Thursday, February 23, 2006

Foreign Control of US Ports

We've been asked in the comments section why we haven't commented on George Bush handing over control of US ports to the United Arab Emirates. We assume it's a left leaning questioner as it's phrased like those "When did you stop beating your wife" questions. A few quick facts and related opinion about the port controversy:
  • Port security will still fall under the jurisdiction of the US Coast Guard and Department of Homeland Security. Should that make anyone feel better? Not really. DHS is becoming a bloated government bureaucracy, exactly what led us into the complacency that culminated in 9/11. And the USCG still only inspects 5 to 8% of the intermodal containers entering this country.
  • The ports are currently operated by a foreign government - the British. Yes, the Brits have been steadfast allies for many years. But terrorists have shown they can infiltrate ANY open and free western society, government, armed force, etc. Although this deal would be a paper move, it is a paper move that makes Americans uncomfortable.
  • "the review of the deal was conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a body that was created in 1975 to review foreign investments in the country that could affect national security"(from the NYTimes). Unfortunately, the President and Secretary of Defense do not seem to have been in the loop on this decision. More bureaucracy gumming up the works.
  • Democrats are moving to the right of the president, trying to outflank him. Various arab groups are screaming racism, which further marginalizes their input. Republicans are in a tizzy trying to make the Administration switch directions.
In short, it's complete FUBAR. We can only imagine that the White House is waiting for an opinion poll before making a move, which is stupid. It's Clintonian for pete's sake. The funniest thing about this is that all the screaming to keep the ports in American hands will mean the only firm capable of running a system this big will get the contract for years to come. That company is called Halliburton and we can hardly wait for the screaming to begin once that happens.

Now excuse us while we reorganize our stock portfolios to reflect that of the Vice President. (thanks to Captain's Quarters and Michelle Malkin for doing a lot of heavy lifting on this)

28 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

2/23/2006 12:01:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm second, two is more than one!

Not knowing enough to make an opinion, I'll make one anyway and let the more knowledgeable shove it up my ass.

This is part of a free market, and who gives a shit!

2/23/2006 12:16:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Congrats to Lt. Andy Dakuras...You're the best...just ask him

2/23/2006 12:17:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

4get da ports! da next breach of security WILL b from south of da border? it WILL b a sandnig posin as a beaner. da dude wit da i am 1st has gots 2 b deleted.

2/23/2006 12:18:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

NBC on the 10pm news, reported 1 of the persons involved in the I-55 crash was of dubious integrity in that large amounts of ca$h were found. PoPo's unite any truth 2 dis?

2/23/2006 12:50:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seriously who cares who owns or operates a port? For example, say after running the port for a couple years The federal government or a municipal government felt that the land was more suitable for a Wally world due to "economic" shortfalls of the port, they would just take that land away from the owner. As it has been done on many occasions to private citizens. Not only that, why would any terrorist ride in a big slow ship to the U.S. with his bomb, when he can fly here in a couple hours drive his rental van right to home depot, buy some fertilizer, stop at citgo for some diesel fuel and a slim Jim then park that bomb right in front of the Cabrini green high rise have his windows washed then KA-BooM! Cause everyone knows that high rise public housing buildings and infidel welfare recipients are the #1 terrorist target. So if anyone living on welfare is reading this move out of the city as fast as possible. Orland park is very safe they are only on green alert. I also hear that Hamas is tracking your link card.

2/23/2006 01:22:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let SEISER run the ports! He runs everything else!

2/23/2006 06:54:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is good. Arab workers are not fat lazy drunks like the typical american worker. The american union workers are overpaid, lazy, fat-assed people. No more mob running the docks.

2/23/2006 08:43:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Its a management company genius. You don't think some Arab aristocrat is going to join the Teamsters, do you?

2/23/2006 08:56:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

this our country stop giving it to others to run...

2/23/2006 09:33:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

well, the white house had already been sold, why not the ports?

2/23/2006 10:08:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

VOTE FOR HILLARY!

2/23/2006 10:22:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bush, Snow Struggle to Explain Knowledge of Port Deal

Feb. 23 -- President George W. Bush and Treasury Secretary John Snow are struggling to explain why they didn't know until several days ago about a state-owned Dubai company's takeover of seaport facilities in New York and five other U.S. cities.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan acknowledged yesterday that Bush wasn't aware until last weekend that a panel headed by the Treasury had approved the $6.8 billion sale of London-based port operator Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. to DP World, based in the United Arab Emirates. Snow said yesterday that he learned of the deal in the past ``three or four days.''

It get more curious with every passing hour.

2/23/2006 11:40:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The U.S. owes so much money to these Arab countries to fund G.W. war that they offered the ports as collateral as repayment for the loans to the U.S. Why do you think this deal must go through? The Arabs will demand payment or jack up the interest rate on the loan? G.W. has promised to veto any law blocking this deal, what is the motivation? Come on guys,some of you are good with the internet start ivestigating.

2/23/2006 12:44:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It has been reported that retired Chicago cops pulled off that bank robbery in England. They used that H.R.218 to get their weapons onto the plane. The money is supposed to be bound to a retired wagonman's place in Florida.

2/23/2006 01:34:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since when has the US taking money as a loan from another country in recent times?????

The US is the one who is constantly forgiving other countries loans

2/23/2006 02:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Port Authority suing to halt sale

February 23, 2006
NEW YORK-- The Port Authority said Thursday it will file suit to block a Dubai-based firm from taking over operations at a Port Newark container terminal, saying the federal government has not given them assurances about security issues.

Anthony Coscia, chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, said the agency would file a lawsuit later Thursday or Friday in New Jersey's Essex County state court.

"We as owners of that facility should be made comfortable that whoever operates it is capable of it," Coscia said.

2/23/2006 03:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Republican Rep. says, "not just NO - but HELL NO!" to port sale.

The storm is forcing the president to choose between losing face with the Arab world and embarking on what would be his first veto battle with the GOP-led Congress. And it has enabled Democrats to seemingly outflank him on a key GOP issue: national security.

Has Bush lost his way politically - or at least his touch?



"In regards to selling American ports to the United Arab Emirates, not just NO - but HELL NO," conservative Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., wrote Bush in a terse letter on Wednesday that she also posted on her Web site.

2/23/2006 04:06:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SCC,

You are the biggest apologist(s) for the Bush
Administration. The port story was the biggest over the weekend and on Monday. It took you until Thursday, and like a thief in the night, to post some regurgatated conservative babble. I guess you need their lead until you make up your mind on a issue.
Your a joke.

2/23/2006 04:35:00 PM  
Anonymous Tony Soprano said...

F*CK YOU Achmed

2/23/2006 05:44:00 PM  
Blogger SCC said...

Dear Ignoramus,

Please point out our apoligizing for the Bush administration. We said no one should feel secure with only 5-8% of containers checked, we said Americans (which we happen to be) should be uncomfortable with arab control of ports, we criticized the fact that Bush and Rumsfeld were out of the loop on the decision, we called the decision by the White House to wait for an opinion poll Clintonian.

Just because we ignore the screams from the left as they attempt to make hay out of various scenarios and we wait for more facts to become available before forming our own opinions, we're apologists? Excuse us, but get your head out of your ass. Go re-read the original post.

We and various other members of the right ARE taking the adminstration to task. Just because we don't run around screaming about it like you doesn't mean we're apologists. And let's face it, we doubt that Karl Rove and George Bush are checking this blog every single day to see what we typed or didn't type.

2/23/2006 06:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just because we ignore the screams from the left as they attempt to make hay out of various scenarios and we wait for more facts to become available before forming our own opinions, we're apologists? Excuse us, but get your head out of your ass. Go re-read the original post.

We and various other members of the right ARE taking the adminstration to task.




you just prove his point.

2/23/2006 07:21:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

to 10:08:09am
yes the white house is already sold, clinton did that loooong ago

2/23/2006 10:13:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ONE THING IS FOR SURE, HALLIBURTON IS OWNED BY THE JOHNSON FAMILY. THATS IN LBJ. LADYBIRD JOHNSON OWNS THE MAJORITY SHARE OF HALLIBURTON. A TRUE DEMOCRAT COMPANY.

2/23/2006 10:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Ignoramus said...

