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: KLP who wrote (4689)	2/27/2006 2:28:52 AM
From: Lady Lurksalot	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

KLP, "he [Jimmy Carter] is a blithering idiot...." You're being too kind. <g> - Holly

To: KLP who wrote (4689)	2/27/2006 2:45:02 AM
From: ManyMoose	Respond to of 71588

Ain't he the guy who thought it was OK to give away the Panama Canal? The thing that bothers me most about the Port deal is that Jimmy Carter says it's OK.

To: KLP who wrote (4689)	2/27/2006 6:49:14 AM
From: Rock_nj	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

Well, there you go. Our "national security" President of the 20th Century is saying to port deal is OK, so it must be OK. ;-) It comes down to this for me, why should we take an uncessary risk with our port security? Perhaps the UAE company will run the port terminals for a decade without a terrorist incident and then sell it to some other company like a German company and the ordeal will be over. But, if an attack that could be connected to port security issues occurs while the UAE company controls the terminals, then we will look back and say "what were we thinking", why did we uncessarily jeopordize our security for a fast buck? If some middle level manager at the UAE company is hard pressed for some extra money, it's going to be a lot easier for an arab terrorist organization to talk him/her into selling them security information than an American, or at least do so without being detected. That is why this deal is an uncessary security risk. Don't forget, this is the same American government who just spent the last few months telling us the War on Terrorism is such a serious national security matter that the President should superceed the Constitution and be allowed to conduct warrantless searches to conduct the war. Well, how serious is the situation if now they are letting an arab company know our port operations?!? In reality, an American is far more likely to be killed by another American in a car accident or a crime than by some arab terrorist. Statistically, terrorism is not that big a security problem. It is the potential for a massive and devastating terrorist attack that makes it a real security concern.

To: KLP who wrote (4689)	2/27/2006 6:09:59 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

The thing that bothers me most about the Port deal is that Jimmy Carter says it's OK. That should make any American sit up and take notice, and be very afraid....he is a blithering idiot... You can never depend on that type of indicator. As the saying goes even a stopped clock is right twice a day. I don't see how the purchase makes us more vulnerable. I'm not firmly committed to my position yet but at this point I think the purchase should be allowed. Tim