Port Update: Bush Will Veto

  • Thread starter Thread starter TPJCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Semper Fi:
The deal has been known to Congress since at least '04. So, where was their outrage then?
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone on the right side thinks that Schumer and his ilk aren’t trying to make hay. But you know what they say about politics and bedfellows.

I stand by my comments, I still think it’s a terrible idea, and I’ve frankly had it with Bush. He talks tough about this deal, threatens veto (for once :rolleyes: ), worries about hurting the feelings of the UAE, but once again pretty much tells the American public where they can stick it along with insinuating those opposed are racist.

I may sound a bit shrill, but I’m fed up.
 
I’m against China having to do anything with our ports(they are a wolf in sheeps clothing who i envision us having a war with someday) and certainly not an arab country…at least britian is an ally of ours…What’s bush trying to sell this country out for the almighty dollar.
 
The thing is the PEOPLE of this country are finding out about this deal and the PEOPLE hopefully won’t stand for it!!I hope there are some patriots in congress who will shoot this thing down.
 
40.png
Jennifer123:
I’ve frankly had it with Bush.
Click to expand...
Exactly when did you support Bush? Did you support Bush? When?
 
Ani Ibi:
Exactly when did you support Bush? Did you support Bush? When?
Click to expand...
I voted for Gore in 2000, converted in every sense of the word, supported Bush after 911, and voted for Bush in 2004. So what? 🙂
 
Bush wants to know why a middle eastern company should be held to a different standard than a British company…LOL! I don’t see the British funneling money to terrorists and giving lip service to the fight on terrorism…that’s why George.
 
Philip P:
I haven’t formed an opinion on the port deal - but I find it interesting that he is threatening a veto, and will be even more interested if he actually does. To my knowledge, Bush has never vetoed anything (please do correct me if I’m wrong).
Click to expand...
You are correct, he has never vetoed anything. I fault him for that.

I have twice voted for the man, and I like and respect him, but I do jokingly call him “President Yes” when it comes to big government spending and his failure to veto any of it.
 
40.png
Jennifer123:
I voted for Gore in 2000, converted in every sense of the word, supported Bush after 911, and voted for Bush in 2004. So what? 🙂
Click to expand...
What do you mean so what?
 
40.png
Jennifer123:
I’ve frankly had it with Bush.
Click to expand...
I’d be ready to throw the entire Republican Party out of government, if there was a way to do that without throwing the Democrats in. :rolleyes:
 
40.png
alekzander:
Bush wants to know why a middle eastern company should be held to a different standard than a British company…LOL! I don’t see the British funneling money to terrorists and giving lip service to the fight on terrorism…that’s why George.
Click to expand...
Where’s your proof that the UAE government funneled money to terrorists? Oh wait, there is none.
 
40.png
alekzander:
I’m against China having to do anything with our ports(they are a wolf in sheeps clothing who i envision us having a war with someday) and certainly not an arab country…at least britian is an ally of ours…What’s bush trying to sell this country out for the almighty dollar.
Click to expand...
Certainly not an Arab country? Proves my point in my previous posts right here… :rolleyes:
 
Semper Fi:
Where’s your proof that the UAE government funneled money to terrorists? Oh wait, there is none.
Click to expand...
foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185107,00.html

“Nonetheless, the FBI has also concluded that the UAE’s banking system filtered much of the money used for the operational planning before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and many of the hijackers traveled to the United States through the UAE.”

It may be a stretch that the UAE gov’t was involved, but many say that lax enforcement of irregularities lead to this occurring.
 
Jennifer123 said:
foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185107,00.html

“Nonetheless, the FBI has also concluded that the UAE’s banking system filtered much of the money used for the operational planning before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and many of the hijackers traveled to the United States through the UAE.”

It may be a stretch that the UAE gov’t was involved, but many say that lax enforcement of irregularities lead to this occurring.
Click to expand...

Much money was funneled from Canada and many of the terrorists came from Canada too. Let’s stop doing business with Canadians?

Also, I said where’s the proof that the UAE government. Not private banks.
 
This is not a democrat vs Republican issue…there are Republican congressmen upset about the presidents decision as well.
 
40.png
Jennifer123:
It may be a stretch that the UAE gov’t was involved, but many say that lax enforcement of irregularities lead to this occurring.
Click to expand...
And it is this ‘lax enforcement’ which concerns me the most about having them operating our major ports.

I don’t care how wonderfully European Dubai may be (it’s oppulent, that’s for sure), if the UAE cannot crack down on the terrorist elements in their own country or show they are working with the U.S. to actually change the mindset of the nations around them to put a stop to all this muslim extremism then they aren’t ready to own the operations of our ports.

Assurances by the government that all aspects of the deal and national security were covered mean squat to me after Katrina. Since 9/11 we had been assured the nation was prepared for another terrorist attack and yet when nature struck instead, our nation failed miserably to respond. Katrina was a prime opportunity to test out our terrorist response programs and our administration blew it. I do not trust their ‘analysis’ of this port deal, and a lot of good it’ll do them or us when something does go wrong in those ports or terrorists manage to smuggle things/people in and out of them under their ownership which end up being tied to a bombing or other terrorist plot.

We’ve got several sleeper cells on U.S. soil as it is…give them access to a port of entry (let alone 5) and then tell the loved ones of all the soldiers who have died fighting this ‘war on terror’ this nation is doing everything in it’s power to protect us. Bah- humbug.
 
Let’s see, what American company has the capacity to run the terminals (note they are not running ports) instead? I know! Haliburton! Glad to see all of you Haliburton supporters out there. 😃
 
Why would Bush even open this Pandora’s box so to speak if this comes back to bite him in the butt he would look like such an idiot! Why would he even take the chance?
 
40.png
alekzander:
Why would Bush even open this Pandora’s box so to speak if this comes back to bite him in the butt he would look like such an idiot! Why would he even take the chance?
Click to expand...
He told us:

“I think it sends a terrible signal to friends around the world that it’s OK for a company from one country (the UK) to manage the port, but not a country that plays by the rules and has got a good track record from another part of the world can’t manage the port (UAE),” Bush said.

The UAE is a good ally in the war on terrorism. The only reason, I think, in Bush’s mind (and in many I have talked with today against this decision) to deny the contract is because the company is Arab. We have a term for that. It is called racism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top