Was the port deal blocked because of racism/Islamaphobia?

Gently pushing this one onto the forums....

Yes and no. I think the Congressmen that made the most fuss would whore out their mothers to Hitler if it furthered their interests, but they know that overall there is a suspicion of Middle Eastern nations, and they wanted to appeal to the redneck, flag-wavin, hate-them-ayyyy-rabs crowd. The have so little ability to horn in on the Republican conservative base that this was a gold mine for them.

Also, being bought off by the unions, the Dems had to head in that direction, too. It says something that Jimmy Carter agreed with this and the folks who were up for election this year "took a stand"...

First, I totally concur with Baker!  Except (or as Trudy says, the big but?  NOoooo).

I think that when the political winds started blowing, the democrats ran back to their real roots.  Racism.  They are comfortable there, and in this case it suited their purpose.

The republicans?  Oh there was some racism there, but mostly it was xenophobia.

I have to admit that no, I didn't like the idea of a company based in an Islamic country that may or may not have supported terrorist organizations running any of our ports. And yes, it has to do with the fact that it's Islamics that are always looking for new and exciting ways to kill as many of us as is possible.
Okay, maybe it wouldn't be run specifically by those who want to do us in, but you mean to tell me that Abdul couldn't hand a briefcase full of cash over to Mahmud to let him "put this crate on that ship bound for America"? or that, at some point somebody who agrees with Abdul wouldn't come into a certain position or job of influence?
I don't like the idea that the Chinese run ports on the West coast, either, but China isn't an unreasonable rogue nation or nutty religious faction that's out to get us. It's a business deal with them, and they like our money too much.
For the fanatic followers of Allah, money only matters as far as the point to where it provides the means for you to kill people.
Besides, haven't you heard? Now the Dems are whispering that somehow Bush manipulated them. Yeah.....that this was EXACTLY what that no good puppet master wanted. He WANTED it to go down the way it did, and even CALLED the DPW officers and gave them the word to pull out when they did!



Funny how Bush is an idiot and a goofball only when they want to portray him as such, then he gets all Machiavellian on'em when they want to portray him that way. Morons.

"...but China isn't an unreasonable rogue nation or nutty religious faction that's out to get us.

No they are an unreasonable atheistic rogue nation that's out to get us; one that rubber hoses people to death because of their religious beliefs and then publishes reports about how we are among the worst human rights violators: Link.

I would be far more annoyed about the Chinese than the UAE, any day of the week. At least the UAE wouldn't have any real interest in defeating us militarily. China would love to supplant us as the sole superpower. Granted, they aren't gonna invade us, and probably would prefer not to go to war with us, but they have their thumbs in every nasty pie we are dealing with now.

they know that overall there is a suspicion of Middle Eastern nations, and they wanted to appeal to the redneck, flag-wavin, hate-them-ayyyy-rabs crowd. The have so little ability to horn in on the Republican conservative base that this was a gold mine for them.

Baker, I live in an affluent suburb. I wouldn't call anyone around me uneducated or a red neck, but I'd almost certainly call 90% Republican voters. I posted on the other blog that Americans are getting tired of feeling helpless.

You talk about red necks hating Arabs, but most of the men I talk too around me feel the same way. They work long hours and they catch the news from the paper, or at night for a little while. They may not be as informed as you are, but then who really is?

They feel powerless and I can SEE the rise of anti-Muslim mindsets all around me.

My point is, you can't just write off people who don't like Muslims to a small minority of red necks.

I live in middle America and it dominates here. People are just plain fed up with the whole Nation of Islam, which they tie to anyone of the Muslim faith. And every time one of the kids from this town or around here comes back in a body bag...it goes up a notch because of the endless local news coverage....that make it news for weeks and weeks after.

"y point is, you can't just write off people who don't like Muslims to a small minority of red necks."

Oh, no, Tova, don't get me wrong. I don't limit ignorance to the simple folk. My point was that was the one segment that the Dems usually can't get at. I am well aware that people are xenophobic and quick to hate at all levels, it's just that the flag-waving, church going, NRA members are the ones the Dems covet the most.

(...and that is said as someone who has been an NRA member, and who has lived happily in Appalachia all my life.)

As for the body bags, I'd stick to shunning the nations that send our people home in them. We have few enough allies there as it is. Every time we shun people who haven't harmed us, their anger at us goes up a notch. If you have a problem with my characterization of this as blind and ignorant, consider the frame of mind it takes to shun an ally simply based on an 'anti-muslim mindset'.

Also, the fact that Bill Clinton was more or less brokering the deal and kind of consulting put me off a little, too.

Baker---

I agree with you, but as you said, China doen't really want to do us any harm, even thought the often, directly or indirectly, help our enemies.
Neither does the UAE, but they're much too close (perhaps even sympathetically) to the people who do.

If you have a problem with my characterization of this as blind and ignorant, consider the frame of mind it takes to shun an ally simply based on an 'anti-muslim mindset'.

No I don't have a problem with your characterization as long as you include the BURBS and don't limit America's "stupidity" to the red necks! Heh.

Neither does the UAE, but they're much too close (perhaps even sympathetically) to the people who do.

See Baker? This is what I am talking about. When Americans can be CONVINCED all Muslims aren't in bed together, aren't secretly slapping the terrorists on the back, then this "hate" will just escalate.

You may think its ignorant, but ignorance in mass often leads to war.

We can know all these things about China, but there is one thing we know China won't do. They won't be converting to Islam anytime soon, so a holy jihad isn't likely.

Firstly it's not surprising that citizens of the US would feel the way they do when the Govt and media continue to reaffirm fear of all things Arab since 9/11, having said this I would have to say most of the UK is owned by Arab companies, I know this is an not quite true but in the UK and Australia and many other countries we have a large amount of investment from many arab countries and this is not an issue for us, of course there will always be the concern that some profits may go to funding terrorists, then again from what we have seen in the Australian media many of our own orginisations have done more than enough to do the same in Iraq, take the AWB for instance or BHP.
The reality is we don't know but a good start would be to have laws to make sure these companies no matter whether they are arab or not are more open and accountable, so we can sure funds are not given to terrorists.
I know this may sound selfish but when the US cingress knocked this deal on the head, I for one could only think great, now there is more investment coming to Australia, maybe our media and govt are not as effective at scaring the shit out of us as they are in the US.
PO have many interests in Australia, however all Australian ports at this point in time are Govt owned, so I suppose this is of no concern, for us as it would be to the US. What I am trying to say is, I still believe important infrastructure should always be owned by the state, but outside of this the UAE don't worry me in the least.

"We can know all these things about China, but there is one thing we know China won't do. They won't be converting to Islam anytime soon, so a holy jihad isn't likely."

Well, China has done quite nicely killing 50 million of their own people and dehumanizing every plot of land they touch without the help of religion. It isn't religion, it is a hateful philosophy that is the problem, and China has that out the wazoo. I don't think their government overtly SEEKS our harm, but I do believe they wish it.

I am well aware that people are xenophobic and quick to hate at all levels, it's just that the flag-waving, church going, NRA members are the ones the Dems covet the most.

Yeah they covet us the most AND we're the least likely to follow their tune.

China does not need to wish harm to the US or anyone else, they are becoming one of the most dominent economies in the world, this is a far easier to conquer, and less costly to China, why you guys have to worry about china as a military threat is beyond me, those that do worry that is. Australia is smack bang in the middle of all the Asian countries, sought of if you get my meaning, and I can tell you there are many countries to be worried about than China. That is if one was paranoid.
The rality these days is that we are more likely to be "ättacked" by a Militant group of people than a nation. As has been seen in the US with 9/11 and Bali. To name but a few, the tough thing is with these people is they are much harder to fight, mainly because in many cases we do not who, where or when this can occur.
The reality we face today is to a great extent Terror cells, not nations, although there are still nations taht are sabre rattling, which must be contained, but as we have learnt with history, there will always be some nut who can take over a country and create a threat, just look at Iran, Sudan, Nth Korea, Burma but at this stage these nations are containable, it is the support to militant groups that is of concern.
However this does not justify the treatment of the UAE, just because they are Arabs.

Just one other point, a recent survey of Australians showed that a majority feel no more insecure now than before 9/11, some of this I would say has to do with our remotness and isolation, is this a good thing. I think yes, only thing worse than a parnoid Government is a nation full of paronoid people.

" China does not need to wish harm to the US or anyone else, they are becoming one of the most dominent economies in the world, this is a far easier to conquer, and less costly to China, why you guys have to worry about china as a military threat is beyond me, those that do worry that is. "

You have a rosey view of how things are going there. It could go either way, frankly. Each step they take toward dragging their huge rural areas into the 21st century the more they realize they simply do not have the resources to power the advance. Believe it or not, limited resources are one of the world's oldest reasons for war.

