Estimated read time: 1-2 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
NEW YORK, Feb 22, 2006 (UPI via COMTEX) -- U.S. newspapers questioned the deal turning six U.S. seaports over to a Dubai firm, but the Los Angeles Times called the controversy misplaced.
"Mr. President, are you nuts?" the New York Daily News asked in a Wednesday editorial. The News said Bush had set the stage for a bitter showdown "with friends and foes" alike, over his threatened veto of any congressional move to block the $6.8 billion deal with the United Arab Emirates-run Dubai Ports.
The UAE firm would operate ports in New York, Miami, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Baltimore and Newark, N.J.
"We'd like to hear some reasonable argument made as to precisely why handing off our ports to the UAE makes sense," the Daily News editorial said.
The New York Times said Congress was right to question the deal. "The Bush administration has followed a disturbing pattern in its approach to the war on terror. It has been perpetually willing to sacrifice individual rights in favor of security. But it has been loath to do the same thing when it comes to business interests," the Times editorial said.
"Port operators work with U.S. security officials (port police, the Coast Guard, the Department of Homeland Security) in charge of preventing terrorism," the Los Angeles Times said, adding the dustup "diverts attention from a pressing and genuine debate over what those agencies really need to do to keep our commercial harbors safe."
"Given the critical nature of these ports and legitimate concerns about seaport vulnerability to terrorist infiltration, 'trust us' is not good enough," The Chicago Tribune said in its editorial.
URL: www.upi.com Copyright 2006 by United Press International
