deepseas,
yes it does repeat again. I wasn't really paying attention, but had it on and all of a sudden, shouting... and Lou Dobbs was right.
why have security when we're selling key areas away
Moderators: bingolong, Jennifer, tamra
Forum rules
Spam is not allowed. All spammers will be blocked and reported to appropriate agencies.
Spam is not allowed. All spammers will be blocked and reported to appropriate agencies.
Re: Osama, Saddam and the Ports
---
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
Re: Osama, Saddam and the Ports
now Israel backs port deal which can only mean one thing: a whole lot of money is involved for an elite few.
and of course they'd endorse UAE operating US ports, but they damn sure wouldn't endorse UAE operating their own. do these people think we're stupid?
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/02/ ... index.html - Israel backs UAE U.S. port deal'
either way, I think the U.S. should maintain its own ports in post 9/11 world.
and of course they'd endorse UAE operating US ports, but they damn sure wouldn't endorse UAE operating their own. do these people think we're stupid?
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/02/ ... index.html - Israel backs UAE U.S. port deal'
either way, I think the U.S. should maintain its own ports in post 9/11 world.
---
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
Re: Osama, Saddam and the Ports
deepseas,
well in looking for the url of the plastics company that Dubai is also purchasing, found this. murphy's law, looking for something and find something else in the process. but the plastics company makes MILITARY EQUIPMENT! un-friggin-real!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/02/2 ... 16210.html - Elizabeth Dole's hubby Bob Dole hired as lobbyist for Dubai'
so I guess we can expect new currency with all new faces, because we have been sold out in the interest of business w/profits for only an elite few
well in looking for the url of the plastics company that Dubai is also purchasing, found this. murphy's law, looking for something and find something else in the process. but the plastics company makes MILITARY EQUIPMENT! un-friggin-real!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/02/2 ... 16210.html - Elizabeth Dole's hubby Bob Dole hired as lobbyist for Dubai'
so I guess we can expect new currency with all new faces, because we have been sold out in the interest of business w/profits for only an elite few
---
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
Re: Osama, Saddam and the Ports
deepseas,
I see absolutely no relation whatsoever. these are all just coincidences. yeah right!
but I'm just laughing my ass off at all those back woods folks mouthing off about "terrorists are gonna get us, democrats can't keep us safe".
MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA dumbasses! they got what they asked for and more. so they can kiss that "In God We Trust" goodbye and welcome "In Dubai We Trust" on all currency from now on!
I see absolutely no relation whatsoever. these are all just coincidences. yeah right!
but I'm just laughing my ass off at all those back woods folks mouthing off about "terrorists are gonna get us, democrats can't keep us safe".
MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA dumbasses! they got what they asked for and more. so they can kiss that "In God We Trust" goodbye and welcome "In Dubai We Trust" on all currency from now on!
---
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
Re: Osama, Saddam and the Ports
funny, I just got this in the email - perfect timing. a few of these are from an old Osama bin Laden joke. and I could really care less about the KFC one. in fact when a KFC is torched overseas, they have no idea as to how much of a favor they're doing! ![]:o)](./images/smilies/lildevil.gif "Devil")
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal1.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal2.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal3.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal4.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal5.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal6.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal7.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal1.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal2.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal3.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal4.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal5.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal6.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c107/ ... _deal7.jpg[/img]
---
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
Re: Osama, Saddam and the Ports
deepseas,
and dayum how arrogant is this:
Americans need to be educated it's our damn ports, we can decide what WE want to do w/them. even the photo of the CEO in the pic has this look on his face that says "I only care about the money, could care less about your country"
[Font size=2 face=v color=Green]Lawmakers vow overhauls in response to ports deal
Head of Dubai company seeks to reassure Americans
Sunday, March 5, 2006; Posted: 7:37 p.m. EST (00:37 GMT)
(CNN) -- Two U.S. lawmakers called Sunday for overhauling the rules by which the United States approves foreign management of facilities involved in national security.
That came as the CEO of DP World sought to allay concerns over a deal that would give his United Arab Emirates-owned and -based shipping company control of several U.S. port terminals.
"We need to clarify to the American people ... it's a misunderstanding or misconception of us as DP World, what sort of an operator we are," Mohammed Sharaf told CNN.
"We need to educate the people in America that we are truly a global company, and it is not in our best interest to get into those areas where we feel or our customer feels that security is an issue."
Meanwhile, California Rep. Duncan Hunter and Maine Sen. Susan Collins, both Republicans, said they will introduce legislation on the matter. Both have criticized the ports deal.
The bill from Hunter, who is chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, would prohibit any foreign entity from owning facilities that the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security deem critical to national security.
The bill from Collins, chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, would change oversight of the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS), the administration panel that reviewed and approved the ports deal.
Sharaf said DP World works with authorities in every country on the five continents that it operates and meets international standards for port security, but noted that that security is not primarily the port operator's responsibility. That duty belongs to such authorities as Customs or, in the United States, the Coast Guard, he said.
Also, he said, DP World employees have to pass immigration and security procedures in the country where they work. Still, he said he wants to reassure Americans.
"We are recognized as the best in the industry," he said. "We are very confident that we have met and will meet the requirements."
State-owned DP World's purchase of P&O, the Britain-based company that manages cargo or passenger terminals at some ports on the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf coasts, has stirred up intense opposition in Washington. British authorities gave the $6.8 billion merger tentative approval Thursday.
President Bush has threatened to veto any congressional attempt to block the deal, warning that it would risk alienating a key ally in the Persian Gulf.
But under pressure from the White House and Republican leaders in Congress, DP World agreed to delay taking control of P&O's North American port operations until a 45-day security review can be completed.
The deal had already received approval by CFIUS, which is led by the Treasury Department and includes representatives from the departments of Defense, State and Commerce.
Critics of the deal have pointed out that two of the September 11, 2001, hijackers came from the UAE, and that funding for the attacks was funneled through Dubai, a major Persian Gulf banking center.
But UAE Economy Minister Sheikha Lubna al-Qasimi pointed out that those who participated in the attacks came from several different countries.
"You can't actually accuse a country because of two," she told CNN. "Two do not make a nation."
The White House said it supports congressional input.
"We welcome discussions with members of Congress on the CFIUS process," spokeswoman Maria Tamburri said. "We'll be talking with members of Congress about their ideas."
Nuclear allegations
Earlier this week, Hunter accused Dubai of facilitating transfers of nuclear weapons technology.
He elaborated Sunday on ABC's "This Week," saying that in 2003, 66 high-speed electrical switches, or triggers for nuclear weapons devices, were shipped through the UAE "even over the protests of the United States."
"Dubai has a reputation of being the place where you go in if you want to ship something with anonymity," Hunter said.
He said he did not believe Bush knew that, and that the CFIUS board looked at the ports deal "from a very superficial level, and they didn't get the intelligence briefs that go to Dubai's activities to transship things like centrifuge parts."
"They didn't look at the front companies that Germany has identified as operating in Dubai to secure nuclear components for Iran, and I think if the president gets that information ... we're going to see a turnaround."
Asked about the nuclear allegations, al-Qasimi said, "When you look at any port operation, you have to distinguish between products coming in and being re-exported and from products sitting in transshipment mode. Transshipment means that you don't inspect the box."
Collins said she believes Hunter's bill would go too far.
"Not all foreign investment is the problem," she said on "This Week." "But in this case, we have a country that has a very mixed track record on terrorism, a country that the 9/11 commission said had been both a valuable ally and a persistent problem."
She said she and Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut Democrat, will sponsor a bill that would move CFIUS oversight from the Treasury Department to the Department of Homeland Security.
"I think the process right now is deeply flawed," Collins said. "It's too weighted toward investment concerns when the purpose should be and needs to be national and homeland security."
Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat who also has criticized the deal, appeared to agree with Collins, telling CNN that the process of review and approval should be more open and thorough.
