Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rush Limbaugh Live Thread Monday Feb 27, 2006
Rush ^

Posted on 02/27/2006 8:10:15 AM PST by MNJohnnie

The "Port" of Public Opinion The Patriot Post ^ | February 24, 2006 | Federalist - Patriot Post

Posted on 02/24/2006 10:28:57 AM PST by knightshadow

The port of public opinion...

Protests about the planned transfer of management for several U.S. seaports to a state-owned company in the United Arab Emirates are fraught with almost as much confusion as fervor -- which explains why the current division within the political parties is almost as stark as the one between them. When Karl Rove, Jimmy Carter and The Los Angeles Times line up on one side of an issue, while Senators Bill Frist, Chuck Schumer and The New York Times line up on the other, something is seriously amiss.

Of course, the first casualty of political conquest is the truth, which is not to say that both sides don't feel genuine concern. In an effort to elucidate the issue, let us first distinguish between fact and fiction.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a multi-agency panel that evaluates foreign financial interests in the U.S. with national-security implications, has approved the transfer of management of some port terminals (not the sale of these ports) in New York, Newark, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami, New Orleans and Houston. The transfer is from a British owned company, Peninsula and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, to Dubai Ports World, which is headquartered in the UAE. What this means, essentially, is that American managers and longshoremen will now get their checks cut by DPW instead of P&O. In other words, DPW will become one of many operators in these ports.

This does not put DPW in a position to act as an agent for al-Qa'ida, delivering weapons of mass destruction to their terror-cell operatives in the U.S., as has been suggested by some print and Internet tabloids. Direct responsibility for port security is shared by the Coast Guard, Customs and Border Protection, and state and local port authorities. Here it should also be noted that port-management priorities are wholly subordinate to port-security priorities. Of course, port-security operations, particularly those pertaining to interdiction of WMD, are augmented by the entire asset base of the U.S. military, its intelligence community and its law enforcement agencies.

Despite the rancor, the U.S. does not outsource the protection of our critical national-security infrastructure.

Approval of the DPW proposal underwent three months of interagency review. According to Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, "This review definitely was not cursory and it definitely was not casual. Rather, it was in depth and comprehensive." This is the same review that management companies based in China, Denmark, Japan, Singapore and Taiwan underwent before being authorized to manage terminals in the port of Los Angeles. We might add, China now manages some terminals on both ends of the Panama Canal.

Foreign investment in the U.S., including port management, is nothing new.

As for the assertion that President George Bush should have known about the proposal, Frances Townsend, his senior advisor for Homeland Security, counters, "Rarely do these [reviews] wind up on the president's desk and that's only after there has been an investigation and there is some disagreement. This didn't get there because none of the agencies who reviewed it had any objection."

The public remonstration in this case is the result of a volatile combination of legitimate sentiments: a fundamental distrust of Islamic countries combined with a concern about the potential for terrorist exploitation of our busy shipping ports.

The distrust is warranted, particularly in the wake of 9/11. Not only were two of the hijackers from the UAE, but 11 of the Saudi hijackers traveled to the U.S. from Dubai, and $250,000 used to bankroll the 9/11 attacks was wired through Dubai banks. There were ties between Islamist emirs in the UAE and Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, and the UAE recognized the Taliban government.

On the latter point, however, our intel sources indicate those ties enabled the CIA to confirm the location of bin Laden twice in 1999, but the Clinton administration declined to eliminate him. Bill Clinton has floated several excuses for why he did not act on this intelligence -- which all sank.

Further, Pakistani nuclear proliferator Abdul Qadeer Khan testified that a UAE company assisted him with the transfer of nuclear technology to Iran. However, as we noted two years ago, our sources indicate that Khan was either a CIA operative or a dupe and that the UAE cooperated fully with surveillance of Khan's contacts in Dubai.

