Tell me this crap doesn’t have anything to do with money (power) and control behind the scenes from the people who actually control what goes on in the world?
I would just like to point out a few things, starting with the headline:
================================================
“Bush unaware of port deal until after approval”
If you believe that one, I have a bridge I’d like to sell you. They say: “Senior officials were expected to explain at a press conference Wednesday what persuaded them to approve the deal, the first-ever sale involving U.S. port operations to a foreign, state-owned company.”
So let me get this straight. Senior officials knew about and approved the deal, but the most senior official of them all, the president, was left out of it. The most senior official didn’t know squat until after the fact.
So, I guess those senior officials either knew how bush would vote or they told him that he’s voting this way whether he wants to or not…because:
“Defending his decision, Bush responded to a chorus of objections”
=============================================
Now consider this tidbit:
"A senior Homeland Security official, Stewart Baker, said U.S. intelligence agencies were consulted “very early on to actually look at vulnerabilities and threats.”
But listen to this:
“Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., said they would introduce a “joint resolution of disapproval” when they returned to Washington next week. Collins heads the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee”
In one sentence, they are saying a senior homeland security official knew about all this and looked into vulnerabilities. In the next sentence, the HEAD of Senate Homeland Security is going to try and stop this nonsense. So was the head of security kept in the dark? Did she know and voice disapproval, but they told her everything would be secure and to shut the hell up?
“Bush on Tuesday brushed aside objections by leaders in the Senate and House that the $6.8 billion sale could raise risks of terrorism at American ports.”
What are these people doing heading homeland security if their concerns are brushed off? What the hell are we paying them for?
===============================================
This next one is a real winner:
“Treasury Secretary Snow said failure to complete the transaction would send the wrong message overseas.”
So, we can invade a country that didn’t attack us, overthrow their government, kill their children on the street, profess it’s because they have WMD even though they don’t………and this doesn’t send the wrong message overseas? Now all of a sudden we’re worried about sending the wrong message.
We listen to bush tell us that a country is a threat because they house and give aid to our enemy and that makes them an enemy as well. Then they do a 180 and throw this in our faces:
“Lawmakers from both parties have noted that some of the Sept. 11 hijackers used the United Arab Emirates as an operational and financial base. In addition, critics contend the United Arab Emirates was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist.”
So now those people who have harbored and aided our enemy are cool. It’s now okay to accept those we turned against.
=================================================
How about this one:
“A senior executive from Dubai Ports World pledged the company would agree to whatever security precautions the U.S. government demanded to salvage the deal.”
When they come with the rubber gloves on to do cavity searches, these people are just going to bend over and cooperate. Yeah, right.
==================================================
Who is the voice of the people? Our Senators and Congressmen are our voice. They are supposed to listen to their constituents and reflect the views of the people who make up our nation. With all this disapproval, if bush goes on record saying he’s going to go against the voice of the people, what does that tell us about him as a president? The following statement demonstrates this:
“Rep. Jim Saxton, R-N.J., also indicated Bush faced a serious struggle. "Frankly, I think we can override a veto. We have more than enough votes to do it," he said.”
More than enough votes. This says the majority of the people don’t want this to take place. This says that bush is ignoring what the majority of the people want. Bush is supposed to represent the majority of the population. He’s doing just the opposite. Tell me he doesn’t have his own agenda.
