Posted on 02/22/2006 3:53:16 PM PST by DoNotDivide
President Bush's announcement Tuesday that he would support the effort of a United Arab Emirates-owned company, Dubai Ports World, in its bid to take over a lease for part of the Port of New York and other major U.S. seaports — even to the point of vetoing legislation that would block the deal — is as regrettable as it is untenable.
President Bush has dug in his heels on a fight he surely cannot win. The only political figure of note who has fully supported his position publicly seems to be former President Jimmy Carter — a salutary reminder of the latter's dismal judgment on national-security matters. Meanwhile the list of elected officials, Republican (including the leadership of the Senate and House) and Democrat alike, making clear their adamant opposition grows.
This sentiment on Capitol Hill reflects the overwhelming, common-sense attitude of the vast majority of the American people. They are horrified at the prospect of entrusting the management of sensitive U.S. port facilities to a government that allowed most of the operational planning and financing of the 9/11 attacks to occur from its soil.
If this drama is allowed to play out fully, several things are predictable:
Legislation will be enacted by veto-proof margins in both the House and Senate to block the DP World takeover of the port terminal and other management contracts currently held by the British company, P & O.
If so, the president will be unlikely to cast his first veto in a futile attempt to block the legislation. The deal will, therefore, be aborted.
Relations with the UAE, which has been helpful in some aspects of the War for the Free World post-9/11 — the factor that seems to have trumped all others in the secretive deliberations of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) about the DP World takeover, will be damaged unnecessarily.
This will be particularly so in light of the fact that the congressional investigations of this transaction promised by people like Rep. Peter King and Sen. Susan Collins, the Republican chairmen respectively of the House and Senate Homeland Security Committees, will surely delve into the nature and conduct of Dubai Ports World. If the following response to a posting on the WarFooting.com blog last Thursday by a self-described, but anonymous, former employee of the UAE company is any guide, that won't be pretty:
The US and the West in general are making a serious mistake if they hand over control of 21 ports to an Arab company, owned by an Arab government.
As a former employee of the DP World I can offer a unique insight into the goings on of this company, and I'm afraid if you scrape beneath the surface, it's not all its cracked up to be.
Did you know that several times a year, staff receive a company memo informing them that, for that particular month, one day's salary will be deducted and given to a Palestine "charity"!!! Staff are allowed to refuse by informing Human Resources Department, but no one ever did — knowing that this would lead to being over-looked for promotions and/or not having your contract renewed. I recall one poor Indian dock-side labourer on [a] $500-a-month [salary] complaining that he couldn't afford to make the payment as he had his wife and three children back in India to feed. He promptly was fired!
They have a reputation and a track record of not honouring staff contracts for expatriates, and I know of several employees who didn't receive their end contract bonuses or whose personal effects were not repatriated back to their home country. I mean, what can you do when the company is owned by the government of UAE and Shari'a law applies?
The author goes on to remind us of some of the United Arab Emirates' unsavory behavior: "the UAE bans Israelis from visiting or working in their country, and maps of the world have Israel blackened out. Even a non-Israeli who has visited Israel and has an Israel visa in their passport, is denied entry into the UAE." He also observes DP World made much on their website about "one of its senior executives, Dave Sanborn, being nominated by US President George W. Bush to serve as Maritime Administrator, a key transportation appointment reporting directly to Norman Mineta, the Secretary of Transportation and Cabinet Member."
Some, like my friends at the Wall Street Journal's editorial page, take a libertarian view: The deal makes business sense and, hey, security is the U.S. government's job, not the company's. The truth of the matter is that the job of performing port security is already problematic; an arrangement that affords opportunities to put personnel and cargo in positions where they can do us harm and involves reading people into the government's port-security plans who may not be on our side amounts to what the lawyers call an "attractive nuisance." These are opportunities that are not likely to be passed up by terrorists who have operated from the UAE in the past.
These considerations argue for the president to do as he did with Harriet Miers — namely, recognize that a strategically and politically insupportable mistake has been made and cut his losses. The CFIUS process that put him in this untenable position — and that has been responsible for innumerable other bad decisions about national security-damaging foreign investments must be overhauled. And port security must be made a priority, not something we contract out to one-time, and possibly future, hosts to anti-American terror-wielding Islamofascists.
— Frank J. Gaffney Jr. is a contributor to NRO and the lead author of War Footing: Ten Steps America Must Take to Prevail in the War for the Free World .
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) stated July 1, 1998 in USE OF POTASSIUM IODIDE IN EMERGENCY RESPONSE:
"Potassium iodide, if taken in time, blocks the thyroid gland's uptake of radioactive iodine and thus could help prevent thyroid cancers and other diseases that might otherwise be caused by exposure to airborne radioactive iodine that could be dispersed in a nuclear accident."
Howver, that is only ONE form of radiation, and there is no magic pill or medicine that will protect you from all radiation sources. For instance, there is no medicine that will effectively prevent nuclear radiations from damaging the human body cells that they strike.
Also, the recently (November, 2001) released FDA document Potassium Iodide as a Thyroid Blocking Agent in Radiation Emergencies states:
"KI provides protection only for the thyroid from radioiodines. It has no impact on the uptake by the body of other radioactive materials and provides no protection against external irradiation of any kind. FDA emphasizes that the use of KI should be as an adjunct to evacuation (itself not always feasible), sheltering, and control of foodstuffs."
Potassium Iodide (and Potassium Iodate, KIO3) will provide a very high level of thyroid protection, taken in time, for the specific radio-isotopes of iodine, which is expected by many to cause the majority of health concerns downwind from a nuclear emergency. (And, is the reason most all developed countries have stockpiled it.)
However, there are numerous other, and very dangerous, radioactive noble gases and/or radioactive fallouts that can be associated with nuclear emergencies too. Luckily, I don't live close to one of these ports ; )
This is a good article. Glad some are thinking clearly.
As for the elections, the threat of veto by Bush has probably given the Democrats their upcoming victories, sad to say.
If you look around at the various threads, as more information has come out, there's lying, deceit, treason, cover-up and all sorts of other things going on.
The President has jumped the shark on security at home once and for all. Unfortunately, he played an ill-advised game and is going to the mat, if not just becoming an extremely lame duck and taking the GOP to the mat, and thus the nation.
"Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job!"
Your man, McCain, is backing Bush on this.
Then McCain, the arrogant pr*ck, is as stupid as "Shrub" and needs to go back to Hanoi to brush up on how security is supposed to run ...
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.