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

Skip to comments.

Armed Services Chairman Opposes Port Deal
UPI.com ^ | 3/03/2006 | Staff Writers

Posted on 03/03/2006 7:59:36 AM PST by ex-Texan

WASHINGTON, March 3 (UPI) -- A top Republican has declared opposition to allowing a Dubai government-owned company to assume control of operations at U.S. ports.

House Armed Services Committee Duncan Hunter said the United Arab Emirates has a "terrifying" record of allowing the transshipment of nuclear materials and weapons of mass destruction through its country to Pakistan, Iran and other countries.

The controversial deal will give Dubai Port World, Inc. control over P&O North America, a shipping and port terminal operator with a presence in 21 American ports on the East and Gulf Coast. P&O runs public port terminals -- where cargo is loaded and unloaded -- in at least six major U.S. ports.

The $6.8 billion takeover is now expected to be complete by next week, despite an ongoing 45-day security investigation by the U.S. government to address concerns about the company's ownership and possible vulnerability to terrorist infiltration.

The White House's Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States approved the deal in January without conducting the 45-day investigation required by law. White House officials said the investigation is only required if members of the committee raise national security concerns.

Hunter said that in 2003, despite U.S. protests, United Arab Emirates customs officials allowed 66 American high-speed electrical switches, which can be used for detonating nuclear weapons, to be sent to a Pakistani businessman with ties to the Pakistani military.

"Dubai can't be trusted with our critical infrastructure. United Arab Emirates officials have been instrumental in the transshipment of nuclear materials and weapons of mass destruction components," said Hunter. "To those who say my views smack of protectionism, I say: America is worth protecting."


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: bds; dubai; dubaiportsworld; iran; israel; portsdeal
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-99 next last
Is this news good for the White House? El Rushbo will probably be saying this to looks like a another victory for the Bush. [More Reports?] Bush was being quoted in AP reports saying outsourcing jobs to India is good for the American economy. I understand now: Outsourcing jobs overseas is good for America. Outsourcing our borders and ports is good for our national security. What's not to understand?
1 posted on 03/03/2006 7:59:37 AM PST by ex-Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

Well if I put my house on the market and the highest bidder is a Muslim and I refuse to sell to him. I wonder what the government will do to me? Do you suggest that all current contracts with foriegn ownership of terminal berths be canceled, those terminals shut down and those Longshoremen layed off until an American stevedore company can buy the contracts?


2 posted on 03/03/2006 8:04:09 AM PST by massgopguy (massgopguy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

Is this guy up for re-election?


3 posted on 03/03/2006 8:05:16 AM PST by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

America's new can't do motto. We can't do anything for ourselves.


4 posted on 03/03/2006 8:05:33 AM PST by cripplecreek (Never a minigun handy when you need one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

"To those who say my views smack of protectionism, I say: America is worth protecting."

That line of Hunter's is so lame. Did his staff spend a week coming up with it. I guess coming up with a slogan is easier than laying out the facts to support his case.


5 posted on 03/03/2006 8:05:50 AM PST by frankjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frankjr

That line is a bad Dirty Harry-type line. Works great in a movie when your pointing a 44 Magnum at a thug's face, but not very well in reality.


6 posted on 03/03/2006 8:07:40 AM PST by GianniV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All

This is 2 days old. The media is recycling. The tide has clearly turned on this matter.

Hunter will be brought back within the fold.

Everyone needs to focus. Send money to GOP candidates in vulnerable districts, or volunteer your time -- even if you don't live in that district.

The only principled stand is to deny the leftward most candidates office.


7 posted on 03/03/2006 8:07:42 AM PST by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

Their example is 66 high speed electrical switches sold three years ago?

To a country that already has nuclear weapons?

I need more information, but this sounds like more hysterics rather that solid reasoning.


8 posted on 03/03/2006 8:08:35 AM PST by untrained skeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

I'm all for not working with most Muslim countries. What do we owe these people? Are any of them standing up in defiant support of the US? If not, forget 'em.


9 posted on 03/03/2006 8:08:56 AM PST by GianniV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

Duncan Hunter is a liberal shill and a racist. /sarc


10 posted on 03/03/2006 8:13:01 AM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Bump.

Duncan Hunter is one of the most consistent pro-defense hawks still left in the Congress. Many of the rest of them have sold out, ....for the equivalent of 30 pieces of silver.

He has proven his courage countless times, standing up to those schilling for foreign governments.


11 posted on 03/03/2006 8:13:29 AM PST by Paul Ross (Hitting bullets with bullets successfully for 35 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
Well if I put my house on the market and the highest bidder is a Muslim and I refuse to sell to him. I wonder what the government will do to me?

What does your house have to do with national security?...Is it a safe house for terrorists?

12 posted on 03/03/2006 8:14:09 AM PST by lewislynn (Fairtax = lies, hope, wishful thinking, conjecture and lies. (no it's not a mistake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: frankjr

Unlike you (and the current sad excuses for GOP leadership who are driving the party into the ground) he is apparently in tune with Main Street. It's not rocket science. PR101.....


13 posted on 03/03/2006 8:14:48 AM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Owen

What is the fold? Neoliberalism?


14 posted on 03/03/2006 8:15:21 AM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GianniV

The Saudi Wahhabis thought we were swell, when we were bleeding to free their Kuwaiti cousins,
then a few years later, sixteen Saudi hijackers flew into the WTC, Pentagon and Pennsylvania,
and three more were from the UAE.


15 posted on 03/03/2006 8:15:34 AM PST by tumblindice (Crusaders v. Saracens? You sure that's the way you want to frame it? OK . . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter; Flux Capacitor; indcons; cgk; Sweetjustusnow; sit-rep; Esther Ruth; ...

ping


16 posted on 03/03/2006 8:15:54 AM PST by Stellar Dendrite (UAE-- Funds HAMAS and CAIR, check my homepage [UPDATED FREQUENTLY])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

Using some random article to bash Rush, eh? Obviously you have already decided this article equals defeat for the White House. More power to you. And remember it when this deal goes through.


17 posted on 03/03/2006 8:17:09 AM PST by Coop (FR= a lotta talk, but little action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Echo Talon
Ding Ding Ding!!

We have a winner!

18 posted on 03/03/2006 8:17:10 AM PST by Abathar (Proudly catching hell for posting without reading since 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

We are seeing all the neoliberal, Thomas L. Friedman-esque hacks coming out of the woodwork, trying to portray the notion that the mainstream position of the Right should be economistic, globalist, naive, anti nationalist, neoliberalism. And they call the kettle black, calling those of us who have a borders, language and culture agenda "liberals." Up is down, etc .....


19 posted on 03/03/2006 8:18:19 AM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

No matter on which side of this issue one stands, it is upsetting to read comments like these coming from the House Armed Services Committee Chairman who has not, as far as I can determine, expressed any concern about the fact that DPW provides virtually the exclusive support for our US Navy ships in the UAE ports of Jebel Ali and Fujairah. Those ports accommodate more US Navy ships than any other international port. DPW is also the primary support contractor for US Air Force assets at Al Dhafra Air Base in UAE.
Why would the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee trust DPW to work closely with thousands of US military personnel and military vessels and aircraft, when he has expressed such extreme distrust of DPW's role in civilian operations? If DPW is such a danger to the security of US civilians, why is the same company viewed as a trusted partner by the US military?


20 posted on 03/03/2006 8:19:30 AM PST by OkeyDokeyOkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
More likely than not, the title to your house is already owned by a foreign lender or holding company. That is, if your are paying a mortgage. No Big Deal, right? So what difference does it make if an Arab want to buy it? Makes no difference to the U.S. government, ergo, makes no dfference to me. Saw the news yesterday about Yale admitting a former leading member of the Taliban. He is probably going to be tapped for Skull 'n Bones. In the end, if the White House does not care it means Americans do not care.
21 posted on 03/03/2006 8:19:38 AM PST by ex-Texan (Matthew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: frankjr
Hunter said that in 2003, despite U.S. protests, United Arab Emirates customs officials allowed 66 American high-speed electrical switches, which can be used for detonating nuclear weapons, to be sent to a Pakistani businessman with ties to the Pakistani military.

