Oh, Portgate....nevermind.
Posted on 02/28/2006 1:11:19 PM PST by Reagan Man
Oh, Portgate....nevermind.
Oh, good point Ohio. And also, Reagan Man has posted in the past the addage that Reagan used to say - something about not attacking other Republicans.
Which RM violates at every turn.
Agreed. Ronald Reagan was a gentleman.
True I have been called a agent of the enemy on those Islamic threads
Yeah besides the immigration issue threads , the threads that are getting out of control are those Islamic based ones. I fully expect someone any day now someone to
finally cross over that line that many are standing at and start joking about taking a gun and shooting at a mosque.
But that one wasn't "HIS THREAD".. see the difference..LOL
And I have some news for you, you are wrong. The reason the CFIUS didn't say no was they reviewed the leases and security and found nothing wrong. In fact if you read the act you will find they can't say no unless they find something wrong. 1530 were approved because a carrier does there homework ahead of time and conforms to all regulation before submitting anything to CFIUS. It is a costly process and nothing is submitted until is thourghly examined by experts in the field. It is not rubber stamped. UAE and DP has been examined by federal security for years and much of the information is already known. The US knows full well how trade and security is conducted by DP for their ships. Most of DP shipping will be from and to other port terminals in other country. There is a manifest for anything being loaded on a ship before it is loaded and is sent to the US port authority. It is inspected by a customs official before and after it is sent to the US. We have inspectors in Dubai port terminals. And of the 1530 how many were airport terminals, land port terminals and seaport terminals. Leases for airport terminals change quickly because there's a airline going broke every month. Every time a airline stops or starts a service to a airport a terminal is brought or sold.
ROFLMAO! Too funny!
You can't have your facts straight and idolize one and despise the other.
Anyone on this forum doing so is either ignorant of the facts about Ronald Reagan, or deliberately using Reagan's name to attack President Bush.
There is a serious problem here with this poster.....
On the other hand, If it isn't then the administration may be caught in a giant hornet's nest without a can of raid.
When it's all over I am hoping some sense will be made of this whole thing.
Good post.
Does anyone know if it was it a democrat or Republican congress that gave the Treasury Department the lead in CFIUS decisions?
Indeed we do, and that thread had too many FACTS posted on it... and I was only too happy to cut and paste the best factual posting...lol.
Definitely.
Indeed. A very serious problem.
From President Bush's remarks today:
Let me just make something clear to the American people. If there was any doubt in my mind, or people in my administration's mind that our ports would be less secure and the American people endangered, this deal wouldn't go forward.... Our duty is to protect America, and we will protect America.
In other words, trust me. Can you explain why I should trust President Bush one part of our Nation's security, our ports, when he is a complete sellout to business interests on the border issue?
I wonder if the anti-Dubai folks want China operating ports on both our shores. They are already operating the Panama Canal too.
A. Start talking about illegal immigration
B. Call everyone who disagrees with you a Bushbot or Bush Sycophant
C. Start over with Your VERY OWN THREAD
You mean, "strategery"? I don't think so. Bush&Company just screwed up royal on this one. The Bush Treasury Dept`s inner agency, the CFIUS agency, didn't handle this properly from the get-go. And Dubya's defiant outrage in that press conference last week started all the BIGTIME criticism of his leadership on this issue. From there on out, it was all down hill for Bush. Its clear the rules need to be changed, ASAP. No foeign entity deserves to have any managemnt control over commercial port of entry operations. None at all. Whether it be the British, the Red Chinese, the Saudi's or the UAE. Commercial operations of American ports of entry should be controlled by Aemricans. Period.
I have to argue with these Bush bashers that this was not a deal done in a back room at the White House.
The UAE fairly took over these contracts. It is now up to us to make the decision.
Good question. I don't know the answer to that.
It all means what you mean a sell out. I understand the business concerns. I also understand we need these Mexicans working here. I cant imagine what would happen in Texas if all the illegals would disappear. On the other hand I dont want terrorist comming over the border and I dont want people living here forever without becoming citizens and becoming inculturated into America. The border issue is a tough one because no can talk about it rationally and compromise on it. However as to Middle Eastern terrorism and other aspects of National Security I think he has been quite good. The problem is Al Quadia cannot controll how business is run and our relations with other countries financial or otherwize. To do so would be a victory for them in itself. Again I am not sure why Bush is suddenally getting hammered on a problem no President has been able to get a hold on either
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.