Wednesday, February 22, 2006

When Economic Sense And Common Sense Collide

These days in the West, economic sense triumphs over common sense with alarming regularity. No finer example of this can be found than the recent decision here in the United States to give control of six ports to the United Arab Emirates. And this decision at a time of war with the ‘Christian’ West’s mortal enemy: Islam!

On November 6, 2001, when the ‘War on Terror’ was in its infancy, President Bush said : You are either with us or against us in the fight against terror. Indeed, Mr. President! Indeed! So who do you really think the UAE are with? With us infidels? Or, perhaps, with the believers? That means to say, Osama bin Laden and his entourage?

One thing you fail to understand, Mr. President, is that the West, not just the USA, is under attack from Islamic jihad. The jihadists will stop at nothing till they win this war against ’infideldom’. Even if, for one incredible minute, we assume that the intentions of the UAE are good and benign towards the US and its allies, how are you going to be able to ensure that the people given control of the ports won’t be infiltrated by jihadists?

Ports, because of all the containers handled in them, are notoriously difficult to police and control. It would seem that the US is doubling its headache to relinquish control to a company based in the United Arab Emirates. It must surely be tantamount to inviting trouble.

Nobody is trying to say that all people in the UAE are bad people. Far from it. But it must surely be conceded that they are Muslims. On 9/11 America was attacked by Muslims! The jihadists, people who follow the teachings of their prophet to the letter, have stated openly that they wish to destroy the West in general, and the US in particular. You surely cannot be unaware of their objectives, can you?

You stated yesterday that you were trying to conduct US foreign policy by treating the people of the world “fairly”. This is a lofty ideal, Mr. Bush, to be sure. But please don’t forget that your first duty is not to the people of the world, but to the people of the United States, to US citizens. Their safety MUST come first, and it must take the HIGHEST priority.

You would do well to remember Churchill’s words: "The whole history of the world is summed up in the fact that, when nations are strong, they are not always just, and when they wish to be just, they are no longer strong."

One thing the President said yesterday was incomprehensible to me, and certainly insulting to Britain. He asked his opponents to explain why they were opposed to a Middle Eastern firm taking over control of the ports when they did not oppose a British company controlling them. Really, Mr. President! Are you serious?

For a start, if you didn’t know it before, the United Kingdom is the US’s staunchest ally. The British always stand four-square behind the US. The UAE does not. I see that comment as a smack in the teeth for the British. That comment certainly does not pay them any compliment; indeed, it does them a disservice.

If you, Mr. President, really think that placing the control of these six ports in the hands of a Middle Eastern company, indeed any Middle Eastern company, does not pose a greater threat to the security of the US than it does in the hands of a British company, then one can only raise serious questions about your judgment, serious questions about your ability to come to sound conclusions, serious questions about your ability to take sound decisions.

George Bush has gone further, though. He has threatened to veto any law blocking a deal giving an Arab company control of the ports. Veto the law? But why? Why is the President so keen for an Arab company to take control of the ports? To me, it seems suspect that the President should be so keen for control to be handed over to the Arab, Islamic world. One can only ask the following questions: Who stands to gain financially from this? And by how much? Because financial gain by some people, or some companies, must surely be at the root of this! Mega-money must surely be at stake!

But there is one further question I should like answered. It is this: Since when do the Emiratees have the expertise to run six American ports? To run their own country, they have to depend on foreign workers. About 84% of workers in the UAE are foreign workers, and low-paid, Third-world workers at that! So where have they gained all this experience all of a sudden?

In times of war, we cannot be circumspect enough. Common sense must prevail. This, if it goes through, will be a triumph of the power of economics over common sense, the triumph of stupidity over sound judgment. Indeed, this must surely be a fine example of the collision of economic sense with common sense!

©Mark Alexander

9 comments:

cybercrusader said...

SPOT ON AND EXTREMELY WELL SAID!

Mark said...

Thanks UIP! This is such folly, isn't it?

Anonymous said...

I've been reading about this issue for the last week or so.

You brought up something I haven't seen elsewhere. The fact that UAE imports a huge (84%)number of foreign workers for it's own country--so where *did* they get the expertise to run 6 major US ports?

Other blog world speculation as to why Bush is so intent on having this deal go through included getting UAE help against Iran since the two countries aren't on good terms.

An interesting link* that brings into question the soundness of this proposal:

UAE royals, bin Laden's saviours

*This was posted by bordergal on another blog.

Mark said...

Heather:

Thanks for the interesting link.

I find Bush's insistence on having a Middle Eastern, Muslim-owned company to take charge of six American ports as dangerous as it is disgusting!

I have lost all faith in Bush as a leader of the Western world!

John Sobieski said...

I was surprised at Bush's in your face attitude with that veto threat. Then to find out the guy was even informed BEFORE the deal was approved. Now he is so convinced that all vetting was thorough and complete. Why should we trust him? He was so sure of Saddam's nukes and he was so sure that Miers was the best choice for the Supreme Court.

Ay, Bush, you haven't seen the crest of this revolt. You wait until investigators start snooping around this deal and what is being said in the Dubai mosques about infidels (that's us if you don't know Bush), you just wait.

Mark said...

Yes, John. And Bush was so sure that it was such a great idea to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq and the wider Arab world, too. But what do we have: A darn mess! Then to add insult to injury, we are losing our democracy at home!

BTW, I've managed to upload the avatar. Thanks to you!

cybercrusader said...

John S, You've got it, I do believe you've got it. I, too, can hardly wait for the press to snoop around this deal. It's got to be filthy dirty....

Always On Watch said...

I am frothing at the mouth over this ports deal!

Take a look at this. Looks as if Bob Dole has been hired on as a lobbyist for DPI.

There is also this:

What you don't know is about the President's brother, Neil Bush, and his ties to Dubai....

Neil Bush is a frequent visitor to and paid speaker in Dubai, showing up there right after 9/11 trying to get investors for his failed Ignite! educational software company. While there, "[Neil] Bush held talks with Dubai's Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammad bin Rashid al-Maktoum and Information Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahyan on the 'world economy in light of recent events, as well as higher education in universities," Arab American Business reported. Bush was in Dubai so much that he e-mailed his wife of his desire for a divorce from his Dubai hotel room.
(Bush's relationship with the Dubaian and UAE royals has a lot to do with his Syrian-American Ba'athist boss, Jamal Daniel, who paid him $60,000 a year for only a few hours work. Bush's marriage to his second wife was held at Daniel's Houston home.)

At a Saudi speech, he encouraged conferees to expand lobbying and PR efforts to change "perceptions" about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict....

Mark said...

Always:

"George Bush has gone further, though. He has threatened to veto any law blocking a deal giving an Arab company control of the ports. Veto the law? But why? Why is the President so keen for an Arab company to take control of the ports? To me, it seems suspect that the President should be so keen for control to be handed over to the Arab, Islamic world. One can only ask the following questions: Who stands to gain financially from this? And by how much? Because financial gain by some people, or some companies, must surely be at the root of this! Mega-money must surely be at stake!" (Source: When Economic Sense and Common Sense Collide)

I hate to say I told you so, but I can't resist! :-)

YOU, though, have come up with the details. How clever of you! :-)

I tell you now: This deal STINKS!

My going off of Dubya accelerates now each time I speak, read or hear his name. Can that man really have the best interests of America and Americans at heart?

GREED is the root of the problem. It is also what will bring the West down! It's only a matter of time.