House Speaker Dennis Hastert and newly-minted House Majority Leader John Boehner will soon be "flexing muscle" against the Bush administration-approved transaction that permits shifting control of port operations in six U.S. ports from a British company to a company owned by the United Arab Emirates.
"We are very concerned about it and that it could threaten our national security," one senior House Republican leadership aide told FOX News late Monday. Another senior aide said: "Most indications point to leadership flexing muscle against this transaction." Read more.
FNC wants to know what YOU think!
The Bush administraion has given the UAE company the thumbs up to control U.S. ports — do you?
E-mail us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Check out what FOX Fans are saying:
"I am against it all the way! These people get enough American money from us already. Who is to say the money would not migrate into the hands of our enemies? My thought is the money could land up in the wrong hands. Remember, we are still at war with terrorists. This is not just about business." — Larry
"As usual, everyone has a knee-jerk reaction to a story before the facts are known. And, as usual, the 'mainstream media' will not tell us the truth because their agenda is to destroy the president and undermine our efforts against terrorism. I will have an opinion after I have heard all sides and gotten all of the facts." — Randall (Georgetown, TX)
"I find it strange that President Bush is confused about why people would question the administration's decision to approve the sale of this company to a UAE state-owned company. He and his administration have been trying to scare the American people to death for years. Well, they now reap what they have sown." — Jackie
"What most people are missing is that this is a business deal. A UK company was sold to a UAE company (albeit state owned). There are, from what I’ve studied, ample checks and balances put in place. The United States needs to be consistent on our belief in free markets and the democratic process. Let’s move on from this politically motivated issue and get on to the real national security issues, such as better control of our borders." — Chris (Albuquerque, NM)
"As a lifelong Republican, I am screaming against the sheer stupidity of this. George Bush is truly either the dullard he appears to be in public or he is a traitor to this country. First, the porous southern border, and now the ports. It begs the question: is he stupid and uninformed or does he know exactly what he is doing? I voted for him as a default against the unthinkable 'President Kerry.' If the GOP can’t come up with a better candidate next time, I’m staying home from the polls." — Anita
"We must practice what we preach. Shall we deny this company to do business with us just because they are Muslim? If we are so against racism in the U.S., then everyone who is screaming about this should just hold their tongue." — Debbie (Pittsburgh, PA)
"Like others who have spoken out, I am a Republican and a Bush supporter. However, I do not agree with allowing a foreign, state-owned corporation to take over operations at six of our ports. The UAE may well be a U.S. ally, at this time, but alliances are subject to change with changing national interests. Who can say where the UAE's loyalties might lie in future?" — Jim (Fredericksburg, VA)
"I support our president and the state department in their decision to approve this deal. Our port security is provided by the U.S. Coast Guard, and that fact will not change with the change of port management. People are just playing politics here in trying to expose some ulterior motive or conspiracy within our current administration. We have intelligence officials who have looked at this deal closely and confirmed the security of our ports will remain in the good hands of our Coast Guard." — Douglas (CA)"I'm a Republican and a strong Bush supporter...until now! I would NEVER give control of these ports to UAE under any circumstances!" — Chuck (Sierra Vista, AZ)
"I don't have a problem with it. A U.S company can hire Saudis who are here legally. Considering the arrests in Toledo I wouldn't feel any safer with our own company. I think this would be a VERY FALSE sense of security. At least everyone will be watching the company." — Valerie (Jefferson City, MO)
"UAE involvement would be minimal — American security and longshoremen. We don't know enough about the investigation of UAE as it relates to this matter to make an informed judgment. Whatever is finally decided, it should be based on facts not political correctness, as there is much more involved here than just this one contract. It will affect our relationship in the entire Mideast." — Walter (Bismarck, ND)
"Look, this company has been vetted. The administration has gone on public record with its support and confidence in the company. We live in a free country and have a free market. This isn't like Saudi Arabia is being given the job. Do you know your geography and history? Do you know where the UAE is? People need to read up a bit more and then form an opinion." — Gary (New York, NY)
"It seems to me, there should be questions covering concerns before leaping off the deep end, so to speak. I don't feel that the general public, at this point, can make an intelligent decision concerning this. We need more information." — Joan
"The UAE isn't in control of security people! Our government is...oh wait, it's worse than I thought!" — Pat (Miami, FL)
"The current administration is constantly telling us we must fight terrorism. We are spending billions of dollars to fight terrorism. We have restructured our agencies and created a new agency to coordinate security. Either security is important and UAE should not be granted control of U.S. ports, or it is not important, UAE should be granted control of U.S. ports, and we should stop spending billions on control of terrorist activities." — Jerry (Milan, TN)
"People need to calm down and look beyond the word 'Arab' in UAE. The UAE have been vetted. All is good. We live in a free market, yes? You don't like it, move to France. Do you really think that Bush would give control of the borders to terrorists? Educate yourself on the story before you react. The laws are being followed and the administration has every right to follow through with this policy." — Max (Santa Clara, CA)
"Bush and his administration have a lot to gain if our borders and ports are vulnerable. Fear of an attack is the only thing that has kept this monkey in office. America is finally getting wise to this dope, aka the 'Worst President' in the History of the U.S.!" — Karen (Mobile, AL)
"My question is: why isn't there an American company that has stepped forward to maintain the security of our American ports? More jobs would be created and we (as a country) would be more confident that no bombs, chemicals, etc. would be coming into the United States. Is it all about cheaper COSTS? No wonder U.S. companies go abroad to get products done cheaper. Isn't the COST worth it?" — Ken (Hutchinson, KS)
"I just listen to President Bush's statement that he approves of the UAE controlling our ports. It is not just lawmakers who are against it – it is the people! There must be a hidden reason for Bush to be so adamant (and secretive) about this. It sends a terrible message to Americans, especially with the 30,000 laid off at GM and the rise of outsourcing. Watching the Olympics I can't help but wonder, where has our great country gone? Have we been sold out by our own president?" — Sue
"I support the president. The UAE has been checked out. The president says they have been vetted and all is well. People are just having a knee-jerk reaction. Most uneducated people see 'Arab' and freak out. The president would 'hand over' our ports to any nation or company that had tied to terrorism. It's called capitalism y'all." — Danny (Winston-Salem, NC)
"Has President Bush lost his mind? If Clinton tried this Republicans would be screaming bloody, blue blazes. Does Bush have a death wish for the GOP?" — Leo
"This has been in motion for some time. Its just lawmakers trying to get reelected. Nothing more. The UAE have been allied with the U.S. Man, people are so reactionary and fail to take the time to really understand a story." — Jake (Cleveland, OH)
"I can't believe that the Bush Administration wants a Middle Eastern company to run our ports. I'm beginning to think that George Bush is as stupid as the Democrats say he is. This is just as good as turning them over our ports to the terrorists who want to destroy us." — Harold
"Why does someone else control our ports? If we already import to much and don't use our own oil. How does giving port control to the same people we buy oil from promote free trade? It's not like they would stop selling us oil if we controlled our own ports." — Tom
"Has the Bush administration gone PC? Apparently they need to wake up and smell the coffee, and with that hot steaming cup of reality, have a Danish!" — Karen (Florida)
"The selling of America is not just business and all the tax brakes that came out of our tax paying pockets is what made that company worth what it is. Are you a American or a sellout?" — Shelly
"Hey, Mr. President: It's America calling! We are against the move to shift port security to the UAE. What's wrong with retraining the millions of unemployed and do it ourselves? We are sick and tired of being outsourced and marginalized by your greedy and reckless policies. Why didn't you inform the public about this move? Why did you wait until the last hour to make it known? You have lost me for good. You have no regard to secure our borders and now our ports too. It's time for you to GO!" — Kirby (Dallas, TX)
"This outsourcing to a foreign company (from the UAE nonetheless) should enrage the middle and lower class citizens who support this administration. It demonstrates not only the insensitivity to hand it over to a Middle Eastern country, but the continued disregard Bush has for the have-nots. But these small-minded people will continue to take this president at his word and support him; all the while they are being stepped on and over by this administration. Wake up America and demand change!" — Justin (Boston, MA)
"Stupid, stupid, stupid. I cannot imagine what the president was thinking when he came up with turning our ports over to the UAE. Let's see Congress flex some muscle, pass legislation and then thump the veto!" — Julian
"I thought President Bush was in office to help defend America, not sell it! I want my vote back!" — Russell