Some points to consider about Arab port deal

Re “GOP Allies Abandon Bush in Fight Over Arab Port Deal,” Feb. 23

President Bush has only himself to blame for the strong reaction to the port deal. He has drummed into us a fear of everything Arab and a belief that national security is at stake in everything, so it’s no wonder we are shocked and awed that his administration would approve a contract with an Arab country.

BARBARA GEHRKE

Sylmar

*

Are the congressional Republicans threatening legislation to block the president from approving the sale of port operations to the United Arab Emirates the same ones who claim to have no power to stop the president from ordering illegal wiretaps?

CRAIG ZEROUNI

Los Angeles

*

Your editorial “Port hysteria” (Feb. 22) completely misses the mark. First, you say that foreign firms that run operations at U.S. ports are “not in charge of security.” But the reality is far more complex.

Many of these firms have received federal port security grants from the Department of Homeland Security. Giving a country such as the United Arab Emirates a role in running our ports could make the job of law enforcement harder. Two of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were United Arab Emirates nationals. Dubai was a key transfer point for shipments of nuclear components that were sold to Iran, Libya and North Korea by the Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan. The United Arab Emirates remains a key financial center for terrorists.

Finally, your claim that lawmakers are ignoring port security is another fallacy. Since 9/11, Democrats in Congress have voted more than a dozen times to increase funding for port security.

SEN. BARBARA BOXER

D-Calif.