Congress Investigates Security Risk of Telecom Acquisition Concerns that Chinese businesses shouldn't be in America's business Tipped by Romney2012 
Back in October networking vendor 3com was acquired in a $2 billion joint purchase by U.S. equity investment firm Bain and Chinese networking vendor Huawei. That acquisition is still pending review as Congress takes a look at whether it poses any national security risks to the United States. Although Huawei holds only a minority of the investment, there are concerns that giving U.S. telecommunications and networking access to the Chinese is a risky endeavor. The company is reportedly privately owned and has no links with the Chinese government but Congress is unsure about the nature of communications and relations between the business and the government. In the meantime, Huawei is moving forward with its stated goal of taking over global telecommunications making recent deals with Tmobile and O2 in Germany and Vodafone in Spain.
|
  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 |  Deal should be rejected if Chinese company involved
U.S. Representative Thaddeus McCotter, a Michigan Republican, has called on CFIUS to reject the deal. Huawei's take in 3Com, which markets intrusion detection systems, would "gravely compromise" U.S. national security, he said in a House floor speech in October. It is common knowledge that the Chinese army has launched internet attacks against US government agencies. And there is information that Huawei, which is run by an ex-army senior officer, provides info on technology partners to the Chinese army helping facilitate their spying forays.
While US companies help the CIA and NSA spy on other countries, there is no reason the US should approve a deal that helps the Chinese army spy on the US.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
|  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Deal should be rejected if Chinese company involved said by Romney2012:While US companies help the CIA and NSA spy on other countries, there is no reason the US should approve a deal that helps the Chinese army spy on the US. I totally agree, but our current government is polluted with way too many idiot "free traders" as it is. These people can't see past the serious security implications of some of these deals because they are so obsessed with "free trade."
Look at how the current administration was more than happy to do everything it could to help China buy Unocal. Thankfully, that deal fell through. But it had not been their first attempt to sell out the security of the USA for a quick buck. I am sure we can all remember the uproar the proposed Dubai Ports World deal created.
On the other side of the of the political spectrum, we have a school of people who are "guilty" of the USA's success. We saw these people orchestrate the transfer of significant military technology to China in the 1990s. It explains fully why China, which could not even put a man in space in 1999 was able to shoot down satellites today.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | Jonbo298
join:2004-01-12
Council Bluffs, IA | Re: Deal should be rejected if Chinese company involved Agreed on all points. The Chinese are just trying to plant themselves slowly around the world, to pull a Big Brother on the world in due time. People can deny it, but look at how locked down they made the "free access of information" internet.
People didn't think it was possible at first because the internet is open for any dialog. Well, China proved that wrong and this deal should be denied. | |
| | | |  n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
 ·Optimum Online
| Re: Deal should be rejected if Chinese company involved said by Jonbo298:People didn't think it was possible at first because the internet is open for any dialog. Well, China proved that wrong and this deal should be denied. The funny thing is it was American companies such as Cisco that made it possible for them to lock it down and monitor their citizens. We will always sell out our values to the highest bidder.
Also realize the reason the Chinese are on a buying spree is because they have so damn much cash from us whoring ourselves to them. They need to buy hard assets because the value of the United States dollar is falling almost daily rending their paper holdings less and less valuable. | |
| | | | | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Deal should be rejected if Chinese company involved said by n2jtx:They need to buy hard assets because the value of the United States dollar is falling almost daily rending their paper holdings less and less valuable. If it makes you feel better, the Japanese made similar mistakes investing in depreciating US commercial real estate in the late 1980s and early 1990s. They lost a ton of money.
In a sense, the Chinese have pretty much put their eggs in the American basket because they bought so many dollars. As the dollar sinks, the overall wealth controlled by the Chinese decreases. The more they dump the dollar, the more their remaining dollars lose value.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
|
| | | | "Free trade"? Don't you mean "greed"?
