To Whom it may Concern:
Ok Time AGAIN, for the facts. You can get the information on Container Security at this link. Click on the link at the top of the thread to see the OFFICAL facts, not the make believe talking points and other nonsense of the Port Deal Critics.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1590048/posts
We scan 100% of the containers coming into the US for radiation all ready. That information has been pointed out to the critics repeatedly. We ONLY NEED to physically inspect about 6% of Containers because of security concerns. It is fraudulent to claim we "only search 3-6% of containers. IF we needed to, we could search more. The Terminal Operator controls NOTHING about the shipment. That is true of any freight handler be it trucking, air freight or port terminal. The Bills of Ladeing are controlled BY THE SHIPPER as well as the RECEIVER and must go thru Customs. You do NOT let the shipper contol the Purchase Order/Shipment manifest because it is a legal document which once the reciving party signs legally obligates them to pay. Letting the Bill be handled by the Freight Handler would create the easiest possibility to steal. They simply would alter the shipment documents and pocket a portion of each shipment. Thus the Shipper could not PROVE they shipped it and would have no ability to compel payment because the Receiver never signed for it. Legally until the Receiver SIGNS for the freight it belongs TO THE SHIPPER, NOT the Port Terminal or other Freight Handlers. Because of the ability of Port Termanal, Truck Companies and others to misroute, steal or lose Freingt what they pick up and what they deliver is monitored by everyone involved. That is basic business. If you sign for 8000 cases and only got 6000, YOU are LEGALLY liably for those missing 2000 cases. The original Shipper gets paid based on what you sign for, NOT what they say they shipped. It is NOT easy to add or subtract things from shipments as the Port Terminal Hysterics keep screaming. That too, is another of their lies.
The level of RABID ignorance here is simply inexcusable. The United States is giving NOTHING away. Two weeks into this story it is utterly inexcusable for anyone to be thisrabidly ignorant. Here are the facts. A PRIVATE company, P&O is selling it Port Terminal Operations. A company Called Dubai Port World is BUYING that private company. Part of what they are acquiring is 9 terminal leases, out of 300, in 6 US Ports. 9 out of 300 GET IT? The US Govt is giving NOTHING away. They have NOTHING to do with the deal. They CANNOT require the leases be granted to some other company. All they can do is REJECT this or that company from getting the leases. Then P&O would either have to find a different buyer OR Dubai Port World will simply sue.
Either way, the same American Dock Workers, the same American Clerks, Truck Drivers, Gate Guards, Office Workers, Cleaning Crews etc etc etc etc who NOW work of P&O will switch to getting their checks from Dubai Port World. Some Stock Holders and upper level management will change. The name on the outside of the building will change, the Labor Unions will have to negotiate new contracts (which is why they do NOT want this deal to go thru) and that is about ALL that will change. No misstatements, distortions and lies about "Running our Port" "Compromising Port Security", "Access to Sensitive Military Cargo Shipments" or any of the other utterly stupid nonsense being spewed by the critics is going to change the FACTS.
Those are the FACTS. That is not White House Spin, RNC Talking Points and all the other stupid nonsense being screamed to drown out the FACTS. Time for people to grow up and LEARN the facts. How can people capable of using a computer be so utterly IGNORANT of the facts of this matter after 2 weeks?
There must be a genetic element. Some Invincible Stupidity Shield gene that keeps "Journalists" from being able to absorb even ONE fact about this topic. The display of panic, hysteric, bigotry and ignorance on the part of some of the Port Deal Hysterics is inexcusable.
Good job, Johnnie. And kudos for doing it.
I put myself in the category of becoming lazy about these things. We need to get back to activism instead of fighting among ourselves, imo.
Thanks for taking the time to do that. I'm working on a letter to the editor but will use portions of your letter to send (snail mail; they do not read e-mail, imo) to our senators.
Interesting article that's not too kind to Hill and the Dims. Looks like someone in Dubai knows what we know about the Dims (they want to turn America into France) and GWB:
"What are the lessons for the UAE and the whole world from this episode? First off — character matters. George Bush — like or despise him — is a man of principle."
