When does the ransacking begin?

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

So anyway, what is Congress doing about COSCO?

 

DPW has not been tied to any terrorist dealings I'm aware of, their COO is an American, etc. etc.

 

COSCO runs a good operation, but have also been caught in cahoots more than once. I listed one time as an example. There's more.

 

I think their contracts should be arbitrally cancelled as soon as the Iraq-Katrina funding bill gets signed. Might take Congressional action to do that. But, we can't have no chinks running our ports. It's not safe after last week.

623799[/snapback]

 

No, chinks are fine. They're not tied to any real terrorist activity by race. That is...they're not sand !@#$s.

[GG]

Is anyone else weirded out by the liberal-labelled posters arguing against the existence of racism here, while the conservative-typecast posters are arguing for its presence? 

 

!@#$ing weird, man... 

623746[/snapback]

 

Racism doesn't apply to Arabs.

 

As to the other points, I still put a lot of blame on Schumer because he was the first one to pick up on Lou Dobbs' rantings and picked the right moment to start screaming 9/11 - Arabs. Interesting how Bush gets plastered every time he mentions 9/11.

 

Republicans reacted only because they started getting hysterical calls from their constituents about Arabs invading US ports. Never mind that nothing would change about port security. (As prime example, three weeks after the security issue was dissected over and over on this board, our own master of crypto posts, EII still harped on cargo security being handed to the Arabs)

 

The troublesome part about this fiasco influencing opinions on the Arab street is the ultimate target. We've seen lists of Bush transgressions on Arabs - from Gitmo to Abu Graib. Yeah those images will rile the populace, but they probably didn't do much to people who have the power to shape the opinion of the Arab street. The DPW deal, however, smacks the Arab power brokers right in the face. And that, is not a good thing.

[Ghost of BiB]

Racism doesn't apply to Arabs.

 

As to the other points, I still put a lot of blame on Schumer because he was the first one to pick up on Lou Dobbs' rantings and picked the right moment to start screaming 9/11 - Arabs.  Interesting how Bush gets plastered every time he mentions 9/11.

 

Republicans reacted only because they started getting hysterical calls from their constituents about Arabs invading US ports.  Never mind that nothing would change about port security.  (As prime example, three weeks after the security issue was dissected over and over on this board, our own master of crypto posts, EII still harped on cargo security being handed to the Arabs)

 

The troublesome part about this fiasco influencing opinions on the Arab street is the ultimate target.  We've seen lists of Bush transgressions on Arabs - from Gitmo to Abu Graib.  Yeah those images will rile the populace, but they probably didn't do much to people who have the power to shape the opinion of the Arab street.  The DPW deal, however, smacks the Arab power brokers right in the face.  And that, is not a good thing.

623815[/snapback]

 

Thank you, GG.

[KRC]

So anyway, what is Congress doing about COSCO?

 

DPW has not been tied to any terrorist dealings I'm aware of, their COO is an American, etc. etc.

 

COSCO runs a good operation, but have also been caught in cahoots more than once. I listed one time as an example. There's more.

 

I think their contracts should be arbitrally cancelled as soon as the Iraq-Katrina funding bill gets signed. Might take Congressional action to do that. But, we can't have no chinks running our ports. It's not safe after last week.

623799[/snapback]

 

We’re not done bashing Arabs yet. Give it a little more time before we start to alienate ourselves from the Asians. One ethnicity at a time, please.

[SilverNRed]

We’re not done bashing Arabs yet. Give it a little more time before we start to alienate ourselves from the Asians. One ethnicity at a time, please.

623819[/snapback]

A billion people here, a billion people there....

[cromagnum]

Democrats are racist, and have weakened americas security, because a state owned company D.P.W. UAE has been known to support terrorist and fund madras, was denied access, to run ports in america. Not to sound like a jerk, the iraq war from the begining sounded bad. Denying DPW sounds passively agressive,better to err this way then the other.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

I am getting tired of this. Point out exact quotes by Bush where he said or implied that ALL Arabs are terrorists and cannot be trusted. From the beginning, I remember him being pretty clear that it is the extremists that he has a problem with regarding terrorism, not all Arabs. I could be wrong and I am asking you to prove me wrong.

623769[/snapback]

You are right, Bush has been very careful the make the distinction between Arabs and terrorists, however, as I stated earlier, that is all he has said and he or his Admin, didn't make the case for the UAE ahead of time, given some of thier history.

 

The rest of Republian Party has hammered Dems on this issue and the distinction has become mute because of this. Turn about is only fair politics. Actually, very good politics and both sides are playing it with lots of hypocracy thrown in.

 

But as Monkey reiterated, Bush in lunchin lately and lost his best sales folk, so the rest of the crowd couldn't sell a space heater to an Eskimo in the dead of winter.

 

On the merits, I happen to agree with you and BiB, the anti-arguement is weak. Still not thrilled with the idea of foreign companies controlling our ports, but from an trade negotiating standpoint, not security.

 

I think our trade reps have given away the kitchen sink, going back to Bush 1 and including Clinton, and even that would not bad if we got something more in return. The trade deficit and debt proves my point.

 

Furthermore, we continue to trade with lots of folks that we think are morally suspect including China, so what is the big deal as far as ownership goes, other than an economic one and that has not been argued.

 

But isolationists, including Dobbs, Buchanan and Buckley have joined rural populist Reps and Dems that don't trust anyone that doesn't talk or look like white trash america and watch Jessica Simpson shake her @#$s, the rest see a political opportunity.

