Who Owns Our ports?

I think I agree with the Governors, Congressmen, and Senators that are against letting a foreign power that we are "kinda" at war with have control over our ports.
Bush saying:

"the United States is sending "mixed signals" by attacking a Middle Eastern company after the ports were run by a British firm for several years."

Is ridiculous. Britain is on our side, remember?

We are involved in a War on Terror, not a war with England,Not a war with France., But a War on Terror, where 2 of the "enemy soldiers" came from the UAE. Were not at war with the UAE, but they have pretty porous ports to let 2 terrorists though to come blow up our Homeland. And we want to let them take over OUR ports?

The idea is offensive.

Since the War on Terror is this vague war on shadow villains, why do we want to give the keys to our home to a country that has already spawned and shipped 2 notorious Terrorists who helped blow up 3000 people? Sure it's the wrong message. It's not a mixed signal, it's pretty clear:

"NO, we don't want them CONTROLLING OUR PORTS".

This isn't out of bigotry, but out of concern. The owners of the ports don't set security, but they will manage the port operation, and could easily let though anything they wanted. Why do we as a nation insist on selling ourselves out to send a message. So what if the message is considered mixed. Was this a mixed signal?


We need to retain our sovereignty, and stop selling out to other countries or we will become beholden to everyone else, losing our national heritage. What's the next step, contracting out T.S.A. to Iraqi security firms because they are the lowest bidders? We are already sending our tax financial data to India for data processing. And we allow China to own U.S. Dollars in such quantities that they can affect our economy. These are sovereignty issues to me.

We need to stop selling ourselves out. That's not a mixed signal, thats pretty clear.

Bush | port | sovereignty | UAE | security | Homeland