Please don't vote for McCain

scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
More Obama tidbits.
"The people in this stadium need to know who we're going to fight for," Obama said at Soldier Field. "The reason that I'm running for president is because of you, not because of folks who are writing big checks, and that's a clear message that has to be sent, I think, by every candidate."
But behind Obama's campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth. A Globe review of Obama's campaign finance records shows that he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs as a state legislator in Illinois, a US senator, and a presidential aspirant.
In Obama's eight years in the Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he raised for his campaigns -- $296,000 of $461,000 -- came from PACs, corporate contributions, or unions, according to Illinois Board of Elections records. He tapped financial services firms, real estate developers, healthcare providers, oil companies, and many other corporate interests, the records show.
Obama's US Senate campaign committee, starting with his successful run in 2004, has collected $128,000 from lobbyists and $1.3 million from PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit organization that tracks money in politics. His $1.3 million from PACs represents 8 percent of what he has raised overall. Clinton's Senate committee, by comparison, has raised $3 million from PACs, 4 percent of her total amount raised, the group said.
In addition, Obama's own federal PAC, Hopefund, took in $115,000 from 56 PACs in the 2005-2006 election cycle out of $4.4 million the PAC raised, according to CQ MoneyLine, which collects Federal Election Commission data. Obama then used those PAC contributions -- including thousands from defense contractors, law firms, and the securities and insurance industries -- to build support for his presidential run by making donations to Democratic Party organizations and candidates around the country.
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
More good news from Iraq......I thought this was a war that could not be won?

February 15, 2008, 4:00 pm
A Trade Show Relocates — to Baghdad
By Gina Chon
For the first time in six years, a trade show aimed at drumming up business for local companies was held in Baghdad, reflecting recent security improvements. The DBX Trade Show had been held in the stable Kurdistan region; similar conferences have been held in nearby countries such as Jordan.
But since Iraq has seen a downturn in overall violence, organizers of the Baghdad Business to Business Expo decided to hold the three-day event in the capital, making it easier for local businessmen to attend. More than 260 companies had booths at the event, which began Friday at the al-Rasheed Hotel.
 
bdhutier

bdhutier

Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2473859
Actually Bush lied. Texas doesn't really border Mexico

You're right, Reefraff... Texas doesn't border Mexico, Mexico Borders Texas!!

Just my serious, informational input to this discussion!
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2473215
Israels source of terrorism is not coming from Iraq.
New documents seized by Israel from Yasser Arafat's headquarters in Ramallah and other terrorist operational centers in the West Bank show in extraordinary detail how Iraq has been funding terror and mayhem against Israeli civilians during the last two years.
Among Saddam's victims have been U.S. and European citizens who were visiting Israel. And yet for some reason, as with the evidence showing Iraq's alliance with al-Qaeda, few Western reporters have been willing to pay attention. A notable exception was a report aired Sept. 29 by CBS 60 Minutes correspondent Leslie Stahl. Citing captured documents provided by the Israelis, she revealed that Saddam's closest deputy, Vice President Taha Yasin Ramadan, personally had signed checks made out to Palestinian terrorist leaders who had organized suicide-bombing attacks.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
http:///forum/post/2474730
More good news from Iraq......I thought this was a war that could not be won?

