Posted on 03/12/2006 7:51:11 PM PST by bayourant
Did Race play a role in the Port Deal discussions? The very charge is met by the likes of Sean Hannity and others with Righteous Indigination. In fact, to mention it makes you the true problem. Mark Levin in fact called a MAjor General a dirtbag over that charge. The below cartoons may be an issue now in the UAE. They are not cartoons about that ole darn prophet however. THere will be no boycotts over these but remember still they dont help things. The cartoonist just give us what we want sometimes. From MSNBC the following cartoon. There were many others that through the glory of the net are available to all.
Sleep well Eeevil!
Thank you. I hoped that was the case.
Somehow I think I knew that!
I'm not laughing. You made a point:
"It was THE worst signal, in the middle of this war, that America and Americans could send."
I asked you to explain it.
You either won't or can't. So either answer or stop ranting.
And yes, that's gonna' stick.
If the U.S. had not intervened in the ME these countries would likely no longer exist - and they know it.
They are allies of convenience and for now their regal lifestyle is being protected by the U.S. This could easily change. These countries do not support us because of any shared values because there aren't any - except maybe the creation of wealth.
Saudi Arabia sees no conflict in assisting us at the same time they assist our enemies. I see no reason to believe the UAE are not capable of the same duplicitous behavior.
LMAO and thanks! I needed that. Two strep throat kids in a row makes one yearn for a LOL.
I think you missed the point. I've read about 300 of the guy's posts over the last week. He hasn't shown any signs of being overly prone to out-and-out lies.
And since I presume you to be truthful, it looks to me like a misunderstanding which only gets worse when charges of lying are thrown about.
Assuming we have some truth in the narrative: bayourant was listening to the Mark Levin show on March 9, and THOUGHT he heard Mark say the general was a "dirtbag".
I believe that he THOUGHT that was said -- because he immediately posted it to the live thread, and he says he wrote a letter to WABC about it. Given the availability of transcripts and audio, and the fact that he was posting to a thread followed by hundreds of people who were listening at the same time, it is nearly impossible to believe he deliberately LIED about what he thought he heard.
Presuming therefore that he THOUGHT he was right about what he heard -- nobody on the thread corrected him, while two posters agreed with him (not about the comment, but wrote in agreement with his sentiment). So it is rational that he left that day believing that he had confirmation of what he had heard, since nobody told him he was wrong.
Fast-forward to this thread. HE was obviously mad about what he THOUGHT Mark said. He brought it up specifically.
Then a poster by the freeper name of "holdonnow" accuses him of calling holdonnow a liar. boyourant is confused, because (and I believe this as well) he doesn't know who holdonnow is, but boyourant KNOWS he didn't accuse a fellow freeper of anything, just some talk show host (Mark Levin) he was listening to on March 9.
So back-and-forth accusations are thrown, with Boyourant looking stupid because he's not in on the joke, which is that he's actually TALKING TO MARK LEVIN and he doesn't know it. But it is a rational mistake.
So here's a guy. He heard something on the radio (or thinks he did) which made him really mad, so mad he posted it on the live thread and wrote the station. He brings it up 3 days later and he's under attack for being a liar, with the "proof" being that in this very threat he's denying what he clearly just did -- but that's a misunderstanding, because boyourant DOESN'T KNOW WHO HE IS TALKING TO.
But he is educated quickly. He is told it is Mark. But he can't believe it, because he knows what he heard and he can't believe the guy would deny it. He's dug his hole, and he's coming around slowly, too slowly.
But seeing the light bulb, it's dawning on him that there is something going on here -- so his last post shows a hint that he's going to go back and really research to prove he's not just a liar.
I believe he wasn't lying, just mistaken. I'm disappointed that something that is so obviously a misunderstanding got blown up to where a guy from the UAE who gave us a different perspective got banned in a matter of about an hour during which he was completely lost as to what was happening.
I am a short-time listener (WMAL, sometimes I could receive WABC), a big fan, and my son and I love the show (my son is 10, and for him it's "the show with the guy that yells all the time and calls people dopes". I disagreed with the conclusion regarding the Port deal, but I defended Mark (not that he needed it) because he was about the only opponent who didn't make me scream about ignorance of facts.
