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.
>>>They weren't going near that fast.<<<
8:46:40: Flight 11 crashes at roughly 490 mph (790 km/h) into the north side of the north tower...
9:03:13: Flight 175 crashes at about 590 mph (950 km/h) into the south side of the south tower...
http://www.wtc911.us/wtc_911_facts.html
What would be the government's motivation for planting explosives around the towers in addition to the 600 mph impact of a 767 with 20,000 gallons of jet fuel on board? The magnitude of the destruction seems to have been much less important than the actual attacks in terms of allowing Bush to benefit politically.
>>>"six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators."<<<
I hope there's lots more. The GOP is already reduced to nuclear waste and if the dems follow it will open the door for whatever clean public servants who emerge from the rubbles to form a new party. Anything short of that is meaningless imo.
>>>Why did you even reference post about my Savior? Get a life and respect others.<<<
this is not a bible study or prayer board you know. If you can't tolerate a soft ribbing in good jest maybe there's a better forum for you somewhere else..? Watching you praise Bush here all hours of the day how the hell do I know who your savior is?
Nabil Shaath says: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, "George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan." And I did, and then God would tell me, "George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq …" And I did. And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, "Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East." And by God I'm gonna do it.'"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml
hey Brig.......that's a little odd. Give em' hell tough guy analyzing a man's features in detail like that. But you do it with obvious ease so it must come naturally.
"SEDER: Well, I got to tell you, in “Fubar” Steve Cheryll and I got knocked for dedicating so much space to anti-gay gay Republicans, and I think part of it is that, you know, they‘re repressing their natural feelings, and they take their self-loathing and just project it outwards. And so some of your most virulent gay haters end up like Ted Haggard, actually getting a little bit on the side in private. It seems to be the rallying cry for conservatives at this point."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16110325/
Asking about Bush's birthday is poking fun at your savior?
>>>Bush will go down in history as one of our greatest presidents<<<
Been suspicious for a while but now I'm convinced. You come here to yank chains with no intention of being rational. Bush one of the greatest presidents, invade and destroy Iran as we're getting our asses kicked by a civilian population in Iraq..........these are statements by either a joker or a fool. Unusual form of entertainment but whatever turns you on. Have fun....
"President Bush has been named as the worst president since the end of the World War II in a new national poll.
Mr. Bush was chosen by 34 percent of the voters who participated in the the Quinnipiac Unversity survey. Richard Nixon finished second with 17 percent -- just ahead of Bill Clinton with 16 percent."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/01/politics/main1673345.shtml
>>>kill anything that moves or sleeps - men, women, children, eldery, handicapped, pets, plants, etc. Worked out pretty well.<<<
From the ISG report:
"The primary mission of U.S. forces in Iraq should not be to defeat al Qaeda."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/07/opinion/main2237703_page2.shtml
There.....Bush's bogus w.o.t. strategy stripped bare by one of his best friends and the man who helped him win the election in 2000. He's exactly right of course in that Iraq being "The central front on the war on terror" was never anything more than a slogan to feed the clueless republican base.
>>>declare a war....congress.....do it on the battlefield....<<<
I see.........once you declare war it's ok to systematically exterminate an entire country's population?
>>>If they suddenly stop posting on stock boards but continue to post all day on nonstop boards....it's pretty obvious what happened.<<<
First of all what's a "nonstop board"? Next......judging by your posts here, what's obvious to you is much less obvious to a majority of americans and that probably applies to your theory of why people stop posting on certain stock boards too. If you care to know, my decision had exactly nothing to do with Bush's reelection but had everything to do with the amount of junk one has to sort through on most stock boards to find anything useful. I just trade better without all the noise.......that's all. A great trader ......forget his name now....said: "Trading is a lonely business and therefore it's not for everybody". I scoffed at it then but no longer.
>>>to celebrate Christmas and the birth of our Savior:))))))))<<<
GW Bush's birthday is Dec. 25th?
>>>alias called "daytrader" yet you never show your face near a stock board<<<
What's your point? You have to socialize with strangers on internet stock boards to be a real trader? Maybe that's what you need to get through the day but what if you had to call your own shots? Turn off CNBC, turn off Cramer and all the rest of the noise and stop asking Zeev if the close will be red or green and see how you do on your own. Or maybe you already did and recognized you need the handholding?
>>>vacate or die....BRIG<<<
What's the difference between the tactic you promote and genocide?
Iraq has a population of about 25 million. If Bush followed your advice and killed them all he would become the worst mass murderer in modern history. You feel that would be helpful in the w.o.t. and a good start for him as he works towards establishing a new democracy in the ME?
And it has nothing to do with the kind of enemy they're facing? How do you fight an all out war of attrition without mercy or compassion against an enemy that's not wearing a uniform? Kill the entire population?
Oh.....so US troops have been too timid since the invasion started? That's the whole problem?
>>>not if we take that oil and fund what needs to be done.....game over....BRIG<<<
Instigating or are you that far gone? US troops haven't been able to secure the road between Baghdad and the airport in almost 4 years but seizing control of all oilfields and start shipping the product should be cupcake work once the decision is made? What's your rationale?
Is there a city in america that doesn't have "certain parts"? An entire city should be labeled a hell hole if it has certain undesirable sections? As for crime, Miami doesn't even make the top 25 list. I wouldn't want to live there but it's obviously not a dangerous place.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15475741/
And you're sinking lower every day. One response more idiotic than the next.
>>>Bush's approval rating declined as a result of a marketing campaign carried out by the unconscionable zealots of the Democratic party<<<
William Buckley Jr. is not an unconscionable zealot of the Democratic party but maybe THE most conscious spokesman for the republican party and a good proxy. If he feels this way, isn't it reasonable to believe that Bush has lost support because of his policies and not because of a marketing problem?
William F. Buckley, Jr. Calls for Pres. Bush to Resign, Says Iraq Has Been a Failure
In statements that were reminiscent of Walter Cronkite's admission that Vietnam was an unwinnable mistake, a statement that prompted Pres. Lyndon Johnson to to remark, "if we've lost Walter Cronkite, then we've lost the American people," legendary conservative spokesman William F. Buckley, Jr. blasted Pres. Bush's foreign policy by saying that the entire Bush administration was engulfed by Iraq to the detriment of every other issue.
To all those who question, in light of the inane and purposely outrageous comments from such GOP talking head mainstays at Ann Coulter, Joe Scarborough and Bill O'Reilly, whether there can actually possibly be such a thing as a truly intelligent and incisive conservative I suggest they listen to or read the writings of William F. Buckley, Jr.. Though Buckley certainly is misguided on a variety of topics, he speaks eloquently in defense of them. To listen to Buckley and then to listen to Ann Coulter one would never guess that they share a common starting point for their beliefs. Where Ann Coulter quickly diverges into fascist neo-Nazi insanity, however, William F. Buckley, Jr. has in the past broken with the conservative ilk who stick like glue to outdated and outmoded ideology.
During the interview, Buckley said that if a European leader experienced the difficulties in foreign policy that Bush has, that it would be commonly expected he would either retire or resign. He also blasted Bush for being "extravagant on domestic spending." He said the Pres. Bush was "incapable of bringing together such forces as apparently were necessary to conclude the Iraq challenge." Later on, when asked what Pres. Bush's foreign policy legacy will be Buckley said, "There will be no legacy for Mr. Bush...his foreign policy is indecipherable."
These must be quite chilling words to Republican strategists. As Buckley goes, so goes many of the new conservatives. Buckley's conservatism is far more in line with the majority of conservative-minded swing voters than the extreme, hardcore conservatism represented by Coulter and O'Reilly. If Bush has lost Buckley, then the GOP is in far more trouble than they think. They are in so much trouble that even Karl Rove's underhanded strategies may not be enough to save them.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/47762/william_f_buckley_jr_calls_for_pres.html
>>>Too bad the hero of the left, Bill Clinton didn't take out Bin Laden when he had the opportunity. He had four planned attempts that either missed because of incompetence, or weren't executed due to his indecisiveness and lack of leadership.<<<
Pure bullshit. If you're interested in the truth, do a google search on the subject and you'll find CIA officials as well as non-partisan republicans confirming as much.
John McLaughlin helped run the CIA in both the Clinton and Bush administrations.
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: President Clinton did aggressively pursue Osama bin Laden. I give the Clinton administration a lot of credit for the aggressiveness with which they went after al Qaeda and bin Laden.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0609/24/cnr.04.html
"Clarke told me that in the mid-nineties “the C.I.A. was authorized to mount operations to go into Afghanistan and apprehend bin Laden.” President Clinton, Clarke said, “was really gung-ho” about the scenario. “He had no hesitations,” he said. “But the C.I.A. had hesitations. They didn’t want their own people killed. And they didn’t want their shortcomings exposed. They really didn’t have the paramilitary capability to do it; they could not stage a snatch operation.” Instead of trying to mount the operation themselves, Clarke said, “the C.I.A. basically paid a bunch of local Afghans, who went in and did nothing.”
In 1998, Al Qaeda struck the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing more than two hundred people. In retaliation, Clinton signed a secret Presidential finding authorizing the C.I.A. to kill bin Laden. It was the first directive of this kind that Clarke had seen during his thirty years in government. Soon afterward, he told me, C.I.A. officials went to the White House and said they had “specific, predictive, actionable” intelligence that bin Laden would soon be attending a particular meeting, in a particular place. “It was a rare occurrence,” Clarke said. Clinton authorized a lethal attack. The target date, however—August 20, 1998—nearly coincided with Clinton’s deposition about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. Clarke said that he and other top national-security officials at the White House went to see Clinton to warn him that he would likely be accused of “wagging the dog” in order to distract the public from his political embarrassment. Clinton was enraged. “Don’t you fucking tell me about my political problems, or my personal problems,” Clinton said, according to Clarke. “You tell me about national security. Is it the right thing to do?” Clarke thought it was. “Then fucking do it,” Clinton told him.
The attacks, which cost seventy-nine million dollars and involved some sixty satellite-guided Tomahawk cruise missiles, obliterated two targets—a terrorist training camp outside Khost, in Afghanistan, and a pharmaceutical plant thought to be manufacturing chemical weapons in Khartoum, Sudan—and were notorious failures. “The best post-facto intelligence we had was that bin Laden had left the training camp within an hour of the attack,” Clarke said. What went wrong? “I have reason to believe that a retired head of the I.S.I. was able to pass information along to Al Qaeda that an attack was coming,” he said.
Clarke also blames the military for enabling the Pakistanis to compromise the mission. “The Pentagon did what we asked them not to,” he said. “We asked them not to use surface ships. We asked them to use subs, so they wouldn’t signal the attack. But not only did they use surface ships—they brought additional ones in, because every captain wants to be able to say he fired the cruise missile.”
Asad Hayauddin denies that anyone in Pakistan even had enough knowledge to compromise the mission: “The U.S. didn’t tell us about it until forty-five minutes before the missiles hit.”
After the 1998 fiasco, Clinton secretly approved additional Presidential findings, authorizing the killing not just of bin Laden but also of several of his top lieutenants, and permitting any private planes or helicopters carrying them to be shot down. These directives led to nothing. “The C.I.A. was unable to carry out the mission,” Clarke said. “They hired local Afghans to do it for them again.” The agency also tried to train and equip a Pakistani commando force and some Uzbeks, too. “The point is, they were risk-averse,” he said. Tenet was “eager to kill bin Laden,” Clarke said. “He understood the threat. But the capability of the C.I.A.’s Directorate of Operations was far less than advertised. The Directorate of Operations would like people to think it’s a great James Bond operation, but for years it essentially assigned officers undercover as diplomats to attend cocktail parties. They collected information. But they were not a commando unit that could go into Afghanistan and kill bin Laden.”