said by pnh102:said by Romney2012:On the other side of the of the political spectrum, we have a school of people who are "guilty" of the USA's success. We saw these people orchestrate the transfer of significant military technology to China in the 1990s. It explains fully why China, which could not even put a man in space in 1999 was able to shoot down satellites today. And I absolutely agree. When the opportunity for industrial espionage presents itself to the Chinese, they will take advantage.  | |
| | | |
| Reviews:
 ·DSL EXTREME
3 edits | said by Romney2012:U.S. Representative Thaddeus McCotter, a Michigan Republican, has called on CFIUS to reject the deal. Huawei's take in 3Com, which markets intrusion detection systems, would "gravely compromise" U.S. national security, he said in a House floor speech in October. It is common knowledge that the Chinese army has launched internet attacks against US government agencies. And there is information that Huawei, which is run by an ex-army senior officer, provides info on technology partners to the Chinese army helping facilitate their spying forays. While US companies help the CIA and NSA spy on other countries, there is no reason the US should approve a deal that helps the Chinese army spy on the US. This needs a VETO like no other deal, I don't trust a Chinese owned company as all I've ever heard about is the Chinese Government there owns 51% of every company there, So No Way Jose!
Re: Deal should be rejected if Chinese company involved
--
(25.92GHz crunching for SETI with the PC Perspective Killer Frogs) | |
| | zerog
join:2002-02-10
Carrollton, TX
kudos:1 | While US companies help the CIA and NSA spy on other countries, there is no reason the US should approve a deal that helps the Chinese army spy on the US.
Isn't that the other way around nowadays? Isn't the CIA and NSAs main function to protect American business interest?
I'm pretty sure China is only trying to do the same thing that US did to rise to global power, although with some slight differences. | |
| | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Deal should be rejected if Chinese company involved said by zerog:While US companies help the CIA and NSA spy on other countries, there is no reason the US should approve a deal that helps the Chinese army spy on the US.
Isn't that the other way around nowadays? Isn't the CIA and NSAs main function to protect American business interest? I'm pretty sure China is only trying to do the same thing that US did to rise to global power, although with some slight differences. I agree. But why should we help them? We should hinder their rise at our expense.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
|
 ztmikeMark for moderationPremium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN | Future for America? Hell, why not just give the Chinese everything?
We already owe them billions of dollars for the stupid war.
I'll be laughing when the Chinese banks tell the U.S to go fuck off. And our market does a barrow spin to the ground with a fiery explosion. (like it is now.)
--
"I am the worst president in U.S history, I'm either stupid or dumb most of the time, but people still believe me." George W. Bush | |
| | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Future for America? said by ztmike:I'll be laughing when the Chinese banks tell the U.S to go fuck off. And our market does a barrow spin to the ground with a fiery explosion. (like it is now.) You draw amusement from seeing the US economy falter?
Why?
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
| | | | | Re: Future for America? said by Romney2012:said by ztmike:I'll be laughing when the Chinese banks tell the U.S to go fuck off. And our market does a barrow spin to the ground with a fiery explosion. (like it is now.) You draw amusement from seeing the US economy falter? Why? I hate that.  | |
| | | Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| said by Romney2012:You draw amusement from seeing the US economy falter? Why? I could understand that attitude from someone who's been impacted by the rather contrived modern definition of a "free market:" Factory workers were impacted in the '80s. Tech workers have been impacted since the late '90s (offshoring and an influx of imported H1B visa workers who work longer and harder because their admittance *and* their ability to apply for a green card is tied to one employer).
For those people, it sure doesn't seem like the system worked to protect *their* "way of life." They were *forced* to pay for a standard of living which their offshore competitors don't. (Sewer systems. Environmental protection. Animal welfare. Building codes and zoning laws. Food and drug quality.). And then "allowed" to "compete on the open market." Anyone with half a brain knew what the outcome would be before it even began: "Ooops. Looks like you can't compete. Well, it's just a *free* market. You don't expect a hand-out do you? That would be *so* anti-market."
There was nothing free or fair about that "trade." It decimated the way of life for millions. Now, as this selective definition of "free market trade" threatens the way of life of *everyone* it's supposed to be a matter of "national interest?"
If I were one of those who'd already had my way of life decimated (in the name of improving corporate competitiveness, or lower consumer prices) I think I would find it amusing when unrestrained (and selectively-defined) "free trade" visits *everyone*.
If the system didn't care about those people, why should they care about the system? Maybe the original poster has no standing to make a claim like that. But, I know *many* who do.
Mark | |
| | | | | | Re: Future for America? Mark - if Congress wasn't a bunch of p***ies and would slam a tariff on a product they don't want the U.S. to sell to this country, it would really be free trade.
It is funny cars made in Mexico cost more to make than those made in the U.S. Even Japanese cars cost more to make in Japan than in the U.S.
