Sunday, February 26, 2006

UAE terminal takeover extends to 21 ports - United Press International

UAE terminal takeover extends to 21 ports - United Press International

Mr. President, why are You so strongly opposed to the 45 day congressional security review that so many in Congress and the general public believe to be the prudent course of action? Why the hurry to execute this potentially dangerous deal? What do You say to those who are asking for the reasons this deal should move forward?

Saturday, February 25, 2006

Homeland Security Objected to Ports Deal

Homeland Security Objected to Ports Deal - Associated Press

What changes were made to the ports deal to eliminate the concerns of the Department of Homeland Security? We need congressional hearings.

Thursday, February 23, 2006

"if we were concerned about... the United States of America"

UAE Company Offers to Delay Port Deal - FOXNews.com

It's an understatement to say that sometimes President Bush doesn't seem to think about what he's saying. Consider the Dubai Ports deal, dubbed "Portgate" by talk radio host and author Michael Savage. President Bush attempts to reassure the American public, saying, "We wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security of the United States of America." My thoughts exactly. If we have any common sense left in this country, we will be very concerned about this deal, and will not go forward with it.


I voted for this man, twice. He's done some good things, but that's another discussion. This time, I think he must have lost his marbles. He seems not to be in touch with reality, or at least not in touch with what appears to be a growing tsunami of public opinion: that at this point in history to give control of American ports to an Arab company is to play Russian roulette. Perhaps we have some friends among Arab governments (please don't ask me to name a few), but we also have many enemies in the Arab world who would sieze any opportunity to deliver destruction to our doors.


It's not reassuring to tell us that the security of the ports is under the control of the U.S. Coast Guard and Customs officials. They may be good, but how tight can port security be when only 5% of incoming containers are actually inspected? The Treasury Department has approved of the deal. Is that a reason to feel assured of our safety? I think not.


Is President Bush prepared to absolutely guarantee the security of these ports will not be compromised in any way following such a transfer of ownership? On what basis can he offer such a guarantee, when four days ago he hadn't even heard of this proposed deal?

Will he publicly attach to the ports deal the condition that if an act of terrorism against the United States is ever linked to Dubai Ports World or the UAE, that the U.S. will retaliate with a devestating military attack upon the UAE's capital, Abu Dhabi, and recoup our financial losses through confiscated oil?


If -God forbid- a well orchestrated plot imports destruction through our eastern cities I expect the president's indignant chest-thumping and military response will provide little consolation.

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Iran roars. France awakens. Germany dreams.

France says Iran has secret nuclear program - Reuters.com
Iran is working furiously to develop nuclear weapons as quickly as possible, knowing that the West may intervene militarily. President Ahmadinejad regards nuclear weapons as a necessary tool to export Islamic revolution and Iranian control first of the Middle East, then Europe and Asia, and then the Americas.
France, stung by recent uprisings of radical Islamists among its immigrants, has begun to awaken to the threat. Germany either dreams or is afraid to speak openly of the gravity of the threat.
While we wait for the mighty United Nations to restore world peace, Iran refines Uranium. Its true motives will become abundantly clear in due course.

Letting down our defenses... White House Defends Port Sale to Arab Co.

White House Defends Port Sale to Arab Co. - Breitbart.com
It's absolutely insane to turn over control of American ports to an Arab country when we are on the brink of a major conflict with the Arab world.
Suppose the United States uses military force to stop Iran from deploying nuclear weapons. Iran will retaliate with any and all means at its disposal, including destabilizing regional neighbors who do not come to its assitance in opposing the U.S. The United Arab Emirates certainly will feel the pressure of Iran and other radical Islamist forces to exploit the ports it controls in the U.S. for the purposes of terrorism and economic retaliation.
Something is seriously wrong with our federal government that this insane transaction can be permitted to take place. This outrage should be stopped!