latest polls say 1% of iraqies wants the u.s to stay, so i guess he is right when he says vast majority wants them to leave...99%.....osama never once said he was responsible for 9/11....why on earth would he not wanna take credit for it, even when he has been hunted for so long that it doesnt matter if he admits it or not??????? lets stop all these silly games, democrats and republicans receive 99% of the votes in the u.s every time, reminds me of the days when saddam held elections. wake up america, to have one more political party than communist china is not democracy.......oh, and did someone see his speech at aipac,he aint gonna change anything, it a big hoax.

carlin backs me up : http://www.videosift.com/video/George-Carlin-Please-Wake-Up-America

"osama never once said he was responsible for 9/11"

how do you back that up? A 2 second google will show every news outlet on the planet reporting the video tape in which *he* takes credit for it.

eg.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/binladen_10-29-04.html

Lawl. ^That one always makes me scratch my head, too.

Obama is in Kuwait now! He's hanging out with Hagel. That was really good to hear.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Get a picture with him and post it. Come on Farhad.

This was the most powder puffy piece I've seen from Lara Logan - there's no doubt who she favours in the election.

ehhhh....i dont know if you guys over there noticed, but osama looks a little chubbier on the only tape were he is supposed to take credit for 9/11....his nose was also a little bigger than on all the other tapes of him....the tape is fake.....

oh, and be careful when you speak off news outlet on the planet. there are 2 types, the u.s version and then the rest of the world version. when cnn europe reports a number of 100.000 civilian casulties in iraq in line with other newscasts in europe, cnn u.s reports 10.000, when its 1.000.000 in europe, its 100.000 in the u.s.

>> ^dead_tofu:
ehhhh....i dont know if you guys over there noticed, but osama looks a little chubbier ...

that would be the "fatty bin laden" tape.
understandable. it comes up often, in this context.

now, i'm not going to pretend to know, because i wasn't there, but here is someone who went to a good deal of trouble, to respectfully examine the 'fatty' issue:

http://www.muckrakerreport.com/id372.html

what. the. fuck. is. the. battle. against. terrorism.

chubby or not, there is not a single prove that any of the hijackers had connection to osama. i know that sounds far out, but prove me wrong.... there isnt any prove...oh, there was a 100.000 dollars transfer to muhammed atta from a pakistani general.... pakistan being a military dictatorship....supported by u.s......this is so weird.... ever seen "zeitgeist"?

>> ^MINK:
what. the. fuck. is. the. battle. against. terrorism.


Several things at once:

1. The battle for politicians to benefit from people's fears after 9/11
2. The battle for revenge against the people who perpetrated 9/11
3. Preemptive attempts to destroy the support systems for people who might be thinking of another terror attack on the U.S.

Bush championed #1 over everything, Obama wants all three.

I'm not particularly in favor of any of the three, but 9/11, and the reaction to it has poisoned America into thinking that at least #2 and #3 are totally justifiable, to the point where you couldn't win an election without some sort of warlike posture towards terrorists.

I still think using the military to fight terrorism is like trying to fight mosquito swarms with a bazooka, but in Afghanistan there's actually a real opposing force (the Taliban) we're fighting. Unlike with Saddam, the Taliban was actually involved in 9/11, so we at least have some reason to be there, and fighting there might actually have a positive effect along the lines of #3.

I'm thinking we need to stop pretending this is the Cold War 2.0 though, and get real specific about just getting our revenge for 9/11 and then getting over it. I don't want this to be the defining paradigm of American foreign policy for the next 50 years.

I saw how she was eyeing him. Of course marriage means nothing to Lara.

Now we just need to sit back and wait for the sex tape to be released. Hopefully after the election.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

^Quit invading my mental porn collection.

Obama/Logan '08!

... she did get a bit soft towards the end of the interview.

"So, losing is not a option...(?)"

... now theres a lazy drifter right over the plate. I know for a fact I've heard O'Reilly say this exact "question" to Bush people about Iraq.

^ Given that there's a whole political party out there who wants to call Obama an unpatriotic surrendermonkey Defeatocrat, it's probably fair to ask him to clearly reiterate that he doesn't view losing as an option either.

But yeah, a fairly kissy-poo interview, though based on what she's done with her reporting up to this point, you really think she wants to try to give a hostile interview to Obama?

McCain's right to call this an extended photo-op, just like every trip McCain himself has ever taken overseas, since becoming a Senator.

This wasn't the time to sit down for an interview with a tough inquisitor, this was time to sit down with the pretty lady who's interested in seeing him succeed in winning the election.

Expect most coverage to be positive, unless he calls himself a jelly donut in Berlin.

If we're going to blow our entire nations economy, why cant we do something like invade Australia and seize all the better looking Australian women? You've got to admit, my plan makes sense.

Listen to Lara Logan breathily ask him if he has any doubts.

"No, ma'am, I have no doubts that you'd like to shag me."

>> ^dead_tofu:
chubby or not, there is not a single prove that any of the hijackers had connection to osama. i know that sounds far out, but prove me wrong.... there isnt any prove...oh, there was a 100.000 dollars transfer to muhammed atta from a pakistani general.... pakistan being a military dictatorship....supported by u.s......this is so weird.... ever seen "zeitgeist"?


Have your tinfoil hat sources made mention of an Ahmad Shah Massoud? I'm sure they have been careful to ignore any mention of him. He was the military leader of the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan". In April 2001 he spoke to the EU and warned them of strong ties between the Taliban and Al-Qaida, and that a major terrorist attack was imminent. On Spetember 9th, 2001 he was assassinated in Northern Afghanistan. His death on the 10th made papers all over the world, but the next day's events left his death largely forgotten. Would you still like to insist the tapes are fake? Even though a prominent Afghan military leader who warned of Al-Qaida planning exactly the kind of attack made on 9/11 was assassinated 2 days prior to it?

^I don't want this to be the defining paradigm of American foreign policy for the next 50 years....either, and care not to suffer cut, paste, doubt, and sleep either.....Allowed to happen, certain key figures in many governments were complicit, ya frikkin' morons....

Go with the tinfoil hat blanket, perhaps replace the soggy security dragged around as a toddler....

Basically, what I see here is a politician who is very well spoken, has a good head on his shoulders and can speak clearly, and intelligently without a teleprompter.

Same can't be said for who has been running your country for the past 8 years, or the running candidate for the 'other' side.

This trip of his is a smart political move though, it's really a case of looking and acting like he's already president, and getting people really comfortable that he would work in the role.

I do hope he is your next president.

I also was watching a program last night here in Australia on John McCain and it showed one of his new supporters, who used to be a Clinton supporter, saying that he was going to vote for McCain because he had been in the airforce and shot down and a prisoner of war, and so that meant that he had what it takes to lead the country.

Um

Wah?

How the hell can people be so dense as to think that because you got SHOT DOWN, and then spent time as a prisoner of war, you have ANY... I mean ANY greater claim AT ALL to be a good leader of a country? Wow... and I've heard many others spout that because of his military record he would be the better leader.

For god's sake people... being a member of the armed forces does NOT immediately make you a fine leader.

(Being a member of the armed forces who showed great bravery and strategic and diplomatic knowledge maybe, but not just automatically 'armed forces = good').

GAH.

>> ^spoco2:
Basically, what I see here is a politician who is very well spoken, has a good head on his shoulders and can speak clearly, and intelligently without a teleprompter.
Same can't be said for who has been running your country for the past 8 years, or the running candidate for the 'other' side.
This trip of his is a smart political move though, it's really a case of looking and acting like he's already president, and getting people really comfortable that he would work in the role.
I do hope he is your next president.
I also was watching a program last night here in Australia on John McCain and it showed one of his new supporters, who used to be a Clinton supporter, saying that he was going to vote for McCain because he had been in the airforce and shot down and a prisoner of war, and so that meant that he had what it takes to lead the country.
Um
Wah?
How the hell can people be so dense as to think that because you got SHOT DOWN, and then spent time as a prisoner of war, you have ANY... I mean ANY greater claim AT ALL to be a good leader of a country? Wow... and I've heard many others spout that because of his military record he would be the better leader.
For god's sake people... being a member of the armed forces does NOT immediately make you a fine leader.
(Being a member of the armed forces who showed great bravery and strategic and diplomatic knowledge maybe, but not just automatically 'armed forces = good').
GAH.


Well, I'd say he showed some bravery when he refused a prisoner exchange that would see him released early because of who his father was. Also showed some diplomatic knowledge of what his staying would deny his captors. That said I agree there is a lot more to being president, but his military record is exactly what one would want from a president. He's pretty certain to condemn the use of torture and understand what the cost of war is on the soldiers fighting it. I still favor Obama, but Mccain isn't half so bad as most McCain=Bush folks want to believe.

Wonderful how the liberal mainstream media has finally dropped any pretense of being objective/non-partisan as they follow their charismatic zero of an idol around.

The obamemperor wears no clothes.

Sorry QM, but you get a downvote on that comment purely because of your ridiculous labeling of 'mainstream media' being liberal.

Because Fox is so pro Obama.

yeash, love playing the underdog don't you, poor misunderstood right wingers, never get any airtime... Sorry, but the media is strongly right wing in general, don't try and convince people otherwise.

A nice example are the related vids below... like this one

Sorry QM, but you get a downvote on that comment purely because of your ridiculous labeling of 'mainstream media' being liberal.

Don't apologize for being wrong, it's unliberal. I don't mind that 90% of the drive-by media are card-carrying members of the taxocrat party, it just annoys me when they deny it. Altho they're certainly capable of that level of delusion.

None are so blind as those who refuse to see. Next you're going to claim all of Hollywood is conservative because of lone Chuck Norris.

Because Fox is so pro Obama.

FOX FOX FOX! Before FOX there was ONLY libmedia. The former Big 3 networks are all liberal and STILL ARE.

yeash, love playing the underdog don't you, poor misunderstood right wingers, never get any airtime... Sorry, but the media is strongly right wing in general, don't try and convince people otherwise.

FOX kicking your sorry butts in the ratings is not a "monopoly".

Jesus, she's got hotter. I know it's lame and sexist to only comment on a woman's appearance rather than the content of the video, but I'm truly astonished.

it's been purposefully filmed that way, it's like the first scene of a porn, can't you tell her face has been all greased up!