"Dubai can't be trusted with our critical infrastructure. United Arab Emirates officials have been instrumental in the transshipment of nuclear materials and weapons of mass destruction components," said Hunter. "To those who say my views smack of protectionism, I say: America is worth protecting."

That line of Hunter's is so lame. Did his staff spend a week coming up with it. I guess coming up with a slogan is easier than laying out the facts to support his case.
Ignoring the facts is what's lame.
22 posted on 03/03/2006 8:19:56 AM PST by lewislynn (Fairtax = lies, hope, wishful thinking, conjecture and lies. (no it's not a mistake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice; Stellar Dendrite; GOP_1900AD

Duncan Hunter did stop Cosco in 1998. AT least he's being consistent!

http://www.house.gov/hunter/cosco99.htm
NEWS FROM
CONGRESSMAN DUNCAN HUNTER
52d District, California
Member, National Security Committee
Chairman, Subcommittee on Military Procurement


www.house.gov/hunter
____________________________________________________________________


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 17 September 1998



AGREEMENT REACHED TO BAN COSCO FROM LONG BEACH
SENATE RECEDES TO HUNTER LEGISLATION

WASHINGTON, DC---Members of the House and Senate agreed today to deny the President the authority to issue a waiver allowing the China Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO) to lease a terminal at the former Long Beach Naval Station in California. The House passed the prohibition on the waiver authority, authored by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), in approving its version of the defense bill by a vote of 357-60 on May 21, 1998. The agreement today came as Representatives and Senators wrapped up their work on the Conference Report for the Fiscal Year 1999 National Defense Authorization bill.(snip)


23 posted on 03/03/2006 8:20:04 AM PST by WatchingInAmazement ("Nothing is more expensive than cheap labor," prof. Vernon Briggs, labor economist Cornell Un.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: untrained skeptic; Owen; massgopguy; ex-Texan

Sections of Mexican Border Called Virtual War Zone (Ft. Worth Star Telegram)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1589050/posts?q=1&&page=51

To: Fruitbat

WTH's W waiting for on this!

He's trying to secure a deal with a Mexican company owned by the Mexican government to enforce our immigration laws. Apparently, no one wants to do the job here and they can do it much cheaper. It's all part of the new global economy. Yeah, Yemen and Iran already guard our border with Canada. China and Russia are protecting the Pacific for us. And we leased a consortium of Liberian/Nigerian navy ships to patrol the Atlantic. Finally, the UK has given Somolian pirates access to Diego Garcia in a new strategy, apporved by their courts and not their Parliament, to patrol the Indian Ocean on the cheap.

It's a great plan. I hear no one disobeys laws because everyone involved makes enormous amounts of tax money.


25 posted on 03/02/2006 11:47:53 PM PST by sully777

Post #25 is intended as a parody of the UAE situation, as seen through a different context--namely running our borders.

The way I hear it, the US Border Patrol said it didn't sign off on it, then after someone got hold of them, they released a document this week saying the deal was great for America. Safest, most effective form of protection for our borders against illegal aliens is to use Mexicans. Anyone against the idea is no doubt a racist and too stupid to understand the complexities of today's world. (Sarcasm still on)

26 posted on 03/02/2006 11:54:31 PM PST by sully777


24 posted on 03/03/2006 8:20:07 AM PST by sully777 (wWBBD: What would Brian Boitano do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

"Do you suggest that all current contracts with foriegn ownership of terminal berths be canceled, those terminals shut down and those Longshoremen layed off until an American stevedore company can buy the contracts?"

No - just those with ties to terrorism and who think Israel should not exist.


25 posted on 03/03/2006 8:22:15 AM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

This guy better tune into Rush Flim Flam who has the Bush administration marching orders. It's all ok...It's all good...The deal is already done....Dubai related operations have no security baggage associated with them. UAE is so on our side. Bush said so.... I feel better already.


26 posted on 03/03/2006 8:23:33 AM PST by putupjob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
I'll bet if they outlaw unions at the ports, a US company would be willing to do it.

You think the Dems will go for that deal.

27 posted on 03/03/2006 8:23:35 AM PST by AmishDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

Hunter's my Congressman. He's pretty good overall--but his staff has been buffaloed more than once by the Legacy Media-Political Complex.


28 posted on 03/03/2006 8:24:05 AM PST by BeHoldAPaleHorse (Tagline deleted at request of moderator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

Maybe the Congress will "federalize" the ship parking business, just think how many positions they can create opening every container that gets unloaded. (Sarcasm)

Liberals are in need of campaign funding the old fashion 'union' way.


29 posted on 03/03/2006 8:26:35 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
UAE's DPW currently ILLEGALLY boycotting Israel. If the Ports Deal goes through, we will be effectively boycotting Israel (our only trusted long term ally on the War on Terror

Ah, what the hell does it matter. We are giving ourselves carte blanche to run Israel's foreign policy, giving large chunks of land to Hamas (who is financed and supported by the UAE).

Bush is looking to be Israel's worst best friend.
30 posted on 03/03/2006 8:27:50 AM PST by sully777 (wWBBD: What would Brian Boitano do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
Duncan Hunter On the Issues
31 posted on 03/03/2006 8:28:14 AM PST by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GOP_1900AD; All

Some statements from my FR homepage. Someone needs to get up there at the next RNC major meeting or even the next GOP Convention and say things like this. Whatever happened to the Barry Goldwaters of yore?




As a former "moderate" and former believer in the naive utopian views contained in, among other texts, Thomas L. Friedman's "The Lexus and the Olive Tree" I have developed a unique geopolitical perspective.

Since beginning my awakening process in 1996, I have increasingly embraced a hybrid of neo-Clausewitzian and worst-case approaches to geopolitical analysis that would make all liberals, and even certain factions within the GOP, cringe. It goes without saying, that Communists, Marxists, Nazis, Fascists and other procrustean types hate me.

Specifically, I believe that war between great powers is inevitable and happens in a recurring cycle which cannot be broken by any but Almighty God. The sooner we accept this, and structure our lives, our expectations, our geopolitics, our economics, and our strength of will, to this reality, the better it will enhance the chances for the long term survival of Western Civilization. This might seem counterintuitive, given the conventional anti Clausewitzian "wisdom" that great war has become so destructive as to make all conceivable unlimited wars fought between great powers immoral. However, consider the ultimate end state of the current conventional "wisdom" - is it any different from what would be brought on by the mentality of "better Red than dead" or, the more current variation, "better Muslim than dead?" There has been no consensus whatever that the next great war shall be the end of all times or that certain "worst case" wars against large nuclear armed powers (or axes of them) are unthinkable under all circumstances. Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, a CIA veteran, among others who have done so, has presented analyses which completely refute the ideas of "nuclear winter" and "total destruction." I postulate that should we ever be so unfortunate as to be put in a situation where we have not explicitly prepared to fight and win a war against the greatest powers, up to and including a full nuclear exchange, and, we face another world war axis, we may well think to ourselves that we desparately want to live, and that we do not envy the dead. We might well castigate ourselves for failing to consider the obvious fact that war between great powers is the most likely eventual outcome and that no peace lasts forever. Shame on us for dreaming naively otherwise!

When the gallows at Nuremburg dispatched Evil Incarnate, many mouthed the words "never again." Sadly, it would have been possible to predict, as early as 1946, that this was but a shallow platitude. The Trial of the Century convicted only a fraction of a certain Nazi contingent of the overall totalitarian monster. It did not indict, per se, totalitarianism. In all but Western Europe, totalitarianism was given a pass. The cancerous cells were never eradicated. And, predictably, they have again taken root. Islamism, National Bolshevism, neo-pan Sinicism, neo-pan Slavism, and a number of other mass psychotic polities, have risen to the surface once again, and have merged with the general envy that less capable countries (and even internal factions sympathetic with them) have toward the West and toward the US (and Israel) in particular. "Never again" is now impossible. So now the only question is, when "it" happens again, who will be the fiends, who will be the victims, where will it happen and how badly? To shy away from this only means that one is dreaming of the impossible. How naive.

This is but part of an overall hard line far, true, Burkian Right, conservative outlook, mindful of the Western Tradition, which gives me an immense source of personal accomplishment and is embodied in my tag line.

If I can incite raging maniacal tantrums in all shades of Leftists, while at the same time bringing out ad hominem attacks by those who abuse the word and mistakenly proclaim themselves as "Conservatives" (but who are really of the Jacobin, anti conservative stripe, wanting no rules and no moral code in force, and who actually harm the Right, not to mention society as a whole) then I must be doing something right (um, make that Right!).

When you see not only the Left but also many who proclaim themselves to be "conservatives" actively undermining Western Civilization and selling out the USA to enemies foreign and domestic, including anti Western nation states, then the time for drastic measures may be nigh.




At various times since my sign up date, there have been false claims and misconceptions regarding my beliefs. While I may criticize certain factions whose power in the GOP slowly increased throughout the 20th century (e.g. Progressives, Libertarians, Free Traders, Big Tenters, Grover Norquist bootlickers, etc) I have an explicit goal of tough love for the GOP. I have no hidden agenda; my agenda is open. In essence, I believe strongly that for the GOP to become *THE* party for the 21st century, we must diligently study best practices from our past. Of note, I frequently meditate on the Republican Party Platform of 1900. This platform included balanced fair trade, a strong national defense, strong national sovereignty, responsible currency management, and a generally pro USA and pro Western Civilization stance. It is the essence of a rare time in our history where we were financially, geopolitically, and spiritually ascendent all at the same time. I think that we still don't fully comprehend the great harm done by Czolgolz' bullets. I urge all here to meditate on these things, and to consider how to move the GOP from a receding, reactive, increasingly liberal stance, to a stance of taking initiative and becoming the leader in both political and geopolitical development of the USA and Western Civilization. Some will label me a throw back to primitive ways, but as I see it, my ways are reflective of the true future and of the primacy of the greatest civilization ever to grace God's green Earth.




I loath the 3rd Way, the Norquist Arabists and Transnational Progressives, and pledge to fight these movements with all my might. The 3rd Way, Norquist Arabists and the Transnational Progressives are unmistakable enemies within of the USA and the West. No matter how high in position any of them are, if they commit treason, then the full weight of the law must come down on them and make examples of them which shall be remembered for 1000 years.




About my handle: Firstly, it signifies my promotion of the principles of the GOP platform of 1900 A.D. Secondly, with my overt use of "A.D." as opposed to nonsense such as "CE," I am boldly stating my belief that Western Civilization owes its life to Judeo-Christian and Romano-Hellenic underpinnings. God Bless America and God Bless Western Civilization.




"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government." ---George Washington, 1793


32 posted on 03/03/2006 8:28:27 AM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn

It could be used as one. It's strategically located near two chinese restaurants.


33 posted on 03/03/2006 8:28:58 AM PST by massgopguy (massgopguy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

The xenophobia fostered by conservatives (just read the comments on this site about towel heads, "turn Mecca into a parking lot," camel jockeys, etc.) has has come back to bite.


34 posted on 03/03/2006 8:29:27 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
Well if I put my house on the market and the highest bidder is a Muslim and I refuse to sell to him. I wonder what the government will do to me? Do you suggest that all current contracts with foriegn ownership of terminal berths be canceled, those terminals shut down and those Longshoremen layed off until an American stevedore company can buy the contracts?