"The CFIUS committee in the past has let economic or diplomatic considerations trump security considerations," he said. "That's not good enough post-9/11.
Former Democratic presidential candidate Gen. Wesley Clark, however, called for an overall strengthening of port security on "This Week."
"It's weak, and it doesn't matter who owns it," Clark said. "We're not inspecting the containers that are coming in. We don't have the right radiation monitors out there. We don't know who's in the ports ... We have to work with the people in Dubai, the people in Rotterdam, the people in China, because that's where the threats originate that come to our ports."[/font]
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/05/ ... index.html - cnn.com'
and dayum how arrogant is this:
Americans need to be educated it's our damn ports, we can decide what WE want to do w/them. even the photo of the CEO in the pic has this look on his face that says "I only care about the money, could care less about your country"
[Font size=2 face=v color=Green]Lawmakers vow overhauls in response to ports deal
Head of Dubai company seeks to reassure Americans
Sunday, March 5, 2006; Posted: 7:37 p.m. EST (00:37 GMT)
(CNN) -- Two U.S. lawmakers called Sunday for overhauling the rules by which the United States approves foreign management of facilities involved in national security.
That came as the CEO of DP World sought to allay concerns over a deal that would give his United Arab Emirates-owned and -based shipping company control of several U.S. port terminals.
"We need to clarify to the American people ... it's a misunderstanding or misconception of us as DP World, what sort of an operator we are," Mohammed Sharaf told CNN.
"We need to educate the people in America that we are truly a global company, and it is not in our best interest to get into those areas where we feel or our customer feels that security is an issue."
Meanwhile, California Rep. Duncan Hunter and Maine Sen. Susan Collins, both Republicans, said they will introduce legislation on the matter. Both have criticized the ports deal.
The bill from Hunter, who is chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, would prohibit any foreign entity from owning facilities that the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security deem critical to national security.
The bill from Collins, chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, would change oversight of the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS), the administration panel that reviewed and approved the ports deal.
Sharaf said DP World works with authorities in every country on the five continents that it operates and meets international standards for port security, but noted that that security is not primarily the port operator's responsibility. That duty belongs to such authorities as Customs or, in the United States, the Coast Guard, he said.
Also, he said, DP World employees have to pass immigration and security procedures in the country where they work. Still, he said he wants to reassure Americans.
"We are recognized as the best in the industry," he said. "We are very confident that we have met and will meet the requirements."
State-owned DP World's purchase of P&O, the Britain-based company that manages cargo or passenger terminals at some ports on the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf coasts, has stirred up intense opposition in Washington. British authorities gave the $6.8 billion merger tentative approval Thursday.
President Bush has threatened to veto any congressional attempt to block the deal, warning that it would risk alienating a key ally in the Persian Gulf.
But under pressure from the White House and Republican leaders in Congress, DP World agreed to delay taking control of P&O's North American port operations until a 45-day security review can be completed.
The deal had already received approval by CFIUS, which is led by the Treasury Department and includes representatives from the departments of Defense, State and Commerce.
Critics of the deal have pointed out that two of the September 11, 2001, hijackers came from the UAE, and that funding for the attacks was funneled through Dubai, a major Persian Gulf banking center.
But UAE Economy Minister Sheikha Lubna al-Qasimi pointed out that those who participated in the attacks came from several different countries.
"You can't actually accuse a country because of two," she told CNN. "Two do not make a nation."
The White House said it supports congressional input.
"We welcome discussions with members of Congress on the CFIUS process," spokeswoman Maria Tamburri said. "We'll be talking with members of Congress about their ideas."
Nuclear allegations
Earlier this week, Hunter accused Dubai of facilitating transfers of nuclear weapons technology.
He elaborated Sunday on ABC's "This Week," saying that in 2003, 66 high-speed electrical switches, or triggers for nuclear weapons devices, were shipped through the UAE "even over the protests of the United States."
"Dubai has a reputation of being the place where you go in if you want to ship something with anonymity," Hunter said.
He said he did not believe Bush knew that, and that the CFIUS board looked at the ports deal "from a very superficial level, and they didn't get the intelligence briefs that go to Dubai's activities to transship things like centrifuge parts."
"They didn't look at the front companies that Germany has identified as operating in Dubai to secure nuclear components for Iran, and I think if the president gets that information ... we're going to see a turnaround."
Asked about the nuclear allegations, al-Qasimi said, "When you look at any port operation, you have to distinguish between products coming in and being re-exported and from products sitting in transshipment mode. Transshipment means that you don't inspect the box."
Collins said she believes Hunter's bill would go too far.
"Not all foreign investment is the problem," she said on "This Week." "But in this case, we have a country that has a very mixed track record on terrorism, a country that the 9/11 commission said had been both a valuable ally and a persistent problem."
She said she and Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut Democrat, will sponsor a bill that would move CFIUS oversight from the Treasury Department to the Department of Homeland Security.
"I think the process right now is deeply flawed," Collins said. "It's too weighted toward investment concerns when the purpose should be and needs to be national and homeland security."
Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat who also has criticized the deal, appeared to agree with Collins, telling CNN that the process of review and approval should be more open and thorough.
"The CFIUS committee in the past has let economic or diplomatic considerations trump security considerations," he said. "That's not good enough post-9/11.
Former Democratic presidential candidate Gen. Wesley Clark, however, called for an overall strengthening of port security on "This Week."
"It's weak, and it doesn't matter who owns it," Clark said. "We're not inspecting the containers that are coming in. We don't have the right radiation monitors out there. We don't know who's in the ports ... We have to work with the people in Dubai, the people in Rotterdam, the people in China, because that's where the threats originate that come to our ports."[/font]
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/05/ ... index.html - cnn.com'
---
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
Re: Osama, Saddam and the Ports
deepseas,
yeah i'd like to see them try. talk about outrage.
but when, oh when will people be outraged enough to protest daily until this ends. because obviously Pimp Our Congress isn't concerned
yeah i'd like to see them try. talk about outrage.
but when, oh when will people be outraged enough to protest daily until this ends. because obviously Pimp Our Congress isn't concerned
---
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
Re: Osama, Saddam and the Ports
deepseas,
wow balls are finally starting to show themselves. and any presidential veto can be overridden
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11730569/ - Republicans vote to block port deal'
[Font size=2 face=v color=Green]House Republicans defy Bush on ports deal
Full House to vote next week on issue; Senate also considering measure
Updated: 6:59 p.m. ET March 8, 2006
WASHINGTON - In a double-barreled repudiation of President Bush, House Republicans pressed legislation Wednesday to block a Dubai-owned firm from taking control of some U.S port operations while Democrats clamored for a vote on the issue in the Senate.
“We believe an overwhelming majority will vote to end the deal,” said Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, whose attempt to force the issue to the floor brought the Senate to a late-afternoon standstill.
Congressional supporters of the deal “are few and far between,” conceded Sen. John Warner, R-Va., an administration supporter.
Democrats mobilized in the Senate as Republicans swung into action in the House, ready and even eager to defy Bush’s veto threat on a national security issue in an age of terrorism.
The GOP-run House Appropriations Committee met to approve must-pass legislation, aiming to attach a provision to prohibit DP World, a company run by the government of Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, from holding leases or contracts at U.S. ports.
Highly charged debate
“One of the most vulnerable situations facing America is our ports of entry,” said Rep. Bill Young, R-Fla., chairman of the House defense appropriations subcommittee. “Whoever’s responsible for those ports of entry should be American.”
The developments underscored the extent to which the politically charged issue has come to dominate the agenda, with Republicans and Democrats competing to demonstrate the strongest anti-terrorism credentials in the run-up to midterm elections.
“The president’s position is unchanged,” Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, told reporters while traveling on Air Force One with Bush to New Orleans.
“We’re continuing to work closely with Congress,” McClellan said. “We recognize that some members have concerns. The lines of communication are open.”
Frist warns White House
While Senate Republicans maneuvered to prevent a vote in the Senate, an aide to Majority Leader Bill Frist said the Tennessean warned Treasury Secretary John Snow that “the president’s position will be overrun by Congress” if the administration fails to aggressively and clearly communicate with lawmakers during a 45-day review that is in progress.
The aide spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting was private among Snow, Frist and several GOP committee chairmen. The Treasury Department oversees the multi-agency committee that initially approved the DP World takeover.
Republicans said it was possible senators would pass a simple symbolic statement in coming weeks that would put the Senate’s view of the takeover on record without interfering with it.
But by mid-afternoon Wednesday, with the Senate debating legislation to respond to a corruption scandal involving lobbyists, Democrats signaled they wouldn’t be satisfied.
“They absolutely aren’t going to allow us to do anything with this scandal related to our ports,” said Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. He told reporters he was prepared to let the lobbying reform bill languish if necessary.
Schumer under fire
Senate Republicans accused Schumer of subterfuge in the way he sought to inject the issue into the debate, then pointed to a letter earlier this month in which he and other Democrats said they would refrain from seeking immediate legislation.
He and fellow Democrats brushed that aside, though, with Reid calling the maneuver “absolutely valid.”
The political context was unmistakable. Democrats circulated a pollster’s memo claiming that recent events had “dramatically reduced” the GOP advantage on national security.
Some GOP senators accused the House of acting prematurely because of the heat Republicans were taking from their constituents.
“To kill the deal without a comprehensive solution to port security is just living for the political moment,” said Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
House Democrats fail to force debate
On the House floor, Democrats failed for the second time in a week to force a debate and vote on legislation that would require congressional approval of the takeover after a 45-day security investigation.
Republicans and Democrats in Congress have been assailing the Bush administration for its decision to let DP World purchase Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation, a British company that holds leases at several U.S. ports.
The underlying $91 billion spending bill the House committee debated includes nearly $68 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and $19 billion for hurricane relief and rebuilding along the Gulf Coast. The measure largely adopts Bush’s request for the war, with most money for operations and maintenance, equipment replacement, and personnel costs.
The House measure includes $4.2 billion in hurricane aid that Bush requested for reimbursing homeowners who lost their homes, but does not follow his lead in setting it aside exclusively for Louisiana.[/font]
wow balls are finally starting to show themselves. and any presidential veto can be overridden
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11730569/ - Republicans vote to block port deal'
[Font size=2 face=v color=Green]House Republicans defy Bush on ports deal
Full House to vote next week on issue; Senate also considering measure
Updated: 6:59 p.m. ET March 8, 2006
WASHINGTON - In a double-barreled repudiation of President Bush, House Republicans pressed legislation Wednesday to block a Dubai-owned firm from taking control of some U.S port operations while Democrats clamored for a vote on the issue in the Senate.
“We believe an overwhelming majority will vote to end the deal,” said Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, whose attempt to force the issue to the floor brought the Senate to a late-afternoon standstill.
Congressional supporters of the deal “are few and far between,” conceded Sen. John Warner, R-Va., an administration supporter.
Democrats mobilized in the Senate as Republicans swung into action in the House, ready and even eager to defy Bush’s veto threat on a national security issue in an age of terrorism.
The GOP-run House Appropriations Committee met to approve must-pass legislation, aiming to attach a provision to prohibit DP World, a company run by the government of Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, from holding leases or contracts at U.S. ports.
Highly charged debate
“One of the most vulnerable situations facing America is our ports of entry,” said Rep. Bill Young, R-Fla., chairman of the House defense appropriations subcommittee. “Whoever’s responsible for those ports of entry should be American.”
The developments underscored the extent to which the politically charged issue has come to dominate the agenda, with Republicans and Democrats competing to demonstrate the strongest anti-terrorism credentials in the run-up to midterm elections.
“The president’s position is unchanged,” Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, told reporters while traveling on Air Force One with Bush to New Orleans.
“We’re continuing to work closely with Congress,” McClellan said. “We recognize that some members have concerns. The lines of communication are open.”
Frist warns White House
While Senate Republicans maneuvered to prevent a vote in the Senate, an aide to Majority Leader Bill Frist said the Tennessean warned Treasury Secretary John Snow that “the president’s position will be overrun by Congress” if the administration fails to aggressively and clearly communicate with lawmakers during a 45-day review that is in progress.
The aide spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting was private among Snow, Frist and several GOP committee chairmen. The Treasury Department oversees the multi-agency committee that initially approved the DP World takeover.
Republicans said it was possible senators would pass a simple symbolic statement in coming weeks that would put the Senate’s view of the takeover on record without interfering with it.
But by mid-afternoon Wednesday, with the Senate debating legislation to respond to a corruption scandal involving lobbyists, Democrats signaled they wouldn’t be satisfied.
“They absolutely aren’t going to allow us to do anything with this scandal related to our ports,” said Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. He told reporters he was prepared to let the lobbying reform bill languish if necessary.
Schumer under fire
Senate Republicans accused Schumer of subterfuge in the way he sought to inject the issue into the debate, then pointed to a letter earlier this month in which he and other Democrats said they would refrain from seeking immediate legislation.
He and fellow Democrats brushed that aside, though, with Reid calling the maneuver “absolutely valid.”
The political context was unmistakable. Democrats circulated a pollster’s memo claiming that recent events had “dramatically reduced” the GOP advantage on national security.
Some GOP senators accused the House of acting prematurely because of the heat Republicans were taking from their constituents.
“To kill the deal without a comprehensive solution to port security is just living for the political moment,” said Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
House Democrats fail to force debate
On the House floor, Democrats failed for the second time in a week to force a debate and vote on legislation that would require congressional approval of the takeover after a 45-day security investigation.
Republicans and Democrats in Congress have been assailing the Bush administration for its decision to let DP World purchase Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation, a British company that holds leases at several U.S. ports.
The underlying $91 billion spending bill the House committee debated includes nearly $68 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and $19 billion for hurricane relief and rebuilding along the Gulf Coast. The measure largely adopts Bush’s request for the war, with most money for operations and maintenance, equipment replacement, and personnel costs.
The House measure includes $4.2 billion in hurricane aid that Bush requested for reimbursing homeowners who lost their homes, but does not follow his lead in setting it aside exclusively for Louisiana.[/font]
---
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
Re: Osama, Saddam and the Ports
deepseas,
you know that's coming!! one that's linked exclusively to Dubai so their profits continue to go to another country instead of ours.
talk about being sold out!![]:o(](./images/smilies/flaming_mad.gif "Flaming Mad")
you know that's coming!! one that's linked exclusively to Dubai so their profits continue to go to another country instead of ours.
talk about being sold out!
---
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
Re: Osama, Saddam and the Ports
deepseas,
GREAT!! now our president is worried about UAE's feelings. what about our feelings when terrorist funding was funneled through UAE that helped fund the 9/11 attacks? and what about our feelings in regards to security?
that deal opened the door to discovering that almost ALL our ports are foreign managed, and re-emphasizing borders are wide open. so those that bought into the "terrorism for re-election" nonsense really should be apologizing.
and if UAE are friends, they'll be friends, not PORT CONDITIONAL FRIENDS!!!
shit, do we need kids in the white house?? they can figure that simple shit out.
GREAT!! now our president is worried about UAE's feelings. what about our feelings when terrorist funding was funneled through UAE that helped fund the 9/11 attacks? and what about our feelings in regards to security?
that deal opened the door to discovering that almost ALL our ports are foreign managed, and re-emphasizing borders are wide open. so those that bought into the "terrorism for re-election" nonsense really should be apologizing.
and if UAE are friends, they'll be friends, not PORT CONDITIONAL FRIENDS!!!
shit, do we need kids in the white house?? they can figure that simple shit out.
---
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
huh? what? who? damn, I'm always the last to know.
