Mark My Words - commentary on news, politics, religion, philosophy, science and social issues

Or so goes some of the criticism being thrown around by various politicians. It's hardly unexpected that certain Demoncraps would try to glom on to national security as an issue, though they've been doing plenty to make such efforts more difficult with their harping against racial profiling, so-called "domestic" eavesdropping and whatever else they can stir up in obedience to the most radical moonbats who have hijacked the party.

While a review of the port deal is reasonable, we should all make sure that whatever side we are on, we do not spread misconceptions or outright lies. As for my decades too late comment, that is covered in an article by Jim Geraghty at NRO. Along with corrections to the misinformation, he unfortunately has to point out that some Republicans are being led by the nose and repeating the same errors. Sadly, spineless, and the stupid party, are appellations once again being confirmed by such actions.

AN ORGANIZED DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN ON THE PORT DEAL (emphasis added in bold)

[...]

There are plenty of folks on the GOP side of the aisle repeating and spreading the lies. But check out the comments on the other side of the aisle.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton:

“Senator Menendez and I don’t think any foreign government company should be running our ports, managing, leasing, owning, operating. It just raises too many red flags. That is the nub of our complaints,” said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., speaking via teleconference in response to Bush’s announcement.

As reported in USA Today, 80 percent of the terminals in the Port of Los Angeles are run by foreign firms. And the U.S. Department of Transportation says the United Kingdom, Denmark, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, China and Taiwan have interests in U.S. port terminals. The blogger Sweetness and Light observed that the National Shipping Company of Saudi Arabia, which is partially owned by the government of Saudi Arabia as well as Saudi individuals and establishments, operates berths in the ports of Baltimore, Newport News, Houston, New Orleans, Savannah, Wilmington, N.C., Port Newark, New Jersey, and Brooklyn, New York. (The link has an inadvertently haunting photo, BTW.)

The argument from Democrats now that “foreigners” shouldn’t be operating U.S. ports is either protectionism, xenophobia, or both. And it is at least a decade late

Preceding this and further corrections he offers us this information that is not being mentioned by those throwing around dishonest criticism.

Clearly, this is a hot-button issue, and there are plenty of reasons for concern in the UAE’s past behavior, particularly before 9/11. Of course, we’re hearing from guys like Ret. Gen. Tommy Franks and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace that UAE is “a friend” and “very, very solid partners” in the war on terror. And Sen. John Warner observed that the U.S. military has docked more than 500 ships in the past year in the UAE and uses their airfields to perform support missions for both Afghanistan and Iraq. But some folks still feel as if they can’t trust the UAE, and/or they want a fuller review. Fair enough. I don’t begrudge someone for having concerns about this deal.

Be sure to read the entire article. We can't have a reasonable discussion on this issue, nor decide on appropriate actions, if we allow ourselves to be carried away by political opportunism and errors on the level of propoganda or if we are led by the spineless cowardice as displayed by some in the GOP.

---

Port security sellout?

Other blogs to check out:

Jo's Cafe has Monday Specials
Mudville Gazette has an Open Post
Blue Star Chronicles has What Everybody's Talking About
third world county has Monday Open Post/Olympics? What Olympics?
basil's blog is having a Picnic
Bloggin Outloud has Monday Open Trackbacks and Silly Search String Week