Volkswagen Passat Forum banner

1 - 20 of 76 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Have you guys heard about this?

Is Bush on drugs or what?

These guys produced the 9/11 hijackers and they've been caught funding terrorism and for a cool 6.6 billion we're going to let them control some of our ports... which consequently ship much of our military equipment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,885 Posts
I've been following the story for the past 10 days or so on AM talk radio. Both the left and right wingers were (and still are) really pissed over the whole thing. The mainstream media started covering the story three days ago.

I think those who object are just racists. There is no established link between Arabs, Islam and any kind of threat to US national security.

In fact, you're a racist for bringing this topic up.
 

·
My intake has Emphysema
Joined
·
7,712 Posts
JamesBondage said:
I've been following the story for the past 10 days or so on AM talk radio. Both the left and right wingers were (and still are) really pissed over the whole thing. The mainstream media started covering the story three days ago.

I think those who object are just racists. There is no established link between Arabs, Islam and any kind of threat to US national security.

In fact, you're a racist for bringing this topic up.
That's just f'ed up. As a matter of fact I'm amazed is hasn't shown up in here yet. Probably just because people know SOMEONE will try and raise the race flag. There's nothing racial about this. People have a right to be concerned about their safety. And with all that has happened in the past and what's going on now, they have that right to be concerned.
If you've been so called following this for 10 days, you would also know that two of the folks involved with 9/11 happen to have been or were at one time UAE employees.

So, let the flaming begin......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,341 Posts
I personally think no foreign country should own/run any of our ports...but IIRC some are already foreign-owned (British)? Coast Guard is and will continue to be responsible for security. I have no idea about the background checks needed for employees and who is responsible for them and how that might change if UAE takes over. I assume there are some federal/customs people that do the screening and such?

Another thing, I hear alot about how little of the cargo is scanned, which I understand due to the volume and the time needed to scan.....seems like they need to scan it while it's sitting on the boat, it takes weeks to get here...that should allow them to scan a much higher % although I suppose this might infringe on the boat owners rights.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,987 Posts
Let's establish a few points first:

1. These ports were already under contract with a British firm.
2. The UAE company bought the company/contract.
3. The contract is a service contract, not ownership of the port.
4. The Coastguard will still control security.
5. The INS will still control who gets off those ships.
6. US union longshoremen will still be the ones who unload and load those ships.
7. This company was vetted out by a committee created by congress and containing US Secretary of State, Defense Secretary, Attorney General, Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and others. This group would not bring terrorism to our shores. Hell, even some people in the BH's hero, Jimmy Carter, says this is correct. That doesn't mean a hill of beans to me, but maybe to some kool-aid drinkers it will.

Finally, here is the problem with saying we can't do business with them because two, not all, of the 9/11 hijackers were from the UAE. All of the bombers in London were British citizens. Does that mean we couldn't do business with the original firm, they being from GB?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,026 Posts
Do you really need to imply that anyone who raises concerns is a lemming, "kool-aid" drinker?

That adds nothing to the debate, other than demonstrating that you are incredibly narrow-minded. You're either with us, or against us, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,987 Posts
VAB5 said:
Do you really need to imply that anyone who raises concerns is a lemming, "kool-aid" drinker?

That adds nothing to the debate, other than demonstrating that you are incredibly narrow-minded. You're either with us, or against us, right?
I meant the kool-aid drinkers who think everything Jimmy Carter says is the gospel truth. They hold him up when he ridicules Bush's decisions, so maybe those same people will give his support the same weight. I have concerns, just not ones based on misinformation or lack of information put out by opponents of this decision. BTW...I wasn't really debating anything, okay maybe a little with the end question. I was more pointing out some facts about the situation, which I think have been missing in the oversimplification of this event. I didn't really state my opinion about whether I agreed with the decision or not, other than to say that I didn't think it would be bringing terrorism to our shores.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,292 Posts
On the surface, it seems daft as all get out.

But then, occupying forces have alway used indigent populations for base jobs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,116 Posts
I love that an executive from DP World is currently awaiting confirmation as Bush's Maritime Administrator. Always gotta have some little tidbit to feed the conspiracy theories.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,885 Posts
Jimmy Carter says that we will hurt the Arab's world feelings if we block this deal from going through. I agree with him. Nothing is nore important than feelings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,829 Posts
But isn't the British firm that held the contract a privately-owned company, while the UAE company is actually owned by the government?

And I don't think it's gonna hurt any Arab feelings outside the UAE, since none of them will be seeing any money from this deal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,987 Posts
Harvey Wallbanger said:
But isn't the British firm that held the contract a privately-owned company, while the UAE company is actually owned by the government?

That is correct.

What I worry about is that if we reject this contract it provides these country more (warranted or unwarranted) more ammunition to support their propaganda that we are out to destroy Muslims/Islam. Beyond our worry about terrorism in general, is there anything about this company that would disqualify them from this service contract? Again, we are not allowing them to run security on what comes into the port. It is American workers loading and unloading the cargo.

Question: Why the hell don't we have an American company that does kind of work?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,046 Posts
Qualified low bidder on a contract that has to follow federal laws in awarding the contract. Otherwise the Feds will lose their asses in court when the award is contested.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,885 Posts
Harvey Wallbanger said:
But isn't the British firm that held the contract a privately-owned company, while the UAE company is actually owned by the government?
That's how the UAE company was able to low-ball and get the contract.
 
1 - 20 of 76 Posts
Top