Saturday, July 23, 2011

Re: UN to Remove Jerusalem from Israel?

LOL. Three countries tried to seize Jerusalem and got their clocks
cleaned in 6 days. The UN? Hilarious!

Ya think they moved the captital from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by
accident.

I can see about 20 guys in Mossad laughing their asses off, bout now.

Oy vey, look at the blue helmed warriors are coming for us?

Bwa ha ha hahahahaha ha ha ha!. Moishe, grap your sling shot, and
tell them to screw. See you in half an hour, grab some fish.

On Jul 23, 10:21 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> **
> <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/eowyn2/> UN to Remove
> Jerusalem from Israel?<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/07/23/un-to-remove-jerusa...>
> *Eowyn <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/eowyn2/>* | July 23,
> 2011 at 7:04 am | Tags:
> Bangladesh<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=bangladesh>,
> East Jerusalem <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=east-jerusalem>,
> EU <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=eu>, Golan
> Heights<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=golan-heights>,
> Jerusalem <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=jerusalem>, Palestinian
> state <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=palestinian-state>, Quartet
> on the Middle East<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=quartet-on-the-middle-east>,
> Russia <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=russia>, Six-Day
> War<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=six-day-war>,
> UN Security Council<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=un-security-council>,
> USA <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=usa>, West
> Bank<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=west-bank>|
> Categories: God's
> creation <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=354016>,
> Islam<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=420>,
> Israel <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=9937>,
> Liberals<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=35711271>,
> Religion <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=4983159>,
> Terrorism<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=35034649>,
> United Nations <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=59722>, United
> States <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=5850> | URL:http://wp.me/pKuKY-8gy
>
> Patriot Update is sending an e-mail alert that the United Nations Security
> Council has scheduled next Tuesday, July 26, in New York, for open "debate"
> about whether or not they will seize Israeli land in September, and divide
> Jerusalem by establishing a Palestinian state, without negotiation or
> approval from Israel.
>
> [H/t beloved fellow Tina!]
>
> The same alert is also posted on many blogs, such as Traditional Values
> Coalition <http://traditionalvalues.org/content/article/31644>.
>
> **According to the e-mail, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had
> feared just such a "surprise" move after the Quartet on the Middle East (UN,
> EU, USA, and Russia) met on July 11 in Washington, DC, to endorse Obama's
> plan<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/breaking-news-obama...>(in
> his speech of May 19) to enforce Israel's 1967 borders and divide
> Jerusalem.
>
> But I cannot find verification of this on the web. Instead, the Seattle PI
> reports<http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Quartet-struggles-on-way-forwar...>on
> July 12, 2011, that the Quartet meeting was a bust:
>
> The "highly-anticipated gathering hosted Monday by Secretary of State
> Hillary Rodham Clinton and attended by U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon,
> EU top diplomat Catherine Ashton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
> failed to produce a unified statement on the way ahead."
>
> So I went onto the United Nations' website to find confirmation of the July
> 26 Security Council meeting. I found a "Programme of Meetings and
> Agendas<http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/En/lateste.pdf>"
> in the *Journal of the United Nations*. On page 2 of the pdf document is
> this:
>
> The Security Council will hold an open debate on Tuesday, 26 July 2011, in
> the Security Council Chamber Room GA-TSC-01, in connection with the agenda
> item "The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question".
>
> Member states wishing to inscribe their names on the list of speakers should
> contact the Secretariat....
>
> Here's a screenshot I took of that announcement:
>
> <http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/un1.jpg>
>
> Then I went looking for the agenda item and found this document: A
> "Statement" made on January 19, 2011, by Mr. Md. Nojibur Rahman, Minister
> (Economic) and Charge d'Affaires of the People's Republic of Bangladesh to
> the United Nations at the Security Council Open Debate on the agenda item
> "The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question".
>
> On behalf of Bangladesh, a Muslim country, Rahman said the following:
>
> *"In order to achieve a lasting solution in the Middle East, it is very
> important to address the key issue, which is prolong and illegal occupation
> of the Arab territories by Israel.... My delegation believes that direct
> negotiations will only be successful if there is sustained regional and
> international support for...Palestinian State-building...which guarantee
> Israel's withdrawal from all occupied Arab and Palestinian territories back
> to June 4, 1967 line.... In conclusion, let me reiterate Bangladesh's
> long-standing position that the continued illegal occupation of Palestine
> over the past six decades is the root cause of violence, unrest and
> destabilization in the region.*"
>
> So there you have it. Despite the innocuously-worded announcement in the
> UN's "Programme of Meetings and
> Agendas<http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/En/lateste.pdf>"
> of an "open debate" by the Security Council scheduled for July 26, 2011, the
> statement by Bangladesh's representative to the United Nations makes clear
> the debate agenda* is* about "restoring" Israel to its pre-1967 borders,
> also called the Green Line<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_%28Israel%29>
> .
>
> That, in turn, means Israel must surrender the territories it captured in
> the 1967 Six-Day War <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War>, including
> the West Bank <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank>, Gaza
> Strip<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip>,
> Golan Heights <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golan_Heights> and Sinai
> Peninsula <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinai_Peninsula> (the latter has
> since been returned to Egypt). But the Green Line once divided Jerusalem
> into East and West, with the western section within Israel. Annexed by
> Jordan in 1948, East Jerusalem
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Jerusalem>includes Jerusalem's Old
> City <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_City_%28Jerusalem%29> and some of the
> holiest sites of Judaism <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism>,
> Christianity <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity>, and
> Islam<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam>,
> such as the Temple Mount <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Mount>, Western
> Wall <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Wall>, Al-Aqsa
> Mosque<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Aqsa_Mosque>,
> and the Church of the Holy
> Sepulchre<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_Holy_Sepulchre>
> .
>
> <http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/six_day_war_terr...>
>
> Territories held by Israel before and after the Six Day War of 1967
>
> All of which means that returning Israel to its 1967 borders would mean that
> Israel not only loses the West Bank -- and with that its defense strategic
> depth -- Israel -- and the Christian world -- will also lose Jerusalem to
> the new Palestinian Muslim state.
>
> It should be said that the United Nations is decidedly partial on the
> Israeli-Palestinian conflict and regularly condemns Israel for this or that.
> Even if the UN Security Council's "open debate" next Tuesday concludes with
> their demand that Israel return to its pre-1967 borders doesn't mean squat.
>
> If wishes were horses, beggars would ride....
>
> *~Eowyn*
>
> Add a comment to this
> post<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/07/23/un-to-remove-jerusa...>
>
> [image: WordPress]
>
> WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com/> | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
> Manage Subscriptions<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> Unsubscribe<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> Reach
> out to your own subscribers with WordPress.com.<http://wordpress.com/signup/>
>
> *Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:*http://subscribe.wordpress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Anders Behring Breivik - Right Wing Politics Attacked by Left Wing Brainwashing ?

