Torkel said:
Age and nationality are the only things stopping you from becoming Juve's manager? 
.
Buy on AliExpress.com
Nick Against the World (36 Viewers)
- Thread starter IncuboRossonero
- Start date
And the language .
.Buy on AliExpress.com
Torkel said:
But you made him your president. Twice.
I read his post and tend to agree. Why should we, the American people, want our ports run by anyone but Americans? You can say its just us hating Muslims and the east, which of course is the only reason we wouldn't want a UAE firm.
Id much rather the bid go to an American firm, many of these contracts, not just Admiralty but business in general, are going to companies from out of the country or just plain moving to other countries, (Bangalor youre welcome enjoy McDonald's). Which leaves many of our citizens without decent paying jobs. Once thriving industrial cities such as Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Beck's beloved 313 (detroit) are now some of the poorest places in the US. I guess what Im trying to say is that there are other reasons beside being Arab for us to not want this firm.
Id much rather the bid go to an American firm, many of these contracts, not just Admiralty but business in general, are going to companies from out of the country or just plain moving to other countries, (Bangalor youre welcome enjoy McDonald's). Which leaves many of our citizens without decent paying jobs. Once thriving industrial cities such as Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Beck's beloved 313 (detroit) are now some of the poorest places in the US. I guess what Im trying to say is that there are other reasons beside being Arab for us to not want this firm.
No my President does not represent me. I do not have a quarterly report that reflects a 2 billion dollar profit. I do not agree with anything that he or his administration decree is best for our country. He does not represent me anymore that Beck or Bizzy Bone do. Did Milosevic or Sadam represent the feelings and ideals of their country? Bush may represent the USA but he does not represent the American people.
Enron said:
Im quite partial to making them sew crescent moons on their clothes but for some reason that seems a little cliche. Why don't you guys pay us a visit here in the states before you go making dumb observations about the reasons people have to hate the American people. Im serious you can all stay with me, youre welcome in my house. Til then shut the fvck up. As strange as it may seem, not everyone here is named George Bush.
Exactly. Just because we don't want to usher in some Dubai port firm after very little investigation doesn't mean we hate foreigners or want everything to be simply Americanized. Zlatan is known for making such statements of ignorance about America and it's really starting to get disgusting and old now.
Fliakis: I really don't see a problem with my post. As I stated in the opening paragraph the post was just the run of the mill conspiracy theory and not very serious. However, regarding the Dubai Ports situation, it would be imbecilic to employ such a firm without proper investigation, and the information coming from the White House on said organization is few are far between...nobody seems to know anything about Dubai Ports, and that is why we should not employ them without a proper background check. And if you have a problem with America not employing a foreign firm because there is suspicion over their history then that's simply your problem. Thousands of foreign firms work with America every damn day, so don't start crying over one.
This statement is just more evidence that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. For your information, Bush and the White House are behind the motion to employ Dubai Ports to protect our own ports. I don't agree with this unless months worth of investigation are completed. Therefore, your previous statement makes absolutely no sense. Status quo I suppose.
then again its very convenient to avoid this post innit?
andy, fucked if i care what companies are you hiring. what im annoyed about is that your only problem with dubai port seems the fact that the company is arab. thats all. so far you're yet to give a singe argument to prove me wrong.
Rami said:
Read this when you are sober then
Irrational Fear, Your Ship Has Come In
Love the oil, hate the ships
The hysteria regarding the proposed acquisition (now delayed, but still moving forward) by Dubai Ports World (DPW) of fabled British-based port operator P&O is notable for the lack of facts behind it. The deal has turned US politics on its head - conservatives who formerly pleaded with us to "trust the President" have turned on him, and liberals are dabbling in racial fearmongering that would be alarming if applied to other groups. Is the furor really about security? Well, not really. Full responsibility for security at US ports and of the cargo that arrives is - and will continue to be - under the jursidiction of the Department of Homeland Security. As bad as the security situation is, it was just as bad the day before the ports deal was announced. "Much more needs to be done," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) in a statement on the ports. "This includes increasing inspections of containers, improving intelligence, providing federal funding based on risk, and bolstering the physical security of our ports." While true, these factors have little to do with the ownership of the port operator. "The terminal operators do not run security," explained the head of Philadelphia's port. "That is managed by a combination of the U.S. Coast Guard, Homeland Security, and Customer and Border Protection" (limiting terrorist infiltrators at DPW to attempts at sneaking bombs onto consolidated balance sheets). So is it about foreign involvement in US port operations? Again, not really. Nearly 80% of US ports are managed by foreign companies, who proved long ago that they can manage ports more efficiently - and profitably - than their US counterparts. Nobody seemed to mind before, and - more importantly - foreign management of ports was never considered an obstacle to improving our port security. Probing further still yields few clues (and evidence) for the vehement opposition. For all the protests - Democrat and Republican, congressional and local - there is very little explanation of how the DPW deal actually impacts port security. Part of this is due to ignorance of the complexities of global trade and its multi-layered jurisdictions, which is why some are simply calling for an extended review. Some opponents trot out a dubious rationale - DPW's state-owned status, the UAE's former recognition of the Taliban government in Afghanistan, and that terrorist funding has passed through Dubai banks. But when pushed further for an explanation of exactly how the deal makes us less safe, more vociferous opponents mince no words. "In regards to selling American ports to the United Arab Emirates," says (former) Bush supporter and congresswoman Sue Myrick, "not just no, but HELL NO!" One of the benchmarks of the Bush administration is "free trade fundamentalism" (the US and UAE are on the verge of signing a free trade agreement), and if there's one thing we've learned about George W. Bush over the past five years, it's that he's one of the most stubborn political leaders of the last few decades - which means that the homefront battle on this issue has only just begun.
Irrational Fear, Your Ship Has Come In
Love the oil, hate the ships
The hysteria regarding the proposed acquisition (now delayed, but still moving forward) by Dubai Ports World (DPW) of fabled British-based port operator P&O is notable for the lack of facts behind it. The deal has turned US politics on its head - conservatives who formerly pleaded with us to "trust the President" have turned on him, and liberals are dabbling in racial fearmongering that would be alarming if applied to other groups. Is the furor really about security? Well, not really. Full responsibility for security at US ports and of the cargo that arrives is - and will continue to be - under the jursidiction of the Department of Homeland Security. As bad as the security situation is, it was just as bad the day before the ports deal was announced. "Much more needs to be done," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) in a statement on the ports. "This includes increasing inspections of containers, improving intelligence, providing federal funding based on risk, and bolstering the physical security of our ports." While true, these factors have little to do with the ownership of the port operator. "The terminal operators do not run security," explained the head of Philadelphia's port. "That is managed by a combination of the U.S. Coast Guard, Homeland Security, and Customer and Border Protection" (limiting terrorist infiltrators at DPW to attempts at sneaking bombs onto consolidated balance sheets). So is it about foreign involvement in US port operations? Again, not really. Nearly 80% of US ports are managed by foreign companies, who proved long ago that they can manage ports more efficiently - and profitably - than their US counterparts. Nobody seemed to mind before, and - more importantly - foreign management of ports was never considered an obstacle to improving our port security. Probing further still yields few clues (and evidence) for the vehement opposition. For all the protests - Democrat and Republican, congressional and local - there is very little explanation of how the DPW deal actually impacts port security. Part of this is due to ignorance of the complexities of global trade and its multi-layered jurisdictions, which is why some are simply calling for an extended review. Some opponents trot out a dubious rationale - DPW's state-owned status, the UAE's former recognition of the Taliban government in Afghanistan, and that terrorist funding has passed through Dubai banks. But when pushed further for an explanation of exactly how the deal makes us less safe, more vociferous opponents mince no words. "In regards to selling American ports to the United Arab Emirates," says (former) Bush supporter and congresswoman Sue Myrick, "not just no, but HELL NO!" One of the benchmarks of the Bush administration is "free trade fundamentalism" (the US and UAE are on the verge of signing a free trade agreement), and if there's one thing we've learned about George W. Bush over the past five years, it's that he's one of the most stubborn political leaders of the last few decades - which means that the homefront battle on this issue has only just begun.
andy, fucked if i care what companies are you hiring. what im annoyed about is that your only problem with dubai port seems the fact that the company is arab. thats all. so far you're yet to give a singe argument to prove me wrong.
Enron said:
I read his post and tend to agree. Why should we, the American people, want our ports run by anyone but Americans? You can say its just us hating Muslims and the east, which of course is the only reason we wouldn't want a UAE firm.
Id much rather the bid go to an American firm, many of these contracts, not just Admiralty but business in general, are going to companies from out of the country or just plain moving to other countries, (Bangalor youre welcome enjoy McDonald's). Which leaves many of our citizens without decent paying jobs. Once thriving industrial cities such as Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Beck's beloved 313 (detroit) are now some of the poorest places in the US. I guess what Im trying to say is that there are other reasons beside being Arab for us to not want this firm.
Id much rather the bid go to an American firm, many of these contracts, not just Admiralty but business in general, are going to companies from out of the country or just plain moving to other countries, (Bangalor youre welcome enjoy McDonald's). Which leaves many of our citizens without decent paying jobs. Once thriving industrial cities such as Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Beck's beloved 313 (detroit) are now some of the poorest places in the US. I guess what Im trying to say is that there are other reasons beside being Arab for us to not want this firm.
agree that a country does not want a foreign company running its ports but did a foreign company (P&O ) was running these ports before.
Look Enron, I never said you did agree with him. But that's what a president is: a representative of a nation. That's why you choose a president. You choose a president, because it's impossible for everyone to be directly involved in the whole ruling issue. That's what a president is, a representative. That doesn't mean YOU back him though. That means MOST back him.
I already stated it's not because they are arabic, but rather, because they could have ties to terrorism within a country that has some ties to terrorism. Perhaps not directly, however it is a known fact UAE banks did nothing to stop the flow of money between international terrorist organizations. Read my damn posts next time, Fliakis. I already mentioned this. We simply need a better investigation before we dive into something such as this.
OP
I didn't bother reading all those posts but please don't tell me Seven is back..if so,
what a sad sack of shit you are....can't you find anyone else to annoy in your life...or have your imaginary brothers also refused to play with you.
Andy: Environmental Studies.
Vinman: Where does a brotha get a foam roll ffs?!!!
Sergio: Where are you?
Pado: How are you?
Chxta: Where am I?
River: Can you hear me now?
Lillianna: Feeling it?!
Burke: Da
what a sad sack of shit you are....can't you find anyone else to annoy in your life...or have your imaginary brothers also refused to play with you.
Andy: Environmental Studies.
Vinman: Where does a brotha get a foam roll ffs?!!!
Sergio: Where are you?
Pado: How are you?
Chxta: Where am I?
River: Can you hear me now?
Lillianna: Feeling it?!
Burke: Da
Dammit youre right Fli. I cant hide this anymore fellas. I hate Arabs. As a supporter of America I try to do my part to defeat terrorism and Arabs running our ports. I routinely call the police on my local 711 manager, order Danishes from the Muslim bakery, and I always, always, lock my door at night so the suicide bombers dont get me. 
So I guess my country (USA) is in an uproar because Dubai Ports is an Arab corporation. Oh well, what do you want? A cookie? The US should be upset but not because of the ethnicity of the company. Just the fact that its a foreign country should piss you off. Especially when high end business contracts go to big American countries that outsource them to third world countries whose people dont benefit because they make 3 cents a day. The US is a post industrial country in which the only jobs available to the common man are low paying service occupations and even those are being shipped out. People have suffered and while no one will agree I believe the recession is a result of this. The American people should be pissed at their leaders. The preamble to the Constitution states that the government must "promote the general welfare". Way to go Mr President. Way to go.
PS. Sorry for the rant. Eminem - Sing For The Moment came up on the playlist.
So I guess my country (USA) is in an uproar because Dubai Ports is an Arab corporation. Oh well, what do you want? A cookie? The US should be upset but not because of the ethnicity of the company. Just the fact that its a foreign country should piss you off. Especially when high end business contracts go to big American countries that outsource them to third world countries whose people dont benefit because they make 3 cents a day. The US is a post industrial country in which the only jobs available to the common man are low paying service occupations and even those are being shipped out. People have suffered and while no one will agree I believe the recession is a result of this. The American people should be pissed at their leaders. The preamble to the Constitution states that the government must "promote the general welfare". Way to go Mr President. Way to go.
PS. Sorry for the rant. Eminem - Sing For The Moment came up on the playlist.