Meet the Clintons in and out of the UAE
Khaleej Times ^ | March 4, 2006 | BILL O BRIEN & MATEIN KHALID
Posted on 03/05/2006 9:56:24 AM PST by TheLion
MANY residents of UAE thought — mistakenly as it turns out — that they knew the Clintons. Former president Bill and former co-president/current New York Senator Hillary were deemed to be friends of the UAE — and the Arab world in general.
While Hillary hadn’t visited the UAE recently, Bill is a regular — at least when he’s invited for a paid speech or appearance. Sometimes, he’s graced us in person — other times via a video conference. President Bush, everyone agreed, was an anti-Arab cowboy, worthy of little more than derision.
(Excerpt) Read more at khaleejtimes.com ...
Here are some additional comments from the article:
"Other members of the travelling anti-Bush Democratic Party roadshow have also popped into the UAE for a paid appearance or two. Former VP candidate John Edwards honoured us with his wisdom last year as did the woman best remembered by many for opposing the 1991 liberation of Kuwait, ex-secretary of State Madeline Albright, who flew in last December.
So, with the announcement of the Dubai Ports World deal, UAE residents could be forgiven if they expected the Clintons would, at a minimum, resist joining the more extreme chorus of xenophobes, ultra-hawk Republicans and union controlled coastal region Democratic Party politicians in the current round of race-based protectionism ... right?
Nope. In fact, Team Clinton and practically all members of the Democratic Party royalty have gone into overdrive to oppose the deal. The most dangerous place to be over the past few weeks has been to stand between Hillary and a news camera eager for more commentary on how dangerous this whole deal really was, and how George Bush was absolutely cavalier with the security of the American homeland.
Specifically, the lady liberals like to call America’s smartest woman said: “Our port security is too important to place in the hands of foreign governments,” in a statement posted to her web site. “I will be working with (New Jersey) Senator (Robert) Menendez to introduce legislation that will prohibit the sale of ports to foreign governments.” None of the assembled reporters (the US mainstream Press is pretty much an appendage of the Democratic Party) bothered to ask if the deal involved DPW buying the US Coast Guard and the Department of Homeland Security — as her bizarre statement would seem to imply."
>snip
Yes indeed, thanks Bill and Hill. Oh by the way, where was the ‘maximum control’ and opposition to ‘foreign government’ approach when the Clintons allowed the Chinese Government-controlled companies to get control of terminals on the US West Coast? When reporters queried the Clinton Administration’s Press Office in the late 90s about a Chinese firm getting control of the Panama Canal operations, the reply was the administration viewed the fury over port control as ‘silly stuff’.
What are the lessons for the UAE and the whole world from this episode? First off — character matters. George Bush — like or despise him — is a man of principle. He knows the UAE is a friendly nation and firmly believes relations between the US and UAE should reflect a mature partnership. President Bush is taking a major hit from his base and from the independent voters who are critical to future electoral success for the Republican Party. But he’s sticking to his guns…and has threatened what would be the first veto of his entire term of office if the Congress overturns the deal.
Secondly — the Democratic Party — and their allies in organised labour are, at heart, protectionists. Want to know how they really see things? Think France. Big government, powerful government worker unions, maximum insulation from foreign intrusions, national industrial champions, and the use of any device to somehow wish away globalisation and competition. The Longshoremen’s Union that got Hillary all energised is best remembered for a Christmas season industrial action at the Port of Long Beach approximately two years ago. They were against barcodes.
Third and most important. The Clintons are in favour of…..surprise!....the Clintons. When Hillary got the call from her Longshoremen Union sponsors/donors — that pretty much answered things for her. Better yet — it turns out that President Bush is politically isolated on this one which makes a bit of demagogy all the more attractive. The UAE, sadly, moves in to the Clinton category of ‘not currently useful’ to the constant campaign and as a tough old American political observer once said.
One of Bill Clinton’s less than enamoured female acquaintances, Katherine Willey, recounted that after a somewhat spirited, and by her account, not entirely consensual encounter, the future President noted she had a swollen lip. In a fairly cold tone, he suggested she “put some ice on that.” Perhaps, the former first family will offer similar advice to their disappointed fans in the UAE."
Excellent!
Any indication of some of those you sent this to? I mean, I can imagine, but I'd love to pay particular attention to see if any of them actually get a clue. I've got this sneaking suspicion that they ARE starting to listen.