Monday
Feb202006
Salute the Flag, cash the check
Monday, February 20, 2006 at 3:00AM
By Ellen Ratner
Most conservatives I know resent liberal criticisms of the War on Terror. They claim that unlike President Bush, liberals refuse to "stand tall" and "tough it out." Democrats won't "hit back," or yell "Hey, get some!" at our terrorist enemies.
And when liberal films like Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 911" point out the cozy relationship between the Bush administration and fat-cat Arab potentates, lubricated by Middle East oil and Arabian petrodollars sliding into the greasy pockets of those tough, patriotic Republican "consultants" flacking on the sheiks' behalf, my conservative friends dismiss the criticism as just more noise from the loony left.
Well, I say if it has webbed feet, white feathers and goes "Quack! Quack!" don't let anybody tell you different, it's a duck. This week, the Treasury Department's little known Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States voted to let Dubai Ports World – a company 100 percent owned by the United Arab Emirates – take significant operational control of six major U.S. ports.
And now the duck has quacked – big time.
Never heard of CFIUS? Most people haven't but soon you will – I just hope it's not in the aftermath of a mushroom cloud rising over some American city. Sound extreme? Consider this: According to the New York Post, the 9-11 hijackers were financed by banking networks headquartered in the UAE – the sheiks running these countries want your ports, but reportedly won't report on the full extent of their dealings with al-Qaida.
President Bush claims the UAE are our "friends and allies" in the War on Terror, but if you think so, try building a church or a synagogue in Dubai. Or try buying a New Testament there – or call the State Department and ask them if it's OK to wear your crucifix outside your shirt. (And after the State Department has told you that would be a stupid idea, you may want to ask them why it's OK for Dubai to own our port operations.)
The law gives the president the power to block foolish and self-destructive acquisitions like these. After all, haven't the "cut-and-run" Democrats been screaming ever since 9-11 for better protection of our ports? Hasn't every security expert worth their salt been declaring that port security is at the top of the list of unfinished business for our protection? And every time these concerns are raised, all Republicans seem to do is stare at their shoes. I mean, how many suitcase-sized nuclear bombs do you suppose you can fit in one average ship-borne container? Only a thousand?
So my conservative friends, the president is, "hanging tough," right? Well, not quite. Last week, it was reported that the White House approved the deal. Why would they do that?
If you smell something rotten, don't hold your nose quite yet – your country's life may depend on taking a closer sniff. It turns out that CFIUS is chaired by Treasury Secretary John Snow – who joined the Treasury from CSX Corporation, which just happened to sell its foreign port assets to Dubai Ports World in 2004 – just before the old Snow-man took his government job. So I suppose that what's good for CSX is good for America, as they once said of General Motors?
But Snow's heavy petting with Arabia isn't the only connection. It turns out that one David Sanborn, recently appointed by our White House Rambo as administrator of the Transportation Department's Maritime Administration, ran American and European ops for – hold on to your seats, now – Dubai Ports World.
So while our sons and daughters are being killed in Iraq, and while we're paying near record-high prices for gasoline and Exxon-Mobil is making record profits, our war president approves deals like this. This isn't exactly a move one would have expected from a Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman or Reagan. But those were the days when a war president understood the difference between our friends and our enemies.
I don't agree with the Washington Times editorial section on much, but they posed a good question last week: "The root question is this: Why should the United States have to gamble its port security on whether a subsidiary of the government of the United Arab Emirates happens to remain an antiterrorism ally?" Of course, they answered "No." I would only add,"Of course not, no!"
Here's a question for you: Suppose John Kerry or Ted Kennedy had proposed this deal? Can you imagine the screams from Republicans? But I guess they're just a bunch of "cut-and-run" liberals. Today, in order to be a patriot, you have to wear a flag pin on your lapel, squander American life in Iraq while you sell out your country's security to any sheik with an oily smile, have lots of dough and a horde of greasy Washington lobbyists.
The Bush administration's motto: "Salute the Flag, cash the check."
Most conservatives I know resent liberal criticisms of the War on Terror. They claim that unlike President Bush, liberals refuse to "stand tall" and "tough it out." Democrats won't "hit back," or yell "Hey, get some!" at our terrorist enemies.
And when liberal films like Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 911" point out the cozy relationship between the Bush administration and fat-cat Arab potentates, lubricated by Middle East oil and Arabian petrodollars sliding into the greasy pockets of those tough, patriotic Republican "consultants" flacking on the sheiks' behalf, my conservative friends dismiss the criticism as just more noise from the loony left.
Well, I say if it has webbed feet, white feathers and goes "Quack! Quack!" don't let anybody tell you different, it's a duck. This week, the Treasury Department's little known Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States voted to let Dubai Ports World – a company 100 percent owned by the United Arab Emirates – take significant operational control of six major U.S. ports.
And now the duck has quacked – big time.
Never heard of CFIUS? Most people haven't but soon you will – I just hope it's not in the aftermath of a mushroom cloud rising over some American city. Sound extreme? Consider this: According to the New York Post, the 9-11 hijackers were financed by banking networks headquartered in the UAE – the sheiks running these countries want your ports, but reportedly won't report on the full extent of their dealings with al-Qaida.
President Bush claims the UAE are our "friends and allies" in the War on Terror, but if you think so, try building a church or a synagogue in Dubai. Or try buying a New Testament there – or call the State Department and ask them if it's OK to wear your crucifix outside your shirt. (And after the State Department has told you that would be a stupid idea, you may want to ask them why it's OK for Dubai to own our port operations.)
The law gives the president the power to block foolish and self-destructive acquisitions like these. After all, haven't the "cut-and-run" Democrats been screaming ever since 9-11 for better protection of our ports? Hasn't every security expert worth their salt been declaring that port security is at the top of the list of unfinished business for our protection? And every time these concerns are raised, all Republicans seem to do is stare at their shoes. I mean, how many suitcase-sized nuclear bombs do you suppose you can fit in one average ship-borne container? Only a thousand?
So my conservative friends, the president is, "hanging tough," right? Well, not quite. Last week, it was reported that the White House approved the deal. Why would they do that?
If you smell something rotten, don't hold your nose quite yet – your country's life may depend on taking a closer sniff. It turns out that CFIUS is chaired by Treasury Secretary John Snow – who joined the Treasury from CSX Corporation, which just happened to sell its foreign port assets to Dubai Ports World in 2004 – just before the old Snow-man took his government job. So I suppose that what's good for CSX is good for America, as they once said of General Motors?
But Snow's heavy petting with Arabia isn't the only connection. It turns out that one David Sanborn, recently appointed by our White House Rambo as administrator of the Transportation Department's Maritime Administration, ran American and European ops for – hold on to your seats, now – Dubai Ports World.
So while our sons and daughters are being killed in Iraq, and while we're paying near record-high prices for gasoline and Exxon-Mobil is making record profits, our war president approves deals like this. This isn't exactly a move one would have expected from a Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman or Reagan. But those were the days when a war president understood the difference between our friends and our enemies.
I don't agree with the Washington Times editorial section on much, but they posed a good question last week: "The root question is this: Why should the United States have to gamble its port security on whether a subsidiary of the government of the United Arab Emirates happens to remain an antiterrorism ally?" Of course, they answered "No." I would only add,"Of course not, no!"
Here's a question for you: Suppose John Kerry or Ted Kennedy had proposed this deal? Can you imagine the screams from Republicans? But I guess they're just a bunch of "cut-and-run" liberals. Today, in order to be a patriot, you have to wear a flag pin on your lapel, squander American life in Iraq while you sell out your country's security to any sheik with an oily smile, have lots of dough and a horde of greasy Washington lobbyists.
The Bush administration's motto: "Salute the Flag, cash the check."
Reader Comments