Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

what a great idea.

ok, lets take the most likely setting for a terrorist attack by nuclear or biological means, our U.S. ports, and then we'll take the one country with suspected ties to al qaeda and suspected of helping to fund 9/11...and have them run the ports!

please, help me understand the logic here, because my brain hurts

Considering the massive uproar people have made over this, I can't understand why he's being so obtuse about it. But, Bush says he'll veto any opposition to the plan. And, since he's not vetoed a single bill/proposal/etc since he took office, I have to wonder why no one, not even his supporters, aren't beginning to see that this man and his administration are concerned with only two things: power and money.

He doesn't give a shit about the safety of the American people. When this whole thing started, it was "Well, we can't discriminate against a country just because it is an Arab country!" -The hell we can't. Now it's "Well, just trust us. We would never just give a company that was controlled by an Arab country free reign over our ports! Trust your government!" -We did, and 3000 plus people died on Sept 11th.

I'm beginning to think that Cheney shot that guy in the face on purpose, just to cover up the week of important news that surrounded it.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
He doesn't give a shit about the safety of the American people. When this whole thing started, it was "Well, we can't discriminate against a country just because it is an Arab country!"

Bullshit. Isn't Iraq an Arab country? Discriminate my arse.

Originally posted by PVS
what a great idea.

ok, lets take the most likely setting for a terrorist attack by nuclear or biological means, our U.S. ports, and then we'll take the one country with suspected ties to al qaeda and suspected of helping to fund 9/11...and have them run the ports!

please, help me understand the logic here, because my brain hurts


Ahh the irony....lets control the ports in the middle east with our navy but just to make it fair you guys can control our ports but since you have no navy to speak of here how about a pass for good measure I mean I am certain there is no "bad blood" in the middle east twards us at all,

I see Im not the only person who watches the Daily Show

Originally posted by PVS
what a great idea.

ok, lets take the most likely setting for a terrorist attack by nuclear or biological means, our U.S. ports, and then we'll take the one country with suspected ties to al qaeda and suspected of helping to fund 9/11...and have them run the ports!

please, help me understand the logic here, because my brain hurts

There is no logic. I know that doesn't help. Just thought I'd fill ya in on that point though.

Bush is truly amazing. The shit he can pull off and not be impeached or shot is truly impressive.

It's like a guy standing in front of you telling you he's gonna kick you in the nuts, then he kicks you and you thank him for his time and wait for him to kick you in the nuts again.


I just don't get it.

Bush apparently didnt know, and didnt find out until he watched the news

Originally posted by RedAlertv2
Bush apparently didnt know, and didnt find out until he watched the news

That's what they all say. 'I didn't know', 'No one told me'.

It's bullshit.

Originally posted by KharmaDog

It's like a guy standing in front of you telling you he's gonna kick you in the nuts, then he kicks you and you thank him for his time and wait for him to kick you in the nuts again.

imagine if it was him instead of roosevelt in ww2. he would have had the japanese patrolling pearl harbor.

Well You can sleep safe knowing that even if your killed in an act of terrorism you die a patriot knowing that somewhere bush and co are turning a profit to keep America the only superpower...

... While If I die its just to keep Bush happy... I won't count as a patriot...

It's interesting that the UAE 'donated' $100million in aid in response to Katrina, then this came along...

What's the confusion? This was done by the Powers That Be for the same reason the Powers That Be do Anything, regardless of nationality, race, religion, etc.
Answer: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

And of course, now, the story is that Bush didn't even know about it until it hit the news! How can this man look at himself in the mirror? What kind of scrupples can a man have to actually embarrass himself and say that, as the leader of our nation, he had no idea that his administration was about to turn port security over to a country that recgonizes AlQueda as a legitimate political entity?

I guess looking ignorant if preferable to looking corrupt.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I guess looking ignorant if preferable to looking corrupt.

How true.

reagan always did the same thing, i mean teflon president? corrupt, old lying murderer is more like it.

Originally posted by PVS
what a great idea.

ok, lets take the most likely setting for a terrorist attack by nuclear or biological means, our U.S. ports, and then we'll take the one country with suspected ties to al qaeda and suspected of helping to fund 9/11...and have them run the ports!

please, help me understand the logic here, because my brain hurts

apparently the UK runs some of the US ports...the same allegations of ties to al qaeda (not politically of course) and the funding of al qaeda in the form of al qaeda members recieving state benefits...

go...bomb us...you know you want to

I don't get the problem, what is happening?

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't get the problem, what is happening?

it seems that a bunch of people are getting their undies in a twist because an arab company is running a US port

strange though that many of these people are absolutely against branding all arabs/muslims as potential terrorists...yet this is exactly what seems to be going on in this thread...albeit it in "coded speak"

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-hanania2606feb26,0,3518317.story?coll=orl-opinion-headlines

Yeah, I think so too....its hard being a liberal nowadays.

Originally posted by PVS
what a great idea.

ok, lets take the most likely setting for a terrorist attack by nuclear or biological means, our U.S. ports, and then we'll take the one country with suspected ties to al qaeda and suspected of helping to fund 9/11...and have them run the ports!

please, help me understand the logic here, because my brain hurts

There IS no logic. Its just a ticking timebomb. (pun intended)

I just hope people realize that it's not only the states involved, as shocking as that is, there's also ports in Vancouver, Britain, France, and Buenos Aires that this company is going to take over. Not to mention they already control ports in Australia, China, India, Venezuela, etc.

"The reaction in the United States has occurred in no other country in the world," Mr. Bilkey said.

In my opinion, it's a business like any other kind. These aren't some people off a back alley wanting to buy these ports so they could smuggle in terrorists. It's a well respected global company, that has done and will probably do the same thing in many other countries, the states are not the first.

Not to mention, they've shown more than a small share of concern by allowing the states to run their security checks and such even though they were supposed to take over on Thursday already.

And even without Arabs running these ports yet, the security is already sorely lacking, so instead of accusing the businessmen, who are most likely in it for the money, of terrorism, I think the states should really first take a look at the security measures they employ now and people should realize just how unsafe they already are in their own country, and not use the whole potential terrorism thing as a cover for their own personal prejudice against Arabs.

