February 22, 2006
So, 3 Muslims Walk Into A Port
Printer FriendlyBy: Ann Coulter
The idea that the Democrats have any meaningful interest in America's national security is a joke, so I'm perfectly willing to believe there's more to this port story.
But Bush is going to need a better justification for turning over management of our ports to an Arab country than he's come up with so far – especially now that Jimmy Carter has said it's a good idea. Judging from his life's work to date, Carter's definition of a good idea is "an idea likely to hurt America and/or help its enemies."
Bush's defense of the port deal is to say that "those who are questioning it" need 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."
First of all, it's not "all of a sudden." The phrase you're searching for, Mr. President, is "ever since the murderous attacks of Sept. 11." The Bush administration's obstinate refusal to profile Middle Easterners has been the one massive gaping hole in national security since the 9-11 attacks – attacks that received indirect support from the United Arab Emirates.
There are at least 3,000 reasons why a company controlled by a Middle Eastern Muslim emirate should be held to a different standard than a British company. Many of these reasons are now buried under a gaping hole that isn't metaphorical in lower Manhattan.
Even four years after 9-11, I note that we don't hear Tony Blair condemning some cartoons in a Danish newspaper as "a cultural extremism," or saying their publication represents a "dreadful clash of civilizations."
That was U.A.E. Minister of Justice and Islamic Affairs Mohammed Al Dhaheri's recent comment on the great Danish cartoon caper.
So maybe Bush could defend his port deal without insulting our intelligence by asking why anyone might imagine there's any conceivable difference between a British company and a United Arab Emirates company.
President Bush has painted himself into a corner on this issue, and he needs a face-saving compromise to get out of it. Here's my proposal: Let Harriet Miers run the ports.
Isn't it enough that we're already patronizing the savages over the cartoons? Do we have to let them operate our ports, too?
The Bush administration defended Muslims rioting over cartoons, saying, "We certainly understand why Muslims would find these images offensive." Hey, while they're at it, why don't they invite some Muslim leaders with well-known ties to terrorism to the White House for a reception? Oh wait, I forgot ... They did that right after 9-11. Yes, now I see why we must turn over our ports to the United Arab Emirates.
The University of Illinois has suspended editors of the student newspaper, The Daily Illini, for republishing the cartoons – even though the kiss-ass editors ran a column accompanying the cartoons denouncing them as "bigoted and insensitive."
That was still not enough for Richard Herman, the chancellor of the university, who wrote a letter to the editor saying that he was "saddened" by the publication of the cartoons. You want sad? The University of Illinois' sports teams are known as the "Fighting Illini." Now they're going to have to change it to the "Surrendering Illini."
Fox News' Bill O'Reilly refuses to show the cartoons on "The O'Reilly Factor," saying he doesn't want to offend anyone's religion. Someone should tell him those endless interviews with prostitutes from the Bunny Ranch and porn stars aren't high on Christians' list of enjoyable viewing either. (How about adding Prophet Muhammad cartoon T-shirts and fleece tops to his vast collection of "Factor gear"? Isn't Father's Day right around the corner? I'd buy those.)
Needless to say, the Treason Times won't show the cartoons that have incited mass rioting around the globe. At least the New York Times has a good excuse: It's too busy printing national security secrets that will get Americans killed. Its pages are already brimming with classified information about our techniques for spying on terrorists here in America – no room for newsworthy cartoons! The Pentagon Papers and a top-secret surveillance program are one thing; cartoons that irritate Muslims are quite another.
Two days after the Times editorial page justified its decision not to reprint the cartoons as "a reasonable choice for news organizations that usually refrain from gratuitous assaults on religious symbols, especially since the cartoons are so easy to describe in words," the Times ran a photo of the Virgin Mary covered in cutouts from pornographic magazines and cow dung – which I seem to have just described using a handful of common words! Gee, that was easy!
Taking to heart the lesson that violence works, I hereby announce to the world: I am offended by hotel windows that don't open, pilots chattering when the passengers are trying to sleep, and Garfield cartoons. Next time my sleep is disturbed by gibberish about our altitude over Kansas, the National Pilots Emirate embassy is going down. And mark my words: One minute after "Garfield II" goes into pre-production, some heads are gonna roll. Oh – and I'll take the San Diego port, please.
Posted by redguy at February 22, 2006 10:16 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.redstatesusa.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/416
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference So, 3 Muslims Walk Into A Port:
» cause of snoring from passed snoring sleep apnea snoring snoring
dapomsaz [Read More]
Tracked on March 6, 2006 07:08 AM
» Cumshots - internal cumshots, free cumshot pics, cumshot movies, Cumshot and Blowjobs, Cumshot Facia from Cumshots - internal cumshots, free cumshot pics, cumshot movies, Cumshot and Blowjobs, Cumshot Facia
Cumshots - internal cumshots, free cumshot pics, cumshot movies, cumshot and blowjobs, cumshot facials, oral cumshot sex [Read More]
Tracked on March 23, 2006 06:12 PM
» office sex stories from office sex stories
big natural tits fat bitch CFNM Stories clay poker chips
[Read More]
Tracked on June 19, 2006 06:00 AM
» Ronald from Ronald
EDDAEGGABE [Read More]
Tracked on July 10, 2006 10:41 AM
» Travon from Travon
Terrence Marques Humberto Jamar [Read More]
Tracked on August 1, 2006 04:33 PM
» on line pokerroom from on line pokerroom
pursed enchanted.kitten episode floppies pokerroom casino http://www.apokerroomcasino.com/ [Read More]
Tracked on August 13, 2006 12:46 AM
» snort clonazepam from snort clonazepam
pregnant fucking mature pantyhose pantyhose sex... [Read More]
Tracked on August 25, 2006 10:03 PM
» fat porn from fat porn
latina girls teen girls penis pier... [Read More]
Tracked on August 30, 2006 02:18 PM
» viagra from viagra
clonazepam nude cheerleaders [Read More]
Tracked on August 31, 2006 07:52 AM
» midget pussy from midget pussy
wife lovers fat boobs domina [Read More]
Tracked on September 8, 2006 11:11 PM
» buy oxycotin online from buy oxycotin online
casino jobs amateur nude ebony teen [Read More]
Tracked on September 16, 2006 06:30 AM
» cheap viagra from cheap viagra
penis piercing incest porn hot anime [Read More]
Tracked on September 19, 2006 03:15 PM
» order carisoprodol from order carisoprodol
buy valium hustler girls cial... [Read More]
Tracked on September 24, 2006 02:04 PM
Comments
Is this deja vu, or what?
I remember when the Brits convinced Jimmy Carter that antagonizing the Iranians right after a fresh revolution was really a swell idea. But, hey, the Brits were sueing Iran in the World Court over those British financed oil fields that the Iranians nationalized.
Now the Brits ... our good buddies ... pulled this stunt on us and the UAE knowing full well what was going to happen. But, hey, they've aleady got the money and run for it. And, best of all, they've got 'W' doing the Jimmiy Carter knee bend.
I guess this is how 'W' is supposed to reward Tony Blair for his unwavering loyalty to the U.S.
Or maybe 'loyalty' is the wrong word here.
Let's ask Jimmy Carter what the right word is.
Oh, yeah, we already did.
Posted by: Athling
at February 22, 2006 10:46 PM
Another great column Ann that hits the nail on the head. One question no one seems to ask is not why are the Arabs taking over port security, but why do the Brits have it in the first place. Is there no one in America that wants to run our ports? There must be a dollar or two in it - Chuckie Schummer even suggested Haliburton run it today!
Does America own nothing anymore. I used to laugh that the reason the Arabs don't own everything here in America because the Japanese won't sell. Now, it's true.
I think the other point to consider is that while the ports will still have American unions there to run things (that's a scary thought too), but, Arab ownership means one less ring of security between us and those intolerent tent-sellers.
Posted by: andycigar
at February 22, 2006 11:01 PM
Ann,
I love your instinct to be cynical of anything Carter advocates.
As much as I like to argue I’ve yet to take issue with any of your pros I’ve read to date, perhaps that means we weren’t meant to be together??? Well, until now(as dangerous as that may be indicated from your last paragraph) I agree with your logic path and application of principle here but in this specific case when you drill down into the mechanical change in secure operation of the ports it's simply changing the CEO's. Security & Customs for our container ports is all govt. employees and is pretty much a sieve. So one must ask why would the UAE spend billions to buy and then blow up it’s own port when they could slide one in right now and do it all on the cheap? Heck if I were ___ Arab terrorist group, I’m sure while planning I’d be shipping my WMD’s though another port owned by __ (insert infidel) and blow that port/town up and bypass the UAE’s ports just as a professional courtesy.
When you think about it, Bush just diplomatically bought some protection for these ports. Perhaps then we could afford send the passionate civil servants working in security to the other less protected ports. Thereby, leaving the UAE’s ports protected only by our govt. civil servants still employed only because they can’t be fired. You see, I feel safer already!
Posted by: mtnpilot
at February 22, 2006 11:24 PM
Want to know about Jimmy Carter's foreign policy? Can anyone say Anastacio Samosa? Carter aided in the ousting of this Nicaraguan dictator and helped Daniel Ortega to install his Communist regime in that country. It took Ronald Reagan to help undo it. When the country got free elections (Ortega was stupid enough to allow truly free elections) the people were smart enough to oust the bums.
Anyone remember Reza Pahlavi? He was the Shah of Iran that Carter betrayed into the Ayatollah Khomeini and his Islamic dictatorship. Even Bani-Sadr (I think that is how he spelled his name) had to flee for his life because he was trying to lead a moderate government, but was standing between power and the Ayatollah.
It is interesting to note that the "brave" media personalities are not willing to exercise their free speech and publish the cartoons. Let's face it, they are afraid. Remember Satanic Verses author Salmon Rushdie? They do not want to spend the rest of their lives living under threat of a fatwah like him.
As for the UAE company, why allow them to make money off of our ports? At the very least, this is a good question. Do they support terrorists? I don't know, but I do not want to take the chance. As for the Longshoremen, I don't like unions. Look at the situation here in the PDRNY. Where I live, the unionized government employees are overpaid and underworked. But would they protect us against spying or other security ristks or would they put their union benefits/contract ahead of national security? Can't take their word for it. By the time it happens, it's too late.
Posted by: Loser
at February 22, 2006 11:54 PM
So here we are at a crossroads, with the "Port-Issue." We have the big-time radio people divided as well as the bloggers. I only hope that if we make a big deal out of the "Dubai Ports World Agreement," then we will also focus on the Chinese that operate ports in, and for, the country. I am more for helping the United Arab Emirates becoming an economical friend to this country, than I am supporting a communist country like China, but not by much! Especially when they are loaded with nuclear missiles that could make it to the mainland thanks to the Clinton administration. The main thing that send shivers up my spine is that Jimmy Carter agrees with me.
Posted by: HiTekRedNek
at February 23, 2006 12:43 AM
Oh what tangled webs we weave when first we practice to deceive.
I know I am naive, or is it just i am so damn strait forward and practical I can't get my puny amoeba brain around all this crap. It's past the point of an occasional cow pie we can step around. There is no place to step anymore. Truth and deceit have been tangled into an inseparable knot. It's become disgusting and obscene. And it permiates the world. This is Ann's magic.. She's one of the last places we can step, She's that string of clarity and honesty that has not been tangled in the CF of contemporary maddness. You're welcome in my house any time Ann, just wipe your feet firt please!
Posted by: Elephas Maximus
at February 23, 2006 06:58 AM
Ann, you should reprint those cartoons on your web site and maybe you could pose by them. That would show the whole world that you won’t back down to anything when you’re right. O’Reilly talks tough but he knuckles under on the big things. The entire country is depending on you to show us the way.
Posted by: MikeR
at February 23, 2006 09:20 AM
Ann,
A great column as always. I will take a small exception to your remark "Isn't it enough that we're already patronizing the savages over the cartoons?" What is your rationale for insulting savages?
I am heartened to see that a previous poster to this column added some clarity to this situation, even if it was said tongue-in-cheek. We will still be in charge of the security, as lax as it is. I would be remiss if I did not add that the company in question would control not all of the ports but some 11%. (Though most will agree that any percentage is too many.) Additionally, there are other Middle-eastern concerns that already own and/or control docks in those same ports.
That said I, too, feel very uncomfortable that ex-Appeaser-in-Chief and current Leader-of-the-Free-World-Basher, Jimmy Carter, thinks that is a swell idea.
It is interesting to see the notoriously camera-shy Chucky Schumer pontificating on the need to do something now about our security. I surmise that Punch (or is it Pinch, I can never remember with physical attack he is) Sulzberger gave him a big "okey-dokey" to express a modicum of common sense for once. (Is it my imagination but the NY Slimes -"All the News That's Fit-To Wrap Fish In" - can only come to realize that national security is important only if it puts the President in a bad light? Nah, I must be mistaken.)
But, if we let nature take its course, let water seeks it own level and employ other trite phrases, this may soon become a moot point. The blowing up of the Golden Mosque yesterday is, as the term has been over-employed, a tipping-point for civil war in Iraq. I know it is tricky to tell the Shi’ites from the Sunni’s without a “Michelin Guide to Burkas”, but perhaps we should let these outstanding citizens have their way with each other. With their proclivity for violence, perhaps they can significantly diminish each other’s ranks until the few remaining chaps can be rounded up for an extended vacation in sunny Cuba.
It will then be only a matter of time until other like-minded climes might act and react in a similar manner. In short order the threats from this region will be gone along with the perpetrators and we can get back to business status quo ante.
I would like to continue but I have exhausted my supply of hyphens.
God Bless, God Speed, God Protect our Troops!
Posted by: Jaksavin
at February 23, 2006 09:22 AM
I must be stupid,I just don't get it. The butt kissers are saying the muslims are misunderstood and their religion is one of peace. Yesterday, they blew up one of their own churches. Don't print cartoons but its ok to blow up our own religious sites. They are sick SOB's that not only butcher the evil westerners but each other over their peaceful religion. I think the world has a rodent problem that we need to take care of and now.
Posted by: greg1309
at February 23, 2006 09:59 AM
Aside from all that the defenders of the sale have said, the fact is that increased ownership means increased access. And who are they likely to hire? People from their own country of course! And people in the middle east are much more likely to be of a mind with the terrorists than people from, say England! Even if we could trust the owners, and I don't think we can, can we trust their employees? This would be a perfect opportunity for terrorists to slip someone in to a secure area. Bush can't win on this one.
Posted by: snowmane
at February 23, 2006 10:28 AM
Oh, and by the way, I voted for Carter in '76' but not in '80'. I just wish the man would shut-up, I'm sorry I had anything to do with putting him in office. You can depend on him for one thing, he is ALWAYS on the wrong side of an issue.
Posted by: snowmane
at February 23, 2006 10:33 AM
Now that I've been cynically against the Big W ... and the Brits ... now I'm going to say something very cynically in favor of W.
The Prez has been lamenting the mental malais that the country has fallen into over security issues ... especially Homeland Security ... and all of the BS the Dems have been shoveling.
Could it be that he engineered this stunt to snap everyone out of it??? And even force the Dem scarecrow to screech like a Hawk for a change???
I don't know ... I guess if I were a lame duck Prez with nothing to lose, why not?
I'll probably be accused of being 'Rovian' for coming up with this.
(So put on your green glasses Dorothy) :)
Posted by: Athling
at February 23, 2006 05:37 PM
I live in Dearborn, Michigan, where we have a large population from the Middle East. The city for good reason does it's best to address the cultural differences. In the schools, the students are allowed to wear traditional clothing required by their religions, including a fake plastic knife with a curved blade (I forget the name). Fine. Freedom of religion. When will Christians have the same rights?
Posted by: marsh113
at February 23, 2006 06:50 PM
Where do you go
When your own government
Demands you surrender
Tells you to raise your hands
Threatens and punishes you
For being a freedom loving man
Where do you go
And who do you talk to
When they call it a conspiracy
If you say what is true
What do you do
And what does it take
When the sell out is from within
When the leadership goes fake
Where do you go
And what do you do
When it becomes against the law
To fight what is coming for you
When stealing your heritage
Isn't even any longer disguised
When they look you in the face
And laugh handing you their lies
When are we allowed to resist
How do we address our own fate
When permission will only be granted
When....
It's too late
Neils
5:23 pm
02/17/2006
*
transcribed this time
6:03 pm
02/23/2006
N....again
Posted by: neilsthepoet
at February 23, 2006 07:03 PM
So, 3 Muslims Walk Into A Port...
They walk out with their profits and give some to their families, some to their tribe and the rest to the Allah's work...killing the infidels. Lovely. Brilliant.
Posted by: Red
at February 24, 2006 02:19 PM
Wow Red ... how poigniantly to the point :)
Posted by: Athling
at February 24, 2006 04:02 PM
She takes two-hundred shots at far better people than George "W" Bushieboy will ever be, but for once, she's correct about her central thesis.
I still think she's a female Andrew Dice Clay, though.
Posted by: SoxSweepAgain
at February 26, 2006 10:09 PM
OH- Your guy's beloved GOP Dominatrix may also be a felon:
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/celebrities/content/local_news/epaper/2006/02/17/a2a_jose_0217.html
Hope she gets lets than the maximum 5 years in prison.
Posted by: SoxSweepAgain
at February 27, 2006 02:36 PM
Oh come on now. Every one knows that the rich, famous or powerful do not use the same legal system as the rest of us and why should they? Does any one really think Ann should be prosecuted for breaking this law? This is just the sort of thing the Dems and the liberal media would love to jump on and trump up. So what if it’s a felony. It’s not that big of a deal so every one should just let it drop. My goodness, you’d think she cheated on her spouse and diddled a bimbo the way some people want to play it up.
Posted by: MikeR
at February 28, 2006 12:07 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
