FULL CIRCLE FROM SEPTEMBER 11th TO THE PORT CONTROVERSY (Warning: it is
long) The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is suing to stop
the UAE port takeover. According to the claim, the White House-brokered
Dubai deal violates the terms of the contract between the Port
Authority and P & O, the existing port operators.The Authority is
entitled to but was deprived of due process.

Ignoring the people around Ground Zero, can you imagine that? All those
first responders who worked night and day after 9/11, who continue to
patrol and protect the area (those who aren't dying younger because
their government lied to them about air quality). Not only does the
White House not care about security post 9/11, they don't give two figs
about the integrity of EXISTING contracts. For those deeply offended by
this regime's dismissal of the rights and sensibilities of the very
people whose traumatic loss they claim to be acting for, it is painful
to watch them continue to circle the site like vultures whenever a
situation calls for that script, or the race card at other times.
Rather like Cheney declassifying NIE information by leaking through
Libby, and in the process taking out a CIA covert operative. He's got
the executive order, so he can "sell" the information whenever he feels
like it. Now, ON ITS FACE this is all JUST PLAIN NUTS. BUT--- SO IS
EVERYTHING ELSE WE ARE HEARING THESE DAYS: The nonsense about the NSA,
e.g., the FISA court as too burdensome; Biden tripping up Gonzales on
why the White House would never wiretap alQaeda domestically; Bush's
nonsensical rejection of the word "circumvent" to describe his FISA
court allergy. Then there is the TIPS program gone underground under
the new moniker "Basketball." Or the claim that the UAE deal was
properly vetted. Or the McCain torture amendment passage, but not
really, not if the president says no and besides that law doesn't apply
to Gitmo anyway, so there. The list goes on and on. PERFECTLY LOGICAL
FOR DICTATORS. JUST PLAIN NUTS FOR EVERYONE ELSE. Below is a copy of a
response to the Wall Street Journal's early defense of the UAE port
deal and its mockery of democratic attempts to oppose it. Bear in mind
that this regime's refusal to investigate the deaths incurred on
9/11/01 was the start of their Constitution smashing viz 14th amendment
equal protection rights. Sounds esoteric, but consider the following: A
single homicide or unexplained death is investigated under 14th
amendment protections, both for the victim and the community -
especially if there is valuable community knowledge, such as how a fire
started. But with this White House, multiple homicides were to be their
own personal pretext for war. They rejected an investigation because
THEY were going to assign blame in the way THEY wanted, not based on
what is right and constitutionally legislated for a family or a
community...within 5 hours. Within 5 hours they were talking about
using the attacks to invade Iraq. If these people were NOT involved in
letting 9/11 happen as their precursor Pearl Harbor (and perhaps
NSA-spying domestically to ensure no one got close to thwarting the
hijackers), well, to paraphrase a line from an early Morgan Freeman
film: They must have always wanted to grow up to be suspects. How can
you confidently lay claim to legitimate leadership AFTER the fact of a
security disaster (so that it never happens again because America will
never be so unprepared again) if you are not even interested in how the
security system broke down in the first place? It's one of those "duh"
questions. Well, one answer in the differential diagnosis is that they
already knew how it happened because they were tracking its progress.
Or at the very least, they were passively expecting it and had more to
gain by allowing it than stopping it. If the obvious danger posed to
them is an accusation of negligent homicide, this could easily be
overwhelmed by the nation's historical response of rallying around the
leader in times of foreign crisis, and a subsequent CONTINUOUS offense
as the best defense, e.g., strong-arming against an investigation or
arm-twisting on behalf of the Patriot Act. PRESTO-CHANGO, the
criminally negligent White House is now firmly ensconced in the
driver's seat of calling EVERYONE ELSE negligent if they don't give
them what they want, that being continual reward for THEIR incompetence
and negligence that aided and abetted the attacks. In the meantime, NBC
revealed that Bush had a plan for attacking Afghanistan on his desk
September 9th, two days before the 9/11 attacks. God Bless America. I
know people always decry "conspiracy theories" or that they just cannot
go there because it is just too terrible to contemplate (it is). This
is understandable, but there comes a time when we need to grow up. "THE
COAST GUARD IS IN CHARGE OF SECURITY, NOT THE CORPORATION" (Quote from
Wall Street Journal defense of the UAE deal) ALICE: Hey Ralph, did you
hear that? The Coast Guard is in charge of security, not the
corporation! The Wall Street Journal says so. RALPH: Ask 'em who was in
charge of security on 9/11. Does the World Street Journal actually
think this is a valid pro-sale argument? That security remains the
responsibility of US agencies? This is the depth of their understanding
of security...a snappy comeback? The federal government was in charge
of our security on 9/11/01. Fat lot of good that did. On that horrid
day, standard protocol did not happen at all. Scrambles were not
ordered until AFTER the Pentagon attack, a nonresponse and clearcut
failure of protocol that must come from a direct order. In other words,
it cannot result from negligence or surprise, a myth perpetuated by
many. Someone must take an action to create the "negligent" or
"incompetent" condition. The people killed at the Pentagon would fail
to appreciate the WSJ's quick wit, as their own department failed to
secure their OWN headquarters after numerous real-time warnings of what
was incoming that morning. That on its face is absurd, ridiculous,
insane. A standdown took place by definition, not opinion. We still
don't know why. Indeed, in the pantheon of the greatest air force and
military on earth, the ENTIRE top chain of command (Bush, Rumsfeld,
Myers, Eberhart, god knows what Cheney was doing) all kept themselves
out of the decision-making process during the time of the attacks. And
yet Bush's secret service had an open line with the FAA, so there is no
reasonable explanation for his suspicious behavior that morning.
