Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Foreign Control of Ports

We held our fire during the current controversy regarding foreign "control" of US ports. We were dragged into it by a commentator who was upset we hadn't jumped in with both feet on one side or the other. It seems we were correct in withholding judgment until more information became available. First of all, the issue has switched from "ports" to "terminals." That's a HUGE shift in focus. From National Review:
  • "“Senator Menendez and I don'’t think any foreign government company should be running our ports, managing, leasing, owning, operating. It just raises too many red flags. That is the nub of our complaints,"” said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., speaking via teleconference in response to Bush'’s announcement.
  • At the massive Port of Los Angeles alone, 80% of the terminals are run by foreign firms. And the U.S. Department of Transportation says the United Kingdom, Denmark, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, China and Taiwan have interests in U.S. port terminals.
And most of these port deals took place when Hillary was "co-president." So it's obvious that she is again attempting to stake out the middle ground and position herself as a centrist. And anything Hillary is opining on, immediately raises red flags in our world.

The most amusing part of this entire enterprise? Democrats hammer police officers constantly about "racial profiling." And this entire incident is an example of ..."RACIAL PROFILING!" Are democrats guilty of hypocrisy now or when they were telling us that profiling doesn't work?

14 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't see the problem, we'll still handle all the law enforcement ends......security, Customs, Coast Guard.

2/28/2006 12:22:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hillery Knew!

2/28/2006 12:27:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have no problem with Hong Kong or Singapore having a interest in our ports.These are capitalist societies who's only aim is to make a profit.No religious,political,or terrorist threats fom these places.On the other hand, I would have concern about a region like Malaysia having a interest in U.S. ports.Because of their large Muslim population and the threat of terrorisim from that region.And before anyone accuses me of it,I'll admit it.I'm PROFILING! Many people say the U.S. needs to improve it's image with the Islamic peoples of the world.I say that goes ditto for them.I don't trust them.If that makes me politically incorrect,so be it.NO MIDDLE EASTERN COUNTRIES MANAGING OUR PORTS!! Too much is at stake.

2/28/2006 02:17:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the solution to the ports......













LET SEISER RUN IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2/28/2006 05:53:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Paper: Coast Guard Has Port Co. Intel Gaps

WASHINGTON - Citing broad gaps in U.S. intelligence, the Coast Guard cautioned the Bush administration that it was unable to determine whether a United Arab Emirates-owned company might support terrorist operations, a Senate panel said Monday.

The surprise disclosure came during a hearing on Dubai-owned DP World's plans to take over significant operations at six leading U.S. ports. The port operations are now handled by London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Company.

"There are many intelligence gaps, concerning the potential for DPW or P&O assets to support terrorist operations, that precludes an overall threat assessment of the potential" merger," an undated Coast Guard intelligence assessment says.

2/28/2006 05:57:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Poll: Bush Ratings At All-Time Low

(CBS) The latest CBS News poll finds President Bush's approval rating has fallen to an all-time low of 34 percent, while pessimism about the Iraq war has risen to a new high.

Americans are also overwhelmingly opposed to the Bush-backed deal giving a Dubai-owned company operational control over six major U.S. ports. Seven in 10 Americans, including 58 percent of Republicans, say they're opposed to the agreement.

Hillary had nothing to do with the poll numbers Bush now faces. . .

Or did she?

Blame the number on Pres. Clinton. I'm sure Rush will.

2/28/2006 06:01:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

thats the least of what the Clintons are to blame for!!!

FCK OFF LIBERAL ASS HOLE!!!

2/28/2006 06:04:00 AM  
Blogger SCC said...

To Bush Numbers Freak:

It's a BULLSHIT POLL. From rightwingnews.com

But, there's another factor we haven't adjusted for: the percentage of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents who participated in the poll. In the 2004 election, the breakdown by party was as follows:

Democrats: 37%
Republicans: 37%
Independents: 26%

While those numbers can change and do change over time and there's no set rule that says for a poll to be fair those percentages should match up exactly with the breakdown from the last election, the numbers should be pretty close.

So, let's look at the weighted party breakdown from the CBS poll: 1018

Democrats: 37.4% (381)
Republicans: 28.4% (289)
Independents: 34.2% (348)

So, they undersampled the number of Republicans by more than 8.5% and over sampled Independents by more than 8%.

2/28/2006 06:57:00 AM  
Blogger SCC said...

To the Coast Gaurd Poster:

Read the WHOLE ARTICLE: Here's the last three paragraphs

The Bush administration said the Coast Guard's concerns were raised during its review of the deal, which it approved Jan. 17, and that all those questions were resolved. ***

The Coast Guard said the concerns reflected in the document ultimately were addressed. In a statement, the Coast Guard said other U.S. intelligence agencies were able to provide answers to the questions it raised.

"The Coast Guard, the intelligence community and the entire CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States) panel believed this transaction received the proper review, and national security concerns were, in fact, addressed," the Coast Guard said.


GOT THAT?? The Coast Gaurd and everyone else believed this deal received the proper review. Everyone. This is so much BS about nothing. Just the left scoring cheap political points.

2/28/2006 07:02:00 AM  
Anonymous al qaeda lives said...

A classic case of the fox guarding the chicken coop.

Allah Akbar!

2/28/2006 07:28:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

AUSTIN THE BADDEST DISTRICT IN THE CITY! 011 blows. They got no sack on us.

2/28/2006 09:24:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are so eloquent and articulate. Take your ritalin, child.

2/28/2006 09:31:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let us give honor to J. Mereaday and name the 4200 block of Potomac. Or we could name a local school after him.

2/28/2006 03:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bush is a liberal, terrorist lover!!!!

2/28/2006 06:37:00 PM  

<< Home

Newer Posts.......................... ..........................Older Posts