Gothic.net News Horror Gothic Lifestyle Fiction Movies Books and Literature Dark TV VIP Horror Professionals Professional Writing Tips Links Gothic Forum




Go Back   Gothic.net Community > Boards > Politics

Politics "Under democracy, one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule -and both commonly succeed, and are right." -H.L. Menken

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-28-2006, 05:56 AM   #1
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Ports Deal Back Again

Just when you thought it was safe....

</JAWS announcer voice>

But seriously. Dubai is now out of the running for the ports, but whats this? Now, security scanning is being turned over to...communists! Thats right!

I had to use the faux news link first, as they being the most right wing news there is, it's funny to see when even they have a hard time swallowing the bush admins tripe these days.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,188979,00.html

WASHINGTON — In the aftermath of the Dubai ports dispute, the Bush administration is hiring a Hong Kong conglomerate to help detect nuclear materials inside cargo passing through the Bahamas to the United States and elsewhere.

The administration acknowledges the no-bid contract with Hutchison Whampoa Ltd. represents the first time a foreign company will be involved in running a sophisticated U.S. radiation detector at an overseas port without American customs agents present.


*snip*

While President Bush recently reassured Congress that foreigners would not manage security at U.S. ports, the Hutchison deal in the Bahamas illustrates how the administration is relying on foreign companies at overseas ports to safeguard cargo headed to the United States.

I like the way they try to gloss over that bush obviously made a direct lie. 'Althought he reassured, this illustrates...' is a nice way of saying 'yeah, he outright lied about this'.

Read also here:

http://www.shortnews.com/shownews.cf...TOKEN=21544035

Chinese Company Given No-Bid Contract to Detect Nuclear Materials Passing Into the United States

The Bush administration is hiring a company based in China to handle the detection of possible nuclear materials that would pass into the United States through the Bahamas and elsewhere.

The no-bid contract with Hitchinson Whampoa Ltd. will be the first time the US has ever left radiation detection to a foreign company without American customs agents being present.

After assurances the President gave to Congress that foreigners wouldn’t manage security at US ports, this no bid contract shows how the Bush administration continues to rely on foreign companies to provide security for cargo headed into the U.S.



But the best most indepth is found here:

China Port Control More Worrisome Than Dubai Deal

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1602576/posts

Because it also points out...

The U.S. ports that Dubai Ports World agreed to take over were previously managed by a British company, and Dubai Ports had to outbid another foreign firm, part of the Singapore government's investment arm, to land the deal.

One terminal in New York is operated by a Hong Kong-based company with close links to China's communist party.

The majority leaseholder of a terminal at the Port of Long Beach in California is part of a company that serves as the merchant marine for the Chinese military.

Some of Hutchison's ports lie near key sea lanes and lines of communication, such as the Suez Canal. Hutchison even controls ports at both ends of the Panama Canal, and in Freeport, the Bahamas, just 60 miles from the United States.



Yeah, before bush starts throwing out those human rights violation reports at China. he might want to take into account they control not only the busiest US ports in America, but also...

Of the eight international regions with choke points labeled by the Department of Defense as "U.S. lifelines and transit regions," Hutchison has ports in six.

The late Admiral Thomas Moorer, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and a founding board member of the parent company of NewsMax Magazine, told me repeatedly before he passed that China was using its commercial port facilities to expand its global military reach. A 1999 report by the American Foreign Policy Council determined that Hutchison "has substantial links to the Chinese communist government and the People's Liberation Army."


Of course, it's all relative anyhow because in the most recent report released yesertday
...

Radioactive Matter Gets Into U.S. in Test

http://news.**********/s/ap/20060328/...ltBHNlYwM3MTY-

WASHINGTON - Installing radiation detectors at U.S. entry points is taking too long and costing too much, says a congressional watchdog agency whose undercover investigators breached security by slipping nuclear material into the United States.

In a test last year, the small amounts of cesium-137, which is used in industrial gauges, triggered radiation alarms in Texas and Washington state. The material was enough to make two small "dirty bombs," officials said, yet U.S. customs agents permitted the investigators to enter the United States because they were tricked with counterfeit documents.


*snip*

So yeah, even after 9-11 100% of the nuclear materials the US undercover watched dogs tried to sneak through customs, STILL GOT THROUGH, meaning the BILLIONS they are spending daily to 'scan' all those shipments obviously don't work. This reminds me of when they found out half those sniffer dogs in the airports turned outto be just normal dogs that had no special skills but had been used for over 20 years as bomb squad dogs. Scary to find out all those billions bush gave his cronies in the various defence industries to install those radiactive scanners went striaght out the window and now they have to figure out a way to you know 'really' scan for radioactive stuff.


Anyone else bothered by this? Comments? Anyone think getting worked up over the Chinese deal a bad thing? Anyone else think outside agencies need to not only review the companies that operate the ports but ALSO the machines and technology, especially when the equipment comes directly from a crony of the white house in a no-bid contract?
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 07:25 AM   #2
4mytribe
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 204
If true I think its beggining to show. In order to pay off the debt needed to keep this Titanic afloat we have to sell off everything. I think its desperation and the last gasps. Or could be nothing. Either way Bush is a loser that can't talk right and I'm the loser that voted for him
4mytribe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 08:23 AM   #3
Empty_Purple_Stars
 
Empty_Purple_Stars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Right Here
Posts: 3,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by CptSternn
Just when you thought it was safe....

</JAWS announcer voice>

But seriously. Dubai is now out of the running for the ports, but whats this? Now, security scanning is being turned over to...communists! Thats right!



Yeah, before bush starts throwing out those human rights violation reports at China. he might want to take into account they control not only the busiest US ports in America, but also...



So yeah, even after 9-11 100% of the nuclear materials the US undercover watched dogs tried to sneak through customs, STILL GOT THROUGH, meaning the BILLIONS they are spending daily to 'scan' all those shipments obviously don't work. This reminds me of when they found out half those sniffer dogs in the airports turned outto be just normal dogs that had no special skills but had been used for over 20 years as bomb squad dogs. Scary to find out all those billions bush gave his cronies in the various defence industries to install those radiactive scanners went striaght out the window and now they have to figure out a way to you know 'really' scan for radioactive stuff.


Anyone else bothered by this? Comments? Anyone think getting worked up over the Chinese deal a bad thing?

Uhh vacillate on your opinions much?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CptSternn

1. They aren't as bad as they used to be, or as the US continually claims. Most Chinese people are quite happy and with all the business and technology there, they live quite well for the most part. The fact that they can even Google at all puts them light years ahead of many nations.


So I'm thinking this whole lets hate google because of their China policy is kinda out there.
Please pick a side.
Empty_Purple_Stars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 11:11 AM   #4
WolfMoon
 
WolfMoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I own Pitseleh!!
Posts: 3,747
Is that you, Kerry?


WolfMoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 11:14 AM   #5
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
Good call, EPS. Say, Sternn, want some more syrup on your waffle?

Let's see... according to you, Sternn, all Arabs are terrorists. That's why they're incapable of running our ports, right? So what does that make the "Chinks?" What kind of racist and bigoted statement have you got cooked up for us in this thread?
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 11:16 AM   #6
Empty_Purple_Stars
 
Empty_Purple_Stars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Right Here
Posts: 3,442
Dis-In-Formation Lo Mein.

Empty_Purple_Stars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2006, 03:49 AM   #7
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
I was actually referencing the anti-communist theme in the multiculturism thread.

I like communists and arabs. Know many, travel to their countries, and they are good people. I live in a socialist society that itself teaches many principles also taugh by Marx. I like Marx and his teachings as well.

Just find it ironic that less than a few decades ago thousands of americans died trying to stop the spread of communism, now the same communists are running sceurity at the American sea ports.

However, Arabs, the group that now has filled the 'new' enemy group isn't trusted to run the ports, but hey our old enemy the communists are grand people. Forget the cold war and Korea, let them secure our borders for us!

I like China the way it is and think it's brilliant. What I think is funny and quite ironic is the bush admin comes out with a scathing human rights report about the Chinese government one day, then sells off billions in contracts for them to secure the American people the next day. And no one even blinks an eye or thinks thats hypocritical.

Either bush and the US government frowns on humans rights abuses and thinks sanctions should be put in place (or that 'dicators' who abuse human rights need to be removed by force), OR they believe that human rights violations are not that bad and don't mind giving billions to a group that they themselves have publicly rebuked.

I'm not the flip-flop here. I like the Chinese. But I also know that even if I don't like the bouncer at the door of my local club, I don't go up to him issue statements of why I don't like him, call him names and taunt him, especially if I want him to possibly later pull a few drunks bastards off me later if I get into a brawl.
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2006, 11:42 AM   #8
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
Aww... I went back today to look for your White Supremacist quote about Arabs being inferior and incapable of running our ports, but alas, the entire thread seems to have disappeared. Oh well, most people did note it was a bigoted remark at the time, which now makes you a racist hypocrite.

The Chinese people aren't our enemy, nor are Arabs. You keep turning this into a race issue when it isn't. Take off the white hood and stop burning crosses for a moment here, Sternn.

Yes, that human right's report. It also dinged our partners in the Middle East. Yet we were going to do business with them on Ports (and still continue to do business with them in other areas). But alas, you, the friend of Arabs, comes right out and says something like, "You really want ARABS to be running your ports?!?!"

And with statements like, "I like China the way it is and think it's brilliant," it's obvious you're waffling when you come right back and say, "This deal is wrong." So as EPS said. Pick one side or the other, brother. Stop flip-flopping. Either you're for the agreement, and the Bush Admin for that matter, or you're against it because you don't like the Chinese or don't trust them or their system, in which case you're a hypocrite.

Please pick which issue you're a hyprocite on, please.
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 02:24 AM   #9
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
As I said, I love Arabs. I speak Arabic and a bit of Farsi as well (although thats Persian). I also speak a wee bit of Chinese. I have been to various Arabic countries, and visited the Orient. Can't say many bad things about either place as I enjoyed the people and their culture (oh and the food! oh yes! the food!).

My point was not that it's a bad idea for the Chinese or Arab organisations to run ports, as they are good at that. My point which you obviously have taken out of context is that America might want to think twice before letting them run THEIR ports.

You want racism? I have none. Common sense if you think about it. Also shows the hypocricy of the current administration. They pass the patriot act, giving the FBI the power to place listening devices in mosques, detain thousands of men just for being of middle eastern descent, deport hundreds who have lived there for years - working paying taxes, in the name of 'national security', then say 'but hey, its ok if they secure our ports'.

Same with the Chinese. The bush admin puts out a scatching report, calling for bans on Chinese imports, cuts to other social programmes with China, blasting them on their Taiwanese policies, and calling for inquiries into the new military build up, then say 'but hey, its ok for them to run all the nuclear weapons checks at our ports'.

Talk about a flip-flop - if those groups are so 'evil' - yes, 'evil' is the word bush has used to describe them, even included middle eastern and asian nations in his 'axis of evil', then why does he feel that these 'evil' people he is 'fighting a war on terror' against should be securing the very nation he is sworn to protect?

My point is, these groups are not evil, they are merely a straw man that bush has created to try and look like he is doing something while he pisses away Americas resources and destroys its reputation and armed forces ability so his cronies can pilfer and make billions profiteering off the war he created.

But me, racist? Not a bit.

I don't like the british government though if that make you feel better.
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 10:51 AM   #10
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
So then you're all for allowing the Chinese to carry out these operations on behalf of the US?
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 11:48 AM   #11
Empty_Purple_Stars
 
Empty_Purple_Stars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Right Here
Posts: 3,442
Maybe he's just for Chinese Carryout? >.<

Uh..

Yeah..
Empty_Purple_Stars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2006, 10:38 AM   #12
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
I love Chinese take away. But as far as is I think it's ok for them to protect the ports in America, thats a question for the American people. But just remember the choice will send a message out to China, and the rest of the world.

If American doesn't stop the Chinese ports deal, then what America is effectively implying by it's policy is:

A. We don't mind foreigners, just Arabs.
B. Screw Tawain, Tibet and independence.
C. We really don't care about human rights abuses.
D. Communism really isn't all that bad.
E. We care more about the bottom line (money) than anything else

By making friends and buddying up with a country that you claim to be against, claim violates human rights, and also claim to be illegally occupying other free nations - you make yerself as bad as they are.

I find it hard to swallow that bush invaded iraq to stop human rights abuses and bring freedom when at the same time he teams up with other nations who he claims have committed atrocities twice as bad, and still continues to do so.
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2006, 10:52 AM   #13
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
You're not answering my question. Let me pose it to you again: "Do you, personally, support allowing the Chinese to carry out these operations on behalf of the US?"
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2006, 02:54 AM   #14
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Angel
The THEME IS NOT 'the evil Chinks' but 'THE EVIL COMMUNISTS!'

By Lucifer you are a dumbshit.
I'm a dumbshit? First off, you quoted me entirely talking about an issue of Sternn turning the Dubai Ports deal into an ARAB issue. The "now" was in reference to that. Had nothing to do with "the evil chinks," you fucking moron. Sternn has a tendancy to turn political issues into racial ones when they're not. Not that you'd know anyways because you've been here for all of FOUR FUCKING POSTS! You need to pay attention to what you're quoting and what other people are talking about before you run your fucking mouth around here.

Moving on, Hutchison Whampoa is a public company within a free market/capitalist economy under a government that's a limited democracy, not communist. If you don't know anything about Hong Kong's status within China, don't fucking continue typing ANYTHING, my man.

Secondly, the company's owner, Li Ka Shing has praised Democracy in a NUMBER of speeches. Let me quote him real quick: "I love freedom, and I support democracy" That'd not be paraphrased, that'd be directly from the horse's mouth. And what does a good capitalist do? Make money off of whoever the fuck they can. Hence US companies selling advanced computer technology to the PLA. Hell, John Kerry even has "ties to Beijing." Ever hear of a company called, "Boston Capital and Technology?" Ol' John Kerry led quite an extensive outsourcing trade mission in Beijing on it's behalf to sell advanced US space technology to the Chinese. It just so happens that this Boston company has ties to the Chinese Military. I guess that makes Boston Capital & Technology, as well as John Kerry, communists.

But since that's "absurd," we'll reassess what we're looking at: we have a pro-democratic head of a public company based out of capitalist market in a region that's government system is a limited democracy. Go ahead and throw out allegations of them being "communists" and that this is a communist issue. You talk like a tough guy, now back your shit up.

Don't come to me with these two tiny, and suddenly popular, reports either. I'll throw official State Department testimony right back at you stating, "We have also explored concerns that H-W is a front for the government of the People's Republic of China. We have found no information to substantiate that allegation." Or statements from Rear Admiral Quigley stating that there is no indication that H-W operates for Beijing. Or statements from Maritime Operations Director Jorge L. Quijano. Go ahead and try. Because when those two reports were written, it came at the same time these statements were made and the State Department officially took the stance that there were no indications that H-W operates for Beijing.
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2006, 03:31 AM   #15
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Doing business with them doesn't 'make' you a communist no more than doing business with say Al Queda 'makes' you a terrorist.

Just makes you a supporter.

And what does any of John Kerry's business dealing with them have to do with port security? In every thread you or EE try to bring ol JK into the thread. He is like the new Walter Mondale, in a few weeks, no one will remember him except if you look up old articles on microfish in the library and see some reference to an old political cartoon. Bringing him into every argument for some type of 'balance' is inane - hes out, no one cares what he does.

I thought I answered the question quite well, where as you once again have yet to say anything, make sniping comments at users, and basically dodge the subject and bring out something about john kerry having business interests in Hong Kong.

My point was, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. And if they do, then don't pay the lads whos homes youve been throwing stones at to guard yer home from being damaged by stones.

Much like putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop, I think it's a bad idea FOR AMERICA. Not fer ANYONE else, as the rest of the world sees things like cultural diversity, notices that China has been operating quite well with communism in place, hell, it's economy dwarfs the US and it soon will take over as the worlds only super power. WE get along great with them, and like Europe, don't have any issues. We don't issue statements calling them tyrants and saying they violate the rights of their people. IF we did, I can promise you we would then immediately after sell off our security contracts to them.

To see the US selling out its security for money is nothing new. Wal-Mart imports more products than anyone else from China. China accounts for a large chunk of the US trade deficit.

They already own yer arse. Might as well give them yer security as well.

If it we me living there, I'd either petition the government to stop doing business or stop calling the kettle BLACK.

Like I said, don't want to irk the people who are paid to protect you. Especially if they get the money up front.

But hey, maybe it's just me. I wonder how many 'nam vets who died to 'stop the spread of communism' are angered by the fact that the communists will now be the first line of defence in America's ports?

Ironic?

-S
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2006, 10:38 AM   #16
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
Makes you a supporter, eh? Doing business with them. State Department bought up a shitload of computers here not too long ago from a company that's 65% owned by the Chinese Government. But uh, looking back on that human rights report which slammed China pretty good, not to mention the ENTIRE Cold War, I'd say it's safe to state that they don't support communism.

