Posted on 02/23/2006 3:16:25 PM PST by CaliFReeper1
Spread the word to all, let's make this a huge national protest: The United American Committee announces a protest rally on March 4 against the recent sale of the operations of our nation's ports to a United Arab Emirates-owned company. The protest will be held in New York by the port at West 42nd St. & West Side Hwy (Route 9A) in Manhattan on SATURDAY, March 4, 2006, at 12:00 Noon, and also a protest on the West Coast as well on the same day in Los Angeles, Saturday, March 4, at 11000 Wilshire in West Los Angeles, at 12:00 Noon. “Would we have allowed our ports to be operated by a Japanese Imperial owned or German Nazi owned company during WWII?” remarks United American Committee founder Jesse Petrilla. “We have heard from our politicians, now it's time that we hear from the people of America...We need to send a clear message to our president that Republicans and Democrats alike agree that this deal goes against the best interest of our nation and its people.”
The UAC believes that President Bush should reconsider his vow to veto any legislation that may pass through congress which would block the sale. The UAC stance is that President Bush needs to realize that neither Democrats or his Republican constituents want this sale to occur. The United Arab Emirates is a government which has been far from cooperative in the war on Islamic extremism.
The UAC urges anyone within distance to attend the rally in New York or Los Angeles and for those in middle America to gather their friends and hold their own rallies in their towns. The United American Committee asks that protesters send a united message against the sale of the ports. Rally details are subject to change and all updates will be on the UAC's website at www.UnitedAmericanCommittee.org.
“The people need to stand up and demand that the government address the will of the citizens to stand against our enemies before it's too late...before one of those cargo containers comes through with a nuclear bomb inside.” says Petrilla.
Media contact: United American Committee info@unitedamericancommittee.org
WHAT: Protest against the sale of U.S. port operations to U Arab Emirates
WHERE: Los Angeles & New York
In NY: W 42nd St. & West Side Hwy (Route 9A) in Manhattan
In Los Angeles: Federal Building at 11000 Wilshire Blvd.
WHEN: SATURDAY, March 4, 2006 at 12:00 Noon
um. no.
my initial reacion to this sale was quite negative, but I am beginning to come to the conclusion that there are no security risks worth mentioning as a result of the deal.
that being so, I can support a brief hiatus for investigation and public explanation, but cannot "protest" the actual sale.
The UAE have, since 9-11, been our allies - and, for that region at least, have been pretty steady allies.
The people who are protesting the loudest are the ones who don't understand. It's a business transaction between two companies. The UAE has been very helpful to the U.S. General Franks has faith in the UAE. He's been around the block plenty of times, and he has more knowledge of an enemy vs. an ally in his thumb than most regular folks could understand in a year. What I'm saying is..... calm down. THINK. This UAE company has ports all over the world. Why would they want to jeopardize that?
Whatever, the arrangement is, it certainly affects the total number of union members. But, as that law guide points out, the crewmembers have to honor a strike, so it doesn't affect the union's power.
Because of the increase in intl trade, all the ports are busy. But the west coast ports are the busiest. There, you would say that they are reaching capacity, plus the union has opposed futher automation to enhance capacity. Recall the strike a couple of years ago.
There are already containers entering Canada and Mexico which then enter the US. These are not getting the scrutiny that containers arriving at our domestic ports recieve. The number of these "trans-shipped" containers will be increasing.
Note the recent anouncement of the port expansion(don't recall the name) in Mexico. Also, Burlington Northern-Santa Fe bought that leg of the Mexican rail line from that port to Laredo, TX, which gives them control all the way to Kansas City. Add to this the announced creation of an inland port in KC. With this arrangement, KC functions just like a seaport, except it is in the geographical center of the nation.
To get a better control of the security needed for the increasing number of containers entering via Canada and Mexico, we have North American Perimeter Security, which will give the US the authority to control security on these containers(and people).
If you will recall, Mexico has agreed to Perimeter Security and they have agreed to cross-border enforcement in the War on Drugs and the War on Illegals, but they have stipulated that the US Congress must enact comprehensive immigration reform.
And if you go back and look at the "get tuff on illegals" bill passed by the House in Dec, you will notice that the bill authorizes Sec Chertoff to begin implementation of cross-border enforcement, implying that comprehensive reform will be part of the package.
The fix is in.
[What does it take?]
It takes a simple answer to this question which I continue to ask with no reply: How will this deal result in our ports being less safe than they are now?
The only answer I keep hearing is "Because Arabs will own them".
As my deceased grandmother, born in the 19th century, used to warn me, we need to keep an eye on those French Canadians. They are just like Mexicans, they're Catholic and have lots of babies.
With the port controversy and all it's doubtful now the GOP is going to take on an amnesty/guest worker program this year, or at least pass anything like one. I've been wrong before but I just don't see it happening no matter what Mexico wants.
Well it's a fact just about all the terrorists come from that part of the world so it's not unreasonable for people to have their concerns. But regardless of how everyone feels about it here the deal is DOA. No way Congress is going to let it go through, I've said that from the beginning and still believe it.
He said that the chinga derra gringos are going to own everything in Mexico before it is over.
There is nothing that requires immigration reform to go forward. We have been waiting for 8 years now, relying on illegals. What's another year or two.
"And you've got Jimmah on your side. There's something to be proud of."
why do they keep avoiding that fact?
From the man who ruined South Florida, we now bring you the ruination of the ports.
In a nutshell!!!
Why do I think this is sponsored by the longshoremen's union?
yawnnnnnnnnn
Playing into the hands of the libs. Lovely.
You can say that again!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1586052/posts
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration said Sunday it will accept an extraordinary offer by a United Arab Emirates-based company to submit to a second - and broader - U.S. review of potential security risks in its deal to take over significant operations at six leading American ports. The plan averts an impending political showdown.
Why is it okay with you for Mexico to tell our U.S. Congress what to do? Don't make me sputter. And WTH are you talking about: the "War on Illegals?"
There is no war on illegals. Nothing is done about the 12 - 20 million mexican illegals residing here, and nothing serious is being done to stem the invasion.
Portgate has made it clear, as if it weren't already, exactly what the emerging global economy looks like: great for business, bad for national sovereignty.
It has always been true that economics trump politics and nationalism.
Go ahead and protest, but be aware that what you're protesting is a LIE.
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.