Why don't I find it surprising that the New York Times would support the takeover of a US company, Unocal, by a Communist government? This is one way to destroy capitalism.

Another way is to put a left—wing hippie hangover from the late 60s (Pinch Sulzberger) in control over the leading newspaper in the nation. Get over it, dude. The era is over. But for the Times to selectively ignore the national security implications of the takeover amounts to something worse than journalistic incompetence. The Wall Street Journal superbly reported how key military facilities will now be observable by the Chinese. For instance, one Heritage Foundation expert noted that by, 

"allowing a Chinese—government owned entity to purchase Unocal, the U.S. will be handing Beijing an asset of potentially strategic significance if it ever came to a military conflict. The California oil company operates 10 platforms in Alaska's Cook Inlet, the bay governing access to Anchorage —— and Elmendorf Air Force Base. Cook Inlet is also home to the Kodiak Island Launch Center, and both facilities are key to the National Ballistic Missile Defense system. In addition, Unocal's deep—sea exploration platforms in the Gulf of Mexico provide an ideal vantage point for observing activity in the submarine yards of Pascagoula, Mississippi, and the U.S. Navy's facilities of Galveston, Texas."

Yet none of these aspects were covered by the Times—not one. A google search would have revealed this and other less than favorable aspects of  CNOOC's buy of Unocal. Yet, the multi—billion dollar New York Times apparently did not have the resources that a lone blogger does operating from his spare time in his office does.
 
At least one newspaper is standing up for America and it is not the New York Times.

Ed Lasky   7 1 05