Here's how I frame the debate on port deal and make them cry

[louis c]

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) had direct links to al-Queda and bin-Laden. The 9/11 Commission told of a 1999 incident in which bin-Laden was in CIA sights and the attack was called off because he was with UAE Royal family members while hunting in Afghanistan. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is one of only three countries that recognized the Taliban as the legitimate government in Afghanistan while the Taliban shielded al-Queda as they planned the 9/11 attack. Two hijackers on 9/11 were UAE citizens, with one being the pilot who flew into one of the WTC towers. It should be noted that becoming a citizen in that country is nearly impossible if you are not born there of UAE parents. It's impossible for immigrants to become citizens there. 11 of the 19 hijackers' last stop before coming here was the UAE. Money for the 9/11 attack was laundered and funneled through the UAE. Afghanistan drug lords did and continue to launder heroin profits through the UAE. The UAE is committed to the destruction of our ally, Israel. Finally, it has been proved that Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan smuggled nuclear parts to North Korea, Iran and Libya through the Port of Dubai (UAE) which is under the watch, then and now, of Dubai Ports' World, the company owned by the UAE in the ports deal here.

(Here's the line that makes them cry)

I can make a better argument for attacking the United Arab Emirates than Bush can make for turning our ports over to them.

[Canuckistanian]

1. There are far more connections with the UAE than Iraq had

In fact, Iraq had Zero connections.

[EVDebs]

11. Oh, that's a GOOOOOOOOOOD one ! eom

[FreedomAngel82]

12. Exactly

And also bring up that after 9/11 Bush said that those countries who harbor terrorist's won't be tolerated. Gee, now Bush is doing business with them!

[Dawgs]

35. Even Better...

Challenge freepers to come up with more connections to Iraq than the OP's items in his/her list.

[hwmnbn]

2. Ooh, that's good .....

excellent list of facts with a good payoff. I'll have to remember this.

[louis c]

8. You see, Bushco has done all the work for us

He has made his base afraid of countries with any ties to terrorism. Cheney made ambiguous comments that made more than half of America believe that Iraq had connections to 9/11 by showing connections to Hammas and other Palestinian terrorists. He lumped all the Muslim nations together. Bush took low level contacts between some Iraqi security guy and an al-queda operative in a European airport as evidence enough for an Iraqi connection.

So, when these facts are recited one after another, those that fell for the Bush Shit are stunned. Their response is like the foreign robot in Star Trek that was overwhelmed with facts by Spock and repeated over and over again "does not compute" "does not compute" as it burned, sizzled and self destructed.

[magellan]

17. Also in "I, Mudd" when Kirk et al confuse the androids

They query their main server ("Norman, coordinate!") and after receiving no valid response, go offline.

It's amusing watching the freeps claw and grasp for some direction from BushCo. They're so lost without it, the poor dears. Of course, most of them were "Out of Order" to begin with.

[Canuckistanian]

24. I listened to Hannity today

He's definitely against the deal, but can't quite elaborate why. He keeps falling back on the "must..blame...Democrats" defence. But it's not exactly a war cry for him this time.

He even gave a little harangue about the 'despicable' tactic of accusing opponents of racism against arabs.

He said it was (gasp) "something Democrats would do".

[magellan]

26. SH of Faux News said this??

Okay, I demand to know what brave soul snuck into Faux's studio and reconnected Hannity to his brain. You deserve a medal.

[eleny]

3. K&R

Terrific!

[liberal N proud]

4. That is excellent, mind if I copy it to some extent?

[louis c]

5. By all means, I put it here so people can use it

If you can rattle it off to a Bushbot and they listen, the punch line hits them like a sucker punch to the face. You can almost see their knees buckle.

[annabanana]

6. magnificent!

It must be really fun to see their faces...(I will try it next chance I get)

[neoblues]

7. That is, question of outsourcing port management aside...

Regarding countries in which there is a significant threat of the state sponsoring or supporting terrorist activity, the President himself has made clear that the United States cannot stand idly by while other nations hide/support/give aid and comfort to or harbor terrorists. Such activities will be taken as a direct assault on the security of the United States and is grounds for preemptive military action. The UAE fits these definitions do they not?

Now then, do you think we should have them controlling the main access for cargo and material from foreign countries into the United States?

Consider that if terrorists wanted to move a truly large nuclear bomb or scores of tons of hx and rdx high explosives into the United States in order to pull off a truly large attack or vastly increase the number of smaller ones... the means by which they would have to resort in order to get such materials in the country is by means of our ports! They are the most important and most poorly guarded of all means of access to our nation. They should be either at the top or near the top on the list of priorities for our national security.

