Even the nutty bitch

[kosar]

Ann Coulter going off on Bush.

In response to Bush's query asking how it's any different that a private British company running our ports compared to a 9/11 connected Arab government running our ports, she says, 'I could give you 3000 reasons it's different.'

Pat Buchanon, Frist, Hastert, King etc..etc..etc... all strongly against it. All mayors and governors in affected cities/state....strongly against.

And now we 'know' Bush knew nothing of it until after the deal was signed. Same with Rumsfeld, supposedly. If that is true, who the f*ck exactly accepted this deal unilaterally?

This makes the Harriet Miers debacle look like paddycakes.

UAE one of three nations that recognizes the Taliban?

2 9/11 hijackers from there?

Renegade Pakistani scientists nuclear materials went through what port on it's way to N. Korea and Libya? Right, you got it. Dubai.

Strong on terror? LMFAO! How can this admin even claim this with a straight face.

We're on the brink of a civil war in Iraq with us still there.

Can you imagine what will happen when we leave?

But hey, Saddams gone!!!

The same Saddam who Bin-Laden recently descibed as a bitter enemy.

Who the f*ck exactly is our enemy here? The government in Iraq that we have paved the way to take control?

The Shia that we obviously knew would take control as they are the great majority?

The Iraqi government that is closely allied with Iran?

All the while Iran and Syria continue on, totally ignoring us.

Iranian citizens continue to make IED's to kill our troops. Iranian government continues to support hamas and other terroristic groups that disrupt Iraq. Disrupt being a nice way of saying inciting a civil war and killing and maiming American men and women.

Syria totally and completely any and all threats and continuing to refusing to stop their sieve of a border.

All for what? Somebody please tell me.

 

[StevieD]

But the Carlyle Group is doing pretty good. And what a surprise that they have ties to UAE. Funny how every decision this administration makes seems to work out pretty good for them.

 

[BobbyBlueChip]

Can't think of another day that I couldn't tell the difference between Air America and the conservative talk shows.

For the Rushies, though, as long as a tax cuts not on the table, they just couldn't care less.

Whatever happened to your either "for us or against us?"

 

[gardenweasel]

1)i heard they bagged 3 turbans in ohio .....one got away....i`m happy for you....(i was inquiring as to your whereabouts of late)...

2a)debate ...good
2b)potential enemies and homo gibbeters with cartoon allergies running infrastructure.....bad

3)bush...."why should a british company be held to a different standard than an arab (uae) company?" ..

well, offhand, the last time we worried about the british entering the country and doing us harm was around 1812, not 9/12/01.....

4) you can`t expect bush to worry about terrorism or wmd`s when there is over regulation to have to deal with......

5)any idiot realizes that a sharp decline in the dollar is much worse than a few mushroom clouds...

6)a good reason for dems to get tough on terror......a nuclear attack would probably cause climate change...

7)a terrorist bombing might not be so bad....stock market ended the day up after the london bombing... terrorist attacks are now considered to create a "buying opportunity" on wall st, afterall the initial sell-off. ..

now i have to piss you off....

8)of course bush is sticking to his guns on this. ....his entire mideast policy stands a good chance of falling apart if this deal falls apart.... why else do you think the democrats are all over it?....because they`re tough on security?.....lmao....they see a chance of derailing the entire war on terror...

as much as some people here would like it to be the case, WE are not fighting islam.....we are trying to promote secular governments and free people with a real chance for a better life.....

bullets 1-7....kosar/ :em71: :weed:
bullet 8.... kosar/ :rant2: :mj16:


build `em up....and knock `em down....

 

[Pujo21]

THANJ YOU KOSAR,

for those good points. This administration has no shame. And so what he didn't know, he still is taking an absurd stand.

Just go here to The U.S.State Department's travel Warnings to Americans in the UAE ---------> http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1050.html

He is in such a mental freefall. He is not fooling anyone. He sounds like a fiend in a revolving abyss.

I still respect him because he is The President , but really he is heading for a lonely vortex .

I'm all for taking a very hard stand against Terrorism. But he doesn't finish the job.

And he really needs to stop "KISSING UP " to the Arab Sheik Mutha Phuckas.

I just love it when Bush tries to sell us all these used cars about how wonderful these UAE ARABS are..and that they are allies.

WHATTA PHUCKIN' JOKE.

ONLY HIS (" GO TO THE BUNKER WITH MEIN FUHRER ") supporters listen to this 3 card monty charade.

Hey Ctown , are you goebbels or eva or boorman?, :yup

Let us know when it's capsule time ! :chew:

:grins: :142lmao:

 

[smurphy]

Alright - I'm in line with Ann Coulter. Anybody know Al Franken's take? At the very least, this subject has broken through some pretty firm partisan barriers. That's kind of refreshing, but still overwhelmed by the ugliness of this deal. ...and FU to Bob Dole and his damn lobbying group. Thought he was a better guy than that.

In the long run - assuming the deal doesn't happen. this could end up being a good thing for American politics. We've needed a re-shuffling of the partisan cards for quite a while.

God bless Ann Coulter and her skeletal physique.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"Strong on terror? LMFAO! How can this admin even claim this with a straight face."

Instead of laughing ---why not elaborate how this adin is not strong on terror or examples of how last admin was?

--or would you rather I list facts why this adin is strong on terror and you list those those why you think the last was was.

--I didn't think so--

let me give you easier task, Matt--

Would you like to compare terrorist captured by "UAE" vs those captured by last admin?

This could prove interesting.

 

[kosar]

Wayne,

If you continue to insist on comparing post-9/11 to pre-9/11, let's not stop at Clinton. What did Bush 43 do before 9/11? What did Bush 41 do? How about Reagan? Other than selling arms to Iran, giving Saddam WMD and supporting Bin Laden and the Taliban, what exactly did he do? My God, just stop.

Anybody who was in office on 9/11/01 would have gone into Afghanistan and it's not even debatable.

So we're left with Iraq. Are you more comfortable and do you feel safer with radical Muslims, a la Iran, in charge in Iraq? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Every time you bring up Clinton as being soft on terror, I will try for a neat discussion about the previous 12 years where we not only did nothing, but we supported terrorists, not to mention Saddam.

Does your memory only go back to 1992, or what?

Here are a couple more yes or no questions for you:

Was Bush 41 'tough on terror?' ----yes ----no

Was Reagan 'tough on terror?' ------yes ----no

Was Clinton 'tough on terror?' -----yes ----no

If you would humor me with answers to the 4 simple questions that I asked, I would greatly appreciate it. I know your answer to one of them, but the other three? Give it a shot.

 

[kosar]

Instead of laughing ---why not elaborate how this adin is not strong on terror or examples of how last admin was?

Clinton was not 'tough on terror.' Ok? Neither was Bush 41. Hell, Reagan did business with them.

Invading a country and as a result paving the way for Islamfacists to take over yet another ME country is not evidence of 'being tough on terror.'

Nothing has been done to secure our ports, nuke facilites or mass transit systems. In 4 1/2 years after 9/11.

We are trying to turn 6 major ports over to a very questionable ME country who is one of only 3 in the world who recognizes the Taliban as a valid entity. The Taliban? But they don't recognize Israel? Yeah, great move.

If you consider 'blowing shit up' in Iraq, tying up a huge part of our military, as being 'tough on terror', then I guess we'll agree to disagree.

 

[dawgball]

kosar -- i would say during Reagan's tenure, the largest "threat" to us was Communistic USSR. He did pretty well with that.

But other than that, I agree with what you are saying.

 

[kosar]

kosar -- i would say during Reagan's tenure, the largest "threat" to us was Communistic USSR. He did pretty well with that.

Sure, he did well with the cold war and I agree that that was our biggest threat at the time. He was also in office when terrorists killed, what, 230 marines in Beirut. What was the response to that? Nothing.

So when we cite the lack of action after the 1993 WTC bombing that killed 8 people, let's also cite Beirut.

Let's face it, nobody properly recognized the threat or potential threat until 9/11. Or at least not on the huge scale that the threat is.

 

[Pujo21]

It's the same old story with these BUSH FANATICS....Bush gets thousands of our revered young service men/women killed.....then he is licking the balls of his BUTT-BUDDIES , those scumbag UAE SHEIKS...

so they try to change the subject of deflect the blame on Bubba Clinton...

NOW HOW PATHETIC IS THAT.??? Everytime Bush opens his mouth the foot gets deeper and deeper.

Don't tell me for a moment you Bush Supporters agree with The President on this UAE ALLY CHIT.

If you do side with Bush on this matter of letting those scumbags take over our AMERICAN PORTS and if you Bush supporters take a stand that these UAE ARABS are our allies, that's okay, that's fine.
Then please explain why.

How far will Bush go for $$$$. The surrendering of our AMERICAN PORTS to these ARABS ( " only " on the grounds they are our allies) is a stinking sellout and a betrayal of all AMERICANS.

EVEN you Bush supporters can't really fall for this innuendo that these scumbag UAE ARABS are our friends.

 

[gardenweasel]

everything changed after 9/11....that`s a fact....



and that`s another issue regarding this uae deal...the machinations that are in place to investigate and "vet"(i used to think "vet" was a dog doctor)these deals ,im sure,were in place pre-9/11.....

you`d think...that considering how drastically the world has changed since 9/11,that a much more comprehensive investigation process should be instituted when issues that involve the borders,sovereignty and/or security are involved...

everyone seems to agree that the process for ratification of the uae deal was shaky,at best...

 

[Pujo21]

BUSH SAYS HE WASN'T AWARE.

IT WAS ALL BUSH'S PEOPLE------DONALD RUMSFELD,CONDI RICE,JOHN SNOW,MICHAEL CHERTOFF,ALBERTO GONZALEZ that approved this deal.

Are we to stand here and believe that BUSH had " no prior knowlege " of this deal to his Phucking scumbag UAE ARAB BUDDIES..

BUSH DIDN'T KNOW ?????????????????

Bush is telling us he had no influence on this deal. This betrayal of All Americans ? what a stinking liar he is.. now we a gonna listen to the sermon about bubbas blowjob. lol

Oh YES, Bush Knew alright..and Cheney flew
Turk182

 

[kosar]

It's one thing, and bad enough, if Bush is lying about knowing about this deal in order to cover his ass.

But what if he's telling the truth? Now *that's* scary. How is it even possible that a deal like that is approved without the pres or Rumsfeld(who also claims he didn't know about it) even being aware of it? Who the f*ck approved it and who, exactly, is in charge of homeland security, if not the President for christs sake.

 

[djv]

UAE to save the day. They will delay action on the take over for at least 30 days. That's the way to let the President sell it and try to put us all to sleep. Very old trick. By the way Rummhead said he was not a ware of this deal either. Was anyone?