tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7937282.post114194098447014183..comments2024-01-23T02:11:02.912-08:00Comments on B.D.'s world: Call me a cynicB.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/02144122671576207950noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7937282.post-1142015978906483152006-03-10T10:39:00.000-08:002006-03-10T10:39:00.000-08:00I tend to agree. I argued when this flared up that...I tend to agree. I argued when this flared up that the Democrats should be careful not to let this thing turn into some xenophobic backlash. Some Democrats have done that (Ms. Clinton, for example has treaded these waters) as have several Republicans. A case can be made that the UAE is a security risk based on their assistance to 9-11 attackers, however a stronger case for such a thing could be made against the Saudis.<BR/><BR/>No, I would have gone after Republicans about A) port security in general - welcome to the party, jane come latelys, B) the process that wasn't followed properly, and C)the money involved as it concerned cabinet members.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the comment, Michael!B.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02144122671576207950noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7937282.post-1142005448464766272006-03-10T07:44:00.000-08:002006-03-10T07:44:00.000-08:00The main problem with the whole ports thing is tha...The main problem with the whole ports thing is that it comes across to me as racism and fear mongering. A Chinese government owned company had the same job some time ago apparently, and they could be considered just as much an "enemy of democracy". If they seemed like an actual security risk in any way I might have a problem with it, but they don't. It's the current climate in the US to fear anything Arab. <BR/><BR/>MichaelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com