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: Alan Smithee who wrote (4572)	2/25/2006 10:54:50 AM
From: Rock_nj	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 71588

I will be slackjawed with amazement if you can provide the name of even one rich crony of George W.bush who will benefit financially from the Port deal. Secretary Snow, the guy who chaired the secret panel that approved the deal. You are aware, are you not, that the company currently running the Ports in question is a foreign country? I'm not happy about the British running our ports either. Why should we let others be responsible for our security at our ports, even friendly countries like Britain? If we get hit by terrorists again, we can point to sloppy practices like letting other countries run our ports. Yes, an arab company, although not directly involved in port security, would have knowledge of our security. More information than we want people just a heartbeat away from terrorists to have. The United Arab Emerite Princes were hanging out with Osama Bin Laden in the late 1990s. Do we want these guys with knowledge of how our ports operate? Look, I'm typically not a knee-jerk person, and am generally considered liberal on most issues, but this is a no-brainer, if we are serious about security we take matters into our own hands.