There's Taiwan, there's the oil situation, there's the oil situation in tandem with us monkeying around in the Middle East and China's growning need to find popularity there. You seem to think that we have to be attacked at home to draw us into a war with a world power. How many US wars started because we were attacked here in America?

Each step they take toward dragging their huge rural areas into the 21st century the more they realize they simply do not have the resources to power the advance. Believe it or not, limited resources are one of the world's oldest reasons for war

Baker, do you think China is a bigger threat to us than our Arab enemy threat (whatever you want to call it.)?

I am also wondering if you'd point me in the direction of some of the info you read about China...I am guessing you aren't getting it off the general media grind?

I'd appreciate it!

Adding my own thoughts on this issue....

When the news on this issue first broke, one of my co-workers, a fairly 'right minded' individual was upset about the news. He was quite concerned that the move was a bad one, and in his mind, and that of another co-worker, it was completely the wrong thing to do at the wrong time.

I was unconcerned, and even when the news came out that the deal was torpedoed, I was unconcerned for the most part. As I told my co-worker, and others that we work with, as well as friends, I don't think having Dubai/UAE in charge of the ports makes a whit of difference as to who handles what on the docks. The docks will be still be controlled by the friends of Tony Soprano, Teamsters, Longshoremen, etc. Union personnel through and through that will in no way change the way they do business in their daily lives just because another company, that happens to be based in another nation, is signing their checks.

This was plain and simple fear mongering, and once the ball was rolling, the Republicans had to show themselves to continue to own the homeland security issue, even over the objections of their President, because they feared that they'd be giving up an issue to the Democrats and the likes of Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer.

I'd have let them have the issue and I'd have turned right around and called them the fear mongering and somewhat racist jerks that they really are. As noted above and in the news, the Democrats own beloved lover-boy former leader was lobbying on behalf of the folks in the UAE, and had no qualms in doing so. Neither did Bob Dole, John Warner (himself no slouch in the area of national security) or a host of others.

I'm greatly saddened and sickened that things turned out how they did. There really was no legitimate reason to shoot down the ports deal, and yet it became a fire that was out of control and the media drove the issue. Hell, that right there should tell you why we went in the wrong direction, or at least how to tell that we did -- the media was the driver. They drove the issue, and choose the outcome that they wanted and was the only one they'd accept. The self same liberal media that lets the likes of the New York Times, Washington Post, Time magazine and a batch of others try to pick our presidents and run our national and foreign policy.


There are other threats out there, many of other threats. Driving away potential partners and people we should be trying to impress or get to cooperate with us and help influence others in the Islamic world is stupid. Instead of showing ourselves to be a people that are able to form partnerships and trust with others, we show we are easily scared and that we will let racism and religious biases drive our behavior.

I hope that Schumer, Clinton (Hillary), and all of the others involved are proud of themselves and the damage they've done to our nations reputation.

Yeah they covet us the most AND we're the least likely to follow their tune.

and morgan fairchild writes you a check for $100,000 every week whether or not you agree to watch her while she strips naked just for you.

yeah...thats the ticket.

Kingbee:


... Morgan Fairchild?... ... am I missing some kind of cultural reference? I know who she is but... Why her? Because someone isn't likely to choose that?

Sorry Terfpan, but I just have to ask.

Okay, I'll admit that I don't know a lot about the political ins and outs of the ports deal or even the ports business and I'm a Canadian living in Japan.

But I'll sketch in broad details the rhetorical themes that I observed regarding American National security: defend ourselves, make sacrifices, greater scrutiny, tighter security.

So given these broad themes that come across in the 30 second sound bytes of news, or changes in the way things are done business-wise (I'm mainly referring to airports), my first thought about the ports deal was that, "That's wierd to give control of access points of your country to ANY foreign nation. How does increased scrutiny and security work then? This doesn't match the rhetoric I've been hearing." Reading this blog was the first time that I learned that China (Chinese companies) were running some west coast ports.

I guess I am naive. I suppose that US customs and immigration still has a presence in these ports. But it strikes me still as having a lot more leeway in security than an airport. Again, I don't know a lot about it.

So if your going to give control of access points to other countries, why not to countries that have been allies? Pushing them away certainly gives them greater incentive to hold hands with countries that aren't so interested in American safety.

I think that people are reacting to this 180 degree seeming switch in the messages they are hearing as much as anti-arab sentiment which probably heightens the confusion and fear. Most of us (I'm guessing) are like me and don't know what all happens in a port. Most people probably don't know that many ports are already run by foreign interests. I think probably most people look at a port like an airport. ... Which are probably run by foreign countries and I don't know this.

BakerStreet, I doný have a rosey view of the region in which I live, one would be naive to do so, however, the reality is China is very aware of thier energy needs, which is why they are further done the track of developing alternate froms of energy, the other reality is we have approx 40 years of easily accessable oil, after that we are all i trouble, it is then we will see feathers fly, however I believe the nations that will be the aggressors/losers will be those that choose to ignor the realities of our fast diminishing stocks of fosil fuels.
Maybe Australians and many other people are complacent, however I disagree we are, we just don't have a culture of seeing enemies around every corner. Of Course the biggest threat to Australia is that we are a small nation population wise, put a vast land with some of the largest reserves of Coal and Uranium., no water though, or at least bugger all.

momijiki

Morgan Fairchild?... ... am I missing some kind of cultural reference? I know who she is but... Why her?

one of jon lovitz' most popular saturday nite live characters was tommy flanagan (pronounced flan-'ay-gun for some reason) the pathological liar.

here's part of a message he did during the news segment, introducing himself as spokesman for pathological liars anonymous.

I lied about my age and joined the army. I was thirteen at the time. Yeah.. I went to Vietnam, and I was injured catching a mortar shell in my teeth. And they made me a three-star general! And then I got a job in journalism, writing for the National Enquire.. er, Geographic! Yeah.. I was making twenty thousand a ye.. month! In fact, I won the Pulitzer Prize that year! Yeah, that's the ticket

once tommy was rollin, you could pretty much count oh him gettin around to his relationship with morgan fairchild:

And then my cousin died - Joe Louis - and I took it hard. Maybe too hard - I tried to kill myself. Yeahh.. I did kill myself! Sure! I was medically dead for a week and a half! It was a woman that brought me out of it - Indira Gandhi! Yeah, right.. And she told me about Pathological Liars Anonymous. Oh, you'd be surprised how many famous people belong. In fact.. at one of the meetings I met my wife - Morgan Fairchild! Yes, I'm a changed man now, and all because of Pathological Liars Anonymous. Why, I - I even have my picture on the cover of Newsweek magazine. Yeah. Every day! Yeah.. that's the ticket! Yeah, you betcha!

drmiler often reminds me of tommy but he really outdid hisself in #13.

momijiki Morgan Fairchild?... ... am I missing some kind of cultural reference? I know who she is but... Why her? one of jon lovitz' most popular saturday nite live characters was tommy flanagan (pronounced flan-'ay-gun for some reason) the pathological liar. here's part of a message he did during the news segment, introducing himself as spokesman for pathological liars anonymous. I lied about my age and joined the army. I was thirteen at the time. Yeah.. I went to Vietnam, and I was injured catching a mortar shell in my teeth. And they made me a three-star general! And then I got a job in journalism, writing for the National Enquire.. er, Geographic! Yeah.. I was making twenty thousand a ye.. month! In fact, I won the Pulitzer Prize that year! Yeah, that's the ticket once tommy was rollin, you could pretty much count oh him gettin around to his relationship with morgan fairchild: And then my cousin died - Joe Louis - and I took it hard. Maybe too hard - I tried to kill myself. Yeahh.. I did kill myself! Sure! I was medically dead for a week and a half! It was a woman that brought me out of it - Indira Gandhi! Yeah, right.. And she told me about Pathological Liars Anonymous. Oh, you'd be surprised how many famous people belong. In fact.. at one of the meetings I met my wife - Morgan Fairchild! Yes, I'm a changed man now, and all because of Pathological Liars Anonymous. Why, I - I even have my picture on the cover of Newsweek magazine. Yeah. Every day! Yeah.. that's the ticket! Yeah, you betcha! drmiler often reminds me of tommy but he really outdid hisself in #13.

And "you" sir, are the biggest asshat going! In #13 I was responding to what bakerstreet said in number #7. Or are you to ignorant to see that? I do NOT like being refered to as a "pathological liar", fool!