So the UAE doesn't have any say in port security? What's the big deal then?
By Jim Geraghty
National Review online
I’m generally a big fan of the New York Post, but the way this story arranges the facts appears to be some pretty blatant scaremongering.
Declaring that the UAE “has financial links to the 9/11 hijackers” makes it sound like the country’s government itself backed the attacks instead of some of its citizens; if that were the case, we would have invaded them.
Just what does it take for a country to have, as a New York Post editorial put it, “ties to the Sept. 11 hijackers?” The editorial observes that the country’s “banking system — considered the commercial center of the Arab world — provided most of the cash for the 9/11 hijackers.” Terrorists look to financing in Dubai for the same reason Billy the Kid robbed banks; that’s where the money is. I’m sure terror financing runs through Dubai; financing for just about every economic activity in the region runs through Dubai.
“Much of the operational planning for the World Trade Center attacks took place inside the UAE.” Well, the Hamburg cell planned a lot in Germany. Are we to distrust German companies? Does this fact outweigh the fact that our military leaders credit the UAE for cooperation and help in the war on terror, and call them “very, very solid partners”? Do we suspect that Donald Rumsfeld and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace are lying, and putting American lives at risk because they really want to see this deal go through?
The Post editorial continues, “The new leader of Dubai, one of the seven small countries that make up the UAE, has said all the right things about fighting radical Islam since 9/11. But this remains very much an Islamist nation, where preaching any religion other than Islam is prohibited.” (UPDATE: This Post statement is inaccurate.) This is the case in quite a few Muslim countries. Do we wish to cut off business ties with all of those countries?
If you look carefully, you can see the goalposts shifting here. First it was that we couldn’t trust this state-owned company, then it was that we couldn’t trust the company’s home country to be an ally in the war on terror, and now it’s that the country doesn’t tolerate freedom of religion. The idea that religious plurality is now a prerequisite for working with U.S. businesses will come as surprising news to the Saudis.
National Review online
I’m generally a big fan of the New York Post, but the way this story arranges the facts appears to be some pretty blatant scaremongering.
Declaring that the UAE “has financial links to the 9/11 hijackers” makes it sound like the country’s government itself backed the attacks instead of some of its citizens; if that were the case, we would have invaded them.
Just what does it take for a country to have, as a New York Post editorial put it, “ties to the Sept. 11 hijackers?” The editorial observes that the country’s “banking system — considered the commercial center of the Arab world — provided most of the cash for the 9/11 hijackers.” Terrorists look to financing in Dubai for the same reason Billy the Kid robbed banks; that’s where the money is. I’m sure terror financing runs through Dubai; financing for just about every economic activity in the region runs through Dubai.
“Much of the operational planning for the World Trade Center attacks took place inside the UAE.” Well, the Hamburg cell planned a lot in Germany. Are we to distrust German companies? Does this fact outweigh the fact that our military leaders credit the UAE for cooperation and help in the war on terror, and call them “very, very solid partners”? Do we suspect that Donald Rumsfeld and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace are lying, and putting American lives at risk because they really want to see this deal go through?
The Post editorial continues, “The new leader of Dubai, one of the seven small countries that make up the UAE, has said all the right things about fighting radical Islam since 9/11. But this remains very much an Islamist nation, where preaching any religion other than Islam is prohibited.” (UPDATE: This Post statement is inaccurate.) This is the case in quite a few Muslim countries. Do we wish to cut off business ties with all of those countries?
If you look carefully, you can see the goalposts shifting here. First it was that we couldn’t trust this state-owned company, then it was that we couldn’t trust the company’s home country to be an ally in the war on terror, and now it’s that the country doesn’t tolerate freedom of religion. The idea that religious plurality is now a prerequisite for working with U.S. businesses will come as surprising news to the Saudis.
Labels: Dubai Ports World, Media bias
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home