Source

Originally posted by jaden101

strange though that many of these people are absolutely against branding all arabs/muslims as potential terrorists...yet this is exactly what seems to be going on in this thread...albeit it in "coded speak"

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-hanania2606feb26,0,3518317.story?coll=orl-opinion-headlines

and here is how low the right will stoop.
whether or not you bring this up for the sake of irony,
or if you really are that toolish i dont know.

yes thats right. the UAE was blacked out of the 9-11 report and
are suspected of helping to fund attacks on u.s. soil and past attacks on u.s. troops and embassy bombings,
they dont recognise isral as a state but however respect al quada
as a political entity. aned bush's family just happens to have long standing ties with them which im sure have nothing to do with anything since its all just coincidence.

but you're right jaden. its bigotry and racism. how dare anyone just assume that they are the UAE just because they are the UAE. its all just coded speek. right. ok. thanks for playing.

I think it'S really sad in the US, the liberal people hat Bush soo much that they oppose everything he does (or doesn't). Isn't that just a Business deal like any other? What is wrong with it?

whats wrong with it?
not paying attention?

Originally posted by PVS
whats wrong with it?
not paying attention?

Guess I am not. What happened. Did a country take over your ports? Or a Company? And who gave the ports? Were they sold? And what exactly is the big deal anyways?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Guess I am not. What happened. Did a country take over your ports? Or a Company? And who gave the ports? Were they sold? And what exactly is the big deal anyways?

gee, i dont know. maybe some day when im on fire from radiation burning ill reply to this post in a more debatable fashion and we can explore this supposed separation of business and politics when the two go hand in hand.

Originally posted by PVS
and here is how low the right will stoop.
whether or not you bring this up for the sake of irony,
or if you really are that toolish i dont know.

yes thats right. the UAE was blacked out of the 9-11 report and
are suspected of helping to fund attacks on u.s. soil and past attacks on u.s. troops and embassy bombings,
they dont recognise isral as a state but however respect al quada
as a political entity. aned bush's family just happens to have long standing ties with them which im sure have nothing to do with anything since its all just coincidence.

but you're right jaden. its bigotry and racism. how dare anyone just assume that they are the UAE just because they are the UAE. its all just coded speek. right. ok. thanks for playing.

first off...they postponed INDEFINITELY the purchase of the company that currently owns the ports

secondly...the company has owned and operated ports throughout the world including Los Angeles for years...any terrorists brought in dirty bombs through there yet?...no

quite simply you are branding the owners and operators, and even worse, the people who work at the ports as somehow being involved in terrorist activity.

given that its highly improbable that even if the DPA did take over some east coast ports...they aren't going to sack all the employees and employ a bunch of al qaeda sympathisers

of course this is all beyond your comprehension and once again when you've been shown to be a hypocritical idiot you resort to genius comments and insults such as "toolish"

you also like to accuse the Bush administration of scaremongering yet you are pretty much saying that this company are actually proactively trying to get terrorists into America to kill people

thats scaremongering lies if ever i've seen it

Originally posted by PVS
gee, i dont know. maybe some day when im on fire from radiation burning ill reply to this post in a more debatable fashion and we can explore this supposed separation of business and politics when the two go hand in hand. I really don't see your problem. Will this be bad for America? And what is the governments involvement in that? Who owned the Ports before? Who will own them now? And what are you so upset about?

Reading the thread probably adviseable at this point, Bardock.

As for the thread itself: I find myself in the position of people like PVS and KharmaDog, dumbfounded.

That said, security here in the UK isn't exactly asstight. Whilst I believe the police force did a tremendous job of bringing the terrorists responsible for the July 7th bombings to justice, it's gone downhill from there. On the tube especially, you can sometimes just walk through ticket barriers without being monitored.

It's unacceptable.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Reading the thread probably adviseable at this point, Bardock.

As for the thread itself: I find myself in the position of people like PVS and KharmaDog, dumbfounded.

That said, security here in the UK isn't exactly asstight. Whilst I believe the police force did a tremendous job of bringing the terrorists responsible for the July 7th bombings to justice, it's gone downhill from there. On the tube especially, you can sometimes just walk through ticket barriers without being monitored.

It's unacceptable.

-AC

Now, now, lets be realistic, how many people died in acts of terrorism in the last couple years? You probably have a better chance to be killed by a falling coconut.
Oh, and I read the Thread. There's not sa single piece of Information. Just people repeating how stupid Bush ios, and what an ass Bush is and as if we didn't know even how dumb Bush is.....

Would be nice to know what he did, just to see, if it is one of the "Lets hate Bush" threads or one of the "Bush really pulled a stupid, again" threads.

The US ports were bought by a company that apparanty likes Al Quada... People are pissed off over it.

And in a way I can see there point, however to think that all the employees of the company are corrupt and that people will now be using US ports to smuggle in terrorist or weapons, or do so more then before is IMO foolish, a company has to live to. There are probably very few bussines man that would risk losing a contract like that just to kill some random people they don't know.

So infact one company bought the rights for the ports off another company? I can't see how anyone can complai about that. I mean although Bush is certainly the Devil, to allow one company buy another is one of the most liberal things one can do.

good news for P&O

Originally posted by furryman
good news for P&O

indeed...Dubai ports world owns 70% of the shares for P+O

hey...i own shares in P+O too...guess that makes me a terrorist as well

well jaden, if your name was blacked out of a few pages of the official 9-11 report by the administration, you were suspectied of helping fund the attacks, you refused to witness isreal as a state but at the same time respected al qaeda as a legitament political body, and your brother just happened to mastermind terrorist attacks including 9-11 and a leader of al qaeda as well...i still wouldnt just label you a terrorist for the sake of due process. however i would have certain reservations about allowing you and your business partners run the most sensative area of u.s. with regards to importing potential WMDs and other security hazards. maybe its just me being an arab hater

...or perhaps just a matter of me exhibiting greater common sense than that of a carrot. maybe you should give this 'common sense' thing a try, and see if it suits you.

