The Rampant, Irresponsible Political Thread

[Karachi Vyce]

I like how the Administration is saying there's no reason why we shouldn't let an Arab Islamic nation have control over our ports.

I don't know. How about the fact that these fucking savages rioted over a fucking Marmaduke cartoon?

[Dr Maturin]

Much ado about nothing. In the end, it doesn't matter who owns the ports. Security will be handled in the same way. You can't intrude on the free market's will. If they want to do that, they might as well nationalize the ports.

The liberal media and most Democrats are confused because they have to decide whether to bash the president or side with him in "being nice" to an Arab nation.

Jan or R1...do you want to merge this thread with the RIPT? Thanks.

[Dr Maturin]

I like how the Administration is saying there's no reason why we shouldn't let an Arab Islamic nation have control over our ports.

I don't know. How about the fact that these fucking savages rioted over a fucking Marmaduke cartoon?

Then the US government needs to purchase the ports for an amount greater than the UAE company is offering and contract out the running of them. Otherwise, stay out of it. I don't like the government screwing with the free market.

[Jan]

All done.

You're good, ZD...there I was, sound asleep until you called me. Or maybe it's the sense of duty? I woke up and deleted a spam thread the other night, too.

Toddling off back to bed now...

Jan

PS: BTW, ZD, your sig makes me remember my mother. That was a favorite saying of hers when she was mad at us.

[Dr Maturin]

I called you? Oh yeah...I called you.

[Night Marshal]

I like how the Administration is saying there's no reason why we shouldn't let an Arab Islamic nation have control over our ports.

I don't know. How about the fact that these fucking savages rioted over a fucking Marmaduke cartoon?

Last time i check there had been no rioting in the United Arab Emeras but if you would be so kind to point me to those news stories I would be happy to admit that you are right but right now you are simply painting all arabs with the as brush, we in a America like to focus on the crazies that dance in the streets on 911 or those who blame the Jews for EVERYTHING. However those people are not the majority that live there lives.

For what is worth I would like US to take a more active role in owning our own ports. But I bet good money that if it was Halliburton that was about to take over our ports you would most likely be just and angry.

[AaronB]

I have to say for the first time in almost two years Demarcates and Republicans are not breaking along party lines. While this issue itself ranges from Racism of Muslims to the issue of nation security. I honestly am sitting back and trying to learn more before I take sides but I'm happy to see some civil discussion coming back to American politics even if that civil discussion has yet to make it to the US congress.

Don't worry, I'm sure that they will get over this "silly" notion of having a rescpectful debate. As they say, any port in a storm....

[Karachi Vyce]

Last time i check there had been no rioting in the United Arab Emeras but if you would be so kind to point me to those news stories I would be happy to admit that you are right but right now you are simply painting all arabs with the as brush, we in a America like to focus on the crazies that dance in the streets on 911 or those who blame the Jews for EVERYTHING. However those people are not the majority that live there lives.

For what is worth I would like US to take a more active role in owning our own ports. But I bet good money that if it was Halliburton that was about to take over our ports you would most likely be just and angry.

Oh yes, this again. "OMG, you shouldn't say that, you shouldn't lump all Arabs together like that."

I don't really have any sympathy. If the crazies are the supposed minority, they're apparently running things over there, because whenever they do something insane, the rest of the population, the supposed non-zealot majority, doesn't really do jack shit to stop them or even really go out of their way to criticize them.

Anyway, to get back on point: this port issue is a joke, and is probably the dumbest thing the administration has done in a very long list of stupid things they've done. When the 9/11 commission / Homeland Security says that our weakest area of national security is our ports, coming back with, "Oh, well most of our ports aren't under our control" is NOT a goddamn acceptable answer. I don't want companies owned by countries who've funneled significant amounts of cash into Islamic terrorist cults running our security there. Every year the government just pisses away sickening amounts of my tax dollars on pork barrel bullshit, how about taking some of that money and spending it wisely by ensuring that these ports are under direct American control.

[Jan]

Oh yes, this again. "OMG, you shouldn't say that, you shouldn't lump all Arabs together like that."

I don't really have any sympathy. If the crazies are the supposed minority, they're apparently running things over there, because whenever they do something insane, the rest of the population, the supposed non-zealot majority, doesn't really do jack shit to stop them or even really go out of their way to criticize them.

And here's where it gets really difficult to have a conversation--because you do make such generalizations. Before you got here, we had a convention of discussing beliefs and, whenever possible, leaving labels like 'conservative', 'liberal', '________party', etc., etc. and we had some really great exchanges. Probably nobody changed anybody's mind but at least we examined what we believed by being extra careful to discuss views, not generalizations.

Jan

[Dr Maturin]

I don't want companies owned by countries who've funneled significant amounts of cash into Islamic terrorist cults running our security there.

