I Hope You're Sitting Down
The President is right. Wait -- I have to pause for a minute to see if the world ends. Okay, it appears safe to continue.
He's right to withstand the depressingly predictable, albeit bipartisan, stampede of federal, state, and local officials critical of the decision to allow a company owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates to help manage ports in five U.S. cities, including here in Philadelphia.
All the complaining misses the key point: The issue is not who owns Dubai Ports World, it is how port security is handled every day in every coastal city, regardless of what management company is involved. Remember the practice of universal precaution to combat the spread of HIV? You cannot tell who is HIV-positive, so if you might come into contact with blood or other bodily fluids, you have to assume that everyone could be HIV-positive and take the necessary precautions. That is why today you see a lot of people who might be around blood wearing gloves -- from dentists to boxing referees. The same approach is needed for port security. If the proper attention is paid to port security and the appropriate policies and practices are put into effect, it won't matter who owns the management company.
Those critical of Bush send the dangerous message that terrorists come in one form: people from Arab countries. Does no one remember that the people who exploded bombs in the London underground last summer were British citizens? Anyone remember Tim McVeigh? Hello?
Those out there who wish to infiltrate a port and commit a terrorist act are not going to be deterred simply because port management is run by patriotic Americans, nor will they be successful simply because port management is run by a company owned by an Arab country.
Congressional critics need to stop practicing the corporate version of racial profiling and start paying attention to real port security. Here's a place to start: According to a study cited today by Philadelphia Inquirer political analyst Dick Polman, since September 11, 2001, only $560 million has been spent on port security, and an estimated 7 percent of cargo is screened. In contrast, $18 billion has been spent on airline security, much undoubtedly spent usefully, but a whole lot also spent developing such important safety practices as shoe removal and on hiring multiple people to check your ID within 10 feet of each other.
Now the President can go back to being wrong all the time.
He's right to withstand the depressingly predictable, albeit bipartisan, stampede of federal, state, and local officials critical of the decision to allow a company owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates to help manage ports in five U.S. cities, including here in Philadelphia.
All the complaining misses the key point: The issue is not who owns Dubai Ports World, it is how port security is handled every day in every coastal city, regardless of what management company is involved. Remember the practice of universal precaution to combat the spread of HIV? You cannot tell who is HIV-positive, so if you might come into contact with blood or other bodily fluids, you have to assume that everyone could be HIV-positive and take the necessary precautions. That is why today you see a lot of people who might be around blood wearing gloves -- from dentists to boxing referees. The same approach is needed for port security. If the proper attention is paid to port security and the appropriate policies and practices are put into effect, it won't matter who owns the management company.
Those critical of Bush send the dangerous message that terrorists come in one form: people from Arab countries. Does no one remember that the people who exploded bombs in the London underground last summer were British citizens? Anyone remember Tim McVeigh? Hello?
Those out there who wish to infiltrate a port and commit a terrorist act are not going to be deterred simply because port management is run by patriotic Americans, nor will they be successful simply because port management is run by a company owned by an Arab country.
Congressional critics need to stop practicing the corporate version of racial profiling and start paying attention to real port security. Here's a place to start: According to a study cited today by Philadelphia Inquirer political analyst Dick Polman, since September 11, 2001, only $560 million has been spent on port security, and an estimated 7 percent of cargo is screened. In contrast, $18 billion has been spent on airline security, much undoubtedly spent usefully, but a whole lot also spent developing such important safety practices as shoe removal and on hiring multiple people to check your ID within 10 feet of each other.
Now the President can go back to being wrong all the time.
posted by FCB at 9:07 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home