Portgate Talking Point: If you are for Dubai World deal, then you are...

[zulchzulu]

...anti-semitic, pro-terrorist and support nepotism.

The UAE supports the Taliban, had a few terrorists come from there, allowed Osama to bank there and won't release records, is against the state of Israel and wants to give jobs and money to the Bush family, namely Neil Bush and George H.W. Bush....as well as Cheney and the Carlyle Group. There is more to wonk on here, but boiling it down to simple bumper sticker points is the only way to deal with the issue.

The Righties desparate point that it's racist to be against the deal is minimal at best.

[nickinSTL]

1. and my reply to that is...

I have concerns about reputed ties between the UAE and al-Qaeda.

But, more than that, I'm against ANY outsourcing of port security.

I don't want a British company in charge of our port security, either.

Homeland Security is in charge of airport security, why not the security of our sea ports?

[zulchzulu]

3. Good additional points

I think the biggest surprise most Americans found was that our ports management was outsourced. Given a British company was managing these ports, it probably wasn't that alarming.

But from a political standpoint, saying that the UAE would be in charge is almost certain political suicide in an election year for Repugs if they want to play the strong suit with national security.

If I was running against a Repug for a congressional seat, this is practically a huge issue to exploit. There's already enough stuff to run on against a Repug, but this is deliciously easy to hammer on.

[SpiralHawk]

2. Excellent

The points in the original post, and response # 1

Excellent

True talking points - worthy of frequent repitition


k and r

[The Magistrate]

4. An Excellent Summary, Sir!

"Bush: His Friends Are Your Enemies!"

[NoMercy]

5. Can we wait till the Repub Congress has swallowed the hook??

Why are we democrats playing stupid and acting against our own interest.

The rhetoric on the Dubai Ports is 90% flag-waving, Xenophobic garbage and political rabble rousing. It is a sad spectacle to see the LA times remind our Senator that banning foreign terminal ownership would immediately terminate the California economy:

“Memo to Boxer: 13 of the 14 container terminals at the ports of L.A. and Long Beach, the biggest port complex in the U.S., are run by foreign-owned companies.”

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-ports26feb26,0,6772402.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials

We are now oblivious to the fact that the NeoCon tactics being used against the UAE now have the same stench as the propaganda against Chavez’s Venezuela.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x523400

What is most perplexing is that the Arab Ports Deal Saves Democrats, Impeaches Bush, could sink the Republican congress, BUT the NeoCons re going to manipulate democrats into killing it and saving their anti-arabist agenda.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x534113

[Wordie]

6. EXCEPT (whoopsie) first opposition to deal came from pro-Israel RW neocons

Such as Frank Gaffney, who more or less broke the story in the mainstream press (it has been widely publicized in trade journals previously), and the extremely RW Center for Security Policy, which also was early out of the box.

Gaffney is not exactly known for his progressiveness, shall we say, and is a prominent PNAC member. In fact, he is a founding member of PNAC. Here's a brief bio, on RightWeb: http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1183

Frank Gaffney, Jr.

Center for Security Policy: Founder
The Washington Times: Columnist
Americans for Victory over Terrorism: Adviser
Project for the New American Century: Founding member
Gaffney, a former Reagan administration official who cut his teeth working under Richard Perle when the “prince of darkness” was an adviser to Sen. “Scoop” Jackson in the 1970s, is one of the key heavy-lifters of the neoconservative-hawk policy institute world. From his perch at the Center for Security Policy (CSP), Gaffney routinely excoriates any and all arms control agreements, stridently defends U.S. intervention in places such as Iraq, and defends the hardline policies of Israel’s Likud Party.

...Gaffney is a contributing editor to National Review online and a columnist for American Spectator online, WorldNetDaily.com and JewishWorldReview.com. His op-ed pieces have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The New Republic, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Christian Science Monitor, the Los Angeles Times, and Newsday. (1), (3)

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1183

All the lefties who oppose the deal seem to have picked up on misleading RW talking points, as you have. Curious, huh? Why do you think that is???

[Coastie for Truth]

7. Really

<><>

<>

Republican congressional leaders had hoped to curtail bipartisan outcries over a United Arab Emirates-based company's pending takeover of some U.S. port operations by brokering an agreement for a new investigation of the deal's potential security risks.

Then came the disclosure that the U.S. Coast Guard had raised concerns weeks ago that, because of U.S. intelligence gaps, it could not determine whether the UAE company, DP World, might support terrorist operations.

Bush administration officials say those concerns were addressed and resolved.

Nevertheless, both Republicans and Democrats seized on the Coast Guard assessment, which was released by Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, at a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing Monday, to launch a fresh round of criticism just as the furor over the ports deal appeared on the brink of subsiding.

"I am more convinced than ever that the process was truly flawed," said Collins, the Homeland Security Committee's chairwoman. "I can only conclude that there was a rush to judgment, that there wasn't the kind of painstaking, thorough analysis that needed to be done, despite serious questions being raised and despite the involvement of a wide variety of agencies."

<>