Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 
 Author Thread: So whats the deal with 2012 ?
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 33 (view)
 
So whats the deal with 2012 ?
Posted: 7/20/2008 11:50:32 AM
Recently on CLT (Canadian Learning Channel) they had a special on 2012 and part of the show featured "Web Bot". This is a computer program that was designed to identify trends for the stock market. After a while the people running Web Bot noticed that it was picking up on other things and even predicted 9/11.

Now Web Bot is saying that in 2012 there will be an "event" that will change the world. Not to sure what that "event" might be, but it seems to be lining up with what a lot of other sources.

Guess we'll all know in a few years and if your Karmas in good shape, what's the worst that could happen?
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 195 (view)
 
It's official - Bush BS'd us into Iraq
Posted: 7/13/2008 5:59:21 PM
What many Americans probably don't know is that there was a rebuttal to Collin Powells presentation to the UN.

I was watching Powell make his presentationand at the end, CNN and all the other American networks switched to the "talking heads" who went on at great length as to what great presentation Powell had made. Meanwhile expert after expert was refuting the threats being outlined. Many of the sites had already been inspected and the documents linking Iraq to yellowcake from Niger were discounted as fake.

Even leading up to the war the US media were parroting the Whitehouse line. The BBC World Report starts at 6pm and thier reporters were in Iraq and would go to the sites the US listed as weapons labs or caches and report thier findings; nothing. At 6:30pm I would watch the US news just to see the same stories and have a good laugh. Sure enough there would be huge flaming graphic; "CRISIS IN THE GULF"! I would spring up in my chair and think; My God! did I miss something? Only to see a smiling Swede wearing a lab coat and hard hat.

War is big business. The oil, no bid contracts, the mercinaries fighting the war and protecting government officals (Blackwater, guess US Marines aren't good enough for the department of state) and all the other tradesmen, suppliers, and big business making all the tanks, aircraft, etc. that will have to be replaced after they wear out working in the harsh desert. But big business means big bills too and you may have noticed that taxes haven't been levied to pay for this grand adventure in the Iraq. Nope, not one tax increase in fact there have been tax cuts for the richest Americans and the war is being financed through credit. Most of the money being borrowed from China, so win loss or draw your grandkid's, grandkid's will be working for Asians to pay this mess off.

I guess it really shouldn't come as much of a surprise. Bush only did the same thing to the US as he's done to every single company he has ever ran.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 261 (view)
 
Okay very simple question, why is America fighting in Iraq?
Posted: 7/13/2008 5:34:49 PM
Certainly there are a number of reasons why Bush invaded Iraq and none of them have ever been stated by him or any member of his administration. Another, in the growing list of reasons, is that Saddam started selling Iraqi oil in Euros and not US dollars. This represented a real threat to the US petro dollar and after invading the US re-wrote all those contracts.

Now didn't I hear Iran talking about selling it's oil in a pool of currency, including the Euro?
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 31 (view)
 
Canada, U.S. agree to use each other's troops in civil emergencies
Posted: 3/2/2008 5:45:13 AM
I really don't understand the need for the agreement. As mntioned earlier in this thread both countries have always been there for one another in time of crisis. We are also the closest of allies adn share the world longest undefended boarder.

From a Canadian point of view I have to ask myself why we would sign the thing in the first place. If our troops need more training or personnel, then we should see to it.

The other thing that I found a little disturbing was the use of the phrase "civil unrest". Bush has signed a couple of Presidential directives that give him absolute power in a time of crisis and, oh yeah, Bush gets to define what a crisis is.

Now that scary!
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 583 (view)
 
Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/31/2007 10:06:49 AM
Amnesty International, The Red Cross and international law all agree that water boarding is torture. History has proven time and again, that the ENDS NEVER JUSTIFY THE MEANS.

The fact that the same people involved in torture deny what it is should come as no surprise. If American methods were legal or ethical then why were tapes of the sessions distroyed ?

The US tortures. Don't believe me, look up the Arar case on the internet. Seems like the despots in the middle east are good enough to do Uncle Sams dirt work.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 230 (view)
 
Michel Moore's New Film Sicko
Posted: 7/1/2007 5:47:01 PM
Regardless of what you may think of Moore because of his stand on Iraq, by the way he was right about the reasons for the war being wrong, no WMD's. He does bbring to light some disturbing fact about the US healthcare system.

Not to get into anything in the movie, but consider that you need health services when your really young or really old. Two times in your life when you don't have an income, so how smart is it to have a for-profit healthcare system? What kind of care are you going to recieve when the hospital has profit as the priority not patient well being?

There's a good reason every single industrializsed nation on earth, except the United States, has universal healthcare. Personally, I think the debate is long over-due.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 77 (view)
 
Liz Edwards Ann Coulter spat
Posted: 7/1/2007 5:39:36 PM
Ann Coulter's level of debate is type that usually seen during elections and it seems her book add fuel to that fire, so to speak.

At present there are 2 parties, both of which are as crooked as a dog's hind leg and pander to lobbyists for the most parts. If political discussions and debate ever rose above the "Ann Coulter" level then we would see a parisan feeding frenzy like none seen before. As one side brought for the one allegation the other would counter with some sort of scandel and so one. "Pork Barrelling" alone would have every member on the hill sweating bullets and dodging reporters 24/7.

There's no need to worry though; Ann will still write her books and attack ads will replace legitimate debate in November. The Daily Show recently did a piece with a guy that would state "townhalls" during election time. The audiences are screened so nothing goes wrong. Appearently they're not Q&A's at all, just political infomercials.

With all this it would seem that the deck is stacked against the average voter, but I guess I'm an optimist because at the end of the day, it's exchanges like the one between Coulter and Edwards that keeps my hopes alive.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 159 (view)
 
Health Care in Canada May Kill You
Posted: 3/24/2007 6:58:43 PM
I've been treated in the US and believe me THE MONEY COMES FIRST.

To put things in context, if your shot they will stop the bleeding, but you will be out on the street as quick as they can get you without being sued. Forget any kind of follow up care. It's my understanding from watching CNN, that even if you have insurance the care you receieve is dictated more by what is covered than what is needed. Companies will be calling wanting to know why the doctor involved has made the decisions he/she has.

In the US I felt more like livestock than a patient and I think that it was this experience that made me more grateful. I now have a full appreication of what we stand to loose if we allow companies to profit from the sick and suffering.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 177 (view)
 
Is Al Gore a Hypocrite?
Posted: 3/24/2007 6:48:01 PM
Going green is about reducing or removing waste. When you remove or reduce waste you generally save money, not spend it.

Compact flourecent bulbs, sure they are a little bit more money, but how many times during the course for the year do you replace a bulb? Pick the 5 most used rooms for the compacts as well.

Reducing the thermostat a couple of degrees and wearing a sweater go a long way.

Many non-profit organizations will check your home for drafts and leaks that have already cost you money and will continue to unless remedied. (most times quickly and inexpensively)

Check for vampires. These are appliances that consume electricity even when they are off. For example, the VCR thats only used once every 2 months and cel phone charges left plugged in still drain power.

Clean the filters in your furnice and reconsider the beer fridge in the garage. If its getting on in years it could be costing you a bundle in hydro.(money better spent on more beer)

There are lots of other things you can do as well, but these few won't cost anything and might help lower the bills a little bit.

"Think global, act local"
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 11 (view)
 
Iranian capture of UK soldiers
Posted: 3/24/2007 6:35:00 PM
Lets not forget that the US has lots of practice at regime change in Iran. It was the CIA that arranged the overthrow of the constitutional government of Iran in 1953.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 157 (view)
 
Health Care in Canada May Kill You
Posted: 3/24/2007 6:32:10 PM
We have to keep the pressure onOttawa to invest in our healthcare system and then reinvest some more.
Healthcare services are needed most when people are either very young or very old; BOTH TIMES WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE AN INCOME SO A FOR-PROFIT HEALTHCARE IS OUT OF THE QUESTION.

If Stephen Harper can find money to occupy other countries, he can find money to provide for healthcare. If Stephen can find tax dollars for oil companies in Alberts, he can pay for taxpayers to see a doctor. If little Stevie can find money for military aircraft and guns; he can find money for cat-scans and MRIs.

And don't even begin to give me that tripe about not being able to afford it. We've had great healthcare when there was less wealth and prosperity. We're a G8 nation with gobs of oil; trust me we can afford it. It's just sleeze ball politicians like Stephen Harper and Paul Martin before him and Daughton (lie his face off) McGuinty play games with the issue and nothing ever gets done.

Don't believe me; just look at the amount spent on defense and security since 9/11 and compare it to how much the Romano called for. If there was the political will WE WOULD ALREADY HAVE SUSTAINABLE HEALTHCARE.

Eye examination and chiropractic care have already been cut and that was done by the Liberals. It scares me to think what the conservatives would do. Remember Stephen Harper cutting funding for adult literacy weeks before anouncing a budget surplus.

HEALTHCARE IS A HUMAN RIGHT AND WE CAN NEVER LET OTTAWA FORGET IT.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 78 (view)
 
Racism....Is everyone in some form or other a racist?
Posted: 3/24/2007 6:14:40 PM
I once heard a stand-up comedian comment "that you are what you hate".

Recently we've seen gay-bashing preachers involved in homosexual relationships and politicians campaigning on family values persuing congrssional pages.

In some easten cultures our judgements are a means to personal growth. The logic is that for you to see something in another that bothers you, it has to already be apart of you to be recognised. By looking within yourself to find its origin will help in identifying areas where one can grow and develop.

For example, the homophobe could be insecure in his own masculinity. The politically correct individual may be insecure in thier own perjudices, and the list goes on.

I'm not trying to suggest this applies in every case. Flat out ignorance is all to abundant in this world as well.

I like to think that there is nothing to fear only things to be understood.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 13 (view)
 
Third of Iraqi children now malnourished four years after US invasion
Posted: 3/24/2007 5:56:31 PM
I think Donald Trump put it best when he said "everything has been a lie".
The WMDs, the lack of planning and the wild assumptions about dancing in the streets.

Sadly, the average american still believes that the Iraq war is about "freedom" or "democracy" hwne the only winners seem to be listed on the NYSE. Soliders sent to in insuffiencent number and ill-equiped. Wounded that are subjected to shameful care. Soaring debt and politicians that are unwilling to act out of a political self-preservation instincts reum amok.

The rising human cost in Iraq among the civilian population and the hundreds of thousands of refugees continues. Somehow I think nessecities of life are more important to them than an constitution or elections.

Under Saddam, Iraq was a secular society where women could attend school, have jobs and dress how they pleased. Universal healthcare was provided and Iraq had one of the best healthcare systems in the middle east (oil money helps you do these things). Education was provided free of charge right through University. Now Saddam was an evil dictator to be sure, but for the average Iraq that kept his/her mouth shut about the government life was pretty good. It was certainly better than living under the clerics, having no security and unreliable supplies of water and electricity for going on 5 years thats for sure. Not to mention the long list, very long list of other things that are going from bad to worse in Iraq.

There's certainly no easy answer for the US; but when you hear your leaders not even dealing with the hard questions directly, I have to wonder if they realise how serious the situation is.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 1 (view)
 
Third of Iraqi children now malnourished four years after US invasion
Posted: 3/19/2007 6:00:19 AM
Where's the religous right now.
Iraq was better under Saddam
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m31457&hd=&size=1&l=e
167 Mar 2007

Vatican City – Caritas Internationalis and Caritas Iraq say that malnutrition rates have risen in Iraq from 19 percent before the US-led invasion to a national average of 28 percent four years later.

Caritas says that rising hunger has been caused by high levels of insecurity, collapsed healthcare and other infrastructure, increased polarisation between different sects and tribes, and rising poverty.

Over 11 percent of newborn babies are born underweight in Iraq today, compared with a figure of 4 percent in 2003. Before March 2003, Iraq already had significant infant mortality due to malnutrition because of the international sanctions regime.

Caritas Iraq has been running a series of Well Baby Clinics throughout the country. Currently it provides supplementary food for 8000 children up to 8 years and new mothers.

The Caritas clinics help the most vulnerable, and the health crisis they face is much worse than the national average.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 2 (view)
 
RFID chips small as dust particles!!! Mark of the Beast without the need for your consent!
Posted: 2/24/2007 11:08:38 AM
Actually they may be swallowing more than you think. There is also an edible FRID tag that's said to stop working when it comes in contact with the acids in the stomach. Right now they say these tags are being used medically to help diagnose intestinal disorders.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 51 (view)
 
Is Hugo Chavez Insane Or A Reformer?
Posted: 2/24/2007 11:05:33 AM
Hugo takes the country's oil wealth and uses it to build schools and hospitals. The man's lost it, a total nut bar.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 48 (view)
 
Iraq in Fragments
Posted: 2/3/2007 8:47:23 PM
JUSTHANK
I must take exception to you referring to my post of September 2004 with words like "conspiracy love" and US hating" and I made no mention of these things in my post anymore than I "lumped all US citizens siding with GWB"

The fact also remains that in September of 2004 the majority of Americans supported the war and re-elected Bush. It was also long before anyone in Washington was talking about Iran.

Only since the mid-term elections have the majority of Americans turn against the war in Iraq. The change in US public opinion has come after four years as well as repeated reports of war crimes and torture.

Americans must accept respionsiblity for what thier elected and re-elected officials have used their tax dollars and troops have done.

What the US has done in Iraq is wrong and they couldn't have done it without the average Americans "support for the troops" over the past four plus years.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 42 (view)
 
Iraq in Fragments
Posted: 2/3/2007 7:47:43 AM
Guess you didn't bother to look at the date on that post......Did you "JUSTHANK"?

I wrote that at the end of September 2004!

Perhaps you wanted to comment on my post being as true today as when I wrote it YEARS AGO!
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 28 (view)
 
North American Union
Posted: 1/26/2007 5:38:09 PM
I think we're pretty much agreed that while Mexicans, Americans and Canadians all enjoy being friends: we also enjoy being Mexicans, Americans and Canadians respectively.

The point that I think all of us should be concerned about is that this merging of states is being done without our consultation much less our consent. It's true that we all share common values, but we also have our own cultures, customs and traditions.

We're being sold out, plain and simple.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 35 (view)
 
China tests new weapon. Shoots down Satellite
Posted: 1/23/2007 5:49:44 PM
Richard Clark commented that if China attacked the US it would be through cyber-space and target computer sytems controlling infra-structure, like the power grid.

The weapon tested isn't anything new, both Russia and the States have developed and tested them in the past. Due to the danger of an arms race and space as well as the danger posed by the debris, both sides called it quits. I think China was sending a message to the west about any new arms race like missle defense or baby nukes could trigger.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 32 (view)
 
Support our Troops!!!
Posted: 1/20/2007 4:45:50 AM
I thought that was what "support the troops" really meant "support the policy" or "support the politicians".

News flash-Soliders do what they are ordered to do, up to and including killing and/or being killed. Blindly supporting any conflict doesn't do them any good as they will fight and die in worthless causes just the same as they will a legitimate threat to your country's peace and security. In the USA people support war not the troops. Any american questioning any war will have their patriotism questioned.

Talk about a screwed up society.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 8 (view)
 
Spies embedding tiny transmitters in Canadian coins, U.S. report says
Posted: 1/20/2007 4:39:53 AM
Sorry to diappiont you guys but the story was retracted the next day by Washington.

All a big hoax I'm affraid. Just think about it, you give someone change to track them and they spend it or give it to a panhandler ?

Not such a great idea is it ?
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 18 (view)
 
China tests new weapon. Shoots down Satellite
Posted: 1/20/2007 4:33:15 AM
Just remember that it was Bush that started all this non-sense when he wanted a missile defence shield. There is no way the US will be allowed a weapons system that they could use to threaten the world. Thank God China has stepped up to the plate and sent a message to the US. Stop making trouble. We want to live ina peaceful world, like the one we had before Bush was appointed.(votes in 2000 were never counted).
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 34 (view)
 
Anchor babies
Posted: 1/20/2007 4:27:16 AM
I've noticed that the debate never ever includes the employers that hire these people. The ones that want to fatten their bottom line at the expense of regular working americans as well as taking advantage of the illegals by paying them less than the legal wage. For some reason this group is protected, everyone else is to blame (on both sides of the debate) but making employers respect the same laws the rest of us do is a bad thing all of a sudden. So quit picking on the babies in diapers and go after the ones in the boardrooms.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 21 (view)
 
North American Union
Posted: 1/20/2007 4:22:25 AM
The North American Union or Security and prosperity pact is designed to make life easier on the big corporations rather than the people. It's a trend we've been seeing for a while and it has to end.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 14 (view)
 
Crash risk higher for pot smoking drivers
Posted: 1/12/2007 9:33:50 PM
I've never understood why people would want to drive around impaired anyway. If your going to get dumdied on anything why not find a place to put your feet up. (probably won't be much good for anything else)
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 80 (view)
 
Israel plans to use nuclear weapons on Iran.
Posted: 1/12/2007 9:29:58 PM
Well as unfair as the situation may be I really don't see anything being accomplished by talking about anyone's "days being numbered". Although it may seem like a lifetime away, it was only back in Bill Clinton's day that things were very much different. Not perfect from a long shot and certainly not resolved but there was at least hope.

The cycle of violence that started as the result of, what many view as an election stunt has been brutal and unjust. Moderates on both sides of the issue have been silenced throughout the entire region as sympathy from nieghboring countries turns to resentment.

The facts are that nature lothes a vaccum and situations never remain static; they're either improving or degenerating and I don't see them getting any better.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 74 (view)
 
2007 president speech.
Posted: 1/12/2007 9:16:54 PM
After hearing Bush's speach I had tto ask myself if the man is lucid. Perhaps he's had a relapse and back on the bong.

"There won't be any surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship"
What was that routine I saw under the "mission accomplished" banner?

Bush's delivery was flat as well; personally I've heard more stirring and passionate book reports in primary school. Bush's furrowed brow and general demenor was not one of confidence.

In the end the speech seemed to boil down to Bush saying that, after to 4 years, thousands of lives and billions of dollars; he's taking a mulligan on Iraq.

Now once again.....
Could someone explain to me why this is smart?
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 30 (view)
 
Isn't this Madonna Crap getting old?
Posted: 1/7/2007 7:03:29 PM
Reading this thread I was reminded of the old M.A.S.H. series. Very funny and popular, infact I think the shirts worn by B.J, Trapper and Peirce are in the Smithsonian. Anyway, the actors and writers decided to pull the plug on the series rather than seeing it die a slow and humiliating death.

Seeing Madonna on stage trying to do the sultry routine that worked so well so long ago; I really feel sorry for her.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 14 (view)
 
Israel plans to use nuclear weapons on Iran.
Posted: 1/7/2007 6:56:54 PM
Isreal has never really taken much notice of world opinion, much less international law. They are the only nation in the middle east that has nuclear weapons. Weapon that it gained and maintain in direct contravention of international law.

There is no way in the world that Isreal will give up it's nuclear omnipotence by letting another middle eastern country aquire nukes. This is the main reason I can see Isreal acting pre-emptively, as they have in the past, to attack Iran. I think the real question is; when will the war start and how far will the conflict spread?
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 4 (view)
 
I hope what I now say makes sense...
Posted: 12/31/2006 6:21:51 PM
Believe me I'm no great fan of China's either, my main point was that Bush, through his usual ineptitude has "grabbed a tiger by the tail" so to speak and not just where the military is concerned.

Bush has been corporate america's preident instead of a people's president. The financial clout that China has over the US is staggering and probably not well know by most americans.

Despite all of these concerns the thing that I find most disturbing; is that such a powerful and all-powerful (domestically speaking) government like China's, would feel threatened by a religous group like Fang Gong. With all it's economic and military might, it's total control on society, the Chinese government is so threatened by people holding articles of faith that they would execute them.

While I may find it to be more disturbing than a military build up, I also consider it to be a considerable testiment to the power of faith.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 3 (view)
 
Partial agreement with bookworm70 but I would like to add
Posted: 12/31/2006 1:07:14 PM
The size of the Chinese military was pretty modest when compared to the size of it's population as recent as 10 years ago. It hasn't been until recently that they have ungone a rapid expansion and many attribute this to the US missle defense system.

Prior to Bush reviving the program China a very few nuclear missles and Russia was reducing it's a***nal in accordance with SALT. As we all know Bush withdrew from SALT and began pursuing the missle shield and many other programs. In short the arms race was restarted. Couple this with Bush's remarks regarding Tiawan and you can see why China will make sure they are taken seriously. Don't you remember a Chinese sub surfacing right behind a US carrier. If thats not a clear message from China I don't know what is.

The US spends more on it's military than the rest of the world combined. Bush has use pre-emptive military strikes and made it part of US policy. He has back out of treaties like SALT and ignored others like the Geneva convention. All this combined with Bush's lies and manipulation prior to Iraq invasion and his leadership after it have stripped the US of it's crediblity and bred mistrust even amoung many traditional allies.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 59 (view)
 
Breaking News: Saddam sentenced to, death by hanging.
Posted: 12/31/2006 12:51:00 PM
While Saddam's trial may have been a great example of retribution; it failed misserabley when it comes to justice.

The US and Britain helped Saddam in aquiring chemical weapons and his attempt to produce biological weapons. Had Saddam been given a fair trial at the Hague, many Brittish and US officials would also be on trial including Bush Sr., Rumsfeld, Chaney and many other member of the Regan and Bush Administrations. Lets all remember that Saddam was a US daring up until he dared to touch america's oil in Kiwait.

Saddam's death denies other victims the opportunity to stand up in court, confront that killed their loved ones, distroyed their lives and tell their story.

In his final days Saddam was a captive and pretty much impotent.

I'm more than a little concerned that due to the trial and the timing of his execution, if he won't be bigger in death than he was in life.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 12 (view)
 
Ancient ice shelf snaps free from island (caused by global warming?)
Posted: 12/30/2006 3:43:42 AM
And yet there are those that think it's only a cycle and everything will correct itself one magical day. Afterall the thousands of tons of grrenhouse gases has nothing to do with global warming.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 13 (view)
 
Left vs. Right - How Pointless
Posted: 12/29/2006 4:17:38 AM
Divide and conquer.

The states are divided like never before. If it wasn't for this right vs. left thing; politicain and americans would have to put their country first and not their party.

I can't see that happening, if they did then almost 3000 of america's best and brightest would still be alive and people would demand accountablity for the WMD claims.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 1 (view)
 
Fun with telemarketers
Posted: 12/26/2006 5:05:13 PM
With the holiday shopping season still fresh in memory I thought I would include a link to a prank involving a telemarketer phoning wiht an offer.

Personally I'm always at a loss weither to interupt and decline the offer politely or let them finish and then decline. In all cases I'm polite, but this guy is something else.

Hope you enjoy.......................

http://howtoprankatelemarketer.ytmnd.com/
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 251 (view)
 
What Bush has achieved since 9/11
Posted: 12/26/2006 2:27:58 PM
What a joke!

First of all Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11. That was Bin Laden, who by the way, is alive and well thank you very much.

As for this democrat verus republican non-sense, trust me, the Iraqis you call terrorists, could care less. They're too busy fighting to free their country from foriegn occupation and the last time I checked they're doing a damn good job with little more than improvized explosives. Not bad considering they are up against a superpower that is pouring billions into the fight on a monthly basis.

Regime change is illegal under international law making the invasion and occupation of Iraq illegal. US occupation forces have been caught engaging in acts of torture and other war crimes. Crimes against humanity have also been documented including the rape and murder of a young Iraqi girl. Her family were alsao killed, their house and badies burned in an attempt to cover the crime. In all over 600,000 Iraqi civilians, women, children and elderly, have been killed by the US military.

Even though the US doesn't recognize the Geneva conventions, the rest of the world does and the last time I check it included the right to resist occupation. So stop calling Iraqis fighting to free Iraq terrorist. They're not terrorist; they're exercising their rights under international law which is far more than I can say about the USA.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 16 (view)
 
Rumsfeld again facing charges as a war criminal
Posted: 12/26/2006 2:13:47 PM
"I believe that most of the decent Iraqis think of Bush as a Hero and will probably have a Bush day as a holiday."

You've gotta be kidding; right?

Under Saddam Iraqis were tortured; under the US Iraqis are tortured.
Under Saddam Iraqis were impisoned; under the US more Iraqis are imprisoned.
Under Saddam Iraqis had a reliable supply of safe drinking water; under the US it's "hit or miss"
Under Saddam Iraqis had security; under the US Iraqis can't walk down the street.
Under Saddam Iraqis had jobs; under the US most are unemployed.
Under Saddam Iraq was a secular society; under the US it's ruled by Islamic clerics.
Under Saddam Iraqis had a reliable supply of electricity; the US can't keep the lights on.

Under Saddam Iraq was one of the most developed countries in the middle east where the average Iraqi could enjoy a good life provided they didn't skeak out against the government. Not perfect but paradise compared to life in Iraq today.

George Bush a Hero?

I think war criminal sounds much better. Like the saying goes; if the shoe fits.............
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 243 (view)
 
What Bush has achieved since 9/11
Posted: 12/26/2006 4:55:38 AM
If Bush has achieved anything good it has been to remind us that "terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich"
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 49 (view)
 
Why pull out of Afghanistan ? ?
Posted: 12/23/2006 5:53:52 AM
In terms of results and long term goals; Afganistan is a pontless war.

The terrorists have all fled and set up shop some where else, afterall, terrorists are stateless so any country will do.

Terroism is still alive and thiving despite NATO in Afganistan and is probably growing with the help of George Bush and the american military in Iraq.

Even after years of involvement, billions of dollars, and human blood; the country will still remain the way it's been for centuries.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 3 (view)
 
X-51 America's Newest Hypersonic Missile Project
Posted: 12/23/2006 5:47:25 AM
Great the nation that spends more than the rest of the world combined on weapons just got more. Considering what the US has done with the arms it already has, this can only spell trouble.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Bush's Good Ol' Sheiks to the Rescue! Report: Saudis Warn Against Iraq Exit
Posted: 12/13/2006 8:30:48 AM
When****Chaney is summoned to Saudi, you know it's serious.

