Coast Guard Says Dubai Company Might Be Terrorists
Just another misleading, fear-mongering article about the ports deal.
Sounds scary, right?
Except, from the same article...
I'm not that familiar with the Coast Guard and what intelligence on international terror organizations they're charged with keeping, but the idea that they wouldn't necessarily know all there is to know about terror operations in the middle east, several thousand miles outside their jurisdiction, isn't all that surprising.
The Coast Guard had some questions, they got some answers. Now they've signed off on the deal
Case closed, as far as I'm concerned.
Update:
Michelle Malkin is linking to the story above, yet fails to mention the second part where the Coast Guard says everything checked out ok.
Not to dig at Michelle, who I have a great deal of respect for, but it seems like she's either been duped by the media's sensationalizing of this angle of the ports deal or she's purposefully omitting it.
I hope its the former rather than the latter.
Paper: Coast Guard Has Port Co. Intel Gaps
WASHINGTON - Citing broad gaps in U.S. intelligence, the Coast Guard cautioned the Bush administration weeks ago that it could not determine whether a United Arab Emirates-based company seeking a stake in some U.S. port operations might support terrorist operations.
The disclosure came during a hearing Monday on Dubai-owned DP World's plans to take over significant operations at six leading U.S. ports.
The Bush administration said the Coast Guard's concerns were raised during its review of the deal, which it approved Jan. 17, and that all those questions were resolved.
The port operations are now handled by London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.
"There are many intelligence gaps, concerning the potential for DPW or P&O assets to support terrorist operations, that precludes an overall threat assessment" of the potential merger, the unclassified Coast Guard intelligence assessment said.
"The breadth of the intelligence gaps also infer potential unknown threats against a large number of potential vulnerabilities," the assessment said.
Sounds scary, right?
Except, from the same article...
The Coast Guard said the concerns reflected in the document ultimately were addressed. In a statement, the Coast Guard said other U.S. intelligence agencies were able to provide answers to the questions it raised.
"The Coast Guard, the intelligence community and the entire CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States) panel believed this transaction received the proper review, and national security concerns were, in fact, addressed," the Coast Guard said.
I'm not that familiar with the Coast Guard and what intelligence on international terror organizations they're charged with keeping, but the idea that they wouldn't necessarily know all there is to know about terror operations in the middle east, several thousand miles outside their jurisdiction, isn't all that surprising.
The Coast Guard had some questions, they got some answers. Now they've signed off on the deal
Case closed, as far as I'm concerned.
Update:
Michelle Malkin is linking to the story above, yet fails to mention the second part where the Coast Guard says everything checked out ok.
Not to dig at Michelle, who I have a great deal of respect for, but it seems like she's either been duped by the media's sensationalizing of this angle of the ports deal or she's purposefully omitting it.
I hope its the former rather than the latter.
Seva
Zsa Zsa
2Hotel9
likwidshoe
Lestat
Hannitized
Carrick
