Chertoff defends review of ports takeover

[Coexist]

Its in the news already!!!

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/13912689.htm
<snip>
WASHINGTON - Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff on Sunday defended the government's security review of an Arab company given permission to take over operations at six major U.S. ports.
"We make sure there are assurances in place, in general, sufficient to satisfy us that the deal is appropriate from a national security standpoint," Chertoff said on ABC's "This Week."

<snip>
Chertoff said Dubai Ports World should not be excluded automatically from such a deal because it is based in the UAE.
Critics have cited the UAE's history as an operational and financial base for the hijackers who carried out the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001

[xiamiam]

1. right.! trust his competence after Katrina to decide the fate of the ports

[Coexist]

2. that is a good point to push

Chertoff supports it - but should we support Chertoff?!

[mod mom]

7. Excellent point!

[liveoaktx]

8. VIDEO of that segment

No Port Security for HOmeland Security

[Coexist]

3. on Blitzer, re: the ports, "so, you're on board"

Chertoff, "I can't talk about classified information."

WTF? DO YOU AGREE OR NOT?? Sorry, opinions are not CLASSIFIED for crying out loud.

[Webster Green]

4. Well, now hold on just a second!....

"We make sure there are assurances in place, in general, sufficient to satisfy us that the deal is appropriate from a national security standpoint," Chertoff said on ABC's "This Week."

"In general"???

In fucking general???

Chertof used that phrase twice.

So, in general, our ports will be safe. (with possible exceptions?)

I can't take much more. I'm close to my own personal "tipping point".

[Coexist]

5. CBS News picked it up:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/19/ap/national/mainD8FS91QO0.shtml

[Coexist]

6. Saxy Chambliss is AGAINST the port takeover

Chambliss and Boxer on the same side - it MUST be a mistake.