dirty
EOG Master
Columns
<!-- lt-column -->Any port in the terrorist storm
Feb 20, 2006
by Cal Thomas ( bio | archive | contact )
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript type=text/JavaScript>function popEmailWin(URL,LEFT,TOP,WIDTH,HEIGHT) {s = ",left="+LEFT+",top="+TOP+",width="+WIDTH+",height="+HEIGHT;thisWindow = window.open(URL,"PNSRC","location=no,scrollbars=no,menubar=no,toolbar=no,resizable=yes"+s);}</SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="/scripts/textsizer.js" type=text/javascript></SCRIPT>
<!-- rt-column -->
<!-- /spotlight --><TABLE style="FLOAT: left" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=435 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>On Sunday, the Australian government issued the following alert to its citizens: "We advise you to exercise a high degree of caution in the United Arab Emirates because of the high threat of terrorist attack. We continue to receive reports that terrorists are planning attacks against Western interests in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Commercial and public areas frequented by foreigners are possible terrorist targets."
The United States has approved a business deal that would turn over the operation of six major American ports to a company that is owned by the UAE, the very country Australians are to be wary of visiting. The obvious question is: If it is dangerous for an Australian to travel to the UAE because of terrorism, isn't it even more dangerous for a company owned by UAE to own the rights to American ports where terror might be directly, or indirectly, imported?
There have been some dumb decisions since the United States was attacked on Sept. 11, 2001, including the "welcoming" of radical Muslim groups, mosques and schools that seek by their preaching and teaching to influence U.S. foreign policy and undermine the nation. But the decision to sell port operations in New York, Newark-Port Elizabeth, Baltimore, Miami, Philadelphia and New Orleans to a company owned by the UAE may be the dumbest of all.
<!------ OAS AD 'Middle' begin ------><SCRIPT language=JavaScript><!--OAS_AD('Middle');//--></SCRIPT><!-- begin ZEDO --><SCRIPT language=JavaScript>var zflag_nid="305"; var zflag_cid="24/1"; var zflag_sid="26"; var zflag_width="300"; var zflag_height="250"; var zflag_sz="9"; </SCRIPT><IFRAME marginWidth=0 marginHeight=0 src="http://c5.zedo.com/jsc/c5/ff2.html?n=305;c=24/1;s=26;d=9;w=300;h=250" frameBorder=0 width=300 scrolling=no height=250 allowTransparency><script language="JavaScript" src="http://c5.zedo.com/jsc/c5/ff2.js"></script><noscript>
</noscript></IFRAME><!-- end ZEDO --><!------ OAS AD 'Middle' end ------>
Security experts have repeatedly said American ports are poorly protected. Each year, approximately 9 million cargo containers enter the United States through its ports. Repeated calls to improve port security have mostly gone unheeded.
In supporting the sale decision by a little-known interagency panel called the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), the Bush administration dismissed security risk concerns. National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones said the sale of the ports for $6.8 billion to Dubai Ports World was "rigorously reviewed" by CFIUS, which, he said, considers security threats when foreign companies seek to buy or invest in American industry. Apparently money talked more than common sense.
In a rare display of bipartisanship, congressional Republicans and Democrats are forging an alliance to reverse the decision. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, has announced plans for her Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs to hold hearings. Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. - both members of Collins' committee - have raised concerns. New York's Democratic senators, Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton have also objected to the sale. Clinton and Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., expect to offer a bill to ban companies owned or controlled by foreign governments from acquiring U.S. port operations.
In the House, Reps. Chris Shays, R-Conn.; Mark Foley, R-Fla.; and Vito Fossella, R.-N.Y., are among those who want to know more about the sale. In a House speech, Foley said, "The potential threat to our country is not imagined, it is real."
The UAE was used as a financial and operational base by some of the 9/11 hijackers. A New York Times editorial said the sale takes the Bush administration's "laxness to a new level."
Members of Congress may wish to consider that the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components bound for Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan. The UAE was one of only three countries to recognize the Taliban as Afghanistan's legitimate government before the U.S. invasion toppled it.
The Department of Homeland Security says it is legally impossible under CFIUS rules to reconsider approval of the sale without evidence the Dubai company gave false information or withheld vital details from U.S. officials. Congress should change that law.
Last year, Congress overwhelmingly recommended against the Bush administration granting permission to a Chinese company to purchase the U.S. oil services company UNOCAL. Six years ago, when a Chinese company took control of the Panama Canal from the United States, retired U.S. Admiral and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Thomas H. Moorer warned of a "nuclear Pearl Harbor."
Congress must stop this sale of American ports to foreign interests and, in an era of terrorism, prevent any more potential terrorist targets from falling into the hands of those who wish to destroy us.
<!--#include virtual="/includes/ads/ad-detail.inc" -->
Cal Thomas is the co-author of Blinded By Might.
