Tel-Chai Nation

Proof that even the US government, given the chance, can risk state security, just like Israel's has, by giving up control of a most crucial part of the country, that being its sea ports. Michelle Malkin provides the details on a deal made by the Foriegn Investment Comittee to hand over control of six major seaports to a subsidiary of the United Arab Emirates:

[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.

To make matters worse, the White House has been defending the sale to the UAE.

This is by far one of the most blatant shows of duplicity the Dubya administration's been showing for the public, by handing over one its very own seaports to enemies who could very likely use them to smuggle in weapons for terrorist attacks. First, he wants to propose giving amnesty to illegal immigrants, and now, this?

Captain's Quarters presents some concrete concerns about the UAE in the 9-11 commission report. And see also Debbie Schlussel's info on the Dubai sheik Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum. A Blog for All notes that:

You've got to wonder just how much review was done, when the Port Authority wasn't even involved in the process of screening participants who might take over operations at the Port of New York and New Jersey.

The New York Sun (also via Michelle) reports on the rising tide of opposition that's come in:

The Bush administration yesterday failed to quell the swelling tide of opposition to the deal that would give a company owned by the government of Dubai in the United Arab Emirates control over six American ports.

The board of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey promptly made public their demand to the federal government for information and documents related to the decision in preparation for its own review of the implications of the deal next week...

It's good that there's opposition to the deal rising, and will be even better if people keep making themselves heard. Here's the contact page for the White House. And here's a thread from Lucianne with more. And here's something on which I can certainly agree with Democratic Senator Charles Schumer:

New York Sen. Charles Schumer won new allies in Congress and the media yesterday in his campaign to raise national security concerns about a planned transfer of port operations in Newark and other key East Coast cities to a company controlled by the government of Dubai...The takeover was approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., an interagency panel headed by the Treasury Department that can block foreign acquisitions that threaten national security.

But Schumer, who first raised questions Monday, was joined yesterday by an array of six congressmen, including Republicans such as conservative Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, in a call for a second look. Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford) has also raised questions, and The New York Times yesterday editorialized against the deal.

Personally, I can't say I've ever considered Schumer the worst among Democrats, but either way, this is certainly something good he's doing, by helping to defend the nation's security.

Others on the subject include California Conservative, Right Minded, Independent Christian Voice, Adam's Blog, One Jerusalem, Kim Priestap, Gina Cobb, Suitably Flip, The Political Pitt Bull, Always on Watch, Kokonut Pundits, Pajama Hadin, Small Town Veteran, Super Fun Power Hour, Tim Worstall, Church and State, Conservative Outpost, Conservative Revolution, Independent Conservative, With Issue, The Anchoress, JunkYardBlog.

Labels: islam, UAE, US Congress