Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
And having blind faith in a book, written by men, edited by men of a deity (GOD)that no one has witnessed is logical?
You know, I used to be agnostic, but no longer. The reign of the Bush administration and the vile self rightous, indignations of the so called "Christians" like sen. Hank Erwin's racist, hateful statement of the victims of New Orleans have changed my view. God doesn't exist. Erwin's spew that New Orleans and Mississippi's horrors were an act of god's wrath for the sins the cities committed is beyond my comprehension. If this is the way your LOVING god respond to people in the Gulf, I certainly don't want him as MY god. You and your kinds can have him and are welcomed to exit this world and enter your heaven any time you want. We'd be better off without you. And please close the door when you leave.
If he wasn't sent there to die for a lie, zarkawi couldn't have touched him.
<<Sorry to say Peg your in the minority,Thank God>>
PUHLEEEZZZEE!!!!
Your world is so small, you can't see beyond your nose.
Jeff Gannon scandal. What a read.. X-rated photos of the man who is privy to national securities information of Valerie Plame, in addition to his hypocrisy on homosexuals. So much for the right wing morales..
""The Male Corps link takes you to another of Jeff’s escort pages, housed on a different escort service Web site called MaleCorps.com. The page contains the same spread-eagle picture that was on Jeff’s personal site, notes that his branch of service is “United States Marine Corps,” provides more personal information, and the email address for contact is USMCPT@malecorps.com. There’s also a link to see 30 more “x-pics” of Jeff, including “full bod, dick shots, jocks.” The link appears to be no longer accessible.""
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/02/man-called-jeff.html
Lee... I guess the midnight run rocketed to your schmoon and crapped.. LOL!! I see you've recovered your losses.
I'll stick with socket 754 for now since its a cheaper. My daughter doesn't need a newest chip. BTW, the 3400 socket 754 I'm purchasing has a Newcastle core . Should it mean anything to me?
chit, it's still rocketing. At this rate, it'll reach your full schmoon by opening. Gap and crap?
LOL.. I realize that but +15 has got to have some news or sumting. Can't be because the minute $ rebound. Must be the sumting.
http://netdania.com/QuoteList.asp
what's the cause for the bull ram?
Bruce.. I checked and the AMD 3400 is socket 754.
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80704-1
What is the difference between socket 754 and 939? Does the latter compute faster?
Thanks Bruce. I'm glad I asked. Which motherboard do you reccommend ?
Question for the PC builder xperts out there
I'm building a new puter (AMD 3400)for my daughter who does a little game playing. What's the best for mid range video card ? and I'm looking to get a SOLTEK SL-K8AN2E-GR for the motherboard. Anyone heard of the brand or have better reccommendations? Any suggestions are appreciated. TIA.
Note: I'm still a novice at this. If I manage this one alright, it'd be my 2nd..
This is a scarier event than Bush being in office for another 4 years. THe next Scalia will be there for decades. Our Constitution won't survive it..
If there is a "our Maker". Help us now. PLEASE.. Spray cold water on Americans who are still blind to these fascist Bushtic lies... WAKE THEM UP before it's too late.
Don't see how its a sensitive subject if he sees homosexuals as non issue, non event. Its only a big deal if you (homophobics) view it as a "SIN". Reminds me a lot of the days when it was scandalous if a woman exposes her ankles in public, in a man's presence without a chaperone, twists you body to the rhythm of music etc...
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH... the hypocrite, selfrightous, religious zealots rant on, pushing how people should live by their lives. Shoving their ideologies down other people's throat...
And Kerry didn't single her out. I found it perfectly relevant to bring up Cheneys' daughter considering it is precisely Cheney's administration that is trying to diminish America's civil liberties.
Mr Bill in deep doodoo.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html
Then you must fall on your knees and kiss his ass. Nah... You're not fit to even do that..
WOW!! the level to which this administration will stoop to continues to astound me. Why hasn't this been exposed in our media????
DO you have a link? I want to contact the networks..
This should be submitted to Cannes, Sundance, Oscar..
http://filmstripinternational.com/
Pass it around folks..
DUH....
I mean no offense to you.. Just agreeing what was evident over a year ago..
Bush stands firm all right. Stands firm on being irresponsible.
If Bush hadn't placed us where we are, there would be no need for a draft.
<how can Bush fight the war on terror when he doesn't even understand the threat? >
The same question can be asked of Bush.. He did Bin Laden a big favor. AL Quaeda and other fundamentist groups are having more recruits than pre Iraq invasion..
I know many soldiers myself who refuse to vote for Bush and hate him for what he has done.
Hopefully real soon...
ROFLMAO!!
Probably a shock treatment device Karl came up with to shock Bush with when he starts trying to look like a smirking chimp again.
Note. I mean no offense to chimpanzees. As they most likely to have higher IQs than Shrub.
Those aren't stars they see.. Its the psychidelic halos from the laced kool aid they're drinding. Either that or they're sniffling too much glue. A good example is FAThole Limbaugh, see what his drugs did to him?
OK.. My bad. I'll pull out my 2nd grade math book.
delete due to admission of bad math on my account.
What the hell does Iraq have anything to do with our freedom? Saddam was disarmed, and was never a threat to US.
Your "Freedom costs lives" statement in reference to the invasion of Iraq is like Bush saying "I think human and fish can coexist peacefully"
WAKE UP!!! You've been duped, splashed with cold water and you're still duped!! What is it going to take? You being in the frontline of Iraq and witness the horrors yourself??
I am so stumped by this continued lame excuse of freedom costs lives BS..
And why did you join?
apology if this has already been posted.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/state/article/0,1299,DRMN_21_3185596,00.html
GIs claim threat by Army
Soldiers say they were told to re-enlist or face deployment to Iraq
By Dick Foster, Rocky Mountain News
September 16, 2004
COLORADO SPRINGS - Soldiers from a Fort Carson combat unit say they have been issued an ultimatum - re-enlist for three more years or be transferred to other units expected to deploy to Iraq.
Hundreds of soldiers from the 3rd Brigade Combat Team were presented with that message and a re-enlistment form in a series of assemblies last Thursday, said two soldiers who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The effort is part of a restructuring of the Army into smaller, more flexible forces that can deploy rapidly around the world.
A Fort Carson spokesman confirmed the re-enlistment drive is under way and one of the soldiers provided the form to the Rocky Mountain News. An Army spokesmen denied, however, that soldiers who don't re-enlist with the brigade were threatened.
The form, if signed, would bind the soldier to the 3rd Brigade until Dec. 31, 2007. The two soldiers said they were told that those who did not sign would be transferred out of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team.
"They said if you refuse to re-enlist with the 3rd Brigade, we'll send you down to the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, which is going to Iraq for a year, and you can stay with them, or we'll send you to Korea, or to Fort Riley (in Kansas) where they're going to Iraq," said one of the soldiers, a sergeant.
The second soldier, an enlisted man who was interviewed separately, essentially echoed that view.
"They told us if we don't re-enlist, then we'd have to be reassigned. And where we're most needed is in units that are going back to Iraq in the next couple of months. So if you think you're getting out, you're not," he said.
The brigade's presentation outraged many soldiers who are close to fulfilling their obligation and are looking forward to civilian life, the sergeant said.
"We have a whole platoon who refuses to sign," he said.
A Fort Carson spokesman said Wednesday that 3rd Brigade recruitment officers denied threatening the soldiers with Iraq duty.
"I can only tell you what the retention officers told us: The soldiers were not being told they will go to Iraq, but they may go to Iraq," said the spokesman, who gave that explanation before being told later to direct all inquiries to the Pentagon.
Sending soldiers to Iraq with less than one year of their enlistment remaining "would not be taken lightly," Lt. Col. Gerard Healy said from the Pentagon Wednesday.
"We realize that we deal with people and with families, and that's got to be a factor," he said.
"There's probably a lot of places on post where they could put those folks (who don't re-enlist) until their time expires. But I don't want to rule out the possibility that they could go to a unit that might deploy," said Healy.
Under current Army practice, members of Iraq-bound units are "stop-lossed," meaning they could be retained in the unit for an entire year in Iraq, even if their active-duty enlistment expires.
A recruiter told the sergeant that the Army would keep them "as long as they needed us."
Extending a soldier's active duty is within Army authority, since the enlistment contract carries an eight-year obligation, even if a soldier signs for only three or four years of active duty.
The 3rd Brigade recruiting effort is part of the Army's plan to restructure large divisions of more than 10,000 soldiers into smaller, more flexible, more numerous brigade- sized "Units of Action" of about 3,500 soldiers each.
The Army envisions building each unit into a cohesive whole and staffing them with soldiers who will stay with the unit for longer periods of time, said John Pike, head of the defense analysis think tank Global Security.
"They want these units to fight together and train together. They're basically trying to keep these brigades together throughout training and deployment, so I can understand why they would want to shed anybody who was not going to be there for the whole cycle," Pike said.
But some soldiers presented with the re-enlistment message last week believe they've already done their duty and should not be penalized for choosing to leave. They deployed to Iraq for a year with the 3rd Brigade last April.
"I don't want to go back to Iraq," said the sergeant. "I went through a lot of things for the Army that weren't necessary and were risky. Iraq has changed a lot of people.''
The enlisted soldier said the recruiters' message left him troubled, unable to sleep and "filled with dread."
"For me, it wasn't about going back to Iraq. It's just the fact that I'm ready to get out of the Army," he said.
Soldiers' choice at Fort Carson
WHAT THE FORM SAID
• "Elect not to extend or re-enlist and understand that the soldier will be reassigned IAW (in accordance with) the needs of the Army by Department of the Army HRC (Human Resources Command) . . . or Fort Carson G1 (Personnel Office).''
WHAT IT MEANS
• Soldiers who sign the letter are bound to the 3rd Brigade Combat Team until Dec. 31, 2007.
• Soldiers who do not sign the letter might be transferred out of the brigade and possibly to Iraq.
Have never lived in hurricane alley before, til a year ago, so I'v no ideas what to expect. My current domicile is in the direct projected path of Ivan the Terrible. Mobile Bay. Hope it changes its path Eastward. Its much less populated east of the Panhandle area and will inflict less damage...
Don't know if this is already posted..
Link to LA times requires registration..
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/la-na-diplo13jun13,1,1142936.story?coll=la-home-headlines
THE RACE TO THE WHITE HOUSE
Retired Officials Say Bush Must Go
The 26 ex-diplomats and military leaders say his foreign policy has harmed national security. Several served under Republicans.
By Ronald Brownstein
Times Staff Writer
June 13, 2004
WASHINGTON — A group of 26 former senior diplomats and military officials, several appointed to key positions by Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, plans to issue a joint statement this week arguing that President George W. Bush has damaged America's national security and should be defeated in November.
The group, which calls itself Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change, will explicitly condemn Bush's foreign policy, according to several of those who signed the document.
"It is clear that the statement calls for the defeat of the administration," said William C. Harrop, the ambassador to Israel under President Bush's father and one of the group's principal organizers.
Those signing the document, which will be released in Washington on Wednesday, include 20 former U.S. ambassadors, appointed by presidents of both parties, to countries including Israel, the former Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia.
Others are senior State Department officials from the Carter, Reagan and Clinton administrations and former military leaders, including retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, the former commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East under President Bush's father. Hoar is a prominent critic of the war in Iraq.
Some of those signing the document — such as Hoar and former Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill A. McPeak — have identified themselves as supporters of Sen. John F. Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. But most have not endorsed any candidate, members of the group said.
It is unusual for so many former high-level military officials and career diplomats to issue such an overtly political message during a presidential campaign.
A senior official at the Bush reelection campaign said he did not wish to comment on the statement until it was released.
But in the past, administration officials have rejected charges that Bush has isolated America in the world, pointing to countries contributing troops to the coalition in Iraq and the unanimous passage last week of the U.N. resolution authorizing the interim Iraqi government.
One senior Republican strategist familiar with White House thinking said he did not think the group was sufficiently well-known to create significant political problems for the president.
The strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, also said the signatories were making an argument growing increasingly obsolete as Bush leans more on the international community for help in Iraq.
"Their timing is a little off, particularly in the aftermath of the most recent U.N. resolution," the strategist said. "It seems to me this is a collection of resentments that have built up, but it would have been much more powerful months ago than now when even the president's most disinterested critics would say we have taken a much more multilateral approach" in Iraq.
But those signing the document say the recent signs of cooperation do not reverse a basic trend toward increasing isolation for the U.S.
"We just felt things were so serious, that America's leadership role in the world has been attenuated to such a terrible degree by both the style and the substance of the administration's approach," said Harrop, who served as ambassador to four African countries under Carter and Reagan.
"A lot of people felt the work they had done over their lifetime in trying to build a situation in which the United States was respected and could lead the rest of the world was now undermined by this administration — by the arrogance, by the refusal to listen to others, the scorn for multilateral organizations," Harrop said.
Jack F. Matlock Jr., who was appointed by Reagan as ambassador to the Soviet Union and retained in the post by President Bush's father during the final years of the Cold War, expressed similar views.
"Ever since Franklin Roosevelt, the U.S. has built up alliances in order to amplify its own power," he said. "But now we have alienated many of our closest allies, we have alienated their populations. We've all been increasingly appalled at how the relationships that we worked so hard to build up have simply been shattered by the current administration in the method it has gone about things."
The GOP strategist noted that many of those involved in the document claimed their primary expertise in the Middle East and suggested a principal motivation for the statement might be frustration over Bush's effort to fundamentally reorient policy toward the region.
"For 60 years we believed in quote-unquote stability at the price of liberty, and what we got is neither liberty nor stability," the strategist said. "So we are taking a fundamentally different approach toward the Middle East. That is a huge doctrinal shift, and the people who have given their lives, careers to building the previous foreign policy consensus, see this as a direct intellectual assault on what they have devoted their lives to. And it is. We think what a lot of people came up with was a failure — or at least, in the present world in which we live, it is no longer sustainable."
Sponsors of the effort counter that several in the group have been involved in developing policy affecting almost all regions of the globe.
The document will echo a statement released in April by a group of high-level former British diplomats condemning Prime Minister Tony Blair for being too closely aligned to U.S. policy in Iraq and Israel. Those involved with the new group said their effort was already underway when the British statement was released.
The signatories said Kerry's campaign played no role in the formation of their group. Phyllis E. Oakley, the deputy State Department spokesman during Reagan's second term and an assistant secretary of state under Clinton, said she suspected "some of them [in the Kerry campaign] may have been aware of it," but that "the campaign had no role" in organizing the group.
Stephanie Cutter, Kerry's communications director, also said that the Kerry campaign had not been involved in devising the group's statement.
The document does not explicitly endorse Kerry, according to those familiar with it. But some individual signers plan to back the Democrat, and others acknowledge that by calling for Bush's removal, the group effectively is urging Americans to elect Kerry.
"The core of the message is that we are so deeply concerned about the current direction of American foreign policy … that we think it is essential for the future security of the United States that a new foreign policy team come in," said Oakley.
Much of the debate over the document in the days ahead may pivot on the extent to which it is seen as a partisan document.
A Bush administration ally said that the group failed to recognize how the Sept. 11 attacks required significant changes in American foreign policy. "There's no question those who were responsible for policies pre-9/11 are denying what seems as the obvious — that those policies were inadequate," said Cliff May, president of the conservative advocacy group Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
"This seems like a statement from 9/10 people [who don't see] the importance of 9/11 and the way that should have changed our thinking."
Along with Hoar and McPeak, others who have signed it are identified with the Democratic Party.
Adm. William J. Crowe Jr., though named chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Reagan, supported Clinton in 1992. Crowe has endorsed Kerry. Retired Adm. Stansfield Turner served as Carter's director of central intelligence and has also endorsed Kerry. Matlock said he was a registered Democrat during most of his foreign service career, though he voted for Reagan in 1984 and the elder Bush twice and now is registered as an independent.
Several on the group's list were appointed to their most important posts under Reagan and the elder Bush. These include Matlock and Harrop, as well as Arthur A. Hartman, who served as Reagan's ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1981 through 1987; H. Allen Holmes, an assistant secretary of state under Reagan; and Charles Freeman, ambassador to Saudi Arabia under the elder Bush.
Many on the list have not been previously identified with any political cause or party. Several "are the kind who have never spoken out before," said James Daniel Phillips, former ambassador to Burundi and the Congo.
Oakley, Harrop and Matlock said the effort began this year. Matlock said it was sparked by conversations among "colleagues who had served in senior positions around the same time, most of them for the Reagan administration and for the first Bush administration."
Oakley said frustration over the Iraq war was "a large part" of the impetus for the statement, but the criticism of President Bush "goes much deeper."
The group's complaint about Bush's approach largely tracks Kerry's contention that the administration has weakened American security by straining traditional alliances and shifting resources from the war against Al Qaeda to the invasion of Iraq.
Oakley said the statement would argue that, "Unfortunately the tough stands [Bush] has taken have made us less secure. He has neglected the war on terrorism for the war in Iraq. And while we agree that we are in unprecedented times and we face challenges we didn't even know about before, these challenges require the cooperation of other countries. We cannot do it by ourselves."
Reagan turned down requests for AIDS research funding.. With a new worldwide epedemic as AIDS, realized even during the early years, he should have turned on the spigot with funding. Instead, he bankrupt the country with military spending and left his less popular citizens to die. Hence my statement, while Reagan stood watching.
I remember..I remember Bush was involved in one the banking scandals in Texas.. I also remember the 500,000 people that died of AIDS while Reagan stood and watched. Conveniently, his legacy doesn't include the above..
Won't be long before Bushie comes up with some bogus BS to discredit Eaton. The list gets longer each day. I don't expect it to stop either.
They even tried to discredit the current polls numbers..