Originally posted by Fishy
The US ports were bought by a company that apparanty likes Al Quada... People are pissed off over it.

oh we dont know that they like them. all we know is that they recognise them. so perhaps they simply recognise a political entity and forsake all political passions in order to remain objective and neutral....unless of coarse its isreal, because why should they have to recognise the evil empire of the jews

Originally posted by PVS
well jaden, if your name was blacked out of a few pages of the official 9-11 report by the administration, you were suspectied of helping fund the attacks, you refused to witness isreal as a state but at the same time respected al qaeda as a legitament political body, and your brother just happened to mastermind terrorist attacks including 9-11 and a leader of al qaeda as well...i still wouldnt just label you a terrorist for the sake of due process. however i would have certain reservations about allowing you and your business partners run the most sensative area of u.s. with regards to importing potential WMDs and other security hazards. maybe its just me being an arab hater

...or perhaps just a matter of me exhibiting greater common sense than that of a carrot. maybe you should give this 'common sense' thing a try, and see if it suits you.



oh we dont know that they like them. all we know is that they recognise them. so perhaps they simply recognise a political entity and forsake all political passions in order to remain objective and neutral....unless of coarse its isreal, because why should they have to recognise the evil empire of the jews

so you ARE saying that DPA is corrupt and involved in terrorism?

mmm

think you better go and check your facts about the company before making those kinds of accusations

perhaps you should just quietly leave this thread safe in the knowledge that you've been shown up again...like you did with the guantanamo thread and the iraq civil war thread

off you pop son

Originally posted by jaden101
so you ARE saying that DPA is corrupt and involved in terrorism?

mmm

think you better go and check your facts about the company before making those kinds of accusations

perhaps you should just quietly leave this thread safe in the knowledge that you've been shown up again...like you did with the guantanamo thread and the iraq civil war thread

off you pop son

so you ARE putting words in my mouth dispite a directly contradicting post?
how weak and lame!

and a self declaration of victory with an addition to other made up victories from other threads. would you like to post some 'pwned' pics? would be just as relevant.

:edit: oh and before you squeek this out your back end:
"think you better go and check your facts about the company before making those kinds of accusations" please post any contradictory evidence on the UAE, before making such a claim and wasting my/your/everyone's time. kthx

Originally posted by PVS
so you ARE putting words in my mouth dispite a directly contradicting post?
how weak and lame!

and a self declaration of victory with an addition to other made up victories from other threads. would you like to post some 'pwned' pics? would be just as relevant.

why not flip the argument on it's head...

couple of question...would you let Northern Ireland run your ports?

why run your own ports given that American has had it's own record of in house terrorism...timothy mcveigh...is he representative of all americans?

lets not forget the fact the DPA also carries cargo from many other middle eastern countries which would give the US intelligence on those countries shipping details

if it was merely the risk of foreign countries running US ports then its surprising there was no uproar about the japanese, singapore, danish and UK companies that also run US ports...hell even the chinese government owns companies which run US ports...i dont see any uproar about a communist superpower running US ports

do you forget about the US being allowed to use the UAE for staging missions in the war of terror...including against al qaeda in afghanistan?...this includes the permanent housing of the US 5th naval fleet

whats even more bizzare is that if you'd bothered to find out the facts...DPW isn't taking control of any ports...merely some of the operating equiptment within the ports and thus any inspection of cargo for safety and security would still be carried out by the US themselves through the cities own resources and the US ports authority and dept of homeland security

quite simply you're trying to score point against Bush anyway to can because it's what you do...and quite frankly it's pathetic

In my opinion, one of the defining points in this debate is the future. I, personally, don't care about the past. It is irrelevent to me how this company has run it's operations in the past. But, this debate is less about this companies track record and more about teh defining words of the current administration. The Bush administration has repeatedly talked of how this world changed after 9/11 and it's behavior in this matter is contradictory to that soundbite. Forming massive government agencies to watch over our saftey and then they leave the ports in teh hands of a foreign nation!

I don't have any problems with people of Arabic descent, but the truth remains that it is people of Arabic descent that are responsible for the current waves of terrorism. And, this isn't the "code speak" we've been discussing recently. It's the truth. I live in San Francisco, but my family lives in North Carolina. So, I spend a lot of time flying across this country. I hate to admit to it, but every time I am standing in line to board a plane and I see more than one Arabic man standing in line, my stomach tightens.

If there is a foreign company, ANY FOREIGN company, running our ports, then this administration has failed the people of this nation. Not only has it failed the people of this country, but it has lied to the people of this country.

Originally posted by jaden101
why not flip the argument on it's head...

couple of question...would you let Northern Ireland run your ports?

how is that possible? do you mean would i allow a u.k. company to run the ports? i guess so. so long as whichever organization was involved had no suspected ties to the i.r.a. or any other extremists....yeah why not. your point?

Originally posted by jaden101
why run your own ports given that American has had it's own record of in house terrorism...timothy mcveigh...is he representative of all americans?

but there are no direct ties between the governinment and mcveigh.
im still not sure the point you're trying to make, if any.

Originally posted by jaden101
lets not forget the fact the DPA also carries cargo from many other middle eastern countries which would give the US intelligence on those countries shipping details

well, al qaeda has the BEST intelligence on al qaeda, so let them run the ports instead.

Originally posted by jaden101
if it was merely the risk of foreign countries running US ports then its surprising there was no uproar about the japanese, singapore, danish and UK companies that also run US ports...hell even the chinese government owns companies which run US ports...i dont see any uproar about a communist superpower running US ports

never expressed any comfort over china having a hand in u.s. port operations and security. the only comfort i see is that they wouldnt dare disrupt ties with the u.s. since we both thrive off of eachother, and such mutual economic prosperity is not based on a single, inevitably obsolete and eventually expendable resource. no, i still dont find comfort...but the idea lacks the feeling of immediate threat as is the case with this imho.

Originally posted by jaden101
do you forget about the US being allowed to use the UAE for staging missions in the war of terror...including against al qaeda in afghanistan?...this includes the permanent housing of the US 5th naval fleet

after the fact they that initially refused to cooperate with the treasury dept when investigating 9/11 funding which went through the UAE banking system. but i guess that never happened, like all my other lies although:

-"The United Arab Emirates was one of only three countries that recognized the Taliban militia as the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan in the 1990s" -AP

-"The Saudis, officially and privately, sent millions of dollars to the Taliban, and Pakistan was instrumental in the rise of the Taliban in the early 1990s, helping fund and organize the militia. The Emirati government did not provide such large official aid, though private individuals did give an unknown amount of funds. Before the Sept. 11 attacks, Emirati officials would often go to Afghanistan as guests of the Taliban to take part in hunting and falconing trips."

http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=500&sid=709086

-(from an official UAE site, mind you) "The three entry requirements of obtaining a visa in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and its seven emirates (Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah, Ajman, Umm Al Quwain, Ras Al Khaimah, and Fujairah) are that you are not a citizen of Israel, that your passport doesn't contain Israeli stamps, and that your passport is valid for at least 6 months before your arrival. Information about the various UAE visa categories are explained in detail below."

http://guide.theemiratesnetwork.com/living/visa.php


Originally posted by jaden101
whats even more bizzare is that if you'd bothered to find out the facts...

