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

Skip to comments.

LIVE THREAD: Senate Hearing: Briefing on Ports Deal (11:00 a.m. EST)
C-SPAN ^

Posted on 02/23/2006 6:58:42 AM PST by Howlin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 741-760761-780781-800 ... 821-829 next last
To: Peach
I understand... but...then who will update *me*? ;]
761 posted on 02/23/2006 1:14:16 PM PST by Diva Betsy Ross (Embrace peace- Hug an American soldier- the real peace keepers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 759 | View Replies]

To: Diva Betsy Ross

ROFL. Oh, erroneous newspaper articles will be written after all the hearings and we can assume that everything they say is 100% incorrect :-)


762 posted on 02/23/2006 1:15:14 PM PST by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 761 | View Replies]

To: Politicalities
The University of Michigan imparts a reasonably well-rounded education, including mandatory courses in Western literature

The University of Michigan made me a person of the right...I was an anti-authority teenager when I first arrived in Ann Arbor and everybody in authority was from the left :)

763 posted on 02/23/2006 1:18:45 PM PST by Dolphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 706 | View Replies]

To: Peach
We have ~newspapers ~ still?

Oh My .. (hand to chest)...*gasp*... I had no idea.

How 90's of people! ;]

764 posted on 02/23/2006 1:19:51 PM PST by Diva Betsy Ross (Embrace peace- Hug an American soldier- the real peace keepers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 762 | View Replies]

To: Diva Betsy Ross

ROFL! Thanks for my best laugh today. You delivered it PERFECTLY.

bbl


765 posted on 02/23/2006 1:20:24 PM PST by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 764 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
Oh for crying out loud. I'm not being in the least deceptive. I laid my case out in full detail. Your histrionic accusations are both needless and content-free.

. . . you don't even understand that the President et. al. not only didn't know but COULDN'T know about the particulars of this

Again, perhaps you would care to actually explain why the President "couldn't know" about the particulars of this, and why you think this insulation from knowledge is either acceptable or reasonable.

Another bit my scan of your long post brought up was your complete lack of understanding of port security.

Perhaps you should do more than scan.

You can claim that security--which we are involved with over in the UAE, not just on the receiving end--will be the realm of the buyer, but stating it repeatedly doesn't make it so.

Yes, the CIS program and the proposed Container Verification regime involve both originator and receiver. They also involve seal, re-seal, and specific reporting. Now, why is it wise to have DP World in charge of the operators duties on both ends of this spectrum?

And I made it perfectly clear that the operator is not exclusively in charge of security. The operator is, however, of necessity an integral part of security. Again, perhaps you should do more than "scan."

You are trying to use the word "security" in about four different ways in your highlights

I segregated the security issues rather completely. And by necessity, an operator has specific security obligations concerning container, site, personnel, and land tranfer. Perhaps you would care to point out specifically where those duties will not exist in the case of DP World.

That's not debate or argument, that's spin.

Spin? I have made a concerted effort to put on the table both the information I have garnered and the concerns that information raises. In response, I receive truly disproportionate and frankly bizarre accusations. Ah well, such is the world of the internet.

766 posted on 02/23/2006 1:25:47 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 755 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Oh brother. Now, how about disclosing "all that explanation" in some way. I have only been able to see a part of the hearings, as I said.


767 posted on 02/23/2006 1:27:44 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 757 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul

If the shoe fits Tom DeLay, then absolutely, him too. I am strictly referring to their record so far ON THIS ISSUE. Not their whole lives or careers.


768 posted on 02/23/2006 1:31:05 PM PST by txrangerette ("We are fighting al-Qaeda, NOT Aunt Sadie"...Dick Cheney commenting on the wiretaps!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]

To: Politicalities
I really don't see the point of this.

Roger that.

really don't see the point of this. I and MJY1288 have both told you that you don't have a knack for sarcasm.

I agree with you, but what are we three against the thousands?
769 posted on 02/23/2006 1:33:16 PM PST by farmer18th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 706 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper

I'm not referring to P&O's winning bid, or P&O's shareholder approval. That is between P&O and DP World (and indeed, it appears that P&O wasn't certain who would be the winning bidder until the very last minute).

I'm referring to the apporval by the CFIUS, which appears to have been communicated to the President (and indeed to the committee chair, Mr. Snow) after the fact.


770 posted on 02/23/2006 1:36:20 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 725 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3
That's what I'm checking right now - even if they are American companies owned by FOREIGNERS - that's no longer allowed according to some FReepers now.

No one's arguing that Faizel and Al Turdo can't buy a few shares of IBM but control of strategic industries and facilities is an entirely different matter, and I think you understand the distinction. Would you want the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia buying a controlling interest in Boeing?
771 posted on 02/23/2006 1:41:01 PM PST by farmer18th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 751 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
I'm referring to the apporval by the CFIUS, which appears to have been communicated to the President (and indeed to the committee chair, Mr. Snow) after the fact.

I'm having doubts about this myself. This whole story has been misreported from the word "go".

772 posted on 02/23/2006 1:46:00 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Proud to be a cotton-pickin' Republican on the GOP Plantation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 770 | View Replies]

To: farmer18th

No, because of the extensive space and military applications. Would I mind him owning this BRITISH company? No.


773 posted on 02/23/2006 1:46:50 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 771 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3
Would I mind him owning this BRITISH company? No.

If the British company leases stratetic facilities in America, it's an issue--as the majority of Freepers appear to agree.
774 posted on 02/23/2006 1:48:44 PM PST by farmer18th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 773 | View Replies]

To: farmer18th

The majority are wrong this time - a couple terminals at 6-7 U.S. ports are not "strategic" - next?


775 posted on 02/23/2006 1:53:28 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 774 | View Replies]

Comment #776 Removed by Moderator

To: CobaltBlue

Thanks for the link. Very informative. It is always nice to have actual information in this debate. I'm getting very tired of the snarky comments and content free hand-waving of the apologists.


777 posted on 02/23/2006 1:56:04 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 749 | View Replies]

To: buffmonster
"Republican doesn't mean clone"

No, but it used to mean person capable of critical thought... *sigh*

What are the President's motives for wasting our national security?

778 posted on 02/23/2006 1:59:38 PM PST by Diva Betsy Ross (Embrace peace- Hug an American soldier- the real peace keepers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 776 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3
The majority are wrong this time - a couple terminals at 6-7 U.S. ports are not "strategic" - next?

The "next" might be your fault--when an Islamofascist uses his UAE contacts to use that terminal for depleted uranium.

The deal isn't worth it.
779 posted on 02/23/2006 2:02:18 PM PST by farmer18th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 775 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3
why is it that you think Dubai, with billions at stake here and even more in their home country, would NOT be more careful -- rather than less -- about assisting in anti-terror activities at U.S. ports if it is actually operating them? Call it a holdover from the M.A.D.D. Cold War theory ; )

Actually (and hopefully) a reasonable basis for DP World to behave itself. But I don't think DP World management (or upper echelons) will be the source of mischief.

The UAE has turned a blind eye (either deliberately or through negligence) to manipulations of its own banking system, ports, and domestic companies in the past, and has garnered needless international disrepute in the process.

My concern is with the machinations possible within the enormous rank and file that makes up a company the size of DP World (with this acquisition, the third largest terminal operator in the world). Corporate bureaucracy and corruption is, after all, as common as governmental bureaucracy and corruption.

780 posted on 02/23/2006 2:07:29 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 719 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 741-760761-780781-800 ... 821-829 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