Arabs Having Ownership at Six American Ports

Let’s see.  The story is that a company known as Dubai Ports World had just about completed a deal,  a $6.8 billion acquisition of a British company, Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Company.  Dubai Ports World, of the United Arab Emirates.  That one.  This is where Tiger Woods wins golf tournaments  (Dubai). Oh yes, the same one that made it into the 9/11 Commission Report when the United Arab Emirates biggees were playing footsy (going hunting?) with Osama Bin Ladin.

Yesterday, the news secretary for President Bush, Scott McClellan, said:  ”In hindsight, when you look at this and the coverage that it’s received and the false impression that is left with some, we probably should have briefed members of Congress about it sooner.”

As the great, learned Harvey Diltitcher once said, PERCEPTION IS REALITY.  The deal looks dead.

Is it dead?   At least many people think so.   Don’t hang on every word here:   there may be something more to the whole story, and we may never hear of all of the devils in the detail.

Many people are dumping on the deal.   Unfortunately, and this is the only obvious conclusion that can be drawn thus far:   the Bush administration did not umbrella the deal properly for public consumption.

It depends on what damage control develops, and whether the possible underlying aim of the deal, if any, is impossible to achieve now.

So now we have to wait two or three years for somebody to write a book exposing what was happening here.

The problem is basic.  It is the taint.   The perception.  President Bush says the United Arab Emirates is a good ally of the U. S. especially in the fight against terrorism.  The U. S. was doing the deal under the radar, it seems, because incorporated in it was an agreement for DP World to reveal records on demand about “foreign operational direction” of its business at  six U. S. ports  (Philadelphia,  New York,  Baltimore,  Miami, New Jersey and New Orleans). 

It is confusing that the White House says President Bush did not know about the deal until recently.   You have to proceed with the conclusion that Scott McClellan does not dispense lies in any situation.  This would seem to indicate nothing about terrorism was below the surface. 

Probably nobody except one of those CIA whistleblower guys (traitors, maybe) will reveal whether the deal included a method of the U. S. to infiltrate more of the Middle East.   At least this time, no whistleblower apparently surfaced this deal, but that’s beside the point.

Because Homeland Security was the lead agency in shepherding the deal, it seems to me there was more here than the perception of Arabs running six U. S. ports. 

On his radio talk show this morning, Michael Smerconish (Radio Station WPHT, Philadelphia) spent most of his three hours going over Pages 137-138 of the 9/11 Commission Report.  There, you can read the account of how Richard Clarke somehow queered a plan to bomb Osama Bin Ladin in 1999.   

The account tells about the planned attack on a hunting camp where Bin Ladin was in the vicinity of the Sheikh Ali camp in the desert south of Kandahar, Afghanistan.  The attack was called off, according to the Commission report, because a United Arab Emirates prince also was there, along with others from the UAE.   A UAE airplane had brought the hunters to the desert camp.   The CIA not only did not want to kill a UAE prince, they were not convinced they could be sure of getting Bin Ladin.  It doesn’t take one of them there rocket scientists to conclude that some Arabs from the UAE were enjoying some leisure time with the world’s Number One terrorist.

We are in a war.   It is a peculiar war because our enemies do not wear uniforms.   However, we may have to keep reading between the lines on the port story.   It does not seem very logical that the U. S. government would be doing a deal with Arabs during a war  unless there is something there under the radar we don’t know about.   

After all, we do not want our U. S. government to broadcast the location, date and time of our next “attacks” against terrorism.

Maybe a method of fighting terrorism has been killed.   If so, it is unfortunate, and another casualty of war.  But obviously, the President’s news secretary was right yesterday:    they didn’t do it correctly …. because

 ……….   Now most people think it was wrong. 

Alan Halpern

The Philadelphia Daily News yesterday (Wednesday, December 14, 2005) reported the death of Alan Halpern, the long-time editor of PHILADELPHIA MAGAZINE. The obituary on Page 32, in a featured article, said Alan died Tuesday after a lengthy illness. He was 79.

The article ran two columns, full page. It noted how nothing was sacred or off limits to the magazine. He served from 1951 to 1980, taking the magazine from a Chamber of Commerce mouthpiece to a publication that grabbed many local institutions by the scruff of the neck and gave them a good shaking.

Said the Daily News: “It (PHILADELPHIA MAGAZINE) practically shut down the Pearl Buck Foundation for mismanagement and sent Philadelphia Inquirer reporter Harry Karafin to prison for extortion.”

The latter story was so remarkable, my station, KYW-TV, assigned me to cover the Harry Karafin trial, which ran for two full weeks. It was my assignment (from station management) to report the day’s court developments for TWO FULL MINUTES on the six o’clock news every night.

I met Alan Halpern once. In April, 1970, we were both selected to be two of five representatives from Philadelphia to fly on the so-called inaugural flight of Pan American’s FIRST 747. Yes, the big jumbo jet. Alan and I and one other Pan Am invitee were taken by big long limousine from Philadelphia to JFK International, Jamaica, NY. We were treated royally.

We were seated together on the plane. Row 6. And this is the main reason I am noting his passing. The qualities described in his obituary were evident to me in that one night with him. The obituary quoted from an Inquirer description of him as “shy and soft-spoken”, a cigarette addict who seemed to hide in a cloud of smoke”.

I do not recall that he smoked. What I remember is how frightened he was. He was terrified of the thought that this was the first flight of a 747. In addition, he did not like it one bit that he could not see the right wing of the plane. We were seated so far forward, we couldn’t see the wings.

Because it was obvious he was in a panic, I told him I would check things out for him. I left my seat for a minute, walked back in the plane until I could see the right wing.

I returned to my seat and told Alan the wing is about one-third back on the fuselage, but very definitely there. He seemed to appreciate the important tidbit.

Later, he became concerned because we didn’t leave on time. So, because the pre-flight time was quite casual (no security in those days!), we walked to the area just behind the pilots, whose cockpit door was open. The pilots seemed to be quite busy checking their instruments, and Alan was especially concerned that the departure time already had passed. One of the pilots turned around and smiled.

This made Alan feel alot better.

He asked a crew person (possibly the same stewardess, I do not recall) if this really is to be the first 747 flight.

“Oh, yes,” he was told. “The first WITH PASSENGERS. This crew already has flown back and forth to Paris about 20 times.”

Alan returned with me to Row 6. The plane backed away from the gate 45 minutes late. Alan Halpern enjoyed the flight, especially the landing in Paris. It felt as though a feather had touched the runway.

What a great airplane! What a nice man.

House of Representatives

The Iraq war, of course, is a controversial issue nowadays. Supposedly, the polls have it that two-thirds of Americans oppose the war. If the polling were more structured (i.e., objective and truthful), we would find that two-thirds of Americans oppose the killing of American servicemen…and the other one-third oppose the killing while at the same time recognize that military deaths are a given in time of war. The death toll was 25 times higher in Vietnam than present-day Iraq. This does not justify the Iraqi death toll, but critics do not admit the obvious: we are at war. Last night, the House of Representatives voted on a “non-binding” proposal to call for an immediate pullout of American forces from Iraq. After heated, sometimes juvenile debate, the proposal was overwhelmingly defeated. Only three Democrats voted in favor. We send our representatives to Washington to represent us. After the smoke cleared, they did so last night. But we wouldn’t have seen such a debate had not the liberals advanced their causes: there were no WMD’s in Iraq; there was no connection between Iraq and 9/11, ad nauseum. Let us suppose the House APPROVED that resolution. First, of course, President Bush would have ignored it, as he properly should do. Secondly, somebody would ask the U-S Senate to conduct a similar vote. And President Bush would ignore any Senate approval of such a ridiculous proposal. Congressman John Murtha, an ex-Marine from my state (PA), Thursday called for the pullout “at the earliest practicable time”. That triggered last night’s debacle. “At the earliest practicable time” could be 10 years. Or 15 years. What we are doing in Iraq is fighting a war on terror. The suicide bombers strike daily. They kill people every day. Most of the dead are Iraqis. The ongoing assault by American et al forces against the so-called insurgents is designed to pick them off day by day. It is a struggle. People asked for a “plan” regarding Iraq. It is right before you. No government can put down on paper chapter and verse as to how to eliminate terrorism. The liberals not only demand a “plan” but they also call for a pullout date. The fact that this is crazy does not deter the liberals from constantly presenting this drivel. Terrorism is a war unlike any we ever have seen. Our enemy does not even wear uniforms. Where is the ACLU or somebody to complain that the enemy is in violation of the Geneva Convention in not wearing uniforms? Where is the ACLU or somebody to complain that it is barbaric to cut somebody’s head off? Where is the news media in pointing this out? Where are the polls asking IF YOU OPPOSE THE WAR IN IRAQ, AND THE AMERICANS PULL OUT, are you prepared for daily suicide bombings in the United States? We do not have a specific plan. That is correct. We are ad-libbing to a great extent. We are fighting a war against terrorism. It will take time to win. But win we must.