The thing is, capitalist values are about saving a buck by doing business with virtually anyone. Because we buy oil from Venezuela, doesn't mean we support Chavez or any of his policies. Because Google did business with mainland China, doesn't mean they support communism, especially since they gleefully clung to Democratic values here when they partially won the case against the government.

No you didn't answer it straight up, Sternn. Any answer you may have come up with was intentionally muffled into questionable wording that be interpreted several different ways. So I want a "Yes" or "No" in response to whether my next statement is correct or not: "You, personally (i.e. not thinking on anyone else's behalf), are all for allowing the Chinese company to take over these tasks." Is that statement correct in describing your stance?

As for ol' JK, I bought him up in a pre-emptive attack on what I expected out of a counter arguement from someone in regards to Li Ka Shing. That didn't happen and until it does, you can disregard that and the last paragraph, neither of which were even directed at provoking discussion out of you in the first place.

Yes, China's been having great luck with Communism in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Xinjiang, Macau, amongst other regions. And since you didn't read my last post regarding the company not being communist or even from a communist region of China, I'll stop here in even debating this issue further with you.
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 09:14 AM   #17
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Well then I say a resounding 'yes'! Lets see how stupid the current administration can actually be. I mean, I have no problem with it as said, so I support it - especially since I don't have to live there. If the Chinese allow their people (read in sympathisers) to say, allow other groups they call allies (i.e. Palestinians, Russians, N. Koreans) to subvert the US security because, the US is only worried about money, NOT security, then I say sure.

As you said, the US government is only worried about the bottom line, not the people, no human rights, not anything other than the almighty dollar. Past business dealings throughout the world have proven this to be true. Thanks for illustrating this point more vividly for us all.

If the american government is more worried about money than the safety of its own people, then who am I to complain? I'm not the one whos arse is being sold out for money as you so elequently put it.

So my answer is obviously YES, YES, oh faith and begora - YES. That better?

What about yerself? Whats YER one word 'non-convaluted' answer?

You have mine, where is yers?
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 09:52 AM   #18
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
"Yes" as well for me. As I've already cited, the State Department has come out and said numerous times that this company, based out of a semi-democratic and entirely capitalist Hong Kong, is not a front of the communist government of mainland China. Not to mention that this is a sovereign nation these guys are screening outgoing cargo in. That's outgoing, not incoming. The US will still continue to scan the containers as they come in to the actual US.

So cool. We both support Bush's stance. I knew you'd come around, Sternn.
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 10:20 AM   #19
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Umm...except your wrong on one major point there. As pointed out, and listed above, and in the links (multiple times), I quote, from the top of this very post...

WASHINGTON — In the aftermath of the Dubai ports dispute, the Bush administration is hiring a Hong Kong conglomerate to help detect nuclear materials inside cargo passing through the Bahamas to the United States and elsewhere.

Thats not OUTGOING thats INCOMING. Why would the government scan for nuclear weapons LEAVING ths US?

And for the record, I don't support his stance, I just think it an opportunity for once again for america to get a black eye thanks to bush and maybe, this time, after another huge screw up (i.e. large amounts of nuclear material is recovered in the states in the hands of a group of terrorists) people might see him for what he is. A threat to the world who would sell his own mother for a buck.
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 11:49 AM   #20
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
Awesome observations there, Sternn. Freight coming out of the UAE can come directly TO the US. They still check shit in the UAE port though, meaning it's OUTGOING. The Bahamas are not a part of the actual US, meaning when shit comes INTO the Bahamas, it's not IN the US. Do you understand this concept? When shit enters the actual US, meaning a port in the continental United States (tell me please if you need a map outlining what is and isn't the US), it gets checked in the stateside ports. As in, shit is INCOMING. The only way it wouldn't be outgoing from the Bahamas is if it was STAYING in the Bahamas, which is not the US.

I still find it funny that you and Bush take the same stance on this issue. Translated: You agree with Bush on a political issue. Now go take a long shower and try to wash away the "filth" of this realization.
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2006, 12:48 AM   #21
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Yer really not up onyer port security are ye? Much like customs, which I can tell you all about, once inside the US, security levels drop. Dramtically.