I try to buy as much "Made in the USA" as possible and avoid "Made in China" since they are loaded with human rights violations in every part of the country. In the Huang province, 40,000 people lose a finger or break one every year. WalMart imports 10% of foreign trade and $9 billion from China. Workers worked 7 days a week and 16 hours a day making Christmas products for WalMart. They made about $110-150 a month (paid by the piece but never told how much they make).
NAFTA, wanted by both Republicans and Democrats, should be repealed.
Also, eliminate tax breaks for U.S. companies that send jobs overseas. I tell companies, like AT&T, "Get rid of India workers and employ Americans and I might come back. If not, I'll never deal with AT&T again."
DELL tech support is India for consumers and Americans for business. Before that stupidity, DELL was tops.
I'd like to see all products have a label telling the exact percentage of where it is made.
I also think U.S. regulators letting banks use India and other sensitive businesses to do back office stuff is just plain stupid.
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl | |
| | | | | Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| Re: Future for America? said by supergirl:Mark - if Congress wasn't a bunch of p***ies and would slam a tariff on a product they don't want the U.S. to sell to this country, it would really be free trade. I don't know what the solution is. I think we all benefit when the standards of living rise in third-world countries. I just don't think it should be unmoderated (at any expense).
A truly "free" market would sell anything to anyone (despite the damage to national defense, which is just our collective self-interest). We'd open the borders and let anyone come here who'd work for 10 cents less than someone else (not force corporations to go to other countries).
It's clear we don't have a "free" market in the absolute sense a lot of free-traders use it. So, it seems like a shame that we invoke the "national interest" buzz-word when it looks like "free trade" might hurt more than just a few people. But, when it's just factory workers or tech workers being hurt, they're admonished "why do you oppose free markets?"
There's something very perverse about that. We shouldn't be surprised passion for "national interests" isn't as universal as it once was.
I don't think global trade can be stopped. But, I think we can stop hurling around the "free" market word like that justifies some people having their lives destroyed -- ironically in the national interest of "promoting global competitiveness."
said by supergirl:It is funny cars made in Mexico cost more to make than those made in the U.S. Even Japanese cars cost more to make in Japan than in the U.S. That's what's perverse about this. The free-traders say that eventually we'll reach equilibrium. As foreign labor markets have more opportunity, their standards of living will rise, along with their costs. They'll demand OSHA- and EPA-style regulation to reduce deaths on the job, and pollution of the environment. Eventually they'll be as expense as we are, and jobs will flow back here.
That's an admission that it's an unsustainable market condition. In any other industry, when such a condition exists, society has stepped in to moderate what is a non-free, non-fair market. (For example, product dumping, or Japanese-government subsidies to the semiconductor industry, resulting in product dumping.).
But, when American workers find themselves forced to pay for our standard of living, and "compete" with those who don't, and they complain about what is essentially "labor dumping," they're told "it's just a free market, are you some kind of commie who expects a handout?"
It's amazing that so-called free-traders think this won't come back to haunt us. Either "free trade" taken *literally* (selling sensitive business to countries antithetical to our way of life), or a loss of patriotism among Americans who's way of life was destroyed through the *selective* use of the term.
said by supergirl:NAFTA, wanted by both Republicans and Democrats, should be repealed. Or, reinstate (and expand) the TAA law which was intended to compensate American workers who lost their jobs as a result of NAFTA. It provided money for retraining, etc.
I think that's fair. If we're going to enter into trade agreements that moderate financial and commercial markets, making it more predictable for corporations who will do business in foreign countries (eliminating a great deal of what would be "raw, free market" conditions for the benefit of financial and commercial markets) while doing nothing about social inequality (which translates into labor-market inequality) then we should be prepared to deal with the expected result more substantially than dismissing it as "it's a free market, why do you expect a hand out?"
The corporations got a hand out in the form of trade treaties that level the playing field in their favor (mandating common business practices). Why shouldn't American workers (who happen to be the vast majority of society)?
Mark | |
| | | | | | | ...not to mention a *relatively* unhindered ability to intrusively disrupt most 'major carriers' traffic.
[ Isolating / Troubleshooting STS-1's -and-below from remote centers external to the continental United States. ] | |
|
| |
4 edits | Cause maybe it will teach US businesses to not invest in a communist dictatorship who obliviously, as you stated it is common knowledge of the Chinese army launching internet attacks on our government, sees us as a threat.
All this time both governments pay lip service to each other because big American business gives us cheap, low quality goods made in China who quite frankly, is threatening the safety and health of US citizens. While at the same time big business invest in the manufacturing plants and labor both directly and indirectly in China. I don't blame American businesses because all they are doing is fulfilling our demand for cheap foreign goods. When it really comes down to it, we are the ones to blame. | |
| | | | lordjimPremium
join:2004-03-26
Deerfield, IL | Re: Future for America? Not so. See, what people don't realize is this: the American supply chain was corrupted years ago. By the time we began to see only "Made in China" in our Wal-Marts and Targets, it was too late, far too late to vote with our dollars. We the People really weren't given any choice in the matter.
So many people have little understanding of the true nature of a high-tech industrial economy. Products don't appear on shelves by magic: a single consumer device may be assembled from components produced by dozens of different manufacturers. It's a complicated interlocking web of relationships forged between thousands of distinct corporate entities.
Japan started the industrial wrecking ball rolling back in the Seventies, when they went after U.S.-based integrated circuit manufacturers and vendors of other key electronic components. Illegal dumping and other anti-competitive activities forced those companies out of business. That meant manufacturers higher up the food chain were forced to deal with Japan for critical parts, whether they wanted to or not. Japan basically walked down our supply chain, wreaking havoc in specific sectors (you haven't seen a television made in the U.S. in decades, for example.)
Japan is a relatively small country, in spite of its economic output, and was still able to do us significant damage. China is just doing the same thing, only on a truly global scale. Worse yet, if you go back and take a look at the history of trade relations between China and the former British Empire, you'll find that there's ample precedent for China's current behavior.
So we were warned, and yet we still walked into the trap. In any event, the American consumer never got the chance to sell his soul for a trinket ... it was a government sworn to protect him that sold him out first. | |
|
|  JeffreyWilpon please sell the MetsPremium
join:2002-12-24
Long Island
kudos:3
·Vonage
·Optimum Online
| said by ztmike:Hell, why not just give the Chinese everything? We already owe them billions of dollars for the stupid war. I'll be laughing when the Chinese banks tell the U.S to go fuck off. And our market does a barrow spin to the ground with a fiery explosion. (like it is now.) When/If that happens, it's surely not going to be funny. Even if you have no investments in the market, or you've disassociated yourself from the financial sector, you're still going to feel quite a punch if that scenario played out.
--
And so castles made of sand, slip into the sea, eventually.
I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing. | |
| | | n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY Reviews:
·Optimum Online
| Re: Future for America? said by Jeffrey:When/If that happens, it's surely not going to be funny. Even if you have no investments in the market, or you've disassociated yourself from the financial sector, you're still going to feel quite a punch if that scenario played out. It definitely will not be funny. I myself will lose several hundred thousand dollars in 401K and personal investments. However, the sadistic side in me knows we did it to ourselves and we deserve it so that will be my only comfort. How we are able to ignore the most basic concepts of what I learned Economics 101 back in college still eludes me. We are fighting a war that we should have raised taxes to pay for. Instead we took it off budget and sold bonds to the Chinese to pay for it. Plus we increased domestic spending after 9/11 and refused to pay for it as well. At this point we are $9+ trillion in debt to foreign nations and we have no realistic way to pay it off other than perhaps start selling national assets. If any family or corporation ran their budget like the government does, they or the corporate officers would be thrown in jail for corruption. When the Chinese finally decide to start converting their dollar holdings to Euro's, our dollars will probably be worth as much as a German Mark after World War I. You will need a wheelbarrow full of $100's to buy a loaf of bread. Will it be a terrible time, absolutely. But I suspect there will be a lot of people for next 40 years afterwards who will be more responsible in who they elect to office and how they manage their own financial affairs. The Chinese will not escape unscathed, probably losing tens of billions in value, but if they are smart they will be able to time the currency conversion in order to prevent a total decline in their trillions in investments. As for markets to sell to afterwards, when the United States can no longer afford their products, they have Europe and the emerging economies in Southeast Asia.
My Grandparents and the generation that followed learned their economic lesson during the depression in the 1930's. From the late 1970's onward, we started forgetting all of that and the tuition to relearn it is going to be very very expensive indeed.
BTW, I am neither a Republican or a Democrat and I wish a pox on both parties.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
| | | | JeffreyWilpon please sell the MetsPremium
join:2002-12-24
Long Island
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Vonage
·Optimum Online
| Re: Future for America? said by n2jtx:My Grandparents and the generation that followed learned their economic lesson during the depression in the 1930's. From the late 1970's onward, we started forgetting all of that and the tuition to relearn it is going to be very very expensive indeed. BTW, I am neither a Republican or a Democrat and I wish a pox on both parties. I don't disagree with a single thing you said - I'm of the same opinion as you. I just wanted to discourage the fact that it will be funny when it happens.
--
And so castles made of sand, slip into the sea, eventually.
I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing. | |
|
| | | said by ztmike:Hell, why not just give the Chinese everything? We already owe them billions of dollars for the stupid war. I'll be laughing when the Chinese banks tell the U.S to go fuck off. And our market does a barrow spin to the ground with a fiery explosion. (like it is now.) China needs America more than we need them. I don't think your proposal of a worldwide financial Armageddon is anything but insane. If you hate America so much, you can always move to France. Of course, you'll be passed over for jobs (only the real French get those) and have to live with the huge Muslim population or under a bridge. That hate is going to burn you up inside.
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl | |
| | | Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| Re: Future for America? said by supergirl:If you hate America so much, you can always move to France. I can't speak for the OP, but the "love it or leave it" argument never seemed useful to me. A lot of Americans might like those ruining the country (with stupid wars and selling out American interests) to leave.
Mark | |
| | | | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Future for America? said by amigo_boy:... but the "love it or leave it" argument never seemed useful to me. I've always believed that those people in the USA who constantly criticize this country should leave. We don't need their kind here, and this country is better off without them. Unlike a lot of other countries, we don't force anyone to stay here if they don't like it, nor do we don't care if people want to defect because they don't like it.
US citizens who have a "this place sucks" attitude clearly have no idea how good we have things in this country. To borrow a saying, a bad day in the USA is better than a good day just about anywhere else. The only way they can be made to truly appreciate things here is to go and spend a fair amount of time living in some decrepit third world dump.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | | | | Re: Future for America? So, why didn't Alec Baldwin move to the Rain Forest since Gore lost? Because living there would suck.
Sorry, but if you hate America so much, why are you here? Really? We can do a lot better without one more pain in the rearend. I'm just sick of the hate America crowd.
Also, if America is sooo bad, why are all the illegals staying here? Mexico really sucks that's why.
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl | |
| | | | | | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Future for America? said by supergirl:So, why didn't Alec Baldwin move to the Rain Forest since Gore lost? Because living there would suck. Maybe it would have cost too much for Arec Barwin to cuss out his own spawn if he had moved to another country?
said by supergirl:Also, if America is sooo bad, why are all the illegals staying here? Mexico really sucks that's why. What irks me more are foreigners in this country who get offended at the US flag or get their panties in a knot when someone sings "The Star Spangled Banner." Get out of my country already!
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | | | | JeffreyWilpon please sell the MetsPremium
join:2002-12-24
Long Island
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Vonage
·Optimum Online
| Re: Future for America? said by pnh102:What irks me more are foreigners in this country who get offended at the US flag or get their panties in a knot when someone sings "The Star Spangled Banner." Get out of my country already! I generally would agree with you. My friend from France who came to the United States to get his PhD in Economics [while I was finishing up my undergrad work], mentioned to me one day that American people love to fly their flag everywhere, at a lot of events. I forget the words he used specifically, but it was generally a more negative tone to his remark than I had liked. So, I had to take a few steps back and explain to him the differences between Patriotism, Nationalism and Extremism, which he understood when I was done.
Apparently, in France, people don't fly the French flag as much as Americans fly their flag. Whether thats good or bad, not for me to decide. It was just a culture difference for him. Then, I had to explain to him Delaware specifically (where we were), and what the Confederate flag was, and why he saw that many places; business establishments, bars, dorm rooms, houses, etc. Took me about an hour to explain in the briefest detail for him, but I think he got it in the end.
On a slightly more off-topic note, all of us at school always got a kick of the first Cinco de Mayo we celebrated with him. He couldn't understand why an entire town, 50,000 people strong, were celebrating French defeat to the Spanish.  I had to explain to him that it was just an excuse to drink, because he was getting really, really pissed off.
--
And so castles made of sand, slip into the sea, eventually.
I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Future for America? said by Jeffrey:said by pnh102:What irks me more are foreigners in this country who get offended at the US flag or get their panties in a knot when someone sings "The Star Spangled Banner." Get out of my country already! I generally would agree with you. My friend from France who came to the United States to get his PhD in Economics [while I was finishing up my undergrad work], mentioned to me one day that American people love to fly their flag everywhere, at a lot of events. I forget the words he used specifically, but it was generally a more negative tone to his remark than I had liked. So, I had to take a few steps back and explain to him the differences between Patriotism, Nationalism and Extremism, which he understood when I was done. Apparently, in France, people don't fly the French flag as much as Americans fly their flag. Whether thats good or bad, not for me to decide. It was just a culture difference for him. Then, I had to explain to him Delaware specifically (where we were), and what the Confederate flag was, and why he saw that many places; business establishments, bars, dorm rooms, houses, etc. Took me about an hour to explain in the briefest detail for him, but I think he got it in the end. On a slightly more off-topic note, all of us at school always got a kick of the first Cinco de Mayo we celebrated with him. He couldn't understand why an entire town, 50,000 people strong, were celebrating French defeat to the Spanish. I had to explain to him that it was just an excuse to drink, because he was getting really, really pissed off. How do they make War in France? Err, surrender.
Ever saw the French military manual for all new personnel?
It is called: "Surrendering with dignity and a bottle of wine."
What did Hitler say positive about the French army?
"Unlike our Italian friends, at least they know when they are beaten and their tanks don't have one gear for forward and 5 for reverse."
Has France ever won a war?
Yes, but even that has been disputed.
What is France's national pride saying?
"Vive la Perrier!!!"
In WWII, brave French soldiers would thrown grenades into marching German soldiers. The Germans would pick up the grenades, pull the pin, throw them back, and kill the French soldiers.
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl | |
| | | | | | | |
approval from:
amigo_boy
| I think you have to understand where your French friend is coming from, in living memory Europe was pushed into 2 world wars, both were bornout of Nationalism. Patriotism is viewed as the beginning of the slippery slope to Nationalism and then Extremism. Until 1975 (I think) France had a fascist dictatorship on its border to the south, those feelings of antipathy linger in the collective memopry long after the time where the events occurred has passed. | |
|
| | | | | Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by supergirl:Sorry, but if you hate America so much, why are you here? Really? We can do a lot better without one more pain in the rearend. I'm just sick of the hate America crowd. Sorry, but if you can't tolerate constitutionally-guaranteed dissent, why are you here? Really? Whe can do a lot better without more pain in the rearend. I'm just sick of the hate America crowd.
Get it? 
Mark | |
|
| | | | Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by pnh102:US citizens who have a "this place sucks" attitude clearly have no idea how good we have things in this country. I don't think you understand. US citizens who think other US citizens suck (or, that this place sucks because of other US citizens) have no idea how good we have things in this country (and, how much better it might be if they left).
That's what I've never found very compelling about the "love it or leave it" mantra. Implicit in the mantra is the same negativism as those its directed at.
Mark | |
| | | | | |
See 19 replies to this post | |
| | | |
4 edits | But yet it is our constitutional right under free speech to complain as much and as loudly as we want to. If there is one thing that is of value to all citizens of the United States, it is the value of having a opinion. It's quite frankly the American way to speak your mind.
Having these different opinions is what makes our Republic, and our society, for what it is. It has nothing to do with how good things are in this country, period. This take it or leave it argument is very unpatriotic in my opinion. Every American who thinks that way should hang their head in shame cause they do not comprehend what a true American is all about. | |
|
| Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
1 edit | said by ztmike:I'll be laughing when the Chinese banks tell the U.S to go fuck off. And our market does a barrow spin to the ground with a fiery explosion. (like it is now.) A more likely scenereo is that we'll round up the invaders and eliminate them (and the traitors and treasonous among us who let them in who try to stop us from winning), and we'll just take physical control of our own culture, language and borders, and the whole money thing will be put on temporary hold while we re-establish it. The heavily ironic part is that the communists will have turned us communist temporarily while we jettison their invasion, since they will "have all our money". Once we've caughed up that whole money concept, our best direction is to go back to using money again, but with the proper regulation to stop our borders, language and culture from being damaged again, at least while those of us around have memories of why. The black market will be the pro-national pro-assimilated pro-USA market, before we're even done with the jettisoning, so money will still be present, but just not in the same form. We'll get it corrected back again.
Note that I said that is a more likely scenereo than what you said; I didn't say that it's likely. Most likely the Chinese banks telling us to die will be seen for what it is, so they'll avoid that. We'll have to be individually and personally more resilient than in the above scenereo I mentioned, since they'll probably try to continue killing us bit by bit as they've been doing for a while now (and we've only recently become aware of), rather than doing anything large that causes us to become alarmed simultaneously.
Just the other day looking for work 2 of the 5 jobs posted in San Jose for office work on Craigslist said they required "bilingual" people. They didn't immediately mention what they meant by that, but they were only thinking of one particular language, not any languages: they later explained the assumption that this meant "Mandarin". I never even heard of that language until yesterday, so I had to look it up. Apparently, Mandarin is another name for Chinese.
Probably in the takeover of the USA handbook all the enemies have, it says that "in 2008, we start requiring all hires to know Mandarin (Chinese)". They are going bit by bit. | |
| | | Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| Re: Future for America? said by Ulmo:Probably in the takeover of the USA handbook all the enemies have, it says that "in 2008, we start requiring all hires to know Mandarin (Chinese)". They are going bit by bit. It used to be customary to tell Chinese they need to speak English if they want to participate in our markets. That tide is turning. Get used to it.
FWIW: I spend a lot of time working with Chinese. It's been my experience that they're not very honest people. I guess it's something cultural. A broad statement. But, it always seems like they're dissembling. That's the word that always comes to mind.
Mark | |
| | | | | said by Ulmo: They didn't immediately mention what they meant by that, but they were only thinking of one particular language, not any languages: they later explained the assumption that this meant "Mandarin". I never even heard of that language until yesterday, so I had to look it up. Apparently, Mandarin is another name for Chinese. If you do not know what Mandarin is why do you still have job? Why would anybody other than El Bushelito State Department ever offer you one??? | |
|
 Jovi
join:2000-02-24
Mount Joy, PA | Well in light of... multiple website's operated by my state being attacked by Chinese hackers, and their government being the ultimate big brother, I think the choice should be an obviously easy no.
--
"Where's my coffee? Oh. I guess it's my turn to make it."  | |
| | JeffreyWilpon please sell the MetsPremium
join:2002-12-24
Long Island
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Vonage
·Optimum Online
| Re: Well in light of... said by Jovi:multiple website's operated by my state being attacked by Chinese hackers, and their government being the ultimate big brother, I think the choice should be an obviously easy no. I agree. This is an easy decision, and should be handled even more quickly than the potential sale of many of our nations ports to Dubai that was floated in 2007.
--
And so castles made of sand, slip into the sea, eventually.
I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing. | |
|
| | This happens every election year Politicians get to talking about how bad China is then when the elections are over the Anti-Chinese bandwagon hushes it's mouth and rubber stamp everything the Chinese wants . | |
|  Logan 5Enjoying the CataclysmPremium,MVM
join:2001-05-25
Austin, TX
kudos:7
·Comcast
| This is troubling news indeed The above poster is right, the obvious and only answer for this should be a loudand resounding NO!
While it's true that 3Com networking gear has somewhat fallen by the wayside in terms adoptability by business, whats to stop Huawei from adding all sorts of little "surprises" in the firmware of their enterprise class switches which are still used in many small and mid sized enterprises?
Since there's a grey area with Huawei, spying and the Chinese Government only a "terminally ignorant" US congress would condone and greenlight such a merger....
Why wouldnt this connection have come to light during the initial merger filings with the SEC et.al?
Seems like if true this info would have stopped the takeover dead in it's tracks.... | |
| |  lakinoPremium
join:2003-04-03
Campbell, CA | Re: This is troubling news indeed This thread is soooo full of xenophobic, racist hate speech that the entire thread should be deleted! | |
| | | Logan 5Enjoying the CataclysmPremium,MVM
join:2001-05-25
Austin, TX
kudos:7 Reviews:
·Comcast
|  Re: This is troubling news indeed
said by lakino:This thread is soooo full of xenophobic, racist hate speech that the entire thread should be deleted! Nect time please reply to the thread starter then my post when making comments that could be misconstrued as being somehow directed toward me or my comments.
My comments are neither xenophobic, racist or hate speech. It's a proven fact that China has at times in the past employed spies for industrial espionage and engages in sometimes questionable business practices, so please keep the rhetoric to a minumum and lets stick to the facts when replying to my comments.
Thank you. | |
|
| | What We need is some Brawndo-the thirst mutilator It has electrolites | |
|
| |
|
|
