Skip to comments.Hillary Clinton criticizes port deal during Miami Beach visit
Posted on 02/25/2006 4:12:46 PM PST by kcvl
MIAMI BEACH, Fla. Senator Hillary Clinton says she's pleased the Bush administration and a United Arab Emirates company have agreed to delay the company's takeover of significant operations at six major American ports. But the New York Democrat says she's still opposed to the deal and plans to introduce legislation that would block Dubai Ports World or any other company owned by a foreign government from operating U-S ports.
Clinton said critical infrastructure like ports must be operated by the United States, not foreign-owned companies.
She made the comments yesterday in an appearance in Miami Beach. Clinton, who is seen a possible candidate for president in 2008, drew applause in renewing a call to take the Federal Emergency Management Agency out of the Department of Homeland Security.
She also drew applause for having an independent commission investigate the response to the Hurricane Katrina.
She's going to ride this issue all the way to the White House if we let her.
This is a great prelude for her "border security" platform.
Oh? Did anybody think to ask Scarlett O'Hillary how many port operations are currently owned by American companies?
So Hillary are you talking to those Floridians about the Church of the White Supremacist, or is that just for folks on the New York "plantation"?
There is more about it at the link below...
"These choices reveal a disheartening pattern of ideology, influence and incompetence that we have seen, and they violate our values and our interests," Clinton said. "I don't claim that Democrats are always right, but we are far more likely to make choices that reflect the values and advance the well-being of the American people."
I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but even I know after the education I've received in the past few days that there's no US business that manages these ports. So Hillary's proposal can only be viewed one way. She wants the US govt to take over running the ports. That's a recipe for inefficiency.
Bush let the GOP be open to this effective attack by Klinton.
The woman in the picture is speaking extemporaneously to the press without a script.
Oh, I'm sure she took a few hours off, bought an thong swimsuit and got some sun down at South beach.
Obviously she didn't check with Bill. Bill supported this sale (for a fee, of course).
a plot by the Clinton administration to turn over a naval port facility to a Chinese military-owned shipping company called COSCO
COSCO: A COMMUNIST CHINESE-OWNED COMPANY (House of Representatives - April 15, 1997)
Several officers in the Marine Corps have raised questions about why the Clinton administration favored turning over a military base in Long Beach, CA to the Chinese ocean shipping company, Cosco, over the protest of marine reserve battalion made homeless by the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Briefings on the firm fail to convince many of its members. The CIA, the Office of Naval Intelligence, and the Coast Guard reinforced the view that Cosco's strong link with the Chinese Government is a fatal flaw in its proposal to deliver the base to a company.
The chairman of one of these two Chinese arms companies implicated in the scheme to smuggle the 2,000 illegal Chinese-made weapons into Oakland aboard COSCO's ship had coffee in the White House in an affair associated with D.C. fundraising. Officials of the weapons company were indicted for shipping those arms.
On the campaign trail last year and in a White House meeting in 1995, President Clinton endorsed the proposal to transfer land of the Long Beach Naval shipyard to COSCO, but it was this March, 1995, the White House radio address that had critics talking. A COSCO advisor was among the Chinese businessmen invited to hear the President in the oval office just two days after a California businessman, Johnny Chung, made a $50,000 donation to the DNC and hand-delivered it to Mrs. Clinton's chief of staff Margaret Williams, CBS Evening News, March 11, 1997.
Shortly after the Long Beach Naval shipyard land transfer was arranged, the Clinton administration helped arrange, listen to this, Mr. Speaker, in the President's budget that he submitted, he gave free, no strings, gave to Communist China $50 million to burn a coal burning plant, after these meetings and after these DNC fund-raisers from the Chinese. He can cut impact aid for education, but he can also give $50 million to Communist China in the name of trade and just give it. That is not fair trade.
He also gave a multimillion dollar loan to build 5 Communist Chinese ships, COSCO ships, in a nonrecourse loan. What that means, Mr. Speaker, this is a loan of some $137 million, which may not be much to many Members around this body, but you ask the American people, $137 million of their taxpayers' dollars back up a nonrecourse loan to Communist China, a state-controlled company by Communist China, and if they forfeit, who is left holding the bag? The United States taxpayers. Our own ship builders do not have access to this type of loan, Mr. Speaker. Incredible. But yet the administration gives Communist China.
Published: June 23, 2000 Author: Charles Smith
The newly released documents also show that Li Ka-Shing is directly in business with the Chinese government through the China Ocean Shipping Company or COSCO. Li also played a major role in the failed attempt to purchase the former Navy port in Long Beach, Calif., for COSCO.
"I love you my darling! When your terrorist husband dies we can then regale in our anti-Israel lesbian fantasies!"
Chinese state-owned company China Shipping has a terminal in Los Angeles
Dubai owns Emirates airline, one of the fastest-growing in the world, with at least two flights a day, directly into New York.
"I also believe that winning the war on terror will not happen by military strength alone. This is fundamentally about America's values and leadership. . . . The idea of winning hearts and minds has been derided by some. But I don't think that we can overlook its singular importance. . ."--Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, February 25, 2004
Don't the Chi-coms run the ports on both ends of the Panama Canal? Didn't that take place in the 90's?
I'm off to vomit now.
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.