While the issue of some US ports being run by companies from UAE continues to simmer - and Gulf News highlights one possible cause: Islamophobia - an Armenian blogger concludes the story is tragic for another reason:
On October 18th, 2005, I had a meeting with someone who worked for the Department of State in front of the Armenia Hotel and I asked this person about what was going on with the sanctions against the U.A.E. for being placed on Tier 3, which is the black list of countries who are found to be the biggest violators of trafficking humans?
The Department of State worker told me that unfortunately their recommendations fell on deaf ears and Bush decided to lift sanctions for reasons they didn’t agree with.
So the big question I have for Washington and all those that support the recent proposed arrangement with the turnover of six major seaports is why?
UPDATE: Inter Press Service provides more information:
The United Arab Emirates (UAE), the center of a growing controversy over its proposed management of U.S. port terminals, is one of the world’s most prolific arms buyers and a multi-billion-dollar military market both for the United States and Western Europe.
I think the real reason for the backlash has not been rascism so much as the stench of corruption and the public sensing that the deal had to with the Bush’s connections to the UAE.
As it turned out, this is prescicely what happened. Bush is even threatening to veto the motion to oppose the sale.
While I don’t doubt the corruption, but what is the evidence?
Whenever there is oil involved the Bushies are never far away.
The UAE is a major investor in the Carlyle Group and has longstanding connections to the Bush family. The fact that Bush is threatening to veto a motino by his owb party makes this stink al the more. Why is he goign out on such a limb (as he did with Harriet Myers) to defend this descision is as his press secratary maintains, Bush only found out abotu the deal through the media?
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Lou-Dobbs-Bush-P.mov