Bush will veto any bill to stop port deal

AP ALERT

[Brian Mosely]

ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE (AP) — President Bush says the deal allowing an Arab company to take over six major U.S. seaports should go forward and he will veto any bill that would stop it.

[sinkspur]

noticed last night that O'Reilly was trying to convince people this port deal is no real concern.

O'Reilly's right. This qualifies as "The Most Ridiculous Item of the Month."

[FourtySeven]

All I'm saying is that there should be some assurance, and not by some reporterette at Fox News, but from OUR GOVERNMENT, that there will be NO control of security by any UAE controlled company, in any US port! :)

I don't think that's an unreasonable request. I'm laying myself at the "altar" of FR precision here. I would LOVE to be shown such a source, saying this unequivocally! I would love seeing something from the administration, saying unequivocally, that the UAE and/or no UAE controlled company will have any input in port security.

That's all that's required for people like me to shut up about this. People like me being people who are concerned about national security.

[notigar]

Indeed, how soon they forget:

http://freerepublic.info/focus/f-news/1156494/posts

[sinkspur]

Yes, there were and likely are terrorist elements within the UAE.

There are terrorist elements in the US, as we found out today.

Should nobody hire an American company any longer because there are terrorist elements here?

[Tulsa Ramjet]

Cheney Shooting is not in media. NSA is not in Media.

Ooooooooh. The grand plan. Get a lame duck president's accidental shooting off the front pages by threatening to give up some ports to a UAE owned company. People will initially get riled and then it dies down once the "Girls Gone Wild" commercials come on in the evening. Give me a break.

[clawrence3]

Hypothetically, if I could find such assurances that Department of Homeland Security would remain responsible for cargo screening, but that the UAE-owned company (as the port operator) was responsible for securing cargo coming in and out of the port pending said screening, the port facility itself and the hiring of security personnel for its own operations, would that satisfy your concerns? If so, may I suggest you start at www.dhs.gov

[jess35]

Like we don't have enough bright people right here in the USA to do the work

Based on the uninformed kneejerk reaction from many Republican congressmen and a lot of people on this thread....you're going to have to prove that to me.

[SwordofTruth]

There is nothing to this. NOTHING.

Sure there isn't. Let’s just let foreign STATE owned companies run our ports while many Americans are just getting by working at Wal-Mart. (25,000 applied for only 350 jobs at a Wal-Mart in Chicago recently) At one point in our nation's history a deal like this would have been called treason and the deal makers hung.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

I never saw so much butt kissing in my life. Later, we all found out that O'reilly was being sued by his producer for sexual harrassment.

Oh man, you are getting it. Where you stand depends on where you sit.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>To further imply that anyone in the United States who questions the wisdom of allowing a Middle Eastern country to control port operations during a time when we are at war with certain elements within Middle Eastern society is some sort of racist xenophobe begs the question as to just how much of a conservative you, yourself are

He is not a conservative. Politically speaking, he's a centrist bedwetter and full blown Bush sycophant.

[cowtowney]

"Geez, why does he have such a woody about this?"

That is exactly what I was wondering. Why does he care?

It makes me think that a) he has an interest, b) he is paying somebody back for something, or c) he is being too controlling.

Why spend your political capital on this?

[FourtySeven]

We are selling our ports to UAE to get intelligence on them.

FourtySeven, I actually heard someone suggest that's why this is being done.

LOL! I have to laugh, or I'll cry.

[Paul Ross]

To further imply that anyone in the United States who questions the wisdom of allowing a Middle Eastern country to control port operations during a time when we are at war with certain elements within Middle Eastern society is some sort of racist xenophobe begs the question as to just how much of a conservative you, yourself are, if you've internalized the language of "control through racial intimidation" that has, up until this point, been strictly the province of raving leftist moonbats.

Bump!

This is the thing which has been bothering me right along. The knee-jerk slandering of America and Americans.

This administration has failed to be conservative...and then lashes out against the Base regularly and quite spitefully.

I have never ever seen anything like this. Can anyone even IMAGINE that President Reagan would behave this way?

[Tulsa Ramjet]

while many Americans are just getting by working at Wal-Mart. (25,000 applied for only 350 jobs at a Wal-Mart in Chicago recently)

Globalism, you gotta love it.

[DoughtyOne]

Okay, you tell me what the cross section public opinion is in Dubai. Look, we have great realations with the Saudi Arabian leadership. 60% of the citizens are Wahabis and hate our gutts there.

60% of them are very sympathetic to Hamas and the Iraqi Insurgents. Now, tell me that the public in Dubai don't essentially think along the same lines.

Then tell me that this is much difference than Hamas, Syria and Iran managing our ports.

The point was, a bad egg could affect the U.S. in disasterous ways if they slipped through due to this deal. The Bush supporters have said that was simply not true.

Okay if it's not true, then it should make no difference if Hamas runs our ports, or Dubai does. If they can't hurt us from the management position, who cares? Right?

If we should care, then we should take note that two of the 09/11 hijackers were from the UAE. And we should slam the brakes on this now.

[DoNotDivide]

Per the Australian Government:

Summary

We advise you to exercise a high degree of caution in the United Arab Emirates because of the high threat of terrorist attack.

We continue to receive reports that terrorists are planning attacks against Western interests in the United Arab Emirates.

Commercial and public areas frequented by foreigners are possible terrorist targets.

Be a smart traveller. Before heading overseas:

organise comprehensive travel insurance and check what circumstances and activities are not covered by your policy register your travel and contact details, so we can contact you in an emergency subscribe to this travel advice to receive free email updates each time it's reissued.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

It depends if you are a goat, or a lamb.