...said the pot to the kettle

Originally posted by jaden101
quite simply you're trying to score point against Bush anyway to can because it's what you do...and quite frankly it's pathetic

whats pathetic is calling me a liar based on nothing, and the way you will avoid the fact that i just squashed your claim utterly.

whats pathetic is being a coward and trying to cop me out with a cheap PC mask, when you know damn well this has to do with the UAE's shadey politics and dealings and has nothing to do with religion nor skin color. i find your accusations of racism/religious bigotry intensely hypocritical and disgusting.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I don't have any problems with people of Arabic descent, but the truth remains that it is people of Arabic descent that are responsible for the current waves of terrorism. And, this isn't the "code speak" we've been discussing recently. It's the truth. I live in San Francisco, but my family lives in North Carolina. So, I spend a lot of time flying across this country. I hate to admit to it, but every time I am standing in line to board a plane and I see more than one Arabic man standing in line, my stomach tightens.

People flip out at this kind of mentality but it's completely true.

Why spend time putting up fronts of "random selection" when you know you are looking for arab terrorists? People so obviously or arabic origin and/or descent are the ones who should be getting searched.

Innocent people's lives are at stake here, let's not waste time on checking a million people because some of those million feel singled out because they're arabic. Sorry to say, but yes, that is how it has to be. Arabic people are the ones doing it (of course not all), so check the arabic people. Don't check a white man or a black man just to save face, what's the point? If you know that the suspects will come from a particular group, narrow it down.

-AC

i mean the Northern Ireland governing bodies...given that Northern Ireland is considered a peaceful country...yet the ties of sinn fein to the IRA and terrorism throughout the years is extremely well documented



any direct ties between say...mohammed atta and the DPW...uumm...no...and given that there is no link between the hundreds of other terrorists and suicide bombers who committed atrocities in bali, london, madrid and all the other attacks with the DPW then i would say you're making pointless accusations

i noticed you completely ignored the fact that DPW already operate in Los Angeles...i would expect no less from you




ZZZOOOOOOOMMMMM...did you see it PVS...the point going flying over your head again...seeing as many security experts have said that the deal with DPW would actually make the US MORE safe as it would mean better tracking of cargo heading to the US from countries in the middle east

catch it that time?




we'll see if it remains the case in 10 years when it's estimated that China's economy will be larger than the US...




still ignoring the fact the UAE has also provided more intelligence on al qaeda and allowed more missions in the war on terror to be staged from their land that any other supposed "ally"

http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/fs/2006/61914.htm
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48970




perhaps it escaped you that every time we have one of our fun little debates...i provide links everytime...you have done so...mmm...let me count...uuuhhh...once





so why dont you actually find out about their contemporary politics as opposed to bringing up pre 9/11 policies of the country

the US politics have changed considerably since 2001...the UK's policies have changed massively also...

and strangely enough...so has the UAE

to balance my own viewpoint. i will say one thing i found...pertinent...from one of the links i provided....a potential conflict of interest

see, as usual, you avoid all points, or claim them to be superficial without directly acknowledging them, which by the way i posted to thwart your accusations of lying.

this is why i dont debate with you.

because its just you beating your chest, throwing out left handed insults, all the time never acknowledging nor standing corrected on your accusations. why should i bother with you then? your method of 'winning' a debate seems to be to throw out as many accusations of lies, idiocy, racism and everything else that is unsavory, and when those accusations are confronted and knocked down you pretend you never made them. the proof is all here for anyone to see.

but we'll just say you "won", ok?
whatever gets you through the night.

lets go over the points you've ignored so far

the fact the DWP have an impecable track record and have had no complaints from any country ever

the fact that they already operate in the US and have dont without incident

the fact that they wont even be responsible for security at the ports anyway

the fact that they withdrew their offer because of non sensical objections that many political commentators agree is based on nothing but islamophobia and racism

the fact that other questionable governments also own and operate ports in the US including singapore which has a track record of islamic extremism

the fact that many of the people involved in the most high profile terrorist attacks including and since 9/11 have not only not been from the UAE but haven't even been of middle eastern or arabic origin (many have been african)

again ignoring UAE's role in the war on terror since 9/11

remember the first comment towards me on this thread?...shall i remind you



so who is it that really resorts to the insult when their argument is so easily slapped down



show me where i denied making a statement...oh thats right...you cant...because i didn't

i'll ask you one more time to show some evidence that DPW have been actively involved in terrorism and are a threat to the US...given that we both know there isn't any...we can safely conclude that your fears of nuclear annihilation because of a port full of al qaeda operatives is completely unfounded and based on irrational prejudice against arabs...given your lack of care about other questionable influences in your country

Originally posted by jaden101
of course this is all beyond your comprehension and once again when you've been shown to be a hypocritical idiot you resort to genius comments and insults such as "toolish"

yes, i see now. its all a cross-thread grudge. well get the sand out of your bits and quit derailing discussions for the sake of attacking others. if you took acception to my comments, you should have addressed them. i just may have taken them back. or you could have reported me. fair enough.

but instead you fire back with insults and name calling, ON TOP OF accusations of lies, distortion, and racism which are completely baseless and which i have already brushed aside. after my last point i had to come to the realisation that not only was i posting sources for the sake of my own credibilty rather than topic relevance, but that you would certainly ignore the very reason for which i posted them. to disagree is one thing, but you cross the line by accusing, and then cry because i refered to your methods as "toolish" in some other thread.
grow up.

Well you could try answering the points made, instead of fighting over some insults...

As it stands now, we have very little prove to assume any of what you claim is true when Jaden has provided links that say otherwise. Like or hate him, I don't care. But you haven't provided much prove in this thread yet, if any really. So why would we assume the UAE is going to help terrorist bomb the US?

Originally posted by Fishy
So why would we assume the UAE is going to help terrorist bomb the US?

Should we assume they won't?

As I have said before, why should we allow ANY foreign country to have open access to our ports? I think the biggest issue brought to teh attention of the public by this issue is that there are foreign countries in control of our ports.

If the Bush administration is going to allow a foreign government easy access to our nations key strategic sites, then why are we "fighting them over there so we don't have to figh them here"? Maybe we should have gotten our own country in order before we tried to "spread freedom" around the world?

Because your country is one that works for money, like most capatalistic country's the one that brings forward the best terms of service, gives the US most money should get the contract. Unless of course you want foreign bussines to be stopped from controlling important parts of the US industry which I can understand, however that would require an isolation thing and the problem would be a lot bigger then just the ports that we hear about in this particulair thread. And yes you should assume they won't, if there is absolutely nothing to suggest that they ever have and or will.

