Say what? Did someone say veto? Does anyone recall President Bush vetoing a single item that has come to his desk in 6 years? A Malkin reader:
Exactly. This whole story is a bit strange:
Reader Brian L.:He says he'll veto any congressional effort to stop the deal. Now, he decides to veto something. Not Campaign Finance Reform. Not immense pork barrel spending.
I'd call his bluff if I were a leader in Congress.
United States ports are being sold from a British company to a company that is from the United Arab Emirates - home of 2 of the 9/11 hijackers, and a country that allows terrorists to run transactions through it. President Bush makes a somewhat valid point when he says:
"After careful review by our government, I believe the transaction ought to go forward," Bush told reporters who had traveled with him on Air Force One to Washington. "I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company. I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We'll treat you fairly.'"His argument is that it is blatant discrimination. But I disagree. There is no reason to think a British company would allow anyone to slip by security, while the UAE has a longer history of allowing terrorists to act under their noses. I think it makes as much sense as profiling does: The UAE fits the profile of a country that cannot be trusted with US security; Great Britian does not.
A better question is why we allow the security of our ports to be controlled by any other country, period. Nobody ever anticipated the possibility that a sale such as this could occur? There are very few things the government should have full control over, but the security of our borders is one of them. This whole story is a disaster.
Technorati tags: United Arab Emirates, Bush, Ports, Sale, Security.