Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘Dubai’

‘Moral Politics’ TV Interview on Mossad Dubai Assassination

Monday, March 15th, 2010


Watch Mossad Assassination in Dubai.

Yesterday, I filmed a 30 minute interview with Bill Alford for his Moral Politics TV show about the Mossad assassination of Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Mabouh in Dubai.  It’s a handy introduction to the many posts I’ve written on the subject and roves over territory like targeted assassinations, the Mossad’s trampling on the identities and rights of its own citizens, the U.S. connection to the crime, the impact of the Holocaust on Israel’s psychic and political life, and much more.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Mossad Chief Remains Holocaust-Obsessed

Sunday, February 21st, 2010

If anyone needs any further proof that the long shadow of the Holocaust continues to inform some of Israel’s most self-destructive behavior, they have only to read this suggestive story in the Times of London providing inside color from supposed Mossad sources about the run-up to the Dubai assassination.  In it, Uzi Machnaimi describes the motivations that inform Meir Dagan, the bloodthirsty Mossad chief responsible for the Dubai fiasco:

The tone of his directorship is set by a photograph on the wall of his modest office in the Tel Aviv headquarters. It shows an old Jew standing on the edge of a trench. An SS officer is aiming his rifle at the old man’s head.“This old Jew was my grandfather,” Dagan tells visitors. The picture reflects in a nutshell his philosophy of Jewish self-defence for survival. “We should be strong, use our brain, and defend ourselves so that the Holocaust will never be repeated,” he once said.

From what I know of the Holocaust era, I find it extremely difficult to believe that anyone would be able to pinpoint a specific picture that showed their grandfather about to be shot by the SS.  So it seems likely to me that Dagan is using the photo as an archetypal Jewish morality lesson: “You see, this is what we are as a people.  This is what we must ensure never happens again.”  But the fact that Dagan is likely making a fraudulent personal claim in order to dramatize the lesson is instructive: after all he is Mossad chief and one of his stock in trades is deception and fraud for a “higher” national purpose.

But even more importantly, this story shows us how the Holocaust continues to infect Israeli consciousness and contributes to pathological behavior.  If we are to believe Dagan and the Times reporter, he killed al-Mabouh because he was little different than that SS officer holding a gun to his “grandfather’s” head.  You see where this leads?  It leads to every enemy Israel has being no different than the Nazi genocidaires.  It leads to many Israeli critics being labelled Kapo (as I have regularly been) or collaborator with Nazis.

We must finally put a stake through the heart of the Holocaust as justifier of Israeli policy.  This historical event should be precisely this and nothing more.  It must not be allowed to become a template for current or future Israeli behavior.  To the extent it does, Israel will never become a normal nation and always live within a nightmare of its own making.

On a related matter, I was shocked to read that Germany reports that, unlike the other European nations whose passports were cloned fraudulently, an Israeli claiming the name Michael Bodenheimer actually did apply for and receive a genuine German passport.  This “Michael Bodenheimer” assumed the name of a real Israeli Orthodox Jew who studies at a yeshiva and seems entirely incapable of espionage.

This part of the story provides a further disgusting abuse of the Holocaust by the Mossad.  Germany allows former German Jews and their descendants to regain German citizenship under humanitarian provisions of its immigration law as a form of compensation to Jews for the suffering they endured.  So what does the Mossad do?  It exploits this to gain a German passport for a future killer.  Why should Germany continue to be so solicitious of German Jews when its largesse is abused by the Mossad?  This is yet another example of Israel cynically exploiting the Holocaust for partisan political gain.  Whoever within the Mossad thought of doing this act should be prosecuted.

The Sunday Mirror also reports that the UK is convinced that the British passports used in the assassination were secretly copied at Ben Gurion airport by Israeli border police:

Diplomatic sources have told the Sunday Mirror they are convinced officials at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport took away and copied the passports of six Britons who unwittingly became involved in the assassination plot.

…A senior British diplomatic source revealed: “We believe the innocent British citizens involved had their passports taken away and copied when they were going through the airport.” The disclosure came during debriefs of the Britons who revealed how they had recently had long waits at Ben Gurion while their passports were taken away for checks.

The hit squad did not alter the names and numbers in the passports, but the photographs were switched.

This again goes to the absolute hubris of the Mossad. Did they believe that these Israeli citizens wouldn’t recall such treatment and recount it as soon as the killing was discovered and traced back to them? Did it even care?

There are also reports of future material that may be in the offing from the Dubai police which sounds tantalizing:

The UAE-based al-Bayan newspaper reported Sunday that according to Tamim, Dubai’s police have additional information which has yet to be released, “especially about diplomatic passports used by some of the criminals in order to enter Dubai.”

Bad enough that Mossad abused individuals and their countries by stealing their identities and passports, but to have done so using diplomatic passports, if this is true, ratchets up the drama and offense to any government so victimized.

Ronen Bergman, an Israeli journalist who has literally written the book on the Mossad, has reported quite acutely on the killing in the Wall Street Journal:

…Did Mabhouh constitute an immediate threat? Was eliminating him worth violating international law and risking the ire of so many states…? No country that faces the threat of foreign terrorism on the scale that Israel does can afford to entirely renounce the use of targeted assassinations, despite the ethical and legal problems that such executions raise. But such acts need to be extremely rare. In the case of Israel, such operations require the explicit approval of the prime minister, and they are authorized only after the political risks are carefully weighed. In the case of Dubai, it seems that this did not occur. Either the risks were not explained to Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, or he made a serious miscalculation.

Bergman adds an intriguing and tantalizing question which I raised here earlier, that is: given the remarkable achievement on the part of the Dubai police in ferreting out voluminous amounts of documentary evidence of the killing in a very short period of time–could there be another country’s intelligence agency which knew what the Israelis were doing and wanted them to be unmasked?

How did the Dubai police manage all this? Did they have help? For now, it remains a mystery. But in any case, misjudging the ability of the Dubai authorities so spectacularly is evidence of a serious intelligence failure on the part of the organization that sent out the squad.

Here is another tantalizing tidbit from Bergman on the looming transparency of such so-called covert operations in the advanced surveillance age in which we live:

…This past week was the end of an era in undercover operations: It is no longer possible to carry out assassinations without leaving a trace. The Dubai hit squad chose to carry out their mission in a hotel room, no doubt because they believed the setting provided them with the greatest degree of protection. But technology has turned hotels into centers of electronic surveillance, and it is safe to assume that in the future terrorists will regard the comfort of top-of-the-line hotels as safe havens.

In addition to closed circuit TV systems and the ability to track cellphone and computer users, advanced biometric identification systems and online coordination across borders are becoming more and more widespread. Soon it will be much easier to identify and detain suspects in public places such as airports in real time. The technology isn’t quite there yet, but it is close…

These advancements should be welcomed; they make the war on terror a lot more efficient. The problem is that the same technological tools we use to thwart terrorists can also be used against the people whose job it is to stop them.

Of course, what is missing here is Bergman’s sensitivity to the fact that some of those whose job it may be to stop terrorists adopt the latters’ tactics and so become terrorists themselves, albeit of the state variety.  Hard as it may be for Bergman to believe, it may actually be a good thing to prevent all people, including intelligence agencies from engaging in assassinations.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

All Signs Implicate Mossad in Dubai Assassination

Tuesday, February 16th, 2010


After several weeks of confusion regarding the identity of the assassins of Mahmoud al-Mabouh, the Hamas weapons buyer who was assassinated recently in Dubai, all signs are beginning to point in the Mossad’s direction.  The BBC reports that all of the passports used were fraudulent.  The most telling piece of evidence uncovered is that four five of the eleven killers used names of actual Israeli citizens (Update: Jerusalem Post claims seven of eleven were Israeli olim) who appear not to have been involved in the murder.  One of them told the post “I went to sleep with pneumonia and woke up a murderer.” He is also quoted by the BBC:

Melvyn Adam Mildiner, a Briton living in Israel, told Reuters news agency: “I am obviously angry, upset and scared – any number of things. And I’m looking into what I can do to try to sort things out and clear my name.

Of two of the other Israelis, one is a handyman and the other an Orthodox yeshiva student.  Though I’m not schooled in covert intelligence operations, it would seem to me that using the identities of citizens of your own country would be pretty stupid as it would point directly to the Mossad as the culprit.  Not to mention the jeopardy in which it places these individuals.  What is to prevent a Hamas loyalist from tracking the real Melvyn Mildiner and do him in as revenge for the al-Mabouh killing?

And alternatively, using fraudulent passports of foreign countries also risks creating diplomatic incidents with them.  In fact, Israel has been mounting pressure on Britain to change a law that allows filing of arrest warrants against Israeli officials for war crimes.  Given that Israel used multiple fraudulent British passports in this operation, why should that government go out of its way to do anything on Israel’s behalf?  If Tzipi Livni wants to go to England to test the validity of her arrest warrant, why should Gordon Brown care a whit?  Let her go to jail.  Then Britain, Dubai and Israel can work out a prisoner swap involving her and the real killers, who belong in the dock for this assassination.

Dubai officials have previously said that if Israel is implicated they will issue an arrest warrant for Bibi himself.

The BBC story also points to other similarities with past Israeli assassinations–among them the use of foreign (Canadian) passports in Amman when the Mossad attempted unsuccessfully to kill Khaled Meshal.  As I noted earlier, in that operation they also injected the victim with a poison meant to mimic a heart attack.  The goal being to allow the killers time to exit the country before the real cause of death could be diagnosed.  In that case, the Mossad agents were caught and arrested and Bibi Netanyahu, also prime minister then, was forced to provide the antidote.  Meshal lived.  In the al-Mabouh case, the killing method worked and they successfully escaped.  But the aftermath of the crime will turn out much messier I reckon.

As the noose tightens around the Mossad as the culprit, this matter threatens to become an international incident both for the massive fraud involving use of foreign passports, the abuse of hospitality of an Arab country which doesn’t want to roll over and play dead, and a rising willingness to treat Israeli crimes as matters worthy of international tribunals:

“This is a highly sophisticated operation conducted by people who knew when Al Mabhouh would arrive in the country,” Dahi said.

The suspects used “highly sophisticated communication instruments” and during their conversations they used encrypted messages, Dahi said. “The communication tools they used are not available in the UAE.”

They came from several European countries and left to European destinations and one to Hong Kong. “We know where they are right now and even their residences,” Dahi said.

What I don’t understand about this is how political assassination serves any sort of long-term political purpose.  So you kill someone.  What damage ultimately do you do to your enemy?  He replaces the victim with someone either as good or better than the one you eliminated.  Does it get you anywhere?  Does it achieve any sort of objective?  I would argue that Israel is now beyond the point when it can use the conventional tools of war or assassination to harm its enemies.  The world is beginning to indicate it will no longer allow Israel to get away with these crimes.  I used to say that ultimately Israel will pay a price for these idiocies.  Now, I don’t say ultimately, because the chickens are coming home to roost right now.

If you’d like to see a perfect example of the “old” thinking at work, read this garbage journalism which proposes that this entire episode is much ado about nothing:

…Many of the countries whose passports were allegedly used do not like Hamas; and the government of Dubai, despite its impressive investigation, does not really want to get to the bottom of this. Dubai would like to continue giving off the impression that it is a safe country, all of whose visitors are there for only business or tourism.

There are other Arab countries who do not consider Hamas a friend and who are in a secret war – no less bitter than Israel’s – against the Islamist organization. Jordan is one of them, as is Egypt.

As part of the investigation two Palestinians were arrested in Dubai, suspected of aiding the assassination team, and it is not impossible that the whole story is another example of the sort of psychological warfare against Hamas that would have the organization become even more suspicious of flawed security within its ranks.

