The random political thoughts thread

[scaeagles]

Good Lord.

Everyone here knows I pretty much support President Bush. One of my major criticisms is his hanlding of the border. It was, until today, my major criticism.

I have never seen anything so boneheaded in my life.

The US is going to turn control of 5 major US seaports to a company owned and operated out of United Arab Emirates.

WHAT?!?!

I'm sorry if this is politcially incorrect. I will certainly agree that the UAE has been an ally as of late. But the is now flippin' way we should allow an Arab owned company to operate and manage any portion of out seaports.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...1022-8852r.htm

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Good Lord.


I have never seen anything so boneheaded in my life.


WHAT?!?!

Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your life.

Can I send you some fliers on democratic fundraisers in your area?

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Good Lord.

Everyone here knows I pretty much support President Bush. One of my major criticisms is his hanlding of the border. It was, until today, my major criticism.

I have never seen anything so boneheaded in my life.

The US is going to turn control of 5 major US seaports to a company owned and operated out of United Arab Emirates.

WHAT?!?!

I'm sorry if this is politcially incorrect. I will certainly agree that the UAE has been an ally as of late. But the is now flippin' way we should allow an Arab owned company to operate and manage any portion of out seaports.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...1022-8852r.htm

I completely agree, and you can put that in your sig line....within the proper context, of course.

Nothing they do suprises me anymore. Nothing. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, though. Years ago, when I was in college, there was a guy from the UAE who wanted me to go out with him. I wasn't interested, but he spent a bit of time trying to convince me- flaunted the fact that his family was wealthy, his uncle was the president, etc, but I refused, finally telling him that I had a real problem with the repressive nature of the patriarchal Arab society and their anti-semitism. He told me his mother very much enjoyed her separate household and having her every whim catered to, and showed me a picture in a UAE newspaper that had his uncle shaking hands with the Israeli prime minister. He finally left me alone after I started dating someone else.

[Alex]

I'm fine with it.

It's not like the company is going to be importing the port employees from Afghanistan "camps of leisure" to work there. They'll still be Americans. And there is nothing preventing al Qaeda from infiltrating the employment of ports run by American companies (or run by the foreign company that was previously running it).

As the article states, the company isn't reponsible for port security anyway. They're responsible for lining the boats up and getting the stuff on to and off of the ships as promplty as possible.

Besides, the motivations for a UAE company to avoid terrorist attach in one of their ports is much stronger than it is for the company who runs the Port of Oakland (if they're American, I have on idea). If the Port of Oakland has a terrorist attack the managers will just say "hey, blame the president and we need $6 billion to prevent us from going bankrupt." The UAE company will face invasion and an assumption that they personally oversaw the plan for the terrorist attack.

UAE, as far as Middle East countries go, is relatively liberal (not that this is particularly relevant).

[Alex]

I have changed my mind. I had missed, in the initial stories, that the UAE company is owned by the UAE government.

While I don't care if foreign private companies operate our ports, I think it is reasonable to be more concerned about foreign national governments doing so.

[wendybeth]

Even Tom Ridge has concerns, although he thinks that a more thorough explain will show that the Bush admin is on top of things: CNN.



"But Ridge said, "The bottom line is, I think we need a little bit more transparency here. There are some legitimate concerns about who would be in charge of hiring and firing, security measures, added technology in these ports that we'll need to upgrade our security.
"So I think it's very appropriate for the administration to go to the Hill and explain why they think they have not compromised security and, in fact, as they've announced, they will enhance and improve security," he said. "It's tough to see that right now on the surface."