Webloggin » Another Dubai Deal Slips Under the Radar – Military Parts Company on the Block

Update: Moving to the Top Due to Importance of Content

For Sale President Bush on Friday approved a deal for a Dubai-owned company to take control of some U.S. plants that manufacture parts for American military contractors as reported in the USA Today this afternoon.

But we are being assured that we can sleep well at night because it has been vetted by the DHS and Chucky Schumer over a 2 month period since January 28th.

What has me puzzled is that Schumer and everyone else were working behind the scenes to pass this deal while they were concurrently bad mouthing the Dubai International ports deal. Thus everything is a bit disingenuous to say the least. It is apparent that they are all speaking out of both sides of their mouths and we are viewed as unwitting idiots. Perhaps we deserve it; after all we keep putting these people back into office.

I think it’s about time for a complete change in Congressional leadership. Every single one of these representatives of the people seem to be selling the infrastructure of this country to foreign interests. I am all for open markets and a global economy but it seems to me that certain things should be off limits; namely the selling of our military infrastructure to foriegn interests. (Yes, this is nothing new. Britain, a great ally of the U.S., owned these particular companies. That fact does not necessarily make it right.)

The details involve Dubai International Capital’s $1.2 billion acquisition of London-based Doncasters Group Ltd. This acquisition includes two plants in Georgia and Connecticut that make precision components used in engines for military vehicles; specifically “engine ready airfoils,” for aircraft, helicopter and tank engines.

Here is what the people pulling the strings have to say:

This investigation was a significant improvement over what happened before, House Homeland Security Chairman Peter T. King, R-N.Y., said in a statement. It’s been much more thorough, much more detailed. (Referring to the Dubai Ports deal)
This was a transaction that was thoroughly reviewed and closely scrutinized. In the view of the committee, it does not compromise our national security. - White House press secretary Scott McClellan.
House leadership aides, speaking on condition of anonymity, said lawmakers from both parties on the relevant committees had been briefed on the deal, and had agreed that necessary safeguards were in effect.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a leading opponent of the port deal, also said he did not plan to oppose the transaction. There are two differences between this deal and the Dubai Ports deal. First, this went through the process in a careful, thoughtful way; and second this is a product not a service and the opportunity to infiltrate and sabotage is both more difficult and more detectable.

I know that people are saying that a third party isn’t viable so I must ask, if not now, when?