Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (4549)	2/25/2006 2:48:23 AM
From: KLP	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 71588

You know, Laz....I think you've just hit on the point of the port exercise. The deal is probably just fine, although as I said before, I'd feel better if Bush and Rumsfeld had known about it before the deal was ready to go....I really don't trust the mid and upper midlevel bureaucrats much anymore, after all the CIA leakers. How do we know that all the "i's and t's" were crossed and dotted correctly? I do however think it is interesting that GWB is so VERY adamant on this....I'm inclined to trust him at this point, as he has everything to lose with a poor deal... Plus I saw Tommy Franks and others, but particularly Franks, says the deal is quite OK.... And, I don't trust Schumer nor Hillary to know a fig about what they are talking about....both rush to the cameras like they are on a spring, and like Al Gore, know nadda about what they are talking about. And on top of that, we just arrested 3 more Americans in Ohio this week, for recruiting for, and participating in, AQ training camps.... Geeze. It is really horrible to think about Americans training others to kill possibly thousands of other Americans.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (4549)	2/25/2006 5:55:03 AM
From: Rock_nj	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

Amazingly, I can actually agree with Lazarus Long on an issue for a change. I agree that the arab people have no track record of decency and honor and there is absolutely no reason why we should ever let them run our ports. If we are really serious about fighting the War on Terrorism, the last thing we need is a bunch of potential terrorist sympathizes involved in the operation of our ports. Sure, they are just a bunch of arab businessmen and the U.S. will still do port security. But, so what? Why should we even open the door by a crack? Why jepordize our port security at all, by letting an arab company have thorough knowledge of our ports and their workings and failings. How hard would it be for some terorists who knows some guy who knows some other guy to pay to obtain vital information about our port security in an attempt to circumvent it? It would be a hell of a lot harder if an arab company were not involved. No way they can be trusted, sorry their record speaks for itself. A real War on Terrorism starts with real port security and I don't see how that can possibly start with arab control of our ports.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (4549)	2/25/2006 9:12:49 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

"Just what does have to happen before you get to ditch your tolerance?" Would you prefer to were a yellow star prominently? Perhaps we should put up a new sign: Open for Business* *except: Oriental Arab African Hispanic What is you objection to having the ports meet the Homeland Security upgrades? The British ere not going to invest that much. No Americans seemed to be bidding. Are you suggesting that we should become more like the Chinese?