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

[Annie]

no no---read again-----BUSH oks the UAE
I know how much you hate Arabs

Get it numbskull, I disagree with Bush, not for the first time.

 

[nbdysfu]

I'm not normally an opponent of outsourcing or foreign investment, but this is definitely the one area where this cannot happen.

Well it's been happening for decades and noone's made a stink about it until now.

Vital security information could be leaked. False ID cards manufactured from the inside.

security cards for what? their own offices? their own information?

I'm not defending Haliburton, KBR, etc. They've defrauded us out of billions of dollars in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Balkans.

I think Iraq over spending was 6mil in kickbacks and about two people were charged for it. link please, balkans irrelevant.[/quote]

But I am saying, homeland security is absolutely not to be taken lightly. I don't trust a Saudi company, a UAE company, etc etc. No way. I wouldn't trust a British company. It needs to be American.

You seem to have a very backwards isolationalist view of things. Perhaps a buggie drive with Jebediah would soothe your nerves? I mean, thank god the British don't own one or two of our ports anymore.

We don't need to be outsourcing the ownership of our security.

Do you have evidence that we are?

 

[dilloduck]

Get it numbskull, I disagree with Bush, not for the first time.

geez pull in the claws

 

[nbdysfu]

I'll explain it to you ------you REALLY want Haliburton to get the contract---can you really expect THAT to fly?---hell no----you ok the UAE figuring they ain't too bad AND if the dems blow sky high you fall back on the all-american halliburton---
(gravitas?? )

Yeah and I can't wait until about two months from now when Halliburton is on the table and they are [once again] receiving bs about having received preferential treatment as an American company with 'ties to the whitehouse'.

 

[dilloduck]

Yeah and I can't wait until about two months from now when Halliburton is on the table and they are [once again] receiving bs about having received preferential treatment as an American company with 'ties to the whitehouse'.

The look on Chucks face when he said Halliburton would be acceptable was priceless !!!!!

 

[nbdysfu]

Wow. You certainly proved me wrong. Tell you what buddy, do you have the employment rolls of the company... all the managers? all the supervisors? all the security heads?

You will find that most of them who are Arab are related to Al-Qaeda tied groups, the Muslim Brotherhood or Hezbollah.

I think I did on your initial assertion that the DPR management was composed entirely of Muslim Brotherhood. If you posess such a fine document, I would greatly appreciate if you provided a link. DPR Rolls from ports in other countries do not count.

Keep in mind that if I were to crosscheck all the organizations they belong to, donate to and the mosque they attend, I would be bound to find individuals with ties to these groups, if not the very individual in question.

Even Michael Moore [no relation],Senior Vice President Commercial?

 

[Emmett]

RWA, don't hide under the covers yet! Remember, it really is not important who owns the companies that operate the ports so much as what soil they are located on! Obviously W feels capable in that we can implement the rules to oversee these companies operations and so forth.

I will say this. I deliver cars to ports all over the south including a couple of the ones involved. We had great reason for concern before, trust me on this one! We only inspect 2 or 3 percent of incoming OSC's to begin with. My suggestion would be to invest in high tech infrared inspection equipment and other strategies so that it really won't matter who owns the companies that service the ports so long as customs keeps good track and is meticulous in their efforts. That way if an infraction is discovered we could get to the source and remember, CONFISACTION. The company taking part in any shananigans could technically have their companies taken away by the US Government. The UAE would realize this.

Now as to why W is pushing so hard? I think it is leverage with UAE! Oil, Oil, OIL and OIL! W is a clever cat man and he does not give without get. I'm nervous but I am not ready to tie a noose together, band up with my buds and pull him out of bed yet! We do need more information and he has to know that! I would keep tuned to Fox News for further info.

 

[Emmett]

We are talking about INBOUND ya'll. These containers are loaded on foriegn soil anyway! We won't be blown up by an outbound OSC. The question is will the companies implment a high standard of insuring that what crosses our port docks are safe. Hell, we aren't doing that now!

 

[dilloduck]

We are talking about INBOUND ya'll. These containers are loaded on foriegn soil anyway! We won't be blown up by an outbound OSC. The question is will the companies implment a high standard of insuring that what crosses our port docks are safe. Hell, we aren't doing that now!

I'm with ya---too much paranoia. Thanks for the info too.

 

[Fmr jarhead]

Where is all the outrage at the London based company that currently runs the ports, or the Danish comapny that runs so many others in the US?

I have more to fear from a Danish run operation, now than ever before, as the Muslim radicals are TARGETING Danish operations, and those that support them.

It seems to me that it is a clear case of BIGOTRY and a double standard when it comes to the UAE running a legitimate business in the US.....but some of you are too blinded to notice......

On a side note.....who said, "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer!" In a strange sort of way, this could be the case, couldn't it?

 

[dilloduck]

Where is all the outrage at the London based company that currently runs the ports, or the Danish comapny that runs so many others in the US?

I have more to fear from a Danish run operation, now than ever before, as the Muslim radicals are TARGETING Danish operations, and those that support them.

It seems to me that it is a clear case of BIGOTRY and a double standard when it comes to the UAE running a legitimate business in the US.....but some of you are too blinded to notice......

On a side note.....who said, "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer!" In a strange sort of way, this could be the case, couldn't it?

 

[NATO AIR]

On a side note.....who said, "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer!" In a strange sort of way, this could be the case, couldn't it?

We certainly do a great job of that nowadays

 

[Mr.Conley]

I must say I am curious as to why Bush is so staunch on the issue. I would have though he would have given in for a few political points.

