Replies

mr. President, handing control of ports to Middle-Eastern companies/countries which can be easily infiltrated by those who wish to do us great harm ALSO sends a bad message. To US, your employer.

I have stayed out of this debate for the most part, but this kind of idiocy drives me crazy.

For the record: This deal did not hand "control" of any ports to anyone. It transferred the operations of some TERMINALS at some ports to a company from the UAE. Security was and is the responsibility of the Coast Guard and DHS.

People really should read the details of what was proposed before spouting foolishness. I wasn't overly concerned about the deal - foreign airlines, including middle eastern ones, have facilities at all major airports. I don't see how the risk is any greater with this deal than with the airports. Should we deny any Muslim country the right to have an airport terminal in the US?

I wasn't overly concerned about the deal - foreign airlines, including middle eastern ones, have facilities at all major airports.

Actually those do have higher risk. Which is, arguably, being "managed." The U.S. Customs Office inspects all UAE air freight cargo to the U.S. and has the best gamma and neutron scanners to facilitate that. Operating in the UAE.

So it is not, and never was, the case that there were no risks, or no 'red flags.' Any statement to that effect, which regrettably far too many Cabinet officers claimed, where hyperbole.

Fortunately conservatives have developed a lot of expertise parsing weasel-word laden deceptions and exaggerations...and a consensus concluded reluctantly that increased risks were being run, and that they had simply been deemed necessary and presumably still-manageable...at an unstated higher-than deputy Cabinet post level.

This is not to say that the DPW ports security issues couldn't be "managed" also...but that if it was going to be, that was all pursuant to classifed procedures which where thereby non-transparent to the public. Thence, the administration whose credibility was hanging by a thread asked for yet more trust. The weasel words and the unwarranted, and clearly unfair, defamation of the opponents sealed the fate of the original deal. The thread snapped.

The conservatives are the ones who actually saved the relationship, by proposing, as did Congressman Peter King the idea of a wholly-owned U.S. based subsidiary.