[TBP]

The threat to our national security is clear because the people in charge are employees of a government that supports terrorism. Tehy're much more likely to hve people look the other way (or go inspect over there, please) than a company from a friendly country.

But these ports should be managed by US companies.

[spinestein]

After looking at this for the past week, I'm more convinced than ever that this port deal has nothing to do with national security. It simply won't make a difference safety-wise whether the deal goes through or not because there won't be any changes in the way the security procedures are handled.

This is just an issue of the government continuing its agenda of promoting globalization and free trade which it has done since H. Bush, then with Clinton and continuing to W. Bush.

If you look at the people who support this and then look at the people who oppose this, they all line up exactly the same way as they do on the issues of NAFTA and GATT, and for the same reason.

As usual, the McJournalists in this country have misrepresented this to the public by trying to convince people that if the port deal happens, then two weeks later Mohammad J. Terrorist is going to be sitting in a crane unloading nuclear bombs in a shipping container and putting them on a truck to New York.

I'm not going to jump on the paranoia bandwagon that the media wants me to ride every time they get bored and don't feel like reporting real news.