Is it possible that Our Beloved Leader is on the take?
That's the only way I can figure out GWB wanting to sell American port terminals to United Arab Emirates, a known supporter of terrorists. I know Bushy says they are a "loyal ally in the war on terror", but let's look at their track record- they allowed money that funded 9/11 to be funneled through their banks; two of their citizens were among the 9/11 attackers; the UAE government has been implicated in smuggling nuclear technoloy to Iran and North Korea; UAE was one of only a few countries to recognize the Taliban government of Afghanistan.
With "allies" like that...
So the fact is that they are not the sort of folks you want to hand your security to. But hey, why not sell them our ports? Bush assures us that he has passed this scheme through Homeland Security, the NSA, etc., etc., and they all gave it the big thumbs up.
Funny thing about that- to begin with, who the fuck even believes it? With this Administration's record of distorting data and intelligence to suit its ends, and supressing concerns from knowledgable experts in favor of assurances from the few who support their programs, it would not surprise me a bit to learn, a year from now, that analysts at the NSA and HSA are competely bullshit about this and are being muzzled and ignored, in favor of the one analyst who said "hey, no big deal".
And even if the guys and gals at the NSA and HSA do think there is no danger- are these the same guys and gals who thought there were WMDs in Iraq? Who thought that the Iraqis would welcome us by throwing flowers? Who thought Hussein had a nuclear arms program? Who thought that the insurgency was no big deal? Who told Condi Rice that Hammas had no chance to win the Palestinian elections? Even if they are really saying this sale is not a problem, with that sort of track record, I'm not sure I feel very reassured...
But port security will continue to be run by Americans, won't it? Well, that much is true. Americans do the "hands-on" running of the ports, and will continue to. But running a port is a big business. Port security is notoriously under-funded, and the situation is getting worse. I am not suggesting that Ahmed Terrorist will be checking cargo containers in... it's actually much worse-
Remember all the stories about how the Administration is classifying plans for nuclear and electrical plants, chemical plants, and all sorts of other plants and facilities as "top secret" because we don't want terrorists to be able to get hold of them to see what their weaknesses and vulnerabilities are? Remember the Entebbe raid, back in the '70s, when Israeli troops rescued hostages being held at an airport in Uganda? Know why they were able to do that so well? It was because an Israeli company had built the airport, and had the plans... for fuck's sake, if you go bird watching near an airport with a pair of binoculars these days you will be arrested!
Well then why would you hand over the plans to our ports to the terrorists? C'mon guys- if they
own the ports, then their functionaries have access to the plans, security measures, and everything else you do
not want terrorists or their allies to have access to. And if you can get inside, then you can figure out how to circumvent security, and there is
always a way to get around security, especially security in a place as complicated and hard to secure as a busy port.
So, selling our main ports to an Arab country that supports terrorists is, well, just plain stupid. Worse than that really- it's traitorous.
And why do most folks who sell out their countries do it? MONEY. Hence my question at the start as to whether Our Beloved Leader is on the take. He must be. That's the only rational explanation I can see for his actions here.
What makes this all the more alarming is the juxtaposition of this news story with news stories about the continued violence in the Middle East being perpetrated by militant islamics. I am not one to condemn entire religions based on what a few fruit loops do, and I continue to believe that Islam is inherently no more violent than Christianity, but we really seem to be entering an era where the looney-toon fringe elemnets have taken control, and just as you can find plenty of calls to violence in the Bible if you look, so you can also find them in the Koran. And the guys who find those calls to violence in the Koran appear to be running the agenda.
Yesterday an important mosque was destroyed by a bomb in Iraq and the reaction by the competing sect was to burn a dozen other mosuqes and beat their members to death in the streets. In response to a few cartoons hundreds of thousands march in the streets demanding people's heads be cut off. In one country they actually burned people alive over this last week.
Is this
really a good time to be selling these guys our ports?
Let's not end the day on a down note. Excercise lifts your spirits, as Phoebe was just blogging about, and this handy tip was just posted over on the Bibliophile list. As many of us sit at desks all day, and are past an age where physical fitness is an easy attainment, I thought I would pass the routine along.
Yes, that's Ursula Andress, the original Bond Girl. No, she has nothing to do with the rest of the post... why?
Craig appears to be more in the Connery mold. He's even been described as having a "thug-like" face. Good! Some of his photos remind me a bit of Robert Shaw, and Robert Shaw would have made a great Bond. I was a little taken aback to hear that Craig cannot drive a stick. That's a situation that will have to change pretty fast. I mean, yeah, Bond is many things, but all of them can drive a stick shift.
