Responses (3)
|
Anonymous
(2/21):
I'm not going as far as to say this rocks, but I don't think this is as clear cut as you present it: "The process was done by the book," Bartlett said. "If you start deciding these issues in a guilt-by-association method, you will have a situation which has deep and harmful ramifications to the economic interests of this country."
(report)
|
|
ronc99
(2/22):
At the risk of sitting on the fence, the other side to this is the argument we send a good message to the Arab world that we trust them and want to work with them. That is a good arguement in the sence it would work in a normal society. Not sure if we can conclude the Arab world is concidered a "Normal" society. Maybe in the year 100 BC it was, not sure about 2006.
(report)
|
|
ronc99
(2/23):
Maybe we should have let Haliburton run it, then everyone would be running around saying Chaney's lining his pockets again. As for guilty by association, I guess the State of Ohio cannot be trusted, because there were three terrorists working from there. Is anyone getting my drift here? It does not matter what this administration does, it will always be wrong. Guess that comes from not always being right, huh? My experience has been if you never do anything, or make any decision, you will never be wrong. Kind of tough being in the presidents seat. How does anyone think Bush could know and approve every detail that happens during the running of a country. Not condoning this, I think he should have known, but I can see how it could happen.
(report)
|
|
|
Responses (5)
|
ronc99
(2/21):
In this day and age when everyone is told to buy American, this is what the government does. Regardless they are Arabs, or not, this is just another example of them selling us all out to the cheapest bidder. I understand they are supposed to be very good at this, but I am not sure they could not have found an American firm to handle this.
(report)
|
|
Anonymous
(2/21):
This is not a case of guilt by association-- here is a quote from an AP article that gives the background and justification for extreme caution:
"Critics have noted that some of the 9/11 hijackers used the UAE as an operational and financial base. In addition, they contend the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist." Are we really so naive as to think that the UAE government could have no terrorist ties and would maintain U.S. safety?
(report)
|
|
BeadingLady
(2/22):
It seems to me that I have heard this excuse before; does it sound familiar to you?
"375cf829674c@news.ap.org President Bush was unaware of the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates until the deal already had been approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday." He was unaware of it, but yet he said he will veto a Congressional vote to block it? Why would a president veto something he doesn't know anything about? If we asked Mr. Bush or Mr. Chaney about the situation with Oil, I am certain that they know all about that!
The more reading I do and the more I learn about the radical "Islamists," the more I fear for our country and for the European countries. Historically, the "Islamists" are very politcal, intolerant, and violent, and their one aim is to spread their form of Islam to every person in every country in the world by any means available as Mohammed instructed. The concepts of tolerance, democracy, or freedom of thought and speech have no meaning to them. The last thing in the world that they want is "democracy." Sadly, there seems to be no end to the costly mess (both in terms of lives and money) because of oil and greed -- Afghanistan, suddenly invasion of Iraq (WMD-where?), and now involvement with the whole Muslim World.
(report)
|
|
noadvertising
(2/23):
If the Arab world doesn't understand our hesitancy to welcome them open-armed, they've got another agenda. At what cost trust? I'm tired of the politically correct stances our government takes at the expense of national security. We don't all have bunkers to run to like they do. I agree wholeheartedly with BeadingLady's assessment of many Muslims. They will spare nothing to spread their fanaticism and barbaric teachings. I'm sorry for the good Muslims that they all must be suspect, but if I were in their shoes I'd understand. I'm a woman and I accept that some of the stereotypical labels applied to women have a basis in fact. A sensible person can accept that they happen to belong to a group whose reputation is based upon fact, and accept the unfortunate consequences of being a member of that group (e.g. profiling). I still say this is a sickening example of Bush's oil ties. He's all about his own wealth and protecting the same for his good 'ole boys network.
(report)
|
|
noadvertising
(2/24):
Guess what? Bush was elected to run the country, and he should know about this tiny little item!! Every administration is trashed by their contenders, not just this one. This president has led us into more quagmires than any other in recent history, the most obvious being our "search for WMD" in Iraq and subsequent oil war.
(report)
|
|
FOREIGN operated US ports???
