Why am I extracting some satisfaction from the move to put the United Arab Emirates in charge of many of our important ports?
I’m as worried as the next person.
Yet, this move validates a few things I’ve been saying all along.
Every Friday, I read Cal Thomas’s column. It’s difficult for me to read it at times because Thomas is one of the most “conservative” columnists writing these days.
On Friday, February 17, 2006, Thomas said that putting the UAE in charge of American ports was “one of the dumbest things” that’s happened since September 11, 2001.
However, it’s not Thomas’s words that do the validating.
The ill advised sale validates my views on two subjects about which I write on a regular basis and for which I’m harshly criticized. I always refer to the bunch running the show as The Regime and I believe that The Regime coordinated the “attacks” upon The United States of America on September 11, 2001 in order to carry out plans that are documented in the Project For A New American Century, a “project” designed and planned by members of The Regime.
How does this wacky port prank played by the fun loving “Bush administration” help validate what I’ve been supporting and about which I’ve been writing for some time?
If men of Middle Eastern descent hijacked planes on 9/11/01 and the timeline followed The Regime’s explanation, there should be no way that the US government should allow a nation that is known to have financially supported the hijackers to control US ports. Aren’t ports prime entrances into the US for those who might seek to do us harm? Indeed, they are.
Let’s review. We were attacked on September 11, 2001. The Front Man himself identified Al Qaeda and its leader, Osama bin Laden as the culprits who carried out that crime. Yet, we’ve not captured important Al Qaeda operatives and we, for sure, have not captured bin Laden. We have drawn Iraq into a bloody civil war, however.
Do we really believe that Osama bin Laden can escape the clutches of a technological giant that can use satellite technology to read the characters on a license plate from space?
Add this unbelievable fact to our allowing the UAE to control our ports and it becomes very obvious that The Regime isn’t much worried about terrorism from nations in that part of the world.
Why would The Regime bargain with the UAE so casually, knowing that they helped the so called hijackers? It seems that the answer could possibly be because there were no hijackers of Middle Eastern descent who caused death and destruction on 9/11. The Regime knows all too well who carried out that crime and for what purpose it was enacted.
This is my take. If a real president of The United States of America was sitting in a second grade classroom and was told that one commercial jet had accidentally crashed into a major structure which stands within the borders of the mainland of the United States in one of the busiest and most populous cities in this nation, he would immediately end his visit and begin to work on the situation. He’d address the nation, expressing sorrow and assuring us that he will be working closely with the FAA to determine what happened. That’s if it was just an aviation accident! A commercial airliner crashing into the World Trade Center is enough to compel any president’s immediate attention. How could any sane American imagine that the president of The United States would remain sitting in a classroom for a photo op after learning that such an accident just took place?
Now think of it in light of the official explanation. Two commercial jets were hijacked and purposely flown into the WTC. Someone is using our own commercial jets to attack us. George W. Bush is The President of the United States of America. Who ever flew those planes into the WTC and, ultimately, The Pentagon as well, wants to do some serious harm to the US. It seems that they planned the attack pretty efficiently. They must have known where our president was due to be at that time. The thought that they may want to crash something into the place in which he was scheduled to be should seem quite plausible.
Did they immediately hustle him out of the class room? No. They didn’t want the children and teachers to panic.
Under these circumstances one would want the teachers and kids to panic or at least sense the urgency of the situation and to get the hell away from the school, not to mention get the president someplace other than where he is known to be.
This casual response to such a catastrophic American tragedy should have raised a few eyebrows when it took place.
It appears that The Regime expected the public response to something that our supposed “president” learned via the media, that “his administration” is selling several important US ports to the United Arab Emirates, to be equally casual. I guess they didn’t entertain the possibility that the public might react incredulously to this idea.
I hear now that the UAE is as westernized an Arab nation as there is and Dubai has been called “the Manhattan of the Middle East.” I hear now that they’d present as much of a threat to the US as would Switzerland.
What I don’t hear is why we’re continuing to mortgage off the US. What I don’t hear is why an American company or, better yet, the US government isn’t controlling the ports, strengthening port security by utilizing Americans unemployed because of treaties we’ve entered into with slave labor nations. Why are we giving more dollars to other nations in exchange for America? That’s what I don’t hear.
I hear that the left (I hate those labels) is joining the right in “overreacting”. Is this what Dubya meant when he said he was a uniter, not a divider?
Secondly, the sale validates something I do for which I’m chastised time and time again. I call it what it is, a regime.
For one thing, the word “regime” is not intrinsically negative.
Dictionary.com defines regime as:
a. A form of government: a fascist regime.
b. A government in power; administration (emphasis mine): suffered under the new regime.
2. A prevailing social system or pattern.
3. The period during which a particular administration (emphasis mine) or system prevails.
Note that the definitions are not automatically negative. Certainly, the examples given speak to how the word is normally used, that is, to connote a maleficent “form of government” or “government in power; administration”.
The attacks which I incur for referring to The Regime as such are irrelevant and have nothing to do with the subject matter most of the time.
If one was to ask me if I wanted to connote maleficence when I use the word to describe the group of “evildoers” that are now sitting at the head of this land’s government, I would answer with a resounding “yes”.
As I tried to explain above, there are just too many times when George W. Bush doesn’t react in a manner which one would expect the leader of the free world to react. To reuse the example above, his reaction to a large commercial jet crashing into an important American landmark in a crowded metropolis is, by itself, an admission that he, as well as those who should have hustled to get him to safety, knew it was going to happen.
The fact that he learned about the sale of our ports to the UAE through the media should be enough proof that he is not running this country. What is happening, has happened, and is planned to happen is becoming clearer and clearer. All thinking human beings should cease supporting The Regime. There should be outrage and demands for honest, non partisan investigations. There’s a plethora of issues that absolutely need in depth investigating by a grand jury, yet they aren’t getting such investigation.
I’m no follower of the puppy dogs that claim to be the “loyal opposition”. The Democratic Party just introduced a bill in Congress to “clean up” political campaigns. It proposes that political campaigns should be publicly funded. This, indeed, needs to happen.
However, House Bill HR4694 requires political parties who want to qualify for such funding to have received 25% of the vote in previous elections. In effect, while The Democrats are attacking corrupt relationships between politicians and people like Jack Abramoff, they are making it nearly impossible for any party other that Republicans and Democrats, together The Corporacracy, to qualify for federal funding. They are even making it difficult for Independents to become candidates. Their bill is a disingenuous attempt at campaign reform. What it actually accomplishes is to perpetually solidify their place as one of only two corrupt political parties in the former US.
However, in this Democrat/Republican game that’s played and that Americans still buy in to, if The Democrats gain control of one or both houses of congress in 2006, they will immediately begin impeachment proceedings against George W. Bush. At first glance, we may say, “It’s about time.”
It’ll be interesting because, if Bush needs to resign, the real leaders of The Regime will be able to openly lead the nation and possibly do so for a very long time. The resignation of George W. Bush will finally expose The Regime. The resignation of our nominal president will remove any doubt that there is a regime from which a real totalitarian leader could quite possibly emerge.
Who the functioning leaders of this nation are will no longer be a sick joke. What they are planning to do to this nation, in concert with what their plans are for the rest of the world, will begin to be less cryptic as time goes on.
What can be done?
1. Call or write to your representatives in congress, especially those of you who are represented by Republicans, and express your outrage at the sale of our ports to the UAE. Republicans and Democrats are truly working together on this because they know that there aren’t too many constituents who agree with it.
2. In 2006, let’s work on changing the balance of power.
3. Push for public funding of political campaigns.
4. Let’s work together to abolish The Electoral College.
“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson