We should unite with libs and take to the streets on Port issue!

[rtwngAvngr]

I'm serious. He can't just rush this shit through like this. Jimmy. call du. do a sticky thread coordinating with them.


Charge!

 

[dilloduck]

I'm serious. He can't just rush this shit through like this. Jimmy. call du. do a sticky thread coordinating with them.


Charge!

WHOA THERE COWBOY-----Are you really gonna take the libs seriously when they claim they are woriied about national security ??? Besides--I wouldn't try to coordinate a game of solitaire with a lib.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

WHOA THERE COWBOY-----Are you really gonna take the libs seriously when they claim they are woriied about national security ??? Besides--I wouldn't try to coordinate a game of solitaire with a lib.

Shit man. I don't f'in know.

 

[deaddude]

I'm serious. He can't just rush this shit through like this. Jimmy. call du. do a sticky thread coordinating with them.


Charge!

Yes! cooperation is key. Oh happy day! Brothers and sisters can I get an amen!

Sorry I was a little caught off gaurd by RWA being the pilliar for bipartisan cooperation and comprimise.

 

[theHawk]

I'd really like to know the details of this deal. What exactly does it mean that this company would 'control' the ports? They are in charge of inspecting/security? What is it exactly that they do? ....

 

[dilloduck]

I'd really like to know the details of this deal. What exactly does it mean that this company would 'control' the ports? They are in charge of inspecting/security? What is it exactly that they do? ....

They have NO control over security------the US coast guard STILL does it--nothing has changed

 

[rtwngAvngr]

THis company is partly owned by the government of uae, we're effectively being f#cking taken over. This cannot go through. OH new company policy. 3% dhimmitude tax on all non muslim goods. Uh new company policy, No jews allowed. THis is just craptacular to the extreme.

 

[Mariner]

critique. This will be an interesting experience for some USMB regulars--a chance to see Bush's stubborness/resolve from the other side of the table. RightWing, you'll have the opportunity to support legislation proposed by Hillary Clinton!

Here's an update:

The New York Times
February 21, 2006
Pataki Joins Opposition to Takeover of Ports

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and PATRICK McGEEHAN
WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 — The Republican governors of New York and Maryland on Monday joined the growing chorus of criticism of an Arab company's takeover of operations at six major American ports. Both raised the threat of legal action to void contracts at ports in New York City and Baltimore.

"I have directed the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to explore all legal options that may be available to them in regards to this transaction," Gov. George E. Pataki of New York said in a statement.

Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. of Maryland told reporters that he had "a lot of discretion" and was considering his options, including voiding the contract.

Pushing back, officials of Dubai Ports World defended the federal government's speedy approval of its takeover, arguing that both the newly acquired North American division running the terminals and its new Arab parent company had worked closely with United States security officials for decades.

The unit, P & O Ports, "has long worked with the U.S. government officials in charge of security at the ports to meet all U.S. government standards, as do other foreign companies that currently operate ports in the United States," said Michael J. S. Seymour, the unit's president.

The Bush administration said on Thursday that its approval of the deal was final. The sale is scheduled to close on March 2.

Congressional criticism of the deal grew on Sunday after Michael Chertoff, secretary of homeland security, defended the arrangement in television appearances, saying there were unspecified "assurances in place" that the takeover was "appropriate from a national security standpoint."

Critics in both parties argue that a takeover by Dubai Ports World warranted special scrutiny. The company is controlled by the government of the United Arab Emirates, an ally of the United States that has also been home to terrorists, and its newly acquired P & O subsidiary operates major terminals in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.

Representative Peter T. King, a New York Republican, said the review was conducted in just 30 days — far too little time to vet the company thoroughly. "There wasn't a full investigation in the context of a post 9/11 world," he said.

Senator Charles E. Schumer, a New York Democrat, said, "You would just think that when a Dubai company is taking over, that is enough to raise a flag — at least to do a thorough review, at minimum." Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, another New York Democrat, and Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, are expected to introduce legislation prohibiting the sale of terminal operators to foreign governments.

While Tom Ridge, former secretary of homeland security, has expressed confidence that American officials would not have approved the port deal if it put national security at risk, he said on Monday, "The bottom line is, I think we need a little bit more transparency here."

In an interview with CNN, he said it would be "very appropriate" for the administration to brief Congress about why it believes the port arrangement not only does not compromise security but will actually improve it.

People involved in the approval process said that, like all acquisitions of domestic businesses by foreign-owned companies, the Dubai Ports World acquisition was reviewed by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, representing 12 federal agencies.

Officials of Dubai Ports World's North American subsidiary, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the political delicacy of the situation, said the critics' fears were misdirected because the Coast Guard and the United States customs authorities, not the terminal operators, are responsible for checking incoming cargo, passengers and crews as well as for planning and maintaining port security.

Anthony R. Coscia, the chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, said the agency could not stop the Dubai company from assuming a 30-year lease on a major container terminal in New York Harbor unless some provision of the lease was violated.

He said the agency's lawyers had been studying the lease of the terminal to P & O Ports North America, a subsidiary of the company being acquired by Dubai Ports World, but had not reached any conclusion.

Patrick McGeehan contributed reporting for this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/21/politics/21port.html?_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print

Mariner

 

[rtwngAvngr]

RightWing, you'll have the opportunity to support legislation proposed by Hillary Clinton!

Oh joy.

 

[Abbey Normal]

RightWing, you'll have the opportunity to support legislation proposed by Hillary Clinton!

Suddenly, I'm afraid.

 

[dilloduck]

Suddenly, I'm afraid.

