Fear Escalates on Foreign Control of Ports

Houston Chronicle ^ | 2-19-2006 | TED BRIDIS

[Stellar Dendrite]

ping

[Mike Darancette]

Bigotry?

I would Imagine that the Day to day operations will be handled by American Citizens and all attempts will be to keep the operations squeaky clean. This may be an opportunity to install state of the art detection equipment at the ports in question, you can bet that DHS made the new owners jump through hoops to get government approval.

[BigFinn]

What is his thinking? That the moderate Arabs will have control over the radicals? From what I've seen over the last few months, that is NOT the case.
They really need to reconsider this. Doesn't sound very wise at the moment.

[Luke21]

Nothing like handing the Dems a bipartisan issue to hammer us with. Good grief, Jorge.

[Wormwood]

Terrifying deal Bush made.

Bush has yet to discover that he cannot serve two masters.

[B4Ranch]

There'$ only one ma$ter in thi$ $ituation.

[proudofthesouth]

I'd like to know why Bush is supporting this!

[GlennLivett]

I believe the conservative right will put enough pressure on the White House, just like with the Miers nomination, that this decision will be reversed.

I think it really makes President Bush look weak on homeland defense.

[Travis McGee]

It's absolutely pathetic and shameful that we would outsource our port operations to ANY foreigners, EVER.

Much less to Arabs during a war against islamofascism.

Our parents who survived the Great Depression and won WW2 must be disgusted with the Quislings and sellouts now running this nation into the ground.

[Wormwood]

Exactly. It calls into question his loyalty. I

Does it really?

seems like he's the globalist he always was to me.

[DoNotDivide]

Republicrats suck.

[OpusatFR]

"Bush has yet to discover that he cannot serve two masters."

He only serves one: Corporatist Globalists.

[Aliska]

Don't they get enough of our money in oil revenues? Putting the real concern about security aside, another $6.8 bil flowing out of the country cannot be in our best interest.

We already have a balance of trade deficit.

To some extent going global is inevitable, but not to this degree. We will be bankrupted, are already in heavy foreign debt.

I don't think anybody likes the outsourcing of all the jobs in either party, yet there is not enough grass roots power to put a stop on it. People are losing their good-paying jobs by the thousands, and most will never find a comparable one.

[F.J. Mitchell]

It is not fear that is esculating over foreign control of our ports. It is disbelief, shock and blood boiling anger at the damn fools who made this moronic decision and it will not be tolorated.

[OpusatFR]

"...yet there is not enough grass roots power to put a stop on it."

Neither party follows anything other than a specific agenda that has been in place for decades. What the little guy wants is not their concern. Their concern is the corporation, the banks, and the top elite.

[ARealMothersSonForever]

Once again I find myself opposing a decision that was made by an executive branch group (DHS). And this poor decision is being lauded by the party loyalists as "strategery". It would be humorous if it dealt with something inane like which government agency should gather chicken feathers off of interstate medians. But this is recognized as a national security issue, not chicken feathers. There should be OPEN hearings on this now. Not later, after the damage is done.

[rajuchor]

I donno, I think on some issues such as immigration, ports control etc President Bush's administration is making some very very wrong decisions that can be exteremely harmful to us.

I just cannot understand why in the world we are still willing to allow countries such as UAE take control of our ports.

I think onle one person in the whole administration gets things right and it is the one and only HRH Donald Rumsfeld.

I pray to God Prez. Bush is not loosing focus on protecting America and American interests.