Let's put the Dubai World deal in proper perspective, shall we?

1. We are at war
2. We are at war against a Wahabbi-influenced Mecca-bowing enemy who is every bit fanatical as emperor-worshipping Bushito-crazed Japan was in WWII.
3. Both the Japanese and Arabs used/use suicide as a weapon.
4. The Japanese were more civilized, however, because kamakazi was directed only at military targets--Arabs target civilians, women and children.
5. To achieve victory over Japan in WWII, we defeated not only their military but also their Bushito culture where the emperor was exalted.
6. To gain victory in the WOT we must do the same to radical Islam.
7. The DWP deal stinks because it would be too easy for some minor functionary Islamist to infiltrate DWP headquarters.
8. A ship, lets say in a Liberian port, could be then laden with explosives but its cargo manifest falsified.
9. It could then be directed to a U.S. Port.
10. Finally, it was a racist policy in reflection, but you couldn't sell that house in WWII to Japanese--the government had them all in camps.

35 posted on 03/03/2006 8:30:30 AM PST by meandog (Five pillars of Islam: Allah's Mohammad is a 1. pedophile, 2. pimp, 3. puke, 4. pustz, 5. pig!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite

Cong Duncan Hunter is doing a good job on this issue. Standing up and speaking out in the name of American interests is always good to see coming from any CongressCritter. Especially a GOP CongressCritter. Some folks around FR don't like seeing free speech and political dissent allowed. They'd rather see free speech stifled and political dissent abolished. Well, as long as Dubya is Prez anyway. LOL


36 posted on 03/03/2006 8:30:34 AM PST by Reagan Man (Secure our borders;punish employers who hire illegals;stop all welfare to illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Abathar
http://www.hunterforcongress.com/
37 posted on 03/03/2006 8:31:04 AM PST by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sully777

I'm not happy about the deal. Just like I wasn't happy about the Japanese buying Rockefeller Center in 1985. I would have been even less happy had they done so in 1950 and I'm sure the outrage would have been similar since it would have been only nine years since the attack on Pearl Harbor. But in 1950 Japan became an important ally in the Cold War as a staging area for the Korean War.


38 posted on 03/03/2006 8:34:10 AM PST by massgopguy (massgopguy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan; freepatriot32; PatrickHenry; LibertarianInExile

Re: The $6.8 billion takeover is now expected to be complete by next week, despite an ongoing 45-day security investigation by the U.S. government to address concerns about the company's ownership and possible vulnerability to terrorist infiltration.

The White House's Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States approved the deal in January without conducting the 45-day investigation required by law.



Can the President sidestep Congress constitutionally?


39 posted on 03/03/2006 8:34:43 AM PST by sully777 (wWBBD: What would Brian Boitano do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OkeyDokeyOkie
...it is upsetting to read comments like these coming from the House Armed Services Committee Chairman who has not, as far as I can determine, expressed any concern about the fact that DPW provides virtually the exclusive support for our US Navy ships in the UAE ports of Jebel Ali and Fujairah.

So? What makes you think he's happy about that either? But obviously their not going to slip a nuke into their OWN HARBOR for detonation! That's where this differs.

If they are real allies, they can take some rejection too.

As far as Duncan Hunter's consistency, I like this example clipped from an interview with Lou Dobbs a couple weeks ago:

But what we need to do is identify critical infrastructure, and that goes beyond the ports, whether its power grids, transportation lines.

CONGRESSMAN HUNTER: (I recommend in a pending bill that) We identify critical infrastructure. And rather than requiring another review, we simply ban anyone who is not a United States company, which has a board of directors, which is approved by DOD and by Homeland Security from owning that particular critical asset.

DOBBS: Hallelujah.

HUNTER: That's what we need.

DOBBS: Now, you know what some idiot is going to say, Mr. Chairman? Some idiot is going to say that's protectionism.

HUNTER: Well, you know, I think America is worth protecting.