Originally posted by Fishy
Because your country is one that works for money, like most capatalistic country's the one that brings forward the best terms of service, gives the US most money should get the contract. Unless of course you want foreign bussines to be stopped from controlling important parts of the US industry which I can understand, however that would require an isolation thing and the problem would be a lot bigger then just the ports that we hear about in this particulair thread. And yes you should assume they won't, if there is absolutely nothing to suggest that they ever have and or will.

Your argument is plausible in a pre-9/11 world. However, Sept the 11th has been so overused to promote the current administrations agenda, that your argument no longer holds water. Isolationism is one thing. Sure, I would love to just remove all foreign influences on teh middle east, let them slaughter each other and then go in and barter a trade deal with the ones left alive at teh end of the day. (and if you think about it, that's really all they want. Is to be left alone to handle their shit and come out on the other side secure in the course of events) However, you seem to be missing my point. In a post-9/11 world, there should not even be a debate about which country runs the ports of the United States! It should be the United States!

Capitolism falls by the wayside in a debate over national security, in a debate over the life of even one American citizen. Or, at least it should. And comparing a company in northern Europe deciding which light bulb should be manufactured v. another nation controlling access to this nation via our ports is a ridiculous comparison. Descisions can be made in person, over a cell phone or via telecommunications, but allowing another nation to control our ports is basically the same thing as saying that our countrys' airports should be monitored by the "enemy". I don't claim to know the intentions of the UAE, nor does it matter. This debate is about national security, and the current administration (as well as those in teh past apparently) think that it should exist as a craps shoot. Maybe they will, maybe they won't? Where's the logic in that mindset?

Your argument could be considered valid if the "enemy" wasn't spending it's time trying to figure out where this country is most vunerable. Again, should we just assume that the UAE are going to kick ass and take names for the security of this country, the same way we are supposed to be? Hell no.

As far as I'm concerned, there is only one country that shold have any significant influenence over the ports of this country, and that's America. That goes for the british, the arabs, the koreans, the chinese, the peruvians! Where the fu*k is GW? He can't be that far corrupt that he doesn't understand that. You know, Deano's consipacy ideas become more and more valid every time I hear someone argue the logic of this descision.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
People flip out at this kind of mentality but it's completely true.

Why spend time putting up fronts of "random selection" when you know you are looking for arab terrorists? People so obviously or arabic origin and/or descent are the ones who should be getting searched.

Innocent people's lives are at stake here, let's not waste time on checking a million people because some of those million feel singled out because they're arabic. Sorry to say, but yes, that is how it has to be. Arabic people are the ones doing it (of course not all), so check the arabic people. Don't check a white man or a black man just to save face, what's the point? If you know that the suspects will come from a particular group, narrow it down.

-AC



Searching non-Arabs just to look good is a waste of time, ese. It may seem racist to the recipient, but its unfortunately necessary and prudent.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
As I have said before, why should we allow ANY foreign country to have open access to our ports?


We shouldn't. Simple as that.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Your argument is plausible in a pre-9/11 world. However, Sept the 11th has been so overused to promote the current administrations agenda, that your argument no longer holds water. Isolationism is one thing. Sure, I would love to just remove all foreign influences on teh middle east, let them slaughter each other and then go in and barter a trade deal with the ones left alive at teh end of the day. (and if you think about it, that's really all they want. Is to be left alone to handle their shit and come out on the other side secure in the course of events) However, you seem to be missing my point. In a post-9/11 world, there should not even be a debate about which country runs the ports of the United States! It should be the United States!

Capitolism falls by the wayside in a debate over national security, in a debate over the life of even one American citizen. Or, at least it should. And comparing a company in northern Europe deciding which light bulb should be manufactured v. another nation controlling access to this nation via our ports is a ridiculous comparison. Descisions can be made in person, over a cell phone or via telecommunications, but allowing another nation to control our ports is basically the same thing as saying that our countrys' airports should be monitored by the "enemy". I don't claim to know the intentions of the UAE, nor does it matter. This debate is about national security, and the current administration (as well as those in teh past apparently) think that it should exist as a craps shoot. Maybe they will, maybe they won't? Where's the logic in that mindset?

Your argument could be considered valid if the "enemy" wasn't spending it's time trying to figure out where this country is most vunerable. Again, should we just assume that the UAE are going to kick ass and take names for the security of this country, the same way we are supposed to be? Hell no.

As far as I'm concerned, there is only one country that shold have any significant influenence over the ports of this country, and that's America. That goes for the british, the arabs, the koreans, the chinese, the peruvians! Where the fu*k is GW? He can't be that far corrupt that he doesn't understand that. You know, Deano's consipacy ideas become more and more valid every time I hear someone argue the logic of this descision.

If thats your opinion I can understand it, I thought you and others here were just against the UAE. And I see no reason to stop them from controlling ports unless of course you just don't want to give anybody ports, which you don't.

Originally posted by Fishy
If thats your opinion I can understand it, I thought you and others here were just against the UAE. And I see no reason to stop them from controlling ports unless of course you just don't want to give anybody ports, which you don't.

See no reason? Control from outside is a pretty ovious reason! WTF?

god how forgetful you are...perhaps you better go have a look over THIS thread



this is the first time i've seen you post links...it's not for your own credibility but to back up your arguments....as for relevance...there based on the actions of the country pre 9/11 with regards to recognising the taliban etc...since 9/11 the UAE has assisted in the war on terror more than any other country in the world...but again you quietly skip over this fact to further your unfounded accusations that DPW is somehow conspiring to commit terrorist acts against the US

if your arguments are based on prejudice then SHOW ME SOME PROOF OF WRONG DOING BY DPW that justifies your concerns...thats all i'm asking and is all i've ever asked...and of coure questioned and highlighted your inability or refusal to do so





except of course that many of the terrorists involved in madrid,london and others weren't even arabs...so really...it is racist to search only arabs



so why is there no fuss over China, Singapore, Denmark, UK etc that all run ports in the US...simple...prejudice



see above question



PVS...your last 2 posts have had nothing to do with the topic...both of mine have...its quite clear then that you have no answer to the question i gave you that justifies your position about DPW...

Originally posted by jaden101
strange though that many of these people are absolutely against branding all arabs/muslims as potential terrorists...yet this is exactly what seems to be going on in this thread...albeit it in "coded speak"

accusation of racism/bigotry. challenge refuted with valid info regarding IMMEDIATE post 9-11 negligence in cooperation with the treasury dept, blacked out pages in the 9-11 report referring to the UAE, refusal to recognise isreal as a sovereign state and forbidding anyone who even has an israel stamp on their passport from entering dubai, yet was one of only 3 countries to recognise the taliban as a legitament government...all points ignored and accusations still touted:

Originally posted by jaden101
quite simply you are branding the owners and operators, and even worse, the people who work at the ports as somehow being involved in terrorist activity.

(again, words which were never spoken outright nor in code. evidence was posted as to why they are not to be trusted UNCONDITIONALLY due to irresponsible and negligent actions in the past. along with other reasons which were stated, and ignored)

Originally posted by jaden101
of course this is all beyond your comprehension and once again when you've been shown to be a hypocritical idiot you resort to genius comments and insults such as "toolish"

hypocritical complaint of the YEAR

Originally posted by jaden101
quite simply you are branding the owners and operators, and even worse, the people who work at the ports as somehow being involved in terrorist activity.

given that its highly improbable that even if the DPA did take over some east coast ports...they aren't going to sack all the employees and employ a bunch of al qaeda sympathisers

of course this is all beyond your comprehension and once again when you've been shown to be a hypocritical idiot you resort to genius comments and insults such as "toolish"

you also like to accuse the Bush administration of scaremongering yet you are pretty much saying that this company are actually proactively trying to get terrorists into America to kill people

thats scaremongering lies if ever i've seen it

entire post dedicating to attacking a point which i never made. yes, thats useful. thxOriginally posted by jaden101
strange though that many of these people are absolutely against branding all arabs/muslims as potential terrorists...yet this is exactly what seems to be going on in this thread...albeit it in "coded speak"

accusation of racism/bigotry. challenge refuted with valid info regarding IMMEDIATE post 9-11 negligence in cooperation with the treasury dept, blacked out pages in the 9-11 report referring to the UAE, refusal to recognise isreal as a sovereign state and forbidding anyone who even has an israel stamp on their passport from entering dubai, yet was one of only 3 countries to recognise the taliban as a legitament government...all points ignored and accusations still touted:

Originally posted by jaden101
quite simply you are branding the owners and operators, and even worse, the people who work at the ports as somehow being involved in terrorist activity.

(again, words which were never spoken outright nor in code. evidence was posted as to why they are not to be trusted UNCONDITIONALLY due to irresponsible and negligent actions in the past. along with other reasons which were stated, and ignored)

Originally posted by jaden101
of course this is all beyond your comprehension and once again when you've been shown to be a hypocritical idiot you resort to genius comments and insults such as "toolish"

hypocritical complaint of the YEAR

Originally posted by jaden101
quite simply you are branding the owners and operators, and even worse, the people who work at the ports as somehow being involved in terrorist activity.

given that its highly improbable that even if the DPA did take over some east coast ports...they aren't going to sack all the employees and employ a bunch of al qaeda sympathisers

of course this is all beyond your comprehension and once again when you've been shown to be a hypocritical idiot you resort to genius comments and insults such as "toolish"

you also like to accuse the Bush administration of scaremongering yet you are pretty much saying that this company are actually proactively trying to get terrorists into America to kill people

thats scaremongering lies if ever i've seen it

entire post dedicating to attacking a point which i never made. yes, thats useful. thx

Originally posted by jaden101
so you ARE saying that DPA is corrupt and involved in terrorism?

once again, words in my mouth, twisting my point so that its easy to debate...only its bullshit. very relevant and useful to the topic. a standup guy you are

Originally posted by jaden101

think you better go and check your facts about the company before making those kinds of accusations

wow, condemning the 'accusations' which i supposedly made, but in actuallity you fabricated, then going on to accuse me of making shit up. WOW

Originally posted by jaden101
perhaps you should just quietly leave this thread safe in the knowledge that you've been shown up again...like you did with the guantanamo thread and the iraq civil war thread

there's the cross-thread grudge i was referring to. and just so you know i chose to brush you off because you applied the same immature copout to the last debate.

shall i continue, or do you think maybe its time to stop squashing the topic with grudges and insults while pretending to be a genius and a saint, and crying when you're called on it? shall we? or is it time for me to put you on ignore?
i really dont want to, but the needle is buried on the pest-o-meter, so im keeping it open as an option. i dont mind bluntness, and i can even deal with the insults. what irritates me is the whole: you accuse-->i post points and valid sources to refute said accusations-->you ignore and continue to repeat accusations routine.

its pointless

and absolutely NONE of those points having anything to do with the issue of DPW (who you haven't even mentioned once) operating (not running) in ports in the US...which as i've already pointed out...have done so without incident for a long time...you didn't kick up a fuss then because it would seem you are simply pandering to anti Bush sentiment





lets look at the facts...you dont want DPW to run the ports...correct?...yes...as such you believe there is a reason for them not to run the ports...correct?...yes...given that the only reason you've stated for not wanting them to run the ports is because of a risk of terrorism...correct...also yes...

it must be concluded therefor that you think DPW are somehow involoved in terrorism...if not then you are simply besmirching the reputation of a perfectly legitimate company based on absolutely no evidence of wrong doing



so you're saying you're not guilty of scaremongering?...i think the following quote from you shows otherwise



yep...blatent to say the least...i'd even go as far as to say that seeing as DPW already operate in LA then if there is an attack in the US that you would automatically assume that the bomb was smuggled in deliberately through their operations



i dont have grudge against you sonny...why would i have a grudge against someone i soundly thrash in every debate

you see there are several ways to tackle you...pick your unbelievably flawed arguments apart...easy to do...show how irrelevant and incorrect your opinions are...also easy to do...and play you at your own game by taking the piss...also easy to do




would that be the debate where i had to teach you the laws of your own country and provided evidence to show that i was right...or would that be the debate where your only effort was to come in shouting about rhetoric, lies and hypocrisy...then left when i called you on the fact that you hadn't even made any point whatsoever

this is fun

and going back to this point

since when has not recognising a countries legitimacy been a reason to distrust them...take taiwan for instance...it hasn't been blowing up its own civilians for decades and flouting UN security council resolutions like israel has...yet the US doesn't recognise it as a country despite the fact that every other country in the world except China does recognise its sovereignty...the EVIL US...they must be involved in terrorism...right?

Originally posted by jaden101
and absolutely NONE of those points having anything to do with the issue of DPW (who you haven't even mentioned once) operating (not running) in ports in the US...which as i've already pointed out...have done so without incident for a long time...you didn't kick up a fuss then because it would seem you are simply pandering to anti Bush sentiment

well, at least you're not trying to tell me i made it all up. still playing the pointless accusation and strawman game, but at least you're not calling me a liar. oh, and not once did i call for action against bush, did i? i just dont want to die of radiation poisoning. not that i want to die at all, but i would prefer old age. you never stopped to consider that perhaps i live 4 miles away from the newark port, part of which im arguing over. this goes beyond trying to prove some stranger wrong on some forum.

and (for the 20th f***ing time) i criticise the negligence of the UAE, and the spotless company you keep selling is irrelevant. its the ownership of which and the history of selective negligence which i have argued, and you have ignored. i refuse to continue this amidst a barrage of your high and mighty prick waving:




Originally posted by jaden101
i dont have grudge against you sonny...why would i have a grudge against someone i soundly thrash in every debate

you see there are several ways to tackle you...pick your unbelievably flawed arguments apart...easy to do...show how irrelevant and incorrect your opinions are...also easy to do...and play you at your own game by taking the piss...also easy to do


would that be the debate where i had to teach you the laws of your own country and provided evidence to show that i was right...or would that be the debate where your only effort was to come in shouting about rhetoric, lies and hypocrisy...then left when i called you on the fact that you hadn't even made any point whatsoever

this is fun

did i say you called for action against Bush?...no...did i say you were blaming it on Bush...well the following quote from you regarding Bush is quite clear isn't it






so the company actually involved is irrelevant...i dont think i've ever read such a bizzare statement...even from you and thats saying something.

i understand you're criticising the UAE...but you continually ignore the fact that they're done more for the US in the war against al qaeda than any other country since 9/11...so your argument are based on history...i take it you still blame the Germans for WW2?

Originally posted by jaden101
did i say you called for action against Bush?...no...did i say you were blaming it on Bush...well the following quote from you regarding Bush is quite clear isn't it

so i guess your constant accusal of bush-bashing could be translated as bush-loving on your part? notice i didnt resort to that once...






Originally posted by jaden101
so the company actually involved is irrelevant...i dont think i've ever read such a bizzare statement...even from you and thats saying something.

i said that an efficiency track record is irrelevant in the face of recent history with regards to...oh ffs im not going to repeat myself AGAIN.

Originally posted by jaden101
i understand you're criticising the UAE...but you continually ignore the fact that they're done more for the US in the war against al qaeda than any other country since 9/11...so your argument are based on history...i take it you still blame the Germans for WW2?

in some warped parallel universe, where fascists still held sway in germany, yes i would. but alas we dive deeper into the great sea of irrelevance.

Originally posted by jaden101
i understand you're criticising the UAE...but you continually ignore the fact that they're done more for the US in the war against al qaeda than any other country since 9/11...so your argument are based on history...i take it you still blame the Germans for WW2?

How the hell did the UAE do the most for the US?

And why are you bringing up WW2? Yes, I blame the Germans by the way.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
How the hell did the UAE do the most for the US?

They said, 'Terrorists, bad.' That's about all it would take to win that award.

Originally posted by botankus
They said, 'Terrorists, bad.' That's about all it would take to win that award.

Yep, thats about all they did for us. Deep down, theres no way in hell they sympathize with us.

so by highlighting the FACT that you constantly criticise Bush makes me Bush lover...uuummm...no it doesn't really does it?...




do you also find it irrelevant that they already operate in the US and there hasn't been a terrorist attack instigated through their operations?

do you also find it irrelevant that they operate ports throughout the world and never once has an al-qaeda attack been instigated through any of their ports?





you know what else is irrelevant? judging countries on their past actions when their present actions are entirely different



you say you aren't concerned with a state owned Chinese company operating ports but lets actually look at China

it has one of the worst human rights records. according to amnesty international it has jailed without trial, thousands and even hundreds of thousands of political activists...it continually supresses the rights of people in Tibet...it constantly threatens military action against taiwan. it has massive nuclear proliferation. it is the world biggest communist state...despite all this...because the US economy is reliant on China then it's ok to allow to operate ports in the US

so basically thats puting financial concerns over both national security and morality...which strangely enough is EXACTLY one of the main criticisms levied at the Bush administration with regards to the DPW deal

lets look at some related aspects...you are...shall we say...a critic of the Bush administration and its actions throughout the world...

yet despite the Bush administrations actions...you dont find it a problem the the US has more unmonitored naval ports and air bases throughout the world that any other country...places where it could easily transport whatever it likes...completely unchallanged from those countries where its bases are situated

i think we can both agree that this debate is getting a bit cyclical in its nature

so what i'm trying to say is that i understand why, if you dont know the facts, you would be concerned with a UAE partly state owned company operating in the US could cause security problems...and all i've tried to do is show you that those concerns are unfounded

but all you seem to be doing is disregarding the facts to suit your own opinion...



you know what...clearly people like you need to learn how to research stuff on your own and find out facts...so i'll only go as far as to say that if you bothered to read the thread...and bothered to look up information on what they've done in the war on terror...then you wouldn't need to ask that question



way to piss on the graves of all the non US soldiers and citizens who have died because their countries support the US in the war on terror

that would mean 200+ UK soldiers...200+ people in the Bali bombings...the 56 people who died in the London bombings...the 191 people who died in the Madrid bombing...the 33 people who died in the HSBC bank and British consulate bombing in Turkey

Originally posted by jaden101
way to piss on the graves of all the non US soldiers and citizens who have died because their countries support the US in the war on terror Way to not understand a joke!
Originally posted by jaden101
that would mean 200+ UK soldiers...200+ people in the Bali bombings...the 56 people who died in the London bombings...the 191 people who died in the Madrid bombing...the 33 people who died in the HSBC bank and British consulate bombing in Turkey
Tell me again what these people's affiliation is with UAE?

Originally posted by jaden101
so by highlighting the FACT that you constantly criticise Bush makes me Bush lover...uuummm...no it doesn't really does it?...

no, by hilighting the FACT that you unconditionally defend him in every thread makes you someone who is obviously bias. however, since we are all bias in this matter, disregarding those who dont give a shit, i find that pointing that out would be a weak and irrelevant method and would only open the door for yet another classic pinheaded right/left strawman debate.




Originally posted by jaden101
do you also find it irrelevant that they already operate in the US and there hasn't been a terrorist attack instigated through their operations?

yes i do. as i found it irrelevant that new york city was safe from terrorist attacks for over a decade since the first wtc bombing. oh wait...its not that we were safe, was it? but rather that there simply wasnt an attack planned and executed until 9/11. that is why i say the VERY short term absence of an attack means: N-O-T-H-I-N-G.

Originally posted by jaden101
do you also find it irrelevant that they operate ports throughout the world and never once has an al-qaeda attack been instigated through any of their ports?

the only use for ports would be for a nuclear and/or biological attack. since al qaeda has yet to aquire such weapons, or may be holding them as an ace in the hole, why would there have been attacks already? what the hell good would it do them to send a suicide bomber into a shipping crate? if they hit us via shipping ports, they will make it count and they will hit us hard.



Originally posted by jaden101
you know what else is irrelevant? judging countries on their past actions when their present actions are entirely different

you behave in an irrational manner, like you have a hair right across your bunghole. keep repeating the same dead point like a parrot, but fine. ill say again: YES i will hold a country responsible who no longer than FIVE YEARS AGO....AFTER the attacks were reluctant to cooperate in a u.s. investigation.
QUICK!!!! IGNORE THE POINT!!! LOOK AWAY!!!! CALL ME A LIAR AND A RACIST!!!! RUN!!!!!!!!


Originally posted by jaden101
you say you aren't concerned with a state owned Chinese company operating ports but lets actually look at China



this is about as low as it gets. the debate ends here before i tell you what i really think of you and get banned.

tell me again why you posted this?



essentially saying that the best any country has done to help America in the war on terror is to condemn terrorism

despite the fact that hundreds of people have died because of their countries helping in the war on terror

Originally posted by jaden101
so by highlighting the FACT that you constantly criticise Bush makes me Bush lover...uuummm...no it doesn't really does it?...

no, by hilighting the FACT that you unconditionally defend him in every thread makes you someone who is obviously bias. however, since we are all bias in this matter, disregarding those who dont give a shit, i find that pointing that out would be a weak and irrelevant method and would only open the door for yet another classic pinheaded right/left strawman debate, which you seem quite fond of.




Originally posted by jaden101
do you also find it irrelevant that they already operate in the US and there hasn't been a terrorist attack instigated through their operations?

yes i do. as i found it irrelevant that new york city was safe from terrorist attacks for over a decade since the first wtc bombing. oh wait...its not that we were safe, was it? but rather that there simply wasnt an attack planned and executed until 9/11. that is why i say the VERY short term absence of an attack means: N-O-T-H-I-N-G.

Originally posted by jaden101
do you also find it irrelevant that they operate ports throughout the world and never once has an al-qaeda attack been instigated through any of their ports?

the only use for ports would be for a nuclear and/or biological attack. since al qaeda has yet to aquire such weapons, or may be holding them as an ace in the hole, why would there have been attacks already? what the hell good would it do them to send a suicide bomber into a shipping crate? if they hit us via shipping ports, they will make it count and they will hit us hard.



Originally posted by jaden101
you know what else is irrelevant? judging countries on their past actions when their present actions are entirely different

you behave in an irrational manner, like you have a hair right across your bunghole. keep repeating the same dead point like a parrot, but fine. ill say again: YES i will hold a country responsible who no longer than FIVE YEARS AGO....AFTER the attacks were reluctant to cooperate in a u.s. investigation.
QUICK!!!! IGNORE THE POINT!!! LOOK AWAY!!!! CALL ME A LIAR AND A RACIST!!!! RUN!!!!!!!!


Originally posted by jaden101
you say you aren't concerned with a state owned Chinese company operating ports but lets actually look at China

you put words in my mouth. go back and read my post. im not going to repeat myself.



this is about as low as it gets. the debate ends here before i tell you what i really think of you and get banned.

should i grandstand and say your pissing on the graves of 9/11 victims? no because that would be as shitfaced and irrational as you have been. im through.


consider your ass ignored

Originally posted by jaden101
tell me again why you posted this?

essentially saying that the best any country has done to help America in the war on terror is to condemn terrorism

despite the fact that hundreds of people have died because of their countries helping in the war on terror
boo f*cking hoo, come back to this thread when a simple two-line post that IS WHAT IT IS (on the surface...didn't try to make anyone dig any deeper this time...maybe I should have for your sake) doesn't send you to the streets, screaming at the moon for someone to strike down anyone who doesn't dig to the 18th layer of your internal politics.

actually mate...you're talking shit again because i've condemned many of the things the Bush administration have done with posts in this forum...so i suggest you get your facts straight



sorry...whats the point you're trying to make here?...the attack on the WTC had nothing to do with DPW...and it was planned in Germany from as early as 1994...the German authorities were monitoring the people involved and did nothing...this is all established fact...so i really dont see what you're getting at





and like i said before...if this was to happen...would jump the gun and automatically assume the it would be the DPW fault...hence the baseless scaremongering and prejudice



many countries refused to co-operate with the US even after 9/11...not surprising given the the US were ready to bomb anyone that so much as had the slightest connection with al qaeda...such as Iraq strangely enough



thats just petty and pathetic but feel free to use the PM...i can take a little criticism on the chin while it appears that you cant

and whats really as low as it gets is being prejudice towards a company simply because they're arabs despite all the evidence that disproves any other concerns that are fabricated as an excuse to hide the real reason you dont want them to operate in the US

try and dismiss it as a joke if you want...you make it quite clear to anyone who can read what you think of the countries who have helped America...

you managed to try and be patronising and insulting all in the one post...

way to go son...WAY...TO...GO

Originally posted by botankus
They said, 'Terrorists, bad.' That's about all it would take to win that award.

Thats ALL they did, jaden. Givinig somebody thumbs up and tell them "good luck!" is by no means help.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Thats ALL they did, jaden. Givinig somebody thumbs up and tell them "good luck!" is by no means help.

except thats not all they did is it...the US have their biggest permanent navel base in the middle east in the UAE...they have launched more attacks from their air bases in the war on terror than from any other country in the middle east, from the UAE...the UAE have provided more intelligence on al qaeda than any other ally...they have also arrested many al qaeda operatives including 2 of al qaeda most wanted men Abdel Raheem al Nashiri and Qari Saifullah Akhtar

so please do try and get some facts before making rash statements...thats all i ask of all of you

All we ask of you jaden, is to get your old avi back. That freaky gorillaman from some TV show was better!

your saying that the avi he got now aint that freaky gorilla man?

I don't know, man...I mean, it's still freaky, but I'm not having nightmares about it like with the other one.

hey guys...thats the only actual picture for proof of the existance of god...its Bill Hicks

the last one was papa lazarous from the league of gentlemen