Barack Obama, our next President

Full story: Hampton Roads Daily Press

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ...
Comments
899,161 - 899,180 of 1,100,625 Comments Last updated 3 hrs ago
WOW

Bronx, NY

#978959 Sep 9, 2013
Obamas Very Presidency Took Away Freedom Of Speech If you think about Disagreeing with the Powers that be who Obama FRONTS FOR you will be BRANDED, Obama is not a communist he is put in place to justify dictatorship in the world starting with AMERICA he is not black he is not white he is not muslim he is not christian he is not american he is not kenyan who is he and how did the american people Elect him with all these questions all the cover stories who is obama he is not a man of PEACE as we can see
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#978960 Sep 9, 2013
Study Suggests Southern Slavery Turns White People Into Republicans 150 Years Later

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/09/09/2...
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#978961 Sep 9, 2013
lily boca raton fl wrote:
RAFAH, Gaza Strip — The ­Egyptian military has launched what appears to be a campaign to shut down, once and for all, the illegal but long-permitted tunnels that provide a vital economic lifeline to the Gaza Strip and supply tax revenue to the Islamist movement Hamas.
The operation seems to be part of an effort to cripple Hamas, which rules the coastal enclave bordered by Egypt and Israel. The group is an offshoot of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, whose ­standard-bearer held that country’s presidency before being ousted from power this summer.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_ea...
good...Muslims taking care of Muslim terrorists...

Since: May 11

Gettysburg, PA

#978962 Sep 9, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Your ability to read and understand the English language has improved somewhat. You actually realized "safer" as comparative. But, you're still too ignorant to know the difference between "safer" and "safe".
Here's why:
Anti-ship weaponry has advanced a long way in the past 40 years, dufus. Just how dumb are you?
You seem to be admitting that sailors won't be safe when Obama uses them to start a war with Syria and help Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood take over there. All it takes is just one of the anti-ship missiles launched to hit just one ship, and Obama has a planeload of corpses he can do a photo op with when he pretends to be sad about Americans getting killed. Just how dumb are you?
The statement I made said "safer".

Perhaps you should remove your head from your ass & learn to read.
WOW

Bronx, NY

#978963 Sep 9, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
The turning point came in 1983, as the Reagan administration reevaluated its policy toward the Middle East. Note that it does not appear to have been deterred by a small matter such as Hussein’s propensity to massacre townspeople like those at Dujail.
http://www.juancole.com/2013/08/protected-cha...
SONICFILTH IT'S 2013 and OBAMA is president stay on point stay current because you do not like to speak about the KKK and the DEMOCRATS forget reagan he is dead long gone talk OBAMA stop the BIGOTRY AND RACISM
lily boca raton fl

Boca Raton, FL

#978964 Sep 9, 2013
No Surprize wrote:
<quoted text>Obama is gonna start World War III. What a dumbass! Who elected this ass clown??
The War Mongering Sickness and Poison of Unconscious Plantation Liberalism.
It's the culture...
65,917,257 Americans voted for President Obamas second term.

Now, go eat shyt perkele.
WOW

Bronx, NY

#978965 Sep 9, 2013
War Propaganda: As With Iraq, U.S. Media Disseminates Lies and Fabrications on Syria’s WMDs
The Role of the New York Times
A headline in the New York Times (September 7, 2013) stated as fact that “With the World Watching, Syria Amassed Nerve Gas”. The lead paragraph asserted that “Syria’s top leaders amassed one of the world’s largest stockpiles of chemical weapons with help from the Soviet Union and Iran, as well as Western European suppliers and even a handful of American companies, according to American diplomatic cables and declassified intelligence records.”

But as with its propagandistic reporting about Saddam Hussein’s possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in the run-up to the Iraq war, the Times provided no evidence to support its claim, and an examination of publicly available documents the Times cited for this story illustrates how the newspaper is demonstrably lying.

After asserting as fact that the documents show that Syria “amassed one of the world’s largest stockpiles of chemical weapons”, the Times stated that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his father before him,“were greatly helped in their chemical weapons ambitions by a basic underlying fact: often innocuous, legally exportable materials are also the precursors to manufacturing deadly chemical weapons.”

To support its claim that “innocuous, legally exportable materials” were used by Syria to manufacture chemical weapons, the Times cited a 2009 State Department cable released by WikiLeaks in 2010. The cable, the Times stated,“instructed diplomats to ‘emphasize that failure to halt the flow’ of chemicals and equipment into Syria, Iran and North Korea could render irrelevant a group of antiproliferation countries that organized to stop that flow.”

But on its face, this only indicates that Syria imported materials considered “dual-use”, meaning that it could have both civilian and military applications. It does not constitute evidence that Syria actually used such “chemicals and equipment” to manufacture chemical weapons.

The cable states that “Syria, Iran and North Korea have continued to acquire goods useful to their chemical and/or biological weapons programs”, but offers no evidence that dual-use materials it acquired were used for that purpose.

The Times report continued:“Another leaked State Department cable on the Syrians asserted that ‘part of their modus operandi is to hide procurement under the guise of legitimate pharmaceutical or other transactions.’”

Once again, no evidence from the cable is offered that materials that admittedly have “legitimate pharmaceutical” uses were actually used to manufacture chemical weapons.
No Surprize

Seminole, FL

#978966 Sep 9, 2013
Buroc Millhouse Obama wrote:
<quoted text>
If there are that many, then you should easily be able to easily provide a link as an example of one of them rooting for Russia.
Otherwise, you are just doing the typical disingenuous, lying Obama voting liberal routine.
The only fools rooting and speaking Russian and Chinese are the democRats on this God forsaken thread...

The War Mongering Sickness of Unconscious Liberalism

It's the culture...
WOW

Bronx, NY

#978968 Sep 9, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
The Republican hypocrisy on Syria is just amazing. Imagine that Mitt Romney were president. Romney took a far more hawkish line than Barack Obama did on Syria during the campaign. He wanted to arm the rebels, supported in-country cover ops, and so on. So if Bashar al-Assad had used chemical weapons during President Romney’s tenure, there’s every reason to think he’d be pushing for action too. And what, in that case, would Republicans now temporizing or opposing Obama be doing in that case? They’d be breathing fire, of course. There’s a lot of chest thumping talk right now about how a failed vote will destroy Obama’s credibility. I guess that may be to some. But to anyone paying attention, the credibility of these Republicans is what will suffer, and the vote may well come back to haunt some of them in 2016.
Some Republicans are, to their credit, taking the position consistent with their records. John McCain stood up to those people who looked like they were about two feet away from his face at that town hall meeting last week. Lindsey Graham deserves more credit, since he’s facing reelection and is being called “a community organizer for the Muslim Brotherhood.” On the other side, Rand Paul and the neo-isolationists are probably taking the same position they’d take if Romney were president, although we can’t be completely sure. If Romney were in the White House, by 2016,“was so-and-so tough on Syria?” would probably be a top litmus test (unless, of course, things got really terrible over there). I could easily see Paul declaiming on the unique evil of chemical weapons that just this once required him to break from his noninterventionist views, but as things stand he at least is taking the position with which he is identified.
But most of them? Please. The Gold Weasel Medal goes to Marco Rubio, as others such as Tim Noah have noted. Back in April, Rubio thundered that “the time for passive engagement in this conflict must come to an end. It is in the vital national security interest of our nation to see Assad’s removal.” Removal! Obama’s not talking about anything close to removal. So that was Rubio’s hard line back when Obama was on the other side. And now that Obama wants action? Rubio voted against the military resolution in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week.
Ted Cruz? Just in June, Cruz wanted to go into Syria and rough ’em up.“We need to develop a clear, practical plan to go in, locate the weapons, secure or destroy them, and then get out.” Now? Syria is a distraction from, you guessed it, Benghazi. He said last week:“We certainly don’t have a dog in the fight. We should be focused on defending the United States of America. That’s why young men and women sign up to join the military, not to, as you know, serve as al Qaeda’s air force.”
There are many others. These two are worth singling out because they want to be president, and their craven and brazen flip-flopping on one of the most important issues to come before them in their Senate careers is more consequential than the flip-flopping of some time-serving senator no one’s ever heard of. But the whole picture is contemptible.
....What a bunch of relentless hypocrites they are, making a decision as weighty as this purely on the basis of their hatred of Obama.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09...
You all use Left and right when it should be about wrong and right but that is the distraction that the powers that be use to control the argument so it wont be about the RIGHT its about which side wins and thats why BLACK RACISM IS NOW IN THE LIMELIGHT normaal human condition
WOW

Bronx, NY

#978969 Sep 9, 2013
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
65,917,257 Americans voted for President Obamas second term.
Now, go eat shyt perkele.
So we have our own SYRIA in AMERICA because a small group of rebels wants to overtake the will of the MAJORITY so you really support NOTHING YOU ARE FOS
No Surprize

Seminole, FL

#978970 Sep 9, 2013
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
65,917,257 Americans voted for President Obamas second term.
Now, go eat shyt perkele.
Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything you ass clown...

The War Mongering Poison and Sickness of Unconscious Liberalism.

It's the culture...
WOW

Bronx, NY

#978971 Sep 9, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
Study Suggests Southern Slavery Turns White People Into Republicans 150 Years Later
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/09/09/2...
Always goes back a bigotted racists thought
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#978972 Sep 9, 2013
martinezjosei wrote:
Assad to move/hide WMD into IRAN.
lol! Good thing you don't have to explain the logistics behind it since it's assumed you're a simpleton!
WOW

Bronx, NY

#978973 Sep 9, 2013
The Times then turned to one of the “intelligence documents” it cited as proof, stating that “As early as 1991, under the first Bush presidency, a now declassified National Intelligence Estimate concluded that ‘both Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union provided the chemical agents, delivery systems and training that flowed to Syria.’”

But that quote does not date to a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) from 1991, but rather from 30 years ago. The NIE from which it originated, titled “Implications of Soviet Use of Chemical and Toxin Weapons for U.S. Security Interests”, was issued on September 15, 1983 and stated that Syria “probably has the most advanced chemical warfare capability in the Arab world, with the possible exception of Egypt”(p. 11).

What was deemed “probably” true three decades ago may or may not be true today, and it is useful to point out that the U.S. has backed the military dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak, who took power in 1981, with billions in military “aid”. Egypt has been second only to Israel as the largest recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since the 1979 Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, which provided for this money to flow from the American taxpayers to the regime in Egypt.

By 1983, it had also become evident that Iraq was using chemical weapons in its war with Iran, but the U.S. nevertheless removed the country from its list of state sponsors of terrorism in order to step up support for its war effort. In December of that year, President Ronald Reagan dispatched Donald Rumsfeld, who was later Secretary of Defense under the Bush administration, for a second time to Iraq to reassure Saddam Hussein that the U.S. would continue to back him despite his use of chemical weapons.

The 1983 NIE also noted that with its foreign suppliers,“there is no need for Syria to develop an indigenous capability to produce CW agents or material, and none has been identified.” The purpose of that Cold War-era NIE was to build the case that the Soviet Union was violating the 1975 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention.

The rest of the Times article similarly provided no substantiation for the headline’s claim. It cited again “precursor ingredients that can also be used for medicine”, with no supporting evidence that such ingredients were used for anything other than civilian applications.

Perhaps the most egregious example of manipulation with the attempt to deceive the public came towards the end of the article, where the Times quoted from a March 2006 State Department cable:“‘Syrian businessmen regularly report on the ease with which their fellow businessmen illegally import U.S. commodities with seeming impunity, as well as express concerns that the USG’s [United States Government’s] lack of enforcement of the economic sanctions’ are ‘hurting those that choose to play by the rules.’”

“Those transactions presumably included chemicals that could be precursors for chemical warfare”, the Times added.

Yet the “commodities” described in that cable were mostly related to legitimate civilian uses—particularly for use in hospitals.
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#978974 Sep 9, 2013
USAsince1680 wrote:
<quoted text>
He has been brainwashed by Jewish lobby into thinking any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic. This "hands-off" mentality is exactly what has permitted the radical zionist to use the United States as their puppets. IMO, it is much more repulsive to express hate of our president and the United States than a foreign nation that disrespects us.
No doubt. Politics and lies aren't beyond them.

It's simply another tool.
No Surprize

Seminole, FL

#978975 Sep 9, 2013
My Portal wrote:
<quoted text>Assad has the army, Russia, Air Force and most of the world on his side. He his a tyrant for sure, but he had nothing to gain by using weapons of mass destruction and bringing the world down on him, he was already winning.
Obama has mishandled Syria over the past few years. The good/very good options he once had to fix Syria, are in the rearview mirror...

Golf anyone? Vacation?? Hollywood? White house Parties? More incompotence, ineptitude anyone?? Over 100,000 Syrians killed, no problem...

It's the culture...
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#978976 Sep 9, 2013
fetch almighty wrote:
<quoted text>I am denying that it was Assad. Now there have been attacks by O'bama's rebels since January-O'bama is on the side of the terrorists as per usual.
.. as opposed to the commie loving right wing nuts!
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#978977 Sep 9, 2013
No Surprize wrote:
<quoted text>Call him a patriot? A true leader? Who elected this ass clown obama??
Your ongoing defense of your messiah Obama bin Lyin proves you are a warmongering idiot...
It's the culture...
lol! So what was bushie boy son? a peace loving, kumbaya, beach-nik?

I love this comedy channel.

Since: Jun 13

Orlando, FL

#978978 Sep 9, 2013
sonicfilter wrote:
<quoted text>
Following further high-level policy review, Ronald Reagan issued National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 114, dated November 26, 1983, concerned specifically with U.S. policy toward the Iran-Iraq war. The directive reflects the administration's priorities: it calls for heightened regional military cooperation to defend oil facilities, and measures to improve U.S. military capabilities in the Persian Gulf, and directs the secretaries of state and defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to take appropriate measures to respond to tensions in the area. It states, "Because of the real and psychological impact of a curtailment in the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf on the international economic system, we must assure our readiness to deal promptly with actions aimed at disrupting that traffic."
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82...
oil.
You can cut and paste everything in that article until your heart's content.

It doesn't change that beginning with the Carter administration, Saddam Hussein was seen as a moderating, friendly force against the Ayatollah and that relationship continued under President Ronald Reagan as Hussein waged war against Khomeini.

Good relations with Saddam began with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter's former National Security Advisor.

Saddam became the enemy of our enemy after the Shah was deposed under the Carter administration. Which is why Carter blasting Bush for ending Saddam's manipulation makes him the #1 weasel.

Let it go.
Buroc Millhouse Obama

Newington, CT

#978979 Sep 9, 2013
lily boca raton fl wrote:
<quoted text>
Good point.
Almost as good as the one on top of your head, lily.

How is that "brilliant" Obama chess move going, dolt?

"Calling Kerry's bluff? Russian official floats plan to avert strike on Syria"

"Just hours after U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry made an off-hand comment about how Syria could avert a military strike by turning over its chemical weapons program, Russia's foreign minister is proposing that the Assad regime do just that.

Sergey Lavrov said Monday that Russia will push Syria to place its chemical weapons under international control.

"If the establishment of international control over chemical weapons in that country would allow avoiding strikes, we will immediately start working with Damascus," Lavrov said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/09/ru...

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 23 min the wandering girl 4,674
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 58 min wojar 177,414
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 1 hr J RULES 69,000
Are ISIS and Obama in Cahoots??? 1 hr joey 4
Diversity is a codeword for white genocide 1 hr ABSOLUTELYjigsWON 3
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr danetoo 68,381
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 2 hr D-U-H 49,539
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 11 hr edogxxx 97,938
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••