Any Port in a Storm....except for Dubai

The biggest story of the week for both Democrats and Republicans is about a multi-billion dollar port contract with an Arabic country...namely the United Arab Emirate.

[LES KINSOLVING]: The government's Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States has approved a deal that will put six major ports in the United States under the control of a state-sponsored company based in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates. And my question: Knowing, as we do, that the Arab Emirate was tied in many ways to the 9/11 hijackers and their deeds, and knowing the critical nature of port security and protecting the nation, will the President step in and stop this deal from going into effect March 2nd?

[White House Press Secy SCOTT McCLELLAN]: Well, my understanding, Les, is that this went through the national security review process under CFIUS, at the Department of Treasury. That is the agency that is responsible for overseeing such matters. And this includes a number of national security agencies -- the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, the Justice, among others, and there is a rigorous review that goes on for proposed foreign investments for national security concerns. And in terms of specifics relating to this, Treasury is the chair of this and you should direct those questions to Treasury.

I just don't buy this. President Bush should not accept this at all but, unfortunately, he is supporting this contract deal. Michelle Malkin has more. Be sure to read her blog.

Both Democrats and Republicans are beginning to build a groundswell of support against the idea of allowing a foreign country's state sponsored company have control over 6 major ports of the United States. In this case, it would be the United Arab Emirate. Hello! Remember 9/11?? We're at war.

I'm with what the Washington Times is saying.

The root question is this: Why should the United States have to gamble its port security on whether a subsidiary of the government of the United Arab Emirates happens to remain an antiterrorism ally?

The Committee on Foreign Investment is the wrong place for this decision to be made; it appears to be little more than a rubber stamp.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, New York Democrat, among others, is asking tough questions about this deal. For once, we agree with him: President Bush should overrule the committee to reject this deal. If that doesn't happen, Congress should take action. The country's ports should not be owned by foreign governments; much less governments whose territories are favored by al Qaeda.

Contact the White House:

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: 202-456-2461
comments@whitehouse.gov

Don't delay. Our nation's security could be potentially at risk and we are at war.