The Dubai container-ship terminals deal has ZERO impact on our national security. What company manages the off-loading, storage and on-loading ships at terminals in the USA has NO IMPACT on security.
Security is independent of terminal ownership and it is NOT even merely located at the off-loading terminal; it extends to the foreign PORT where the ship is loaded - (as it MUST if we are REALLY to be safe).
When opponents of the Dubai deal exclaim that we are "surrendering out sovereignity over our ports" (as Hillary has charged), or even argue that Dubai would "control" ANY "port" - they are simply LYING. IT IS THE BIG LIE. It is a BOGUS charge. A BOGEYMAN. PURE DEMAGOGUERY. Unadulterated bullshit.
It's NO DIFFERENT than arguing that the NSA intercept program, which ACTUALLY TARGETS INTERNATIONAL CALLS OF AL QAEDA, is a "DOMESTIC SPYING SCANDAL." It's like arguing that Gitmo is a counter-productive torture-center, or that Abu Ghraib's malpractices were widespread and reflect orders from Rumsfeld. It's like arguing that Bush wants to spy on librarians. Bullshit.
Sadly, all this bullshit really does is undermine our efforts to win the THE LONG WAR. And that's the only way these polices should be measured, judged.
If the opponents of the Dubai deal believe that ALL US TERMINALS should be managed by USA companies, then they should introduce legislation to accomplish that. (Though it's interesting to note they never objected when Clinton was president and Chian and Singapore took over terminal management within many US ports. BUT OKAY: if they feel so now, FINE. FINNY THO' that the much overrated 9/11 Commission NEVER recommended any such thing!)
Or the anti-Dubai crowd should form US companies which would bid for ALL the foreign owned terminals - WHICH IS THE MAJORITY OF TERMINALS IN THE USA. They are free to do either or both. (Leftie NJ governor Corzine is rich enough and savvy enough and connected enough to the investment community to do this himself!)
What they are NOT free to do is spread bullshit. Shame on them. Shame on Malkin and Hillary and Schumer and King and Pataki and Corzine and the rest of the LYING DEMAGOGUES.
HERE'S a link to an article about some of these demagogues.
Security is independent of terminal ownership and it is NOT even merely located at the off-loading terminal; it extends to the foreign PORT where the ship is loaded - (as it MUST if we are REALLY to be safe).
When opponents of the Dubai deal exclaim that we are "surrendering out sovereignity over our ports" (as Hillary has charged), or even argue that Dubai would "control" ANY "port" - they are simply LYING. IT IS THE BIG LIE. It is a BOGUS charge. A BOGEYMAN. PURE DEMAGOGUERY. Unadulterated bullshit.
It's NO DIFFERENT than arguing that the NSA intercept program, which ACTUALLY TARGETS INTERNATIONAL CALLS OF AL QAEDA, is a "DOMESTIC SPYING SCANDAL." It's like arguing that Gitmo is a counter-productive torture-center, or that Abu Ghraib's malpractices were widespread and reflect orders from Rumsfeld. It's like arguing that Bush wants to spy on librarians. Bullshit.
Sadly, all this bullshit really does is undermine our efforts to win the THE LONG WAR. And that's the only way these polices should be measured, judged.
If the opponents of the Dubai deal believe that ALL US TERMINALS should be managed by USA companies, then they should introduce legislation to accomplish that. (Though it's interesting to note they never objected when Clinton was president and Chian and Singapore took over terminal management within many US ports. BUT OKAY: if they feel so now, FINE. FINNY THO' that the much overrated 9/11 Commission NEVER recommended any such thing!)
Or the anti-Dubai crowd should form US companies which would bid for ALL the foreign owned terminals - WHICH IS THE MAJORITY OF TERMINALS IN THE USA. They are free to do either or both. (Leftie NJ governor Corzine is rich enough and savvy enough and connected enough to the investment community to do this himself!)
What they are NOT free to do is spread bullshit. Shame on them. Shame on Malkin and Hillary and Schumer and King and Pataki and Corzine and the rest of the LYING DEMAGOGUES.
HERE'S a link to an article about some of these demagogues.
2 comments:
Not withstanding your vehemence, it is a unwarranted assumption on your part that those who oppose the Dubai Port deal are "lying." You have no evidence that these so-called "demagogues" are intentionally deceiving anyone. They may simply believe what they're saying to be true. To assume intentional deceit of those making the argument against the deal is the weakest of all arguments.
If you think corzinbe and king and schumer and hillary don't know the differecne between leasing a three dozen terminals and "CONTOLLING OUR PORTS" or "SURRENDERING OUR SOVEREIGNITY" then you MUST think they are MORONS!
I do NOt think any one of these DEMOGOGUES are morons. They are all VERY VERY VERY SMART PEOPLE.
I think they are LYING - deliberatley ginning up their rhetoric to the point of it no longer containing scintilla of TRUTH.
thgey are doing this for the short term poltical gain.
They are lying scum.
But if you want to continue to think they are merely morons, fine. Good for you.
Post a Comment