Barack Obama, our next President

[John Galt]

Death of Tenzing wrote:

<quoted text>
I think what this is about is now "an informed, high-level official of the U.S. Government" has the authority to order the execution of US citizens. They don't have to bring charges or have any evidence, evidently they just need their good judgement.

These individuals should be tried, in absentia if necessary, and sentenced to death by a court before being executed.

[History 101]

History 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
She is not an Israeli. Like I said, they will more than likely beat us to it.
But say, Homer, wouldn't you be willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to save the world from a threat like Iran?
Then again, I would have been willing to die to save just one child from Saddam's torture rooms.
Maybe we're just different in that way - believing in a higher and nobler cause.
Is there anything you would be willing to die for? Just curious.

Well, speaking solely for ourselves, I'd die to see you die. This is pretty deep stuff so take your time with it.

[Jane Says]

Death of Tenzing wrote:

<quoted text>
I think Jane types with her asss.

yes and at a massize size 4, i cover 2/3 of the keyboard. but, sorry....didn't mention anything about "size" and reinforce your inadequecies.

[Death of Tenzing]

History 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Saddam would be Obama's problem now.
Good thing he's one less enemy for him to worry about, huh?
You'd think the Democrats would be thrilled that he's gone since they wanted to get rid of him too.
So what do you think the UN meant when they issued a warning to Saddam of "serious consequences" if he tried to bamboozle them one more time?
I always wondered about that myself.

Saddam would still be Ahmedinijad's problem and neither would be our problem.

[Truth is no SIN]

SFRC Testimony -- Zbigniew Brzezinski
February 1, 2007

Mr. Chairman:

Your hearings come at a critical juncture in the U.S. war of choice in Iraq, and I commend you and Senator Lugar for scheduling them.

It is time for the White House to come to terms with two central realities:

1. The war in Iraq is a historic, strategic, and moral calamity. Undertaken under false assumptions, it is undermining America’s global legitimacy. Its collateral civilian casualties as well as some abuses are tarnishing America’s moral credentials. Driven by Manichean impulses and imperial hubris, it is intensifying regional instability.

2. Only a political strategy that is historically relevant rather than reminiscent of colonial tutelage can provide the needed framework for a tolerable resolution of both the war in Iraq and the intensifying regional tensions.

If the United States continues to be bogged down in a protracted bloody involvement in Iraq, the final destination on this downhill track is likely to be a head-on conflict with Iran and with much of the world of Islam at large. A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks; followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure; then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a “defensive” U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

A mythical historical narrative to justify the case for such a protracted and potentially expanding war is already being articulated. Initially justified by false claims about WMD’s in Iraq, the war is now being redefined as the “decisive ideological struggle” of our time, reminiscent of the earlier collisions with Nazism and Stalinism. In that context, Islamist extremism and al Qaeda are presented as the equivalents of the threat posed by Nazi Germany and then Soviet Russia, and 9/11 as the equivalent of the Pearl Harbor attack which precipitated America’s involvement in World War II.

[Jane Says]

John Galt wrote:

<quoted text>
Why not take out Castro with a drone now?

Looney Lily is keen on drone attacks, because drive-bys are a popular sport amongst her in-laws the way other families golf or fish.

[John Galt]

Death of Tenzing wrote:

<quoted text>
I think what this is about is now "an informed, high-level official of the U.S. Government" has the authority to order the execution of US citizens. They don't have to bring charges or have any evidence, evidently they just need their good judgement.

So, what are the criteria for who deserves to get a drone up their ass?

Sounds kinda like double secret probation.

[TSM]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
You said they no longer respond immediately.
That is only the case if the suspects were gone. In the event of a robbery or break in where the suspects are still there, they do respond immediately.
Got it?

RealDave I didn’t say it, I just posted what they said, but here I’ll post it again!!

CHICAGOLAND: Police… To No Longer Respond Immediately To Burglaries, Car Thefts!! Dave I think Chicago Is promoting Gun ownership!!

[sonicfilter]

Obama Feeling Sequester Squeeze

By Scott Galupo

Last week I predicted that the fourth-quarter GDP scare would spook the White House into cutting some kind of deal to turn off the sequester, with its across-the-board spending cuts.

Sure enough, today brings news that President Obama will ask Congress for another short-term delay. The AP reports:“Obama will ask for a targeted way to reduce the deficit in the short term, perhaps several months. White House officials say Congress needs more time to work out a 10-year plan worth more than $1 trillion in deficit reduction.”

Because they’ve signaled a willingness to go ahead with the sequester, even as Majority Leader Eric Cantor commences the project of soft-focusing the party’s agenda by talking about issues besides the federal budget, Republicans have found themselves with under-the-radar bargaining leverage. If they’re smart, they will husband this leverage wisely and press for modest measures to rein in spending over the long haul. That they’re no longer threatening to blow up the economy in the short term is a positive sign.

Let’s see how if House GOP leaders can persuade the exuberant freshmen and sophomore members of their caucus not to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/obama-...

[Truth is no SIN]

The White House Could Provoke Attacks in the United States
Reporterre
Thursday 08 February 2007

In testimony before the American Senate, Carter's former National Security Advisor considered the hypothesis that the White House could provoke attacks on its own soil to justify an intervention in Iran plausible.
Zbigniew Brzezinski is one of the people most widely respected in geopolitical matters in the United States. Advisor to Jimmy Carter when the latter was President of the United States between 1977 and 1981, he was considered a "hawk among the doves." Since then, he has stayed very attentive to international questions, within the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Notably, he published a widely regarded essay, Le Grand Echiquier [The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives](Hachette, 1997).
Hostile to the war in Iraq, he spoke February 1st before an American Senate committee on the international situation and more specifically on the power struggle with Iran. One passage in his testimony has caught the attention of several observers: the one in which he considers that the White House could provoke a terrorist act in the United States itself to win public opinion over to the idea of an intervention against Iran. Here is the passage:
"A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks; followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure; then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a "defensive" U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan."
The allusion to a terrorist act in the United States, responsibility for which "would be attributed to the Iranians" is remarkable: an American official at the highest level concedes the idea that the Bush Administration could not only use terrorism to serve its own ends, but even provoke attacks on its own soil in order to justify its aggressive intrigues.
Brzezinski's statements are all the more remarkable in that he himself in his book, The Grand Chessboard, deemed that control of central Asia and its oil resources were necessary for the maintenance of American domination.
But he emphasized that it was difficult to obtain a consensus from the American public to support United States' interventions beyond its borders "in the absence of a sudden threat or a feeling by the population that its well-being was at stake." On that occasion, he recalled the example of Pearl Harbor which tipped American opinion in favor of an intervention in the Second World War.
Consequently, it is not "conspiracy theorists" only who are blowing the whistle on such a corruption of American democracy, even if one must not extrapolate too much from the statements of Jimmy Carter's former advisor. But for several years, many people have, in fact, wondered about the exact unfolding of the events of September 11, 2001 and wonder whether the American administration has not done everything to prevent them [from knowing.] Zbigniew Brzezinski's position provides legitimacy to these questions and undoubtedly constitutes a message addressed to George Bush and his entourage.

[Death of Tenzing]

TheIndependentMajority wrote:

<quoted text>
We didn't start the fires Homer.
Those fires been burning a long, long time. Decades and milleniums.

So why'd we go stand in the middle of it?

[No Surprize]

sonicfilter wrote:

Obama Feeling Sequester Squeeze
By Scott Galupo
Last week I predicted that the fourth-quarter GDP scare would spook the White House into cutting some kind of deal to turn off the sequester, with its across-the-board spending cuts.
Sure enough, today brings news that President Obama will ask Congress for another short-term delay. The AP reports:“Obama will ask for a targeted way to reduce the deficit in the short term, perhaps several months. White House officials say Congress needs more time to work out a 10-year plan worth more than $1 trillion in deficit reduction.”
Because they’ve signaled a willingness to go ahead with the sequester, even as Majority Leader Eric Cantor commences the project of soft-focusing the party’s agenda by talking about issues besides the federal budget, Republicans have found themselves with under-the-radar bargaining leverage. If they’re smart, they will husband this leverage wisely and press for modest measures to rein in spending over the long haul. That they’re no longer threatening to blow up the economy in the short term is a positive sign.
Let’s see how if House GOP leaders can persuade the exuberant freshmen and sophomore members of their caucus not to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/obama-...

Remember, rumors you hear about obama are as true as the ones we hear about you...

A camel can work for a week without drinking. A liberal can cut and paste for a whole week without working.

[Shakalaka]

How freakin FUNNY is this.

One of America's top SNIPERS..goes off to kill the world. Then comes home and is Snipped by his own brother. LOL

AT A SHOOTING RANGE! And these are the SAFE Mofo's they be talking about? Sooo how do they s'plain that away?

"Oh, the famous sniper was "counseling" his fellow murdering solider who was suffering from PTS." Okay.

So taking a crazy person on a shooting range is now Therapy??? God help America! Please God! These folks are stalk raving MAD!

[lily boca raton fl]

Jane Says wrote:

<quoted text>exactly. right after Obama's first inauguration, there were cries from the left to arrest CIA and Cheney for waterboarding.
'Nov 12, 2012
Hypocrite Obama and other Dems like John Kerry on drone strikes.
Obama , Kerry, Biden and other dems love to state over and over how Al-Quadea is on the run or dead and GM is alive.
The fact is these drone strikes that they say has al-quaeda on the run will in my opinion unfortunately create more hatred and terror minded people against the good US citizens in the years to come.
Where is the outcry from dem leaders like John Kerry and Harry Reid who previously accused American Troops of terrorizing innocent Iraqi women and children by doing house to house raids?( http://www.youtube.com/watch... )
Look at the hypocrisy of Obama who along with his in the pocket liberal media friends, had such an outcry against waterboarding. Some even called for war crimes against Bush and Cheney for waterboarding. Cant the same be said for Obama and the drone strikes? Let me ask all of you fine educated progressive folks here. What is more brutal, raiding houses and checking for weapons and frightening women and children in the middle of the night or these drone strikes that blow off the limbs and extinguish the lives many innocent women and children?
What is more brutal and uncivilized? Waterboarding someone or a drone strike that wipes out homes , entires families, babies, elderly along with sometimes the intended target if they guess right?
I find it very interesting that the media made waterboarding such a big issue when Obama first ran for president yet no word or question to Obama in the recent debates or interviews about the morality and questionable legality of drone strikes. I did not hear John Kerry raise his deep voice and call on the admin to stop blowing up these innocent women and children the way he did about house to house raids or waterboarding under Bush. Why not?
So while Obama and his gang continue to boast Al-Quaeda is on the run and GM is alive, I think the families of all of those butchered in Benghazi recently would beg to differ. I hope and pray we are not creating future terrorists against us by these drone tactics.'
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg...

Torture such as waterboarding is not effective in obtaining information. Drones takes out the terrorist.
So, now, you're a bleeding heart for the Muslim women and children?
Why aren't you calling those children future terrorists? And those women; breeders?
You say American kids should be handcuffed in police stations at age 7; you say his future is Attica.
Get stuffed Jane, you're an effing hypocrit.

[History 101]

leosnana wrote:

<quoted text>There would be a number of things I'm willing to die for; however, it's difficult to think of any I would be willing to kill for...almost always ends badly (ask Marcus Brutus)

Prob'ly the wrong time to bring it up but how a few dozen petite morts to put in your stocking this afternoon?

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

[lily boca raton fl]

John Galt wrote:

<quoted text>
So, when you call 9-1-1 in Chicago, just say you're not sure if the bad guys are still there.

Yeah, and ask them what their names are and stuff

[Death of Tenzing]

John Galt wrote:

<quoted text>
These individuals should be tried, in absentia if necessary, and sentenced to death by a court before being executed.

The last two administrations have sent a clear message: all this due-process nonsense is just a pain in the as s.

[Truth is no SIN]

Essie Mae Washington: Strom Thurmond’s mixed-race daughter dies at 87; DAUGHTER OF RAPISTS DEMOCRAT KKK JIM CROW TURNed REPUBLICAN DIES

[Jimmy]

Shakalaka wrote:

How freakin FUNNY is this.
One of America's top SNIPERS..goes off to kill the world. Then comes home and is Snipped by his own brother. LOL
AT A SHOOTING RANGE! And these are the SAFE Mofo's they be talking about? Sooo how do they s'plain that away?
"Oh, the famous sniper was "counseling" his fellow murdering solider who was suffering from PTS." Okay.
So taking a crazy person on a shooting range is now Therapy??? God help America! Please God! These folks are stalk raving MAD!

You are one morbidly sick individual.

[lily boca raton fl]

John Galt wrote:

<quoted text>
OK. So, enhanced interrogation is OK as long as we don't know about it.

What is gained by you knowing about it? What was gained by bringing those pows to Guantanamo? Why didn't they just kill them?
Who would have known? If Awalaki was just killed by an assassin; no one would have known it was by a drone. Mossad always sends assassins; they get the job done and no one asks questions.
But, we have to have public debate on Fox, CNN, MSNBC, 24 hours a day with anchors pretending to know what they're talking about.
Does the public have to know every tactic, every strategy, every movement? If we know, then the enemy knows too