Bush Administration OKs United Arab Emirates Company to Handle US Port Operations

That's Don Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense and member of the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States which unanimously approved the UAE Port operation. Either he's telling the truth or he's lying. Neither is good.

The Arab/Terror angle is the most visceral, but this whole thing is like all the other Bush Administration deals... done in a backroom with secrecy as the guiding principle and open government be damned. I don't know if this was done because of the administration ties to this company or payment to UAE for some service rendered or because a bunch of money from this company went towards GOP causes or what, but I do know it was not done in a way that generates confidence in our government.

 

I actually agree with the Administration on the premise that we should treat people in the world equally and fairly. I think the Congress is overreacting, just as it cried "fouls" over a number of other things in the past. That said, I have some suspicions of the Bush gang's real motives behind "fair play" when it involves Middle Eastern conglomerates. I hope the Congress would stop the silly brouhaha over the "security" and look deep into the money trail. It would be Bush's first ever exercise of veto if the Congress voted to block the deal.

 

its another cheney misfiring and shooting a duck.

the democrats can't get balls and stand up for real issues. so instead they play these weak ass cards cause we are all sheep.

 

i find it interesting that there seems to be bipartisanship on this, frist is going to introduce the bill that bush is going to "veto" today, wednesday.

finally, 6 years later, bush is a uniter!

 

It has become increasingly apparent that the republican party has now begun the mass exit away from anything "Bush"

The republicans are coming to realize the huge mistake of having this assclown as our president and you will see more and more of the party abandoning him on almost every issue that will come up in the next three years. It will be even more apparent with the midterm elections coming up in November. NO-ONE is going to want to have him campaign for them.

 

I don't care how westernized the UAE is in the ME. That's like being the smartest kid on the short bus. The fact remains the 9/11 terrorists and the money trail lead to Saudi Arabia and UAE. It's difficult for Americans to trust countries where there are terrorist sympathizers that will be in charge of port security. The cartoon blowup already illustrated how demented some people are. Why risk giving them the opportunity of easier access?

 

Ooops. (Via Atrios)

 

Incompetence?

 

The Coast Guard and Customs are currently in charge of all security at American ports. That will not change with this deal.

Of course, the only American company capable of handling this job is Halliburton. I'm sure that would go over well with the left.

 

The Coast Guard isn't in charge of inspecting containers. They will help identify ships as they come into port, but they are not going to check ships and manifests as they unload.

 

Yep, no one has said exactly how our security is compromised. This is just dumb, and both Republicans and Democrats are making a big deal out of nothing.

 

No kidding. That's what Customs and Border Protection does. And will continue to do.

Mr. Clutch - I wouldn't say that it's "nothing", there are several legitimate concerns about this deal. That being said, there's a definite level of hysteria that's bordering on the ridiculous.

I liked McCain's statement:

“We all need to take a moment and not rush to judgment on this matter without knowing all the facts....By all means, let’s do due diligence, get briefings, seek answers to all relevant questions and assurances that defense officials and the intelligence community were involved in the examination and approval of this transaction. In other words, let’s make a judgment when we possess all the pertinent facts. Until then, all we can offer is heat and little light to the discussion.”

 

From the CS Monitor:

Companies like P&O don't provide security at the ports. The US Coast Guard and Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement do. For instance, in New Orleans, P&O is one of eight terminal operators responsible for marketing the port, signing agreements with shipping lines, hiring labor, loading ships, and moving cargo.

...

P&O will not be "managing" the ports, as many news organizations have reported. Instead, the company is one of many that leases terminals at the port.

"I've never quite seen a story so distorted so quickly," says Esther de Ipolyi, a public-relations executive who works with the port of Houston. "It's like I go to an apartment building that has 50 apartments, and I rent an apartment. This does not mean I took over the management of the whole building."

 

So everytime Democrats criticize Bush its politicizing the issue and when Republicans do its not? Last time I checked Republican and Democratic Senators were still politicians and I imagine this move is even less popular in TN than in MA.

 

They both are. They know how it looks to the average person looking at this. I know when I first heard about it sounded pretty bad. But if you look at the details this is a non-issue.

 

I've only skimmed this thread but I agree with Buck and Mr. Clutch and think too much is being made of this. Yes its true that foreign corporations are running the ports but the US is providing security and these corporations still have to follow US regulations. Anyway with the nature of multi-national corporations who's to say that a US based company would be safer or anymore loyal to the US?

 

SC: Is there a difference between foreign corporations and corporations owned by a another country? This will be the first sale to a state-owned corporation. No nagging doubts about that? Especially for a state ruled by a patriarchical monarchy with members of the royal family hanging out in Afghan hunting camps with Bin Laden?

And really, the administration didn't follow the law that required a 45 day investigation, it's not clear whether the Committee actually met much less voted on the deal as the law requires, the President and the Defense Secretary are saying different things, and the President has no qualms about making decisions that greatly erode individual rights to protect us, but all of a sudden he's giving a corporation the benefit of the doubt? None of this adds up to a non-issue.

 

wait where is the proof for this. and secondly hi america. you elected a bloody president and an entire administration is STILL being boys with the sauds. did the US just wake up yesterday and realize hey these oil people are boys with other oil people.

i think its just racism.

would anyone care if this company was owned by canada?