If I'm not around tomorrow, it's been fun :->
That sounds like something right out of the liberal handbook, keep saying it over and over, hoping it will be true.
The only problem is it IS true. Deader than a doornail. Wanna bet?
bookmarked
(Emphasis mine)
Maybe you can explain why the Gulf States have been so kind and considerate of us. From the goodness of their hearts? What altruism! I guess it is the same altruism that Kuwait and SA demonstrated by allowing us to defend them in Gulf 1.
"Then, could you explain why those civilized, Christian nations like France and Germany deny us those same privileges, despite supposedly sharing "common values" with us. Who has been more effective in helping us fight the war against Islamic terrorism? Countries in the Middle East, or countries on the Eurpean continent?"
France has nukes. Does that concern you? Would you feel the same about our allies Qatar, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait having nukes? Just wondering how far your multiculturalism extends.
I have my gripes with Old Europe but I still recognize reality - my values are hundred fold closer to theirs than they are to the Gulf regimes.
From the get-go, most of us who opposed the CFIUS approved deal never said DPW/UAE was buying the ports, and most of us who opposed the CFIUS approved deal never claimed DPW/UAE would be in charge of port security. Several polls taken at the time clearly indicated that most Americans understood these basic facts.
Frankly, for the first week or so, it was semantics gone wild on this issue. Once everyone got the terminology squared away the debate was clearly won by those FReepers who opposed the DPW/UAE deal. Once the American people contacted their CongressCritters with their concerns, the deal was DOA.
Some FReepers like "flinging the mud balls", as opposed to debating the facts. Intellectually lazy folks.
Do you mean all our military and economic help we've thankfully provided to Israel?
"These countries do not support us because of any shared values because there aren't any"
Have you been over there lately? The cities over there make Times Square look suburban. Their most popular restaurants are places like Chili's and McDonalds. There is a Starbucks on every corner. Their shopping malls put ours to shame. There is a satellite dish on every rooftop, and children wear Oakland Raider t-shirts. The biggest difference between most major Arab cities and major US cities is that you can walk the streets at night alone in the Middle East without getting mugged. The values of the average Arab are a lot closer to yours than you might think.
"Saudi Arabia sees no conflict in assisting us at the same time they assist our enemies."
Let me refer you to my first statement in this post. We've been doing the same thing for decades.
To: bayourant
"This is outrageous - I never called a major general a dirtbag. I spend a great deal of time with the military. I said what the general said was an outrage, when he said that opposition to the deal was Arab and Muslim bashing. You are a disgrace.
2 posted on 03/12/2006 10:54:21 PM EST by holdonnow "
Mark said the above, identified himself by saying the word "I". Bayourant just didn't catch it early on.
"Well, I've already asked several times what Saudi Arabia has to do with the UAE."
You know, you are like a pit bull when you get a piece of gristle between your teeth. I never said Saudi Arabia and the UAE were the same. YOU made this comparison, not I. I am saying that Arabs in general, regardless of which Arab country is being talked about, are not to be trusted. Lying to infidels is part of the Koran. The UAE supported the Taliban. They let contraband get through their ports regularly. They will not recognize Israel, and 70-75% of the UAE populace are anti-American, according to a very recent poll (as stated on Fox News). They support terrorist groups on the QT, and are otherwise untrustworthy. It's only been about 4 years since 9/11 (two of the hijackers were from the UAE), and now suddenly they've done a 100% turnaround and are our best buds? What a joke. You can live in your world of self deception, just don't ask me to join you, and don't ask your country to join you either.
I think you nailed it. I know I came in not knowing what was going on. And Levin did absolutely nothing to mitigate the situation.
I do agree with the outcome you advocate, even without confirming the details of how all went down. I've been around bayourant on many threads, and while I couldn't tell you waht he stood for, I can tell you that from my point of view, he wasn't a pain in the ass.
I don't want that to be a testimonial, just an observation that I didn't chalk to handle up as obnoxious.
His posting history is there for the moderators and owner to check out.
Ummm. Do you realize that in your post that I responded to you were discussing THE GOVERNMENT? That's why I quoted your description of "the government" in every sentence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.