UAE gave $100 million to Katrina relief

[Jerk]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060224/ap_on_go_pr_wh/ports_security_katrina

Now, with the big temper tantrum thrown by the usual suspects for political reasons, another country is added to the list that hates our guts.

Take a number and get in line!

[royalfan5]

On the upside Bahrain still likes us, and they have booze, and seem to like Michael Jackson.

[Stoop Dawg]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060224/ap_on_go_pr_wh/ports_security_katrina

Now, with the big temper tantrum thrown by the usual suspects for political reasons, another country is added to the list that hates our guts.

Take a number and get in line!

Holy crap! They also contributed to a library!


The United Arab Emirates has long-standing ties to the Bush family. Records show the UAE and one of its sheikhs contributed at least $1 million before 1995 to the Bush Library Foundation, which established the George Bush Presidential Library in College Station, Texas. The executive chairman of Dubai Ports World, Ahmed bin Sulayem, is not listed among donors.

Those freaking a-rabs! They want to re-build homes, schools, AND libraries?!?! And now they want to buy some ports that are currently owned by the British??? No f-ing way, man. No f-ing way!

[JohnnyMack]

Holy crap! They also contributed to a library!



Those freaking a-rabs! They want to re-build homes, schools, AND libraries?!?! And now they want to buy some ports that are currently owned by the British??? No f-ing way, man. No f-ing way!

Call me a cynic, but I wonder how they got this contract. :rolleyes:

[OklahomaTrombone]

Holy crap! They also contributed to a library!



Those freaking a-rabs! They want to re-build homes, schools, AND libraries?!?! And now they want to buy some ports that are currently owned by the British??? No f-ing way, man. No f-ing way!


Can I check out books at the Bush 41 library?

[JohnnyMack]

Can I check out books at the Bush 41 library?

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/074325337X.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

[Hatfield]

Call me a cynic, but I wonder how they got this contract. :rolleyes:

they bought the company that pwn3d the contract.

[jk the sooner fan]

right, the UAE is the ONLY foreign country to have donated money to the Katrina relief

THE.ONLY.ONE

let me ask you something johnny mack.........if you have what you consider to be an important business transaction.....do you complete it with total strangers, or friends you trust?

[JohnnyMack]

let me ask you something johnny mack.........if you have what you consider to be an important business transaction.....do you complete it with total strangers, or friends you trust?

Friends I trust.

I know how the game is played, just pointing out that there is a game being played here.

[jk the sooner fan]

well thank you captain obvious.....jeezus like the rest of us werent able to see that, or to see thru what your real intent is....

[JohnnyMack]

well thank you captain obvious.....jeezus like the rest of us werent able to see that, or to see thru what your real intent is....

No problem colonel indignant.

[OklahomaTuba]

Call me a cynic, but I wonder how they got this contract. :rolleyes:
Probably the same way Haliburton lost it...

[Octavian]

conservatives= sudden defenders of Arab feelings and attackers of "biggoted discrimination" :rolleyes:

liberals= sudden fierce advocates of national security and attackers of "irresponsible leadership" :rolleyes:

GWB = confused as to why most Americans don't understand the difference between: Muslim nations that are diplomatic allies and home to global corporations vs. Muslim nations that are not.

C'mon, George....3 years ago you overwhelmingly convinced the American public for a war against a Muslim nation that had nothing to do w/ 9/11....why act shocked if the overwhelming majority of the American people are now upset when you approve a deal to let a Muslim nation like the UAE (w/ 2 of the 9/11 hijackers, one of the only nations that recognized the Taliban, etc etc.) have commercial control over our already porous ports?

If you hadn't spent the last 4 years blurring the lines and oversimplifying the puzzle...this wouldn't have been such a big deal.

You wanna blame someone for this domestic backlash? Look in the mirror...

[JohnnyMack]

conservatives= sudden defenders of Arab feelings and attackers of "biggoted discrimination" :rolleyes:

liberals= sudden fierce advocates of national security and attackers of "irresponsible leadership" :rolleyes:

GWB = confused as to why most Americans don't understand the difference between: Muslim nations that are diplomatic allies and home to global corporations vs. Muslim nations that are not.

