (does that seem probable to anyone?)...seems more likely than 'we lost him in tora bora'. He's stuck to a dialysis machine for crimey's sake. How hard can it be to find him? unless...
 
from a friends blog -

So, let me get this straight, Mr. President. Arabs can takeover all major U.S. ports without any delay suggested by Congress, but I can't get on an airplane without taking off my shoes, searching my bag, and inspecting my person? Is there something I'm missing here?​

the rest here
 
Sad to say--but the 1 and ONLY thing you have against this company is the country that owns it! That and the fact that GWB is the 1 who gave them the contract. If it was Clinton then this would be a non issue with you.
Click to expand...

Absolutly true!
I shudder to think what might have happened if Clinton had been in the white house durring 9-11. Remember "He was Impeached".
 
If it'd been clinton during 9/11 i bet he woulda gotten off his butt before a pink floyd song could finish (or however many minutes bush sat there)...

hell, Roosevelt woulda stood up and done something after that, and he was in a wheelchair.
 
Fleshwound

I don't think you missed a thing. The only way anyone would buy this crap is if they are the type that would let the "Fox guard the Hen house". I couldn't believe it when I first heard it on the news, but it looks to me like Bush is once again trying to take care of his buddies.

Backstrap
 
Takin care of his buddies real nice...maybe bush could award himself the medal of honor, since he's doin such a great job (brownie). Remember when the cia director got the medal of freedom? I was nearly sick. (this is the same guy who said iraq was a slam dunk, remember?)
 
"QUESTION: Are you confident that any problems with security — from what you know, are you confident that any problems with security would not be greater with a UAE company running this than an American company?

RUMSFELD: I am reluctant to make judgments based on the minimal amount of information I have because I just heard about this over the weekend.

Rumsfeld’s statement was particularly troubling because Dubai Ports World, owned and operated by the UAE government, will also take over a major contract managing the movement of military equipment for the U.S. Army. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace, who was at the briefing, also said he found out about the deal over the weekend. The deal was approved on February 13.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan claimed the Defense Department was part of “a rigorous review…for national security concerns.” If so, why were two of the Department’s top officials not even informed, much less consulted?"

"UPDATE: Donald Rumsfeld, as Secretary of Defense, is a member of Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States. As such, he was one of the people who, according to the Treasury Department, unanimously approved the sale on February 13. How could do that when he didn’t even find out about the sale until last weekend?"

mmmkayyyyyyyyyy

so Rumsfeld didnt know about it but he voted to approve it?

Bush said he was in the dark about the deal but fully supports it?

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/21/rumsfeld-not-consulted/
 
Let me remind you all that one of the reasons bin Laden wasn't killed in 1998 was Klintoon didn't want to wax a UAE prince. Yeah, we knew where bin Laden was, we had Tomohawks ready to fly up his ass, the problem was there was a UAE prince chilling with him.
Click to expand...

from the 9/11 report

"The Desert Camp, February 1999
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. At the beginning of February, Bin Ladin was reportedly located in the vicinity of the Sheikh Ali camp, a desert hunting camp being used by visitors from a Gulf state. Public sources have stated that these visitors were from the United Arab Emirates.151
Reporting from the CIA's assets provided a detailed description of the hunting camp, including its size, location, resources, and security, as well as of Bin Ladin's smaller, adjacent camp.152 Because this was not in an urban area, missiles launched against it would have less risk of causing collateral damage. On February 8, the military began to ready itself for a possible strike.153 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. But the location of Bin Ladin's quarters could not be pinned down so precisely.154 The CIA did its best to answer a host of questions about the larger camp and its residents and about Bin Ladin's daily schedule and routines to support military contingency planning. According to reporting from the tribals, Bin Ladin regularly went from his adjacent camp to the larger camp where he visited the Emiratis; the tribals expected him to be at the hunting camp for such a visit at least until midmorning on February 11.155 Clarke wrote to Berger's deputy on February 10 that the military was then doing targeting work to hit the main camp with cruise missiles and should be in position to strike the following morning.156 Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert appears to have been briefed on the situation.157"

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch4.htm

mmmkay..so we want to hand over port security to the UAE who was meeting with Bin Laden.

Bush claims he knew nothing of the deal till the controversy started..shows how much deep thought went into it.

Rumsfeld says he knew very little about it but was a member of the committee voting on it...

Trust us they say..........:cool:

It appears they were putting more thought into what they were having for dinner.
 
Somewhere in this exchange it was stated or at least suggested that Clinton was to blame for this deficit. Oh contrare! The facts, which can be verified through the Congressional Budget Office look like this!
Deficit.jpg

Although this visual is limited through 2003 just simply extend the red line straight down to represent the current state of affairs. Speaking of the state of "affairs", Clinton may have been a lot of things including the recipient of a bad hummer but he is a political genius who along with a Republican Congress put this country in the black for the first time in our lifetimes.
George W Lottabucks is the first President since Presidents wore beards never to have vetoed a spending bill. NEVER! The Reps keep lobbin' the slowpitch meatballs or porkballs and wonderboy keeps knockin' 'em outta the park!
Finally the Reps have no where to run, no where to hide! From the half price sale to other countries of our jobs to the burdening of our grandchildren with the largest debt known to "man" to the insanity existing at our borders it's all been on the party in power's watch.....Don't ya hate it when that happens?
But look at the good side....at the rate he's going and with 3 years remaining he'll have this entire country prepped for the largest yard sale in history. Watch for falling prices!
Rimrock
 
Hmmm....W didn't even know about this until recently, but he is ready to veto anything in it's way? Does this sound the least bit rational to ANYONE????
W is obviously not in charge and is being played like the fool he is.

Get a rope. In fact, get several.
 
Sure looks like I've missed a lot on here while I've been gone. Nice to be back though. I think both parts have made some good arguments on here about the current situation. First, we all know AT LEAST one person is going to pull the race card, that's a given. So I don't give that another read. Second, all these fancy college words on here doesn't seem to impress anyone (or me) or drive the point home any harder. Appears to me though it's real simple.

Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer. Who's doing what? That's for you to decide......

Me? I simply say, not a wise investment for us the average "Joe Taxpayer" and the USA as a whole.
 

This deal smells. And somewhere in here, I'd expect to see the Carlyle Group with a hand in it. For those not aware, the Carlyle Group is a private financial group including the Bushes and a lot of other wealthy Washington politicos plus a large group of Arab fat cats. The Bushes, through the Carlyle Group, have been making a fortune in the last several years, dealing with the oil countries.

For those wanting more info, do a Google of the Carlyle Group. Scary.:eek:

Bob

Before you comment about the font, it's the eyes.

 
Here is a picture of Bush with his pal whom he dubbed " Big Dude"

who is this "Big Dude" That W and Laura posed for photos for.

None other than Sami Al-Arian

here is an experpt from one of his speeches

"Two years earlier, as a guest speaker at the convention of the American Muslim Council, Al-Arian, mimicking the Quran, spoke of Jews as "monkeys and pigs," adding "Muhammad is leader. The Quran is our constitution. Jihad is our path. Victory to Islam. Death of Israel. Revolution! Revolution! Until victory! Rolling, rolling to Jerusalem!"

"Attorney General John Ashcroft says the arrest of University of South Florida Professor Sami Al-Arian on terrorist connections was made possible by the USA Patriot Act's provisions allowing the sharing of information between U.S. intelligence agencies."

The FBI had copies of his speeches yet the secret service cleared him to meet with W.

"Even more incredible, Bush apologized to the junior Al-Arian for ejecting him from the White House, inviting him back. He dispatched the deputy director of the U.S. Secret Service to Congressman Bonior's office to personally apologize to the 20-year-old intern. And, in June, the New York Times reported that Dr. Al-Arian, himself, "was among a group of Muslim leaders admitted to the White House for a political briefing."

attachment.php


trust me W says.........
 

Attachments

  • bush99.jpg
    bush99.jpg
    22.6 KB · Views: 92
1. You can't get a "seal" to make it legit. It's not a paper seal--it's made of metal with codes engraved--no way to tamper without breaking.
Click to expand...

Do you REALLY believe this? How about do you believe that I can counterfeit the seal in my garage in about 30 minutes with a tack hammer and some number stamps? Believe it - the "seal" is only a strip of metal tape with embossed #'s. Secondly, ANY port security outfit has the right to break the seal and inspect the container. Once broken, the seal is "replaced" with a new seal with a new #. It's also rather EASY to counterfeit some documents claiming that the seal was broken for an inspection and the seal was replaced with a new one. If the documents are forged in the mid east by Al-Qaeda and look exactly like legit docs, then the container and the new seal pass muster.

