Security Risk or Anti-Arab Backlash - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-23-2006, 06:09 PM   #46
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,494
Local Time: 05:40 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


They will not be affected. Security of the Port is not the operator's responsability.....

It is our governements....

and as I said earlier....

Since 9/11 we have not enacted the measurements strongly recommended before 9/11.

Ports are already our most vulnerable point.


good call.

it does seem like this is the real issue.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-23-2006, 08:07 PM   #47
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 05:40 AM
did anyone mention that scott mclellan admitted that president bush learned of the sale through u.s. news media outlets?
__________________

__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 02-23-2006, 08:25 PM   #48
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,494
Local Time: 05:40 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Se7en
did anyone mention that scott mclellan admitted that president bush learned of the sale through u.s. news media outlets?


he takes the security of our country very seriously.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-23-2006, 10:17 PM   #49
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:40 AM
More wiretaps!!!
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-24-2006, 03:06 PM   #50
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:40 AM
Political Hay???

Ports Debate Gives Democrats Opportunity

Quote:
The New York Democrat is a potential presidential contender in 2008, but in this case her criticism was no match for the brisk, one- sentence letter that North Carolina Republican Rep. Sue Myrick dispatched to the White House. "In regards to selling American ports to the United Arab Emirates, not just no, but hell no," she wrote to a president from her own party.
"Evil Arabs? Then, 'hell no!'"
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-24-2006, 03:12 PM   #51
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Justin24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,716
Local Time: 03:40 AM



LOL
__________________
Justin24 is offline  
Old 02-26-2006, 09:22 PM   #52
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 10:40 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox

They will not be affected. Security of the Port is not the operator's responsability.....

It is our governements....
Did anyone watch 60 Minutes tonight? Apparently Port security (of the facilities themselves, not cargo) IS the operator's responsibility and is usually outsourced to rent-a-cop companies.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1344473.shtml
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 01:41 AM   #53
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 11:40 AM
I don't really see what the problem is. In the end the security of your ports IS your governments responsibility. If that is lax, or the law currently has it outsourced to rent-a-cops or whatever, fight against THAT.

Otherwise, I agree that this is a caricature/fear coming back to bite Bush in the arse, and I'm disappointed that the Democrats are playing up to it rather than being mature about it.

The ownership of the ports shouldn't matter at all. It's the security. Don't confuse the two. There's no reason why this ownership change should, could or would change a thing, and if there's a fear that it will, well whats the problem? It's a seperate argument isn't it????
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 02:36 AM   #54
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 10:40 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers

The ownership of the ports shouldn't matter at all. It's the security. Don't confuse the two.
Agreed. But the whole ownership issue has brought to new light some very real concerns that question the appropriate jurisdiction of certain aspects of security that are, at best, lax and vulnerable (regardless of ownership).
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 02-27-2006, 04:09 AM   #55
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 11:40 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy

Agreed. But the whole ownership issue has brought to new light some very real concerns that question the appropriate jurisdiction of certain aspects of security that are, at best, lax and vulnerable (regardless of ownership).
Well, that right there is the problem. The ports can be owned by the DPRK if the security is tight enough. That's the outcome everyone should be gunning for, forget this UAE shit, thats just hysteria.
__________________

__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com