The Skyliner

Issue date: 3/1/06 Section: Opinion

Henson

Adam Henson
Editor-in-Chief


After the terrorist events of September 2001, homeland security has been on the forefront of much government thought and action.Airport security has been tightened, racial profiling has been brought back, the government has even taken steps to monitor private people.

All of this security fear and action has come to a head in the past month with the announcement that the company controlling operations at six U.S. ports on the Atlantic seaboard and on the Gulf coast would be sold to a company controlled by a middle eastern government. According to news sources, the sale passed all required security checks within the federal government and was given a green light before the sale was announced.

One factor has seemed to be ignored though; the company being sold was not before the sell of a U.S. company. It did employ mostly Americans in American ports, but it was a British company.

Why did a non-American company own a company controlling port operations at six major ports, including New York, Newark, Miami and New Orleans in the first place? Talk about outsourcing. Furthermore, why is this just now a security risk? I understand the British to be our friend and ally, but technical so is the United Arab Emirates, the government in control of Dubai Ports World.

It looks to me like more racial profiling. Granted there is some viable reasons, some members of the team who high jacked planes on September 11 had been at least residents of UAE, and the banking infrastructure there had been used to funnel money for that operation. But doesn't having an ally mean that there is at least a moderate degree of trust between the two parties?

Don't misunderstand, I don't agree with the sale, but I think the media as well as opposing political leaders are looking at the issue the wrong way. A foreign company or government should have never owned the company. The media is right; the ports are a very sensitive part of homeland security, a part that could very easily threaten the country's sovereignty.

The company is foreign owned and is being sold to not only another foreign company, but one controlled by a foreign government in a very volatile part of the world. That being the case, I still think the media is pushing an agenda. Dubai Ports World, is a company that has a number of Americans serving as top executives, and has promised to keep American workers at the ports. In a way I think the situation has been blown into a new "red scare" or something of the nature. If the sale goes through the ports are not going to suddenly morph into small sovereign Islamic countries, regardless of what most journalists and politicians seem to think.

The sale did pass through normal security channels, a board made up of low ranking members of several national agencies. That the board was made up of low level personnel is somewhat troubling, but it is the normal procedure. Despite this, the issue has moved past security and become one of mistrust and in many ways race, something that has plagued American throughout her history.

It's important that Christians urge our lawmakers to examine the real issues and not rush to judgment over issues as petty as race. While it is important that national security is preserved, it seems to me the issue has turned into a witch hunt by the president's political opposition.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools