Bush "in dark" on ports deal - Page 4 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #31 of 111 (permalink) Old 02-25-2006, 07:45 PM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1982 300SD
Location: Bel AIr, MD
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Bush "in dark" on ports deal

Jim,
Am I to assume form your post that you do not feel there is a threat from SOME Islamic-terrorists?!!
Do your politics blind you that much?
Was there not some thread that ran thru all the 9-11 terrorists, the first worl trade center bombing, and the attack on the Marine barrcks, etc.?

How can you blame the current President when these events predate his administration by YEARS, and the seeds of this are even further past.?

The great majority of Muslims may be peace-loving people who simply want to live and raise their families. But ther is a fraction of them, like the fraction of white-supremists that do the evil.
Don't be so blinded by political desires that you forget history.

Have you ever imagined how WW2 would be reported by today's press corps? Poor planning at Midway as our soldiers are allowed to die! Thousands dead on the botched landings at Okinowa, N. Afric, Normandy! US troops stall when they should have stopped the killing at the Nazi death camps.
War is hell! Death abounds. Poor planning is rampant. It is the universal story of war. After a steady diet of that kind of dribble, we never would have won the war. Germany would still occupy most of Europe. Young men die in war; its a fact. It is regrettable, but it is still a fact.
I wish Congress had the cahoonies to actually declare a war instead of posturing around it.
MS Fowler is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 111 (permalink) Old 02-25-2006, 07:58 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
RE: Bush "in dark" on ports deal

Quote:
JimSmith - 2/25/2006 8:58 PM

Quote:
Botnst - 2/25/2006 8:45 PM
Maybe we should follow the lead of the virtuous St Franklin of Roosevelt's method: Jail them all if they look wrong.
Bot
Actions speak louder than words. We have been coerced to give up basic freedoms to assure our security. Why? Because the Arab Muslim Terrorists are coming. And we need to fight them over there to keep them from coming over here.....and, and ...

Way too much hyperbole to justify the weak case for attacking Iraq to believe a few gestures or statements of rationality have been heard by anyone but the Arab community looking for such gestures. The ugly, racist view of Arabs the American populace has adopted or formulated in the last few years is a direct response to the drumbeat from the White House. Jim
Slippery little devil, ain'tcha?

We were talking about port security, IIRC. In which the administration favors allowing a UAE-based company to manage the ports for fees. I see no reason why they should not be managing them and you think because some folks from UAE were involved with 9/11 UAE should not be allowed.

Fine. Now use the same racist arguments concerning Brits (who is Richard Reid?) and your fellow Americans (who is John Walker Lindh?). By the UAE argument neither Britain nor the USA should be allowed to manage the ports.

So far we haven't been attacked on our soil by North Koreans nor Iranians. That means they are good candidates.

Bot
Botnst is offline  
post #33 of 111 (permalink) Old 02-25-2006, 08:04 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: Bush "in dark" on ports deal

I may have contributed to the out of context view you have taken of my last message. The point was attempted to be made that the Bush administration should not be held responsible for the racist response of the American people to the Arab population in general. My point was, since 9-11 the Bush Administration has taken actions that have resulted in the racist view a large part of the American population has adopted toward the Arab people in general. The few gestures and overtures to the Arab population in America, and abroad, by Bush has been ineffective in moderating the racist view of the Arabs so effectively seeded and fertilized in the minds of the American public at large for the last five years. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #34 of 111 (permalink) Old 02-25-2006, 08:35 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
RE: Bush "in dark" on ports deal

Quote:
JimSmith - 2/25/2006 10:04 PM

I may have contributed to the out of context view you have taken of my last message. The point was attempted to be made that the Bush administration should not be held responsible for the racist response of the American people to the Arab population in general. My point was, since 9-11 the Bush Administration has taken actions that have resulted in the racist view a large part of the American population has adopted toward the Arab people in general. The few gestures and overtures to the Arab population in America, and abroad, by Bush has been ineffective in moderating the racist view of the Arabs so effectively seeded and fertilized in the minds of the American public at large for the last five years. Jim
How does visiting a mosque and publicly demonstrating deference to the customs of the mosque and repeatedly saying that Islam is not the enemy and supporting management of United States ports support your contention of 'racism,' ignore for the moment the obvious--that Islam is a religion, not a race.

Not to mention that he has failed miserably in the brainwashing since neither of us succumbed. Though I must give you accolades for your sensitivity to the problem. All this time I thought it was about oil and now I find that it is because Bush hates Islam and wants to cede control of international trade to their control. That is one devious mofo.

B
Botnst is offline  
post #35 of 111 (permalink) Old 02-25-2006, 09:18 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: Bush "in dark" on ports deal

Quote:
Botnst - 2/25/2006 10:35 PM
How does visiting a mosque and publicly demonstrating deference to the customs of the mosque and repeatedly saying that Islam is not the enemy and supporting management of United States ports support your contention of 'racism,' ignore for the moment the obvious--that Islam is a religion, not a race.
Bot, you can be awesomely obtuse when it suits you. It was entertaining to watch you writhe around this issue over and over.

I did not use the term Islam to describe the racist activities. I also acknowledged Bush's gestures to the Islamic, and Arab, groups around the world. I said his actions have spoken to the average American louder than his occasional liberal words of caution against racism or religious persecution.

I also said given his consistent message of fear of Arabs for the last five years, and his unwarranted invasion of Iraq, the superficial investigation that bagged a few bad apples in the torture scams, and continued erosion of American freedoms to maintain our security overwhelm his token message of moderation. It is his drumbeat of fear for five years that has generated the backlash against the port deal.

Not to mention that he has failed miserably in the brainwashing since neither of us succumbed. Though I must give you accolades for your sensitivity to the problem. All this time I thought it was about oil and now I find that it is because Bush hates Islam and wants to cede control of international trade to their control. That is one devious mofo.

B[/QUOTE]

I agree I have not been brainwashed. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #36 of 111 (permalink) Old 02-25-2006, 09:21 PM
430
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Oct 2002
Vehicle: SLK32, ML430
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,349
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Bush "in dark" on ports deal

Quote:
JimSmith - 2/25/2006 10:04 PM

I may have contributed to the out of context view you have taken of my last message. The point was attempted to be made that the Bush administration should not be held responsible for the racist response of the American people to the Arab population in general. My point was, since 9-11 the Bush Administration has taken actions that have resulted in the racist view a large part of the American population has adopted toward the Arab people in general. The few gestures and overtures to the Arab population in America, and abroad, by Bush has been ineffective in moderating the racist view of the Arabs so effectively seeded and fertilized in the minds of the American public at large for the last five years. Jim
That is a load of crap. The image protrayed of arabs is no different under GW Bush than it has been under any other recent admin. If there is a racist under current towards arabs it is an issue with either arab behavior or westeren society not of one administration or another.

Lets take an obejective view of the situation instead of a blame Bush attitude. He may or may not be guilty of a lot of things but he was not the root cause of any behavior towards the arab population.
430 is offline  
post #37 of 111 (permalink) Old 02-25-2006, 11:18 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: Bush "in dark" on ports deal

Quote:
430 - 2/25/2006 11:21 PM
That is a load of crap. The image protrayed of arabs is no different under GW Bush than it has been under any other recent admin. If there is a racist under current towards arabs it is an issue with either arab behavior or westeren society not of one administration or another.

Lets take an obejective view of the situation instead of a blame Bush attitude. He may or may not be guilty of a lot of things but he was not the root cause of any behavior towards the arab population.
The most significant event to affect the American view of Arabs before 9-11 happened on 9-11. Immediately after 9-11 the scary types were Al-Qaeda, a group of fanatical Islamic weirdos led by Osamma Bin Laden. George Bush's reaction, to invade Iraq under false pretenses, and the subsequent denials that the invasion was unwarranted, and had nothing to do with 9-11 or the security of the United States, has unleashed a sequence of events that has done more to cultivate and focus American fear and loathing of Arabs than 9-11 itself. If you don't see it that way it is because you don't want to and not because it is not the way it is.

Bush's actions since 9-11 speak much louder than Bush's placating words. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #38 of 111 (permalink) Old 02-25-2006, 11:31 PM
~BANNED~
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Posts: 41,649
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
RE: Bush "in dark" on ports deal

Bot and 430 must be getting some oil or gas checks in some manner to keep blathering on about the supposed righteousness of W. policies. It is the only logical explaination for two smart men to keep supporting the W. fiasco.
Shane is offline  
post #39 of 111 (permalink) Old 02-26-2006, 04:52 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
84300DTurbo's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1984 300D Turbo
Location: Mass.
Posts: 1,606
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Bush "in dark" on ports deal

Quote:
Shabah - 2/25/2006 12:53 PM

Quote:
84300DTurbo - 2/25/2006 12:41 PM

DP World taking over the concession once held by P&O will not effect US port security one iota. they don't even handle security....

+ this was sort of an interesting press release..

Dubai, 24 January 2006: - Global ports operator DP World today welcomed news that one of its senior executives, Dave Sanborn, has been nominated by US President George W. Bush to serve as Maritime Administrator a key transportation appointment reporting directly to Norman Mineta the Secretary of Transportation and Cabinet Member.

The White House has issued a statement from Washington DC announcing the nomination. The confirmation process will begin in February.

Mr Sanborn currently holds the position of Director of Operations for Europe and Latin America for the Dubai-based company

Mohammed Sharaf, CEO, DP World said:
“While we are sorry to lose such an experienced and capable executive, it is exactly those qualities that will make Dave an effective administrator for MarAd. We are proud of Dave’s selection and pleased that the Bush Administration found such a capable executive. We wish him all the best in his new role.�
Is that good or bad?
dunno, but by the date it seemed to preceed the takeover by some time. perhaps they wanted a 'friendly ear' in the us gov't? no one seemed to bring up a stink when that happened! the real stink came when Eller & Co. sued in miami court for $10m..
now it has just snowballed from there.

again, this is all nonsense and over reaction. the port concession does not handle security. if security is not the objectioner's problem, then what is?





1984 300D Turbo - 231k.. son's car now... totalled 11/30/07 RIP

send lawyers, guns, & money...
84300DTurbo is offline  
post #40 of 111 (permalink) Old 02-26-2006, 05:31 AM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1982 300SD
Location: Bel AIr, MD
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Bush "in dark" on ports deal

Seems like the proverbial "beam in the eye".
But who has the splinter, and who has the beam?

This is like a Rhorshot test; People tend to see what they are inclined to see.
Jim, Shane, and similar people see the evil Geo. Bush behind all the evils of the world.
Bot. 430, and I tend not to see those boogymen. While not necesarily a Bush supporter, neither am I a Bush-hater; he disappoints on several items. That doesn't make him evil; just sometimes wrong. He who is without similar error, feel free to take that first shot.
MS Fowler is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome