Bennett & Blankley on the Ports Deal

William Bennett has co-written an opinion piece with Seth Leibsohn for National Review against the UAE ports deal. In laying out the reasons for his opposition, Bennett also addresses the recent name-calling of those who question the deal:

"This is not the stuff of 'nativism' or 'isolationism' or 'Islamophobia' — labels that have been thrown around too casually over the past two weeks. Many of us so labeled were among the first to call for the liberation of Iraqi Arabs and Muslims, and enthusiastically defended and supported the liberation of the Muslims in Afghanistan...and continue to support liberation for Iranians."

Tony Blankley also protests the "libel of the American people" and raises the issue that's been a big concern to me and which has been ignored by many commentators: that any company managing the ports will automatically have to have complete knowledge of our security process. He writes, in part:

"Some months ago...I had had extended conversations with senior executives of an American port management company. They had explained the close inter-working of the management team with the Coast Guard, Customs and local law enforcement in trying to secure the full import process... Based on that and other research...I understood that merely repeating the mantra that 'security is exclusively run by the Coast Guard, Customs and Homeland Security'...was somewhere between an incomplete and a deceptive statement. But for those with a limited knowledge of the topic and other policy axes to grind, once they were fed the mantra it was a short step to the nativist, Islamophobic charge."

Blankley adds: "Now that port security is finally being publicly debated, it is time to consider drastic improvements across the board." Exactly right.

Along those lines, it's informative to catch up with Mark Levin, who details how China came to control the port closest to my home, Long Beach, thanks to the very Democrats who are now using the UAE deal against President Bush.