IMPEACH GEORGE BUSH!! The Bulldog Manifesto When Bush Bashing Goes Too Far - The Bulldog Manifesto

« Home | Life Changes » | And Now a Song.... » | Beyond Funny! » | Impeachment Resolution » | The Perazzi Shotgun » | Sibel Edmonds Responds to Porter Goss » | The Battle For America » | Letter to State Legislators » | A Living Saint Passes Away » | Reap it, Bitches! » 

Friday, February 24, 2006

When Bush Bashing Goes Too Far

OK, I'm certainly not scared of bashing Bush. Heck, the man has provided us with countless opportunities to beat him like a piñata. But this whole Dubai controversy has me somewhat perplexed. I want to bash him for it, but I cannot. Why? Well, for two reasons.

First, I do not believe that Dubai is a terrorist state. Second, the whole Dubai controversy seems to have brought out a whole slew of Arab bashing and racial profiling. The crux of most arguments revolves around the fact that Dubai is an Arab state and therefore cannot be trusted. This line of thinking removes rational thought from the equation. Simply put, we are supposed to believe that "arab" equates to "dangerous". I'm not playing along. Sorry.

As much as I'd love to join in the feeding frenzy, I cannot in good conscience do it.

The Bush administration had more to do with 9/11 than Dubai ever did.

Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com nails it.

E-mail this post



Remember me (?)



All personal information that you provide here will be governed by the Privacy Policy of Blogger.com. More...

I cite Lou Dobbs:

President Bush has put forth a challenge tonight that I simply can't ignore. The president yesterday said he wanted those who are critical and questioning of this port deal to "step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company."

Well, first of all, Mr. President, to equate any country to your principal partner in the coalition ignores that special relationship this country's enjoyed with the United Kingdom for decades and decades. This also is not just a British company and an Arab company, as I think you well know.

Peninsula and Oriental Steam Navigation is a British privately owned company. Dubai Ports World is a UAE government controlled and owned company. You see the difference, of course.

And furthermore, the money used to fund the 9/11 attacks, most of it, in fact, was sent to the hijackers through the UAE banking system. In fact, two of the hijackers were originally from the UAE.

The UAE stonewalled U.S. efforts to track al Qaeda bank accounts after 9/11. In addition, the Emirates does not recognize Israel as a sovereign state. And the UAE was a transfer point for shipments of nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya.

And if those aren't good enough reasons, I would just suggest I'm at a complete loss to offer what might be considered good reasons.

And I add the Bush Family connection:

The oil-rich United Arab Emirates is a major investor in The Carlyle Group, the private equity investment firm where President Bush's father once served as senior adviser and is a who's who of former high-level government officials. Just last year, Dubai International Capital, a government-backed buyout firm, invested in an $8 billion Carlyle fund.

Another family connection, the president's brother, Neil Bush, has reportedly received funding for his educational software company from the UAE investors.

And finally this:

Bush wants to privatize governmental functions. Reasonable enough in some cases, I suppose. In this case, he's not privatizing it to an American corporation, but to a foreign government. It's ideologically inconsistant.

Do you not concede, however, that in reality, when you reduce almost every argument against the Dubai controversy down to it's core, there is an obvious anti-arab mindset?

Bush can't have it both ways.

He can't complain when the simplistic Arab=terrorist schtick comes back to bite him in the butt. He (or Rove or some PR firm) started that meme.

I loathed Bush before it was cool (1999). When the first idea of war came up I was all for a humanitarian war - a war to free people who wanted to be free. All my co-workers (pro-war Repub) were like "well, if you get what you want from this war, even if that's not why we go in, then why dont you support the war?"
And my answer was "Lie down with dogs..." (no offense to the flea-less Bulldog).
Going along with an enemy to get something you want is a dangerous game.
At this point, after all the sickening things BushCo. has done and authorized, I have lost all stomach for ethics.
If racism is what brings down BushCo., so be it - Ill raise a glass to irony as I celebrate the end of King George's Reign of Terror.

For me, it isn't so much Dubai as it is the fact that they are offshoring port security. Did Bush start the practice? Evidently not. Does that make it acceptable -- definitely not. It has to stop and this is as good a time as any.

It *is* ironic to see an Administration that built its power on fear- mongering, xenophobia, racism, and bigotry receive the backlash when it reverses 180 degrees from its previous messsage, counting on the Orwellian Doublespeak to see them through yet again, though.

To me, one of the problems is the financial support the UAE provided for the 9/11 terrorists. I see no transparency at all on that end between them and al Qaeda. I also believe, as was pointed out on "Real Time With Bill Maher" last night, that it would be easier for al Qaeda to work on a contact with DP World to get information on one of the ports in question to send in a container with nukes instead of the documented cargo (Philadelphia is in my area code).

This whole thing smacks of a "quid pro quo" to me...we give DP World the contract, the UAE continues to let us use their air base right across from Iran for some convenient saber-rattling by Dubya (and I definitely believe that he has AT LEAST as much to do with 9/11 as the Saudis).

I honestly don't believe that racial concerns are at the forefront here. I definitely side with the 9/11 commission on their concern about possible links between al Qaeda and the UAE.

(and good luck with the move and the other stuff going on, by the way...)

(Also, check Keith Olbermann's name in the blogroll when you get a minute.)

I don't think the reason for Bush's intruduction of this UAE agency is so much about connections to the Carlyle Group as it is about the fact that the UAE is now allowing the U.S. to house troops within their nation as a mimd-point in the Middle East. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's the bigger business deal here.

i find no reason to bash him here as well. following the twin tower's disaster, friend engaged to foreign women ended up calling gheir wedding's off. why? harassment at ports causesd stress. now, how can i assume that a dubai company (i have friends in dubai as well) is against us? i cannot. i cannot lump this business venture into the "be afraid for your lives" vein of terrorism. we are headed toward a one big world government, after all. what better way to love on our muslim friends than by allowing them to capitalize with us more than they currently are allowed.

You should check out the recent article on think progress

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/01/aq-infiltrated-uae/

Turns out Al Qaeda has already infiltrated the U.A.E.
And Bush don't know a thing about it? How incompetent can one be? Further, Bush is adament on pushing this deal through.

Sorry, but when the American People get wind that Al Qaeda has infiltrated the government of the U.A.E., they will not accept this deal.

It's bad enough that Al Qaeda laundered money through the UAE, that members of the royal family met with Bin Laden, and that the UAE facilitated the sale of nuclear paraphenalia to Libya and North Korea.

If we let the UAE take over the leases for managing 21 of our ports, we will get what we deserve. It will likely involve a mushroom cloud.

Bulldog:

This is a plant. There actually is nothing substantively wrong with the UAE/Dubai deal, which is good, seeing as it's probably going to happen. It is actually intended to merge the xenophobic/homophobic/racist/neanderthal/religious right base with EVERYONE else, and suddenly, as if by magic, Republican members of Congress must stand up for the views of "real Emricans" who are "concerned with national security"...

In other words, this is a ploy so REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS WILL LOOK TOUGH. In short-- a gambit-- sacrifice Bush to save Bush (or more accurately, save Bush from a Democratic Majority Congress that will be obliged to impeach him.)

Brilliant, when you think about it. Support for the ports deal is an absurd 17%. Yes, there are "security concerns". But they're actually not that serious.

The intent is to STIR UP ARAB BASHING, and then allow Republicans in Congress to save us from the Arabs (more accurately, to have a "thorough review" after which the deal will be done anyway).

Win, win, win. Karl won't have it any other way. Because he knows that the only way he loses is if the Democrats take back the House. In which case, he can look forward to more time on the federal payroll-- though about 90 cents an hour doing the laundry at Allenwood.

If Dubai Ports World is a dangerous proposition merely because the funding for the 9/11 bombings was routed through the banks in the UAE, then I wonder as to whether the same reasoning will be applied to henceforth desist any business with any Swiss company given that the Swiss banks assisted Hitler's armies in their nefarious activities and stored their goods during the Holocaust. If not, then the worthy politicians in the US stand guilty of the most deplorable of hypocrisies.
Dubai is one of the most moderate and most advanced of the Arab states, and such demonising of its institutions, which have created a name for themselves as regards to quality, will strengthen those whom the worthy politicians wish to weaken.

Vivek Reddy, they didn't just merely have 9/11 fundings going through their banking system in the UAE, they have been infiltrated by Al Qaeda as well.

According to King Bush, anyone who aids, harbors, comforts, or supports Al Qaeda and terror is our enemy.

If the Swiss are engaging in banking for Al Qaeda then we should indeed not be doing business with them.

Any country that is helping Al Qaeda directly or indirectly and does not make an effort to stop their activities, we should not be doing business with them.

None of our ports should be leased, owned, or operated by foreign countries. Not China, not Brittain, not Canada, Not Australia, and not the UAE or Saudi Arabia.

It's not about Xenophobia as the right contends. If anyone is Xenophobic in this country, it's Republicans. They are the ones that started this whole "War on Terror" and "Axis of Evil" to begin with.

On any given day you can go to right wing sites and read about Republicans wishing to "kill all them damn towel heads and camel jockeys". Republicans lead the anti-Arab charge after 9/11.

I mean really, in a post-9/11 world, should any foreign country be operating our ports? The answer is no.

if our own ports were for sale, why didnt we buy them back?
it just seems too easy a solution to have been overlooked.

also,
without the 45 day review this was illegal. i dont want the review now, or an explanation, i want to see the word illegal associated with this deal more than arab.

i agree with "the talking dog", this was a plan to have the country kick back into "hate the arabs" mode.

The Dubai ports deal is one thing to Bush, m o n e y. Everything Bush has done since he took office is about the pursuit of money and power.

The secret energy policy meetings with Cheney, gave rise to Enron stealing billions from states like California, bankrupting pension plans, and costing thousands their jobs.

The invasion of Iraq, has made private corporations, like Halliburton and Blackwater, billions, while killing some 100,000 civilians, and over 2,000 of our troops.

Hurricane Katrina, has made private corporations, with ties to the White House, millions, while thousands died, and more than 80% of the New Orleans population remains displaced.

Now the FTC is on the brink of allowing two former original Bell companies to recombine, ATT and Bell South, an unnecessary move that will cost thousands their jobs over three years, and reduce competition.

Everything the Bush administration does is for money, and blocking the Dubai ports deal wouldn't stop the hemorrhaging of our treasury, but it would put a wrinkle in the Bush crime family’s portfolio. And anything that snubs the nose of the power drunk bastards that have been killing and stealing us blind over the last five years is ok by me.

Sure the ports aren't the only part of America that's been sold off to foreign interests, but when will it end? With China holding most of our debt, do we really want "free trade" to end up selling the rug out from under our feet?

If we weren’t spending so much on defense, we spend more on defense than almost the rest of the world combined, we could buy the port operations and hand them over to U.S. Customs to run; heck even appropriate defense dollars to do it.

Maybe our government should spend less on turning sharks into spys, and spend more on buying our country back. You know like a stock buy back...

Um, okay, so people are still rabbitting on about the UAE's supposed links to Al-Qaeda... Well, I don't really think that would be a concern to the neocons and Bush anyway because Dubya's granddaddy Prescott, Henry Ford, General Motors, etc funded hitler during WW2, and these people/companies were never held accountable either....

The swastika of the US is the dollar...

t.

New blog launched to expose the disreputable and dishonest American Bulldog breeders and kennels.

If you have a "horror story" when dealing with an American Bull Dog breeder or kennel PLEASE share it with us at http://americanbulldogblog.blogspot.com/

By doing so you will be providing valuable information to potential puppy buyers and help them avoid similar situation.

I cite Lou Dobbs:

President Bush has put forth a challenge tonight that I simply can't ignore. The president yesterday said he wanted those who are critical and questioning of this port deal to "step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company."

Well, first of all, Mr. President, to equate any country to your principal partner in the coalition ignores that special relationship this country's enjoyed with the United Kingdom for decades and decades. This also is not just a British company and an Arab company, as I think you well know.

Peninsula and Oriental Steam Navigation is a British privately owned company. Dubai Ports World is a UAE government controlled and owned company. You see the difference, of course.

And furthermore, the money used to fund the 9/11 attacks, most of it, in fact, was sent to the hijackers through the UAE banking system. In fact, two of the hijackers were originally from the UAE.

The UAE stonewalled U.S. efforts to track al Qaeda bank accounts after 9/11. In addition, the Emirates does not recognize Israel as a sovereign state. And the UAE was a transfer point for shipments of nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya.

And if those aren't good enough reasons, I would just suggest I'm at a complete loss to offer what might be considered good reasons.

And I add the Bush Family connection:

The oil-rich United Arab Emirates is a major investor in The Carlyle Group, the private equity investment firm where President Bush's father once served as senior adviser and is a who's who of former high-level government officials. Just last year, Dubai International Capital, a government-backed buyout firm, invested in an $8 billion Carlyle fund.

Another family connection, the president's brother, Neil Bush, has reportedly received funding for his educational software company from the UAE investors.

And finally this:

Bush wants to privatize governmental functions. Reasonable enough in some cases, I suppose. In this case, he's not privatizing it to an American corporation, but to a foreign government. It's ideologically inconsistant.

Do you not concede, however, that in reality, when you reduce almost every argument against the Dubai controversy down to it's core, there is an obvious anti-arab mindset?

Bush can't have it both ways.

He can't complain when the simplistic Arab=terrorist schtick comes back to bite him in the butt. He (or Rove or some PR firm) started that meme.

I loathed Bush before it was cool (1999). When the first idea of war came up I was all for a humanitarian war - a war to free people who wanted to be free. All my co-workers (pro-war Repub) were like "well, if you get what you want from this war, even if that's not why we go in, then why dont you support the war?"
And my answer was "Lie down with dogs..." (no offense to the flea-less Bulldog).
Going along with an enemy to get something you want is a dangerous game.
At this point, after all the sickening things BushCo. has done and authorized, I have lost all stomach for ethics.
If racism is what brings down BushCo., so be it - Ill raise a glass to irony as I celebrate the end of King George's Reign of Terror.

For me, it isn't so much Dubai as it is the fact that they are offshoring port security. Did Bush start the practice? Evidently not. Does that make it acceptable -- definitely not. It has to stop and this is as good a time as any.

It *is* ironic to see an Administration that built its power on fear- mongering, xenophobia, racism, and bigotry receive the backlash when it reverses 180 degrees from its previous messsage, counting on the Orwellian Doublespeak to see them through yet again, though.

To me, one of the problems is the financial support the UAE provided for the 9/11 terrorists. I see no transparency at all on that end between them and al Qaeda. I also believe, as was pointed out on "Real Time With Bill Maher" last night, that it would be easier for al Qaeda to work on a contact with DP World to get information on one of the ports in question to send in a container with nukes instead of the documented cargo (Philadelphia is in my area code).

This whole thing smacks of a "quid pro quo" to me...we give DP World the contract, the UAE continues to let us use their air base right across from Iran for some convenient saber-rattling by Dubya (and I definitely believe that he has AT LEAST as much to do with 9/11 as the Saudis).

I honestly don't believe that racial concerns are at the forefront here. I definitely side with the 9/11 commission on their concern about possible links between al Qaeda and the UAE.

(and good luck with the move and the other stuff going on, by the way...)

(Also, check Keith Olbermann's name in the blogroll when you get a minute.)

I don't think the reason for Bush's intruduction of this UAE agency is so much about connections to the Carlyle Group as it is about the fact that the UAE is now allowing the U.S. to house troops within their nation as a mimd-point in the Middle East. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's the bigger business deal here.

i find no reason to bash him here as well. following the twin tower's disaster, friend engaged to foreign women ended up calling gheir wedding's off. why? harassment at ports causesd stress. now, how can i assume that a dubai company (i have friends in dubai as well) is against us? i cannot. i cannot lump this business venture into the "be afraid for your lives" vein of terrorism. we are headed toward a one big world government, after all. what better way to love on our muslim friends than by allowing them to capitalize with us more than they currently are allowed.

You should check out the recent article on think progress

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/01/aq-infiltrated-uae/

Turns out Al Qaeda has already infiltrated the U.A.E.
And Bush don't know a thing about it? How incompetent can one be? Further, Bush is adament on pushing this deal through.

Sorry, but when the American People get wind that Al Qaeda has infiltrated the government of the U.A.E., they will not accept this deal.

It's bad enough that Al Qaeda laundered money through the UAE, that members of the royal family met with Bin Laden, and that the UAE facilitated the sale of nuclear paraphenalia to Libya and North Korea.

If we let the UAE take over the leases for managing 21 of our ports, we will get what we deserve. It will likely involve a mushroom cloud.

Bulldog:

This is a plant. There actually is nothing substantively wrong with the UAE/Dubai deal, which is good, seeing as it's probably going to happen. It is actually intended to merge the xenophobic/homophobic/racist/neanderthal/religious right base with EVERYONE else, and suddenly, as if by magic, Republican members of Congress must stand up for the views of "real Emricans" who are "concerned with national security"...

In other words, this is a ploy so REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS WILL LOOK TOUGH. In short-- a gambit-- sacrifice Bush to save Bush (or more accurately, save Bush from a Democratic Majority Congress that will be obliged to impeach him.)

Brilliant, when you think about it. Support for the ports deal is an absurd 17%. Yes, there are "security concerns". But they're actually not that serious.

The intent is to STIR UP ARAB BASHING, and then allow Republicans in Congress to save us from the Arabs (more accurately, to have a "thorough review" after which the deal will be done anyway).

Win, win, win. Karl won't have it any other way. Because he knows that the only way he loses is if the Democrats take back the House. In which case, he can look forward to more time on the federal payroll-- though about 90 cents an hour doing the laundry at Allenwood.

If Dubai Ports World is a dangerous proposition merely because the funding for the 9/11 bombings was routed through the banks in the UAE, then I wonder as to whether the same reasoning will be applied to henceforth desist any business with any Swiss company given that the Swiss banks assisted Hitler's armies in their nefarious activities and stored their goods during the Holocaust. If not, then the worthy politicians in the US stand guilty of the most deplorable of hypocrisies.
Dubai is one of the most moderate and most advanced of the Arab states, and such demonising of its institutions, which have created a name for themselves as regards to quality, will strengthen those whom the worthy politicians wish to weaken.

Vivek Reddy, they didn't just merely have 9/11 fundings going through their banking system in the UAE, they have been infiltrated by Al Qaeda as well.

According to King Bush, anyone who aids, harbors, comforts, or supports Al Qaeda and terror is our enemy.

If the Swiss are engaging in banking for Al Qaeda then we should indeed not be doing business with them.

Any country that is helping Al Qaeda directly or indirectly and does not make an effort to stop their activities, we should not be doing business with them.

None of our ports should be leased, owned, or operated by foreign countries. Not China, not Brittain, not Canada, Not Australia, and not the UAE or Saudi Arabia.

It's not about Xenophobia as the right contends. If anyone is Xenophobic in this country, it's Republicans. They are the ones that started this whole "War on Terror" and "Axis of Evil" to begin with.

On any given day you can go to right wing sites and read about Republicans wishing to "kill all them damn towel heads and camel jockeys". Republicans lead the anti-Arab charge after 9/11.

I mean really, in a post-9/11 world, should any foreign country be operating our ports? The answer is no.

if our own ports were for sale, why didnt we buy them back?
it just seems too easy a solution to have been overlooked.

also,
without the 45 day review this was illegal. i dont want the review now, or an explanation, i want to see the word illegal associated with this deal more than arab.

i agree with "the talking dog", this was a plan to have the country kick back into "hate the arabs" mode.

The Dubai ports deal is one thing to Bush, m o n e y. Everything Bush has done since he took office is about the pursuit of money and power.

The secret energy policy meetings with Cheney, gave rise to Enron stealing billions from states like California, bankrupting pension plans, and costing thousands their jobs.

The invasion of Iraq, has made private corporations, like Halliburton and Blackwater, billions, while killing some 100,000 civilians, and over 2,000 of our troops.

Hurricane Katrina, has made private corporations, with ties to the White House, millions, while thousands died, and more than 80% of the New Orleans population remains displaced.

Now the FTC is on the brink of allowing two former original Bell companies to recombine, ATT and Bell South, an unnecessary move that will cost thousands their jobs over three years, and reduce competition.

Everything the Bush administration does is for money, and blocking the Dubai ports deal wouldn't stop the hemorrhaging of our treasury, but it would put a wrinkle in the Bush crime family’s portfolio. And anything that snubs the nose of the power drunk bastards that have been killing and stealing us blind over the last five years is ok by me.

Sure the ports aren't the only part of America that's been sold off to foreign interests, but when will it end? With China holding most of our debt, do we really want "free trade" to end up selling the rug out from under our feet?

If we weren’t spending so much on defense, we spend more on defense than almost the rest of the world combined, we could buy the port operations and hand them over to U.S. Customs to run; heck even appropriate defense dollars to do it.

Maybe our government should spend less on turning sharks into spys, and spend more on buying our country back. You know like a stock buy back...

Um, okay, so people are still rabbitting on about the UAE's supposed links to Al-Qaeda... Well, I don't really think that would be a concern to the neocons and Bush anyway because Dubya's granddaddy Prescott, Henry Ford, General Motors, etc funded hitler during WW2, and these people/companies were never held accountable either....

The swastika of the US is the dollar...

t.

New blog launched to expose the disreputable and dishonest American Bulldog breeders and kennels.

If you have a "horror story" when dealing with an American Bull Dog breeder or kennel PLEASE share it with us at http://americanbulldogblog.blogspot.com/

By doing so you will be providing valuable information to potential puppy buyers and help them avoid similar situation.

Add a comment

 
All Bark. No Bite.
The Bulldog Manifesto


Headlines from the Impeachment 

Blogosphere
Provided by First Sustainable
Add this box to your site
Add your feed to this box




The Dog House