DOBBS: I couldn't agree with you more. How is it we've gotten to a point where there is even an issue about a foreign government owned company or a foreign government owning U.S. key strategic assets?

HUNTER: Lou, it's the same as when we had the Port of Long Beach, the port officials coming in with their eyes glazed over, having talked to the local lobbyists, and they talked not about the Chinese -- the People's Liberation Army owning the naval base, they talked about a corporation, and this idea of free trade, that if you mask one of your military services by calling it a corporation, which the Chinese do regularly, you can do anything with free traders and with capitalists, because somehow that glazes our eyes and it blinds us.

And so we have to pull back. Let's take a new perspective. Let's look at critical infrastructure. Let's stop it.

40 posted on 03/03/2006 8:38:24 AM PST by Paul Ross (Hitting bullets with bullets successfully for 35 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: meandog

Well they weren't too civilised when they took my father's cousin prisoner at Bataan. You might want to ask the people of Nanking about military targets.


41 posted on 03/03/2006 8:38:40 AM PST by massgopguy (massgopguy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
Yes they bit that juicy bait set out by bj and Hillry and their followers.

Here the liberals were trashing one of their key constituencies of their base and they will slink back all the richer, unscathed for their "racists" propaganda, salivating while the MSM points the accusing finger of what a bunch of racists conservatives really are.
42 posted on 03/03/2006 8:41:02 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: sully777
Nada por nada. If Bush does the deal, he may have to face angry people clamoring for his head. Angry people on both sides of the aisle. Michael Savage was saying a few days ago that this is the worst political crisis he has ever seen. He claims it is worse than Watergate. Savage is riling up people into a savage pitch.
43 posted on 03/03/2006 8:41:26 AM PST by ex-Texan (Matthew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: GOP_1900AD
"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government."
---George Washington, 1793

Indeed. He is proved more right every day. Anyone who doesn't see the wisdom of this is, frankly, no American.

44 posted on 03/03/2006 8:42:28 AM PST by Paul Ross (Hitting bullets with bullets successfully for 35 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright

Is national sovereignty "xenophobia?"

Is the love of one's own land "racist?"


45 posted on 03/03/2006 8:43:43 AM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

House Armed Services Committee Duncan Hunter said the United Arab Emirates has a "terrifying" record of allowing the transshipment of nuclear materials and weapons of mass destruction through its country to Pakistan, Iran and other countries.



Yep. Duncan Hunter a know nothing Bush hater from way back. Bet he spends all his time at DU.

(sarc tag)


46 posted on 03/03/2006 8:44:55 AM PST by trubluolyguy (Islam, Religion of Peace and they'll kill you to prove it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

Do you suggest that all current contracts with foriegn ownership of terminal berths be canceled, those terminals shut down and those Longshoremen layed off until an American stevedore company can buy the contracts?




How about terminate the contracts with countries who have a majority of their population that wants us dead? Can we do that?


47 posted on 03/03/2006 8:46:20 AM PST by trubluolyguy (Islam, Religion of Peace and they'll kill you to prove it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

The Dubai Ports deal currently has 17% popular support according to yesterday's Fox News poll and it is primarily responsible for an overall drop in the President's positives as a leader in the war on terror. This deal, politically, could have long range negative implications for Republicans regardless of whether its the right thing to do or the wrong thing to do.
Its a big loser politically, as is the President going to India to outsource more American jobs and give them American nuclear technology. Bad moves.


48 posted on 03/03/2006 8:46:28 AM PST by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

You are 100% full of crap.

Although, I would say that the demogoguing of this by Leftist politicos is a fairly shallow tactic and disgusts me greatly. This is a conservative, not a liberal issue. The GOP's reluctance to embrace this issue only has meant the libs could run with it. Shame on us all.


49 posted on 03/03/2006 8:46:43 AM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

The enemy within does not bound itself to the Leftist parties. We have them among us as well.


50 posted on 03/03/2006 8:47:39 AM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-99 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