Chertoff Defends Review of Ports Takeover

Yahoo News ^ | FEB.19, 2006 | WILL LESTER

[F16Fighter]

"We make sure there are assurances in place, in general, sufficient to satisfy us that the deal is appropriate from a national security standpoint," Chertoff said on ABC's "This Week."

Is there a crack epidemic within the Bush Adminstration?

As though the border situation is "appropriate from a national security standpoint" as well?

All I can say is if these situations were handled the same post 9/11 by Al Gore and the Dems, Freepers AND the GOP would be beyond freaking out -- and justifiably so.

[Ed25]

Does everyone here realize that this is only a purchase of the contracts? The UAE wont be involved in the day to day operations at our ports

[Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin]

"Chertoff is bad news in every way, all along.....the only question I have is which pipers tune does he dance to?"

I have this exact same question...

[Borax Queen]

I will believe Chertoff and Homeland Insecurity (on any topic) the day hel# freezes over. Lying keystone cops at worst, bumbling bureaucrats at best.

[Bret]

This is another BAD decision by the WH. With the Chinese in California, controlling the Panama Canal and their big container port in the Bahamas, why not give it to them and get it over with? Something has to be done about this!

[Cagey]

This is going to be a PR disaster for the Republicans if this deal is not quashed ASAP

It's already begun and it's going to get worse in the coming weeks. This is beyond any explanation.

[Alaska007]

Looks like another Harriet Myers debacle. The White House had better get a hold of this Port Security situation. Real Fast!

[LibLieSlayer]

The truth is that this is about a BRITISH owned company selling itself to a DUTCH/UAE owned company. We can change contracts and the companies that will run the 6 American ports in question. We may very well end up doing this.

How is the Bush administration supposed to stop two NON-AMERICAN owned companies from consumating this business transaction (in which America holds no legal authority)?

LLS

[takenoprisoner]

Remove Chertoff now! Only a traitor would present this deal as legit.

[Capt. Tom]

What this proposal is doing, is giving the Socialists(democrats) a chance to climb out of the hole they dug for themselves by being perceived as soft on National security. They can now have a chance to rally around the flag and our Sovereignty.

The Republicans , democrats and Bushies want the Mexican border open for their own agendas. But this port thing is an issue that can be used against the Republicans and Bushies by the Democrats.

The Republicans have to jump onboard and curtail the Bushies on this proposed fiasco. Similar to what they did to the Bushies on the nomination of Harriet Miers.

This has to be beaten off in a bipartisan fashion . Or the democrats will get the upper hand. - Tom

[Ed25]

Thank you! you hit the nail on the head

[technomage]

Another unnecessary, self inflicted black eye.

The only thing Republicans have to fear is themselves.

[no-to-illegals]

ah come on guys .... each and every one of us knows his record on border control. with his innovations on port controls we'll all be drinking that clear bubble-up and eating that rainbow stew.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

Attention FReepers

(Does NOT apply to Active Duty FReepers)

Be a part of the solution, not a Monday Morning Quaterback

Click Below for details

http://nws.cgaux.org/visitors/ps_visitor/index.html

[NY Attitude]

Not only are they giving away the country but it is an open invitation for every swinging d**k country to import WMD and smuggle in soldiers.

[kenth]

The UAE may technically be an ally, but I saw a show a while back, wherein a classroom of UAE teenagers was being interviewed. These were, because of being in the UAE, teens from wealthy families. Each and every one expressed outrage that the West was so advanced technologically, militarily, etc. They "felt" that it was wrong that the superior Islamic countries were lacking and that it must be do to the West holding them back.

The point is that no matter how wealthy and privileged these guys are, they still hail from an Islamic background and suffer the same hate for us.

[Final Authority]

Are you saying that there can be no distinction or differences between which foreigner one would allow to enter the USA? Would a British private company be run a bit different than say, a nationalized company from a nation that denies the right of Israel to exist? How about from a nation who supported the destruction of the WTC?

I think couching your opinion as saying you are no fan of this transaction seems to say that you actually would support GWB if he decided that nuking Manhattan would be good as long as it appeased the Islamists.

The USA is fighting for our survival. It is a border war, a cultural war, and the war to maintain our traditions of language and religion. GWB has demonstrated that he is not fighting this war, so which war is he fighting?

[satchmodog9]

Hmmmm. Blame it on Big Port Security. No war for port security.

[no-to-illegals]

so true..... isn't that amazing....considering America is supposed to be at War?

(walking off shaking head)

[Stellar Dendrite]

"All I can say is if these situations were handled the same post 9/11 by Al Gore and the Dems, Freepers AND the GOP would be beyond freaking out -- and justifiably so."

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BTW:



http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/jihadmanual.html

The Al Qaeda Training Manual discovered in the UK describes recruiting seaport workers as making good recruits:

------ "TWELFTH LESSON: ESPIONAGE "

Information needed through covert means: Information needed to be gathered through covert means

is of only two types:

First: Information about government personnel, officers, important personalities, and all matters related to those (residence,work place, times of leaving and returning, wives and children, places visited)

Second: Information about strategic buildings, important establishments, and military bases.

Examples are important ministries such as those of Defense and Internal Security, airports, seaports, land border points, embassies, and radio and TV stations.

---

Candidates for Recruitment Are:

1. Smugglers

2. Those seeking political asylum

3. Adventurers

4. Workers at coffee shops, restaurants, and hotels

5. People in need

6. Employees at borders, airports, and seaports