C'mon, George....3 years ago you overwhelmingly convinced the American public for a war against a Muslim nation that had nothing to do w/ 9/11....why act shocked if the overwhelming majority of the American people are now upset when you approve a deal to let a Muslim nation like the UAE (w/ 2 of the 9/11 hijackers, one of the only nations that recognized the Taliban, etc etc.) have commercial control over our already porous ports?

If you hadn't spent the last 4 years blurring the lines and oversimplifying the puzzle...this wouldn't have been such a big deal.

You wanna blame someone for this domestic backlash? Look in the mirror...

<clears off a seat on the Couch of Traitors for Octavian>

Welcome!

[Octavian]

;)

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

bush is the anti-margaret thatcher. if she were president and someone had asked her about this contract, she would have given a 25 minute speach about a) why it happened, b) what UAE has done to benefit the USA, c) why the deal is good for the US, d) what, if any, US companies could have done the job, and e) whether the guy that okayed the deal wore boxers or briefs. reporters would have walked away at least enlightened about the situation.

bush approaches it from the angle a) don't you morons know that these guys are our allies? and b) congress is a bunch of morons, i'll veto them opposing it. he really needs his speech writers to right out his responses to the press, maybe even go to a written statement approach. he is the worst extemporaneous speaker i've ever seen in politics.

[SicEmBaylor]

bush is the anti-margaret thatcher. if she were president and someone had asked her about this contract, she would have given a 25 minute speach about a) why it happened, b) what UAE has done to benefit the USA, c) why the deal is good for the US, d) what, if any, US companies could have done the job, and e) whether the guy that okayed the deal wore boxers or briefs. reporters would have walked away at least enlightened about the situation.

bush approaches it from the angle a) don't you morons know that these guys are our allies? and b) congress is a bunch of morons, i'll veto them opposing it. he really needs his speech writers to right out his responses to the press, maybe even go to a written statement approach. he is the worst extemporaneous speaker i've ever seen in politics.

I totally agree with all of that. Thatcher would come out and give you every possible argument in favor of it including angles you hadn't and probably wouldn't consider until she spelled it out for you.

[SicEmBaylor]

conservatives= sudden defenders of Arab feelings and attackers of "biggoted discrimination" :rolleyes:

liberals= sudden fierce advocates of national security and attackers of "irresponsible leadership" :rolleyes:

GWB = confused as to why most Americans don't understand the difference between: Muslim nations that are diplomatic allies and home to global corporations vs. Muslim nations that are not.

C'mon, George....3 years ago you overwhelmingly convinced the American public for a war against a Muslim nation that had nothing to do w/ 9/11....why act shocked if the overwhelming majority of the American people are now upset when you approve a deal to let a Muslim nation like the UAE (w/ 2 of the 9/11 hijackers, one of the only nations that recognized the Taliban, etc etc.) have commercial control over our already porous ports?

If you hadn't spent the last 4 years blurring the lines and oversimplifying the puzzle...this wouldn't have been such a big deal.

You wanna blame someone for this domestic backlash? Look in the mirror...


A muslim nation? Sure their faith is mostly muslim, and Saddam professed to be devout but he was anything but a fundamentalist. He and his Ba'ath party were secular who ran the nation as a secular country.

[SicEmBaylor]

I'm not in favor of this port deal, because I'm a fan of racial profiling and thus have no problem rejecting the deal simply because it's a muslim nation.

However, there are some things to consider.

A)UAE has been an uncommonly strong ally in the region. The fact that two of the hijackers as Octavian pointed out were from UAE doesn't at all mean that the UAE supported them. Did the US support McVeigh becuase McVeigh was from these United States? No.

B)We have NO idea the potential wealth of information or services the UAE has extended to us that could have facilited this deal.

C)We do know that they more or less agreed to provide these United States with almost any information we ask for regarding their running of the port.

D)In my estimation, these United States should always reserve the fundamental right to seize any foreign holdings on US soil especially our ports.

E)The only American company this deal could have gone to is Haliburton and how many liberals out there would be foaming at the mouth right now if this port deal had gone to Haliburton?

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Maggie Thatcher, one hot woman! We need more like her...

[jk the sooner fan]

bush is the anti-margaret thatcher. if she were president and someone had asked her about this contract, she would have given a 25 minute speach about a) why it happened, b) what UAE has done to benefit the USA, c) why the deal is good for the US, d) what, if any, US companies could have done the job, and e) whether the guy that okayed the deal wore boxers or briefs. reporters would have walked away at least enlightened about the situation.

bush approaches it from the angle a) don't you morons know that these guys are our allies? and b) congress is a bunch of morons, i'll veto them opposing it. he really needs his speech writers to right out his responses to the press, maybe even go to a written statement approach. he is the worst extemporaneous speaker i've ever seen in politics.

totally agree, he and his administration have been horrible at getting the true/intended message out......they almost seem to have a "bunker mentality"

[Stoop Dawg]

bush is the anti-margaret thatcher. if she were president and someone had asked her about this contract, she would have given a 25 minute speach about a) why it happened, b) what UAE has done to benefit the USA, c) why the deal is good for the US, d) what, if any, US companies could have done the job, and e) whether the guy that okayed the deal wore boxers or briefs. reporters would have walked away at least enlightened about the situation.

bush approaches it from the angle a) don't you morons know that these guys are our allies? and b) congress is a bunch of morons, i'll veto them opposing it. he really needs his speech writers to right out his responses to the press, maybe even go to a written statement approach. he is the worst extemporaneous speaker i've ever seen in politics.

While I don't disagree with what you said, I'm not so sure it applies to this particular situation. Shouldn't it be the responsibility of congress to say WHY they oppose it? Granted, it would be very beneficial for W to give some positive reinforcement, but IMO it's really the opposer's job to spell out why it's such a bad deal. What has the UAE done to make them nervous - other than be Muslims?

[Stoop Dawg]

conservatives= sudden defenders of Arab feelings and attackers of "biggoted discrimination" :rolleyes:

liberals= sudden fierce advocates of national security and attackers of "irresponsible leadership" :rolleyes:

Stoop Dawg = advocate of wire-tapping and racial profiling in order to find and stop ILLEGAL activity.

Stoop Dawg = defender of freedom of companies to conduct legal transactions without government interference.

There are very few instances where govt interference into business transactions is a good idea. National Security is certainly one of them and every effort should be made to ensure the security of our ports - regardless of who is in charge of them. If anyone can show a real security threat then I'm all for telling the UAE to take a hike. But all I've seen is that they are one of our closest allies. Perhaps I'm just uninformed, all I know is what I read in the news and we all know that stuff is incomplete and/or flat-out false.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

totally agree, he and his administration have been horrible at getting the true/intended message out......they almost seem to have a "bunker mentality"

in other words, he's the second coming of richard millhouse nixon...

[Hatfield]

the outrage while maybe a tad misguided is understandable due to the admin banging the gong of fear regarding the mulsim community.

[Harry Beanbag]

the outrage while maybe a tad misguided is understandable due to the admin banging the gong of fear regarding the mulsim community.


I must have missed all that. :confused:

[jk the sooner fan]

I must have missed all that. :confused:

yeah me too considering the administration has included a handful of arab countries in that coalition of nations...

[OklahomaTuba]

the outrage while maybe a tad misguided is understandable due to the admin banging the gong of fear regarding the mulsim community.
Of course, ITS ALL BUSH'S FAULT!!!

No matter if Muslims slammed planes into our buildings killing thousands, riot over cartoons, behead women and children, bomb innocent people day after day, crying out for the death of all infidels, its all BUSH'S FAULT that there is this fear and mistrust of Islam.

Talk about living in a simple, black and white world, where the answer to everything is the same damn thing.
:rolleyes: