I love the faux shock. Firstly this video is crap, and I have serious doubts about the translations, but I've seen shittier anti-muslim crap that attributed even worse translations, but that's ok because we have always been at war with Eastasia.

Anyways, please waste your breath on appropriate videos. This is clearly never going to make it out of the dead wasteland, so quit with your personal crusade. Do I really need to get out my avatar created just for one special person. SIFTERS FOR RACERISTS VIDEOS

Someone is batshit crazy with their everyone is a racist conspiracies.

Anyways, there is a legitimate news story about Israeli students and Israelis connected to 9/11. It isn't quit the level of the usual 9/11 conspiracy stuff, and I haven't seen it investigate enough. Anyone who does not think there are a ton of Mossad in this country are just sadly half-retarded. Now, this video just plays on the semi-facts regarding the FBI investigations, but it is real the group of "art students" or whatever they claimed to be.

And it also isn't racerist as you like to say. There are other races who happen to be Israeli also. There are also other religions who happen to be Israeli. So don't assume someone is racist because they criticize Israelis. They are no friend to this country and are quite expensive to keep as "allies" when the US has to pay out the welfare program in arms and protection money. The US could easily insure all the low-income children in THIS country if we just cutoff the funds we send to Israel to keep their economy propped up. Look at the video of the naval blockades or even the USS Liberty. (Of course the US is much much worse when it comes to their actions in the world)

Obama:
law degree from harvard
president of the harvard law review
lawyer
worked for a charity that set up job training program and a college preparatory program in Chicago's impoverished south side.
taught constitutional law for 12 years at the University of Chicago law school.
state senator for 7.5 years
U.S. senator for 3.5 years

Palin:
attended half a dozen tier-4 state-run schools for about 6 months each and got a bachelor's degree in journalism
Sports newscaster
Fundamentalist
Mayor of a town of <7,000 people for 6 years, cut back on library and museum spending. Governor of Alaska for 1.5 years, replacing an incumbent with <20% approval rating.

McCain:
Graduated naval academy at the bottom of his class
Shot down in Vietnam
Military stuff
Unremarkable senator for 21 years.


Biden:
More experienced than McCain (35 years in the senate)

@jwalther420 - its a new post on his youtube blog, but it looks like you are correct (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/30/griffin-resigns/)

@SDGumdamX - You make a good point; maybe if they are currently deployed but expecting to be on leave at their residence on the Naval Air Station to vote, they may not have planned on casting an absentee ballot. These individuals might miss a postcard testing whether their address is correct, and might then be swept from the voter roll without them knowing.
(http://www.duvalelections.com/content.aspx?id=31)

Dr. Butler was shot down over North Vietnam in April, 1965 and was brought to the Hanoi Hilton prison, two and a half years prior to McCain's arrival. He spent eight years in captivity. Butler is critical of McCain's habitual use of his P.O.W. story to advance his presidential campaign. "John has allowed I think the media to make him out to be the P.O.W., the hero, and in fact there were over 600 just like him who performed just as well." Echoing a similar assertion from General Wesley Clark two months ago, Butler continues, "I think I can say with authority that the Prisoner Of War experience is not a good prerequisite for President of the United States."

Having lived across the hall from John McCain at the U.S. Naval Academy prior to combat, Butler was a close witness to McCain's famously volatile temperament. "He was very sensitive and touchy and just easy to anger," says Dr. Butler. "John McCain is not somebody I would like to see with his finger near the red button." Butler continues, "John McCain's temperament makes it clear that he is not cut out to be President of the United States."

Butler points to the health risks faced by former Prisoners Of War as another cause for concern about a McCain presidency - a concern publicly heightened in recent days by McCain's selection of a political novice as a running mate. "The data show that the Prisoner Of War group are dying at an earlier age and that we suffer lots of residual things that non-P.O.W. group really doesn't have to deal with. And it's imperative that we have someone who is healthy and can stand the rigors of that job."

Other military veterans agree with Butler's criticism of McCain's exploitation of his P.O.W. story. Writes Brandon Friedman, a veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan and author of 'The War I Always Wanted': "To see McCain resort to playing the POW card when answering legitimate questions, in my mind, cheapens that experience. And by cheapening his own experience in war, he degrades all of our experiences in war. He turns the horrific incidents we've all seen, touched, smelled, and felt into a lame excuse to earn political points. And it dishonors us all."

From YT: We are sure this video will draw an onslaught of right-wing attacks, but we bring it to you because it is our job to continue to convey the truth together and give these issues national attention. As Dr. Butler has said, McCain does not have the temperament to have his finger near the red button. Get this video to everyone you know—friends, family members, coworkers, and especially those who don't share your political views. The video is designed to reach them. Get it on your social networking sites like Digg. And get it to every blog, newspaper, and TV station that has ever overplayed McCain's POW story. It is time to fight back with truth!

The mainstream press has already begun to call out McCain for overusing his POW story. And it's cut across all political persuasions. * "Whether he's deflecting criticism over his health-care plan or mocking a tribute to the Woodstock music festival, Senator John McCain has a trump card: the Hanoi Hilton. — Edwin Chen, Bloomberg * "Noun, Verb, POW" — Andrew Sullivan, The Atlantic Monthly * "The McCain campaign's constant invocation of the candidate's POW past is weird bordering on irrational..." — Ana Marie Cox, TIME * "I think they are going to it way too many times." — Howard Fineman, Newsweek

Remember how Joe Biden got the press to refer to Rudy Giuliani as "A noun, a verb, and 9/11"? Well, let's actually take Andrew Sullivan's lead here and get the media to boil McCain down to a similar phrase: "A noun, a verb, and POW." Considering how often the McCain campaign invokes his POW story, isn't that what they're already doing?

WTF, oldnavy? Just because I'm a Marine and lean towards the right the bad economy is entirely my fault? Oil spills are my fault?

You got you CAR? Good for you, I'm sure you deserved it. Why the hell would it matter what branch you were in? You were shot at so you deserved it. I have a brother in the Navy - he's the Chief of pastoral care services at the Bethesda Naval Hospital.
Corpsmen? I respect those guys even more than my fellow Marines. Not only do they have to carry their individual gear like everyone else, they have to pack on an additional 15 or 20 lbs of their medical gear as well. I've heard plenty of accounts of corpsmen having both their legs blown off, and dragging their dying bodies around the battlefield with their arms to patch up wounded Marines. There were two such corpsmen that were awarded recently at a corpsmen ball down by Bethesda.


"You know there are more criminals in on waivers than actual patriots"

Right - because on the enlistment contract there's a box you can check off to say that you're a patriot.

I forgot we could quantify that. Just because someone is a criminal, does not mean they can't have left that all behind them, and wanted to serve their country. Anyone that puts on a uniform, regardless of their past is a patriot in my eyes.

I'm not sure why you feel the need to tell me "Don't call you a democrat" or "Don't label me a a non-voting stalker"
You've been a member here for less than a day. How the fuck would I know anything about you to make such a claim? Secondly, I never did make such a claim.


"I hate you guys that do one enlistment and run your mouth as an armchair patriot"
Don't act like you fucking know me. For all you or anyone else here knows I had to get out for medical reasons. For all you or they know, I had to get out for psychological ones.
Fuck you.
I miss the Marine Corps every day of my life and wish I could go back in.

I'm pissed about the Democrats in Congress too, because they haven't fought for their platform tooth and nail like the Republicans have. In other circumstances, I'd call that a positive, but right now we need them to fight, not try to rise above the fray.

Doesn't mean I'm going to stay home on election day, or toss my lot in with Nader or the Greens, and it certainly doesn't mean I'm going to vote Republican.

It does mean that my soul-searching was all over and done with after the primaries -- now it's just time to fight to win.

As for "professing the success of the surge", he's done no such thing. He'll concede that the increase in troops has brought greater security, and you're right, he's trying to make it sound like he never said it would make violence worse, but he is still saying it hasn't done what it was supposed to do in bringing political reconciliation. To me, that's all academic, because I'm firmly in the camp of believing that the strongest incentive for Iraqis to handle their own affairs would be us saying "we're leaving"...and the Iraqi leadership now agrees.

To be more honest, I'm less worried about when the troops are out, than having a clearly defined plan for what our goals are, and how we know when we've reached them, and how we determine whether or not it's worth continuing. Bush/McCain refuse to give us any of those, and just try to spread drama about how it's some sort of existential conflict, and it simply isn't.

As for economics, keep in mind that Bush inherited a budget surplus from that evil Democrat Bill Clinton...who'd come to office after 12 years of Republican deficit spending, and 8 years of Republican control has almost doubled the national debt. If you're concerned about debt, check this study of Obama and McCain's tax policies, and take particular note of which one results in the smaller deficit.

Also, there's quite the choir of economists now who're calling for more regulation of the market, and a government sponsored universal health care plan.

I'm much more worried about the Patriot act, and you should consider that McCain is 100% behind keeping it, while Obama wants to get rid of it, and has committed to a review of the Bush executive orders and expunge any that "trample on liberty".

I think if you're looking for a pro-civil-rights candidate, you should be looking at the guy who has a degree from Harvard in Constitutional Law, rather than the guy who graduated 894th of 899 from the Naval Academy (where I imagine there was more emphasis on national security than protecting the rights of the individual).

If I were in a situation where the Democrat was pro-torture, pro-wiretapping, and anti-4th amendment, and the Republican was in favor of adhering to the Constitution, I'd vote Republican for the first time, ever.

I don't envy the choice you're having to make in this election, I just hope you consider that defending our rights might be more important than seeing your economic philosophy promoted.

We can disagree about Al Jazeera. They've improved in the last year or two, but they lost my trust a while ago and will have to do a lot to regain it.

I certainly agree that big Corporations (international and domestic) need to be hacked up a bit. They have far to much power and influence. I do NOT however buy that they control whether the US goes to war or not. I do NOT believe Iraq was about oil. We haven't seen a drop of it and it has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars, a tremendous amount of lives, and more popularity and international influence. Anti-war activists and leftists love to say oil oil oil as much as they can to make those that supported the war look like evil corporate sell-outs. It's a very common political partisan warfare technique VERY often utilized by the left. (The right has its own devious techniques, but the left has mastered this particular one.) Anyway, arguing Iraq is a dead stalemate every time, so it's pointless to go on about it. Bottom line, corps have too much power, but not all the power, AND not all corporations are run by demons bent on greed at all costs. You need a certain breed of board members for that sort of heartlessness.

"Ordinary People" don't want war. That is true. But they do want certain things to be and others not to be and they don't want to be the ones responsible for what it takes to make those things be or not be. For example. The west (primarily America at this point) sees the sudden rise and dominance of staunch Islamic culture in western Europe and does not like what it sees. America is all for religious freedom--heck, we were founded on the concept--but America also values secular governing as well as some level of assimilation of immigrants. In other words, come to America, but if you don't want to be an American, if you want to be a somewhere-else-ian living in America trying to impose somewhere-else-ia's laws, please stay in somewhere-else-ia. Makes sense. America has a set of values, laws, and traditions it holds dear. Seeing sections of western European nations suddenly under a pseudo-official Sharia Law makes most Americans cringe and worry about their rights and their culture. Americans say, "we don't want that in our nation" but they don't want to be responsible for preventing it (or other things). People love to protest things while reaping their benefits. Sad state of affairs. (I'm not saying that example was a war-related one, but it fits otherwise.) One of the major functions of governments and leaders is to make unpopular decisions that are necessary. They lose popularity and even become demonized by some, but the job is done and the public can benefit and still feel innocent about it.

As for the US and S Ossentia? 1%. That is the amount of western oil that comes through that pipeline. We don't need it. We wouldn't START a fight over it, but we would defend it against an aggressor as it is in fact of western interest. We didn't need to fight over it as it was in no danger and we were in no way in danger of losing it. America has no vested interest in S Ossentia. A 1% loss in supply is barely a hick-up, especially as oil demand is now decreasing here at a record pace.

As for America moving ships closer to Iran? GOOD!! Iran has repeated threatened to shut down a HUGE tanker route. Since Israel is scared to death (and rightly so) that they might get nuked in the next couple years, which fits with Ahmadinejad's 12th Imam religious views, they might wind up attacking Iran's uranium enrichment plants. It will CERTAINLY happen if Iran tests a nuclear weapon as N.Korea recently did. If that happens, we still need that route open. If Iran shuts it down, that's a major problem for us here, even if we don't drop a single bomb in that country. This is an almost inevitable confrontation. The USA MUST not fire any first shots though. Not this time. Not ever again. However, did we start this devastating war in Georgia to move our ships? No. That idea REQUIRES that you believe that all those with power in the US are truly evil mass-murders, plain and simple, purely literally. It is fine to think that we may have taken advantage of the situation to make a tactical move, but starting it for that end is a little off the charts. Having forces in an allied nation is not surprising. That does NOT by any means mean we started it or encouraged it in any way shape or form. That leap is loaded with fallacies.

I am far too long winded.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
Al Jazeera is an excellent source of news, many BBC journalists work with them and two British journos I know speak very highly to their integrity.

I do indeed distrust the US government as much as I distrust the British government, and I have lived through a 30 year conflict with the British that has opened my eyes to the propaganda regarding international affairs in British news, including the BBC.

It's not a case of me buying into any particular news story. The US has a military presence there to protect oil interests - that's a plain fact. That's what rings the alarm bells for me when suddenly there's a conflict.

It's not about assigning blame, I'm not interested in trying to show where blame lies. That's a childish game and a distraction. Bush is not the emperor at all, I do not believe for a second that Bush is in control of anything whatsoever, the idea that the man is a statesman running a country is plainly ridiculous. He is as much a puppet of corporate America as the Shah in Iran was before the people rose up and put him out of power.

It's all about perception - *why* do you think it is that the same people who think that America blew up the towers to start a war are the people who believe America is behind this conflict? What is at the heart of that perception? It's because the official version of events doesn't ring true to people who have lived through propaganda in their own country.

What is happening in Russia is part of the wider global conflict involving the superpowers, and it's all over resources and investments on a scale that ordinary people can barely comprehend. Russia, China and America/UK are slowly hardening their military and strategic positions around the world.

I don't know the reason why, it could be the beginning of the merging of the 4 big monetary unions into a global economy and central bank/government, it could be that each of them wants greater regional control of the planet, it could be that they are all working together toward a single goal, it could be that they are preparing to go up against each other.

Ordinary people do not want war, the only people who benefit are the super rich and the powerful. Russia rolled mini battlefield nukes into S Ossetia last night, and while the masses of the planet including you and me debate about what is really going on and who is at fault, people are getting slaughtered.

Maybe it's time we put our time and efforts into really trying to get people to talk about peace. Enough really is enough.

Thanks for your message




In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
Taking the last part first, I disagree. That aside, I get news from quite a few sources. I am painfully aware of the bias on both sides of these sources. However, based on study, I trust some more than others. For example, Al Jazeera... black listed, "opinion journalists"... suspect, Al Franken and Sean Hanity... grudge match? That's entertainment. My statement that a need for loathing was required to buy this new story 3 days after the war suddenly and almost inexplicably begain was not meant to offend but merely to exaggerate the point that people who tend to distrust the US tend to blame everything in the world on them, even when the coals aren't even ready for burgers. These are the same people who think we detonated our own buildings to start a war over oil, when neither of those clauses is true.

News on this current struggle is so mired in propaganda and selective publication right now, it is hard to make heads or tails of who is at fault, but blaming the US and namely the Bush Admin. is so predictable a cop-out it's cliche anymore. Bush is not the Emperor Palpatine and America is not the Galactic Empire. heh.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
It seems they are outing America anyway, Osettians are claiming that the 'west' is behind the Georgian attacks - being reported now on BBC and international news. Of course there is no way for you or I to know one way or the other.

Why do I have to assume a hatred and loathing of America? I'm not claiming anything, and I'm not narrow minded or naive enough to only post news clips which I happen to believe or which happen to fit my own personal ideaology. No need to be defensive. It's not people like us who are making these things happen, we are mere bystanders.

I'm trying to get all the news I can as it rolls in, watching it unfold on the news in different countries gives you a much wider picture rather than sticking to one single news source. The *way* it's being reported in different countries is *as* interesting, if not *more* interesting than the content of the reports.

You aren't convinced by this because you have a preconceived notion that it is 'ludicrous'. That's your culture talking, not you.

In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
I'm not convinced. It still appears to me to be conspiracy theory hogwash. In my eyes, it would require a SERIOUS loathing of America to assume such a thing is true on a whim. America did not "orchestrate" any Georgian action. That's just ludicrous. They would out us since they're being obliterated at the moment, since we're not helping. You have to assume that America is EVIL in order to assume these things. If a naval move is made at the same time, than it is because America is taking the opportunity that has been laid before them. Prime time for easy action.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
It sounds like it, but it isn't...

http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&q=warships%20gulf&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn



In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
>> ^Memorare:
read an article today suggesting the aggressive move by Georgia was orchestrated by the US as a strategic diversion to keep Russia busy during a naval blockade of Iran. shrug


Sounds like a bunch of conspiracy theory crap to me. Propaganda.

Taking the last part first, I disagree. That aside, I get news from quite a few sources. I am painfully aware of the bias on both sides of these sources. However, based on study, I trust some more than others. For example, Al Jazeera... black listed, "opinion journalists"... suspect, Al Franken and Sean Hanity... grudge match? That's entertainment. My statement that a need for loathing was required to buy this new story 3 days after the war suddenly and almost inexplicably begain was not meant to offend but merely to exaggerate the point that people who tend to distrust the US tend to blame everything in the world on them, even when the coals aren't even ready for burgers. These are the same people who think we detonated our own buildings to start a war over oil, when neither of those clauses is true.

News on this current struggle is so mired in propaganda and selective publication right now, it is hard to make heads or tails of who is at fault, but blaming the US and namely the Bush Admin. is so predictable a cop-out it's cliche anymore. Bush is not the Emperor Palpatine and America is not the Galactic Empire. heh.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
It seems they are outing America anyway, Osettians are claiming that the 'west' is behind the Georgian attacks - being reported now on BBC and international news. Of course there is no way for you or I to know one way or the other.

Why do I have to assume a hatred and loathing of America? I'm not claiming anything, and I'm not narrow minded or naive enough to only post news clips which I happen to believe or which happen to fit my own personal ideaology. No need to be defensive. It's not people like us who are making these things happen, we are mere bystanders.

I'm trying to get all the news I can as it rolls in, watching it unfold on the news in different countries gives you a much wider picture rather than sticking to one single news source. The *way* it's being reported in different countries is *as* interesting, if not *more* interesting than the content of the reports.

You aren't convinced by this because you have a preconceived notion that it is 'ludicrous'. That's your culture talking, not you.

In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
I'm not convinced. It still appears to me to be conspiracy theory hogwash. In my eyes, it would require a SERIOUS loathing of America to assume such a thing is true on a whim. America did not "orchestrate" any Georgian action. That's just ludicrous. They would out us since they're being obliterated at the moment, since we're not helping. You have to assume that America is EVIL in order to assume these things. If a naval move is made at the same time, than it is because America is taking the opportunity that has been laid before them. Prime time for easy action.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
It sounds like it, but it isn't...

http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&q=warships%20gulf&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn



In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
>> ^Memorare:
read an article today suggesting the aggressive move by Georgia was orchestrated by the US as a strategic diversion to keep Russia busy during a naval blockade of Iran. shrug


Sounds like a bunch of conspiracy theory crap to me. Propaganda.

I'm not convinced. It still appears to me to be conspiracy theory hogwash. In my eyes, it would require a SERIOUS loathing of America to assume such a thing is true on a whim. America did not "orchestrate" any Georgian action. That's just ludicrous. They would out us since they're being obliterated at the moment, since we're not helping. You have to assume that America is EVIL in order to assume these things. If a naval move is made at the same time, than it is because America is taking the opportunity that has been laid before them. Prime time for easy action.

In reply to this comment by Irishman:
It sounds like it, but it isn't...

http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&q=warships%20gulf&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn



In reply to this comment by Doc_M:
>> ^Memorare:
read an article today suggesting the aggressive move by Georgia was orchestrated by the US as a strategic diversion to keep Russia busy during a naval blockade of Iran. shrug


Sounds like a bunch of conspiracy theory crap to me. Propaganda.

>> ^Memorare:
read an article today suggesting the aggressive move by Georgia was orchestrated by the US as a strategic diversion to keep Russia busy during a naval blockade of Iran. shrug


Sounds like a bunch of conspiracy theory crap to me. Propaganda.

Wrong. Real news is Conflict in Georgia. Sorry for being blunt, but even if US forces did invade Iran, on a global scale it probably would not nearly equate to all the shit that just might happen with the rapidly escalating situation in the Caucasus. That's not to diminish the importance of the former, though. Both situations are... well, bad.

>> ^Memorare:
the real news is the impending naval blockade of Iran.
George II still has plenty of time to usher in the apocalypse.

read an article today suggesting the aggressive move by Georgia was orchestrated by the US as a strategic diversion to keep Russia busy during a naval blockade of Iran. *shrug*

the real news is the impending naval blockade of Iran.
George II still has plenty of time to usher in the apocalypse.

McCain used to be sharp, now he's just too old and is losing it.

Used to be sharp? When? He graduated 5th from the BOTTOM of his class in the naval academy (yes thats 894th out of 899!), admittedly doesn't read, admittedly doesn't use the internet, and is now "as old as frankenstein" and apparently senile.

^ true, but my previous post was based on an interesting hypothetical, conjured up by your closing bit, "The sheer propaganda value one gains by being on d..."
which is one of the things art of war was all about.

as in, if the US preempts pearl, your opening premise. due to japanese naval buildup, they freak, summer of '41, bomb tokyo bay or something.

well, there's your sheer propaganda value, right? maybe it's not just japan that thinks that was uncalled for, and sides with them. maybe a desire to kick our ass is what finally unites japan and china. russia chimes in, britain disowns us, canada and mexico start looking at us funny...