quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 So I believe we can drop the wannabe calls at racism and prejudice and realize that it simply isn't in our countries' best interest to have a business like this in charge of 6 of our major ports anyway.

i don't think many Arab Americans would agree with you.

for you to imply that this country (UAE), is not much better than Saudi Arabia is problematic regarding an image that i think needs to be addressed in the Arab world.

i'm not saying you are, but i think democrats are caught in a strange place here criticizing this.

it makes for great politics thats for damn sure.

There is a rift happening between Bush and other Republicans!

The Republican party is in big trouble over this issue!

Bush might become an albatross! Personally, I find his decision to hand the ports over to UAE also to be very ill-judged and unfavorable! I will shortly post a separate aricle about UAE.

___________________
"The favorite American pastime is not baseball, it's moral crusades."

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Et tu Opus?

When it comes to securing our borders, hell yeah. I think you'll find me to be one of the biggest hawks in protecting our country, something that it seems Bush has continually overlooked with blatant disregard.

This is one of the biggest bipartisan issues I've seen for some time, and rightfully so. There is no politics involved here - it's pretty simple, cut and dry. Here's Frist offering a bill to halt the deal:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1645547

So what does your fearless GOP leader do? Why he tells Congress to "fuck off", YET AGAIN:

quote:

President Bush said Tuesday that a deal allowing an Arab company to take over six major U.S. seaports should go forward and that he would veto any congressional effort to stop it. The Senate's Republican leader had promised just such an effort a few hours earlier. "After careful review by our government, I believe the transaction ought to go forward," Bush told reporters who had traveled with him on Air Force One to Washington. "I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company. I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We'll treat you fairly.'" http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/st...-02-21-16-18-30

So what exactly was this "careful review"? Well let's ask Scotty boy:

quote:

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, my understanding, Les, is that this went through the national security review process under CFIUS, at the Department of Treasury. That is the agency that is responsible for overseeing such matters. And this includes a number of national security agencies -- the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, the Justice, among others, and there is a rigorous review that goes on for proposed foreign investments for national security concerns. And in terms of specifics relating to this, Treasury is the chair of this and you should direct those questions to Treasury. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...060216-1.html#m

Dept. of Defense? Really, Scotty? Must be news to Rummy:

quote:

QUESTION: Are you confident that any problems with security — from what you know, are you confident that any problems with security would not be greater with a UAE company running this than an American company? RUMSFELD: I am reluctant to make judgments based on the minimal amount of information I have because I just heard about this over the weekend. http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/21...-not-consulted/

Now you see, that's pretty interesting, especially when you consider the following by ThinkProgress:

quote:

Donald Rumsfeld, as Secretary of Defense, is a member of Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States. As such, he was one of the people who, according to the Treasury Department, unanimously approved the sale on February 13. How could do that when he didn’t even find out about the sale until last weekend?

Hmmm, indeed.

So don't you find it a tad bit interesting that Bush, the president who's never seen a bill he didn't like and has never vetoed not one fucking thing across his desk, is risking to veto this bipartisan issue raised by many, many prominent hard-line Republicans?

There's a few things I can think of here:

1. My Lefty part of me says to the bottom of my heart, "THANK YOU PRESIDENT BUSH!" This is truly the gift that's gonna keep on giving provided that he doesn't change course.

You combine this little bitch along with Katrina, Abramoff, Plamegate and Cheney's full disclosure of classified material to Libby, and the domestic spying issue, Bush is practically begging for a change in power in the Legislature. And it also brings attention to Bush's complete and utter inability to secure our borders and ports (5 fucking percent being checked, are you fucking kidding me?) I will not be able to thank him enough at this rate.

Rove wants to make National Security THE 2006 elections issue? Damn, what a gift.

2. Hi Congress, welcome to earth! What's wrong, you having problems getting your dumbshit leader to listen to you?

Well hey, how about that? Maybe, just maybe he never really gave a flying fucking shit about you in the first place? If this issue doesn't personify Bush's fucking disconnect with Congress, I don't know what will. But knowing the GOP and RNC, they'll likely cave in sooner or later, lest they want to be run out of Congress by their own party.

3. How fucking stupid can you get here Bush? Jesus, even Faux News is going ape shit with this one. Are you drinking again or something? I've noticed your jaw has been moving more frequently lately - got the sniffles? What the fuck is with you, buddy?