Anders Behring Breivik is an exceptional instance. The gathered
details concerning his political beliefs, affinities, activities, show
no indications of irrationality, lack of logic, disordered thought
processes, or even psychopathology. There must be some cracks in his
personality, that may yet surface as details come forward, but in the
information currently available there is nothing that would indicate
that he could do what he has been charged with and alleged to have
done. That he has committed the violent acts he is suspected of is
likely true. That is not what the biggest question is. His profile
causes us to ask why. He was a model instance, almost a pardigm
instance, of a European who has well thought out, intellectually
solid, right wing political beliefs, nationalism and beliefs against
multiculturalism. These were not irrational, emotional, outbursts, but
a long held, solid, rational political position as to what he thought
right for Norway and Europe with indications of some right wing
idealism. He was anti nazi, anti neo nazi. He did have contentions
against Norway's governing Labor Party which is part of the "red-green
coalition", and is very left wing, socialist in its ideology. It is
also pro multiculturalism, not against multiculturalism. Socialist
governments, despite their holding to policies of "transparency,
openness" and so forth, tend to be, almost without exception, somewhat
forceful as to their platforms and policies. They do seek popular
belief in those platforms and policies and socialists can be highly
manipulative on that issue. (We have seen it in other instances of
socialist governments.) How does this then relate to Breivik ?

The theory that Anders Behring Breivik, was being pushed to change his
political viewpoints & beliefs, & reacted to that undue pressure,
gains credence from indications he had a grudge against the governing
labor party & its multiculturalism policies in Norway. Norway may have
broken him, in its attempts to change his mind from right to left.
Left wing "brain washing" is strongly suspected. Or another group
using "brain washing" tactics for effect, to discredit the European
political right wing. The latter would indicate a level of
sophistication not previously clearly seen in that political arena, in
any similar context.

During the Cold War I was taught how what I will loosely term "brain
washing" methods, work, particularly in reference to totalistic
societies but also within espionage, in situations of ideological
conflict. It is a psychologically brutal system and I was shown how it
can, particularly if misused with intent to produce instances of
ideological conversion, can result in not only desired conversion
reactions against the ideological and affinity relations someone is
being programmed away from, but in some instances of very strong,
solid, core beliefs, can result in equally strong reactions against
whatever group appears to be the source of the attempted conversion of
beliefs and affinities.

Clearly Breivik was a long term member of the political right wing. He
started in his youth and had not deviated since then. If the push away
from, for example, right wing beliefs attacks what is pat of the
"personality core" aggressively enough, and the core is particularly
strong and solid, the reaction can become directed at whatever is
perceived as the source of the attack on the core personality. Less
likely to happen where beliefs are more superficial, "interests"
rather than deeply internalized beliefs. Breivik himself believed his
beliefs were more than "interests" adding weight to the theory that he
was broken by what amounts to being the Norwegian governing left, or a
group capable of similar manipulation pretending to be the Norwegian
governing left, Labor Party. This is insufficient to lead to a
definite conclusion as to placing blame on the Norwegian government,
as to having attempted to "brain wash" Breivik. Let me explain why.

In espionage this is referred to as an instance of "signature", where
"signature" is what is characteristic of a group or ideology, but can
be "forged" by another group for manipulative purposes. Forged
signature can never be entirely excluded in instances of "brain
washing". There were instances during the Cold War, of "forged
signature" attempts at ideological conversion. Attempts that were made
to look like they were coming from Washington, when in fact they were
not, but were designed to attempt to convert to anti-Americanism by
making it appear that U.S. operatives were on the offensive and the
source for attacks. The purpose in those instances was to convert the
target against the United States anti Soviet Cold War position. So,
although there appear to be indications of a Norwegian governing Labor
Party "signature" on what appears to be attempted conversion of Anders
Behring Breivik away from his right wing, anti multiculturalism,
nationalist views, we cannot conclude from that indication that that
'signature" was in fact the Norwegian government, as it could be
"forced" by another group wanting to set up Breivik to target the
Labor Party and Norway's government. We have insufficient background
detail to determine that with any certainty.

So we have a problem of unprecedented proportions at the worst
possible moment in our western history. We have a man, who is a model
instance of the political right wing, an anti Nazi, Christian,
conservative, anti multiculturalist, allegedly "Zionist", who has
strong views concerning muslims and Islam, among other similar right
wing positions, charged with terrorism, likely to be charged with more
than 95 deaths and large number of injuries, in Norway. It threatens
to discredit right wing politics in Europe exactly at a time when that
political stance is of immense significance in determining how the
western world, particularly Europe, will evolve towards its political
future. It may even determine Europe's survival in terms of its
cultural and ideological heritage, into that future. A very crucial
problem for European, in fact for western, Judeo Christian originated,
politics, now and into the immediate future. An event that if
misinterpreted, or misunderstood, could damage Europe and the west
irreparably.

Bob Ezergailis
Canada

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Road Shortage in Socialist Paradise

Road Shortage in Socialist Paradise
July 23, 2011 by Per Bylund

I have written much before on the state of Sweden, the mythical land of "working" socialism. Here is another example of how it seems to not work at all as the global myth has it. The huge discount store of Gekås in the small, 9,000-population town of Ullared in southern Sweden attracts 28,000 customers daily. Obviously, most of the customers are from out-of-town or even drive from far away to buy the heavily discounted goods at Gekås.

The problem with all these travelers is that the roads to Ullared are not even close to sufficient for this kind of traffic. This causes traffic jams and customers consequently end up spending time in their cars instead of in the discount store. Meanwhile, the central government's road authority Trafikverket has done nothing to improve the roads to Ullared for the last 15 years. And they are not planning on doing anything either.

As a solution to this problem, which of course affects Gekås as it affects the small town of Ullared and the whole region, Gekås are offering a SEK 100,000,000 loan (approx. $16,000,000) to the road authority to improve the roads – at a very favorable interest rate. Gekås have already invested in the infrastructure in Ullared to support visits by their numerous customers, and this is obviously the next step. The road authority has not responded, but it is likely they will turn Gekås offer down. Private interests are generally not allowed to participate in the provision of public welfare and service. Or, as in this case, the non-provision of it.

JP Daily Quran and Hadith

IN THE NAME OF "ALLAH"
Assalamu'alaikum Wa Rahmatullah e Wa Barakatuhu,

Thanks & Best regards,

Imran Ilyas
Dubai
Cell: 00971509483403

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "JoinPakistan" group.
You all are invited to come and share your information with other group members.
To post to this group, send email to joinpakistan@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com.pk/group/joinpakistan?hl=en?hl=en
You can also visit our blog site : www.joinpakistan.blogspot.com &
on facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Join-Pakistan/125610937483197

Fwd: Media Tip

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rusty Weiss

This is what makes me sick about the media... among other things.

Reuters Labels Norway Terror Suspect as 'Right-Wing' 25 Times

Rusty

--

Please contact me at The Mental Recession, or follow on Twitter @rustyweiss74.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: The American people hate right wingers

it's the farting out of the fistula. born with no mouth, the little deformed gimp whistles out of his fistulas

On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Keith In Köln <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:16 PM, BB47 <mdecot@socal.rr.com> wrote:

That "wheeee" sound? Is that the propeller on your head?

<Grin>!

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: The American people hate right wingers

I wouldn't talk about anyone sounding like a parrot, bird dropping boy

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Stephen Stink <not4udude@yahoo.com> wrote:

Yep....them job creators are unemployment creators! Doncha love gop
talking points? They sound like aryan parrots! Whaoooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wheeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Good quotes on the debt ceiling brouhaha - from Bizzy Blog

Quotes of the Day (072311, Morning)
<http://www.bizzyblog.com/2011/07/23/quotes-of-the-day-072311-morning/>

Filed under: Quotes, Etc. of the Day
<http://www.bizzyblog.com/category/quotes-etc-of-the-day/> — TBlumer @
10:41 am

What's going on here is pure political calculus. Republicans have
done their job, offering a plan that raises the debt ceiling,
sharply cuts current spending, reforms future spending authority and
asks the states to ratify a Balanced Budget Amendment to the
Constitution.

… The debt battle of 2011 is all about getting Republicans to betray
their spending and tax promises so that Barack Obama can be
re-elected in 2012.

– From an Investors Business Daily editorial
<http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/579223/201107221832/Tax-Obsessed.htm>
("Democrats
Are Obsessed with Raising Taxes"), July 23

As noted in my latest Pajamas Media column which also appeared at
BizzyBlog <http://www.bizzyblog.com/2011/07/23/the-fear-based-economy/>
this morning, tax increases (not needed anyway) would cripple the
current "Fear-Based Economy," which has weakended considerably in the
past two-plus months.

___________________

The Republican Congress has handed the President an unparalleled
opportunity. Using the UNLIMITED power provided by the 14th
Amendment, President Obama can single-handed set right the myriad
social injustices that have been plaguing the working poor and
middle class for decades. Reversing 30 years of Republican and
Corporate skullduggery. If he has the courage, and if he is actually
a Democrat.

… I felt it important for someone to at least, even if tongue and
cheek, layout what IS possible if Obama was of a mind. He isn't, he
is too much of a conservative lump to ever have that kind of courage
to do what is REALLY in the nations best interest.

– From The Daily Kos
<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/22/997577/-The-Case-for-Martial-Law?via=search>
*("The Case for Martial Law")* , July 22

"The Jester," if he gets enough heat, will probably back down and say
"You guys can't take a joke." No, I can't. Not this one.

___________________

"We have run out of time and they are going to have to explain to me
how it is that we are going to avoid default" on Aug. 2, the
president told reporters at a hastily scheduled news after Boehner's
announcement.

– From an Associated Press report
<http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEBT_SHOWDOWN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-07-23-08-11-35>
Saturday morning

The "how" is simple, sir. Have the Senate revote and pass Cut, Cap &
Balance.

Then you can separately bring your overpowering case for tax increases
in a separate bill. If the people want it so bad, their pressure should
cause it pass in a straight up-or-down vote.

From this point on, if the government shuts down or defaults, it's on
the Senate and the President. The House has done its job. All the media,
Senate, and White House spinning will never change that fundamental truth.

___________________

The so-called mainstream media is engaged in a bizarre propaganda
effort, aimed not so much at persuading voters to agree with Obama
but at convincing politicians that voters agree with Obama.

– From Jim Taranto's Best of the Web at the Wall Street Journal
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903461104576462142788961966.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion>,
July 22

It's beyond propaganda. They're making stuff up trying to influence what
goes on in the discussions themselves. How many times have you seen
indications that "they're close to an agreement" in the past several
days? John Boehner has put it on paper
<http://www.speaker.gov/UploadedFiles/boehner_07-22-2011.pdf> that "A
deal was never reached, and was never really close." The primary
motivation for relaying the false White House and Democratic leaks has
been to build pressure on Boehner to make the reports true and agree to
something unacceptable.

Comments [moderated] (0) <http://www.bizzyblog.com/?comments_popup=37620>

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Who knew how big the stacks were

http://www.parkwayreststop.com/archives/10006623

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Looks like Zero is getting desparate and Boehner is not giving in - good for Boehner

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEBT_SHOWDOWN?SITE=OHMOU&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

COSTELLO CALLS TO BUY A COMPUTER FROM ABBOTT

Steve | July 23, 2011 at 4:16 am | Tags: Elvis Costello, government, Lou Costello, Microsoft, Microsoft Windows, money, Tony Abbott, United States | Categories: Humor | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-8gP

Here is the original sketch. Below it's updated a bit. Very clever and Funny I think.

watch?v=sShMA85pv8M

COSTELLO CALLS TO BUY A COMPUTER FROM ABBOTT

ABBOTT: Super Duper computer store. Can I help you?
COSTELLO: Thanks. I'm setting up an office in my den and
I'm thinking about buying a computer.
ABBOTT: Mac?
COSTELLO: No, the name's Lou.
ABBOTT: Your computer?
COSTELLO: I don't own a computer. I want to buy one.
ABBOTT: Mac?
COSTELLO: I told you, my name's Lou.
ABBOTT: What about Windows?
COSTELLO: Why? Will it get stuffy in here?
ABBOTT: Do you want a computer with Windows?
COSTELLO: I don't know. What will I see when I look at the
windows?
ABBOTT: Wallpaper.
COSTELLO: Never mind the windows. I need a computer
and software.
ABBOTT: Software for Windows?
COSTELLO: No. On the computer! I need something I can
use to write proposals, track expenses and run my business.
What do you have?
ABBOTT: Office.
COSTELLO: Yeah, for my office. Can you recommend
anything?
ABBOTT: I just did.
COSTELLO: You just did what?
ABBOTT: Recommend something.
COSTELLO: You recommended something?
ABBOTT: Yes.
COSTELLO: For my office?
ABBOTT: Yes.
COSTELLO: OK, what did you recommend for my office?
ABBOTT: Office.
COSTELLO: Yes, for my office!
ABBOTT: I recommend Office with Windows.
COSTELLO: I already have an office with windows!

OK, let's just say I'm sitting at my computer and I want to type a
proposal.&nb sp; What do I need?
ABBOTT: Word.
COSTELLO: What word?
ABBOTT: Word in Office.
COSTELLO: The only word in office is office.
ABBOTT: The Word in Office for Windows.
COSTELLO: Which word in office for windows?
ABBOTT: The Word you get when you click the blue "W."
COSTELLO: I'm going to click your blue "W" if you don't start
with some straight answers. What about financial
bookkeeping? You have anything I can track my money with?
ABBOTT: Money.
COSTELLO: That's right. What do you have?
ABBOTT: Money.
COSTELLO: I need money to track my money?
ABBOTT: It comes bundled with your computer.
COSTELLO: What's bundled with my computer?
ABBOTT: Money.
COSTELLO: Money comes with my computer?
ABBOTT: Yes. No extra charge.
COSTELLO: I get a bundle of money with my computer?
How much?
ABBOTT: One copy.
COSTELLO: Isn't it illegal to copy money?
ABBOTT: Microsoft gave us a license to copy Money.
COSTELLO: They can give you a license to copy money?
ABBOTT: Why not? THEY OWN IT!
(A few days later)
ABBOTT: Super Duper computer store. Can I help you?
COSTELLO: How do I turn my computer off?

ABBOTT: Click on "START...."

~Steve~ A Big H/T to Joseph.

Add a comment to this post

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Reach out to your own subscribers with WordPress.com.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com

A WORD TO THE WISE PERHAPS?

Chappell Hill is a small town between Houston and Brenham on Hwy 290.

CHAPPELL HILL Any would-be robbers looking to walk into the bank here had best think twice.There is a new sign in town.

About a month ago, Chappell Hill Bank president Edward Smith looked at a sign on the front door prohibiting concealed weapons from his business and decided to make a policy change. Licensed to carry a handgun? Come on in, and bring your weapon.

The sign, now prominently displayed on the bank's front door, says: "Lawful concealed carry permitted on these premises. Management recognizes the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as an inalienable right of all citizens. We therefore support and encourage the carrying of licensed concealed weapons." Smith said he made the policy change to send a warning to potential robbers, and also to express support to Americans right to bear arms.

"We had the sign on the window, the red circle with the pistol inside and a line through it.And I started thinking, We've got this no gun sign up and the guy (robber) can come in and do what he wants. But if you've got a policy allowing handguns, he won't know how many people are going to be in here carrying a concealed weapon. There may be some little old lady who's mad at the government, and she'd love to use it" he said.

The bank has been robbed twice in the last three years, including last March when a Western-attired man walked in, ordered bank employees to fill a canvas bag with money and then fled in a pickup truck. The man, who did not brandish a weapon, has not been caught.

The sign has made Chappell Hill Bank and Smith somewhat of an Internet sensation. A photo of the sign has made its way around the world, and Smith has even been interviewed for the National Rifle Association's radio networkhttp://

www.nranews.com/#/nranews ;. He's also been contacted by other media outlets wanting to do stories.

"It's kind of gotten a life of its own" he said.

Expressions of support have far outnumbered criticism.
Smith has been contacted by officials from larger banks considering taking similar action, and has received e-mails in support from across the United States and even from England, Canada,and Germany ..

"I haven't gotten any from Chicago or California , which doesn't surprise me", Smith said with a laugh. "We did get a real nice e-mail from an 88-year-old World War II veteran who said it's about time somebody stood up in this country."

The NRA has even invited him to speak at an upcoming convention, but Smith said, "I'm still deciding on that."

Smith said he's only received one negative e-mail, from an anonymous sender.

~Steve~ H/T May

Add a comment to this post

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Reach out to your own subscribers with WordPress.com.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com

Re: The American people hate right wingers

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:16 PM, BB47 <mdecot@socal.rr.com> wrote:

That "wheeee" sound? Is that the propeller on your head?

<Grin>!

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

UN to Remove Jerusalem from Israel?

Eowyn | July 23, 2011 at 7:04 am | Tags: Bangladesh, East Jerusalem, EU, Golan Heights, Jerusalem, Palestinian state, Quartet on the Middle East, Russia, Six-Day War, UN Security Council, USA, West Bank | Categories: God's creation, Islam, Israel, Liberals, Religion, Terrorism, United Nations, United States | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-8gy

Patriot Update is sending an e-mail alert that the United Nations Security Council has scheduled next Tuesday, July 26, in New York, for open "debate" about whether or not they will seize Israeli land in September, and divide Jerusalem by establishing a Palestinian state, without negotiation or approval from Israel.

[H/t beloved fellow Tina!]

The same alert is also posted on many blogs, such as Traditional Values Coalition.

According to the e-mail, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had feared just such a "surprise" move after the Quartet on the Middle East (UN, EU, USA, and Russia) met on July 11 in Washington, DC, to endorse Obama's plan (in his speech of May 19) to enforce Israel's 1967 borders and divide Jerusalem.

But I cannot find verification of this on the web. Instead, the Seattle PI reports on July 12, 2011, that the Quartet meeting was a bust:

The "highly-anticipated gathering hosted Monday by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and attended by U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, EU top diplomat Catherine Ashton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov failed to produce a unified statement on the way ahead."

So I went onto the United Nations' website to find confirmation of the July 26 Security Council meeting. I found a "Programme of Meetings and Agendas" in the Journal of the United Nations. On page 2 of the pdf document is this:

The Security Council will hold an open debate on Tuesday, 26 July 2011, in the Security Council Chamber Room GA-TSC-01, in connection with the agenda item "The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question".

Member states wishing to inscribe their names on the list of speakers should contact the Secretariat....

Here's a screenshot I took of that announcement:

Then I went looking for the agenda item and found this document: A "Statement" made on January 19, 2011, by Mr. Md. Nojibur Rahman, Minister (Economic) and Charge d'Affaires of the People's Republic of Bangladesh to the United Nations at the Security Council Open Debate on the agenda item "The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question".

On behalf of Bangladesh, a Muslim country, Rahman said the following:

"In order to achieve a lasting solution in the Middle East, it is very important to address the key issue, which is prolong and illegal occupation of the Arab territories by Israel.... My delegation believes that direct negotiations will only be successful if there is sustained regional and international support for...Palestinian State-building...which guarantee Israel's withdrawal from all occupied Arab and Palestinian territories back to June 4, 1967 line.... In conclusion, let me reiterate Bangladesh's long-standing position that the continued illegal occupation of Palestine over the past six decades is the root cause of violence, unrest and destabilization in the region."

So there you have it. Despite the innocuously-worded announcement in the UN's "Programme of Meetings and Agendas" of an "open debate" by the Security Council scheduled for July 26, 2011, the statement by Bangladesh's representative to the United Nations makes clear the debate agenda is about "restoring" Israel to its pre-1967 borders, also called the Green Line.

That, in turn, means Israel must surrender the territories it captured in the 1967 Six-Day War, including the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Sinai Peninsula (the latter has since been returned to Egypt). But the Green Line once divided Jerusalem into East and West, with the western section within Israel. Annexed by Jordan in 1948, East Jerusalem includes Jerusalem's Old City and some of the holiest sites of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, such as the Temple Mount, Western Wall, Al-Aqsa Mosque, and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

Territories held by Israel before and after the Six Day War of 1967

All of which means that returning Israel to its 1967 borders would mean that Israel not only loses the West Bank -- and with that its defense strategic depth -- Israel -- and the Christian world -- will also lose Jerusalem to the new Palestinian Muslim state.

It should be said that the United Nations is decidedly partial on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and regularly condemns Israel for this or that. Even if the UN Security Council's "open debate" next Tuesday concludes with their demand that Israel return to its pre-1967 borders doesn't mean squat.

If wishes were horses, beggars would ride....

~Eowyn

Add a comment to this post

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Reach out to your own subscribers with WordPress.com.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com

We Don't Need No Stinking Amendment

We Don't Need No Stinking Amendment
by Mark Carroll

Incremental attacks on liberty come in many forms. Some are fairly obvious: The Patriot Act, The TSA, inflation via the Federal Reserve, endless wars, etc. Others, taking the wolf-in-sheep's-clothing approach, are less so. One example is the balanced budget amendment, which has again reared its ugly head – this time as part of the Cut, Cap and Balance bill.

Superficially, a balanced budget amendment sounds like a good idea. After all, the Republicans remind us (because they are oh, so thrifty), as individuals we can't live above our means without getting into financial trouble. Why should the federal government be allowed to?

But when we look a little closer, we realize that a balanced budget amendment is not only unnecessary, but dangerous, for several reasons.

First, the issue is not whether any given federal budget is balanced, but whether it is constitutional. When the President, Senators and Representatives are sworn into office, they swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, which severely limits the scope of the federal government. No reference is made in the balanced budget amendment regarding the constitutionality of the budget items. It will simply legalize what is now unconstitutional as long as they stay within certain financial limits.

Second, a balanced budget will simply mean Washington raises taxes/prints money to offset unconstitutional expenditures. As mentioned above, it nowhere addresses the issue of the limitations the founders placed on the federal government via the Constitution. Nor does it address the more important issues of fiat money, the Fed or the IRS. While the balanced budget amendment supposedly limits the amount of money the Congress can spend, it also gives them the authority to waive those limits.

Third, the founders gave the "power of the purse" to the legislative branch. The balanced budget amendment will transfer this power to the President, giving the President the power to budget and tax, blurring the separation of powers the founders wisely gave us.

In June of 1921 the Congress passed the unconstitutional Budget and Accounting Act which supposedly granted budget making power to the President. Ever since then, Presidents have been required to submit a budget for the entire Federal government. Since that Act was unconstitutional, the President's budgets are unconstitutional. The balanced budget amendment will not only legalize what is now unconstitutional, but it transfers the power to tax to the President. Congress will once again have ceded its power to the Executive branch. Congress has already surrendered its power to declare war to the President, and if this bill is passed, we will be one step closer to the President officially being a dictator.

Fourth, the Congress and the President constantly ignore the limits of the Constitution. What makes anyone think that if there is a balanced budget amendment that all of a sudden they will honor their oath to the Constitution? If they were doing that now, an amendment wouldn't be necessary. The problem is with the character of the President and the members of Congress – not the document.

Fifth, Public Law 95-435, which was signed into law by Jimmy Carter, requires a balanced budget. In other words, it is already federal law that the federal budget be balanced – we do not need an amendment to the Constitution. It has been on the books for years. This is just another example of the crooks in Washington simply ignoring the law. Again, the issue is the lack of character and integrity of the bums that supposedly represent us in Washington.

PL 95-435: "Sec. 7. Beginning in fiscal year 1981, the total budget outlays of the Federal Government shall not exceed its receipts."

The Balanced Budget Amendment: "SECTION 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year."

Any substantive difference there? What's stopping them from balancing the budget as they are already required?

Sixth, a balanced budget amendment could take many years, if not decades, before it was ratified by the states. In the meantime, the economy will have collapsed.

Seventh, in addition to whatever time it takes to ratify the balanced budget amendment, it doesn't go into effect until another five years later. This is the Wimpy approach: "I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today." The politicians that are supposedly being so fiscally responsible are just pushing all this nonsense far into the future – no different than their other plans to allegedly cut taxes and spending. A person of integrity would deal with this now and not push it onto someone else years down the road.

Eighth, who enforces this? How is it enforced? Who determines if the amendment has been violated? What are the penalties for violating the amendment? There doesn't appear to be any current punishment for violating the Constitution. Think about it: Michigan Representative John Conyers once said, "We don't read most of the bills [we pass.]" Nancy Pelosi told us we had to pass the health care bill to find out what was in it. How will this be different?

Ninth, if the balanced budget amendment goes nowhere or is vetoed by Obama, it puts the Republicans in a position to say, "See? We tried," and blame it on the Democrats. If fiscal responsibility and adherence to the Constitution are so important to them, why didn't they just end the unconstitutional agencies, programs, taxing and spending when they controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency?

Tenth, while I consider the Constitution to be a dead letter, it still is technically the law of the land. The real danger of a balanced budget amendment is the clamor to get it via a Constitutional Convention. If the Cut, Cap and Balance bill is passed and Obama vetoes it, expect renewed fervor for a Constitutional Convention. If that happens, there is no way to limit the purpose of the Convention to a balanced budget amendment, and we will finally lose the Constitution once and for all. It's how we got our Constitution in the first place – the founders tossed out the Articles of Confederation when the states' representatives were only authorized to amend them.

Again, I know our "leaders" in Washington, who Tom Woods referred to as "interchangeable nobodies, and liars, and thieves and killers" already ignore the Constitution, but they would love an opportunity to finally toss it into the trash as a quaint, antiquated document and be done with it in their quest for total government. Hopefully, through a Ron Paul presidency, the election of a few decent Representatives and eventually several decent Senators, we can restore allegiance to the Constitution and actually have politicians, if not statesmen, that honor their oath of office. That will not happen by way of a balanced budget amendment.

A Ron Paul presidency, which I wholeheartedly support, will go a long way in achieving that goal, but I remain convinced that it is much more likely that we will achieve it via the nullification approach from the bottom up rather than trying to change the make-up of Congress from the top down. In either case, the bottom line is that it bears repeating that a balanced budget amendment is unnecessary, a diversion from the truly critical issues, and very dangerous.

http://lewrockwell.com/orig12/carroll-m1.1.1.html

The Jack Ass Show

"When you assume the Republicans are shills for progressivism, the actions make sense and are easily predictable. If the Republicans won the Debt Debate, government spending would really be cut. Which of course, they don't want. So they had to throw the fight. Unfortunately, like TV wrestling, it becomes more and more obvious the game is rigged. It's as if the rulers in Washington don't even care if we believe their staged fight. It's just a kabuki ritual they have to perform before stealing more of our Freedom."

The Jack Ass Show
by Brian Wilson

After the show, 2 olives and a grey goose yesterday, I steeled myself to watch a few minutes of the Jack Ass Show. The Jack Ass doesn't have opinions, the Laws of Nature flow from his lips. JA doesn't need to know economics or history. A word-a-day vocabulary is the knowledge of all knowledge. His audience doesn't need to think. He already has all the answers.

JA thinks he is a man of principle. But he is an emotional rowboat lost at sea without a philosophical anchor. It takes years to lay a philosophical foundation and build a principled life on top of it. Any fool knows the right and wrong of the 10 Commandments. It takes wisdom to see the folly of pretty ideas that are really tyranny draped in velvet.

The whole manufactured point of his "talking points ad ridiculum" was the principled intransigence of the Tea Party Movement standing firm for real spending cuts in the so-called "debt debate". The hyper-ventilated allegation the Tea Partiers would be branded as "Extremists" and the confidence of the American people is a non-sequitur. The Tea Party Movement is the American people. It isn't an organization that claims to represent anyone. It is a collection of individuals who associate in common cause. Many claim to be Tea Party leaders but they are charlatans walking in front of the parade. The Tea Party people listen to everyone. Take orders from none. And for better or worse, make their own decisions. They may not be the American people but they are a hell of a lot closer than a Jack Ass with a loud mouth and a TV studio.

When you assume the Republicans are shills for progressivism, the actions make sense and are easily predictable. If the Republicans won the Debt Debate, government spending would really be cut. Which of course, they don't want. So they had to throw the fight. Unfortunately, like TV wrestling, it becomes more and more obvious the game is rigged. It's as if the rulers in Washington don't even care if we believe their staged fight. It's just a kabuki ritual they have to perform before stealing more of our Freedom.

While we're on the subject, let me add Sean to the list. He says all the right words but there is no brain behind them. He knows all the correct conservative answers but can't defend them intellectually. He is like Abba: singing a song in English perfectly without understanding any of the lyrics.

Oh yes, why are the 38 at the same time "uncompromising and irrelevant"? It is the insecurity of emotional decision. They hated John Galt because of his confidence in his own beliefs. Where they had doubts, he had none. Hosts like the Jack Ass are never sure their opinion is right - yet they demand everyone agree with them. The uncompromising and principled make them loath themselves. The Principled Man is willing to stand alone with his beliefs because they were not formed from the consensus of others.

Tomorrow and the latest news await….

http://lewrockwell.com/wilson-brian/wilson-brian23.1.html

Fwd: [The_Fair_Forum] 150 human animal hybrids grown in UK labs: Embryos have been produced secretively for the past three years

150 human animal hybrids grown in UK labs: Embryos have been produced secretively for the past three years

By DANIEL MARTIN and SIMON CALDWELL

Last updated at 12:42 AM on 23rd July 2011

Scientists have created more than 150 human-animal hybrid embryos in British laboratories.

The hybrids have been produced secretively over the past three years by researchers looking into possible cures for a wide range of diseases.

The revelation comes just a day after a committee of scientists warned of a nightmare 'Planet of the Apes' scenario in which work on human-animal creations goes too far.

Undercover: Scientists have been growing human animal hybrids in secret for the last three years (Posed by models)

Last night a campaigner against the excesses of medical research said he was disgusted that scientists were 'dabbling in the grotesque'.

Figures seen by the Daily Mail show that 155 'admixed' embryos, containing both human and animal genetic material, have been created since the introduction of the 2008 Human Fertilisation Embryology Act.

This legalised the creation of a variety of hybrids, including an animal egg fertilised by a human sperm; 'cybrids', in which a human nucleus is implanted into an animal cell; and 'chimeras', in which human cells are mixed with animal embryos.

Scientists say the techniques can be used to develop embryonic stem cells which can be used to treat a range of incurable illnesses.

__._,_.___

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group

.....the forum for free & fair debate, Everyone welcome. Hate Obama's health care plan, tell us!

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

__,_._,___