February 15, 2008, 4:00 pm
A Trade Show Relocates — to Baghdad
By Gina Chon
For the first time in six years, a trade show aimed at drumming up business for local companies was held in Baghdad, reflecting recent security improvements. The DBX Trade Show had been held in the stable Kurdistan region; similar conferences have been held in nearby countries such as Jordan.
But since Iraq has seen a downturn in overall violence, organizers of the Baghdad Business to Business Expo decided to hold the three-day event in the capital, making it easier for local businessmen to attend. More than 260 companies had booths at the event, which began Friday at the al-Rasheed Hotel.
But the surge was a failure? The democrats said so.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2472836
Not really... they say the shells they found were from the time of the Gulf War. But even if those weapons had the capablility to reach Israel or Kuwait... its not an imminent threat to the United States as portrayed by the Bush Admin at the start of the war. The shells that were found were said to be unharmful.
If they did strike Israel that may would lead for us to get invloved; however, didn't Israel just go through something like this not to long ago and they responded with their own military against Hezbollah?
Have you read the Loftus Report?
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2472836
Not really... they say the shells they found were from the time of the Gulf War. But even if those weapons had the capablility to reach Israel or Kuwait... its not an imminent threat to the United States as portrayed by the Bush Admin at the start of the war. The shells that were found were said to be unharmful.
There is no ambiguity, however, about captured tape ISGQ-2003-M0007379, in which Saddam is briefed on his secret nuclear weapons project. This meeting clearly took place in 2002 or afterwards: almost a decade after the State Department claimed that Saddam had abandoned his nuclear weapons research.
Moreover the tape describes a laser enrichment process for uranium that had never been known by the UN inspectors to even exist in Iraq, and Saddam's nuclear briefers on the tape were Iraqi scientists who had never been on any weapons inspector’s list. The tape explicitly discusses how civilian plasma research could be used as a cover for military plasma research necessary to build a hydrogen bomb.
When this tape came to the attention of the International Intelligence Summit, a non-profit, non-partisan educational forum focusing on global intelligence affairs, the organization asked the NSA to verify the voiceprints of Saddam and his cronies, invited a certified translator to present Saddam’s nuclear tapes to the public, and then invited leading intelligence analysts to comment.
At the direct request of the Summit, President Bush promptly overruled his national intelligence adviser, John Negroponte, a career State Department man, and ordered that the rest of the captured Saddam tapes and documents be reviewed as rapidly as possible. The Intelligence Summit asked that Saddam's tapes and documents be posted on a public website so that Arabic-speaking volunteers could help with the translation and analysis.
At first, the public website seemed like a good idea. Another document was quickly discovered, dated November 2002, describing an expensive plan to remove radioactive contamination from an isotope production building. The document cites the return of UNMOVIC inspectors as the reason for cleaning up the evidence of radioactivity. This is not far from a smoking gun: there were not supposed to be any nuclear production plants in Iraq in 2002.
Then a barrage of near-smoking guns opened up. Document after document from Saddam's files was posted unread on the public website, each one describing how to make a nuclear bomb in more detail than the last. These documents, dated just before the war, show that Saddam had accumulated just about every secret there was for the construction of nuclear weapons. The Iraqi intelligence files contain so much accurate information on the atom bomb that the translators’ public website had to be closed for reasons of national security.
If Saddam had nuclear weapons facilities, where was he hiding them? Iraqi informants showed US investigators where Saddam had constructed huge underwater storage facilities beneath the Euphrates River. The tunnel entrances were still sealed with tons of concrete. The US investigators who approached the sealed entrances were later determined to have been exposed to radiation. Incredibly, their reports were lost in the postwar confusion, and Saddam’s underground nuclear storage sites were left unguarded for the next three years. Still, the eyewitness testimony about the sealed underwater warehouses matched with radiation exposure is strong circumstantial evidence that some amount of radioactive material was still present in Iraq on the day the war began.
Our volunteer researchers discovered the actual movement order from the Iraqi high command ordering all the remaining special equipment to be moved into the underground sites only a few weeks before the onset of the war. The date of the movement order suggests that President Bush, who clearly knew nothing of the specifics of the underground nuclear sites, or even that a nuclear weapons program still existed in Iraq, may have been accidentally correct about the main point of the war: the discovery of Saddam’s secret nuclear program, even in hindsight, arguably provides sufficient legal justification for the previous use of force.
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2472836
Not really... they say the shells they found were from the time of the Gulf War. But even if those weapons had the capablility to reach Israel or Kuwait... its not an imminent threat to the United States as portrayed by the Bush Admin at the start of the war. The shells that were found were said to be unharmful.
Bill Tierney, a former military intelligence officer and an UNSCOM weapons inspector in Iraq from 1996-1998, told Fox News' Hannity & Colmes on Thursday, February 16th, that Saddaem Hussein was heavily involved with terrorism, and that translations of 12 of the dictator's 'secret tapes' recorded at his palace office, reveal he talked about attacks that were coming to Washington DC. The tapes have been confirmed by U.S. officials as being authentic.
According to Tierney, he was contacted by the National Virtual Translation Center, which is run by the FBI, to translate the tapes which reveal, among other things, conversations between Saddam Hussein and Deputy Prime Minister Tarik Aziz about terrorist attacks on America via missiles, and chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction.
On one of the tapes Tariq Aziz told Saddam:
"The biological [attack] is very easy to make. It's so simple that any biologist can make a bottle of germs and drop it into a water tower and kill 100,000. This is not done by a state. No need to accuse a state. An individual can do it."
The two also talked about their need for help from Brazil, France and Russia.
Tapes dated August 1995 reveal one of Saddam's sons-in-law, Hussein Kamel, explaining how Iraq hid its biological weapons program from U.N. inspectors:
"We did not reveal all that we have. We did not reveal the volume of chemical weapons we had produced."
Kamel also said Iraq had not revealed:
"the type of weapons, nor the volume of the materials we imported
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
By William Stuntz
It is no longer possible to say with a straight face that the war in Iraq is as good as lost, or that the "surge" is a flop. David Petraeus has proved to be a 21st-century Matthew Ridgway: the general who took over American forces in Korea after the Chinese had taken Seoul and swept down the peninsula. Ridgway retook Seoul, pushed Chinese and North Korean forces back to the 38th parallel, and salvaged a partial victory from what had looked like certain defeat. Petraeus has done as much, in more difficult circumstances. Yet Obama and Clinton compete to see who condemned the war soonest and who can promise to withdraw American soldiers the fastest.
They're missing the point. The war can and should be won even if it shouldn't have been fought in the first place--because we're not in the first place; choices must be made from where one stands today, not some imaginary place of the speaker's choosing. And the promise of speedy withdrawal tells those who fight American soldiers: Hold on a little longer; those you fight will soon leave the field. A more destructive message can scarcely be imagined.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
http:///forum/post/2474809
By William Stuntz
It is no longer possible to say with a straight face that the war in Iraq is as good as lost, or that the "surge" is a flop. David Petraeus has proved to be a 21st-century Matthew Ridgway: the general who took over American forces in Korea after the Chinese had taken Seoul and swept down the peninsula. Ridgway retook Seoul, pushed Chinese and North Korean forces back to the 38th parallel, and salvaged a partial victory from what had looked like certain defeat. Petraeus has done as much, in more difficult circumstances. Yet Obama and Clinton compete to see who condemned the war soonest and who can promise to withdraw American soldiers the fastest.
They're missing the point. The war can and should be won even if it shouldn't have been fought in the first place--because we're not in the first place; choices must be made from where one stands today, not some imaginary place of the speaker's choosing. And the promise of speedy withdrawal tells those who fight American soldiers: Hold on a little longer; those you fight will soon leave the field. A more destructive message can scarcely be imagined.

Bush's web of deception runs deep.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by bdhutier
http:///forum/post/2475367
Whaaaa?? Did I miss sarcasm?

I'm never sarcastic.

That actually happened really close to where I used to live.
I just always hear these arguments, of hypothetical situations where the gun owner goes nuts and shoots everyone as he tries to play hero. (personally people watch to many movies) I've never actually heard an actual story. But I posted an example on how it does work. This is how Guns saves lives.
 
bdhutier

bdhutier

Member
Oh, I think I've got it... the "Take the guns out of basic peoples' hands" part threw me off. I was thinking, 'but they were going to kill him, and he saved himself!' Sorry!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top