 

[USMCDevilDog]

I have more to fear from a Danish run operation, now than ever before, as the Muslim radicals are TARGETING Danish operations, and those that support them.

I do agree with this. Right now is a time to have security up and our borders secure. We can't be too sure about who is planning what and who inside our country doesn't like who we're protecting. We gotta remember we have a shitload of Muslims in our country that are outraged by the cartoons too and will randomly attack the US about it because they just don't like us.

Now my full opinion:

I'm sorry but the way Bush is handling it is pissing me off. He won't listen to anyone about it, he just shrugs it off and says he's gonna do it anyways.

This is not a good idea right now, yeah, it's keeping our "enemies" closer and making it look like we don't hate all Arabs, but isn't that exactly what they want? For us to open up to them way to far in advance, before we actually have a secure grip on our enemy, so they can just, say, blow up our ports, attack the cities next to the ports, or shit, even cause Americans to riot over the deal of selling the ports, which seems like a pretty good possibility.

This deal is ridiculous. How can we trust the UAE with our ports when some of us can barely trust our gov't. This isn't just us talking here, you gotta remember we have half of America screaming their lungs out because they don't support this. Even some of my very conservative friends (some of you too) are changing their view on this one and realizing that maybe this is a bad idea.

 

[Mariner]

write: "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."

That's a typical criticism of Bush from the left--that he likes to decide things in secret, without public debate. Secret oil meetings, secret war rationales, etc. This whole experience is good for Bush supporters to have--you can experience the frustrating side of your man.

Anyway, tensions rise as Bush digs in his heels:

The New York Times
February 22, 2006
Bush Would Veto Any Bill Halting Dubai Port Deal

By DAVID E. SANGER and ERIC LIPTON
WASHINGTON, Feb. 21 — President Bush, trying to put down a rapidly escalating rebellion among leaders of his own party, said Tuesday that he would veto any legislation blocking a deal for a state-owned company in Dubai to take over the management of port terminals in New York, Miami, Baltimore and other major American cities.

Mr. Bush issued the threat after the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, and the House speaker, J. Dennis Hastert, publicly criticized the deal and said a thorough review was necessary to ensure that terrorists could not exploit the arrangement to slip weapons into American ports. Mr. Bush suggested that the objections to the deal might be based on bias against a company from the Middle East, one he said was an ally in fighting terrorism.

"If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward," Mr. Bush said, discussing a government review of the deal that began in October and ended on Jan. 16 without producing any objections from officials in his administration.

The president added, "This is a company that has played by the rules, that has been cooperative with the United States, a country that's an ally in the war on terror, and it would send a terrible signal to friends and allies not to let this transaction go through."

The White House was taken by surprise when Mr. Frist and Mr. Hastert joined Democratic leaders in Congress and other prominent Republicans, including Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Gov. George E. Pataki of New York, in calling for the government to stop the deal from closing next week as scheduled.

"We have not received the necessary assurances regarding security concerns," Mr. Bloomberg wrote in a letter to the president on Tuesday evening. He said he was joining New York's two Democratic senators, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles E. Schumer, in calling for a 45-day investigation of the deal under a federal law that governs the review of foreign investments.

Mr. Frist gave the White House only an hour's notice before breaking ranks and saying that "the decision to finalize this deal should be put on hold." He said that if a delay did not occur, he would "plan on introducing legislation to ensure that the deal is placed on hold until this decision gets a more thorough review."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/22/politics/22port.html?_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print

Mariner

 

[rtwngAvngr]

You know what? I'm over it now. They won't own the ports, they won't do security, they'll be doing paperwork in leased builidng. Is it my favorite thing? no.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Now I don't know again. Where are you guys on this?

 

[Fmr jarhead]

Security will continue to be handled by US jurisdictions, local and federal, just as they are now....

If security is your concern, then that should not change, nor will it, until Congress does something about it, none of which has anything to do with whomever operates the ports....

We need to reach out to moderate and liberal Muslims throughout the world, to help get the Radical Islamic Murderers under control...or eliminated from the face of the earth....BIGOTRY toward an Arab owned company is not the way to foster any long term peace in the region. It can only further push away those who are moderate, and wanting to be civilized, participants on our planet.

Furthermore, do you think the unions (longshoremen amongst others) are not going to be resolute in keeping an eye open to anything "out of the ordinary," as long as they are not on a lunch break?

 

[dilloduck]

That's a typical criticism of Bush from the left--that he likes to decide things in secret, without public debate. Secret oil meetings, secret war rationales, etc. This whole experience is good for Bush supporters to have--you can experience the frustrating side of your man.

Exactly---typical criticsm from the left. Worthy of being ignored as pure partisan BS. It's a shame some Rebublicans felt the need to hop on the bandwagon even before anyone has punched any REAL holes in this decision. For god's sake folks----This decision was made exactly how these decision have been made before and included several people from several affected agencies. There's a whole lot of unknowns out there yet--can't you wait until you know the whole story before hopping on Bush like a rabid liberal.

 

[5stringJeff]

gop_jeff, you write: "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."

That's a typical criticism of Bush from the left--that he likes to decide things in secret, without public debate. Secret oil meetings, secret war rationales, etc. This whole experience is good for Bush supporters to have--you can experience the frustrating side of your man.

Anyway, tensions rise as Bush digs in his heels:

The New York Times
February 22, 2006
Bush Would Veto Any Bill Halting Dubai Port Deal

...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/22/politics/22port.html?_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print

Mariner

It's not like this is the first time I've disagreed with Bush. I think he was wrong to sign CFR, wrong to let spending get out of control, etc.

And the veto threat is empty. Everyone knows that.