4. Did I mention how big of a fucking gift this little bitch is to the Democrats? Okay, good. Now, what the hell are the Democrats gonna do with it? I'll fucking become pregnant if they actually use this to their advantage, which of course the chances aren't too good for either.....

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

Last edited by MisterOpus1 on Feb-21-2006 at 22:16

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo i don't think many Arab Americans would agree with you. for you to imply that this country (UAE), is not much better than Saudi Arabia is problematic regarding an image that i think needs to be addressed in the Arab world.

Hmm, I'm not sure where I ever implied such a thing. But now that you mention Saudi Arabia, I'm game to discussing Bush being a little bitch to this country, the one that harbored 15 out of 19 hijackers if you are.

quote:

i'm not saying you are, but i think democrats are caught in a strange place here criticizing this. it makes for great politics thats for damn sure.

What do the Democrats have to do with Bush holding hands with the fucking Saudi Royal family, and all his family ties to the businesses of the Sauds?

I don't know if I speak for the Democrats or not. Strangely, I've heard much more criticism from Republicans on this issue. I've heard some Democrats argue about it, but it seems many are watching the GOP eat it's own, once again. I'd be hard pressed, however, to see any Democrat being in favor of Bush's actions, though - do you?

From my perspective, this is bad both for political and for National Security purposes. If this somehow becomes unfavorable to other Arab countries, so be it, but I have my doubts it would really go that far. I dunno, like you said it is interesting politics. But I don't want to fucking hand over ports of my country to a state-sponsored, government-run company that had so many ties to our #1 enemy right now, do you?

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r I would be warey of any foreign entity totally controlling all my major shipping ports, that's just being responsible to one's country. Foreign investment is one thing, total foreign ownership, especially in the realm of border security and immigration, is quite another. I'm not against foreign ownership but the sensitivity of this particular situation would definately bring up a red flag and it has.

thats odd these ports were managed by a forign company in any case, but this compnay happend to be Brtish.

now this british company is being bought by one from Dubai.

so the issue isnt soverginity, stop talking shit, its because a company form the middle east has bought a british company that was managing these ports.

therefore...ooooo scary muslims

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Given the present day circumstances and history of those particular countries, no. If those particular countries weren't so difficult to deal with, I would probably change my mind. How many of those listed countries have had problems with terrorist attacks? They are (or at least were) quite on the other side of that coin unfortunately, making them suspect when they reach out to invest in a 'target' country. It'll take time but eventually, when the world trusts them again, they're be able to invest without getting a side glance and a raised eyebrow from the host country. Unless you're Canada; we've just been whoring ourselves to the Chinese as of late...

- well coming from your point of veiw you should totally understand anti-americanism...and why people hate kfc (amogst other american symbols) all over the world...
- which other country causes as much bullshit all over the world than the US...and according to your reasoning this anti-american rationalsim is more than valid
- plus without this chineese whoring Canada would be not be doing as well, economically speaking...the immigrants and buisnessmen bring in a lot of money that dirversifies canadian economic interests away from the US.
- WASP power!

another thing...i really don't have problem with WASPyness...
if only you would disclose your subjectivity rather than protraying your opinions as without bias
it would be easier discussing things knowing where youre coming from

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Hmm, I'm not sure where I ever implied such a thing. But now that you mention Saudi Arabia, I'm game to discussing Bush being a little bitch to this country, the one that harbored 15 out of 19 hijackers if you are.

yeah, you did. the list you gave for UAE detractions could have been applied to any number of Arab allies that we have successfully and safely worked with for decades. but thats neither here nor there.

president Bush is a Saudi "Bitch" as much as any other American president in history. what a frikken sophomoric statement that is. really. sounds like you wanted that airbase in Rhyad to stay there

quote:

I'd be hard pressed, however, to see any Democrat being in favor of Bush's actions, though - do you?

i'd be hard pressed to find any issue that democrats wouldn't blindly jump on seeking a vulnerability of the administration.

quote:

From my perspective, this is bad both for political and for National Security purposes. If this somehow becomes unfavorable to other Arab countries, so be it, but I have my doubts it would really go that far. I dunno, like you said it is interesting politics. But I don't want to fucking hand over ports of my country to a state-sponsored, government-run company that had so many ties to our #1 enemy right now, do you?

so much for being a uniter, huh?
no. i don't have a proplem with it just because i know it's much more complicated and involved than what you say.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo yeah, you did. the list you gave for UAE detractions could have been applied to any number of Arab allies that we have successfully and safely worked with for decades. but thats neither here nor there.

Actually, that is both here and there. If such a list could be applied to other Arab countries, then it is up to this Administration to shut the fuck up and put its money to where it's mouth is. Remember this?:

"You're either with us or against us".

So if there are other government-sponsored terrorist countries, esp. like Al Qaeda, then perhaps we should be doing a little more than giving stupid fucking lip service political statements that go nowhere in reality?

And I thought you GOPers were supposedly tough on terrorism?

And while we're at it, let's take yet another gander at this lovely country that runs the corporation responsible for running 6 of our major ports. From 18 months ago:

quote:

Osama bin Laden's operatives still use this freewheeling city as a logistical hub three years after more than half the Sept. 11 hijackers flew directly from Dubai to the United States in the final preparatory stages for the attack. The recent arrest of an alleged top al-Qaeda combat coach is the latest sign that suspected members of the terrorist organization are among those who take advantage of travel rules that allow easy entry. Citizens of neighboring Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia can come to Dubai without visas, which other nationalities can get at the country's ports of entry. http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-09-02-terror-dubai_x.htm

Doesn't that just make you feel so swell inside? What a great place to be in charge of entrance into 6 of our major cities!

quote:

president Bush is a Saudi "Bitch" as much as any other American president in history. what a frikken sophomoric statement that is.

Oh really? Shall we dive into the politics of the Bush family and their deep and direct connections to the Saudi Royal family as well as their connections to oil? Could you be so kind as to point out those same connections to the Clintons? I'd be very interested.

quote:

really. sounds like you wanted that airbase in Rhyad to stay there

Why would I care? And how is that relevant to protecting our own borders in an appropriate manner?

quote:

i'd be hard pressed to find any issue that democrats wouldn't blindly jump on seeking a vulnerability of the administration.

Similarly, I'd be hard pressed to find Bush apologists such as yourself EVER get your nose out of this President's ass at any given point in time. I'd also be hard pressed to find Bush supporters such as yourself actually raise a descent argument without any character assassination and ad hominems.

But let's see here, given the fact that you have clearly vocal hard line GOPers like the governor of Maryland, New York, and Bill Frist go directly against Bush on this, I guess we'll be categorizing them in the same dipshit generalization that you just made about the Democrats now, won't we?

quote:

so much for being a uniter, huh?

A uniter with a government-sponsored country with ties to Al Qaeda?

Well gee, how silly of me to think we actually have to address those individuals who support the fucking bastards who actually attacked us! How ungracious of me to feel it necessary to be so cautious in extending my hand to such individuals.

I guess I just keep thinking that Saddam attacked us, and that this whole darn Al Qaeda thingy wasn't such a big deal afterall. I mean, who cares if bin Laden is still running free, and that now that place we attacked (Iraq) is the biggest al Qaeda terrorist breeding ground!

I mean, we got Saddam, right?

It sure is fun thinking like a Bush apologist! I love this memory hole!

quote:

no. i don't have a proplem with it just because i know it's much more complicated and involved than what you say.

Well now's your chance to explain yourself. And be sure to explain how your leaders like Bill Frist, the Maryland and New York Governor are so wrong with their assessment as well.



So everything just has to be a fucking bullshit attack with you, doesn't it? Even on this point which is clearly a bipartisan issue you just have no room for anyone else's thought but Bush's, do you? And don't you just get tired of lashing out at everything against Bush's stance on things? Surely there's a few issues you have with him, don't you? You can't possibly be up his ass on everything, can you? I honestly had a slight amount of room of doubt that this is how you would behave on every occasion. Unfortunate, and now's it's no longer surprising.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

Last edited by MisterOpus1 on Feb-22-2006 at 00:30

quote:

Originally posted by tamk - well coming from your point of veiw you should totally understand anti-americanism...and why people hate kfc (amogst other american symbols) all over the world...

First, lets get a few things straight (at least for your sake) since you're obviously new here...

a) I'm not an anti-American socialist Canadian, quite the opposite. I don't identify with the Canadian knee-jerked reaction of defining myself as being Canadian by being "anti-American".
b) I believe in the theories of capitalism and democracy more than any other systems.
c) I have more immigrant friends than anything else; I find they (normally) have a better view of the world depending on how well travelled they are.

I don't know why I necessarily need to explain myself to you just to have an opinion on a situation that obviously needs to be addressed, regardless of the country.
I would have made the same comments and opinion had the ports been in Canada. What if Canada was to sell their major Western ports to a major Chinese corporation?? You don't think there wouldn't be a backlash from that??

quote:

- which other country causes as much bullshit all over the world than the US...and according to your reasoning this anti-american rationalsim is more than valid

Against, you're mistaken. See above.

quote:

- plus without this chineese whoring Canada would be not be doing as well, economically speaking...the immigrants and buisnessmen bring in a lot of money that dirversifies canadian economic interests away from the US.

I agree that our dependance on the States is too much and in these days of the 'global economy', diversification is just a good idea.
However, the caveat is whom you deal with.
Let's not forget China is still a communist country and while it's almost a necessity to deal with them with the amount of cash they're throwing at everything, they still have an atrocious human rights record. We should not be rewarding them for that...
This is getting off topic however, I merely mentioned China to prove a point regarding foriegn ownership.

quote:

- WASP power!

Dood...I'm not even WASP so this is totally irrelavant and rather ignorant actually...

I think you're missing the big picture here.
UAE is not the U.K.
The U.K. is not a question when it comes to foreign ownership because they're proved themselves in the past to be allies of the host nation.
The UAE is not necessarly known for such staunch support in any global situation other than the liberation of Kuwait.
I will admit that the UAE is probably the warmest of the Middle Eastern countries to deal with when you take into account their history with the Britsh (the UAE was a protectorate of the British until 1971) however, we're talking about a major, major deal.
There have been no assurances or reports to the public regarding the deal.

quote:

President Bush said Tuesday that the deal allowing an Arab company to take over six major U.S. seaports should go forward and that he would veto any congressional effort to stop it. "After careful review by our government, I believe the transaction ought to go forward," Bush told reporters who had traveled with him on Air Force One to Washington. "I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company. I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We'll treat you fairly.'"

>>Source<<

I understand what he's trying to do but he simply hasn't made the right reassurances and that my friend is why the red flags are going up...

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 "You're either with us or against us".

so which is it? is it "here and the there" or is it "lip service based on non-reality" i don't think it's either. i don't think it's relevant to this discussion. the only "reality" it marginalizes is a global relationship with trusted partners economically and diplomatically if used in the wrong context like you are doing.

quote:

And I thought you GOPers were supposedly tough on terrorism?

i think all Americans should be tough on terrorism. why Dems aren't i have no idea. i don't see this as a partisaned issue, although the politics of it interests me. i realize that it's just part of it but it's just so easy to take a tough stand on terrorism in an election year on both sides of the aisle.

quote:

And while we're at it, let's take yet another gander at this lovely country that runs the corporation responsible for running 6 of our major ports. From 18 months ago. Doesn't that just make you feel so swell inside? What a great place to be in charge of entrance into 6 of our major cities!

sure. they did a lot of their training in Germany and Great Britain and here, recieved money from there. used an ATM here, stayed at this dude's house, had some beers in New Jersey. so the fuck what?

quote:

Oh really? Shall we dive into the politics of the Bush family and their deep and direct connections to the Saudi Royal family as well as their connections to oil? Could you be so kind as to point out those same connections to the Clintons? I'd be very interested.

i'm not going to go off the moonbat end with you about this cause it's not even tangent to the subject. suffice it to say that as president, he has been no different thatn any other.

quote:

Why would I care? And how is that relevant to protecting our own borders in an appropriate manner?

really? then let me ask you this. what do you think the implications would have been if we didn't pull our forces off the Saudi peninsula? you can call him a "bitch" for doing so but how stupid would that be seeing how you're so righteous about defending our homeland.

quote:

Similarly, I'd be hard pressed to find Bush apologists such as yourself EVER get your nose out of this President's ass at any given point in time. I'd also be hard pressed to find Bush supporters such as yourself actually raise a descent argument without any character assassination and ad hominems.

more insults huh? where are we? DemocraticUnderground.com, the frikken DailyKos? can't a man think logically...with an open mind about this. take into account all things on a global scale without all the xenophobia?
fukkin moonbats dude

quote:

But let's see here, given the fact that you have clearly vocal hard line GOPers like the governor of Maryland, New York, and Bill Frist go directly against Bush on this, I guess we'll be categorizing them in the same dipshit generalization that you just made about the Democrats now, won't we?

no. the only "dipshit generalization" was my comment about you saying we shouldn't have a country like this running our ports and how many Arab Americans see it differently, which after a comment like that, i still stand by.

what is your opinion of Singapore?

quote:

So everything just has to be a fucking bullshit attack with you, doesn't it?

again, when did i ever attack you about this?