Do you seriously believe that Al-Qaeda doesn't have sympathizers in many many many arab companies who ship things in containers that they can't get authentic documents to cover a broken seal?

AND, I AM DISGUSTED with the Clinton bashers. Every time someone criticizes GW these people drag out Clinton's disgrace as if that somehow excuses GW's inadequacies. GET A CLUE! If GW was/is so great then WHY THE HELL do so many American's dislike him? (About 60% of America dislike him if GW's own poll #'s are to be believed.) If your response to that is at least GW is better than Clinton I have news for you - NEITHER ONE is an upstanding example of anything except self gratification.

In the end, I sort of wish that GW gets his way in this Dubai Ports World deal. I "sort of wish it" because I KNOW that eventually AQ will infiltrate DPW and will attack our country again and a whole lot of innocent Americans will die for it. And it will be GEORGE W. BUSH's FAULT when it happens. But hey, afterwards we can all blame Clinton as the reason while we exonerate GW Bush.

Get a life, get a clue, get a new choice for President.
 
You need to learn how these cargos are "sealed"---you can't break open the metal seal and put on another 1 to start with. Along with the metal is an encrypted code. Finally as been said repeatedly-----IT WON'T DO ANY GOOD ONCE THE CARGO IS HERE---the cargo "breach" must be stopped over seas.
Next, as stated before---UAE allow us to dock our Naval ships in their ports in Dubai, thus an ally which we use regularly and very important. This company has O do do with our port security---that IS STILL maintained by the port authority and coast guard---as it has always been.
Nobody here can give me 1 other company for any reason other then UAE that should have received the contract. Also for those that say it takes away jobs for Americans, wrong--almost all the port workers will be in fact American.
This is all to do about nothing. The company is top notch and legit--the fact that the owners are from UAE is the ONLY issue and that is baseless.
Please someone who is against this--tell me which company is/was better, what this company has ever done not to deserve, and exactly what is your fear since the staus of port security is/has/was under port authority and the Coast Guard?!:confused:
 
The UAE allows us to dock our ships thier because we keep the current regime in power. Try importing a little democracy into the UAE and Saudi like we did in Iraq and see how long the friendship lasts. Every container that comes into this country isnt checked now.

1. the UAE recognized the Taliban
2. They made visits to Bin Laden
3. after 9/11 they got religion and joined the US or at least present the appearence of doing so :cool:
4 UAE is a muslim country
5 What are the chances of some mulim elements inside the UAE supporting Bin Laden?
6. We are a tool for Saudi and the UAE to use, once we are no longer useful then the tool is to be disposed of.

Bush has terminal colon blockage when it come to the Arabs because he is to busy sucking up to them.
 
You need to learn how these cargos are "sealed"---you can't break open the metal seal and put on another 1 to start with.
Click to expand...

I spent 10 years on the freight dock before going to law school. I can tell you that the "seal" isn't anything special. It's just an alum metal strip with embossed numbers. No "encoding" or special treatments. Just numbers. Some heavy-duty seals are cable/wire rope with an embossed tag and a lead collar which is crushed to form the link. Again, nothing special or encrypted. Not even close to tacticool or ninja.

Breaking and replacing a seal is done all the time. The only thing that will happen is that either the authority who broke the seal will note it on the manifest OR the seal will be replaced with a new seal and the new # recorded on the manifest if the cargo is of a type easily damaged or stolen or for security reasons.

And it's certainly MUCH easier to ship bad stuff into the country when the shipping port isn't secure and the receiving port "looks the other way" as the suspect container comes in. It gets harder when the receiving port is run by those who have a vested interest in being safe.

In this case the situation is going from bad to worse in the security dept. And it ISN'T because of racism. Most people understand that the avg guy in the mid-east is harmless. However, most of us also understand that the avg guy isn't the one who is trying to ship containers into this country. That means that the handful of people who have the means to ship also includes the limited number of those who intend us harm. Thus, these persons have the wealth, means, and will soon have the access to our ports.

And anyone who believes that this won't affect security is seriously underplaying the connection between port operations and port security. Operations tells security how to do things not the other way around. In order to run the port, operations needs ALL the details of security ops on an ongoing basis. This gives operations access to security codes and other internal info that otherwise may not be avail to your average terrorist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top