Posted on 02/22/2006 6:05:32 PM PST by Stellar Dendrite
U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay said Wednesday that President Bush is making a big mistake backing a sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates.
The former Republican majority leader said the administration's approval of the deal is "pretty outrageous." DeLay made the remarks during a campaign event with Houston real estate executives.
Separately, U.S. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Humble, said he is concerned about Texas ports where military cargo is handled by London-based Peninsular and Oriental, the company to be purchased by the UAE's Dubai Ports World.
Poe said ports in Beaumont and Corpus Christi move military goods, materials and records of which he would not want UAE employees to have access.
Concerned lawmakers from both parties have noted that some of the Sept. 11 hijackers used the United Arab Emirates as an operational and financial base.
"We would be bringing trouble upon ourselves," Poe said. "I've heard the UAE is our friend on the war on terror, despite the past, but they may not be our friend tomorrow.
"They would have access to every manifest regarding shipping, all cargo going out, what's on it, where it's going and all incoming shipping coming back to the port."
John LaRue, director for the Port of Corpus Christi, said he appreciates Poe's concern, but says ports such as his have experience in working with foreign companies.
"I understand that he wants to review the process that went on. I think most people need that sort of interpretation," he said. "At the same time, ports all over the U.S. are run by companies like Dubai."
Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi, said he too is concerned about military shipments handled by a UAE government-owned company.
"I think in the world we are living in today, we need to take all the precautions necessary, and I think there is a lack of oversight," he said.
"So many of us in Congress are disappointed there was insufficient oversight on this."
At the Port of Houston, one of the nation's largest ports, Peninsular and Oriental handle freight and have longshoremen load and unload ships, but there is no military cargo moved, port officials said.
The port's Executive Director Thomas Kornegay said any deal with the UAE company won't change security operations or efficiency.
"They load and unload the ships, but we have the cargo checked by the customs and border protection," Kornegay said.
"And the U.S. Coast Guard does all the terminal security and checking the vessels before the come into the port. That is not going to change."
Still, DeLay said the deal would be overturned by Congress.
"When it's a matter of national security, the president will be overturned," DeLay said in an account that appeared on the Web site of the Austin American-Statesman. "We will overturn it within the next few weeks."
The White House said Wednesday that President Bush was unaware of the pending sale until it already had been approved by his administration.
The administration also said that it should have briefed Congress sooner about the transaction, which has triggered a major political backlash among Republicans and Democrats.
In the Houston area, DeLay faces Tom Campbell, Michael Fjetland and Pat Baig in his Republican primary. Democrat Nick Lampson, a former congressman, is unopposed and will face the GOP winner in November.
DeLay resigned his House leadership post amid Republicans' concern about a corruption scandal tied to lobbyist Jack Abramoff. He's also awaiting a Texas trial on money-laundering charges connected with the transfer of $190,000 in corporate contributions donated to candidates through a Texas political action committee he founded.
ping
"When it's a matter of national security, the president will be overturned," DeLay said in an account that appeared on the Web site of the Austin American-Statesman. "We will overturn it within the next few weeks."
But Jimmah said it was alright.....? What's the problem?
Well now, Tom DeLay comes out in opposition. Now we'll see how many Bushbots (of which I've been accused of being myself at times in the past) start talking about how corrupt DeLay is, after months of defending him.
Let's see, Jimmy Carter is for it, Bill Frist and Tom DeLay are opposing it. This is not a hard decision.
I agree with Delay.
This is honestly not going to happen. The repubs are positioning themselves for re-election, regardless of what the second-term prez wants.
The administration also said that it should have briefed Congress sooner about the transaction,
If Bush didn't know about it, how could he have briefed Congress sooner???
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Hmmmmmm... good question.
you better have your flame suit on.
my question is... how could Bush/Rove not see this fall-out coming?
I bet we see a poll in the next couple of days with Bush at an all-time low.
Carter wanted to weld shut the silo hatches on our Boomers.
I just want to see Bush finally veto something.
Hmmm... Delay criticizes the president and AP "forgets" to put it's DNC-mandated "indicted" tagline in the article!
There is no "party line" on this one. Clinton and Schumer are against the deal, just like DeLay.
The Democrats who oppose it are simply taking advantage of a golden opportunity that has been dropped in their lap - it is not at all consistent with their ideology to oppose this deal.
So a thinking man's got to think about what is more important - commerce, or national security.
I go with national security, myself, but men of good will may disagree. I haven't forgotten 9/11. I think if this were proposed on 9/12/2001 the nation would have universally rejected it. I don't see that the situation has really changed since then to give us the level of security assurance required to accept this deal. Whichever side the autocratic government of the UAE may be on, 85% of the people of that nation are supporters of jihad and overt enemies of America. They cannot sufficiently assure, in such a context, that individual actors among them will not take advantage of the opportunity to cause catastrophic harm to our country, and there is little to no reason to trust them.
I will only trust an Arab nation that is openly at war with jihad and wages a real war to that end, as Afghanistan and Iraq are doing now. I would accept Iraqis or Afghans running these port terminals, but the UAE is not in that class of nation.
Er, Bush is IN CHARGE of the Executive branch.
An Ex Con might be "a friend" -- but you never want him in charge of your bank account.
And why didn't he know? A muslim nation taking over shipping contracts isn't important? I disagree.
I agree with your assessment. But it needn't be this way, albeit for boneheaded decisions like this, and the obvious "fix-is-in" mentality regarding border security. The reason for Bush's abysmal polling numbers (aside from the fixed polls, I know, I know...) is that he has alienated the conservative base (just like his daddy did). Tone deafness must run in the family.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.