Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Shooting a Guy in the Face is not National Security

I'm a bit perplexed. President Bush claims to be interested in protecting us from terror attacks, yet he is gung-ho all about letting the United Arab Emirates have control over six of our biggest ports.

Two Republican governors are threatening legal action to block an Arab company from taking over operations in major U.S. ports and some GOP lawmakers say the deal should be closely examined.

New York Gov. George Pataki and Maryland Gov. Robert Ehrlich on Monday voiced doubts about the acquisition of a British company that has been running six U.S. ports by Dubai Ports World, a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates.

The British company, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., runs major commercial operations at ports in Baltimore, Miami, New Jersey, New Orleans, New York and Philadelphia.

Critics have noted that some of the 9/11 hijackers used the UAE as an operational and financial base. In addition, they contend the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff made the rounds on the talk shows Sunday, asserting that the administration made certain the company agreed to certain conditions to ensure national security. He said details of those agreements were secret.

During a stop Monday in Birmingham, Ala., Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said the administration had a "very extensive process" for reviewing such transactions that "takes into account matters of national security, takes into account concerns about port security."
DoG sources have provided us with a transcript of the meeting during which the "very extensive process" for reviewing such transactions took place:
U.S.: Do you have oil to sell us?
U.A.E.: Yes.
U.S.: Approved!
Don't forget to use premium when filling up your Hummer.

Hmmn... Maybe it's about time I got around to stocking up on the bottled water and duct tape.

No comments: