It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Mr Bush, THIS is not a threat to national security?? WHY NOT?

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 05:18 PM
I put this under political conspiracies because I feel this concerns national security.

Apparently Bush has a seemingly infinite capacity to rationalize even the most preposterous idiocy.

I mean, I would LOVE to rant on and on here but does anyone else see a problem with this? I mean.. we are sitting here loosing our liberty with innocent civilians being treated like terrorists but it's perfectly ok for Bush to sell out operations at 6 MAJOR seaports to his arab 'buddies' without any real review or oversight...??!?!

Never ends does it?

[edit on 21-2-2006 by TxSecret]

posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 05:22 PM
Already being discussed here:

and here:

posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 05:26 PM
I think this pretty much explains the President's position and it would seem to me that this would satisfy the "tolerant" segment of the nation:

"I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company," Bush said. "I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We'll treat you fairly.'"

posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 05:34 PM

"This is a company that has played by the rules, has been cooperative with the United States, from a country that's an ally on the war on terror, and it would send a terrible signal to friends and allies not to let this transaction go through."

posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 05:46 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if that british company held the original title to the danged port!!!

as far as why a middle eastern company should be held to a different standard that Britain......umm.....gee, I don't know. the middle east has and will probably always will be in a state of war with each other. their ways are very different from ours, and well, what can I say, there's seem to be alot of people in that neck of the woods who dance in the streets when horrible things happen in this country, like planes, flown by lunatics from this area of the world bring down important buildings and kill thousands of our people!!

great britain on the other hand, along with other european nations, once owned much of the land the US sits on. we speak the same language as great britain, as well as share many of the same traditions. in so many ways, it's our motherland.

so, well, considering it was british companies that controlled all of our commerce in the early stages of our nation, it doesn't seem that unreasonable for them to still be involved....does it??

he does have his feathers ruffled about this though, doesn't he?? makes me wonder, did abernoff have these people as clients also? how much was bush and buds paid off for this one?

or maybe this is just one of the ways he has found to secretly "deal with the terrorists"?

posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 06:12 PM

Please contribute to the existing thread linked above.

Thread closed.

top topics

log in