FOX NEWS: White House; Bush Didnt Know About Port Deal

You sir, have balls.

 

Crying wolf once too often?

---------------------
Terror fears, stoked by Bush, now bite him

For almost five years President George W. Bush has warned Americans to fear terrorism, but now those words may come back to bite him.

The president, who has cast himself as America's protector against terrorism and Islamic militancy, has been thrown on the defensive by a bipartisan revolt over his administration's approval of a state-owned company from the United Arab Emirates assuming operation of six major U.S. seaports.

Bush and his aides have argued that the United Arab Emirates is an anti-terrorist ally and that the company would have no security role. But even Bush allies, like South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsay Graham, have called the deal "politically tone deaf."

With Republican and Democratic lawmakers drafting legislation to block the port deal, Bush vowed on Tuesday to use his veto for the first time should any such law reach his desk, drawing the lines for a high-stakes political battle.

"Politically, for the president, it is a huge mistake for him to be defending this decision. The president will be overturned," said U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, the former number two Republican in the House of Representatives.

Bush has long been successful in persuading Americans they were under constant threat and he was the best man to protect them, although polls reveal paradoxes in attitudes.

Last month, some 75 percent of Americans said in a Zogby survey that they expected the country to suffer a major terrorist attack within the next two years, but a CNN/Gallup/USA Today poll found that 64 percent of Americans had confidence in Bush's ability to prevent an attack.

Fears have not subsided, pollster John Zogby said, although the United States has not suffered a major attack since September 11, 2001. Bush two weeks ago revealed a plot foiled in 2002 to fly an airplane into the West Coast's tallest building and said the terrorist threat had not abated.

"That's what makes this story so ironic. I guess you can't have it both ways," Zogby said.

Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University, said, "Bush is a victim of his own rhetoric. This deal flies in the face of the Bush administration's general posture, which has been that there is much to fear out there and they have been vigilant in protecting the country."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060222...84.eUGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

 

Eh? How is he having it both ways. Do people not understand that this deal changes nothing about security?

 

You and I may Mr. C but to Joe America, perception is everything in politics.

 

I do think this is a political loser for Bush no matter what. If he backs off he looks weak. If he takes a stand he looks like he's compromising security (to some). Are we seeing the first signs of lame duckness?

 

I'm with you that I don't think this is that big of a deal but I think how the Admin. has handled it has been terrible and that this is partially the Admin's rhetoric biting them on the butt.

Think about it this way. Even though on several occasions GW Bush, Cheney and other officials have said that Iraq had no connection on 9/11 they've continually obfuscated that connection by using such langauge as "We struck at the geographic region where the 9/11 terrorists came from" or drawing tenous connections like meetings that went nowhere between Al Qaeda and Saddam's regimes 10 years ago. Well POR is a company from the geographic region where the 9/11 terrorists came from, in fact two of the 19 came from Dubai and also there are many tenous connections between the 9/11 terrorists and Dubai. So while the Admin. has sought to slyly create the impression that Iraq and 9/11 are connected the methods and manner they have done it easily lead to the conclusion that Dubai was connected to 9/11 and that we are handing over our ports to a country in the geographic region where 9/11 was hatched.

 

Kind of like Saudi Arabia, right? An ally that funds Al Queda through its businesses and "charities." Here's the UAE record on terrorism:

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Dubai_Ports_letter.pdf

– The UAE was one of three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.

– The UAE has been a key transfer point for illegal shipments of nuclear components to Iran, North Korea and Lybia.

– According to the FBI, money was transferred to the 9/11 hijackers through the UAE banking system.

– After 9/11, the Treasury Department reported that the UAE was not cooperating in efforts to track down Osama Bin Laden’s bank accounts.

Yep, this is *exactly* like a British company controlling the major ports on the eastern seaboard. (There is no emoticon that can convery enough sarcasm here)

My question for the Dubya loyalists: what is your personal threshold for failure, corruption lies and sheer stupidity in your political heroes? As we're teetering on civil war in Iraq tell exactly what has not gone completely haywire in your boy's reign?

 

here comes the scandal................?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060223/ap_on_go_pr_wh/ports_security

Documents Show Secret Deal on Ports Sale

Under a secretive agreement with the Bush administration, a company in the United Arab Emirates promised to cooperate with U.S. investigations as a condition of its takeover of operations at six major American ports, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

The U.S. government chose not to impose other, routine restrictions.

