Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jimthefiend
The Coast Guard and Homeland Security are required by federal law to run security at our ports. That will not change. Nor will ANYTHING change except that now a new corporation will be in charge of administration.
The company that runs those ports now is a UK based one, and was recently purchased by the Dubai interest. Why hold them to a different standard than the UK? It's nonsense.
Congress has NO business whatsoever interfering with the sale. They have no oversight authority for business dealings made between two foreign nations, and Bush would be absolutely correct in slamming a veto on any effort to do so.
Anyone who claims this is a security threat is a fucking dipshit, no offense.
Thank you, please come again.
|
The Bush family has long time friends in the UAE. There is a HUGE difference between a British firm and a Saudi owned firm in charge of operations at a port. So on the surface this doesn't smell right. Remember in the UAE the children are taught to hate Americans in school.
This is clearly NOT in the best interest of the US and should be stopped. The president can veto a bill and congress can override the veto. On this one there are prolly enough votes.
BTW, many of your sites are banned in the UAE. They are not in Britain. A couple of other points. The government in the UAE actually is involved in ownership of the company involved. Other agencies being responsible for security isn't even an argument worth having. There are just to many opportunities for foul play when in charge of port operations.