They have got to be kidding! It's absurd to even think of giving such access, power and capability to a foreign business--especially one from a country that is basically rife with the very terrorists that we're defending against! Such a company could easily be infiltrated by terrorists or successfully spied upon and they're outside the effective reach of our FBI and even the CIA or other intelligence services would be acting with a handicap there. Likewise, they cannot be compared to a "great British company" (much less NATO members). It's simply insane, and the only possible reason would have to be for personal profit of leading Republicans (ie. the Carlisle Group). That's not acceptable.

[EVDebs]

9. Mention Ptech and run them out of Congress in '06, now yer talkin

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2481878&mesg_id=2482256

[niallmac]

10. Thank you! I'm going to copy and paste to the inside of my eyelids. This

"Port Deal" is the perfect underliner for slow to catch on Freepers of Just how hypocritical our Iraq murder mission really is.

[Ready4Change]

13. Far more connects than Iran, sounds like.

Nice collection.

[lonestarnot]

14. Truth to crybabies!

K & R!

[peacetalksforall]

15. There is a pattern with these neo-cons:

They contrive to make enemies that they hand us on one level. But the enemy they hand us is their partner on a sub-strata level.

The pattern that subsequently evolves is that their partner becomes their enemy also, not just ours. Noriega. Hussein. Taliban. And many more.

Their new partners are the UAE and Kuwait. It will take longer for the UAE to become their enemy because Carlyle is involved in the UAE deal.

Those who have not become enemies yet are the Likud Party. the House of Saud, Musareff and India.

There are no constants with these people and there is no truth.

Notice the campaign they concocted against the French while they partnered with France in the coup against Haiti (Aristede and the installation of criminals to run the country until the last election). That was a real lighweight farce campaign that a few million people still passionately endorse.

This time they sealed a deal with their friends and tried to keep it a secret. This mistake equals the assumption that they would conquer Iraq in 25 days and have people loving us. In both instances, they've been left reeling from the consequences.

Could we come up with a new group of coalition partners if we had to?

[dweller]

20. another link in the chain/pattern

noticing today in the SMW thread, that due to pipeline bombing, the price of oil per barrel climbs.

now, who profits from the 'terrarists' activities?

yeh, who loves ya georgie?

dp

[RazzleDazzle]

16. GREAT line, just great

[0007]

18. Super!

[Gabi Hayes]

19. don't forget the Coast Guard evidence, and the fact that they LIED

about the need to do an automatic investigation, based on reservations like the above

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x531475

[Patsy Stone]

21. That was absolutely fabulous!

Well done. :thumbsup: K&R.

[ClayZ]

22. I love this line!

"I can make a better argument for attacking the United Arab Emirates than Bush can make for turning our ports over to them."




:applause:

[radwriter0555]

23. There are so many flaws, where do I start? Primarily, the 911 hijackers

are mostly alive... in particular, the fellas deemed to be from Saudi Arabia. At least 9 of those accused of being involved in 911 were 'mis-identified'... so we don't know where they came from.

A compilation of the news stories that covered this oft-overlooked story:

http://www.welfarestate.com/911/#15

Secondly, I believe OBL when he said he wasn't involved in 911. I firmly believe that the PNAC was the master engineer of this debacle. All roads lead to the white house.

Most importantly, bush and the GOP aren't worried one little bit about terrorism coming from Saudi Arabia. Not at all. Their job is to keep us scared while they get away with massive deals.

[louis c]

27. That conspiracy theory doesn't win elections

it marginalizes us. To recite it is what the other side wants. even if it's true, proving it is impossible.

[radwriter0555]

29. Conspiracy theory my ass. It's a FACT that most of the hijackers were NOT

correctly identified. It wasn't POSSIBLE to identify them within the 4 hours that it "took" to get their alleged names and faces all over the media.

And it HAS been proven, just do some reading.

And this has nothing to do with "winning elections". Democrats can't WIN elections as long as the GOP is counting the votes with Diebold machines. (Yes, I would suggest more READING on your part before you barf the conspiracy theory line)

Facts are facts. Repeating the hate radio bush regime lies (democrats can't win elections) does nothing. Standing your ground, accusing the bush regime and every single republican of crime and corruption DOES. Standing your ground and saying what is TRUE is what may turn the tide against this hideous, corrupt and criminal regime and the whores who support them. Given the unlikely potential that Americans are smart enough to do such a thing as "think" for themselves, the only alternative you have to sieze the White House is a bona fide revolution with NATO in the streets of DC.

I figure it could take another 6 years before you all get fed up enough of the slop you're swilling to actually do something en masse. The next election will be a far bigger fiasco than the last 2.

