Farewell

[dizzing]

I just wanted to say goodbye to all of you.I'm not going anywhere, I just think the end of society as we know it is drawing near incredibly fast lately.  This issue with Bush and the Dubai Ports World company taking over the management of 7 main US ports seems like a complicated one, and I see there are valid points to each side of the issue. That being said, I must point out that any arguments in favor of the deal are completely irrelevant.  Many of the ones against it are, as well.  But the most important thing to note here is that the coast guard does NOT inspect all cargo entering the ports, and it's not about to start just because the UAE is in control of them now.  They simply don't have the resources or time to do that kind of inspecting, the way they're currently structured.  Now, Dubai is an interesting emirate.  It is largely suspected that this is the location where the Pakistani nuclear scientist set up deals to sell his arms secrets to the "axis of evil", and it's a fact that illegal nuclear arms parts shipments passed through Dubai on their way to countries just getting started on nuclear programs - countries like Iran and North Korea.  Illegal shipments?  Of nuclear contraband?  Dubai?  I'm not saying they're behind it, but they sure don't seem to be good at keeping that kind of thing away from their shipping routes.  Routes that are now in danger of coming straight into American harbors.  And with a 1 in 7 chance of actually being inspected.  But I'm sure since 9/11, our priorities on national security are high enough that this kind of thing won't be an issue.  We would never think of doing something like that without worrying about security, right?[quote name='George W. Bush to his Cabinet regarding the Dubai Ports deal']"This deal wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security
of the United States of America,"[/quote]Oh.  My bad.

[dizzing]

oh yeah, i know they don't control the ports yet.  just that they're getting really close to making the deal happen, and that bush is going to veto any legislative attempts to slow the acquisition down.

[Izzletodasmizzle]

i feel your pain man i dont know what this man is doing to the US but i feel that every part of our country is for sale when it comes to him i just feel like we sell out to whoever the highest bidder is under bush im 19 and im scared very scared of what this man is doing to my future in only the 6 years he has been in office

[Sonthert]

It is still suspected that the people responsible for the anthrax attacks were Americans, although nobody has ever been shown to be responsible. Should we assume that Darren, himself is responsible, because he is American? Why paint the UAE with a paintbrush because a few of their countrymen are whackjobs? I have had several Emirati friends and they are no more dear and sweet people in the world. The UAE is very progressive in terms of the Middle East. Let me tell you where there is safety. Great Britain, Spain, Israel, the toughest countries on the planet still worry about terrorism continuously. We could learn some things from Israel about anti-terrorism. The truth is, we can't stop it. Israel can't, we can't, Great Britain can't. Proof? How is it that millions of pounds of drugs enter this country, almost round the clock? We're talking about one dirty nuclear bomb, a few hundred pounds. We're talking about a bio-warfare device, a dozen pounds at most. We're talking about botulism toxin, several ounces. The only safety there is in living your life to its fullest and putting these problems out of your mind. Accepting that with freedom there must be vigilence, our foundaing father made the point, repeatedly, I will make it once. If we love our country, we must ignore terrorism. If we stop to ponder, we are lost, the terrorists have won. The alternative, despite how grim it might be, is to accept that America is not Lord of the Planet and that we do have to answer for our attrocities in the rest of the world. We have to answer before the court of popular opinion. Not just our own, but in the eyes of our fellow man, whether they are the same color as us, the same religion or even speak the same language as us. Our continued interference and subversion of governments and societies around the world tilts the balance to create extremism and fanacticism that will consume us and our freedom, if we don't stop. We can stop, concentrate on our own affairs, leaving the rest of the world to its own devices. We have to choose whether we want to be Lords of a lost, devastated world, or members of a global community. This global community is quickly developing the capability of even the smallest member being able to kill, injure, terrorize large number of people for other people's interference. Do we want to play this most dangerous game as the stakes increase exponentially? Is it a disgrace to bow out the hand and wait for better cards? Not at all, its the sensible, humane thing to do.  I love this country, I am willing to die in defense of this country, our constitution and our freedom. I am not willing to throw my life away and I am disgraced to watch American lives be thrown away in useless pursuits, like Iraq, but numerous other American foreign policy debacles over the past hundred years (starting with T. Roosevelt). Unless dozens of examples from recorded history happen to be wrong, these pursuits will only serve to endanger all of us for the benefit of a small minority. "All great countries are destroyed. Rome was destroyed, Greece was destroyed, Persia was destroyed, Spain was destroyed." We're up. Do want to take a lesser role in world events and preserve our freedom or do we want to be a dusty lesson in a far-off history book? Sorry, thats all I can come up with off the top of my mind. I hope is was helpful, or at least controversial.

[dizzing]

Tangiers, you're right on several counts, but respectfully I think you may have missed my point.  my point is that only 1 in 7 shipments into our ports actually get inspected by the coast guard.  britain and the USA are staunch allies, and i doubt there are too many british officials with secret agendas for terrorism in the USA.  the UAE, however, is a far different picture.  many shipments of illegal nuclear arms components have gone through their country, largely with their help.  plus, if the american government is in fact responsible for the terrorist attacks of 9/11, or tied in anyway to the actual assistance of terrorist groups (whuch, unfortunately, we must always be willing to consider - remember that during the seventies several plans were drawn up by the DOD on how to stage terrorist attacks on american military targets in cuba in order to blame cuban revolutionaries), now that the ports are run by a company who might easily be paid or otherwise inclined to "look the other way" when the inevitable dirty bomb or anthrax or whatever comes rolling up deep within the belly of a cargo ship and right into our port cities there's not much left to stop such a thing from happening.  of course, they'd never actually use such a thing there.  it would be taken secretly to some other major strategic location andused, and nobody would ever even think that the UAE-controlled ports had anything to do with it. [I'd like to pause here to acknowledge that if our own government were determined to carry out terrorist attacks, I guess it wouldn't be so hard for them to slip it past us anyway.  But that may be exactly what they're planning to do.  Maybe they're just working on a scheme to place the blame elsewhere - that's something the administration is getting good at lately.]Hell, it doesn't matter if the US. Government itself took control of the ports.  In fact, i think that'd be even SCARIER.With all this in mind, when bush says something like "This deal wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security
of the United States of America," it sounds pretty damn foolish to me.  You're right - we can't always be worried about terrorism.  If we think about that exclusively all the time, to the point where it detracts from our civil liberties or way of life, the terrorists have won.  This has already occurred in a way since 9/11.  However, to take a stance that we are completely unconcerned with terrorism, especially in a situation such as this one where there is a very REAL threat of it, is crazy.  It's too progressive for our own good, because it means we've lost our common sense.  I honestly don't even have a problem with Dubai Ports World taking control of the ports, only our government's (what seems to me to be over-)abundance of confidence.So I just want to make it clear that my post had nothing to do with the fact that the control of the ports is being outsourced - as a matter of fact, it already IS outsourced - or even that the UAE is taking control.  I read up on Dubai Ports World and found that they seem to be a well run, up-and-coming major world corporation and I'm sure that they'll do at LEAST as good a job as the British firm in charge.  The problem I have is that our government no longer even acknowledges to the public its own concerns about security - concerns which EVERYONE feels, and rightly so.  With the interest of a free market, it's great that such a large-scale acquisition could take place; but, as I know I've heard in at least a few places, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

[Sonthert]

I guess the point is, that is doesn't matter. We're watching with at least three different government agencies, state law enforcement, federal law enforcement, not to mention municipal law enforcement, we have dogs, counter-intelligence, sweeps, stings, interdictions and assorted other legal tangles, yet we only are able to stop 10% of the illegal drugs coming into this country. It is logistically impossible to stop the flow of drugs, which are shipped in thousands or millions of shipments to the UNited States, how are we going to stop two or three that are terrorist wrath? We can't stop terrorism. If someone can come up with a practical, workable, affordable solution, lets hear it. What about more hijacked planes? Its hard to stop every person and ascertain if they are terrorists. What about a suicide bomber with a nuclear bomb? What about a terrorist boat, loaded with a huge bomb, that cruises unsuspectedly into NY harbor and BOOM! You can't stop them with force. Additionally, if they wanted to attack us again, they would have. They chose not to, which makes me even more suspicious. Originally I suspected Israelii secret police or Afghan anti-Taliban forces. Did you ever see the original episode of "The Lone Gunmen", where an airliner is taken over by the government, who intends to fly it into a scyscraper to justify stopping a war? Its true...it was the "pilot" episode...literally and figuratively. What if the terrorist threat is over already? Do you think they would tell us? One way or the other, worrying about terrorist attacks is illogical and irrelevant.

[dizzing]

right, we're going to get attacked regardless of what we do.but the quote of bush's that i posted originally says it all, i think.  our government does so much in the name of fighting terrorism and trying to bolster our national security (they go too far, really, look at the patriot act). but when it comes to something like this, where there is near universal concern over possible conflicts of interest, they do nothing more than tell us to metaphorically go back to sleep.  and i'm not trying to argue with you, because i agree wholeheartedly with everything you've said.  i just want to make my point clear - i'm using bush's stupid statement as just another reason to criticize the administration and it's policy of looking like total morons in order to gloss over serious issues.  it's becoming more and more clear that their real motives are completely hidden from public view, and this is just a prime example.and  i personally dont' care one way or the other if the terrorists attack us again.  hell, 9/11 was [this entire portion of this post has been deleted by my better judgement].anyway, yeah.

[Sonthert]

Despite what's made public, if you are a conspiracy theorist, wouldn't the dark forces bent on our destruction have acted again if they wanted too? Distilled, that's one of the central point of my ramblings.

[dizzing]

well, a) i am not a conspiracy theorist.  i simply won't rule out any possibilities.  and whether they would have acted again or not if they'd wanted to already is moot.  we have no way of knowing whether or not they would want to, why they would want to, or how they would go about executing such a thing.  even if they wanted to, they could have many reasons to wait a while.  i won't even speculate about this, because like i said, it doesn't matter.  and your comment about "dark forces bent on our destruction" seems pretty out of place as well , like i said, i'm not a conspiracy theorist by any means.  when i say "we're going to get attacked regardless of what we do" i don't mean as a result of any particular conspiracy, it's just highly unlikely that we'll never see another terrorist attack.  and if those plotting the attack have enough power (for example, associates in our own government or even administration) they will be able to pull it off in such a way that we'll have no idea what the truth behind the issue is.  We still haven't got any idea what happened on 9/11, just a slew of allegations.  Heck, they used it as a reason to go to war with Iraq.  Talk about missing the point...but i really get the feeling you're just trying to get the last word in, so this will be my last post on this thread   just rest assured that I agree with everything you're saying, i just choose to take a different perspective for the sake of "bush-bashing"