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/030804fa_fact
5 day work week in congress irks republicans
"Keeping us up here eats away at families," said Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.), who typically flies home on Thursdays and returns to Washington on Tuesdays. "Marriages suffer. The Democrats could care less about families -- that's what this says."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/05/AR2006120501342.html
>>>Maybe you should try living in Miami for a while..<<<
How bad can it be if Jeb Bush is moving there. Safe to say he can afford to live wherever he wants. Or do you know something he doesn't?
"Bush, who plans to move to Miami after vacating the governor's office, said in his letter, "Miami is a wonderful city filled with diversity and heritage that we choose to celebrate, not insult."
http://cbs4denver.com/topstories/local_story_333091204.html
>>>other than religious .. some even wonder about that .. think about it ...<<<
If Bush is a christian of deep faith as he claims to be then he's not like any other I ever met. Without exception, those i have known and still know are polar opposites of GW Bush......i.e. humble, kind, unassuming gentle humans who oppose violence and social injustice rather than promote it. I personally don't think Bush is any more religious than the pets he keep but that's just me...
>>>I saw Daddy Bush crying<<<
Guess he heard it too then.......the latest rumor in Washington. Everyone's worst fear.......that Bush really is in charge now.
"And I've talked to a lot of people about this today, and they say that, well sure, the White House always puts the best spin it can, the rosiest picture it can on events. But when it comes to war, the public really wants it straight. And here's an indication, they say, that the White House was saying one thing in public and thinking quite another in private.
But here's the other thing, Wolf, is that we see the president in public still sticking pretty much with the script. I mean, the day after the Hadley memo came out, questioning whether or not al Maliki was the right guy for the job, President Bush said pretty unequivocally that he was in that press conference with Maliki that he was.
I spoke with David Gergen, former White House adviser under two presidents, Republican and Democrat, about this. And he says, you know, here's the danger for President Bush, and the danger is that people have thought up until now it was people like Don Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney who were driving the president forward.
Now with all of these concerns being aired by the president's closest advisers, there's a perception, perhaps, that the president is the one who's not listening to anybody else, he's got his own ideas, his own agenda and he's pursuing it regardless of what everybody else says."
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0612/04/sitroom.01.html
>>>Briefly, his expressionless eyes met the camera before he lowered his head submissively in expectation of what came next: noise-blocking headphones over his ears and blacked-out goggles over his eyes.<<<
"The indictment, covering events through the fall of 2001, specifies no terrorist plots – not even the purported plot to detonate a bomb laced with radioactive material inside the U.S, the initial justification for holding Padilla."
So what's all this about then? Chains, blacked out goggles, noise cancelling headphones, three guards in camoflauge riot gear........? And he's a US citizen held in a military brig isolation cell for 3 1/2 years without being charged with a crime and without access to a lawyer. Super patriots hap, ieddy, rollingrock, yayaa, e.t., rawnoc and BRIG.......no problem at all here?
In this undated image taken from U.S. government video, filed with the court by defense lawyers on Dec. 1, 2006, terrorism suspect Jose Padilla fitted with blacked-out goggles during his military detention. (AP Photo/U.S. Government)
>>>Massive warship! What a legacy that will be for him!<<<
Quiet a legacy and a miscast one imo. A river barge with the world's largest sewage tanks installed would have been a better choice.
Would you not agree that Lincoln is merely recognized as having been a US president rather than being recognized for having been a great one? For the third time.......what do you think Bush done that merits you coming to his defense?
Bull. President's day was originally designated to celebrate George Washington's birthday. Lincoln gets to tag along....not for his greatness but for having his birthday the same month as Washington. So same question still........why do you think GW Bush's record is so impressive you feel obligated to come to his defense here, by creative reaching no less?
"Although Lincoln's birthday, February 12, was never a federal holiday,
http://www.answers.com/topic/presidents-day-united-states
>>>President Lincoln, a man this country chooses to celebrate via a national holiday<<<
What national holiday celebrates Lincoln as a great president?
>>>President Bush is only the second most hated president.<<<
You've spent a lot of energy here tonight explaining that there may actually have been one president in US history who was more hated than Bush or "worse" than Bush. Whatever you try to prove, why do you think he's worth it? Why is it important to you to establish that he's only number 2 from the bottom instead of dead last? He's a loser and a failure of seldom seen historic proportions so what's the difference?
>>>if Bush were to run against gore or kerry once again, Bush would probably win.<<<
You base that assumption on what? These polls were taken 4 months ago and I hope you won't try to make the case that Bush is more popular today than he was in August.
Poll: President Bush would lose to Kerry and Gore today
According to a survey by Scripps Howard News Service released by Ohio University which asked 1,010 "Americans to ponder their options in every U.S. presidential election held since 1964," two term President George W. Bush would lose to both Senator John Kerry and former Vice President Al Gore.
"46 per cent of respondents would support Democrat John Kerry in a repeat of the 2004 ballot, while 40 per cent would vote for Republican George W. Bush," according to Scripps Howard News Service / Ohio University poll.
Interestingly, Ralph Nader captured 7% in the survey, even though the independent only garnered 0.4% of the popular vote in 2004.
In a "rerun" of 2000, the poll suggests that Gore would beat Bush with 46 to 38 percent.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Poll_President_Bush_would_lose_to_0809.html
>>>VP Cheney at that time can rest well with how he has conducted his life.<<<
Know what yayaa.......I couldn't rest well merely saying what you just did. Your faith may be strong but when was the last time you had your integrity checked?
We know plenty already but more will come out. Cheney was at the epicenter of the apparatus that got this bogus war started. Almost 3,000 US troops dead so far for no good reason and you can keep adding about 100/month while you're resting well along with your VP.
>>>her incessant use of the word "Decider" is offensive<<<
Why? He told us that's who he is.....at a WH press conference no less. Bush refers to himself as the decider so why does it offend you when someone else does it, no matter how many times? Referring to Arnold Schwarzenegger as the terminator is offensive to you as well?
got that right.....
but as usual, you really don't know why except that you just think so. The undisputed master of nonsense replies....
>>>Maybe you should look at your own repetitive derisive rhetoric.<<<
Did you ever look at your repetitive attacks on pegn? Next time you get ready to refer to her as a moron why not ask yourself who's more deserving of the moron label? You who have stood up for Bush and his failed war all the way from 85% to 30% or pegn who throughout the freefall called Bush an incompetent loser and the war a misguided fiasco? Everything you've turned yourself inside out to support has collapsed in spectacular fashion and everything pegn has been critical of has gone from bad to worse. So who do you think is looking smarter between the two of you? Just asking....
In response to blue sky who said:
>>>il·lit·er·ate
adj.
1.
a. Unable to read and write.
b. Having little or no formal education.
2.
a. Marked by inferiority to an expected standard of familiarity with language and literature.
b. Violating prescribed standards of speech or writing.
3. Ignorant of the fundamentals of a given art or branch of knowledge
Now go eff yourself<<<<
You're making a fool of yourself. I underlined the word you screwed up and you still didn't get it. I give you another clue..........it wasn't illiterate.
>>>It would be perfect for you then since your illiterate anyway.<<<
lol........you mock someone for being illiterate and can't spell it right. (you're illiterate)
>>>I would be watching this man.<<<
Me too.....hoping it rubs off on others. Many more like him are needed in DC.