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.
Trying to understand and explain the behavior of someone means you automatically support him/her?
>>>I did answer your question.<<<
Repeat it please, maybe in different format since something gets lost in the translation here.
Europe's full of christians. How do you explain that the only european countries having an Al Qaeda problem are those who teamed up with america to destroy Iraq?
>>>Iraq destroyed itself by refusing to unify and engaging in tribal warfare and supporting al Qaeda<<<
You mean refusing to unify on terms imposed by an american invasion that's led to the death of 3% of the population? Why wasn't any of this going on prior to the invasion? Coincidence? And "supporting Al Qaeda" seems a bit simplistic since citizens of any occupied country - including americans - will support anyone who joins in fighting the occupying forces.
>>>Your point is that it's all about America.<<<
No it's not. The point is why america at all which seems to be impossible for you to understand. You keep quoting Bin Laden but only when you can use his quotes to imply some kind of generic hatred that somehow america accidentally got caught up in. When he speaks openly about US ME policy and how it's influenced him you ignore it. Cognitive dissonance?
How do you figure I defend terrorism? What sentence of mine leads you to that conclusion? Of course terrorism is wrong but there are reasons for it and no.........9/11 wasn't "deserved" but shouldn't have been totally unexpected.
Still waiting for your answer....
Europe's full of christians. How do you explain that the only european countries having an Al Qaeda problem are those who teamed up with america to destroy Iraq?
>>>I see you are still part of the blame America crowd.<<<
Sorry but I can't relate to unconditional support of anything, be it my children, my wife or my country. Why is it so impossible for you to admit that america has faults just like everyone and everything else? For you to believe that america's ME policies have nothing to do with the threat of terrorism, you also have to believe that america's ME policies have been models of fairness and even-handness. And if you believe that then it's my opinion that your understanding of patriotism is flawed.
>>>This is clearly about more than America. Bin Laden says it very clearly: "Every Muslim hates Americans, hates Jews, and hates Christians<<<
Europe's full of christians. How do you explain that the only european countries having an Al Qaeda problem are those who teamed up with america to destroy Iraq?
>>>HAL has lots of loyalty to the good ol USA<<<
And to the troops........they say....as they feed them untreated waste water and then feed the wounded to the rats at Walter Reed. Still....everywhere Bush & Cheney go to speak to the soldiers the hootin' and the hollerin' never ends. Showing respect I can understand for the sake of job security but the team that sent them on a bogus mission with outdated equipment and half hearted support still get rock star ovations. Do they screen the troop audiences too for loyalty?
“But the push to privatize support services there accelerated under President Bush’s ‘competitive sourcing’ initiative, which was launched in 2002,” the letter states.
During the year between awarding the contract to IAP and when the company started, “skilled government workers apparently began leaving Walter Reed in droves,” the letter states.
The letter said Walter Reed also awarded a five-year, $120-million contract to IAP Worldwide Services, which is run by Al Neffgen, a former senior Halliburton official."
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/03/Weightmansubpoena/
"Follow-up testing of the water soldiers were using to bathe, shave and even brush their teeth revealed evidence of coliform and E. coli bacteria, Callahan wrote in an e-mail to a staffer for the Democratic Policy Committee, led by Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D.
Halliburton subsidiary KBR was responsible for treating water at that base, under a contract to provide logistical support to U.S. troops."
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/biz/3780160.html
>>>I can't say I have any sympathy for Gonzalez<<<
I can't either but I can be sarcastic about it. This creep works night and day on ways to legally hurt people, be it with torture, with the patriot act or with the suspension of habeas corpus. And now he's upset that his credibility is shot because the abuses that were predicted from the day his programs were launched have been confirmed. He should be water boarded for confessions of treason, tried in a military tribunal and then jailed for life in gitmo.
>>>"People have to believe in what we say," Gonzales said. "And so I think this was very upsetting to me. And it's frustrating."<<<
I feel bad for gonzo. His good name ruined by the FBI and he's hurtin'. Anybody else?
>>>Senator Reid defended the decision to work with Fox, reasoning that it might help Democratic candidates reach out to right-leaning Fox viewers.<<<
Hard to believe the democratic leadership still hasn't the faintest clue what they're dealing with on the right. Would somebody please tell them that those who at this point remain loyal to George Bush and Fox news cannot be cured, educated or otherwise influenced by democrats or anyone else for that matter. Only skilled psychiatrist specializing in cult behavior should bother.
>>>Your thoughts?<<<
My thoughts are that the reasons you gave could be applied to almost any country on earth. But since they're not targeting any country on earth but focus on the US and its allies in the ME, your reasons don't really satisfy.
You quoted Bin Laden yourself so you must have faith in his sincerity. A few other quotes:
"In the video, bin Laden accused Bush of misleading Americans by saying the attack was carried out because Al Qaeda "hates freedom." The terrorist leader said his followers have left alone countries that do not threaten Muslims.
"We fought you because we are free ... and want to regain freedom for our nation. As you undermine our security we undermine yours," bin Laden said.
He said he was first inspired to attack the United States by the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon in which towers and buildings in Beirut were destroyed in the siege of the capital.
"While I was looking at these destroyed towers in Lebanon, it sparked in my mind that the tyrant should be punished with the same and that we should destroy towers in America, so that it tastes what we taste and would be deterred from killing our children and women," he said."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html
"Bin Laden has unquestionably suffered a moral failure of enormous proportions. But to say that he orchestrated the September 11 attacks simply because he is a bad man, and that what he hates about the U.S. must be those things, like freedom and God, that we hold to be the most good, is grossly oversimplifying. Bin Laden’s hatred for the United States is located in the complex history of American foreign policy in the Middle East."
http://www.brunchma.com/~acsumama/com/com092801.html
>>>9/11 added "them" to the proverbial equation. Big time.<<<
What was the motive for 9/11 in your opinion?
>>>I don't defend that.<<<
You have so far judging by everything you say here. And you've certainly been all over anyone who had the poor taste of complaining about Bush's unchecked powers. Calling them terrorist sympathizers and enemies of american liberties.
As I've kept saying and as the story I posted proves......the real enemy of american liberties is George Bush and the dorks who support him.
hey Trader.......just a little story here about the fight to defend our liberties that's so important to you. Looks like one of the tools you have supported just blew up in your face. (note that Bush didn't want anyone to know he f#*ked this up too)
FBI Illegally Used Patriot Act, Audit Says
WASHINGTON, March 9, 2007
(CBS/AP) The FBI improperly and, in some cases, illegally used the USA Patriot Act to secretly obtain personal information about people in the United States, underreporting for three years how often it forced businesses to turn over customer data, a Justice Department audit concluded Friday.
FBI agents sometimes demanded the data without proper authorization, according to a 126-page audit by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine. At other times, the audit found, the FBI improperly obtained telephone records in non-emergency circumstances.
Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine's report says that number was underreported by 20 percent, according to the officials.
Fine conducted the audit as required by Congress and over the objections of the Bush administration.
The audit blames agent error and shoddy record-keeping for the bulk of the problems and did not find any indication of criminal misconduct.
Still, "we believe the improper or illegal uses we found involve serious misuses of national security letter authorities," the audit concludes.
At issue are the security letters, a power outlined in the Patriot Act that the Bush administration pushed through Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. The letters, or administrative subpoenas, are used in suspected terrorism and espionage cases. They allow the FBI to require telephone companies, Internet service providers, banks, credit bureaus and other businesses to produce highly personal records about their customers or subscribers — without a judge's approval.
One government official familiar with the report said shoddy bookkeeping and records management led to the problems. The FBI agents appeared to be overwhelmed by the volume of demands for information over a two-year period, the official said.
"They lost track," said the official who like others interviewed late Thursday spoke on condition of anonymity because the report was not being released until Friday.
"While we’ve already taken some steps to address these shortcomings, I am ordering additional corrective measures to be taken immediately,” FBI Director Robert S. Mueller said in a press release Friday.
The FBI in 2005 reported to Congress that its agents had delivered a total of 9,254 national security letters seeking e-mail, telephone or financial information on 3,501 U.S. citizens and legal residents over the previous two years.
The Justice Department, already facing congressional criticism over its firing of eight U.S. attorneys, began notifying lawmakers of the audit's damning contents late Thursday. FBI spokesmen declined to comment on the findings.
Tasia Scolinos, a spokesperson for the Justice Department, said Gonzales told Mueller "these past mistakes will not be tolerated, and has ordered the FBI and the Department to restore accountability and to put in place safeguards to ensure greater oversight and controls over the use of national security letters."
Sen. Charles Schumer, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee that oversees the FBI, called the reported findings "a profoundly disturbing breach of public trust."
"Somebody has a lot of explaining to do," said Schumer, D-N.Y.
Fine's audit also says the FBI failed to send follow-up subpoenas to telecommunications companies that were told to expect them, the officials said.
Those cases involved so-called exigent letters to alert the companies that subpoenas would be issued shortly to gather more information, the officials said. But in many examples, the subpoenas were never sent, the officials said.
The FBI has since caught up with those omissions, either with national security letters or subpoenas, one official said.
Cindy Cohn, the legal director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the government, in general, needs to return to information gathering methods used prior to the Patriot Act.
The FBI must "limit these very powerful tools to situations in which the government is actually tracking suspected terrorists or spies," Cohn told CBS News radio.
National security letters have been the subject of legal battles in two federal courts because recipients were barred from telling anyone about them.
The American Civil Liberties Union sued the Bush administration over what the ACLU described as the security letter's gag on free speech.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/09/politics/main2551665.shtml
Exactly what everyone EXCEPT Bush republicans predicted would happen. Tell me one thing you clowns have been right about in the war on terror. Just one thing will do.
>>>Of Course, we are talking a about a party that rented cattle to put on Bush's Farm.<<<
whole damn ranch is a hollywood set. Bought just in time for the 2000 election........probably along with a chainsaw and a truckload of tree trimmings for Bush's brush clearing photo shoots. Ever see this ole' rancher on a horse by the way?
>>>I'll bet CNN, MSNBC and all the other lib sources had the same graphic on their screens,<<<
I watched MSNBC who's headline was produced AFTER the entire verdict was out. It read: "Libby guilty on 4 of 5 counts". Short, sweet and true.
>>>but since you libs only watch FoxNews<<<
Never watch it.....ever. Even removed it from my direct tv personal preference menu so i don't accidentally tune it in and contaminate the moment.
A Bush republican misses a point. So what else is new. Of course it's an accurate statement but was it an honest headline considering the overall verdict?
Fox news....
>>>In sum, the evidence against Libby was that his memory of the sequence and details of perfectly innocent events of no great importance differed from that of other witnesses. The judge who let this case go to the jury is one or more of the following: a nitwit, a coward, and/or a partisan hack. The jury that convicted was prejudiced, stupid or both.<<<
Sounds like a vast, left wing conspiracy to me. Led by a prosecutor appointed by Bush's own justice department no less and a judge appointed for life by GW Bush himself.
(Reggie B. Walton, JD (born Donora, Pennsylvania, February 8, 1949), is a United States District Judge for the District of Columbia, appointed in 2001 to his lifetime seat on the federal bench by President George W. Bush.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reggie_Walton
And the "prejudiced, stupid or both" jurors who were screened and selected by both the prosecution and the defense. One of the best lawyers in the country, handpicked by the Bush WH to defend the VP's good name, was fooled by a pack of idiots that just walked off the street?
Then nine jurors contradict Libby, one of them the current Bush WH deputy communications director and another a reporter specifically selected by the WH to get their story out but now they're all confused political hacks and Libby is the only one not lying.
Please keep it coming for entertainment value. Bush republicans have gone from having dangerous influence on US politics to being the laughing stock of the country. A small group of delusional fools who have convinced themselves that it's humanly impossible for a conservative to do wrong.
>>>No one is tearing up liberties in this country.<<<
None of these Bush initiatives chip away at people's liberties in your opinion?
1. the right to kidnap US citizens and foreigners off the street and hold them indefinitely without access to counsel.
2. the right to break into and search your home without informing you.
3. suspension of habeas corpus.......a constitutional right for every US citizen.
4. the right to ignore legislation by congress through more "signing statements" than any other president in US history.
5. signing the right to torture prisoners into law.
Save yourself the trouble of denying any of this ever happened. You'll only be out googled with enough proof to make you look foolish.
>>>I stand behind what's best for my country.<<<
Right....and you defend liberties while supporting a regime that's tearing them up one by one. All you have is slogans that you really don't seem to understand the contents of.
If you can't answer these basic questions about your convictions, why should you not be considered confused?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=17675552
>>>I'm just pointing out the facts to you pal.<<<
No pal......I pointed out a number of facts to YOU and asked a few questions too that you chose not to answer.
As passionate as you are about trashing those who you feel oppose what you stand for you sure do a lousy job of explaining where you stand and why. Frankly you seem confused.
>>>You don't care at all about defending liberty in this country.<<<
But you do? Tell me why you care more than I do about defending liberty in this country considering that you support and I oppose a president who:
1. Has given himself the right to kidnap US citizens off the street and hold them indefinitely without access to counsel.
2. Has given himself the right to break into and search your home without informing you.
3. Has suspended habeas corpus.......a constitutional right for every US citizen.
4. Routinely ignores legislation by congress through more "signing statements" than any other president in US history.
5. Has signed torture of prisoners into law.
Not only do you celebrate these measures but you accuse those who don't of being traitors.
Supporting the destruction of long standing liberties is good and opposing the destruction of long standing liberties is bad.....? Help me out here.
>>>What does easy have to do with it?<<<
You said it yourself:
"the statute is very narrow. Why continue except to do political harm??"
What does that mean except: "It's a tough crime to prove so why bother unless it's about politics"?
>>>It's solely a question of whether he should have wasted taxpayers money on an investigation that had no chance of success on the original charges.<<<
You have no clue what you're talking about. As if Fitz himself decided to investigate to do political damage to the Bush WH. The CIA asked for this investigation and the justice department then appointed Fitzgerald to conduct it. What do you want him to say? I won't waste taxpayer money trying to prove a crime with such a narrow statute?
The justice department ordered him to investigate and while doing so he spoke with Scooter Libby who kept lying under oath. That's the prosecutor's fault?
>>>the statute is very narrow. Why continue except to do political harm??<<<
Is that how you feel prosecutors in general should approach their job? Why bother unless it's easy?
no spin from the cult yet I see. must be waiting for marching orders. Oh wait........almost forgot...a GOP lawyer was just on MSNBC and assured everyone that this in no way reflects poorly on the Bush WH. So at least we can be assured of that.
Libby guilty on 4 of 5 counts.
>>>we need the Iraqi people to come together in cooperation and take a stand for their country<<<
And you still think the reason they haven't done it in 4 years of US occupation is that there haven't been enough occupiers? Another 21,000 and it'll all come together in short order? Another 221,000 out of the gate might have done it but 21,000 at this stage is nothing but more troops led to needless slaughter which you ought to understand by now.
Between yourself, rollingrock and the rest of the super patriots here you all seem to share one thing: Fear of anything approaching defeat or miscalculation on part of the US military........under any circumstances. No matter how useless the current strategy has proven to be, even redeployment to the borders of Iraq in a wait and see capacity is unacceptable because you see it as defeat and only kick ass aggression until "victory" is achieved satisfies.
If Thomas Edison was a Bush republican I guarantee you he would not have been given credit for the light bulb. Instead of accepting that the initial trials were failures and that a new approach was necessary, he would have insisted he had the right idea and kept fumbling with all the failing elements until he either ran out of money or raw material.
>>>I am sure many though WWII was a hopeless hell hole as well...<<<
What similarities do you see between WW2 and Iraq?
>>>Lol, Okay let's bring everybody home and retrain them then send them back into IRAQ.... LOL<<<
Sorry if I stay on topic but you started this in reference to the troops that have yet to be sent there.......not those who are already on location. Not that it matters cause you missed the whole point anyway. There IS no way to train them for today's Iraq which is why they shouldn't go.
I suppose the fact that you support sending more troops into a hopeless hellhole is what makes you a bigger patriot than those who oppose it. At least in your mind..
>>>But that isn’t Murtha’s idea. He has said in advance that the military cannot meet the requirements he plans to insert in the bill.<<<
What if the requirement is that the troops be trained properly in defusing a civil war? Sounds like a reasonable requirement if you're sending troops into a civil war. But how do you train 20,000 troops to make peace between 26 million arabs who hate each other?
>>>Lots of truth in Coulters articles<<<
Like this one which you posted with pride a couple of months ago:
"Democrats were desperate for America to lose. They invented "Watergate,"
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15955185
>>>I'd rather have a man who is brilliant surrounded by a sea of idiots than just another idiot in a sea of idiots.<<<
Obviously.....but my concern is to what extent his brilliance will be hampered being surrounded by a sea of idiots who haven't shown much willingness to compromise with anyone. Just wondering if someone slightly less brilliant surrounded by a sea of mediocrity wouldn't yield better results.
>>>looking to protect the good citizens of his district by voicing a problem with another HoR member who chose to use his holy book in a private HoR swearing-in ceremony.<<<
Didn't he basically say that particular member was a threat to national security because of the way he chose to be sworn in?
>>>Seems to me like the cheney bombing would drop the stock markets more than a chinese rate hike.<<<
An opposing view if you care.
February 28, 2007
12:03 AM ET
The One Indicator You Should Focus on RIGHT HERE!
There's really being no good fundamental reason that the stock market sold off so sharply Tuesday: yes, Chinese stocks dropped 9% to help get the decline started in the U.S., but remember China is up around 130% over the last 12 months. If you've ever traded a stock that's more than doubled in less than a year, you know that a 10% correction on certain days is normal and healthy within a long-term bull trend. I think China (measured by symbol FXI) should settle back a bit more near 90, down about another 5%, at which point it's a buy on my charts for the next 6-12 months.
So did the alleged Taliban attempt on Dick Cheney's life have any affect? I think that's the weakest excuse I've ever heard...Next!
The bottom line is the market was coming off a complacent recent peak, where the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) had just hit under the 10.00 level about a week ago, near all-time lows. When no one expects any volatility is EXACTLY when the contrarian should expect plenty of volatility to come to catch the masses by surprise.
But NOW, the VIX Tuesday showed an unbelievable sign of a fear panic now in place: the 1-day percentage jump in the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX), which gained 61% today! That's the biggest 1-day jump in the VIX in percentage terms EVER! That tells you investors really hit the panic button today, and now with most investors and commentators talking about moving to the sidelines, you have to be ready to catch a likely retest of the lows from Tuesday that's likely to come in the next couple of days.
More importantly, the VIX closed just under 18 off an intraday peak at 19. Plot the VIX on your weekly chart, and go back and look at the importance of the 20 level, both in the bull market phase from 1991 - 1997 and since the 2003 bull market began. Every test around 20 is typically very bullish for stocks in the long run, as even the brief test over 20 last June was a classic fear spike to be bought right at major lows.
So keep a super-close eye on the VIX indicator and the all-important 20 level. I'd expect to see some downside probing either tomorrow or Thursday, and any touch up to 20 is likely to be a gift to buy in the big picture. And with the Fed staying on the sidelines or perhaps now even posised to ease, there's no reason to expect this to turn into a 1987 situation, which was driven then by fears of higher interest rates.
So don't be suckered by the fearful commentators all saying step to the sidelines - there's opportunity here, and you have to be ready to pounce!
Trade Smarter,
Price Headley, CFA, CMT - Founder & Chief Analyst
>>>I am DAMN well gonna do my best to see Ron Paul make President.<<<
If he ran as a libertarian, no problem. But he's running as a republican last I heard. You're not concerned about the family he surrounds himself with? I don't care how great he is........one individual won't cleanse the party of the culture it has adopted over the past decade and he'll have to play ball with the crackpots we've been joking about if he hopes to get anything done. A vote for someone who'll be forced to cut deals with John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Jim Inhofe and Virgil Goode...? Don't think so.
Passenger manifests only list those officially onboard at the time of departure. I.E. ticketed passengers and crew. Why they omitted the hijackers I don't know.
>>>do you have links to; 757 landing gear found<<<
>>>dna evidence from deceased passengers<<<
"Investigators have identified remains of 184 people who were aboard American Airlines Flight 77 or inside the Pentagon, including those of the five hijackers, but they say it is impossible to match what is left with the five missing people."
http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/pentagon-unidentified.htm
>>>the flight manifest<<<
Good luck getting the official manifest from the airline. This is what was supplied to the media by American Airlines:
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html
I'd like to take credit for that but I won't. Got pummeled over that post......not by kos but by his loyalists. Something else made them come around.......like watching their candidates getting beat up every day without lifting a finger to defend themselves maybe...?
>>>I think your estimate of how many people would have to be in on it is way high.. jmho..<<<
Depends on how far you take the conspiracy. One of the most talked about is the pentagon crash which the believers say wasn't an AA 757 at all but a small fighter jet. I used to work for a major airline and I know how many people are involved in the dispatch of one single flight just on the airline side of it. Add to that relatives of the passengers, air traffic control staff + rescue workers on the site and you really end up with an impossible scenario for a well kept secret imo. Never mind physical evidence on the crash site such as an easily recognizable 757 landing gear wheel assembly and DNA evidence from deceased passengers matching those on the flight manifest.
Oh no........kos himself wrote a comment about a year ago on how democrats should avoid getting too involved in republicans personal attacks during the election campaign. I remember it well because I produced one of maybe 3 posts ever on that site in response to him asking if he happened to watch John Kerry's implosion in 2004 and if any lessons were learned.