I figure that's why Bush has delayed his decision on Iraq, the Saudis haven't made it for him yet.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 12 (view)
 
Modified cameras turned to weapons
Posted: 12/13/2006 8:28:03 AM
One thing I have learned is that you will never be able to protect people. YOu can protect building, cars and planes but not people.

What really gets me is the stupid things security will have the general public do, like taking off shoes etc. When trained professionals backed with a multi-million dollar infa-structure must resort to these measures it a clear indication that the powers that be have no control.

And yes boys, will be boys. When I was 7 my friend and I made gun powder from stuff we bought at the drug store.....thank God there was no internet back then, the RCMP would have sent us to Syria.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Talabani calls Iraq report 'dangerous'
Posted: 12/10/2006 2:35:51 PM
I think there could be a little bit more going on than we've been told about on CNN surprise, surprise. There could be other reasons that Talabani's a little "hot under the collar". Below is a Sunday Times article witht he web site list for those of you that are interested.
Enjoy..................

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-2496369_1,00.html

December 10 2006

The Sunday Times December 10, 2006


Secret American talks with insurgents break down
Hala Jaber, Amman



SECRET talks in which senior American officials came face-to-face with some of their most bitter enemies in the Iraqi insurgency broke down after two months of meetings, rebel commanders have disclosed.

The meetings, hosted by Iyad Allawi, Iraq’s former prime minister, brought insurgent commanders and Zalmay Khalilzad, the US ambassador to Iraq, together for the first time.

After months of delicate negotiations Allawi, a former Ba’athist and a secular Shi’ite, persuaded three rebel leaders to travel to his villa in Amman, the Jordanian capital, to see Khalilzad in January.

“The meetings came about after persistent requests from the Americans. It wasn’t because they loved us but because they didn’t have a choice,” said a rebel leader who took part.

Last week the long-awaited report of the Iraq Study Group, co-chaired by James Baker, the former secretary of state, and Lee Hamilton, a former congressman, called for America to seek to engage with all parties in Iraq, with the exception of Al-Qaeda.

However, the insurgents’ account of the hushed-up meetings reveals that concerted attempts to engage them in negotiations had already failed earlier this year.

Hopes were high when the insurgent leaders greeted Khalilzad in Amman. The Iraqis had just held their first democratic elections for a permanent government and the US ambassador hoped to broker an enduring political settlement.

Feelers had been put out to Iraqi insurgents before but not at such a high level. “The Americans had been flirting with such meetings for a while, but they needed to sit down with people who carried more weight in the insurgency,” said one leader of the National Islamic Resistance, an umbrella organisation representing some of the main insurgent groups.

The trio of Iraqi negotiators claimed to represent three-quarters of the “resistance”. It included Ansar al- Sunnah, the group responsible for a suicide bombing that killed 22 in a

US army canteen in Mosul in December 2004, and also the 1920 Revolution Brigade, which has carried out many kidnappings and claimed to have shot down a British Hercules aircraft near Tikrit in January 2005, in which 10 people died.

At the first meeting with Khalilzad on January 17, the insurgents expressed concern about the emergence of Iran as a new regional power. With America equally worried about Iranian interference, the two sides appeared to have found some common ground. The talks continued in Baghdad for about eight weeks, sometimes on consecutive days at Allawi’s home.

At one point the insurgents offered Khalilzad a 10-day “period of grace” in which attacks on coalition forces would be suspended in return for a cessation of US military operations.

They called for a “timetable for withdrawal”, saying that it should be announced immediately although in practice it would be “linked to the timescale necessary to rebuild Iraq’s armed forces and security services”, according to one commander.

Other demands said to have been received sympathetically by Khalilzad, such as an amnesty for insurgents and a reversal of the “de-Ba’athification” process that stripped so many Sunnis of their jobs, have now been urged by the Iraq Study Group.

There was more. Brushing aside the results of Iraq’s democratic elections, the insurgents proposed that an emergency government be formed under Allawi’s leadership. Non-sectarian politicians should be appointed to the crucial ministries of defence and the interior, they urged, because they would be responsible for rebuilding a strong national army and security service. Under this proposal, the newly elected Iraqi government would, in effect, have been sidelined.


“I told Khalilzad that we had the know-how and the manpower to regain control of Baghdad and rid it of the pro-Iranian militias,” one of the insurgent commanders added.
“If he would just provide us with the weapons, we would clean up the city and regain control of Baghdad in 30 days.”



The atmosphere eventually soured at a meeting said to have been attended by Khalilzad and six US generals as well as tribal leaders from Baghdad, Anbar, Diyala and other hotspots. Each side apparently accused the other of stepping up attacks during the supposed period of grace and the insurgents refused to have lunch with the generals on the grounds that they were military occupiers.

The talks were further complicated by the different demands of warring Sunni rebel groups. A close associate of Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, Saddam Hussein’s former vice-president and the king of clubs in the US “most wanted” deck of playing cards, said that many of the insurgent groups were still being directed by Saddam’s former party and military leadership.

According to a senior Ba’athist representative, insurgent groups linked to al-Douri would not sit down with the Americans unless they first agreed to a series of other conditions ranging from compensation for Iraq’s losses during the war to the reinstatement of Saddam’s military.

The final blow to the negotiations came in mid-March when Khalilzad said that he would be willing to talk to Iran about resolving the conflict in Iraq. The news came as a bombshell to the Sunni insurgents, who complained to the ambassador at their final meeting.

Shortly afterwards the government of Nouri al-Maliki was formed with the support of pro-Iranian elements. The Sunni insurgents responded by sending a memo to Khalilzad — now tipped to become US ambassador to the United Nations — suspending all meetings and accusing the Americans of “dishonesty”.

According to one commander, the insurgent groups were told: “Place your faith in Allah, the gloves are off. Carry on with your resistance.”

A US embassy spokesman in Baghdad yesterday declined to comment on the talks but said America remained committed to the current government and to “an inclusive Iraqi political process, with representatives from all Iraq’s communities”.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 22 (view)
 
Mary Cheney: Gay and Pregnant
Posted: 12/10/2006 2:26:14 PM
With any luck it will be a step forward for gays and lesbians in the US so that maybe some day they can enjoy fair and equal treatment under the law.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 28 (view)
 
The path to terror in Canada
Posted: 12/10/2006 2:12:40 PM
If you take a look at the last 100 years you'll see that most of the terror people have had to endure has been state sponsored. From post revolutionary France to Pol Pot's Cambodia or Stalin's Russia, the bulk of terrorism is state sponsored.

Bush has screwed the pooch on the war on terror and the US is already starting to pay the price. With Harper's blind acceptance of american policy's will only result in Canada being judged in the same light and deservedly so.

"terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terroism of the rich"
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 15 (view)
 
Judge Weighs Torture Claim Vs. Rumsfeld
Posted: 12/10/2006 3:53:52 AM
You either have values or you don't. If torture is wrong and american values are reflected in the constitution then americans should stand by them and hold those who don't to account.

If Iraq has proven one thing; it's that americans are great at talking about their values, morals and ethics, but talk is as far as it goes. From torture to manipulated intellegence not once has the Bush got it right.

If you ask me they'll most likely give Rummy the medal of freedom.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 6 (view)
 
A Marines letter from Iraq.....
Posted: 12/5/2006 9:19:54 AM
I think it is very revealing how, with the surfacing of the Rumsfeld memo, that americans were supporting the troops in Iraq but the sec def didn't.
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 5 (view)
 
A Marines letter from Iraq.....
Posted: 12/5/2006 9:16:48 AM
Under Bush "support the troops" has become "support the politicians and the policy"
 paddler
Joined: 9/29/2004
Msg: 139 (view)
 
Iranian paper: Great war to wipe out Israel coming
Posted: 11/30/2006 12:27:04 PM
Just came across this article and thought it might add something to the discussion. All the links and sources are listed if anyone cares to follow up on thier own.
Enjoy.....................



http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Nov06/Leupp28.htm

CIA: No Evidence for Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program
White House “Hostile” to Reality-Based Report
by Gary Leupp
www.dissidentvoice.org
November 28, 2006

According to Seymour Hersh’s latest New Yorker shocker, the CIA has found no evidence of a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program. The White House, given a draft assessment in the fall, has been “hostile” to the agency’s report.

Now why would that be? Why no sighs of relief? Why no, “Thank you guys,” and pats on the back for all their careful intelligence work?

I think the answer’s obvious to anyone who’s been paying attention.****Cheney and his neocon acolytes who still dominate Middle East policy (David Wurmser, Elliott Abrams, Stephen Hadley, Stephen Cambone, Eric Edelman, Elizabeth Cheney, with Abram Shulsky, David Addington and John Bolton in supporting roles) have a certain view of what constitutes good intelligence. It’s at variance with the view more widely held among those of us in what they dismiss as the “reality-based community.” That includes many intelligence professionals.

My university hosts the Fletcher School of International Law and Diplomacy, a prime CIA recruiting ground. I know from personal exposure that some choosing that career (never at my urging) can be decent, self-respecting, conscientious scholars and researchers. If asked to investigate whether or not a country has a nuclear weapons program, they’re likely to interpret the assignment literally and give it their best shot.

But this is not the neocon understanding of what intelligence entails. When****Cheney says, “Find me evidence,” he means, “Validate my project with evidence.” He wants talking points to disseminate to the American public via Fox News and the Wall Street Journal editorial page to justify regime change in Iran. He wants an Iranian client-state, bridging “liberated” Afghanistan and Iraq, helping to encircle rising China, decorated with permanent U.S. bases keeping a watchful eye on the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf and Caspian Sea, and friendly with nuclear Israel.

Before the Iraq War, Cheney, his deputy “Scooter” Libby and Rumsfeld deputy Paul Wolfowitz all strongly opposed the CIA reports concluding that Saddam Hussein had no important al-Qaeda ties and that Iraq didn’t have enough WMDs to threaten anybody. Cheney and Libby repeatedly visited CIA headquarters in person to demand revisions of reports and inclusion of “intelligence” later proven to have come from persons known by the CIA to be unreliable. But dissatisfied with the level of cooperation from the CIA, Cheney with Rumsfeld created the “Office for Special Plans” (headed by Douglas Feith) within the Defense Department to scatter disinformation through the “free” press and then through administration officials appearing on weekend news programs -- including the myths of the Niger uranium deal, aluminum tubes as nuclear centrifuges, al-Qaeda training camps in Iraq, etc.

So of course the White House -- at least if (as I suspect) Cheney retains the upper hand in an apparent power struggle -- is going to be hostile to the CIA report, whose existence has likely been leaked by some self-respecting intelligence officers. The administration knows that war critics in Congress might brandish this report to discourage the well-planned attack, calling for negotiations and dialogue with Tehran. Their voice will be all the more convincing if, as expected, the report of the Iraq Study Group headed by James Baker urges that all Iraq’s neighbors be involved in finding a solution to the war in that country. The idea that the CIA would abet such wimps must give the surviving, struggling neocons shitfits. Will the current serve, or will they lose their fortunes?

(Hersh writes that the CIA paper has made “planning for an attack on Iran… far more complicated.” On the other hand the neocons know that AIPAC is strong, and will passionately argue that opposition to a preemptive attack is appeasement, and Ahmadinejad is Hitler, that Iran wants to “wipe Israel of the map,” that Israel’s security and U.S. security are the same, and that whatever the cost the U.S. MUST prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. They know that even now many favoring a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq won’t stand in the way of an Iran attack because they’re intimidated by such reasoning. Few politicians may care to argue back, but they could say, “The historical analogy is ridiculous. Do you even know what Ahmadinejad’s constitutional powers are, in relation to military affairs, foreign policy, and the Iranian nuclear program? Don’t you think the administration’s exaggerating the Iranian threat, like it did the threat from Iraq? Why did State Department Sean McCormack jump last May to validate a totally false and almost immediately discredited report that the Iranian parliament was planning to badge Jews? Are you aware that the IAEA headed by one of the UN’s most respected officials, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mohamed ElBaradei, has repeatedly reported there is no evidence the Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program? Just as our own CIA has done, for godsakes? Did you know that Iran has never once in modern history attacked another country? By the way, what is Israel doing to encourage friendly relations with Iran, and with its Arab neighbors? Would complete withdrawal from the West Bank and Syria’s Golan Heights in accordance with numerous UN resolutions help?”)

I wonder if Dubya’s actually “hostile” to the CIA report. Could be that he hasn’t read it, or has had it summarized for him by a hostile Cheney, who’ll be telling him that the CIA is dominated by liberals who just don’t want to see the evidence and interpret it so cautiously that they’re risking our security. But his dad’s telling him (through James Baker and Brent Scowcroft) to back off a bit on Iran, having screwed up so bad in Iraq, and to actually sit down and talk to the Iranians about settling down that Mesopotamian mess. He’s perhaps been urging his boy not to snap at the CIA because those guys are there to HELP him, after all, as they along with the generals gently suggest that he cool his jets. And meanwhile the neocons, his rock of support, whose words must genuinely hurt, declare him a failure.

Key neocons (including Bill Kristol) turned on Rumsfeld long ago, damning his inclination to use too little force and firepower. But now some neocons out of power (including Perle, “axis of evil” speechwriter Frum, and “Cakewalk” Edelman) are on the president’s own case; having once delighted in his receptivity to their plans (born out his natural callousness and desire to one-up his war criminal pop), they now blame him for not wisely executing the colonization-of-Iraq project.

But notice that the neocons out of power and inclined to comment aren’t turning on Cheney, from his undisclosed location long serving as the real power behind the throne. Hersh reports that the White House (Cheney) insisted before the midterm elections that even if the Democrats took both houses U.S. policy towards Iran wouldn’t change. But, a former senior intelligence officer told Hersh, “[t]hey’re afraid that Congress is going to vote a binding resolution to stop a hit on Iran, à la Nicaragua in the Contra war.” Cheney and his neocons are surely working closely with Lantos and Lieberman and other warmonger Democrats to achieve the overthrow of the Iranian government before Bush leaves office. The “Office of Special Plans” has been revived in the same Pentagon offices as the “Office of Iranian Affairs,” headed by the Leo Strauss scholar Abram Shulsky and reporting to the vice-president’s daughter Elizabeth Cheney. It will take more than a classified CIA report to stop the train, but the train does appear to be slowing down.

Despite war preparations, the contradictions within the Bush regime and in the power elite in general suggest that rather than expanding the criminal war, those bearing top command responsibility might just have to back off. Their credibility with the people has hit rock-bottom; the mainstream press is no longer so cooperative; traditional power centers have become alarmed at the influence acquired by the neocon cabal, the Israel lobby and Christian fundamentalist PACs. The regimes targeted for change in Damascus and Tehran are working with a somewhat independent-minded (if still U.S.-dependent) Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The announcement of a summit between Syrian, Iraqi and Iranian leaders in Tehran may have taken Bush by surprise; the meeting in Amman with al-Maliki right after the planned summit, requiring Bush to fly down from the NATO conference in Riga, looks as though it was hastily called. Meanwhile, according to reports, Baker’s Iraq Study Group will suggest that U.S. diplomats sit down and talk with Iraq’s neighbors about ending the violence in the invaded country.

Will not even the most mule-headed Democrat in the Democrat-led legislature now have to pause before recommending or approving further aggression against those nations bordering Iraq? Perhaps Bush and Cheney have already given them their cue. “If we don’t attack Iran,” they say, “the Israelis might, and we’d understand that.” And the Democrats can, after expressing any personal opinions they may have on Iran-Israel issues, add, “Anyway it’s not the U.S.’s business to go attacking a country that even the CIA says poses no threat to us.”

Gary Leupp is a Professor of History, and Adjunct Professor of Comparative Religion, at Tufts University and author of numerous works on Japanese history. He can be reached at: gleupp@granite.tufts.edu.
 
Show ALL Forums