You've got to be fucking kidding me 2 ...

I don't think you read my whole post. If you did, you're choosing to ignore reasons that led me to ask him that question.

When I say that Bush made the right call here, I'm saying I agree with what he did, not that I don't think anything's going to go wrong with the situation. They could be affiliated with terrorists, but we don't know, do we?
 
lizard said:
Demi, look...if the UAE can't control their own people as outlined in my post above, how can we trust the company they own? They have deliberately been uncooperative with us on terrorism.


I guess they have their own motives, and no obligation to comply to everything the U.S. wishes them to do. I may be wrong on this, but since I don't know much about the UAE (and didn't know this company was state-controlled until you posted that) i've just been going off the information presented in the thread. i still think most of what i say stands though.
 
Demilich said:
When I say that Bush made the right call here, I'm saying I agree with what he did, not that I don't think anything's going to go wrong with the situation. They could be affiliated with terrorists, but we don't know, do we?

:err: You agree but think something will go wrong? You state there is a lack of knowledge and that the deal should still go through? I'm not following you here.
 
Does obstructionist mean simply that they don't do what the U.S. muscle wants them to? 'cause I wouldn't necessarily call that a bad thing. I don't think you're gonna see my side on this since as an American, homeland security effects you in a way it doesn't matter to me.

Thanatopsis123 said:
You agree but think something will go wrong? You state there is a lack of knowledge and that the deal should still go through? I'm not following you here.


I agree with what he said, and that has nothing to do with whether I think anything will go wrong. The point is that they have done little to warrant suspicion. Lizard's posts have made me rethink that a bit, but as long as the government says security isn't an issue... meh.
 
Demilich =
osama-strat1.jpg
:loco:
 
Thanatopsis123 said:
*tries to think of something witty that he might rent*

Ah fuck it, somebody witty take over.

Okay, I found a description... r.c. called in to report that he saw osama bin laden at the blockbuster video store on 29th street in van nuys, california. he rented 3000 miles to graceland and bought some microwave popcorn and a playstation 2 skating game. (he was going to rent the replacements, but took at back, mentioning something about having already seen it. )
 
hangtime said:
If Arab's aren't the only ones running around blowing up women and children of their own people with suicide back pack bombers than who else is??
Please relate:confused:

Americans kill their own people too. Some of them are called murderers for it. They do it for different reasons, but it's the same thing. There's context behind every different situation, and you completely ignore it in this case.
 
From March, 2004:

The Central Intelligence Agency did not target Al Qaeda chief Osama bin laden once as he had the royal family of the United Arab Emirates with him in Afghanistan, the agency's director, George Tenet, told the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the United States on Thursday.

Had the CIA targeted bin Laden, half the royal family would have been wiped out as well, he said.



I don't see how it's a good idea to hand over ports to Bin Laden's pals.

Again, this is not about an "Arab company," this is a company owned and controlled by the hereditary oligarchy of the UAE, many of whom, apparently, were Bin Laden's jolly old pals.
 
I'm bowing out of this discussion. Too much new information being presented for me to keep track of what's reliable and what isn't. I'm not American anyways, I don't know much about your politics. I was in over my head from the beginning anyways!