Looking at the incident in perspective, a senior Hamas figure responsible for the deaths of two Israel Defense Forces soldiers and a key contact in the group’s arms smuggling is dead.

…Unless dramatic evidence is found to definitively prove an Israeli connection, it is likely that the State of Israel will emerge from this affair unblemished and the Mossad will continue enjoying a reputation of fearless determination and nearly unstoppable capabilities.

Where I come from there is supposed to be at least a semblance of distance between journalism and spookdom. Not apparently in Israel and not even in the pages of Haaretz.

I would like to see Dubai take out Interpol warrants for these Israeli murderers.  Then I would like to see Dubai request that the ICC try them when they are caught.  I would like Israeli progressives to watch out for these people and report them when they see them so they can be identified even if they choose to stay in Israel where they can’t be captured.  No more impunity.

The BBC offers a history of Israeli political assassinations.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Dubai Seeks 11 Europeans in Hamas Assassination Plot

Monday, February 15th, 2010
11 dubai assassins

Dubai released the images of 11 suspects in the assassination of a senior Hamas leader there

Fascinating news coming out of Dubai about the assassination of senior Hamas weapons buyer, Mahmoud al Mabhouh, who was assassinated in a well-orchestrated plot in that country two weeks ago. Al Mabouh was Hamas’ chief intermediary with the Iranians and allegedly specialized in securing that nation’s weaponry for the Palestinian group.

Haaretz writes today that “it is widely reported” that the Mossad is a leading suspect in the murder. A Dubai police commander said the killing method was one used by the Mossad and it reminded a journalist friend of mine of the attempted Mossad assassination of Khaled Meshal in Amman in which the killers injected him with a poison that would mimic a heart attack.  After the killers were captured & King Hussein demanded the antidote from then prime mininster, Bibi Netanyahu (surprise!), the agents were released.  And guess which Arab capital hasn’t seen another assassination since?

What is fascinating is that Dubai has released the photos of 11 suspects, all of whom carried European passports. Two Palestinian accomplices are in custody. I’m not an expert in such operations, but I wonder whether, if the Mossad carried this hit out, these were Israelis who were natives of these countries; or whether the Mossad contracted out the killing. I’m not even sure that Mossad does this sort of thing.

Interesting background to this story is provided by the Times of London’s Sheera Frenkel, who wrote an excellent story about an Israeli campaign of assassination directed at Hezbollah and Hamas senior operatives.  This may be part of the same pattern.  An Iranian nuclear scientist was also assassinated in Teheran recently; and though evidence points more in the direction of the Iranian intelligence service than the Mossad, Israel would certainly be motivated to kill leading Iranian nuclear researchers.

I’m beginning to wonder whether this incident could turn into something similar to the CIA rendition-kidnapping in Italy which, due to botched communications among the kidnappers, was easily exposed by the Italian government.  Now, the Italians have the names of all the CIA personnel and have tried them in abstentia giving the CIA a big black eye.  Could the same thing happen to Mossad?  Now that we have pictures, someone’s going to know one of these killers.  An Interpol warrant might scare up some new developments I hope.  From there, could there be an ICC warrant in some Mossad agent’s future?  And if Bibi signed off on it as he did Khaled Meshal’s attempt, could we have an Israeli PM receiving a warrant as well?

It is clear that Hezbollah and now probably Hamas are both desperate to assassinate Israelis in revenge for the Gaza and Lebanon wars and the killing of Imad Mugniyeh in Damascus.  It appears the Mossad has a better killing average so far.  Though my hope is that exposure will cause it enormous grief for this heinous betrayal of international law and moral values.

Not to mention that the next time Israel’s soldiers are captured/kidnapped by Hamas or Hezbollah, I certainly will have very little sympathy considering the depredations by Mossad against their leaders.  What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Bush’s Approval Ratings Down to 33%

Saturday, March 18th, 2006

The good news is that the latest Pew Research Center poll shows Bush’s approval rating at 33%. The bad news is that a major part of the reason why is his championing of the Dubai ports deal:

In the aftermath of the Dubai ports deal, President Bush’s approval rating has hit a new low and his image for honesty and effectiveness has been damaged. Yet the public uncharacteristically has good things to say about the role that Congress played in this high-profile Washington controversy.

Most Americans (58%) believe Congress acted appropriately in strenuously opposing the deal, while just 24% say lawmakers made too much of the situation…

Bush’s overall approval measure stands at 33%, the lowest rating of his presidency…

The president’s ratings for handling of several specific issues, particularly terrorism, have also declined sharply. Just 42% now approve of Bush’s job in handling terrorist threats, an 11-point drop since February…

Bush’s personal image also has weakened noticeably, which is reflected in people’s one-word descriptions of the president. Honesty had been the single trait most closely associated with Bush, but in the current survey “incompetent” is the descriptor used most frequently.

My position on Dubai ports as I’ve made abundantly clear here in my many posts about the deal is that Bush did the right thing on this and that Congress was doing its best to chew the scenery while it overacted to the hilt in the part of ‘champion of national security.’ The only slight positive is that the last poll I read about two weeks ago showed that only 17% of Americans supported DPW’s right to manage U.S. port facilities. That meant a 50% uptick in support for the deal. But going from 17% to 24% isn’t terribly impressive.

But what really made me scratch my head in disbelief is this bit of doublespeak from Americans regarding matters related to the ports deal:

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press…finds…a narrow majority (53%) has a negative view of foreign investors owning U.S. companies. But that is significantly less than the 70% expressing the same opinion in 1989, when high-profile acquisitions of U.S. firms by Japanese companies provoked widespread concern.

Moreover, by 53%-36% more Americans view foreign companies investing in the United States as a good thing; there are no significant partisan differences on this issue. Two-thirds of Americans (66%) believe free trade is good for the United States, which is largely unchanged since 2000.

58% of us supported the cancellation of a specific foreign trade deal while 53% view foreign investment here as a good thing. Further, 58% of us supported protectionism and isolationism regarding the DPW deal, but 66% of us believe in free trade. Hello! Anybody home?? Are we morons or do we enjoy living in denial of the fact that our bifurcated beliefs constitute utter hypocritical??

Dubai Ports Deal to Haunt U.S. Overseas Business Interests?

Sunday, March 12th, 2006

It’s entirely possible that there will yet be hell to pay for our Congress’ short-sighted, bilious cave-in to political grandstanding and xenophobia in the Dubai ports imbroglio. The Hill, in an article published Thursday, just before the deal collapsed indicated that the UAE leadership was furious for its treatment at the hands of congressional solons:

Dubai is threatening retaliation against American strategic and commercial interests if Washington blocks its $6.8 billion takeover of operations at several U.S. ports…

A source close to the deal said members of Dubai’s royal family are furious at the hostility both Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill have shown toward the deal.

“They’re saying, ‘All we’ve done for you guys, all our purchases, we’ll stop it, we’ll just yank it,’” the source said.

Boeing DreamlinerUAE Dreamliner deal: will Boeing lose out to Airbus & feel Emirates’ ire? (photo: USmarkets.nl)

Boeing is the company that could suffer the most damage if UAE feels unkindly toward U.S. interests:

Retaliation from the emirate could come against lucrative deals with aircraft maker Boeing and by curtailing the docking of hundreds of American ships, including U.S. Navy ships, each year at its port in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the source added.

The Emirates Group airline will decide later this year whether it will buy Boeing’s new 787 Dreamliner or its competitor, Airbus A350. The airline last fall placed an order worth $9.7 billion for 42 Boeing 777 aircraft, making Dubai Boeing’s largest 777 customer.

Dubai in mid-February also established the Dubai Aerospace Enterprise, a $15 billion investment to create a company that will lease planes, develop airports and make aircraft parts to tap into growing demand for air travel in the Middle East and Asia.

The family-ruled sheikhdom may buy as many as 50 wide-body aircraft from Boeing and Airbus during the next four years, according to Aerospace Enterprise officials.

The UAE military also bought Boeing’s Apache helicopters. Meanwhile, Boeing has been in talks with the emirates to try to sell its AWACS planes.

The Hill noted that if Boeing is hurt then a mighty powerful member of Congress might just have a whole lot of scrambled eggs on his face:

Any repercussion to Boeing could put House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) in a delicate position. Boeing’s decision to move its headquarters to Chicago has been seen as calculated to facilitate a close relationship with Hastert. He is against the ports deal, and his office did not return calls by press time.

Several businesses have expressed concern that the controversy over the $6.8 billion ports deal could damage trade with the UAE…The American Business Group of Abu Dhabi…said that Arabs may hesitate to invest into the United States, according to a report by Reuters.

This report is quite weakly sourced so I have no idea how likely any of this is to come to pass. But if it does we have only ourselves to blame. Where do we get off thinking that our ill-informed decision to kill this deal and insult the world’s Arabs into the bargain will not be thrown up in our face at some later date by those whose interests we have damaged?

A hat tip to Villainous Conspiracy and Emirates Economist.

Washington Post: Congress “Craven”on Dubai Ports Deal

Sunday, March 12th, 2006

I couldn’t believe the puffery in today’s NY Times’ Republicans Hail Colleague Who Fought Bush on Ports (the article is nowhere to be found on the Times website nor in Google News so I don’t have a link; by the way, I’ve never seen such a thing happen before at Nytimes.com. UPDATE: there is now a link as of 3/12) making Peter King out to be a maverick new Republican kingmaker because of his “leadership” opposing the Dubai Ports Deal. And King relishes his newfound celebrity in the most disgusting way:

Mr. King–who CNN dubbed “King of the Ports”–often sounded as though he could hardly believe the rapid and unexpected turn of events. “I have to keep pinching myself on all this stuff.”

The man is a demagogue and xenophobe to boot. What does he have to be proud of?

The Washington Post appears to agree with me. Only they take the entire grandstanding Congress to task for its egregious performance over the past two weeks in its editorial, Happy Now?:

THEY SPEND drunkenly…fail at oversight and…can’t stop the administration from abusing detainees or tapping phones. But never call the members of Congress powerless: Yesterday, in the exalted name of anti-terrorism, the Senate rebelled against its Republican leadership and joined the House in a vote to prevent a company based in a moderate, friendly Arab country from making a minor investment in the United States. When it became clear that some such blocking measure would pass, Dubai Ports World threw in the towel, announcing that it would sell all of its U.S. operations…and do business elsewhere.

…This [Dubai Ports World] investment always was a business decision, not the early stages of a covert attack on Baltimore. Quite rightly, the company and its Dubai-based owners…didn’t want their country’s and their company’s names dragged through the mud, so they cut their losses.

The Post lays out the pernicious “message” that Congress is sending to Arab nations and businesses and the damage that may be done to U.S. security and economic interests throughout the region from such stupidity:

…Our brave new Congress has achieved more than the irrational spiking of one business deal. It has also sent a clear message to the Arab world: No matter how far you move along the path of modernization and cooperation, Americans may be unable to distinguish you from al-Qaeda. Dubai welcomes hundreds of ship visits every year from the U.S. Navy and allied ships. It has worked with U.S. agents to stop terrorist financing and nuclear cooperation. But none of that mattered to the craven members of Congress–neither to the Democrats who first sensed a delicious political opportunity nor to the Republicans who then fled in unseemly panic. As to long-term damage to the United States’ security, economy and alliances? Not of concern to the great deliberative body.

No one should underestimate the potential damage. Any government in a Muslim-majority country will have to ask itself: Why take the risk of friendship? If governments find no good answer to that question, the fight against radical Islamic terrorism will suffer. Meanwhile, Arab investors may think twice before putting their money in a country where their companies risk expropriation…Arabs are rapidly becoming a major supplier of foreign capital. This isn’t a good moment for Americans to discourage foreign investment, given the nation’s dependence on foreign capital (see: Congress, drunken spending by). Nor will the message — that foreign ownership was unobjectionable when it was British but intolerable when it was Arab — do much to advance U.S. efforts to promote equitable investment rules for its own companies abroad.

Here the Post dishes out special opprobrium for the Congressional leaders who led the charge and warns those in Congress who try to ‘Monday morning quarterback’ the disaster that they have nowhere else to look but in the mirror for the cause:

Over the next few days, many excuses for this fiasco will be offered, by those who should have known better, by those who know better already and by those who may awake to the embarrassment of their mass hysteria. Some will blame the president, because he politicized the discussion of terrorism or was highhanded in threatening to veto a bill banning the sale. But if Congress can’t do the right thing in the face of such provocations, it is lamer than the excuses themselves.

Some, meanwhile, will blame the public, because opinion polls showed overwhelming objections to this deal. But it was Congress that brought this matter to public attention; here we think, for example, of the cynical actions of two Democratic senators from New York: Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles E. Schumer, who heads his party’s effort to win back control of the Senate in this year’s elections. Congress falsely portrayed the deal as the “purchase” of U.S. ports. Congress failed to tell the public that port security is run by the U.S. Coast Guard, not the men who pay the salaries of the (overwhelmingly American) longshoremen. Congress created this storm, in other words, and then toppled in its wind.

A hat tip to Villainous Conspiracy and Emirates Economist.

Dubai Ports Deal is Dead

Thursday, March 9th, 2006

Dubai port deal cartoonLegacy of hate and mistrust caused by Congressional opponents of deal (cartoon: Mike Keefe/Denver Post)

This is a sad & outrageous day. A black day for America, for democracy, for tolerance and for commercial intercourse among nations. Surely, there will come a day when we will rue what we have forced Dubai Ports World to do today. I hate to wish ill upon my country and fellow countryfolk. But if UAE chooses the European Airbus instead of Boeing for that next $10-billion airplane deal this spring, we’ll have only ourselves to blame.

So DPW is going to transfer the port operations to an American company. That’s rich considering that there are few, if any such companies that can handle this deal. Our shipping industry has been on the decline since the mid-1950s. That’s why 80% of imported cargo is handled here by foreign companies. All I can say is good luck in finding someone who can do the job. I’d predict a massive cargo bottleneck lasting weeks, if not months after the ports are handed over by DPW & P&O.

Thinkitthrough makes an excellent point when he reminds us that it was the the U.S. airport security system which allowed the 9/11 hijackings. Are we that confident that our current security regimen will guarantee the safety of our ports even with a U.S. company managing the port?

I doubt DPW will have the stomach to challenge this outrage in court. I have no doubt that they would win a resounding victory as I can think of no legal justification for essentially robbing the company of its right to do business in the U.S. The selective targeting of this particular company, owned by adherents of a particular religion, and based in a particular nation located in a particular region, is the worst and most base form of political pandering. I look forward to the day when Duncan Hunter, Hillary Clinton, Jerry Lewis, Chuck Schumer and Peter King get their political comeuppance. I can see no circumstance in which I would vote for any Democrat who played a leading role in this shameful episode. The only way I’d vote for Clinton for president is if her opponent were in the Bush mold. If the Republican candidate were John McCain, much as I disagree with him on many issues, at least he didn’t grandstand or pander on this thing. These political miscreants should be made to pay a price for their mischief.

This disgusting incident has also pointed to the complete meltdown of the Bush presidency. He no longer commands congressional Republicans. He no longer sets the political agenda. He no longer issues orders which the troops follow. He’s a toothless wonder–eviscerated, emasculated and emaciated. He wouldn’t even use his Constitution-given prerogative to issue a veto. He will likely go down in history as one of two or three presidents who didn’t issue a single veto during their presidency (and the others happened because they died shortly after taking office!

On this day xenophobia has won, racism has won, fear has won. It is a day that should live in infamy.

For some truly righteous indignation about the death of the deal read, as usual, Lounsberry.