Dear SCC,

I took your advice and reread you post. You open with your assumption that those who questioned your lack of an opinion on the matter were left leaning; because only those that are left leaning would dare question SCC.
You delve into the facts, and point out that DHS is in charge of port security, and that USCG inspects 5-8% of the containers; there was no criticism of the administration.

You incorrectly point out that the current operator of the port is a foreign government. The current owner is a British corporation. The new owner will be owned by the government of the U.A.E.; this is not a small point. Dealing with governments is more difficult than dealing with corporations. Read the 9/11 Report, it will tell how the U.A.E. government allowed the 9/11 terrorists to move freely, and obtain passports.

You then finally get to that stinging criticism of the Bush administration by stating that they were out of the loop because of bureaucracy gumming up the works. You make it sound like Bush is a victim. That bureaucracy that is gumming up the works are all members of the Bush administration.

Then you go on about the Democrats moving to the right, and the administration acting like Clinton, and suggest that in the end Halliburton will get the job. Who cares? You missed the point: is this deal good, bad, or neutral to the security of the United States? You describe this matter as a paper deal that makes Americans uncomfortable, and only in your retort do you state that this is your position. So your ringing criticism of the Bush Administration is that you are “uncomfortable”. Once again, SCC, you have blazed a trail.

Oh and by the way, in your rebuttal you stated that you ignore the screams from the left. I think you better check on who is screaming. Last time I checked the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the Senate were leaders of the Republican Party.

SCC, thou shall now properly remove your head from your ass.

2/24/2006 06:45:00 AM  
Blogger SCC said...

Point to you for our government vs corporation control misstatement. We still remember when the socialists had control of Britain and everything corporate was the government. Thank god for Magaret Thatcher.

Foreign entities own lots of the United States. Should ports be one of them? We're not really sure - it isn't like they're going to disband the stevedores and longshoreman associations and security is still in DHS's hands (though DHS doesn't seem all that impressive.) As to the rest, it IS criticism, but it is reasoned and measured criticism that just doesn't seem to be around much these days.

We aren't trying to blaze a trail of dissent. We're trying to get all the facts to make an informed decision. And because we make that effort, our opinion evolves over time. We aren't like you where everything Bush does is bad and only for the benefit of rich republicans. We calmly and reasonably sift through the facts and the BS. We don't have a constituancy to answer to, so we can afford to take our time, unlike certain republicans with other ambitions.

If this turns out to be another tempest in a teapot as so many of the "scandals" from the media seem to be, we actually look smarter by remaining calm about the whole thing instead of staking out a position so far out in the fever swamps of the right that we look like extremists.

2/24/2006 09:19:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This seems like a no-brainer to me.why in hell would we want a middle eastern government managing our ports? Last time I checked,we were at war in that part of the globe.This is stupid even for Bush.The U.A.E.may be our so called allies at the moment,but if you think organizations like Al Quiada and Hamaas don't have friends in these places I've got a bridge on Wacker Dr.for sale.Everybody's concentrating on Iraq and Iran,But we need to keep an eye on some of our "freinds"in the region.Countries like Pakistan,Saudi Arabia,Egypt,and yes the U.A.E.

2/25/2006 02:05:00 AM  
Anonymous Ignoramus said...

Dear SCC,
Your recent rebuttal was measured and made sense. However, what is wrong with taking a statnd now? UAE gave comfort and sanction to the terrorists. In the 9/11 report it was revealed that the UAE was used as a point of origin to lessen suspicion. I believe we need to send a message to the Arab world. We will trade with you, but in areas that may have an impact on National Security, we will take a pass on that type of deal. What is wrong with that? And why wait to stake out a position. I've read your comments on so many issues, and your not shy in taking a position.
In regards to the President, I am not questioning him because of his conservatism, I am questioning because of his judgements and postitions.
This administration cooked intelligence and sold us a war that is a quagmire. It created and pushed through the Congress a Medicare prescription drug bill written by drug and insurance lobbies. It has turned a budget surplus into the largest budget deficit speding in the history of the United States. It leaks classified information, and then assails those who leak classified information.
I, like conservatives William F. Buckley and Patrick Buchanan, have problems with this administration. True patriots should not wait to see what the liberal or conservative spinmeisters have to offer. Use common sense and weigh in.

2/25/2006 08:16:00 AM  

<< Home

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