In approving the $6.8 billion purchase, the administration chose not to require state-owned Dubai Ports World to keep copies of its business records on U.S. soil, where they would be subject to orders by American courts. It also did not require the company to designate an American citizen to accommodate requests by the government.

Outside legal experts said such obligations are routinely attached to U.S. approvals of foreign sales in other industries.

 

It is certainly interesting that the President didn't konw about the sale to the company and yet the whitehouse and the company had a secret deal.

Just what is going on, that the govt. is being run with the President out of the loop.

 

Let's just say he does what he is told.

 

Nothing says "LEADERSHIP" like being left out of the loop on important deals, secret agreements, that include having a company from the middle east control our ports.

That Bush sure is a leader.

 

Bush returns to a familiar defense-- ignorance.

 

It only reaffirms what I and many many other true conservatives (though we have been labeled litertarians by the neo cons) have always said about Bush.

 

The article also says...

So, I thought the spin was that these guys would have nothing to do with security... yet now you have a leak, presumably form the administration, trying to salvage the deal by appealing to security concerns and obviously setting up a mechanism to question the patriotism of anyone who has issues with this deal.

And by the way, if a foreign country is coming here to run our ports, I want tehm to do everything possible to assist DHS, not just "all reasonable steps." There's a lot of wiggle room in that statement.

This is another end run around the laws and the idea of open government. Notice the records will be offshore and not subject to the courts. Reading between the lines, the info will be available to the administration, but not to Congress or the people for any kind of oversight on what kind of info is collected and how that info may be used. Forget terrorism for a moment... do we trust these guys not to use government-acquired information to help out their corporate cronies in a free-market battle with another company that didn't hire Abramoff or his ilk?

 

your gonna argue that they said 'all reasonable steps'? what more do you want.

 

Well, let's see...

I might define "reasonable steps" as taking action when you get a brief that says "Bin Laden Determined to Attack US" or perhaps actually delivering water, ice, and trailers to the areas Katrina devastated.

Clearly, this administration has a somewhat different definition. No telling what the Dubai guys think it means.

 

Via Josh...

"And so people don't need to worry about security. This deal wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security for the United States of America."

--W

 

Via Kos...

Quotes by George W. Bush:

"America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud. "

"This is still a world of terror & missiles & madmen. We are challenged by aging weapons and failing intelligence. I will rebuild our military power - because a dangerous world still requires a sharpened sword. I will move quickly to defend our people and our allies against missiles and blackmail. And I will have a foreign policy with a touch of iron - driven by American values and American interests."

"I believe the most solemn duty of the American president is to protect the American people. If America shows uncertainty and weakness in this decade, the world will drift toward tragedy. This will not happen on my watch."

"I will never relent in defending America - whatever it takes."

"On September 11 2001, America felt its vulnerability even to threats that gather on the other side of the Earth. We resolved then, and we are resolved today, to confront every threat from any source that could bring sudden terror and suffering to America. "

"The United States and our allies are determined: we refuse to live in the shadow of this ultimate danger.'

"There's no bigger task than protecting the homeland of our country."

"Our greatest responsibility is the active defense of the American people. 28 months have passed since Sept. 11, 2001-over 2 years without an attack on American soil-and it is tempting to believe that the danger is behind us. That hope is understandable and comforting-and false. The killing has continued in Bali, Jakarta, Casablanca, Jerusalem, Istanbul and Baghdad. The terrorists continue to plot against America and the civilized world. And by our will and courage, this danger will be defeated. "

"Our first priority must always be the security of our nation, and that will be reflected in the budget I send to Congress. My budget supports 3 great goals for America: We will win this war, we will protect our homeland, and we will revive our economy."

"People don't need to worry about security"

 

So, the Cabinet Secretary who, under law, is designated the Chairman of this group didn't attend the meeting and didn't know about the controversy until the news reports started popping up on desk... more or less the same way Rumsfeld found out about it. Good thing the WH assured us the vote was unanimous and good thing we know that Bush (who didn't know) talked to the Cabinet Officials (at least some of whom didn't know) to get their assurance that this is a good deal.

The administration needs to prove this.

I agree and 2008 can't get here soon enough.