Posted on 02/24/2006 4:57:39 AM PST by When_Penguins_Attack
Again I believe that is too much access. I can assure you if they take even this level of control they will soon know the security arrangements of the port.
Of course it is, of course it is and your following statement "I'm here to tell you that outside of FR and some of the talk shows, no one GIVES A DAMN about the ports." proves it and that you are a person of authority and whatever you say, is so, not to be disputed because you are of "the big world". How do you stay so humble?
Maybe I am reading this incorrectly, but does the act of Congress in the 90s, (early 90s or later 90s?) mean that security regarding corporate dealings, trumps national security?
@@@@@
CFIUS was set up to screen corporate deals involving foreign companies for the potential effect on National Security as well as other effects. Congress mandated that the decision-making process be kept secret. This may have been so that shareholders would not be affected one way or another in advance of the sale, or so that insider deals would not involve congressmen.
12 different agencies participate and if any ONE of them has an objection, the process is halted, cancelled or goes into a formal 45 day review.
Senator Warner of VA chaired a very informative 'hearing' yesterday. I was totally convinced by the expert testimony of Gordon England, Deputy SecDef, Michael Jackson, and - Kimmitt. - all really knowledgeable about the actual situation.
I'm sure it would have been much more advantageous to our defeating Islamofascism if we did not have to alert our Islamofascist enemies about the amount our cooperation with the Emirates.
LMAO....great sarcasm
I think this whole port thing is something the Dems like Schumer brought up to try to pretend they're tough on national security like Kennedy did with the "missile gap" in 1960 against Nixon. The only way Dems can win is to pretend they are more conservative than the GOP. Heritage conservatives like me (since 1974) see W as wobbly and liberal on most things. Frankly, its the War on Terrorism that keeps the GOP together right now and the hope these new Supreme Court justices might do some good.
Well, considering my over thirty years of active duty in the Coast Guard, much of that involving the MDZ planning and port security, and with first hand knowledge of how port security actually works, and knowing the difference between port operations and commercial operations, and having a continued involvement with the maritime industry...I can assure you that that you're wrong.
Actually, the first scenario is rather plausible. The CIA has played the 'front' company game since the 1950's. That's how we acquired rare titanium from the Soviets for our SR-71 Blackbird.
Are you suggesting that Reagan was afraid to go to war for us? He won the Cold War! Get a grip.
There you go again - why are you bringing facts to this debate? /sarc
It's the only game they have. It becomes more and more difficult to square your accusations against the real first hand knowledge and experience of people like General Franks.
Thanks for your long service to our country!!!!!
Trust me, it was a pleasure.
You cannot hide every national security-related discussion behind a veil of secrecy. National security affects every last one of us. You can have a rational, informative discussion on this issue without disclosing classified information. The President has not made a clear case for this deal yet. I'm trying to get past all the partisan posturing and get to the bottom line (does it make sense or not?). As a citizen and part owner of our government, I am obligated to do that, not just to blindly accept what our elected representatives tell us (or don't tell us).
This is a stupid question, but here goes:
Regarding this "deal" with the company controlled by the UAE, what are the facts about the financials of the "deal"?
Was the contract put out to bid?
Is any money exchanged for the award of the contract?
How does the vendor get it's money? From whom?
What is the term of the contract?
What is the reason why no company in the United States is interested?
There is so much which is unknown.
"I'm here to tell you that outside of FR and some of the talk shows, no one GIVES A DAMN about the ports. It ranks up there with the Winter Olympics in terms of interest."
This is not true. People in my office who never have anything to say about political stuff and who are mostly Republican have been talking and grumbling about this all week. My parents, who are in their mid-eighties and have never for a moment considered voting anything but Republican, are steamed at Pres. Bush.
You are right in a perfect world, but that just isn't the case.
The ports will likely be safer after the sale of P & O to Dubai Ports World, because the new management will have better knowledge of potential terrorists. Surveillance and port security will still be directed by the Coast Guard and other U.S. agencies, not by the company loading and unloading ships. DPW will likely retain most of P & O's employees in the U.S.. Whether it's a British company, German, French, Chinese, whatever, matters very little, except that DPW has an excellent reputation. It is in their economic interest to help prevent a terrorist attack in the U.S.. President Bush is right again. Too bad we can't have Four More Years.
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.