Today, your President posed this challenge to the critics of his plan to turn over American port security to a company owned by the United Arab Emirates:
"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," Bush said. "I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We'll treat you fairly.'"
Of course, Bush got a few facts wrong (not just making up the term "Great British"). The company is owned by another country. That's a critical fact Bush chooses to ignore.
So, not sure that Bush reads AMERICAblog, but we'll step up. How about we help explain the concern by pointing to this USA Today article from just 18 months ago?:
Osama bin Laden's operatives still use this freewheeling city as a logistical hub three years after more than half the Sept. 11 hijackers flew directly from Dubai to the United States in the final preparatory stages for the attack.
The recent arrest of an alleged top al-Qaeda combat coach is the latest sign that suspected members of the terrorist organization are among those who take advantage of travel rules that allow easy entry. Citizens of neighboring Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia can come to Dubai without visas, which other nationalities can get at the country's ports of entry.
Doesn't that make you feel safer? Oh, sure. The article is 18 months old. But do you really think things have changed all that much?
Just imagine if a Democratic President cut this deal -- and defended it the way Bush has. Karl Rove would have a field day. This is a major political issue. Remember, Rove's the one who wants to make national security a political issue this year.
