Controlled Chaos

QUOTE(Steff @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 02:32 PM) I think we leave at 3 something on the 14th.. I'll check and PM you. Is that the only one you're going to? Yeah...we get there the 12th and I was voted down on going to the sox game that day. We're golfing instead. Then we are golfing 36 holes the next day cause the sox are away. Then we are going to the game the 14th. Hopefully we can hang out one of the nights somewhere.

QUOTE(Steff @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 03:39 PM) :sleep http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46362 DAM!!!!!!!!!! Always a step behind, but on the bright side....this is making the rounds cause I just got the email!!!!!!!!!!!!

Every 14th of February you get the chance to display your fondness for your wife or girlfriend by showering her with gifts, flowers, dinner, shows and any other baubles that women find romantic. Secret...guys feel left out. That's right...left out. There's no special holiday for the ladies to show their appreciation for the men in their life. Men as a whole are either too proud or just too embarrassed to admit it. This is why a new holiday has been created. March 20th is now officially "Steak & Blowjob Day." Simple, effective and self-explanatory...this holiday has been created so your ladies can have a day to show your man just how much you love him. No cards, no flowers, no special nights on the town-the name of the holiday explains it all...just a steak and a BJ. That's it. This twin pairing of Valentine's Day and Steak & BJ Day will usher in a new age of love as men everywhere will try THAT much harder in February to ensure a more memorable March! It's like a perpetual love machine. The word is already spreading, but as with any new idea, it needs a little push to start the ball rolling. So spread the word, and help bring love and peace to this crazy world.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 03:26 PM) I saw your reasons, and they included race. I don't live in Utopia. But I can most certainly choose the right thing to do. I just don't even know what to say about your statements that a bunch of white kids are likely to get killed because they are near Cabrini. Its racist and ridiculous. I drive by Cabrini all the time, including at night. If you want to continue amplifying race as an issue, then by all means, make your decisions based on race. I for one refuse, and in the long run, I am convinced thats how we can make it a non-issue. I was in that car 16 years ago as a stupid teenager drving around, and yeah we had a real good chance of getting in some deep s*** if that cop hadn't gotten us out of there. So we'll go are seperate ways on the issue...

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 02:49 PM) Gotcha. So, using your logic, you are a hypocrite - you think profiling is OK "at times". And its not "all profiling". If I'm a cop (not a stretch for me, BTW), and I see a bunch of rough lookin' kids out cruisin' at 3am, I'll try to find a reason to stop them. But guess what? I do it on BEHAVIORAL factors, and other factors directly related to crime. For example, the kids are out at 3am. Maybe they look like they are drivind erratically and have been drinking. But what does NOT come into play is race - of the drivers or the neighborhood. Its illogical (see my earlier posts) and morally wrong. And while prevention is indeed part of law enforcement, that prevention still needs to work within the bounds of the law. DWB does not fit that rule. So in the case of domestic security, race is and should be irrelevant. There have been a lot more terrorist acts commited on US soil by caucasians than Arabs. And what evidence is there that this charge about the 2-Arab rule is true? I just highly doubt there is a rule about fining airlines for having over a maximum number of a certain race being checked. Its ridiculous. But if there is such a policy, I'll be the first in line to rally against it. By profiling "at times" I meant profiling with "reasons" I then stated some those reasons, but you wanted to call me a hypocrite so you ignored them. ok fine. You live in your utopian world where you only pull over kids if they are driving erratically...and I'll live in the real world where a cop looks at all factors...including skin color. See my cop would pull over 5 white kids in a car at 2:00 am in Cabrini Green...cause he knows something is up. Him pulling them over and getting them out of there might just save their lives. You on the other hand would let them drive around and maybe get killed cause they weren't driving erratically or doing anything else related to crime. or wait can we only make profiling examples with black people??

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 02:24 PM) Another good site for cheap gas!

QUOTE(Steff @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 12:31 PM) 7th to the 14th Are you going to the game on the 14th?? That's the game we are going to.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 01:37 PM) Then by your logic, you are either a hypocrite, or you favor racial profiling in general. So since you are apparently OK with profiling, you are OK with cops targeting blacks? This was your argument, by the way, that if you are against this deal, you are a hypocrite because it was profiling. And do you have any evidence of airlines being fined for questioning 2 Arabs at once, or is that just an "illustration"? I was against this deal, and am still against it, because the company is controlled by a government who seems OK with terrorism (and might even support it), and a company whose ports are obviously questionable in their security record. And further, now learning more and more, it seems even more clear that this deal did not follow process, and was effected by some underhanded dealings without our own government. I am in favor of profiling at times....hence why I wasn't speaking of myself in calling people hypocrites. I think most here could have put that together. No it wasn't an illustration.... Linky Were you aware that it was the policy of the Justice Department - and I'd like you to comment as to whether these continuities are still in place - before I go to Justice, were you aware that it was the policy and I believe remains the policy today to fine airlines if they have more than two young Arab males in secondary questioning because that's discriminatory? Cops targeting blacks cause they're black is a little extreme. Just as is grabbing every single arab looking person at an airport is extreme. However, when you add some factors in. Paid with cash...One way ticket...No checked baggage..young Arab male...then I'd say a couple extra questions are warranted. Pulling over a car cause there are a group of blacks in it...NO, there is no reason for it. Pulling over a car with a group of blacks in it looking like gangbangers and trouble makers, driving around at 3:00 in the morning in the middle of suburbia?? yeah...pull em over and check em out. If there's a group of white boys driving around an all black neighborhood, looking like gangbangers and trouble makers...guess what a cop is going to pull them over too. Cause they are there either for trouble or drugs. Same with hispanics. That's part of a cops job...to snuff out trouble before it happens..not after bodies start piling up. It's all profiling. It's seeing something out of place and checking to see if it really is or isn't. It's done all the time. It's how crimes get stopped before the happen. It's how murders get stopped before they happen.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 12:33 PM) So, you're going to assume that people arguing against this must not have a differentiated reason, and therefore they are hypocrites. The assumption is false. The comparison is apples and oranges to me, thats why its different. And I see you are neatly not expressing a view on this. Are you OK with racial profiling of Arab-looking folks at airports? How about black people in sooped up cars? When this first came out, before their were any facts on the company....people were against it. I was against it and the first reason was because it's an Arab country. There's my view. I don't have a problem with asking an extra question or two to young arab males at the airport. I do have a problem with airlines getting fined if they have 2 arabs being questoined at the same time.

Well anyone be there March 12th-15th??

QUOTE(The Critic @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 10:13 AM) Yeah, if he appeared dizzy it was probably from rolling his eyes every 15 seconds at the latest dips*** remark to come out of that dope's mouth. haha

God Bless!!

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 11:02 AM) How would you feel about the Chinese Government handling management and hiring security personnel at U.S. ports? This isn't about what I want. I would personally rather our governement handle all our ports. I think it was a London based company that was sold to the UAE...I wouldn't have liked that London company either...I didn't know s*** about our ports then though. Why can't we manage our own ports? I vote for Kapomet's start up company...he seems like a good enough guy and he's not from the UAE so right there is big plus for everyone.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 10:50 AM) Are you trying to justify racial profiling? Or are you saying its wrong, including in this case? Or do you agree with those who say this is an apples/oranges comparison? What is the point you are really driving at here? That the people arguing against this are hypocrites. They are profiling.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 10:23 AM) For me the issue has always been about the hypocrisy (sp?) of the adminsitration on this issue first and foremost. The nations of the world are "either with us or against us." We used suspected ties to terrorism as partial reason for the Iraq invasion. Now, we're giving a lucrative deal to a company owned and controlled by a government that has provided funding to El Quaida, from a country that some of the 9-11 hijackers travelled throuugh to get to the US, and one of a handful of countries (Pakistan and Saudi Arabia being the others) that recognized the Taliban as the legitimate Afghan government. How's that for ties to terrorism? I truly don't think the move compromises our security in any way, and a good NPR piece this morning supported this belief. But I'd like aomwone who thinks reservations aboutt this deal are unfounded to square the "with us or against us" rhetoric with the fact that we are giving a company owned by a state with KNOWN ties to terrorist organizations a $6 billion dollar contract. First let me say that I don't like this deal, so I'm not arguing in favor of it. I'm just saying blocking this company because they are Arab owned and from the UAE is the discrimination and racial profiling that is deemed reprehensible when used against an individual. Why is it ok for so many politicians to be discriminating against this whole country. If 5 people from the UAE were to come to this country to work, a company could not say we can't hire you cause you came from UAE. The ACLU would be on that company in the blink of an eye. Just as American Airlines can't say, you came from UAE so we're going to have to check you a little more closely than grandma over here.

Well Done!!

You both make valid points....but with all due respect...none of that informatoin was available when this story first came out. All people heard was UAE was taking over 6 ports and everyone started screaming NO WAY. I DON'T LIKE THIS. THIS CAN'T HAPPEN. etc etc etc.... Which to me says everyone was doing it based on this being on arab nation...first and foremost.

Here's a question for conversation. If we are not willing to racial profile against Arabs getting on planes any more diligently and vigoursly than my 87 year old grandma. Why are we so willing to profile against an entire Arab nation?

Deer video

She's from Naperville. I think she went to Naperville North. She was also in "The Princess and the Marine" with Zach from the saved by the bell. That makes her a bonafide star in my book!!

QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 09:42 AM) Right on both counts! Yep!! I always thought she was cute though....she just had that look to me. I didn't see her for a long time until that Blind Justice show.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 09:08 AM) i emailed the contact for the site to ask who it was. If Im wrong, oh well. It's Marisol Nichols. She's a hometown girl and quite the hottie if I might add. She was in Vegas Vacation, Blind Justice, and now she is in a new show In Justice.

I saw it. I though they did a nice job showing how the fan base has gone back and forth over the years. FYI - Tamaron Hall said she likes going to Sox games for the Mai Tai's. So if you ever see her at the Cell and are looking for a way to hit on her...buy her one of those!!

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Feb 19, 2006 -> 11:43 PM) yea, that sounds very intrusive. if the bar owner wants to put cameras in his/her own establishment that is their right, but to force it is bs I'm not sure, but I thought he wanted cameras outside of those bars?? I have no problem with them in public area's. If by apartment complex's he means in the parking lots or cameras facing the doors....then I'm all for it. If he means inside the halls and such I'd say no.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Feb 20, 2006 -> 10:27 AM) How do they do a 3D ultrasound? Is it more than one "camera" on your wifes belly? Check out the link in my post. They have pictures and stuff.