Opinion | Columnists
The stench of craftiness
Does New York Times have a logical explanation for printing a shocking and unfair editorial, calling on the Bush administration to reverse the decision that gives DP World control over P&O?
- By Rashid Saleh Al Oraimy, Special to Gulf News
- Published: 00:00 February 20, 2006
Even since Islamophobia became the active currency in the hands of US rightists, who invent a new bogus enemy every new day, the symptoms of such a syndrome (Islamophobia) have begun appearing in various segments in the West, whether open-minded or narrow-minded, liberal or fanatic.
Islamophobia is rising and has become like an infectious disease that spreads amidst political and media circles in the West. In its editorial on Thursday, February 16, The New York Times, which prides itself as the first newspaper that speaks of US liberalism, called on the US administration to reconsider the decision that gives Dubai Ports World control over London-based P&O, which operates the Port of New York, and other US ports.
The newspaper said the move would pose a danger to the US national security on the pretext that many of the September 11 hijackers and planners travelled through the UAE.
It also said the UAE banking system was used in preparing for the attacks. The newspaper has not been satisfied with this baseless allegation and also called on Bush administration to block the sale and prevent Dubai Ports World from obtaining its commercial rights due to terror-related reasons.
Discrepancy and bad faith in the editorial can come under the famous saying: "Explaining an obvious matter makes it more complicated."
Yet, the US banking system and even flight-training institutes and US airports are to be blamed as they hosted those terrorists who carried out the September 11 attacks. The US is the country to be blamed since its security services, the strongest in the world, did not succeed in uncovering the plot and left the terrorists free until they struck the country.
Responsible
So, no country should be blamed or held responsible for the acts of terrorists, who managed to transfer money for financing their attacks.
Yet, if it is a must that a country should be blamed and held responsible, than no doubt the US is to be blamed.
The issue of acquiring the British company that operates US ports is a mere business matter and it has nothing to do with politics, and thus, it must be looked at within its true framework.
Worse, such a tricky means by The New York Times brings out the smell of incompetence for dubious commercial purposes.
If not, what is the logical explanation for printing a shocking and unfair editorial? Such an editorial comes within the context of incitement against a peaceful company operating under the umbrella of the law in the UAE and the US.
Does Dubai Ports World not practise its activities in the US, and other countries, in line with international and local laws followed in each country?
And, if the answer is yes, it means that objectivity and credibility will be the victims if a distinction is made. It will also deepen the already bleeding wounds of The New York Times and its reputation will be in the mud.
No one can forget the newspaper's recent scandal in which its journalist Judith Miller was arrested and prosecuted because she refused to give the names of her sources.
Where does The New York Times stand today? And where is the objective and fair media now?
Rashed Saleh Al Oraimi is a UAE-based columnist for Al Ittihad newspaper.
Opinion Editor's choice
-
Russia, China complicit in Syria carnage
By Fawaz Turki, Special to Gulf News
By their double veto at the UN, they have chosen to back the Al Assad regime that is already wet spaghetti
-
Two prime ministers in trouble
By Kuldip Nayar, Special to Gulf News
Gilani faces contempt of court charge while Singh encounters moral responsibility in 2G scam case
-
Moving towards honest democracy
By Vladimir Putin, Prime Minister of Russia
Russia needs to unbundle power and property and separate executive power from system of checks over it
Your turn
