Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

THE PORT DEAL - THIS COULD BE BUSH'S FIRST VETO? HE'S JOKING, RIGHT? (Boortz on Poortz)
Nealz Nuze ^ | 2/22/06 | Neal Boortz

Posted on 02/22/2006 4:24:38 PM PST by LibertarianInExile

I've tried...tried hard...but it's no use. I just can't understand why George Bush is so invested in this idea of turning the operations at six essential U.S. ports, New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia, over to a foreign government...and an Islamic foreign government at that.

Security experts are pretty much in agreement that if--and I think it's a "when" rather than an "if"--a nuclear device is ever smuggled into this country, the weapon will arrive in a container through one of our ports. Do you think that these containers are screened? Actually, many of them are. But where and how they are screened is critical. Most of the screening actually takes place in a foreign port before the containers are loaded onto a ship for the trip to America. Are any of those containers screened here? Yes. A few. A very few. The primary method of screening is for our security officials to look at the container manifests while those containers are at sea to determine which containers will be opened for further screening. What is being proposed here is to put a foreign government, an Islamic government, in virtual control over just how those manifests are prepared and how they will read...especially the manifests for containers being shipped from a port operated by an Islamic government TO a port being operated by an Islamic government.

Let this swirl around in your brains for a moment. The wonderful, peaceful religion of Islam is involved in most of the shooting "hot" conflicts around the world. I can't cite the exact numbers right now, but we probably have factions shooting at one another in about 130 or so locations on every continent--with the possible exception of Antarctica. In about 97% of those conflicts you will find Muslims on one side or another. There is only one major world religion out there that has as one of its basic tenants the goal of world domination. That religion is Islam. There is only one religion out there with a sizable faction that has declared war on our country, and which is dedicated to the goal of killing as many of us as they possibly can. That religion is Islam.

Though far too many people don't realize it, the Western world now finds itself smack in the middle of World War IV, the war against Islamic terrorism. (World War III was commonly referred to as the "Cold War." It was a world war nonetheless.) On just what level does it make sense to the President of the United States to turn over the operations of six critical American ports to an Islamic government...especially an Islamic government with established ties to terrorists who have already struck and killed thousands of Americans?

So this is where George Bush wants to use his first veto? How many budgets has he signed? Six? We've seen non-defense government spending increase throughout his administration at record rates, and never a veto. Never. Not even a hint of a veto. So now Bush has finally found something he wants to veto? He wants to veto any bill that would prevent the turnover of six critical ports to a Muslim government? Pardon me, but what the hell is going on here?

Bush pretends...and it has to be pretending...not to see why people are so worked up over this. On the one hand he suggests that this is all about anti-Arab prejudice. Please, Mr. President. Give us a bit more credit than that. Then Bush says: "I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a [British] company."

OK...where do we start. As you read through this list keep this fact in mind: Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, the company selling the American ports operations to Dubai Ports World, is a private company. Peninsular is not owned by the government of Great Britain. Dubai Ports world is a state-owned company, owned by the United Arab Emirates. So, what we have here is a private company selling its rights to operate these six ports in the Untied States to a government...an Islamic government. (96% Muslim) So, to answer Bush's question as to...why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a [British] company." let's start with this correction. It's a Middle Eastern government that's being held to a different standard than a British company. Governments often use deadly force to accomplish their goals. Private companies do not. There, President Bush is your reason No. 1 for a different standard. Now that we've established that rather important difference...let's move on to compare Great Britain to the UAE.

1. Great Britain is not an Islamic Nation. The de facto state religion there is Anglican, the Church of England. My extensive research shows that the Anglican Church has never, at least in modern times, committed an act of terror against the United States. Nor has the Church of England demanded that Israel be wiped off the face of the earth. Additionally, the Anglican Church has not announced its intention to subjugate the entire world under Anglican rule.

2. The UAE IS an Islamic Nation. Review Item No. 2 above.

3. The 9/11 hijackers did not use Great Britain as an operational and financial base for the planning and funding of their attacks on the United States.

4. The 9/11 hijackers DID use the United Arab Emirates as an operational and financial base for the planning and funding of their attacks on the United States.

5. None of the 9/11 hijackers came from Great Britain.

6. Two of the 9/11 hijackers came from the United Arab Emirates

7. Great Britain did not recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. The Taliban, you may remember, provided the operational base for the operations of Al Qaeda.

8. The United Arab Emirates DID recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. Good move.

9. Great Britain recognizes the government of Israel.

10. The UAE does NOT recognize the government of Israel.

11. Supporters of this move will tell you that there are already foreign companies already running most of American port operations.

12. We're not talking about a foreign company here. We're talking about a foreign government.

There just must be something here under the surface. Something unseen. Something undisclosed. The Bush White House just can't be this blind to the legitimate concerns of the people and of those in Congress who are concerned about this move.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: boortz; islam; islamic; jorgealbush; morerubbish; muslims; ports; religionofpeace; rop; terrorism; thereligionofpeace; trop; uae; veto; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 next last

1 posted on 02/22/2006 4:24:41 PM PST by LibertarianInExile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: LibertarianInExile

hey Neil...... Stupid has no cure but ignorance does. Educate yourself before shooting off your mouth and exposing your shallowness. World trade is above your paygrade. Silence would be thge best policy till the ignorance is remediated.


