Go to Did I Say That?
- Add a comment
- Go to Bill Clinton helped Dubai on ports deal.......even after the news broke!
katray - I agree, Clinton isn't president. Also, he talked the UAE into..
... offering a 45 day review. What's wrong with that? That's all we've been asking for. Time to take a serious look at their offer, and revisit the idea of foreign ownership of holdings in our ports. I have been yelling for expanded security for our ports, but the vast majority of money has gone to aviation not ports. This hoopalah had served us well in bringing port security to the public's attention.
posted by
blogflogger
on March 3, 2006 at 11:25 AM
| link to this | reply
Another thought - Why criticize Bush and not Clinton over this issue?
Clinton isn't serving in public office and Bush is
president at this date in time and as such, the one charged with the responsibility for keeping the U.S. safe.
posted by
Katray2
on March 3, 2006 at 11:07 AM
| link to this | reply
Na, sorry, Corbin,
I'm holding you to the "pots" issue!
posted by
atigam
on March 2, 2006 at 3:45 PM
| link to this | reply
May he be blessed for all his efforts, as he has
and may we be wise as serpents and as harmless as doves.
Go to IS BILL CLINTON DOING IT AGAIN?
posted by
MountainClimber57
on March 2, 2006 at 1:58 PM
| link to this | reply
Duh....."Ports issue"
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on March 2, 2006 at 1:41 PM
| link to this | reply
katray
And I didn't address you in the subject line........of the comment I think you are referring to.......
I was asking those that have had all of the posts for the past couple of weeks about the pots issue, to chime in on Clinton's actions......if the UAE is the thrust of their attacks...which I don't believe is.........
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on March 2, 2006 at 1:41 PM
| link to this | reply
I am not hopping up and down all over Bush Corbin!!
in case you were referring to me. Yuck!! And yuck on hopping Clinton too! ;)
For what's it worth, I think more and more of those who have labeled themselves Democrat are beginning to realize we are a one party system - the Dems. and most of their leadership offer weak to zero improvement over the current mess of hypocrisy, deception and corruption. They are as embedded with the greed beast as the Republicans. Ditto Offbeat's comment basically.
We need to begin anew with the political structure, imo.
As far as UAE, I don't have a firm grasp on the entire situation, but I know from researching that there are documented connections to terrorism; enough doubts cast to at least slow down the "done deal" declarations and allow an extended, in-depth investigation. It appears much more complex than just a "couple of terrorists living there." Excerpts like this one should alert and awaken anyone, except the most party-faithful puppets (and no, I'm not applying that description to you, unless of course, it fits) who refuse to look at the whole picture.
After the attacks, U.S. Treasury Department officials complained about a lack of cooperation by the UAE and other Arab countries trying to track Osama bin Laden's bank accounts.
http://www1.wsvn.com/news/articles/national/BO14162/
posted by
Katray2
on March 2, 2006 at 12:55 PM
| link to this | reply
The embarassing difference is that
Clinton actually knew something about the deal and Bush, ever the ignorant buffoon, didn't until the whole world did, and then said, "uh, yeah, I support that (even though I haven't a clue what it's about)"
posted by
atigam
on March 2, 2006 at 12:16 PM
| link to this | reply
Let me be more specific about my question here.......
Shoudn't those hopping up and down on President Bush over this be making the same kind of comments about Clinton...what's the difference?
But what do we hear? Chirp....Chirp! The sound of the crickets...because it's not about the UAE.....it's just another way to attack GW......
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on March 2, 2006 at 11:46 AM
| link to this | reply
katray
So a couple of terrorists lived there? We have them in Toledo, Buffalo, and Seattle....should we embargo those cities?
Here's some info from Gen. Tommy Franks:
Former General Tommy Franks, who led the successful ouster of the Taliban from power in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq, has some thoughts on the port controversy swirling around the United Arab Emirates.
He told Fox News' Tony Snow this week that while the UAE may have had a spotty record on terrorism before 9/11, the Arab confederation has since become a valued ally. "I believe it's ludicrous and disingenuous for us to look at activities inside the United Arab Emirates and say that, just because one, two, or three hijackers, at some point in time, lived in the Emirates that we should hold that government responsible (for 9/11)," he said.
He went on to detail for the first time some of the cooperation he got from UAE leaders. "One of their officials personally handed me the grid coordinates and provided maps of Taliban-related sites," he said. "They set the foundation for what followed by giving us unprecedented access to their intelligence." Mr. Franks can't speak to complaints that the UAE continues to deny diplomatic recognition to Israel because "I'm not a diplomat, thank goodness" but insisted it would be counterproductive for the U.S. to scapegoat a country that became the first in the Middle East to allow inspection of containers bound for the U.S. at its ports.
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on March 2, 2006 at 11:43 AM
| link to this | reply
Thanks Offbeats!
posted by
Katray2
on March 2, 2006 at 8:52 AM
| link to this | reply
To clarify
It's not about "dastardly Arabs taking over," it's the hypocrisy of being told by this administration that any nation/government with connections to terrorism is an enemy of the U.S. and will be dealt with accordingly. There is growing evidence the UAE is "connected."
posted by
Katray2
on March 2, 2006 at 8:51 AM
| link to this | reply
Kat
Your right on that point..greed is a disease that goes beyond parties, color, creed, and all walks of life. Greed is a major down fall in all aspects of business and politics. Good point!
posted by
Offy
on March 2, 2006 at 8:21 AM
| link to this | reply
Most definitely Corbin
Greed is not a one party master or maybe it is...Not much of a difference really between Dems. and Republicans imo; money grubbing corruption rules supreme. The Clinton web sounds very similar to Bob & Elizabeth Dole's.
posted by
Katray2
on March 2, 2006 at 8:17 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin that is an intersting situation, I wonder if Billy Bob and
Hill the Thrill got into it over their different sides (if there really is a difference between) or was Hill putting on a Demo show?
As far as the port I still don't have enough info to say what is right or wrong, good or bad. A very conflicting situation.
posted by
scoop
on March 2, 2006 at 8:04 AM
| link to this | reply
CORBIN
This can't be a case of the "good guy, bad guy" game the two of them are known for...I am not surprised though. Why would they play it from both ends knowing it would fall back and slap them in the face? Well, all I can say is it's the "Clinton's" all things are possible with those two!
posted by
Offy
on March 2, 2006 at 6:03 AM
| link to this | reply