Well, Ben & Jerry's haven't poisoned me yet.

[Towelmaster]

The first thing that goes in a war is the truth, then innocence, followed by subtlety.

All that crap about 'all those people are responsible for what their radicals do' (freely translated of course) is just what I said : crap. Karachi Vice : Have you ever heard of the power of a gun? Let alone the power of religious indoctrination???

How much power and influence do you have over what your government does? Lots I bet...? Like if thousands would protest against the inept way New Orleans was 'aided' after Katrina this would immediately result in inept people getting fired and a better organization that listens to the people more? Indeed. And pigs may fly.
And that is still you, living in a democracy where they do not chop your head off when you dissent. OK. I admit : the elections have become somewhat of a joke, the campaigns are basically mud-slinging contests, but the U.S. is still a democracy(actually it is a Republic but that difference is lost on most people nowadays).

Anyway : These acts of uncivilized extreme islamic barbarism are carried out by heavily armed self-delusional extremist religion-freaks who can't see the sun shine, and who would gladly sacrifice thousands of their own people(and of their own religion) because 'it would serve the purpose of the Holy Book'. Actually ; they've been doing that for years now. Yes...and Mohammed is sooooo proud of them. <insert-your-own-puke-smiley-here>.

Saying that 'Mohammed Jones' or 'Achmed Smith' is responsible for what O.B. Laden does is akin to saying that you are personally responsible for Cheney shooting his hunting-partner, that YOU are personally responsible for the fact that the dikes weren't up to standard in Louisiana. It is akin to saying that you are responsible for every death in Iraq, including the innocent bystanders.

This is extremism without brakes. This has nothing - nothing! - to do with the Moroccan(muslim) friends that I have great - moderate - discussions with over a beer(!).

Your late great writer Samuel Clemens said it perfectly and with literary brilliance : "Generalizations are no damn good!".

And to finish with a question to all : here is the quote from my own weblog because I had to translate it from dutch to english :

"German sentenced for selling toiletpaper with 'Koran' written on it to mosque.

Today the 61-year old german Manfred von H. was sentenced to a probationary prison-sentence of 1 year by a German court. Manfred von H. created toilet-paper with the word 'Koran' printed on it and tried to sell it to a mosque.

Von H. included a letter with his merchandise, in which he described the Koran as 'a cookbook for terrorists'. According to the German court he is therefor guilty of insulting the Islamic faith and disturbing the peace.

Von H. wanted to use the proceeds(...) of his project to build a monument for 'all victims of Islamic terror'."

Any input? Who thinks this is normal behaviour? Who thinks this is a justified use of free speech? Who think this is uncivilized? Because if what Karachi V. says us right than the people in this mosque are responsible for OBL, so what do we care?



Me, I keep thinking of a cartoon of Jezus and Mohammed crying their eyes out and hugging each other because of the mess people have made of their teachings.

Even as an atheist I can relate to that very much.

[Dr Maturin]

Saying that 'Mohammed Jones' or 'Achmed Smith' is responsible for what O.B. Laden does is akin to saying that you are personally responsible for Cheney shooting his hunting-partner

This debate ends now, when you equate what OBL does to what Cheney does.

As for Katrina...I'm more concerned with what didn't happen BEFORE than with what happened after.

[David Panzer]

This debate ends now, when you equate what OBL does to what Cheney does.

oh noes!!!

looks through telescope to watch a new supernova happen

[Towelmaster]

This debate ends now, when you equate what OBL does to what Cheney does.

As for Katrina...I'm more concerned with what didn't happen BEFORE than with what happened after.

Dear ZhD: Apart from the fact that this discussion does not include only you and is not really yours to end except for your part in it(of course) please note :


If you read my posting you will see that I use that 'comparison' to demonstrate that it is indeed ridiculous to blame civilians for and/or through their religion). And yes; it is an extreme example, they often work best to get the point across. If you think that I would compare The Deed itself(Cheney vs. suicidebombers) you really do not give me enough credit. Never in that post do I compare Cheney to O.B. Laden, I draw a parallell between the fact that you cannot just be held responsible for what the leaders of the government and/or the church do in your country. You are pretty helpless to do anything about it. And so is 'Mohammed Smith' (a normal muslim-guy who doesn't even care about politics). I stated you cannot by definition blame everything that some people do on the whole group. I hesitate when it comes to denouncing the acts, because I feel that some groups in the world don't do that either. But denouncing is not taking responsibility, it is exactly the opposite.

So please do not take the message out of its context. I would appreciate it.

p.s. All the updates were typos. I hate those...

[Towelmaster]

As for Katrina...I'm more concerned with what didn't happen BEFORE than with what happened after.

I understand from the news-media that the dikes weren't properly maintained(?).

To a dutchman that is sacriledge of course. Without dikes we would still exist, but this country would be one third of its(already tiny) size.