Barack Obama, our next President

[RealDave]

flack wrote:

<quoted text> You don't.

So you are denying that there are any oil industry subsidies?

[Truth is no SIN]

World events since the attacks of September 11, 2001 have not only been predicted, but also planned, orchestrated and - as their architects would like to believe - controlled. The current Central Asian war is not a response to terrorism, nor is it a reaction to Islamic fundamentalism. It is in fact, in the words of one of the most powerful men on the planet, the beginning of a final conflict before total world domination by the United States leads to the dissolution of all national governments. This, says Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member and former Carter National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, will lead to nation states being incorporated into a new world order, controlled solely by economic interests as dictated by banks, corporations and ruling elites concerned with the maintenance (by manipulation and war) of their power. As a means of intimidation for the unenlightened reader who happens upon this frightening plan - the plan of the CFR - Brzezinski offers the alternative of a world in chaos unless the U.S. controls the planet by whatever means are necessary and likely to succeed.

[John Galt]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
He lost a court ruling saying he could no longer use racial profiling.
Joe, the racist POS. No wonder you right whiners love him.

Just because dumbass Dave says so?

[Truth is no SIN]

DEMOCRATS ARE ADVISED BY A man who operates with precision and mastery in the dialogue of public policy decision making is Zbigniew Brzezinski; former National Security Advisor to President Carter (a Democrat), co-founder of the Tri-lateral Commission and registered Republican. In his now infamous book titled The Grand Chessboard, published in 1997, Brzezinski laid out the geo-strategic importance of the Middle East and Central Asia as being the regions where the next major global conflict(s) would take place. In this book Brzezinski says the “imperial mobilization” necessary to commandeer the world’s remaining hydrocarbon reserves would be hard to embark upon without a catastrophic and catalyzing event on par with Pearl Harbor.
A group of men who call themselves the “neo-cons” took up Brzezinski’s chessboard and created The Project for a New American Century (PNAC). In 2000 these men took the Whitehouse. The neo-cons also recognized that a “catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor,” would benefit their dreams of imperial mobilization. Well, the new Pearl Harbor they all publicly prayed for came and went, and just as they had predicted, it helped to speed up the process of American imperial mobilization.
But now Brzezinski is singing a much different tune. When Israel embarked on its failed war in Southern Lebanon, Brzezinski publicly stated the following on numerous occasions:
These neocon prescriptions, of which Israel has its equivalents, are fatal for America and ultimately for Israel. They will totally turn the overwhelming majority of the Middle East’s population against the United States. The lessons of Iraq speak for themselves. Eventually, if neo-con policies continue to be pursued, the United States will be expelled from the region and that will be the beginning of the end for Israel as well.
Brzezinski publicly voiced this strong opinion on July 20, 2006 – about one week after Israel invaded Lebanon – at The New American Foundation American Strategy Program, where Daniel Yergin sits on the Board of Directors.

[RealDave]

TSM wrote:

<quoted text>
RealDave where’s the Lie?

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?

[John Galt]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
The CIA is under white House control

In theory, but who knows?

[RealDave]

John Galt wrote:

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

Castro is not putting in missile bases or attacking US interests.

[John Galt]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
So you are denying that there are any oil industry subsidies?

Please identify a specific subsidy that is unique to the oil industry.

[Truth is no SIN]

According to this 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, the CIA's intervention in Afghanistan preceded the 1979 Soviet invasion. This decision of the Carter Administration in 1979 to intervene and destabilise Afghanistan is the root cause of Afghanistan's destruction as a nation.
M.C.
DEMOCRATS ARE WAR MONGERS

[RealDave]

John Galt wrote:

<quoted text>
Just because dumbass Dave says so?

Are you saying this was not in court?

[leosnana]

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.

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)

[Death of Tenzing]

lily boca raton fl wrote:

<quoted text>
Perhaps the State Department should have revoked Awalikis citizenship before he was killed. That's what this is about.

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.

[John Galt]

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?

Any place other than Chicago, if the subjects were still there, the police might not be necessary.

[Death of Tenzing]

Homer 2016 wrote:

<quoted text>Actually it took me about 3 seconds, you must type with 1 finger or possibly your thumb or a toe.

I think Jane types with her asss.

[Jimmy]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
The CIA is under white House control, dipstick.
George Bush lied to go to war.
I see you;'re still giving people the finger when they aren't looking. How pathetic.

Sure thing lugnut.

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

I guess Democrats were also.

Baaawwwaaahhhh!!!!!

Moron.

[Truth is no SIN]

A couple of thoughts about the Brzezinski interview below. First, it flatly contradicts the common justification for U.S. actions in Afghanistan during the 1980s: that the U.S. simply aided forces resisting Soviet imperialism. Brzezinski makes clear that the Soviets were baited into sending forces to Afghanistan; thus their actions were defensive. Moreover, the U.S. used the violent Wahhabi (Saudi Arabian) form of Islam to create a monster-movement which plagues the world today. or more on this, see 'Articles Documenting U.S. Creation of Taliban and bin Laden's Terrorist Network' athttp://emperors-clothes.com/ docs/doc.htm
A reader wrote: "Similarly just because Brzezinski (among others) likes to claim that he personally overthrew the Soviet Union doesn't mean that you or the rest of us have to take him seriously. Nobody in 1979 had any reason to think that the Afghan war would bring down the USSR. Nor have we any real reason to think that it did bring it down."
The point is well taken at least as regards Brzezinski's claim that his Afghan strategy destroyed the Soviet Union. But the issue here is a different one: what role did the U.S. government play in the creation of Islamist terrorism? In that regard, Brzezinski's assertion that the U.S. provoked Soviet actions and that Islamism was deliberately fostered is backed up by sources on all sides of the Afghan issue.
Zbigniew Brzezinski about how the US provoked the Soviet Union into invading Afghanistan and starting the whole mess

[John Galt]

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?

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

[DBs Mama]

History 101 wrote:

<quoted text>
Pretty insightful...and true.
(Although I wouldn't say all deranged people are necessarily democrats...but probably raised by progressive politically correct liberals...since the poison of political correctness is enough to make even the sanest among us a little crazy.)

Well, looky who's here! Speak of the Devil you cheap harlot! I told you what would happen if I catched you round my boy and now look who's landed right in my lap! It wasn't enough that you shot Billy and stole the love of my life away from me but then you went and corrupted DB with your wickedness! He was just a boy.. barely 35. And here you come with your skimpy little dress and perfume and you took my only son from me. I told you what would happen if I caught you near him again, Jezebel! Big-city college girl with her Yankee ways and curly hair, I told DB you was trash but he was a boy and didn't know no better. But you did didn't you, harlot. I swear you bring out the meanness in me, you lyin' piece of Yankee white trash, I told you what'd happen, and now it will! Mark my words!

[Death of Tenzing]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
If you attempt to dodge answering a question by asking a question, I just go back to the original questions you dodged. For instance, the questions you've been dodging for a month now:
Where was Obama during the 7-goddam-hour battle between Al Qaeda and the stripped-down American embassy security detatchment in Benghazi when orders with presidential authority came from the White House to hang the Americans in Benghazi out to dry while the White House watched Al Qaeda kill them on the live video feed?
And;
Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?
When you answer these questions, then we can get to the questions you posed in your predictable attempt to digress and avoid admitting Obama is a clown act.

The Treasury Dept.

[history 101]

John Galt wrote:

<quoted text>
Please identify a specific subsidy that is unique to the oil industry.

Texas