<!-- lt-column -->Any port in the terrorist storm
Feb 20, 2006
by Cal Thomas ( bio | archive | contact )
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript type=text/JavaScript>function popEmailWin(URL,LEFT,TOP,WIDTH,HEIGHT) {s = ",left="+LEFT+",top="+TOP+",width="+WIDTH+",height="+HEIGHT;thisWindow = window.open(URL,"PNSRC","location=no,scrollbars=no,menubar=no,toolbar=no,resizable=yes"+s);}</SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="/scripts/textsizer.js" type=text/javascript></SCRIPT>
- Email to a friend
- Print this page
- Text size: A A
<!-- rt-column -->
<!-- /spotlight --><TABLE style="FLOAT: left" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=435 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>On Sunday, the Australian government issued the following alert to its citizens: "We advise you to exercise a high degree of caution in the United Arab Emirates because of the high threat of terrorist attack. We continue to receive reports that terrorists are planning attacks against Western interests in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Commercial and public areas frequented by foreigners are possible terrorist targets."
The United States has approved a business deal that would turn over the operation of six major American ports to a company that is owned by the UAE, the very country Australians are to be wary of visiting. The obvious question is: If it is dangerous for an Australian to travel to the UAE because of terrorism, isn't it even more dangerous for a company owned by UAE to own the rights to American ports where terror might be directly, or indirectly, imported?
There have been some dumb decisions since the United States was attacked on Sept. 11, 2001, including the "welcoming" of radical Muslim groups, mosques and schools that seek by their preaching and teaching to influence U.S. foreign policy and undermine the nation. But the decision to sell port operations in New York, Newark-Port Elizabeth, Baltimore, Miami, Philadelphia and New Orleans to a company owned by the UAE may be the dumbest of all.
<!------ OAS AD 'Middle' begin ------><SCRIPT language=JavaScript><!--OAS_AD('Middle');//--></SCRIPT><!-- begin ZEDO --><SCRIPT language=JavaScript>var zflag_nid="305"; var zflag_cid="24/1"; var zflag_sid="26"; var zflag_width="300"; var zflag_height="250"; var zflag_sz="9"; </SCRIPT><IFRAME marginWidth=0 marginHeight=0 src="http://c5.zedo.com/jsc/c5/ff2.html?n=305;c=24/1;s=26;d=9;w=300;h=250" frameBorder=0 width=300 scrolling=no height=250 allowTransparency><script language="JavaScript" src="http://c5.zedo.com/jsc/c5/ff2.js"></script><noscript>
Security experts have repeatedly said American ports are poorly protected. Each year, approximately 9 million cargo containers enter the United States through its ports. Repeated calls to improve port security have mostly gone unheeded.
In supporting the sale decision by a little-known interagency panel called the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), the Bush administration dismissed security risk concerns. National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones said the sale of the ports for $6.8 billion to Dubai Ports World was "rigorously reviewed" by CFIUS, which, he said, considers security threats when foreign companies seek to buy or invest in American industry. Apparently money talked more than common sense.
In a rare display of bipartisanship, congressional Republicans and Democrats are forging an alliance to reverse the decision. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, has announced plans for her Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs to hold hearings. Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. - both members of Collins' committee - have raised concerns. New York's Democratic senators, Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton have also objected to the sale. Clinton and Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., expect to offer a bill to ban companies owned or controlled by foreign governments from acquiring U.S. port operations.
In the House, Reps. Chris Shays, R-Conn.; Mark Foley, R-Fla.; and Vito Fossella, R.-N.Y., are among those who want to know more about the sale. In a House speech, Foley said, "The potential threat to our country is not imagined, it is real."
The UAE was used as a financial and operational base by some of the 9/11 hijackers. A New York Times editorial said the sale takes the Bush administration's "laxness to a new level."
Members of Congress may wish to consider that the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components bound for Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan. The UAE was one of only three countries to recognize the Taliban as Afghanistan's legitimate government before the U.S. invasion toppled it.
The Department of Homeland Security says it is legally impossible under CFIUS rules to reconsider approval of the sale without evidence the Dubai company gave false information or withheld vital details from U.S. officials. Congress should change that law.
Last year, Congress overwhelmingly recommended against the Bush administration granting permission to a Chinese company to purchase the U.S. oil services company UNOCAL. Six years ago, when a Chinese company took control of the Panama Canal from the United States, retired U.S. Admiral and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Thomas H. Moorer warned of a "nuclear Pearl Harbor."
Congress must stop this sale of American ports to foreign interests and, in an era of terrorism, prevent any more potential terrorist targets from falling into the hands of those who wish to destroy us.
<!--#include virtual="/includes/ads/ad-detail.inc" -->
Cal Thomas is the co-author of Blinded By Might.Copyright ? 2006 Townhall.com
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
:cocktail