 

Notice that folks like Biden and Liberman are keeping their heads down on this one. Can't wait to see the vote in the Senate.

[Johnny Coli]

I am getting tired of this. Point out exact quotes by Bush where he said or implied that ALL Arabs are terrorists and cannot be trusted. From the beginning, I remember him being pretty clear that it is the extremists that he has a problem with regarding terrorism, not all Arabs. I could be wrong and I am asking you to prove me wrong.

623769[/snapback]

Words versus deeds, Mr. Candidate. Of course he didn't say "All arabs are terrorists." But, you can't tell me that the anti-terrorism policies of this administration, and their fast-and-loose interpretation of civil liberties doesn't have an impact on the perception of the populace at large when the people predominantly singled out by those policies are arabs. You can't say "Muslims are our friends!", then round them up by the hundreds on questionable INS violations, detain them for no reason then say "sorry, won't happen again, they're really our good buddies, please don't burn down their convenient store."

 

Here's the report on law enforcement practices in NY after 9-11, via the US Commision on Civil Rights. March 2004 report

From the executive summary:

There are parallels between the racial profiling of Japanese Americans during World War II, pre-9/11 profiling of African Americans and Hispanic Americans, and post-9/11 profiling of Muslims, Arabs, and South Asians.

[...]

Beyond law enforcement acts of racial profiling related to drug prevention and street crime, racial profiling has taken on new dimensions targeting Muslims, Arabs, and South Asians regarding business license violations, financial transactions abroad, and international travel at airports.

[...]

The federal Call-In Special Registration program requiring male nationals 16 years and older from predominantly Muslim countries to register is seen by some as a form of racial profiling, targeting Muslims, Arabs, and South Asians.

[...]

In sum, the law enforcement policies and practices described above pose a threat to civil rights and civil liberties, especially within New York’s Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities.

 

Here's more from the main body of the report:

For male nonimmigrants 16 years of age and older already in the United States, federal authorities established the Call-In Special Registration program. Call-In Special Registration required that male nonimmigrants from a list of targeted countries report to the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS) of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) [formerly the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)] to be fingerprinted and photographed, and to answer detailed questions under oath.[15]

 

BCIS designated Call-In Groups of nonimmigrants to register. Group 1 included nationals from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, and Syria; Group 2 included nationals from Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Eritrea, Lebanon, Morocco, North Korea, Oman, Qatar, Somalia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen; Group 3 included nationals from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia; and Group 4 included nationals from Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, and Kuwait. Special registration was completed with Group 4. Only foreign nationals of predominantly Islamic countries—with the exception of North Korea—were required to register in the Call-In Special Registration program.[16] Because it targets primarily Muslims, many feel special registration is discriminatory, an act of racial or religious profiling.[17]

 

 

Whether stated or not, there was a single group that was predominantly viewed as suspect post-9-11. That group was/is people of arabic descent. It's pretty powerfull to see a group of men taken away. The less tolerant members of society tend to think "guilty" when seeing someone led away by the FBI.

 

 

For clarification, my history on this board should be pretty rock-solid with respect to racism and xenophobia. I am not condoning what congress did, for whatever their reasons were for doing it. The Monkey is free to think it is completely due to racism. That's his view. I'm merely pointing out that, if that is your view, and there is in fact a strong undercurrent of xenophobia in the US with respect to arabs, a lot of that sentiment can be attributed to how the Bush administration reacted in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks. Clearly, I do not think it is right, and I am not...repeat not...defending it. I also think that how the administration handled this deal should be held up to some scrutiny as well.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Two Washington Post articles, the first echoing everything that Ken and Monkey have posted, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6030902291.html

 

the second echoing BiB's understanding of the political consequences by David Broder

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6030902290.html

 

The Post Even!

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

The Monkey is free to think it is completely due to racism.  That's his view.

623992[/snapback]

 

And you - in particular - are entitled to disagree with me. It's called "having a discussion", and I'm happy you and I can disagree intelligently and respectfully. Even if you are wrong.

 

But it's not about right or wrong, really. It's about not trying to argue your point by throwing bull sh-- clown and beach ball analogies in my face.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Jesus Christ. DPW has already announced they're going to divest themselves of the US maintenance contracts. So what does the House do? Vote anyway, to guarantee they do.

 

Because apparently the sand !@#$s are also liars, as well.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Jesus Christ.  DPW has already announced they're going to divest themselves of the US maintenance contracts.  So what does the House do?  Vote anyway, to guarantee they do.

 

Because apparently the sand !@#$s are also liars, as well. 

624045[/snapback]

CYA, here is apt editorial explaining why, chicken *****, but it makes sense politically, they need proof that they acted for their campaign talking points:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6030902293.html

[GG]

CYA, here is apt editorial explaining why, chicken *****, but it makes sense politically, they need proof that they acted for their campaign talking points:

 

624052[/snapback]

 

Is thi something from Jay Rockefeller's playbook, in knowing all about the AQ spying program, but waiting for the opportune time to start screaming about it?

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Is thi something from Jay Rockefeller's playbook, in knowing all about the AQ spying program, but waiting for the opportune time to start screaming about it?

624099[/snapback]

Didn't know Jay was a screamer, but it is not about waiting for an opportune time to start screaming, but more if the wind blows too stiffly, or it rains too hard, or if my raw meat has too much salmonella because I don't cook it enough, or if a hurricane hits NO then I am going to scream, and I know how because I practice on my staff all the time.