Rumsfeld I think said something about it being a domestic service
responsibility. And both Bush AND Myers' ridiculous excuse? that well
gosh golly gee I heard it was a small plane accident so I went to a
meeting. Really? Who said that? Someone living in a cave? Someone
incapable of clicking on a TV? I know of NO ONE who heard the
speculation that it was a small plane accident. I would bet bush and
Myers are the only people who did. Name the person who told you that,
Mr. Bush. Name the person who told you, Gen. Myers, Mr. Head of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff. Since when do military men accustomed to drills
decide to blow off the report of an attack by not showing up? More to
the point, what company safety rep do you know would refuse to follow
protocol in a fire drill? But generals and commanders-in-chief make it
a casual habit to ignore such a report? Would refuse to go to battle
stations? They must do disaster drills like the rest of us. Why would
they assume this was not a drill in a week when drills were KNOWN TO BE
on the docket? And General Myers, Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff at the time, was promoted to head up NORAD. Get a clue, people.
Equally offensive is their utterly blase attitude towards the damage
that even an accidental "attack" by a small plane would do when
violently embedded into a skyscraper. Dozens could be killed; debris
from that height are deadly projectiles. Did General Myers think some
stupid meeting was more important than checking in for an update and
query on any special needs that the military might be required to fulfill
in such a disaster? And that some branch might be needed? Or even the
National Guard? Did I mention that this guy was the HEAD OF THE JOINT
CHIEFS OF STAFF?! The head of ALL the heads of ALL the military
branches? The point is, HE DID NOT KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. He needed to
check in and find out, and at his level he would have gotten instant
clarification of the actual facts. And if he HAD done what he was
obligated to do (coupled with the fact that a few high-level Pentagon
officials had CANCELLED flights for that morning), if he HAD made that
call, he would have found out, that no, General, this is NOT a
small-plane accident, this is NOT one of the war game exercises taking
place this week, this is NOT a drill; in point of fact, this is
actually a whole lot like ALL the warnings you and the rest of us have
been hearing about for months, that the nation is under attack in 3
places with 3 hijacked planes and by the way YOU ARE THE GODDAMMNED
HEAD OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF AND TELL US WHAT TO DO!!!! But maybe
Myers always wanted to grow up to be a suspect in a criminal case. This
was his chance. Now I would expect a safety rep to resign in disgrace
for being that stupid. For a military general, and if I haven't
mentioned it, THE HEAD OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, oh, I don't know,
how does torture sound to you as reasonable punishment? I'll settle for
a lie detector test. We have a 24-hour ALERT system that safeguards
American airspace. FOR WHAT? WHERE WERE THEY? Same thing with Katrina.
No one showed up to do the job. We don't HAVE a president. This country
just has people who think they are half-presidents, or in Cheney's
case, the self-acknowledged evil genius behind the throne because
"actually, it's a pretty nice way to work." (what is he? 12?). All this
diffusion of responsibility, so nobody shows, nobody is held
accountable. Listen, if the UAE were in charge of US security and I
could use their laws to handle such a sick non-response to a domestic
attack, I would be delighted to hire them. Because if they HAD been in
charge that day, they would all be executed by now. In dictatorships,
you don't GET second chances to do nothing while your people are
murdered, then lie outrageously and repeatedly afterwards on why you
failed at your primary job. ....which means you not only failed ON THE
JOB, but you yourself are a COMPLETE failure. No business in America
would accept their pathetic excuses. Why does the WSJ? Scared? Safer
and easier to pretend you are one of them instead of doing what is
right by taking them on? (Nuance: Even if you were not confusing
responsibility with opportunity, port operators are in charge of
security after the cargo is unloaded). It is also a BIG surprise to
millions of Americans to learn we are not or cannot even handle our own
sensitive port operations. Oh honey (you say to me), THAT ship sailed a
long time ago! End of discussion, apparently. Except you forgot the
OTHER talking points: Yes, Wall Street Jugheads, it IS quite a
revelation that foreign ownership of our ports has been with us for
some time. But was that a pre-9/11 decision? It's not the same WORLD
today, is it? Oh, and here comes CLASSIC First-World Cocktail-Party
Political Combat, from the WSJ: "So the same Democrats who lecture that
the war on terror is really a battle for "hearts and minds" now
apparently favor bald discrimination against even friendly Arabs
investing in the US? Guantanamo must be closed because it's terrible
PR, wiretapping al Qaeda in the US is illegal...." Democrats now
apparently favor bald discrimination against even friendly Arabs
investing in the US? Apparently? Really? Is that really apparent? To
quote any savvy 4-year-old: Nuh-uhhhh”. Discrimination, if at all,
would be a third-base issue. We're still on first and second. (The
loading of all bases is another discussion about structural racism in
our political system and the extraordinary utility of that phrase,
Anti-Semitism. It is also best left for another time). So here's your
martini olive back. Try again, and this time try not to throw it like a
girl. (Gotta get that daily discrimination affirmation in). How well
you WSJ combat vets pile it on with your devastating critique of
democrats, your mockery of their presumed beliefs, setting up all the
pins for your strike: "Guantanamo must be closed because it's terrible
PR, wiretapping al Qaeda in the US is illegal…” (Hike!. Pow! Wam!
&!#!! Socko!*&!! Swooosh!) ??? Is that it? You think it's that
easy to dispense with truth? Morph it into a caricature for ridicule? I
think it's more like this: If you say that while holding a coffee cup,
does your little pinkie stick delicately out? Does the snuffbox come
out of the vest pocket? God, the juvenile level of political discussion
in this country is child’s play: Wiretapping alQaeda in the US was
NEVER illegal and NO ONE has ever claimed it was. Guantanamo is a
concentration camp where over 90% of the captives are innocent. What
was the purpose of putting that headache and now nightmare into
reality? Scare the crap out of the American public? Favor the WSJ
editorial writers with the opportunity to read to us from "My Pet
Detainee"? The idea that these human beings have no rights to protest
being kept like slaves? Where the f*ck do you get that from? Our
founders? If you don't like this country's values, go live in the
friendly UAE. You stay, you fight for your country's values. That's the
way it works... ....especially when you send young people to be blown
up in hell zones while allegedly fighting for their country’s values on
the order of masculinity-challenged, vicarious thrill-seeking
chickenhawks. I don't think you can BE a WSJ editorial writer and have
a kid in Iraq at the same time, not and be able to comfortably write
the kind of garbage you have written here. It would be TOO real. You
could not joke about it like this, play with words and contrived
arguments as if they had real meaning in the real world. It would be
too real, and you would be too real. The next time you see or read
something about the disgusting torture of innocent people who are being
kept and treated like dogs in America's first concentration camp, don't
run to your favorite democratic stereotype to absolve yourself of
personal guilt and professional responsibility for their miserable
existence, the crimes against their humanity and the murder of our
birthrights. You're the goddammed FOURTH ESTATE! – you are supposed to
be acting responsibly in your role as part of the national security
apparatus. You have no meaningful 2-party system today. So what do you
see and hear and feel NOW? (now that you are deprived of your trusty
escape valve of democratic strawmen). (ALICE: Oh Ralph, don't worry.
The UAE will not be in charge of Fourth-Estate security. That will
continue to be the responsibility of the Wall Street Journal). So
wiretapping alQaeda in the US is illegal, eh? Who said THAT? Same
person who said 9/11 was a small-plane accident? That's not journalism.
That's a deliberate distortion of the facts in a conscious decision to
deceive. Repeat after me: Wiretapping alQaeda in the US is NOT illegal
as long as you check in with the FISA Court. Otherwise, the FISA Court
is a dead letter except for Potemkin window dressing - faking a
democracy, faking the Founders' work. And you already know that. So why
lie? Because like a certain VP, it's really cool to be the evil genius
behind the throne, manipulating people without them knowing it? BTW,
it's not just for Cheney. It was also Hitler's favorite feeling.
Congrats on the heady company you're keeping. There's MY olive. Hope
the gin stings. Some people think the GOP tough-guy talk is sexy. Well
perhaps, if you're a nancy-boy looking for a little action (no
affirmation there; it includes hetero OR otherwise). But that's just
more cocktail-party image making. Bullies and dictators in reality are
pathetic in the extreme. And Nazis? The worst. Nazi imitators? Pretty
damn close to ditto, minus the psychotic fixation on a racial group. A
difference with little difference, certainly not to the smaller number
of people being killed. Of course, this Reich is "forever" and the
century is young. "The Coast Guard is in charge of security, not the
corporation." RALPH: Thanks, Wall Street Jugheads. Been waiting for
that report all year. Let’s buy up the issue and put it under the arm
of every first responder who worked Ground Zero that day, and lay it on
the beds of those who are dying younger because their own government
lied to them about the air. Thanks again for the propaganda
reinforcements. By the way, did you bring any guns? Of course, that’s
not really an issue, is it? Selling off America like they sold off
Iraq, causing injured and humiliated people to take their fury to the
militias and the streets. It’s not like any domestic disturbance would
further the kind of political capital and cover they've been running on
exclusively since the “foreign” attacks...though alQaeda was not in
charge of our security. And, of course, they did not WANT Iraq to
dissolve into chaos and horror. It just so happens that wherever these
so-called leaders go, death destruction and despair naturally follow.
...The showers of flowers that turn out to be daisy cutters. I'm out of
olives. B A Gilmore