Pentagon: Ports uproar may pose security risk

CNN ^ | February 24, 2006 | CNN

[indcons]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The second in command at the Pentagon said Thursday that people who publicly oppose allowing a Middle Eastern company to take over management of some U.S. ports could be threatening national security.

Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England told the Senate Armed Services Committee that blocking the deal could ostracize one of the United States' few Arab allies.

"The terrorists want our nation to become distrustful," England said. "They want us to become paranoid and isolationist, and my view is we cannot allow this to happen. It needs to be just the opposite."

The comments came as administration officials went before the committee to defend their approval of a deal by which DPWorld, which is controlled by the government of the United Arab Emirates, would take over British-based P&O. The transaction reportedly is worth $6.8 billion.

[Dog]

The second in command at the Pentagon said Thursday that people who publicly oppose allowing a Middle Eastern company to take over management of some U.S. ports could be threatening national security.

You have got to be freaking kidding....throwing gasoline on the fire is not how you put out a fire.

[Dog]

This is just unbelievable.

[Esther Ruth]

ping

[fizziwig]

Boy the libs are gonna love that statement...it fits their view of the Bush admin to a tee....

This is really getting ridiculous. And here I was just starting to lighten up my opposition to the port deal and now this idiot speaks....unbelievable!

[afnamvet]

Paging Karl Rove...Karl Rove..white courtesy phone please.

[samadams2000]

This reeks of another Andy Card blunder. Anyone else feel same?

[Stellar Dendrite]

ping

[Dog]

The thought has crossed my mind.

[SENTINEL]

Insult to injury.

[afnamvet]

It appears that the only thing working for the Whitehouse is that Barney and Ms, Beasely are getting their walks,

[Esther Ruth]

But on Thursday his top aide, Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, told Fox News Radio that it also was important that Congress be comfortable with the merger before it's made final.

"What is important is that members of Congress have the time to get fully briefed on this," Rove said. "They're going to be coming back next week. We intend to work closely with them in order to give them a comfort level on this."

[Stellar Dendrite]

ping

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

Yes, and the pastrami sandwich I ate for lunch could also be a security risk.

[Prince Charles]

The second in command at the Pentagon said Thursday that people who publicly oppose allowing a Middle Eastern company to take over management of some U.S. ports could be threatening national security.

Black is white, and white is black. And conservatives are now enemies of the state?

[samadams2000]

Good thing we dont have an illegal immigration and border security problem or this could get really ugly.

[indcons]

Bizarre statement indeed.....I thought national security was the motivator behind most peoples' concerns (except the Democrats that is).

[demlosers]

So how many port terminals around the world does DPWorld operate?

I've read they run ports in Australia, Britain, South Korea, Vancouver, Canada... It's only logical not to do business with the ports that DPWorld operates because we cannot trust them. No shipments can come from them or through any their ports to the United States.

If Dubai Port World cannot do business inside the US, then we cannot accept any cargo containers from them.

Makes sense - right?

[jimbo123]

We're the enemy. And the Arabs are the good guys.

I guess we should stop asking for the appropriate due diligence on this deal because the Arabs feel like we don't trust them. I wonder why?

[Prince Charles]

What you said!