You've got to be kidding me

Eric Hydrick / Web Editor

Recently, it was announced that a company owned by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) would take over operations at 6 major ports within the United States. As if that wasn’t bad enough, George Bush said he approved the deal, and has threatened to veto (it would be his first if he actually follows through with it) any legislation stopping the deal. What Bush doesn’t seem to realize is, that we’re handing over 6 points of entry of items (and potentially people) to a government that no one in their right mind should believe has our best interests at heart.

According to news reports, 2 of the 9/11 hijackers were from the UAE and the UAE served as a financing center for funding of the attack. In addition, the UAE recognized the Taliban as a legitimate government of Afghanistan before the US drove them out, one of only a few countries to do so. This is not a country with a track record of beneficial to the US.

In an attempt to stem the criticism of letting a country with a spotty history involving the US to run 6 of our major ports, Bust has attempted to raise the question of why an Arab business is being held to a different standard than a British business (who ran the ports before being bought out by Dubai Ports World, the UAE-owned company scheduled to take over the ports in question), mirroring his attempt to win support of the supremely unqualified Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers. However, this “question” is a load of crap. We’re not comparing two private businesses, we’re comparing a private business (the British company) and a government-owned business (Dubai Ports World), and they’re being held to the same standard, it’s just that Dubai Ports World doesn’t measure up.

Bush claims that there are agreements in place that have not been released to the public in order to ensure security at American ports. However, the only details about these agreements that have been released to the public is that the UAE has agreed to keep as many American jobs as possible. While I’m sure that the workers at those docks appreciate the steps taken to ensure their job security, there doesn’t seem to be any agreement in place to ensure national security, which is the part that has most people just a tad upset over the deal.

Bush appears to be playing the “trust me” card on this takeover deal, which is not a good card for him to be playing right now. After all, Bush is saying we should trust his character judgment after Michael Brown and FEMA’s utter failure and Harriet Miers as a potential Supreme Court Justice despite having no qualifications other than being a nice person willing to play the gopher role that the most junior Supreme Court Justice often has to play. Right now, the last thing anybody should be inclined to do is to trust Bush’s judge of qualifications. The simple fact that Bush trusts this deal should be a major warning flag for everybody.

There is no reason to believe that the UAE has the desire or ability to help ensure the security of US ports. Their support of extremist and violent Islamic groups indicates that allowing this takeover will only weaken US security by giving our enemies an ally at our gates. Their support of al-Qaeda and its allies give pause to wonder just what would start coming through those six ports: weapons, terrorists, a God forbid a WMD. Allegedly, the UAE is now on board with the war on terror, but that isn’t an excuse to hand over 6 points of entry into the United States over to them, especially without earning the trust of America. Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, and you have to start wondering whether or not we’re asking for it.

Contact Eric Hydrick at pendulum@elon.edu or 278-7247.