[louis c]

42. Ya, OK, whatever

That's any easy sell.

[petgoat]

25. You left out Le Figaro's report that a few weeks before 9/11

Osama met with CIA agent Larry Mitchell at the American Hospital in Dubai.



Osama also met with Prince Turki bin Faisal, who was then head of Saudi
Security and is now ambassador to the USA.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/searchResults.jsp?searchtext=mitchell&events=on&entities=on&articles=on&topics=on&timelines=on&projects=on&titles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on&search=+Go+

[oblivious]

47. Radio France International also reported that.

November 1, 2001
Radio reports new CIA-Bin Laden details
PARIS, Nov. 1 (UPI) -- Radio France International offered additional details Thursday of allegations that terrorist suspect Osama bin Laden met with a CIA officer in the United Arab Emirates in July.
http://prisonplanet.com/radio_reports_new_cia_bin_laden_details.html

Bin Laden Met With CIA Agent in July
Radio France International - Le Figaro

t r u t h o u t -- 10.31.01 | According to information's collected by Radio France International, and Le Figaro, Oussama Ben Laden met with an American CIA agent last July while he was being treated for a kidney ailment at the American Hospital of Dubai.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_01/11.01A.htm

[Seabiscuit]

28. Great, but how does one memorize all that, and worse, how does one

get a freeper to stay within earshot of you while you deliver that great speech? They're all cowards when confronted with facts, you know. They have a tendency to walk out of rooms where true facts are being aired.

[louis c]

33. I haven't had a problem in either case.

[stop the bleeding]

30. me likey, this is what I say as well but you were able to supply me with

a few more tidbits

thanx

:yourock:

[iconoclastNYC]

31. I like it.

Have reservations about the war mongering there at the end but I get your point and I guess it's probably in there because of your intended audience.

Too bad you didn't work a dig in about the Iraq war...seems like we had more justification for invading UAE than Iraq.

[Stephanie]

32. in a nutshell!

well done.

[Wordie]

34. Framing the debate...or spin?

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) had direct links to al-Queda and bin-Laden.

So did we.

The 9/11 Commission told of a 1999 incident in which bin-Laden was in CIA sights and the attack was called off because he was with UAE Royal family members while hunting in Afghanistan.

I am doing more research on this one... (see the next item)

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is one of only three countries that recognized the Taliban as the legitimate government in Afghanistan while the Taliban shielded al-Queda as they planned the 9/11 attack.

Zogby, on Hardball yesterday, claimed the UAE did so at the request of the United States, which, recognizing that it had little chance of getting our people into a Taliban-run Afganistan, wanted to use the UAE as a window into what was going on there. (I can't help but wonder if there might have been something similar going on with that hunting party everyone keeps bringing up.)

This article presents yet another view:

One Persian Gulf political analyst says the U-A-E did so because of a request from Pakistan, which was the main sponsor of the Taliban. The Emirates also wanted to see a stable Sunni Muslim government there, to balance the mostly-Shiite one in Iran.

The analyst in Dubai also says the recognition was aimed at putting an end to the civil war in Afghanistan. He says the Emirates had no idea "the regime would turn out the way it did."

The other two countries to recognize the Taliban were Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. But all three cut ties with the Taliban after the Afghan leaders gave shelter to Osama bin Laden following Nine-Eleven.

http://www.kold.com/Global/story.asp?S=4549602

Two hijackers on 9/11 were UAE citizens, with one being the pilot who flew into one of the WTC towers.

And this is significant because? Terry Nichols, after all, was a citizen of the US.

It should be noted that becoming a citizen in that country is nearly impossible if you are not born there of UAE parents. It's impossible for immigrants to become citizens there.

Again, significant why, in terms of this deal?

11 of the 19 hijackers' last stop before coming here was the UAE. Money for the 9/11 attack was laundered and funneled through the UAE.

The UAE is a transportation hub and banking center for that entire region. These guys also came through New York, and had bank accounts there. So what? Further, they've instituted tough new anti-terrorism and anti-money laundering laws.

Afghanistan drug lords did and continue to launder heroin profits through the UAE.

Link? I'm not certain that's true. And even if it were true, how does that differ from New York, another regional center, that also has drug money coming through it?

The UAE is committed to the destruction of our ally, Israel.

Wrong! It's true that the UAE has not recognized Israel. That is because Israel continues an illegal occupation of Palestinian land (and it's not just me saying that, it's the United Nations and Human Rights Watch). That's a very different thing. It's not an unreasonable position for the UAE to take.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=536929&mesg_id=538916

Finally, it has been proved that Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan smuggled nuclear parts to North Korea, Iran and Libya through the Port of Dubai (UAE) which is under the watch, then and now, of Dubai Ports' World, the company owned by the UAE in the ports deal here.

This has not been substantiated, has it? Further, Dubai and DPW has instituted further policies to cut down on the likelihood of these sorts of problems.

There certainly may be reasons for the US to do some serious overall upgrading of security policies and requirements, to apply to all port operators, rather than disallowing this deal.

This article, from the LA times, suggests it's the UAE's geographical location, rather than any complicity on the part of the UAE, that has created some of these problems.

A recent CIA assessment says that Dubai, like other emirates, "is a drug trans-shipment point for traffickers given its proximity to Asian drug-producing countries; the UAE's position as a major financial center makes it vulnerable to money laundering."

The agency noted that the country's anti-money-laundering controls were improving. Businesspeople and government officials say that financial regulators are quicker now to act against suspicious bank accounts or wire transfers. ID cards are required for many transactions, and the UAE has been cooperating with the United States on tracking terrorists' financial networks.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-dubai27feb27,1,5504187.story?coll=la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true

As I've been saying, there may be reasons to oppose this deal; let's discuss them, let's investigate them. Let's not let anyone rush us into decisions based on insufficient or inaccurate information. That's not "framing the debate," that's spin.

[Dawgs]

37. Disagree!!!

It's time to quit playing nice.

My Mom and I were discussing this earlier. I don't care if this is a good deal or not. If we can use it to get rid of Bush then so be it. It's time to start playing by their rules.

BTW, I don't think it's a good deal. Your answers seem more like spin and right-wing excuses than rebuttals.

[Wordie]

39. So sad...

It's time to start playing by their rules.

It's really painful to see DUers saying things like that. If the Dems truly morph into mothing more than a sad copy of the Republicans, then count me out. And I wouldn't be surprised if I'm not the only one, since the rational voices are all being shouted down on this one.

And you say that I'm offering RW points...aren't you aware that the far RW is where some of the OP's points originated?

[Oilwellian]

40. Osama, is that you?

Bush said it best regarding this issue, "this deal wouldn't have gone through if I was concerned about the security of the United States of America." A rare moment indeed that Bush actually spoke the truth.

Should a nuclear weapon sail into one of the 21 terminals that DPWorld will operate in this country, and this is a very certain possibility due the history of manifests being manipulated by DPWorld customers and/or employees, I promise to take you off of ignore long enough to ask if you still think it's a good idea to hand our port terminals over to Osama's pals.

[Wordie]

41. Truthy, not facty...seems to be today's approach.

You are stating things you clearly know nothing about. Are you a ports expert? A national security expert? Where are you getting the information that forms these opinions? Provide links to the things you claim, please. (And I don't mean some goofy person's blog, or some site with an agenda.)

It's me swimming against the tide here, not you. It would be far easier to go along with the crowd. I think GWB is the worst president in our history, yet, because I dare to question all the misinformation and endless spin about this deal, I'm accused of presenting "Bush's talking points" and my liberal credentials are questioned.

It's wrong to think independently now? :shrug:

Take a hint from your namesake:

In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. --George Orwell

Don't fall for, or repeat, the spin.

[louis c]

43. This deal sucks

and if we delay and lose this opportunity, we will forever be the minority party in America.


KISS. Keep it simple stupid. We don't win elections by convincing each other. We have to convince those who pay little if any attention. I'm not saying that's right, I'm just saying that's the way it is.

[Wordie]

44. Voters consistently reject smarmy I'll- say- anything- to- get- elected

candidates. Some even forgo voting out of disgust when the only choice is between two of them.

Yet you suggest this as a winning strategy??? :rofl:

There are plenty of ways to exploit the opportunity without becoming liars like the Bush people. And what happens when people realize they were lied to? That's what's happening to Bush right now! Why should we put ourselves in that position? There are SO MANY reasons to go after Bush, and people are fed up with him. We don't have to lie or misrepresent anything to get their votes. The truth will more than do the job!

[AntiFascist]

45. One of the hottest issues that no one is talking about may be that...

UAE control of the ports may make drug trafficking and money-laundering to and from the U.S. all that much easier. Perhaps Bush is being forced to push this deal through because he's been made an offer he can't refuse?

[Wordie]

46. Aliens from Mars are planning a takeover of earth and

an unidentified CIA operative says they will definitely travel through the UAE, so the ports deal should be nixed!

:do- we- have- a- smiley- for- tongue- in- cheek?: ;)

[buddysmellgood]

36. That is an excellent line

[Dawgs]

38. How about all of the financial ties to Snow and the Carlyle Group?

Does anyone have a detailed list showing these links?