Tis why sugglers like places like Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Bahamas. Once you get items through those ports, you can mail them via FedEX, UPS, etc. and they go right on the belly of a plane without any extra checking. Think I'm wrong? Try it.

I know people in all those places, and by bouncing them through the same aforementioned ports, have been known to send 'care-packages' back from Amsterdam to mates in the states. Haven't had one stopped yet. So please, tell me how if a terrorist breeches the same security that there is some other check in place.

Once again, yer making this up. Read the article(s). Try it yerself. Not that it matters, as mentioned 100% of all the nuclear material they tried to sneak in got in anyway, so does it really matter who is searching the ports?
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2006, 12:13 PM   #22
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
Heh, I think you're mistaking the Bahamas for the US Virgin Islands there, Sternn, or US terrirtory. It's not. It's a completely independant and sovereign nation. It wasn't even ever a commonwealth of the US. The Brits used to own it. Bahamas became independant from the UK in 1973. So how you equate the Bahamas to being a part of the US is just mind boggling.

Read up on history, sport, then look at your posts and tell me who's making up information.
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2006, 06:09 AM   #23
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
The same way the Panamanian canal is part of the US. The US runs it, pays for it, staffs it, and controls it. Like ports in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yes, they are free nations, but you are telling me the US doesn't control all aspects of security?

And once again, please scroll up and actually READ the ARTICLE. I didn't write it, just copied it and pasted it. But since you seem to be too lazy to do so...

The administration acknowledges the no-bid contract with Hutchison Whampoa Ltd. represents the first time a foreign company will be involved in running a sophisticated U.S. radiation detector at an overseas port without American customs agents present.

Thats a quote. Not my words.

And again, from the top...

After assurances the President gave to Congress that foreigners wouldn’t manage security at US ports, this no bid contract shows how the Bush administration continues to rely on foreign companies to provide security for cargo headed into the U.S.

So are you aruging with FOX news? Also, why would they even write this if it were totally wrong and 100% false? You think news agencies just make this up? I mean, thats basically what you are arguing. I just post the articles here, followed by what I think about the decisions. You argue the points of the article, that are made by FOX news.

If this weren't a security issue and not news worthy, as you would have us believe, it wouldn't be on the news, and congressmen wouldn't be arguing about it as we speak.

-S
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2006, 09:58 AM   #24
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
You just don't seem to understand this concept here. The ports this cargo passes through isn't a US port.

Alright, hold on, I'll go ahead and dig you up an article with the correct language here:

http://news.**********/s/ap/port_secu...azkxBHNlYwN0bQ

"By TED BRIDIS, Associated Press Writer Fri Mar 31, 9:39 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Anxious to avoid new flare-ups over seaport security, the White House alerted dozens of Republican lawmakers on the eve of a story by The Associated Press on the subject and provided their staffs with an advance briefing.
ADVERTISEMENT

The March 22 briefing involved between 50 and 100 congressional offices, participants said. It focused, they said, on an AP story being published the next day that disclosed that the Bush administration was hiring a Hong Kong conglomerate to help detect nuclear materials inside cargo passing through the Bahamas.

The no-bid, $6 million contract represents the first time a foreign company will be involved in running sophisticated U.S. radiation-detection equipment at an overseas port without the presence of U.S. Customs agents.
"

Translated: that's not our port. Shit gets scanned in our ports if we've been tipped off about something.
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 06:28 AM   #25
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
...and cummon, finish that statement. Tipped off by who? The people scanning the ports.

Hey, it's not my security thats being sold out. And as mentioned, if this were not newsworthy and people didn't think it was a breech of security, it wouldn't be in the headlines, in every major paper.

Why you try and downplay the importance and try to justify a point that this isn't even newsworthy as they obviously have it wrong is beyond me. Your arguing with the facts as presented in a dozen news articles, ones of which yerself have found and posted.

If it's not a security issue, then why is it here?
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Back Stencil Godslayer Jillian Fashion 21 11-30-2008 05:45 PM
Omfg I'm Back...!!!! $haDe General 19 08-18-2008 04:16 AM
Going back to school and not being a loser Opteron_Man General 32 05-28-2008 05:46 PM
Teenage problems/summer school or held back Kristin Whining 12 05-28-2008 04:43 PM
Advice please, on how to deal with a cheating fuck? ExistentialDisorder Whining 16 02-17-2006 06:26 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:03 AM.