UAE Port Deal

At first, this port deal came as a shock to me. I didn't know what I was reading nor did I understand what was going on, especially at first. To air this out, I must confess my ignorance at the beginning of the story. I was totally unaware these ports were under the control of a British company, which struck me as odd. Why are American ports being run by the British? Ports compromise a large portion of national security and while I quite trust the British and have nothing against them, I don't trust anyone other than ourselves when it comes to OUR security.

Now these ports are being handed over to a company based out of the United Arab Emirates. Suddenly the news is bustling with this and that, citing racism, citing fear. Politicans are split, though not on part lines. On one side you have Carter and Bush agreeing on the transfer (Carter agreeing on something should raise an IMMEDIATE red flag) and on the other you have Frist and many other Republicans saying "No."

So I asked myself, where do I stand? I stand against the deal. Immediately when I said that I was labeled an "Islamophobe." I guess this is the word of the year, to be used much in the same way people call you ignorant if you don't like everything and anything under the sun. For instance, my not liking rap music or Caribbean food makes me ignorant. It has nothing to do with the fact that I personally don't like the stuff, no, it has to do with ignorance. So I imagine Islamophobe will be used in much the same way.

Let's look at the case. The United Arab Emirates, a very modern, moderate country, not run by fanatics, and a strong ally in the War on Terror, will be running American ports, New York included. If any Arab country should be running them it probably should be the UAE as they are among the least anti-American countries in the Middle East. However, I still do not trust a company from a foreign country to my safety. I trust my own country, which has something to lose.

Does this mean that terrorists will suddenly enter these ports with nuclear weapons with ease? I doubt it. The stipulations of the deal have that the US can intervene at any time, seize records, and stop shipments, which is a given. Do I believe that the UAE has honorable intentions, certainly. They despise terrorism as much as we do, I hope.

However, there is something disturbing about the UAE. They were among three countries (included Pakistan and Saudi Arabia) to recognize the Taliban government. This is something that I cannot just simply dismiss. The Taliban government is responsible for funding and harboring the SOBs known as "Al Qaeda." You remember these guys right? Osama Bin Laden, 9/11/01, USS Cole, Embassy Bombings, yeah those guys.

My only "Arab" concern rests on the fact that now an influx of Arab workers will be helping at these ports, meaning it gives Middle Eastern terrorists a much better opportunity to get in, especially under the auspicious of port workers. Granted I don't think this is an intention but the unintended outcomes and consequences always rear their ugly heads when good intentions were first cited.

Personally I am against this deal, not because they are Arab, not because I fear terrorism, not because I am with the pack. I am against this deal because I am against any situation where Americans are not in charge of their own security, their own well-being, and their own ports. This is the same reason I oppose China funding most of our deficit. America's fate should NEVER be in the hands of foreign countries. A country will ALWAYS act within its best interest if survival is on the line. This is a risk we CANNOT afford to take. So I am sorry Mr. O'Reilly, I cannot agree with you on this, a rare thing as that is, but I do not want to see our ports in the hands of foreigners, whether they are British, German, Russian, Arab, Chinese, or Martian.