Thus, if we want to punish the UAE because it has airports and banks, or because it has cooperated with CIA clandestine counter-proliferation efforts, so be it. There is, however, no suggestion of evidence that the UAE government had any knowledge, much less complicity, with the al-Qa'ida cell responsible for the 9/11 attacks, or any other attack on U.S. interests or personnel. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence that the UAE, along with Kuwait and now Iraq, is a critical ally in the region.

Indeed, since 9/11 the UAE government has provided significant intelligence and staging support in the war against Jihadistan. They have actively participated in the pursuit of al-Qa'ida terrorists. In 2002, for example, UAE officials arrested and turned over to U.S. officials Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who conspired in the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and masterminded the attack on the USS Cole in 2000. In 2004, UAE officials arrested Qari Saifullah Akhtar, who trained thousands of al-Qa'ida operatives around the world. He was returned to U.S. interrogators in Pakistan.

As for Dubai Ports World, it already provides support for U.S. Navy ships in Jebel Ali and Fujairah, which accommodates more U.S. Navy ships than any other international port. DPW is also the primary support contractor for U.S. Air Force assets at Al Dhafra Air Base.

Rising above the din, the real issue is this: America's seaports constitute one of many big holes in our border security, regardless of who manages the terminals. Despite the port security that exists both stateside and in the ports of origin, there is no guarantee that WMD won't be smuggled into the U.S. in one of the thousands of cargo containers that land on our shores each and every day.

As we have noted before, when al-Qa'ida has mated the right nuclear core with the right weapons hardware (something they may have already succeeded in doing), getting that weapon into the U.S. will not be that difficult, regardless of who is managing and securing entry points. The harsh reality is that there simply is no way to secure U.S. borders, with even a modest degree of confidence, against importation of nuclear WMD hardware the size of a footlocker, and a fissile core the size of an orange.

This reality accounts for the Bush Doctrine of Pre-emption -- take the fight to the enemy and endeavor to wage war on their turf, not ours. It is a reality for which pre-emption is our only option -- our only chance of preventing a catastrophic attack on our nation.

This is certainly not to suggest that we adopt the French border-security model -- one in which we throw up our hands and run away. Indeed, we need to be vigilant about territorial security. However, allowing a UAE company to manage some port terminals does not constitute a surrender from such vigilance.

For the public, there may be some psychological solace in the assertion that preventing DPW from managing port terminals is tantamount to securing our destiny -- but it is a false sense of security.

The public confusion, media hysterics and, consequently, opportunistic political posturing and demagoguery have all but completely obscured the facts pertaining to our relationship with the UAE and its shipping conglomerate, DPW. The Democrats have used this issue to leapfrog to the right of Republicans on national security, and some Republicans responded quickly by adopting the same line on DPW. Unfortunately, both are doing so at the peril of our national security.

Not only has President Bush declared, "The UAE has been a valuable partner in fighting the war on terror," but has even threatened to veto any legislation to undo this deal. As he has yet to use his veto for any legislation (to our utter dismay, given some great opportunities), threatening a veto in this case can only mean that the consequences of derailing our relationship with the UAE constitute a grave threat to our national security.

Most likely, a compromise on UAE/DPW between the White House and Republican congressional leaders was brokered prior to public objections from Sen. Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert. If that compromise is anything other than a "technical delay" in approving this transaction, we believe U.S. national security will suffer the consequences.

Feel safer now?

TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: artoflockstepping; carrythewater; gopmouthpiece; hushbimbo; mcnabbisarab; rushlimbaugh; sameoldsh; talkradio
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-216 next last

1 posted on 02/27/2006 8:10:17 AM PST by MNJohnnie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: indcons; macmedic892; Unrepentant VN Vet; old_sage_says; hattend; navynucmom; MozartLover

Sorry for the partial early ping, At work today and my Email system seems to have purged my Rush Ping List. Have it on my home email so we should be back to normal operations tomorrow. Talk to you all then.

2 posted on 02/27/2006 8:11:49 AM PST by MNJohnnie ("Good men don't wait for the polls. They stand on principle and fight."-Soul Seeker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

WaL Bump

3 posted on 02/27/2006 8:16:10 AM PST by mnehring (Perry 06- It's better than a hippie in a cowboy hat or a commie with blue hair.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
What's with the links?

These cheapskates need to get Rush 24/7!

The parodies we get while the rest of you are fed commercials make it worth double what it costs you.

(pukin dog is not affiliated with the Rush Limbaugh program)

4 posted on 02/27/2006 8:21:52 AM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Good Morning!

5 posted on 02/27/2006 8:24:51 AM PST by angcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

9 hours and 25 minutes to go.

6 posted on 02/27/2006 8:35:25 AM PST by navynucmom (Shut Up Edgar..............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Guess there IS a benefit to being a newbie, after all.

I'll probably be in lurk mode the rest of the day, though.

7 posted on 02/27/2006 8:52:45 AM PST by Unrepentant VN Vet ("Antique" MSM infers some remaining functionality; IMO they're the zombie media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
Here ... work N lurk mode ON
8 posted on 02/27/2006 9:01:01 AM PST by sono ( I did something dumb this weekend—I walked into a Muslim bakery and asked for a Danish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

LOL...the Daschle radio clips alone are worth it

9 posted on 02/27/2006 9:03:00 AM PST by mystery-ak (Army Wife and Army Mother.....toughest job in the military)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sono

Workin' at home bumperoo!

10 posted on 02/27/2006 9:06:51 AM PST by TPartyType
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Good afternoon, and thanks for the ping! Here in usual work, lurk and lunch mode...

11 posted on 02/27/2006 9:09:25 AM PST by LibertyLee (George W. Bush--now more than ever--an admitted Idol and 24 watcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertyLee
Rush talking about Toshiba trying to buy Westinghouse Electric (owned now by the Brits) Nuclear Energy reactors tech.

Back in the mid 80's a division of Toshiba stole US Submerine running silent technology. Wonder if Rush knows that.

I know this because I worked for Sharp copiers back then and we used this info against Toshiba copiers that were a piece of carp anyway.

12 posted on 02/27/2006 9:16:06 AM PST by AGreatPer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mystery-ak

RUSH! Step away from the kool aid!

their not tracking us, who would really care?

13 posted on 02/27/2006 9:17:04 AM PST by txroadhawg ("Stuck on stupid? I invented stupid! " Al Gore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

G'day Johnnie ;o)

14 posted on 02/27/2006 9:19:07 AM PST by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AGreatPer

I know we have our favorite trade spy stories. I go to Thailand fairly often (because of my Thai wife). Certain plazas will sell you software programs for little more than the cost of the CDs they are burned on. I think the point Rush is making is that there's so much globalization that something from everybody--including some of our worst enemies is everywhere. I think the ports issue will be resolved on the merits after this 45 day period. But I do agree with you: Toshiba copiers were horrible and were always broken...

15 posted on 02/27/2006 9:21:48 AM PST by LibertyLee (George W. Bush--now more than ever--an admitted Idol and 24 watcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: LibertyLee
Longshoremen who walk like Hillary Clinton??!


16 posted on 02/27/2006 9:23:03 AM PST by mewzilla (Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla


17 posted on 02/27/2006 9:23:23 AM PST by angcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

That's funny...her legs might as well be longshoreman's and I understand she swears like one too!

18 posted on 02/27/2006 9:24:22 AM PST by LibertyLee (George W. Bush--now more than ever--an admitted Idol and 24 watcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: navynucmom
'24' tonight on Fox - ;o)
19 posted on 02/27/2006 9:27:02 AM PST by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Valance

8 hours and 30 minutes ;)

20 posted on 02/27/2006 9:28:13 AM PST by navynucmom (Shut Up Edgar..............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-216 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
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson