Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Bushies had secret -- not very restrictive -- deal with UAE


Team Bush cut a secret deal with their pals in the UAE on port security:
The Bush administration secretly required a company in the United Arab Emirates to cooperate with future U.S. investigations before approving its takeover of operations at six American ports, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. It chose not to impose other, routine restrictions.

As part of the $6.8 billion purchase, state-owned Dubai Ports World agreed to reveal records on demand about "foreign operational direction" of its business at U.S. ports, the documents said. Those records broadly include details about the design, maintenance or operation of ports and equipment.
But according to experts, the deal did not include a lot of standard operating procedures. Why was the Bush Administration so determined to give the UAE a break?:
The administration did not require Dubai Ports to keep copies of business records on U.S. soil, where they would be subject to court orders. It also did not require the company to designate an American citizen to accommodate U.S. government requests. Outside legal experts said such obligations are routinely attached to U.S. approvals of foreign sales in other industries.
This story still has a long way to go before we really find the truth. And, the truth won't come from the Bush Administration. Read More......

Open Thread


Thread openly. Read More......

DeLay on the Bush/UAE deal: "pretty outrageous"


Atrios, who has the story, loves a good wingnut war. So do we. Read More......

The situation in Iraq is deteriorating fast


The press reports from Iraq are dire. The situation is careening towards civil war. Bush owns this mess:
Insurgents posing as police destroyed the golden dome of one of Iraq's holiest Shiite shrines Wednesday, setting off an unprecendented spasm of sectarian violence. Angry crowds thronged the streets, militiamen attacked Sunni mosques, and at least 19 people were killed.

With the gleaming dome of the 1,200-year-old Askariya shrine reduced to rubble, some Shiites lashed out at the United States as partly to blame.

The violence - many of the 90 attacks on Sunni mosques were carried out by Shiite militias - seemed to push Iraq closer to all-out civil war than at any point in the three years since the U.S.-led overthrow of Saddam Hussein.
Read More......

55% in Gallup poll think Iraq war is a"mistake"


Via E&P;:
More Americans than nearly ever before now say the war in Iraq is a "mistake" for the United States, according to a new Gallup poll. That figure now stands at 55%, up 4% point since late January. Only once before was the figure higher, at 59%, and that was during the period of overall pessimism right after Hurricane Katrina hit.

Gallup noted that it had asked this question about other wars involving the United States, "and only the Vietnam War engendered more public opposition than the current Iraq War. " The peak opposition to the Vietnam conflict was 61%. That figure for the generally unpopular Korean War was 51%.
If my calculations are correct, 55% is more than a majority. Yet, somehow, Bush denigrates anyone who questions his Iraq policy. He is dissing over half the country. No wonder his approval ratings are so low. Read More......

A little night blogging...


From Amsterdam....

An assorted gathering of AMERICAblog readers, other bloggers, and Dems Abroad at the Cafe Americain this evening.



A better view of the cafe. It's gorgeous, looks like something out of a Vienna cafe, luxurious, turn of the century (I'm guessing), just what you'd want some hoity toity European cafe to look like.



Then we took a gorgeous, albeit freezing, walk along the canals.



And finally, some bikes parked in the middle of a main square (these folks actually ride bikes in below zero weather), we call the square Led Zepellin because it sounds like the Dutch name for the square, and as Dutch sounds a lot like Sleestak, you find it's often best to improvise.

Read More......

Bush now says he didn't know about United Arab Emirates ports deal


So we've established the pattern. Bush is either a serial liar, or he's completely out of touch and a simple figurehead who has no idea what his own employees are doing.

From AP:
President Bush was unaware of the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates until the deal already had been approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday.
Then we get the old White House line that congress already approved of this deal, so why complain now? That is of course the same argument that the White House and congressional Republicans are using to defend Bush's illegal domestic spying program. So if the Republicans are fine with this argument vis-a-vis the domestic spying, then they're going to need to explain why it's different now.
White House counselor Dan Bartlett said Wednesday the UAE company, Dubai Ports, "is a reputable firm that went through a congressionally approved vetting process."
Read More......

Open thread


Had a great coffee and dinner with a bunch of folks, including a number of local readers, some other bloggers, and some of the Dems abroad. Really nice group. Going to edit a few photos first, then report on more later. Read More......

RUMSFELD: Us Still Paying for Propaganda in Iraq


From Reuters:
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Tuesday he was mistaken when he stated last week that the U.S. military had stopped paying Iraqi newspapers to publish pro-American articles.

Rumsfeld had said in a television interview on Friday that the U.S. military had ceased paying to place positive stories in Iraqi media after criticism in the U.S. Congress and press. Rumsfeld made similar comments the same day to the Council on Foreign Relations.

"I just misstated the facts," Rumsfeld told a Pentagon briefing on Tuesday.

Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said the military command in Iraq was still paying to plant positive stories, even as U.S. Navy Rear Adm. Scott Van Buskirk investigates it.
Freedom is on the march! What an embarrassment of an administration... Read More......

Drive to ban gays from adopting underway in 16 US states


This is 2006's version of gay marriage. The issue the Republicans will use to get their voters to the polls? Ban the gay perverts from adopting.

Wonder how Dick Cheney feels about that? Read More......

Welcome to Iraq's civil war


From AP
A large explosion Wednesday heavily damaged the golden dome of one of Iraq's most famous Shiite religious shrines, sending protesters pouring into the streets. It was the third major attack against Shiite targets in as many days.
Read More......

Bush didn't even know about the deal with the UAE that's he is now defending


Kinda sums up the whole Bush administration. Now the White House says Bush didn't even know about the UAE port security deal til it was a done deal. But he's going to defend it -- even to the point of a veto:
President Bush was unaware of the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates until the deal already had been approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday.
If this is White House spin to make Bush look better, they're wrong. It makes him look even worse and more out of touch. They've screwed up again. Read More......

I was just reading the Amsterdam guide book my hotel left in my room...


And here's the section on AIDS
In contrast to saying nothing, as in England, or inciting celibacy, as in the States, or parading a horde of sport and fashion celebrities holding up condoms on the front cover of a popular magazines, as in France - Holland decided on a more direct sensible approach. We were treated to a special public service health film on nationwide television during prime time: two totally nude attractive teenagers (male & female) masturbating while holding hands and kissing. The voice over narrative explained that there were other ways of achieving sexual satisfaction besides penetration. It ended with their orgasms.
Read More......

The fact that Bush is willing to veto any attempt to block the sale of US port management to the United Arab Emirates, that speaks volumes


Bush is now saying he'll veto any legislation that stops the United Arab Emirates from taking over control of major US seaports.

Now, think about that. Bush will use his first veto since his presidency started six years ago to defend the economic interests of not just big oil, but big foreign oil. Bush is choosing sides, and he's choosing the sides of a big rich Arab oil country over the national security interests of the United States of America.

Why is he doing this? It would be easier for Bush to side with the Democrats and Republicans and even the religious right who are all demanding he scotch the deal. But Bush is digging in, he's gonna stick by the deal.

The only reason you do that is because there's some secret deal that's tied to this port takeover and Bush isn't tell us about it. All that supposed "help" the United Arab Emirates is giving us by letting US ships dock there, is it being paid with extortion? Give us your harbors or we no longer accept your ships?

It's not clear.

But what is clear is that the United Arab Emirates has the president of the United States by the balls, they've got something on him, and that's not a good thing.

So much for Karl Rove and the Republicans devoting this year to blasting Democrats over national security. George Bush just shot himself in the face, and didn't even need Cheney.

And one more thing. Bush is now playing the race card - I dare anyone to explain to me why it was okay for a British company but not an Arab company to run our ports, Bush said yesterday.

Well, Coretta, you're hardly a bastion of civil rights, so spare us the crocodile tears.

Second, no American is going to buy the supposed equivalence between Great Britain, America's closest ally in the world, and the United Arab Emirates, a country with disturbing ties to terrorism. I'm not thrilled about any foreign government running our ports (and mind you, it was a British company running our ports before, THIS is the actual UAE itself that would be running them), but when it comes to national security and someone trying to sneak a nuclear bomb into the United States, you better believe I'm going to trust my life to England over the United Arab Emirates. And so will every American you poll.

And finally, Bush is willing to chuck our civil rights out the window with his illegal domestic spying program, indefinite detentions at Guantanamo, and more. But suddenly we have a war-on-terror issue dealing with Bush's rich Middle Eastern oil buddies and NOW Bush is more interested in civil rights than national security.

Nice priorities, Mr. President. Read More......

Wednesday Morning Open Thread


I woke up to Dan Bartlett on my TV again this morning trying to explain to the bigots that Bush and his team have fostered why they let Arabs take over our ports. That's twice in one month I've woken up to his spew of lies emanating from my television. It's got the potential to put you in a bad mood, until Bartlett says something laugh out loud funny, like (paraphrased) "we would never do anything to jeopardize national security". Yeah, like ignoring "Bin Laden determined to attack inside the US"?

Consider this an open thread! Read More......

I'm arrived and well in Amsterdam


I'll never get over the concept of being halfway around the globe in less than half a day.

Anyway, in my hotel, free wifi access throughout the place - woo woo. And it seems to be quite nicely located, and a nice place. I've got coffee scheduled with the local AMERICAblog readers at 4:30pm this afternoon at the Cafe Americain at the American Hotel, which should be fun (assuming anyone shows up LOL).

Not too many first impressions of Amsterdam - it's been 20 years since I was here last.

I was reading the International Herald Tribune over breakfast (they include breakfast too, God bless 'em), and there was a fascinating op ed about Muslims in Holland. One of the more interesting parts of the article is how open the Dutch have been to immigrants over the centuries, even welcoming Jews when others would not. That's now changing, post September 11, and post the very high profile murder of a Van Gogh heir who was killed for insulting Islam.

Just as interesting, a rabbi is running a group that's leading the charge in defending the rights of Muslims from discrimination, discrimination that sounds all too similar to what Jews face. The rabbi talks about how Jews have managed to maintain their faith and vales while becoming good citizens in their own home countries, and notes that this is what's needed by Muslims as well. But, the Jewish clinging to tradition and culture came at a price, and it likely will as well with Muslims.

But I worry whether the Muslims are going down the same path as the Jews, the Greeks, the Italians, Latinos, Asians, and every other immigrant group that has gone from one country to another. It would be fascinating to study the history of immigration into the US, or anywhere, and see if the same problems and concerns existed about integration, violence, attempts to force the home culture to adapt to the immigrant culture etc. A lot of that of course did happen, and it's not a bad thing - America is clearly an amalgam of its immigrant cultures. In America, for the most part, we were able to successfully assimilate everyone into the larger melting pot, rather than have immigrant groups try to force the pot to become more like them. But isn't that what some of the Muslim population is demanding in Europe? That their adopted homes become more like their original homes? Then again, is it wrong for them to seek such change in a democratic society?

And why limit this discussion to Muslims? This become-like-me-or-else mentality is exactly what America's religious right is doing to our country today, as is the Republican party. They are trying to drag America and its culture and its values and its laws far to the right so that those things only represent one small minority of American values. A minority that clearly thinks its values are the right values, to hell with the rest.

That kind of thinking is as dangerous for America as it is for Holland.

But what do you do in response? I've said before that the only thing that keeps America's religious right relatively non-violent (other than blowing up abortion clinics and murdering doctors) is that American culture wouldn't put up with them adopting more widespread violence. And if that's all that separates America's religious extremists from Islamic fundamentalists burning cars in the streets of Europe, then maybe this problem is much bigger than Christians and Muslims, Arabs and Europeans.

Maybe the problem is religious fanaticism and its efforts to overthrow liberal democracies. If that's their goal, and I think for many American and foreign religious fanatics it is exactly what they intend, then they must be stopped, as their ultimate plan is to destroy our entire system of governance, destroy our democracies, and that cannot be tolerated, even in the name of tolerance. Read More......

Executions prevented in California


Medical personnel won't participate. For them, killing someone is unethical:
State officials on Tuesday postponed indefinitely the execution of a condemned killer, saying they could not comply with a judge's order that a medical professional administer the lethal injection.

Prison authorities called off the execution after failing to find a doctor, nurse, or other person licensed to inject medications to give a fatal dose of barbiturate, said Vernell Crittendon, a spokesman for San Quentin State Prison.
Read More......