:chillpill RWA YOU WILL NEVER LIVE IT DOWN !! :rotflmao:

 

[Bonnie]

Oh joy.

Uh OH!!!!!!!!!!!!! :tng:

 

[5stringJeff]

My only critique is that Bush is trying to push this through all "secret squirrel" - even threatening a veto - without letting the public debate occur. That doesn't sit right with me. Let's get everything out in public, have the debate, and then decide.

 

[NATO AIR]

The potential for terrorist inflitration in the upper levels of management in Arab firms is especially high, a danger that I cannot overlook in this regard.

The deal shouldn't go through.

 

[dilloduck]

My only critique is that Bush is trying to push this through all "secret squirrel" - even threatening a veto - without letting the public debate occur. That doesn't sit right with me. Let's get everything out in public, have the debate, and then decide.

The whole process was done the way all of these transactions are handled. Nothing more secret than it has ever been done before. The politicians who need some leverage hopped on this issue but what's new? If Bush is gonna throw everything up for debate NOTHING would ever happen or it would be delayed SOOOOOOO long that the dems may have a stronger bargaining position by the time it gets resolved. I say strike while the iron is hot. If nothing you do is right by the opposition, why even try to appease them?

 

[deaddude]

RightWing, you'll have the opportunity to support legislation proposed by Hillary Clinton!

Had not thought of that. This is a sign of the Apocholypse

 

[dilloduck]

The potential for terrorist inflitration in the upper levels of management in Arab firms is especially high, a danger that I cannot overlook in this regard.

The deal shouldn't go through.

 

[Annie]

I'm serious. He can't just rush this shit through like this. Jimmy. call du. do a sticky thread coordinating with them.


Charge!

Hmmm, we have Jimmah and CAIR going with the UAE. When did they become the conservative touchstone?

 

[NATO AIR]

Its a sad, bitter truth. Are YOU willing to put the lives of millions of Americans in the hand of a non-American Arab?

Gimme a break.

Most of these guys are either Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah or Al-Qaeda. From Saudi to UAE to Egypt. That's the harsh truth.

 

[Annie]

critique. This will be an interesting experience for some USMB regulars--a chance to see Bush's stubborness/resolve from the other side of the table. RightWing, you'll have the opportunity to support legislation proposed by Hillary Clinton!

Here's an update:

The New York Times
February 21, 2006
Pataki Joins Opposition to Takeover of Ports

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and PATRICK McGEEHAN
WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 — The Republican governors of New York and Maryland on Monday joined the growing chorus of criticism of an Arab company's takeover of operations at six major American ports. Both raised the threat of legal action to void contracts at ports in New York City and Baltimore.

"I have directed the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to explore all legal options that may be available to them in regards to this transaction," Gov. George E. Pataki of New York said in a statement.

Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. of Maryland told reporters that he had "a lot of discretion" and was considering his options, including voiding the contract.

Pushing back, officials of Dubai Ports World defended the federal government's speedy approval of its takeover, arguing that both the newly acquired North American division running the terminals and its new Arab parent company had worked closely with United States security officials for decades.

The unit, P & O Ports, "has long worked with the U.S. government officials in charge of security at the ports to meet all U.S. government standards, as do other foreign companies that currently operate ports in the United States," said Michael J. S. Seymour, the unit's president.

The Bush administration said on Thursday that its approval of the deal was final. The sale is scheduled to close on March 2.

Congressional criticism of the deal grew on Sunday after Michael Chertoff, secretary of homeland security, defended the arrangement in television appearances, saying there were unspecified "assurances in place" that the takeover was "appropriate from a national security standpoint."

Critics in both parties argue that a takeover by Dubai Ports World warranted special scrutiny. The company is controlled by the government of the United Arab Emirates, an ally of the United States that has also been home to terrorists, and its newly acquired P & O subsidiary operates major terminals in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.

Representative Peter T. King, a New York Republican, said the review was conducted in just 30 days — far too little time to vet the company thoroughly. "There wasn't a full investigation in the context of a post 9/11 world," he said.

Senator Charles E. Schumer, a New York Democrat, said, "You would just think that when a Dubai company is taking over, that is enough to raise a flag — at least to do a thorough review, at minimum." Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, another New York Democrat, and Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, are expected to introduce legislation prohibiting the sale of terminal operators to foreign governments.

While Tom Ridge, former secretary of homeland security, has expressed confidence that American officials would not have approved the port deal if it put national security at risk, he said on Monday, "The bottom line is, I think we need a little bit more transparency here."

In an interview with CNN, he said it would be "very appropriate" for the administration to brief Congress about why it believes the port arrangement not only does not compromise security but will actually improve it.

People involved in the approval process said that, like all acquisitions of domestic businesses by foreign-owned companies, the Dubai Ports World acquisition was reviewed by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, representing 12 federal agencies.

Officials of Dubai Ports World's North American subsidiary, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the political delicacy of the situation, said the critics' fears were misdirected because the Coast Guard and the United States customs authorities, not the terminal operators, are responsible for checking incoming cargo, passengers and crews as well as for planning and maintaining port security.

Anthony R. Coscia, the chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, said the agency could not stop the Dubai company from assuming a 30-year lease on a major container terminal in New York Harbor unless some provision of the lease was violated.

He said the agency's lawyers had been studying the lease of the terminal to P & O Ports North America, a subsidiary of the company being acquired by Dubai Ports World, but had not reached any conclusion.

Patrick McGeehan contributed reporting for this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/21/politics/21port.html?_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print

Mariner

Hey Mariner, you should have been here for the Shaivo debates. I think I lost mucho 'friends' during that, looks like a repeat here.