Richard Cohen - Playing the Race Card
Once again, Deborah Howell’s favorite “liberal” columnist gets it absurdly wrong. In Tuesday’s Washington Post, Richard Cohen plays the race card in the Dubai Ports World scandal. Just weeks after Mary Matlin proclaimed on national television, “I think these civil rights leaders are nothing more than racists,” Cohen praises the White House for stalwartly defending civil rights by kowtowing to Arab billionaires. But even the basic premise of Cohen’s column could not be more off-base.
The simple fact is we have not been repeatedly attacked by Rastafarians, or Gauchos, or Maori. We have been attacked by proponents of a violent and hateful ideology which has its roots firmly planted in Arab soil. This could not be more clearly illustrated by the attack on 9/11 itself. All of the hijackers, planners and supporters of that operation were Arab Muslims. Does Cohen really believe this fact is a mere coincidence?
As mentioned in my previous post, the idea that a UAE government-run entity could be infiltrated by an Al Qaeda member or sympathizer is not a mere hypothetical question. It's happened before. And consider the point that Clark Kent Ervin, the former inspector general of the Homeland Security Department, made on CNN this morning. Regardless of who patrols the ports on the ground, any port management firm will have to have access to highly detailed information about our port security procedures. They will need that information to comply with those procedures and run the business efficiently. Given what has happened before, how can the UAE guarantee that this information won't be passed on to Al Qaeda and exploited in another attack on the US? This is not about prejudice, this is about common sense.
FYI, here is the Ervin interview: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/23/ervin/index.html
I agree with your points. I have said from the outset that this 'race card' thing is totally ridiculous. It is plain common sense that if you get bit by a dog and someone tells you they are going to have a dog reside in your home, you would be perfectly reasonable to say that the dog could not stay...even if you had already accepted several other pets, like cats,hampsters or birds.
Moreover, the USA a few months back refuse to allow Cnooc, a china owned engery company to buy Unocal, for the same national security reasons..the dealwas squashed....no one tried to play the 'race card' on that.
I have been making the same point that Ervin, did repeatedly on several blogs...that whether or not they provide security, Dubai poses a risk because they must know security procedures if for no other reason that to execute or comply with them.
This is not about ethnic bigotry. This entire 'deal' is about globalism and capitalism unfettered by government regulations.
Our government debt is being bankrolledby Chinaand we have a tradedeficit with China...so what we are doing is allowing foreign investment to offset those deficits. It is no coincidence that the chair of CFIUS is the US sec of treasure. His motivation for doing the deal seems to be a conflict of interest with the budget deficit vs. national security....he is selling America off to pay for the debts no matter if it means a loss of soverignty. America was built on capitalism and it is going to crumble due to capitalistic greed as well.
I do not care how friendly a port Dubai is to America, in that part of the world, yes we have navy aircraft parked there and aircraft surveillance is allowed but the Arabs there benefit as much from us being there, to protect their interests from other hostile arab nations, as we gain by being there...so that is a wash.
What I find most disturbing about this deal, is that for the most part if you read the details, it is a DONE deal, and this 45 day investigagtion POST approval, is nothing more than window dressing.
March 1, 2006 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
hmmm... I apparently had a typo in my name when I signed up, hopefully I'll be able to fix it... (It should be, obviously, Fancy Pants Elitist).
Anyway,
You might be interested to know that Think Progress today had a link to a letter from Al Qaeda to the UAE. In it, they threaten:
"You are well aware that we have infiltrated your security, censorship, and monetary agencies along with other agencies that should not be mentioned. Therefore, we warn of the continuation of practicing such policies, which do not serve your interests and will only cost you many problems that will place you in an embarrassing state before your citizens. In addition, it will prove your agencies’ immobility and failure. Also, we are confident that you are fully aware that your agencies will not get to the same high level of your American Lords. Furthermore, your intelligence will not be cleverer than theirs, and your censorship capabilities are not worth much against what they have reached. In spite of all this Allah has granted us success to get even with them and harm them."
http://www.ctc.usma.edu/aq/AFGP-2002-603856-Trans.pdf
There's more, but it's pretty clear that Al Qaeda, at least in 2002, was blackmailing the UAE. And that's "post 9/11" (man I hate that phrase!), so it's very possible they are still exerting influence from within.
Considering that the UAE provided safe harbor for two of the terrorists that struck us on 9/11 (that is if they really did that, there are reports from BBC and other sources that at least seven of them are alive.); considering that the new Emir of Dubai, who owns the Dubai port company, went hunting with Osama bin Laden in '98 and '99 and the reason why we didn't hit Osama's camps with our drones is because we might have wiped out "half the royal family of the UAE", according to George Tenet, in the 9/11 Commission investigation, and also according to Richard Clarke; considering that the UAE is known to have allowed a Pakistani scientist, one A. Q. Kahn, to smuggle nuclear components to Iran and North Korea; considering it is a major money laundering haven for arms dealers and drug dealers; and considering that it has a terrible record on human rights, human traficking and enslaves a number of people in it's own country this is NOT a country owned company who should be running our ports! They do NOT reflect America's values, and they are a security risk.
It's not that they are "Arab", it's that the they consort with and are extremely vulnerable to the terrorists, and if we do have a major attack in this country again and it's traced to the ports, then we will know why.
The links to terrorists has only been slightly covered in the news when they talk about the port issue, so it needs to be exposed more. While Republicans rail about "Arabs" and play the race card, and Dems try to focus on the fact that it's about foreign countries running our ports, the ultimate reason is that the ROYAL FAMILY of Dubai consorts with Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda has also infiltrated various branches of Dubai's government. It astounds me, that our self-proclaimed "war-time" President would promote such a thing when it is obviously a profound security risk! Especially when he so blatantly tries to manipulate us with EVERY SPEECH about the "evil-doers", and "terror, terror, terror", to the point where in one speech recently he repeated "terror, terrorist or terrorism" over 97 times! The man is a sociopath, and apparently is trying to set us up for another attack. He seems to be growing increasingly out of balance, and people like him, when cornered are exceedingly dangerous.
Anyway thought you might want to know about the letter.
March 1, 2006 11:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
It astounds me, that our self-proclaimed "war-time" President would promote such a thing when it is obviously a profound security risk!......The man is a sociopath
Well, I find it to be wholly consistent with the fact that THE BUSH family is in bed with the Saudi Royal family and CAPITALIST first. The emirs are major shareholders in the Caryle Company of which the Bushes are major partners as well. So Bush's action are anything BUT inconsistent....he is willing to sell off the soverignty of the country by allowing China to bankroll our debt and foreign governments to own are infrastructure ...it is all about MONEY....globilazation and unfettered global capitalism...he is not a sociopath...but he is motivated by avarice.
Thanks for the info on the letter ....that was a good read.
March 2, 2006 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink