Does Dubai Ports handle security or not? Cautious minds want to know.

Buried in a story in the Washington Times on Wednesday was one of the most important pieces of information to come out on this Dubai Ports World question. Those supporting this deal have said that the Arab company would only handle operations, not security. Yet in Wednesday's Washington Times, the Coast Guard admitted that they oversee security plans that are submitted by the facility operators, which in this case is Dubai Ports World.

Put simply, DPW constructs the security plan, not the Coast Guard or Customs. Here is the exact quote from the February 22, 2006 article entitled "Bush vows ports deal will stand" which reads: "'Port security is handled by the Coast Guard, which oversees security plans submitted by facility operators and conducts planned and surprise inspections throughout the year,' said Coast Guard Lt. Cmdr. Jeff Carter."

Heaven knows there is enough confusion and misinformation out there about this deal to at least have some kind of review take place to ensure that little details like this are fully understood. I applaud the delay of the deal. It is pretty important to determine the basics here and dare I say the details of the deal. Either Dubai Ports submits security plans or they do not. To paraphrase the astute "Federalist", when Bill Frist, Hillary Clinton, Dennis Hastert, Chuck Schumer and the New York Times are lined up on one side and Karl Rove, Jimmy Carter and the Los Angeles Times are lined up on the other, something is terribly amiss.

I do not know for a fact what the correct answer to this is, but I do know that the incorrect response is to call those who are asking simple questions about the deal "racists", "registered bigots" and "xenophobes." Sounds mighty similar to to the names being tossed around in the immigration debate too.

The New York Times wrote, "Most experts seem to agree on only one major point: The gapingholes in security at American ports have little to do with the nationality of who is running them." Perhaps for the first time in my career, I agree with them.

It is immaterial to me whether this deal would go to Dubai Ports or a company in Yemen, Syria, Iran, Indonesia or any other foreign nation that is infested with terrorists who want to kill us. It isn't about Arabs any more than immigration issues are all about Mexicans. In the ports issue it is about terrorists and in the case of immigration, those who break the immigration laws of our nation. What is so hard to understand? There is no doubt that there are terrorists in every country, but not every country gives safe harbor and shelter to them. Some countries are more active in their "War on Terror" obligations like, say, the UK.

But the pitiful program designed supposedly to safeguard our ports is yet another reason to be doubly concerned about putting them directly in harms way. If the safety of our ports was not in question, then this wouldn't be such an issue.

Neither President Bush nor Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff knew about this deal. Does anyone sense a problem here? What's more, for the President to draw the line in the sand here, on this issue, and threaten his FIRST veto, when so much junk gets through Congress on a daily basis......it just makes no sense at all.

Looking at it in economic terms, there has to be some kind of economic benefit that overwhelms the political cost of this deal. And it must be a doozy for the President to risk it all on this.