Ports, Boarders and National Security

I haven’t made up my mind on the issue of a company from the U.A.E. running our seaports. The first news report said it would be 6 ports, but it could be as many as 22. Apparently the whole contract process has been a financial boon to those with close connections to the Bush family. Politicians helping friends and family get their snouts in the public slop bucket, who’d a thunk it?

On a gut level it bothers me that an American port would need to be run by a foreign company. Weren’t there any American logistics companies interested in the work? Maybe there aren’t, or maybe they didn’t offer a competitive bid for the contract, or maybe the Arabs have a better lobbyist. I just don’t know.

The security issue is a big question for most folks. Theoretically, as long as stringent security processes are followed, it shouldn’t matter which company is collecting the profits.

On the other hand, letting foreigners handle American security is consistent with Presidential policy. The Mexican military freely patrols on the north side of our boarder. There isn’t much reason to suspect that GWB is terribly concerned about that.

The President's greatest achievement in security programs is the TSA. Their greatest achievement is keeping Grandma’s knitting needles and toenail clippers off the plane. They’ve also managed to raise costs, waste money, steal luggage, make flying miserable and sexually assault anyone they please, so it’s not like they’ve done nothing.

Bush has a vision for Iraq and the Middle East. Here’s an idea, let him run for President over there. Clearly he is more concerned with protecting the democratic process in Iraq than he is in protecting our boarders at home.