<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Port Security Worries</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.californiaconservative.org/terrorism/port-security-worries/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.californiaconservative.org/terrorism/port-security-worries/</link>
	<description>Speaking Out For The Silent Majority (TM)</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 06:31:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: California Conservative &#187; Port Security Worries, Part II</title>
		<link>http://www.californiaconservative.org/terrorism/port-security-worries/comment-page-1/#comment-100611</link>
		<dc:creator>California Conservative &#187; Port Security Worries, Part II</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2006 16:05:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.californiaconservative.org/?p=2373#comment-100611</guid>
		<description>[...] Campaign &#187; Helping Osama Keep His Promise &#187; Politically Correct Coup &#187; Port Security Worries, Part II &#187; Court Documents: Hospital Gave Lethal Injections to Patients During Hurricane Katrina&#187; Samarrah Mosque Bombing &#187; GOP Powerhouse in the Making &#187; Muslim Activists and Campus Liberals Agree: Free Speech Has Limits &#187; Iran Promises Financial Assistance to PA &#187; Port Security: We Weren&#8217;t Wrong To Question, But We&#8217;re Satisfied By The Answers &#187; &#8220;Pussies&#8221; At The Gate &#187; That&#8217;s Just Brilliant: Google&#8217;s Philanthropy &#187; Thinking of becoming a liberal? &#187; Praising Alan Dershowitz &#187; Hell Hath No Fury: Women, Hatred, and the Middle East &#187; Nabbing Terrorists and Opening the Ports &#187; Port Security Worries &#187; Malik Zulu Shabazz &#187; S.F. Examines Power of Dog Droppings  List all posts &#187; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Campaign &raquo; Helping Osama Keep His Promise &raquo; Politically Correct Coup &raquo; Port Security Worries, Part II &raquo; Court Documents: Hospital Gave Lethal Injections to Patients During Hurricane Katrina&raquo; Samarrah Mosque Bombing &raquo; GOP Powerhouse in the Making &raquo; Muslim Activists and Campus Liberals Agree: Free Speech Has Limits &raquo; Iran Promises Financial Assistance to PA &raquo; Port Security: We Weren&#8217;t Wrong To Question, But We&#8217;re Satisfied By The Answers &raquo; &#8220;Pussies&#8221; At The Gate &raquo; That&#8217;s Just Brilliant: Google&#8217;s Philanthropy &raquo; Thinking of becoming a liberal? &raquo; Praising Alan Dershowitz &raquo; Hell Hath No Fury: Women, Hatred, and the Middle East &raquo; Nabbing Terrorists and Opening the Ports &raquo; Port Security Worries &raquo; Malik Zulu Shabazz &raquo; S.F. Examines Power of Dog Droppings  List all posts &raquo; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stop Bush!</title>
		<link>http://www.californiaconservative.org/terrorism/port-security-worries/comment-page-1/#comment-100263</link>
		<dc:creator>Stop Bush!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 18:14:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.californiaconservative.org/?p=2373#comment-100263</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;"...some anonymous Bush administration officials objected to the deal..."&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Well, let's hope none of them have spouses that work in sensitive areas of government, like the CIA.

&lt;blockquote&gt;The reality is that our ports havenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t been run by U.S. companies for quite some time.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Yeah, and in this case, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co, the British company that Dubai World Ports is buying and therefor acquiring control of our ports, was a &lt;em&gt;private&lt;/em&gt; company based in a country -- the UK -- that has been our ally for something like 200+ years.  Contrast this with DWP, owned by the Emir of the UAE.  This is the same Emir that: officially recognizes the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afganistan; has called for the total destruction of removal of Isreal; governs the land and business operations of a country that supported financially and logistically two of the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers; and last but in no way least:was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist. (Smuggled contraband through its own ports... wait a minute, isn't that what this whole brouhaha is all about?)

So saying that our ports haven't been run by US companies is a specious claim.  A private company in the UK is not the same as a government-owned company in the UAE.  

&lt;blockquote&gt;The current firestorm in Congress is much ado about PR and politics... Democrats are using this issue to criticize the administration.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

No, this is about &lt;b&gt;Homeland Security&lt;/b&gt;.  Namely, what the Bush Administration is about to do is hand over the day-to-day operations of six major ports on the Eastern seaboard to terrorists and terrorist sympathizers.  Bush and his spokesmen can do their stand-ups in front of the White House all they want, but the truth remains that the management of the ports will be controlled by a government that says one thing ("We're on your side!") and does another("Welcome to Dubai, Osama!")  What happened to the Bush doctorine of not differentiating between terrorists and nations that harbor terrorists?  

As to your injection of partisan politics, the criticism has come from both sides of the aisle, of whom you should note, Sen. Frist, Rep. King (R-NY), and Speaker Hastert.  At least try and be fair, here.  

&lt;blockquote&gt;"I can understand the PresidentÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s insistence that the deal go through..."&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Which leads us to the real Bush Doctorine: money talks and bulls**t walks.  This is not an international political incident; it's a business deal that no one in the Bush Administration thought anyone would notice.  

I know how we liberals can prevent this... get the U.N. to endorse the deal, and the conservatives will demand that it stop!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>&#8220;&#8230;some anonymous Bush administration officials objected to the deal&#8230;&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Well, let&#8217;s hope none of them have spouses that work in sensitive areas of government, like the CIA.</p>
<blockquote><p>The reality is that our ports havenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t been run by U.S. companies for quite some time.</p></blockquote>
<p>Yeah, and in this case, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co, the British company that Dubai World Ports is buying and therefor acquiring control of our ports, was a <em>private</em> company based in a country &#8212; the UK &#8212; that has been our ally for something like 200+ years.  Contrast this with DWP, owned by the Emir of the UAE.  This is the same Emir that: officially recognizes the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afganistan; has called for the total destruction of removal of Isreal; governs the land and business operations of a country that supported financially and logistically two of the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers; and last but in no way least:was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist. (Smuggled contraband through its own ports&#8230; wait a minute, isn&#8217;t that what this whole brouhaha is all about?)</p>
<p>So saying that our ports haven&#8217;t been run by US companies is a specious claim.  A private company in the UK is not the same as a government-owned company in the UAE.  </p>
<blockquote><p>The current firestorm in Congress is much ado about PR and politics&#8230; Democrats are using this issue to criticize the administration.</p></blockquote>
<p>No, this is about <b>Homeland Security</b>.  Namely, what the Bush Administration is about to do is hand over the day-to-day operations of six major ports on the Eastern seaboard to terrorists and terrorist sympathizers.  Bush and his spokesmen can do their stand-ups in front of the White House all they want, but the truth remains that the management of the ports will be controlled by a government that says one thing (&#8221;We&#8217;re on your side!&#8221;) and does another(&#8221;Welcome to Dubai, Osama!&#8221;)  What happened to the Bush doctorine of not differentiating between terrorists and nations that harbor terrorists?  </p>
<p>As to your injection of partisan politics, the criticism has come from both sides of the aisle, of whom you should note, Sen. Frist, Rep. King (R-NY), and Speaker Hastert.  At least try and be fair, here.  </p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;I can understand the PresidentÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s insistence that the deal go through&#8230;&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Which leads us to the real Bush Doctorine: money talks and bulls**t walks.  This is not an international political incident; it&#8217;s a business deal that no one in the Bush Administration thought anyone would notice.  </p>
<p>I know how we liberals can prevent this&#8230; get the U.N. to endorse the deal, and the conservatives will demand that it stop!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

