well, don't jump on the "don't let terrorists control our ports" band wagon just yet. firstly, I am not even sure any of the staffing will change. moves like this don't normally effect a lot of people at the bottom. secondly, its not like they are in control of the security. the coast guard, homeland security, ect, are still going to be in charge of the security. that being said, I still think it is a bad idea to have something so vital to the US as ports controlled by a country that may be hostile to us in the near future. on the other hand (I think I am out of hands now), if we go to war against that country, we might be able to buy it off their sinking economy real cheap =]
But.. if you tie a string around your finger, it will turn purple. This is a strange move on the part of the government though.
Dont you worry your little pants off there buddy. Soon as Hillary or some other liberal nutjob starts to bash the Pres and call him out, all the liberal whackjobs on this site will follow suit.... The clones will come.
It's funny how you yanks come out with this....and yet the terrorists responsible for 9/11 (or 11/9 in the real world) were mostly Saudi....and you've apparently remained the best of friends with them!
Funny how that happened. People fell for the story because they were told too. The average american has the intellect of a dog. But we were indoctrinated in school as far back as I can remember... Anyone whose ever played "Simon Says", well, we just live a grown up version of it now. Simon says that Iraq funded 9/11 so we gotta got to war with them....Ok, Simon said it so let's go...Bring 'em on!!! Saudis had all the terrorist but I didn't say Simon Says so you can't follow that train of logic...Ok...
I agree with Cato; this isn't as big of a deal as it's being made out to be. So they "control" some ports? In reality, they won't be controlling anything. We will still have security, jobs, and trade. I don't think people really understand what America's definition of "control" is. The UAE may have a small stake in the pie, but America gets to feast on the rest. And honestly, if terrorists really wanted to get into the United States, why the hell would they take a shipping boat? They can fly here (although it wouldn't be prudent), or walk across the Mexican/Canadian border, or any of a million other things. The UAE controlling the ports would be like if we let Canada "control" it; what are they going to do? AmishRakeFight
The United Arab Emirates is not a terrorist state, and has absolutely no ties to terrorism. The only reason you are worried is because the word "Arab" is in the name, that is a sign of a racism. The UAE is an extremely progressive country, and quite wealthy. There is nothing to fear from them. Yes, I would rather have an American owned organization running our security, but if there are no viable options, than there is nothing we can do.
indeed, it is racist. and dont mock the mighty canadian navy!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Your a joke. Typical liberal bullshit. Nobody ever made that assessment in American politics. But dont let the truth stand in way if your liberal ideology. Truth and liberalism dont mix , we all know that.
Truth...does anyone really know what the truth is anymore? I mean..really??! "Wag the Dog" is the theme that truly defines the love affair between Washington and the media. We are conditioned to freely relinquish our freedoms for the sake of national "security" and believe all of the garbage and nonsense that comes to us via Washington and the media. We are our own worst enemy and we shouldn't be worried about foreigners destroying us from the outside because we are doing a damn good job at being the enemy within! Repulicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Liberals..whatever (Libertarians rock!!)! Let's put our heads together and remember that our officials are ELECTED and we need to do a better job at holding them and the media accountable for constantly feeding us a bunch of crap! I believe in protecting our country and our freedoms (don't get me started on Eminent Domain) as much as the next guy but I refuse to live as a victim; fearful that we could be blown to pieces at any moment. We are the newest breed of Pavlov'd dogs and "Homeland Security" has the control! It's interesting how we charge to spread democracy around the world when we are truly a republic. How can we continue down the path of democracy and freedom for Iraq, yet, our veterans don't get treated with the dignity and respect that they truly deserve! What the hell! We have been blessed for so long and we have done a lot of good but we are in a dark place right now. America...we've got to do better!
Actually Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld both made assertions that intelligence proved a significant and material link between Al Quaeda and the regime of Sadaam Hussein. its well documented. logically, it follows that if the Iraqi leader has close ties to AL Quaeda, then he either had knowledge of and provided support in some way to the plotters of 9/11, even if indirectly, or he will at some point play a role in supporting future terrorist operations against the United States. that is the kind of chain of logic that the Bush administration meant to beget when they made the claim that intelligence could provide a significant and current link between AL Quaeda and Sadaam. of course, that link has failed to materialize, but it made a difference in public opinion at the time as it was meant to.
first of all, the UAE does have ties to terrorism, even if they are not strong ties. they recognized and provided some financial support to the Taliban government when it was in power in Afghanistan. in addition to that there have been several known terrorists who were native to the UAE although they no longer lived there at the time that the terrorist acts were committed. in fact i believe one or two of the 9/11 hijackers were originally from the UAE. on the other hand they are one of the most westernized of the arab states. they are quickly becoming famous as a tourist haven for westerners in the middle east. they have one of the worlds consistently top-rated hotels in terms of oppulence, and right next to it is the worlds largest and most advanced water park. the government of Dubai is also involved in a project off the coast in which they are constructing (using an elaborate dredging process) two palm tree shaped islands which flank a group of islands that looks like a golbe when seen from the air. these islands will be home to hundreds of mansions ranging in price from about 750,000 - 2.5 million dollars each. their government is secular and its popularity as a tourist destination has had the effect of westernizing its culture to a large degree. that said, the company from the UAE seeking to gain control of the port is doing so by purchasing the British firm that was operating the port to begin with. so, i cant see the gripe about other countries running our ports in a post 9/11 world if it was already run by a foreign interest (albeit Britain) to begin with. a bigger problem than this, i think, is that despite the billions of dollars flowing into the homeland security program, a shocking 95% of the containers that come into this country through our ports everyday are not inspected by anyone. how come? if we had a better security infrastructure in place there, we wouldnt have to worry about this in the first place. despite the fact that much of the opposition to this deal has characterized itself as anti-foreign control of US ports by any country, the real objection revolves around the fact that the company is arab. this is obvious because several foreign countries control ports in the United States and this issue has never come to the fore until right now when the UAE threw its hat in the ring. its racist, ridiculous, and in the end, UAE control of the port will probably have little effect, especially now, since their is no way out of this political debacle without either getting major security assurances from the UAE, or offending them by proving that we are so scared of terrorists that we are now a nation ruled by fear and racism. i hate to say it, but i have to side with Bush on this one. let them in.
Tell me Mr. Blkice.. what freedoms have been stripped from you personally ? And please elaborate on your comment about the Vets... what exactly do you mean? Libertarian ehh ? Damn skippy !!
Mr. OliverJ - I am happy to address these issues 1. Freedom - I am speaking about the way fear and paranoia have negative impacts on our willingness to hold on to our personal privacy. For starters take a close look at the Patriot Act and examine the telephone interception issues that have been exposed for public scrutiny. We are at war and we are living in an environment where we are encouraged to willingly look the other way when the government decides to monitor our phone calls, emails, facsimiles, internet activity, google searches, library records, etc. I know that this has always occurred but it is expected for us to accept this activity without question in the name of national security. Anyone who challenges our government is considered "un-American" these days..what the hell is that? How many times have we heard the "un-American" and "...if you're not with us you're against us" rhetoric coming out of Washington? Frankly, it is very un-American to not stand up and question decisions that often need further discussion. 2. Health care and medical benefits for veterans has greatly diminished over the years to deplorable levels. Regardless of where anyone stands on issues our soldiers deserve to be treated with honor and nothing less. They put their asses on the line and their families on the back burner to ensure our safety. We can do a lot better for them and their families..
