Hillary Has "Port Values" Except when it's Saudi Arabia or China

“Now these choices reveal a disheartening pattern of the ideology, influence and incompetence that we have seen. And, they violate our values and our interests. Now, I don’t claim that democrats are always right but we are far more likely to make choices that reflect the values and advance the well being of the American people.”

Hillary Clinton
Speaking on the UAE Ports Deal & “Port Values(?)”

After that “value violation” tirade, why did the media not ask Hillary about the Saudi run US ports?

As Sweetness and Light pointed out, the National Shipping Company of Saudi Arabia (NSCSA) already runs 9 ports here in the US!

And, it was back in 1997, when Hillary was serving as co-president, that the Saudi owned shipping company (NSCSA) began service between North America and Italy, Greece and Turkey?

This just proves that the Clintons have evolved a long way since 1999 when they claimed that port control was “silly stuff”.

Back in 1999 when a Chinese owned Hutchinson-Whampoa, Ltd. took control of ports at both ends of the Panama Canal the Clinton White House scoffed at the security risks:

Clinton White House spokesman Joe Lockhart dismissed the Insight story about Chinese port control including the Panama Canal and the surrounding controversy as “silly stuff.”

Chinese owned Hutchison-Whampoa Ltd. today owns 90% of Panama Ports Company.

Back when port control was “silly stuff”…

The Clintons watched as China became gate keepers at both ends of the Panama Canal.

So “Communist China” controlling ports is good, “Saudi Arabia” (remember 9-11?) controlling ports is good, but other more moderate Arab allies from the Middle East controlling ports is “bad”.

Jim Geraghty at TKS has a must read on the disinformation campaign about the UAE port management deal today:


Generation Why? has thoughts on the ports deal.
Powerline reports on the “Sound and Fury” of the UAE port controversy.
Jamie Allman has a bit of advice for President Bush.

You Might Like