3 posted on 02/22/2006 4:29:33 PM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. Slay Pinch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile

Good article. Interesting points about the manifests, counters the arguements that "oh, the UAE will not be in a position to subvert security at all".


4 posted on 02/22/2006 4:30:34 PM PST by ozoneliar ("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants" -T.J.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile

I;m pretty certain that he won't need to use a veto on this.

I figure that in two or 3 more days, the right will have recovered from there VERY liberal-like knee jerk initially on this issue. They will have re-examined it, and they will come to realize that nothing's really changed, except the name on the check......

The outrage will be gone. Whatever resolution comes up will either barely make it through congress and there will be a veto, but more likely, any resolution will die in committee.

It's about timing now and how quickly it will come about.


5 posted on 02/22/2006 4:31:21 PM PST by MikefromOhio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bert

yes yes profit over everything /s


6 posted on 02/22/2006 4:31:55 PM PST by Charlespg (Civilization and freedom are only worthy of those who defend or support defending It)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bert

And your credentials are???


7 posted on 02/22/2006 4:32:01 PM PST by bordergal (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile

Great Britain is not an Islamic Nation.

I would beg to differ here. The British Empire has been taken over by the muzzies long ago. They own most of the property and business throughout.


8 posted on 02/22/2006 4:32:57 PM PST by Mrs. Shawnlaw (No NAIS! And the USDA can bugger off, too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bert

Nice rebuttal. You so effectively refute every point he raises. It's like a primer for how to dissect an argument logically! /sarc

Too bad you are such a typical supporter of the deal. Some of us would support the President here if he or his supporters could make a good case for the handover.


9 posted on 02/22/2006 4:34:56 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Freedom isn't free--no, there's a hefty f'in fee--and if you don't throw in your buck-o-5, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Shawnlaw

Admittedly, I had a similar reaction, in light of another article recently posted--I think it was a Steyn piece, in fact--about the Muslim terrorists based in Britain were being seriously considered a threat for once.

However, Boortz is correct in that most British companies are not run by a Muslim state that supported the Taliban.


10 posted on 02/22/2006 4:37:37 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Freedom isn't free--no, there's a hefty f'in fee--and if you don't throw in your buck-o-5, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile

Search?


11 posted on 02/22/2006 4:38:03 PM PST by newgeezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile
There just must be something here under the surface. Something unseen. Something undisclosed. The Bush White House just can't be this blind to the legitimate concerns of the people and of those in Congress who are concerned about this move.

Okay, I'll start.

1- Bush SUDDENLY decided that the US needed to 'wean itself off of oil' -- ahem, this from an OILMAN? My conjecture is that BUSH has been PAID OFF some how and some way. Follow the money.

2- Bush is acting 'dumb' to the clamor against the Nation of Muslim Caliphs as if it's a 'bigot' thing. FOLLOW THE MONEY.

3- Liberals will call Conservatives all kinds of names to try to shift the focus from ISLAM to anything else. However, SOME Liberals are looking at this with renewed vision. This issue may bring some Liberals and Conservatives together.

Follow the Money. What's the pay-off? Where is this going? I, for one, am afraid for my grandchildren.

Bush is acting like Andy Jackson did when the Cherokee won their lawsuit all the way to the Supreme Court, and he refused to abide by the decision.

Tell me where the money trail leads.
12 posted on 02/22/2006 4:38:06 PM PST by HighlyOpinionated (In Memory of Crockett Nicolas, hit and run in the prime of his Cocker Spaniel life, 9/3/05.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: bert

btw, if you get a praise allah from me, you are most likely a terrorist sympathizer or a terrorist yourself supporting muslim terrorists around the world. this is the internet and we intend to ferret you all out.


14 posted on 02/22/2006 4:40:56 PM PST by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

I wish I could agree with you that the only thing changing is the name on the check. If that is true, why did no American company buy in? What made it so important for the UAE to buy in at a profit level evidently no American company found acceptable?


15 posted on 02/22/2006 4:45:05 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Freedom isn't free--no, there's a hefty f'in fee--and if you don't throw in your buck-o-5, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer; Admin Moderator

I did search. I did not find it. If the thread is deleted, that's fine.


16 posted on 02/22/2006 4:46:53 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Freedom isn't free--no, there's a hefty f'in fee--and if you don't throw in your buck-o-5, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile

because there wasn't one INTERESTED?

The government should FORCE a company into a deal?

Since when is THAT a conservative ideal?

Look around, there was no American company interested in the deal.


17 posted on 02/22/2006 4:47:37 PM PST by MikefromOhio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Hi Mike!

Brit played an interview clip of the U.S. Chief Operations Officer for DWP. He is a 60 something AMERICAN gentleman. He is not an Arab, and has been with the company many years.

The more we find out about this thing, the more we find that bull$hit and disinformation is exposed.

LLS


18 posted on 02/22/2006 4:47:55 PM PST by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile

Boortz is a puutz.


19 posted on 02/22/2006 4:48:54 PM PST by Past Your Eyes (You new the job was dangerous when you took it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

I guess so.

I didn't watch Brit tonight :)


20 posted on 02/22/2006 4:51:03 PM PST by MikefromOhio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson