Port Ability

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Following on the heels of Dubai Ports World’s decision to divest itself of U.S. holdings, and not to seek ownership of a company that operates terminals in U.S. ports, some in Congress are questioning whether other sensitive national-security assets are in dangerous hands.

Intense opposition to the purchase from the American public led to a backlash among congressional Republicans and Democrats alike, who questioned the planned sale.

The attention focused on the narrowly averted acquisition by Ports World has caused the same legislators to question the propriety of American ownership of American security assets.

“Arabs were responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and we almost let them run our ports. Are we nuts?” asked a high-ranking Republican who asked not to be named. “But it doesn’t stop there. White Americans were responsible for acts of war and genocide against Native Americans, and for the capture and enslavement of the forebears of African-Americans. Yet members of this group control industries vital to homeland security. You have to ask, is it a good idea for those people to have control over vulnerable parts of the defense sector?”

“The Democrats will be with us on this,” he continued. “We’re going after rich white guys, and they can’t pass that up.”

One vexing question is who will be left to run such industries, now that Arabs, a majority of Americans, and probably members of most other racial and ethnic groups, are disqualified. The Vatican is said to be forming a corporation in earnest to get into the U.S. ports business, and the Principality of Seal- and (land area 6,000 square feet) has expressed interest.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.