Frist calls for halt to UAE Port deal

[KevinTheOmnivore]

There seems to be three distinct arguments here that you guys are trying to make.

1. Dubai is a deplorable nation, so they shouldn't be put in charge of these ports, mainly due to their poor record on human rights and terrorism.

2. Homeland Security is a dysfunctional organization, so handing over the port contract to an ARAB nation is bad.

3. Foreign countries shouldn't run the companies that ultimately run our shipping.

For the first one: I think Dubai certainly has a better record on compliance in the WOT than some other allies of ours (although Saudi Arabia is being applauded today for stopping that bombing). Dubai has been helpful in assisting us in the war, and the company they now own (which seemed perfectly fine when it was owned and operated by white folks from England) has a solid track record around the world.

#2: Okay, so HS is a poorly run organization, and they have no business contracting out the ports. Where were you two weeks ago, or a few months ago for that matter? It has all of a sudden become a security threat, simply because an Arab nation owns THE COMPANY that will be processing the shipments.

If you think HS is too inept to handle security, then you're making a different argument.

#3: Fine, foreign countries shouldn't own the companies that often just hire American longshoremen to handle port cargo. But what again is your argument against this? Two of the 9/11 terrorists were from there? Haven't we already capitulated on that one regarding Saudi Arabia???

Max, you argue that "anyone who think that being in charge of offloading cargo and handling customs declarations about contents has nothing to do with security, and that the country owning that operation isn't a matter of significance... why one might almost argue they had a pre 9/11 mindset."

It matters because why? Why does it matter now, when it didn't seem to matter to you before it was owned by Arabs???