So, What About Saudi-Run Ports, Kuwaiti Air & Egypt Cotton?

More on the ports debacle from today’s Wall Street Opinion Journal
(Via GOPinion)

Dubai Ports World finally threw in the kaffiyah on its American operations yesterday, agreeing to sell them “to a U.S. entity.” We hope that entity turns out to be Halliburton, if only for the torment that would cause certain eminences on Capitol Hill.

In recent weeks Members of Congress have suggested that the foreign-ownership ban should apply to: roads, telecommunications, airlines, broadcasting, shipping, technology firms, water facilities, buildings, real estate, and even U.S. Treasury securities. If this keeps up, we’ll soon arrive at France, where even food and music are “protected” from foreign influences as a matter of national survival.

Going well beyond Dubai, House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter (R., Calif.) says he wants Congressional oversight of all foreign purchases of “critical infrastructure.” Mull over that one for a minute. If you think corruption on Capitol Hill is bad now, wait until foreigners need approval from Congress for every multi-billion-dollar investment…

…The Dubai episode has been a debacle of the first order, and while the Beltway is toting up winners and losers, the rest of the world is shaking its head and wondering what’s going on. The world’s largest economy and its ostensible political leader seems to be sneering at the very foreign investment that has been crucial to its prosperity. Let’s hope it was a momentary hallucination, and not the start of a larger protectionist binge.

That follows the bit posted yesterday about Gaps in Port Security Open Gaps in Foreign Policy and what to do with those Saudi and United Kingdom, Denmark, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, China and Taiwan controlled ports already up and running in America?

Reader C. W. Smith wrote in with research he did on airport security:


I’ve been following the DPW ports issue pretty closely and I decided to do a little research today in order to put this whole thing in context.

The most cogent argument put forth by those who oppose the DPW ports deal is that we should not turn over port management to companies who are based in, or owned by, foreign countries that have significant Islamist populations, because this would increase the likelihood that a native Islamist in the host country could infiltrate the company and carry out a terrorist attack on our home soil.

While I sympathize with this line of reasoning, I don’t think the threat is significant because DPW will be largely relegated to managing American fork-lift operators, whereas US federal and local authorities will be managing security.

But, assuming the DPW opponents argument is valid, should we allow such questionable countries to operate 747’s over our biggest cities?

UAE, Turkey, Jordan and Kuwait currently fly jumbo-jets into JFK airport on a regular basis. In addition to JFK:

UAE, home of two of the 9/11 hijackers, flies Emirates Airlines into George Bush Airport in Houston.

Turkey, home to Abdullah Ocalan and a population that was found to be the least friendly to Americans , hosts Turkish Airlines that flies into Los Angeles, Cleveland, Chicago, Dallas, Las Vegas and Miami.

Jordan, home to head-hacker-extraordinaire Abu Musab al-Zarqawi , is also the home of Royal Jordanian Airlines which flies into Chicago, Detroit, and San Francisco.

Kuwait, home of Terrorism Kuwaiti Style , and a Senior Kuwaiti Official who said Katrina is a soldier of Allah in the fight against American Imperialists , flies Kuwait Airways into Seattle, San Diego and Boston.

Thus, if the DPW opponents are correct, and we can’t trust these people to manage American fork-lift operators on our port docks, then we certainly shouldn’t allow them to fly 747’s within striking distance of our precious cities. However, I think this whole DPW flap has absolutely nothing to do with security and everything to do with politics.

C. W. Smith
Batavia, IL.

Where does all of this stop and is there anything “safe” besides Egypt Cotton?

You Might Like