> If it has to be Middle East, wouldn't Israel, with all of their experience in the security field, be a better choice?
> Howard

It doesn't have to be the Middle East, and in fact it was a British company that was running those ports before the UAE-owned company bought it.

The real point that gets lost here is that port management companies do not handle port security. They handle the logistics of moving boats in and out; they aren't the Coast Guard or customs inspection. All of this brouhaha is really over nothing.

The Republicans who oppose this are revealing their usual xenophobia that borders on racism (Arabs! Managing ports!) and the Democrats who should know better see an opportunity during an election year to attack the president.

Stephen