Lawyers are ruining our society

On the Internet, somebody once said, there are 10,000 jokes about lawyers.

But the lawyers are no joke.

While some of them do essential work (example:  public prosecutors who put the bad guys in prison), lawyers, in general, are ruining our society by running our society.  And lining their own pockets simultaneously.  They are in control of your lives.  Perhaps you don’t realize it, but YOU are the ones doing the lining.

Lawyers will be the last people on earth to admit this.  And, of course, you KNOW they are costing “people” alot of money, but you probably haven’t realized how much effect they are having on your life.  But, you figure, what can you do about it?

In our Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson et al complained that the King of Great Britain had “erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.”

Alas, the King of Great Britain has been replaced by thousands of “lawmakers” who spend their days in the Congress and state and local legislatures of this land, mostly, it appears, finding new ways to generate lawyer fees, often due to more and more governmental regulations. They do this through the swarms of new laws and expanded government.  Is it un-American to ask whether this nation has become “a multitude of New Offices”?

The Declaration of Independence was signed by 56 men.  Fewer than half (24) were lawyers.  We should have stopped there.

On a national basis, and on the state and local scene, we have far too many legislators (read that:  lawmakers).  In Philadelphia, for example, can you tell me what logic there is in having 17 members of City Council?  In Philadelphia, there are 10 “district” council members and seven “at-large” members of Council.  The “routine” is just that, and should be handled by fewer than 10, effectively seven or five.

In Pennsylvania, there are 203 state representatives and 50 state senators.  Will somebody tell me why we shouldn’t operate with, say, 50 state representatives and 20 state senators?

And Congress??  Heaven forbid!  We have 435 members of the House of Representatives and 100 United States Senators.  And each one of ‘em is working like the devil to write a bill that becomes law with THEIR NAME on it!  Think of how many bills are written into law!  Many tax and regulate and cause us no end of bureaucratic obligations.  Knock off alot of those state representatives and state senators, and city council members, and most of the 535 birds in Congress, use the saved office budgets and hire the fewer persons needed to implement the fewer laws that are needed to run this nation.

Alot of them are lawyers.

And they pass laws to tax and regulate you and me.  And this not only causes unwieldy big government but also hits you and me in the pocketbook.  And we have to spend alot more of our time complying with the regulations and filling out and filing the many tax forms that hit the average individual and business.

Did I hear somewhere that the paper for the printing of the tax code weighs 80 pounds?  And did I hear somewhere that something like 36,000 laws tell the American public what to do?

Pardon me, but is this not ridiculous?

Lawyers in America’s legislatures have spent the past 200 years drowning us in regulations and taxes (and tax returns).  We broke from the Mother Country to escape taxation without representation.  Now, we have taxation WITH representation, with the representation overwhelmingly in the form of sharks from the legal profession.  The major firms have HUNDREDS of lawyers.  There have to be grievances and violations right and left, all over the place, to generate work for all these attorneys. and fees, and more fees, and still more fees.  Even the law departments of our governmental agencies justify their employment by suing seemingly anybody with a big company and big buckos to be had.  Example, Bill Gates and Microsoft, a pathetic effort by our United States Justice Department.  Microsoft was forced to spend millions to defend itself from what primarily is a bogus federal lawsuit.  And the tobacco industry!  It does not matter whether you smoke or not.  The lawsuit against the tobacco industry really impressed the anti-smoking lobby.  But the lobby was a pawn.  It was all about fees for lawyers, and delayed, albeit unworthy, tax revenue for states.  It was all about money.  And that’s what lawyers are about.

Oh, sure, they “love” the law.  They keep society on a law-abiding course.  But the cost is prohibitive.

Many of the laws regulate without corresponding proper, effective enforcement.  The lawmakers whose name is on the bill signed into law can have back pain from patting themselves on the back for their acumen.  The rest of us must accept provincialism throughout our society.  And, without a lull, the lawyers keep collecting more and more fees.

Inside these NEWS items from GSS Tours is a report on how New Jersey regulates the motorcoaches that operate in the Garden State.  Just attacking the overbearing laws is a huge task.  This is why so many laws not only survive, but multiply in their applications.  The average small business owner does not have the time to fight the laws and regulations that so effectively pin him/her down.  And states pass laws that probably or in fact do violate the U. S. Constitution.  Included here, we contend, is the New Jersey law calling for unannounced bus inspections.

But here’s the rub:  you have to GET A LAWYER to fight the improper law.  You cannot ask the state lawyers to help you!  They only serve the Governor and the state legislature.  IMAGINE THAT!  Our taxes pay the salaries of all governmental employees, yet they do not really “work” for us, if they are lawyers.  Does anybody know this???

While this has practical application, it nevertheless unfairly hamstrings the private citizen who has a legitimate grievance.  Should not the public lawyers have the additional responsibility of evaluating and testing the rulings they previously had “approved”.  The governmental law departments have no “Customer Service Window” to help the public.

So, these bus inspections are conducted often almost daily in Atlantic City, and they likely are in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution.  But the Governor and the state legislature, who approved the state law(s) applicable, will not initiate a review of their skullduggery.  Why should they?  Admit they may be wrong?  Admit they are over-regulating?  And why should the New Jersey Attorney General test whether he, or his predecessor, made a mistake originally by declaring the legislation constitutional which ultimately is used in such a dictatorial fashion.  Yeah, in a letter to the Governor, it was suggested that the procedure reminds one of the stories from 60 years ago (read this  “Gestapo”).   It is unbelievable.

The situation certainly is no joke.  It’s the lawyers.

In Philadelphia and Pennsylvania, the cost of malpractice insurance is becoming prohibitive for the average family practitioner.  Costs have mushroomed in recent years, increasing into the many thousands of dollars.  The typical family doctor cannot keep up with the premiums.

Of course, you can blame the insurance companies, as they are partly to blame.  But primarily, it’s the lawyers.  The lawyers file their huge claims for anything from improper surgery to hot coffee in the lap.  Juries, especially those in Philadelphia, are generous to the poor plaintiffs.  The financial awards turn into huge rewards.  And the lawyers get one-third to one-half of the money.

Lawyers know their annual income is directly affected by how aggressive they pursue lawsuits.  It doesn’t matter if they are chasing ambulances or hammering doctors, the goal is the fee.  And the greater the fee, the bigger their home, the snazzier their car.  While lawyers cannot stand to hear the criticism, and hide behind a holier-than-thou attitude, lawyers are perhaps the greediest profession of all (and that even includes the sports pro athletes).  Greed fires malpractice claims.

The situation is getting worse, America.  You ought to recognize and realize that YOU are allowing this to happen.  Just keep on giving plaintiffs 1,000 times more than they may deserve.  And, pray tell, just WHO do you think, ultimately, is paying the bill for the greed?