Port This

Judges Summary:

When it comes to grandstanding, Frist is hard to beat.  The judges loved the shot of Long Beach, especially the Queen Mary below.  Now that's a terror target if we ever saw one.  Also, the fly boy theme -- reminiscent of President Bush's Katrina/New Orleans fly over -- works brilliantly.  The only thing missing is the Commander-in-Chief bomber jacket.

Compared to the Menendez entry, Frist also earns points for audacity. As a Democrat, Menendez would have given his Capitol parking spot for just about any national security issue to get behind.  As the Republican Senate Majority leader, on the other hand, Frist scores big for turning on the White House and shoving the port security issue right down Bush's veto threatening throat.  Maybe the Bush family and their friends are in bed with Dubai.  Maybe Bush screwed up by taking Congress for granted.  Either way, Frist and the Repubs seem to have officially kicked Bush into lame duck status as the Prez finds himself in another "Harriet Miers moment."

Regarding the Menendez shot, the props are just excellent.  It's brilliant how the detailed port layouts seem like an open invitation to the evil doers.  And why limit threat-mongering just to shipping cargo?  These pix show the physical plant just as ripe for aerial assault.  Loved the plethora of microphones, by the way, indicating Bob is one big mouthpiece.

Finally, we liked the drama in the Foley picture.  Unfortunately, the style is a little dated -- say, "Morning In America," or the "'01-'04 'Keep 9/11 Alive' Patriotism Orgy."  Next time, though, would it be so hard to also toss in a crane, a bit of water or even a buoy?

(image 1:Genaro Molina/AP. Pool.  February 21, 2006.  Long Beach, CA.  Via YahooNews.  image 2: Jose F. Moreno/A.P.  February 21, 2006.  Port Authority of New York and New Jersey,  Newark, N.J.  Via YahooNews. image: Marc Serota/Reuters. February 21, 2006.  Port of Miami.  Miami, Florida  Via YahooNews.)

Comments

[jonst]

Live by the photo opt; ya die by it. I love it. Let them go after the lame duck with all the agression our VP showed going after quail, among other creatures.

I hope they bring BushCo down like a pack of wild dogs would bring down a drugged lamb. Have at it boys....

Maybe there is actually a chance to save the Republic yet.

[futurebird]

I love all the microphones with the various news logos on them. How do you arrange a bouquet like that? It adds urgency and credibility to the speaker.

I think this ports issue is a scam. Many ports are foreign owned. This smacks of jingoism.

What's next? Torching kebab houses since terrorists could feed us poison lamb kebabs.

Please.

[Asta]

Futurebird, there's an aspect of this you seem not to understand.

Twenty percent of our country is owned by foreign entities. That's one fifth of America. One fifth of our assets, our resources. That's quite a chunk.

Secondly, the jobs involved in managing these ports will go to non-Americans. These are jobs our people need.

Bush accuses everyone who doesn't agree with him as America Haters, yet what he is doing here is totally anti-America.

I wonder how long it will be when they start selling off our citizens into slave markets overseas. Don't laugh. How do you think America got started in the first place?

[futurebird]

What's wrong with a foreign company? A corporation is a corporation. It's not like the people or the workers own these things that we're selling off.

The Jobs will not go to non-americans. They will hire from the longshoremen union just like every other foreign own port company. It's one of the few unions that survived-- though shrunk by containerization.. you can't out-source longshoremen-- if only other industries had that kind of built in protection.

The trouble is the capital is concentrated-- it's immaterial whose hands it's concentrated in-- the point is it's not yours or mine. Would an american born fat-cat keep your interests at heart?

At least this way these people from other countries care if our economy descends in to total chaos.

[marysz]

But when push comes to shove, will the Republican congress cave in to Bush and his Big Money pals? Menendez, the Democratic NJ senator, stands over a murky aerial view of the ports. Unlike Frist and Foley, he's not casting himself as some top-gun type hero. The Port Authority of NJ has already sued to block the sale. This lawsuit may do more to stop the transition than congressional action (if that ever comes). In the upper left-hand corner of the photograph behind Menendez are the dark swirling undercurrents of the NY harbor. This deal must have been in the making for months (or years) before it became public. What else is being hidden from us?

[weisseharre]

urlite...just got an email from dr. bill invoking the gip...who...exhumably...never knew jack

[jt from BC]

futurebird, you've hit the bulls eye with your evaluation of the economics of port operations. In Vancouver B.C. anti union forces have harped that a few members are, or maybe from 'The Hells Angels' and as union members threaten our national security. Regardless of the means used to try and break this union it has one hell of a record.
In case your unaware the first Longshoreman's union was formed in New Brunswick in 1849.

http://ilalocal273.com/ILA/150/001.htm

[Asta]

I'm with Marysz on this...what else is being withheld from us?

The real zinger is how Bush and his brownshirts have mongered fear the last 4+ years, fear of the "Ayrabs", the terra-ists (Ann Coulter gets a standing ovation last week when she referred to the "enemy" as "ragheads") and suddenly, we're turning over 6 major ports to a government-owned company (Dubai Ports) who has known ties with Al-Qaeda. I don't expect much empathy from our non-resident posters here, but I find this event to be quite disturbing.

[zatopa]

I'm looking forward to the inevitable PR campaign engineered to convince Bush's base that the UAE are a model democracy, friend, ally, etc. The visuals should be great. The architecture in Dubai makes Vegas look like community theater.

[lytom]

The quick look at the middle (Bob Mendez) politician's background gave the feeling of two towers in a process of collapsing...

There are two ways to look at it. One, the friendly relationship Bush has with Dubai rulers, not to mention the financial ties. Bush this time embodies so called "true, democratic frienship" to any corporation with lots of money. Maybe there is even a hidden debt that needs to be demonstrated and repayed...
The second, the fundamentalist view in which all Middle Easterners are enemies and are not to be trusted on the US soil. This clashes with Bush and leaves the rest of US to find which side are they on.
The politicians smell the tide of anti arab in US public and in the MSM, despite so called fairness to muslims, which is demonstrated in weak speaches and never in deeds. The secret trials of suspected terrorists have already been judged by the public, who still believe the propaganda they read in the MSM.
So is there a side to be on?
To appear friendly and fair to arabs you would have to share a stage with Bush. To be against is a patriotic stand, and for politicians an opportunity to jump on.
I think that there is also a side that recognizes no difference between the two stands, just a little diversion which will be ironed out just like it has been done with other issues like lies, Guanatanamo torture center, Abu Graib, war, dead civilians, and so on... in which Bush will make two steps back and two steps forward.

[jonst]

Futurebird,

There was a time, once, long ago, before the elites sold the nation out, that Americans use to think there was such a thing as 'vital, strategic, industry' that was thought important to US national security. Certain controls were place on these industries. Now everything goes overseas to entities that have one supreme goal: maximization of shareholder value. And screw our interests if they get in the way of their goal. Now, perhaps, the citizens are waking up and saying "hold on a second....let the fire sale on American assets stop." We'll see. I sure hope so.

[futurebird]

Now, perhaps, the citizens are waking up and saying "hold on a second....let the fire sale on American assets stop." We'll see. I sure hope so.

But why is it OK to have the Brits there and not OK to have the UAE? I wish this was the reason-- but I think it's jingoism-- plain and simple.

Also it's not the country that the corporations comes from that is the problem-- it is the freedom that corporations have to cross borders-- a freedom that is not extended to all of the people in the world.

The serfs and vassals must stay put while players who's "country" is nothing more than a heading used for tax purposes range over the entire planet.

[jt from BC]

ASRA, I guess I'm the non resident poster so perhaps Economics 101 is an area you might consider in understanding corporations and their global reach.( which is what futurebird I think was pointing out)

My Country has greater foreign ownership and whether the corporation is local or foreign or some combination makes little difference.

France regulates 17 % foreign control of its cultural industry we too have a quota to protect and foster local cultural, talent and content, which may explain why proportionally there are so many Canadian entertainers now making big bucks in your country an export which we applaud, especially if they retain Canadian citizenship as their taxes help recoup our earlier subsidation and promotion of them.

Other than few exceptions your country and mine are up for grabs, which is precisely the mandate of corporations in our global village.

Walmart if it was a country would rank 19 the in the world. The reality is you either take on the concept of corporations as an entity or try to balance their monopoly with unions.
Walmart has closed two of its most profitable stores in Canada because of 'non union interference' you of course are well aware of those US States which are legally challenging the public subsidizing of Walmart workers medical costs.
This is not a troublesome area for them here as we have universal health care.

Foreign ownership has concerned us for over 50 years but now the greatest threat is through NAFTA and US private HMO's among similar predatory institutions which will mutate Northwards and place our most cherished institution on the endangered or extinct list.
Privatizing and exporting our water is the number two target where corporations locally and foreign are looking for loopholes. Of course it is argued this would create greater jobs for us which is true, assuming of course we ignored the environmental nightmare which would follow, fortunately many of us Lilliputans here are now better informed and resisting like hell.

Welcome to the 21 century.

[jonst]

Futurebird,

Its not jingoism. First, I don't want any foreign ownership of the vital national security American assets. British or otherwise. Second...I am unaware of any personal contacts between members of British Royal family and OBL. I am aware of contacts between OBL and SOME members of the royal family of UAE. And so would you, if you googled OBL, UAE royal family and the words "hunting trips" and "Afghanistan". As well, there are numerous other connections between the two groups. Now, it may be less than politically correct to point this out. I'm sorry about that but there it is. You, are, of course, free to argue that these facts should not lead one to the conclusions that they lead me. Fair enough. Who knows,you may be correct. But I have my doubts, if, and when, you argue that these facts did not take place.

[Asta]

JT, I took economics in college, thank you. I suggest you read Charles Dickens to get a feel for what our societies will be like with the demise of the Middle Class.

And it IS a war on the Middle Class in this country, and it's probably happening in yours, too, particularly with the results of your recent election.

I am painfully aware of the effects of this New World Order, this global economy, hell, I live in Pittsburgh, for God's sake, have a little sympathy.

[futurebird]

The stated objections to this deal are terrorism-- not, foreign interests owning American capital.

I guess the last layer of absurdity is the fact that terrorists are from small fundamentalist resistance groups. Terrorist acts are not in the interest of big business. (unless used to prevent revolutions that might otherwise result in people taking real democratic control of their countries)

[jonst]

Futurebird,

You wrote...."The stated objections to this deal are terrorism-- not, foreign interests owning American capital."

Says who? Where do you get your facts to make a blanket asseration like that? That's not what I see, or hear, at all.

[futurebird]

Jonst

All of the news articles cite "port security" as the reason people are objecting to this deal.

[jt from BC]

JONST, I would be more concerned about Saudi Arabia a country where GWB likes holding hands with Sheiks and where his Daddy's Caryle group enjoy more than great hospitality and friendship.

"The Saudi agenda extends far beyond policy-makers. In the late 1990s, the privately owned Massachusetts technology company, Ptech, designed software used to develop enterprise blueprints that held every important detail of a given concern. The company was financed with more than $22 million, by Saudi multi-millionaire Yasin al Qadi, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist. The Saudis thus gained access to strategic information about many major U.S. corporations such as SYSCO, ENRON, and the U.S. Departments of Defense, Treasury, Justice, Energy, and even the White House. The extent of the damage, if it was investigated, remains a mystery."

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060115-103622-3038r.htm Jan 6th 2006

If you want the comprehensive Arabian Tales of George Walker Bush check this out;

http://www.bushwatch.com/bushcarlyle.htm

Perhaps it just runs in the family as Grandaddy Bush had his bank confiscated for doing business with the Nazi up until 1942.

As a non resident if I had to choose I'd take the United Arab Emirates any day in exchange for eliminating Saudi Arabia's already established threatening economic holdings and strategic involvement in the intelligence assets of the US.
Other than greed or getting caught why would corporations be concerned with the national interest. Well represented with former Pentagon and high ranking government officials on their Boards of Directors or as shareholders, its not that they are unaware of whats happening. We must trust they have our interests at heart.

ASTA, As a fan of Charles Dickens I look to our involvement in third world countries and the consequences of (colonialism) now referred to as neoliberalism when I require a classic poverty update. I credit in great part our Middle Class privileged status to such policies and foreign practises.
It appears a lot of former friendly paupers are not digging the free enterprise system' these days and are being lead by democratically elected demigods and populists tyrants as pontificated by Condi.
Your correct our new government will pick up a lot of this rhetoric but as minority government one major misstep.... for as you may know we are a cautious lot especially after Mulroney and Ronnie serenading us (NAFTA ) with "When Irish Eyes are smiling."
I've always consider our way of life unsustainable from an economic and environmental perspective. Which will strike the first devastating blow is for me an open question. Terrorism for most Canadians is not a big deal and many thought 911 might better have been handled as a major criminal event and been vigorously pursued with a different strategy than blowing the shit out of two countries and who knows how many more..?

I don't feel particularly sorry for you or me its our excesses, debts and illusions we've unloaded on our children or grandchildren that is tragic. (the middle class record of tolerating poverty in our respective countries preferring handouts and charity to pursing social justice is not an inspiring one either )Sorry if this sounds lecturing its not intended to be in that vein
My empathy is for the millions without health care and the potential catastrophes they face, and for those in poverty in our opulent countries.
We would differ greatly I suspect on dealing with these realities so I will stop here.

[Asta]

Actually, JT, I happen to agree with almost all the points you just made. We're really not that far apart in our opinions, we just have a different way of making the presentation. (Again, my motto: Sarcasm does not translate well over the Internet.)

The world would be a much different place right now had our government handled 9-11 as a crime scene and not as an excuse for a sociopath to prove to his daddy that he was All Man. The World Trade Center bombing in '93 was handled in the fashion you speak of, and the perpetrators were apprehended and punished. We didn't go off bombing innocent bystanding countries.

I also see very well that our form of government is turning into something very ugly -- corporate fascism. Individual rights are being trashed for the good of WalMart (which I view as a cancer on our nation's landscape), and I choose WalMart as the symbol of all corp. greed because it is, as you said, almost a nation unto itself. It seems our government has granted companies status as human beings. It started with that nasty eminent domain crap passed down by the laughable but dangerous supreme court of ours. Well probably earlier, but that case is major in its far reaching consequences.

Let's make a deal -- I won't talk down to you if you won't talk down to me, okay? I have a college education, I assume you do, too. Let's assume the best of each other and take it from there, okay, Friend?

[jonst]

JT,
You present a false dichotomy. I know about the Bush family history and the Carlyle Group. I think the family are criminals, for the most part. And I hope Bush gets impeached. And tried in criminal court for his actions. That said, thanks to the Bush family et al bounding our future up in the Middle East, I would suggest I am, worried about both Royal Families. I think there are elements in both Royal Families that are virulently hostile to the West in general, and the US in particular. And wish to inflict damage on us. God knows, (if you will pardon the pun) they have their reasons, both real and imagined.

I think the Royal Families are split. Some are overwhelmingly capitalist and Western oriented and look to the West as their allies, and indeed, their protectors.

I don't want to make too much of it. Nor do I want to sweep the reality under the rug.

Futurebird,

Look at any newspaper, the letters to the editor section, listen to any call in program on C-Span where it is the subject, engage Americans in conversations and I think you will see that foreign ownership is an issue. Not the only issue. But a big issue.

[readytoblowagasket]

I make it my own personal policy to oppose anything George W. Bush is for, because I've found that I get screwed 100% of the time by his every decision. In this case I don't know exactly *how* I'll get screwed — I only know that I'll get it down the road and that it'll hurt. I also know it won't have anything to do with national security, national identity, or job loss. So arguing about those issues among ourselves is academic. GWB is not thinking that hard about it.

The only momentary gratification I can savor is that Bush periodically makes the Republicans in Congress scramble to do some damage control (like with the Harriet Miers fiasco). It's always fun to see them work (sweat) a little.

Frist is clearly taking one of his presidential-run flyovers.

[ummabdulla]

Dubai Ports has known ties with Al-Qaeda? Dubai is not a model democratic state, nor is it an Islamic state - it's a model capitalist state. To a degree that's actually pretty absurd - they have the 7-star hotel, they're building the highest building, they've built huge island developments where they was no land, they're always trying to make the biggest this or that. If Dubai's known for anything, it's shopping, and the biggest tourist draw is the Dubai Shopping Festival. They advertise their resorts and festivals with pictures of women in bikinis and couples having a romantic glass of wine. Anyone who's been there could only laugh at the idea of Dubai as a terrorist state.

[jonst]

Look ummabdulla, no one, or I'm not anyway, calling anyplace a 'terrorist state". You raise a strawman argument. A false argument. I say this: I say there was a signficant relationship between the OBL and SOME, I repeat, SOME members of the UAE Royal family. See this link below. If you want to say I am lying about this. Or incorrect, fine. If you want to say Google, or the the guy that wrote Ghost Wars, and about 40 other writers are lying, fine. IF you want to say the reports are correct but they prove nothing, fine. Fine fine fine. But one can't and be rational anyway, deny the reports of these connections. People are not making this stuff up. They might very well be overeacting to it. But they are not making it. http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/viewMedia.php/prmID/4421

[Asta]

When Ummadulla wrote about how wonderful Dubai is, I thought, Las Vegas.

And if can one here can argue that Las Vegas isn't the Mafia's money laundering center, go for it. I would love to hear the argument. Dubai is the money laundering member of the UAE.

And, yeah, I heard about the island developments, supposedly to represent the 50 American States. All I could think was, it's a Memorial to the Late Great United States.