U.S. Port Security Run by UAE?

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

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?

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

but there are no direct ties between the governinment and mcveigh.

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

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

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?

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.

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...

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."

-(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."

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

...said the pot to the kettle

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

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.

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

UAE Ports Host More U.S. Navy Ships Than Any Port Outside The United States. The UAE provides outstanding support for the U.S. Navy at the ports of Jebel Ali - which is managed by DP World - and Fujairah and for the U.S. Air Force at al Dhafra Air Base (tankers and surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft). The UAE also hosts the UAE Air Warfare Center, the leading fighter training center in the Middle East.

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.

see, as usual, you avoid all points, or claim them to be superficial without directly acknowledging them

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

or if you really are that toolish i dont know

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

you pretend you never made them.

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?

i refered to your methods as "toolish" in some other thread.

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

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,

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

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.

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

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!

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

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

see above question

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.

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 [b]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" [boldface added][/B]

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
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 [b]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" [/B]

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 😬

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:

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

(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)

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

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

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

gee, i dont know. maybe some day when im on fire from radiation burning

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

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 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

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

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 🙄

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:

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 🙄

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?

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

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

and (for the 20th f***ing time) i criticise the negligence of the UAE, and the spotless company you keep selling is irrelevant.

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.