|
Thanks for flying with  WordPress.com |
|
| Thanks for flying with 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.
On Sep 26, 11:53 am, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Not only does "Palestine" refuse to recognize Israel, their charter
> calls for its destruction.
> ---
> that's israel's problem ... not ours
>
> the US interventionist policy must end
>
> On Sep 26, 7:50 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The UN CREATED Israel. Truman and Stalin jumped on board, and that
> > was that.
>
> > Not only does "Palestine" refuse to recognize Israel, their charter
> > calls for its destruction.
>
> > Good veto
>
> > On Sep 24, 12:14 pm, Keith In Köln <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > By the same token, Israel is against the United Nations acknowledging
> > > Palestine as a Nation-State....Uhm....The same mechanism that Israel was
> > > acknowledged.
>
> > > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 4:18 PM, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
> > > > So much for republicans being the Zionistas, eh? Maybe Rahm should
> > > > have been a clue.
>
> > > > "Palestine", wants to be recognized as a state, while refusing to
> > > > recognize Israel as a state. Okey dokey.
>
> > > > Bravo Mr President
>
> > > > On Sep 24, 5:51 am, Moe <coates...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > The biggest threat is the undermining of the representatives in the
> > > > > Congress when it comes to decisions that affect the policies of the
> > > > > United States. I was surprised to see a clip with Wolf Blitzer and
> > > > > Netanyahu discussing the fact that during the speech of Netanyahu
> > > > > before the Congress various Israeli politicians were sitting together
> > > > > with American representatives to influence their voting. Blitzer asked
> > > > > Netanyahu if this was correct and how would an Israeli react if Joe
> > > > > Walsh sat in the parliament of Israel to assure that Israel walk the
> > > > > line to American interest. Netanyahu said in a joking manner that he
> > > > > has no control over the politicians in Israel. Netanyahu has gone so
> > > > > far as to threaten various politicians about their re-election if they
> > > > > did not pull the Israeli line. It is clear to everyone who can think,
> > > > > Israel can do what it wants to disrupt the balance in the region. For
> > > > > any mistake made then the USA will be called to bail Israel out. This
> > > > > means US Taxpayers and members of the US Armed Forces will pay the
> > > > > bill. This payment will be in the form of taxpayer's money and lives.
> > > > > United States pays Israel 3.5 Billion Dollars per year in support.
> > > > > They pay Palestine 500 million dollars a year. America does not have
> > > > > this money. We should be investing in the USA. Look at the increased
> > > > > costs due to securing the American interests on a worldwide basis.
> > > > > American taxpayers cover the increased costs and the host countries
> > > > > pay their part. After Obama took office, USA has reduced threats. Due
> > > > > to recent actions by Israel, the threat level has increased for all of
> > > > > America´s allies in addition to that of the US.
>
> > > > > Israel is looking at Iran. Israel might take action to destroy these
> > > > > plants. They have asked or oppressed the US for F-18s and the armament
> > > > > to destroy the nuclear plants in Iran. Israel has received addition
> > > > > armaments and cooperation from the United States to the level where
> > > > > the interest of the United States are in question. Look at the case of
> > > > > F-15 plans that Israel received from the United States. After USA
> > > > > terminated the project, Israel then sold the plans to China. China
> > > > > then had a great technological leap forward with their efforts to gain
> > > > > American military expertise. Look at the spying cases of Jewish
> > > > > Americans and the attempts to free the convicted individuals by
> > > > > putting pressure on Congress members.
> > > > > If you look at the Israeli population in Israel, 800.000 of their
> > > > > register citizens are living in the United States. How many of
> > > > > Israel's citizens are living else where due to the daily risk. The
> > > > > amount of money made is tremendous for selling homes to Israelis in
> > > > > who have USA, as their first address. Another case is the cheaper
> > > > > access to the American market for medical devices and software
> > > > > products. This costs the average American not only his job but also
> > > > > increase taxes for services he is not getting. What is it costing us
> > > > > for a government that has more interest in appeasing Israel and not
> > > > > supporting the infrastructure of the United States? How many American
> > > > > lives will be spend for any of the foolish steps that Israel might
> > > > > take in the region? What are the additional costs to Europe and the
> > > > > United States due to the Israeli failed action with the Turkish aid
> > > > > ships? What is the cost of an American Congress that is more
> > > > > interested in supporting Israel's follies than that of support the
> > > > > interests of the American people?
>
> > > > > On Sep 23, 2:26 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Biggest Losers in Palestine Veto? The American PeoplebyPhilip Giraldi,
> > > > September 22, 2011
> > > > > > If the Palestinian application for United Nations full membership
> > > > actually takes place Friday and the United States uses its Security Council
> > > > veto to stop the process, it will be the final step in a predictable and
> > > > preventable tragedy playing out. Some are arguing that Washington might
> > > > actually abstain, thereby gaining considerable favorable sentiment from much
> > > > of the world and also sending a signal to Israel that there are limits to
> > > > the bilateral relationship. But it is far more likely that President Barack
> > > > Obama, who has stated over and over that he will protect Israel in
> > > > international forums, will not flinch when he calls on Susan Rice to cast
> > > > the fatal vote. Any expectation that the president might hesitate either
> > > > because it is the right thing to do or because it benefits the United States
> > > > is fanciful, particularly with a presidential election looming in 2012.
> > > > > > Washington's attempts to "mediate" the situation have really been
> > > > limited to pressuring the Palestinians to back off. Sending National
> > > > Security Council officialDennis Ross, "Israel's lawyer," to Ramallah to talk
> > > > around the Palestinian leadership should, if anything, indicate to the
> > > > Palestinians that Washington is, as it always has been, firmly in the
> > > > Israeli corner. So let us assume that Palestine will feel compelled to seek
> > > > full U.N. membership as the world's 194th nation and that Washington will
> > > > then veto the application. The first question then has to be whether the
> > > > entire process had any meaning at all or it was just kabuki, a stylized show
> > > > played out to an appreciative audience with a predictable ending. The short
> > > > answer is that the Palestinians will certainly be on the losing end as they
> > > > have been for more than 60 years but the real losers will be the United
> > > > States and Israel.
> > > > > > The mainstream media has echoed Israeli and American arguments that
> > > > Palestinian statehood is meaningless without a negotiated settlement of
> > > > issues on the ground. But Israel has made it clear that it has no desire to
> > > > negotiate anything while it continues to occupy the West Bank, so the
> > > > Palestinian choice is to accept the status quo, in which it is powerless and
> > > > voiceless, or attempt to line up the international community more solidly
> > > > behind it and shift the playing field.
> > > > > > Israel has been working hard to stop the process, or, at worst, to
> > > > mitigate its impact by having a number of important nations, mostly in
> > > > Europe, either abstain on the vote or vote no. Prime Minister Benjamin
> > > > Netanyahu made a glad-handtourof European capitals earlier this year with
> > > > that express purpose, and he received positive signals from the Italians,
> > > > the Dutch, the Poles, and the Germans, though it is by no means clear how
> > > > they will vote. It was for Israel a top national priority, which it has
> > > > conveyed clearly to its friends in the United States.
> > > > > > Washington, at the urging of Israel, also joined in the effort,
> > > > starting withwarningslate last year to Latin American nations that
> > > > recognizing Palestine as a state would be "unacceptable." More recently, the
> > > > State Department and the White House have repeatedly expressed their desire
> > > > that the Palestinians shelve their plans to seek a U.N. seat, and they have
> > > > been assiduously working both in front of the TV cameras in New York and
> > > > Washington and behind the scenes to convince the Palestinian leadership to
> > > > cease and desist. The dialogue has been given some teeth by Congress, which
> > > > is determined tocut all aidto Palestine if the U.N. action goes through. One
> > > > congressmen, Joe Walsh of Illinois, is preparing amotionthat will provide
> > > > congressional support for an Israeli annexation of much of the West Bank if
> > > > the Palestinians proceed. Walsh describes Palestinian statehood as
> > > > "absolutely outrageous."
> > > > > > So Israel sees the Palestinian plan as a major threat and the United
> > > > States appears to be on board, but many would reasonably observe that Israel
> > > > often cries wolf and greatly exaggerates what it perceives as threats
> > > > against it. Is that true in this case, making it just another instance where
> > > > Tel Aviv is adopting an extreme position in hopes that Washington will
> > > > deliver the goods? It may not be. Israel sees danger precisely because the
> > > > Palestinian bid will do a couple of things that call into question some
> > > > significant aspects of the status quo. First of all, since it will certainly
> > > > pass with a huge majority in the General Assembly if the
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
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.
On Sep 27, 5:48 pm, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Cain, like Bachmann, Perry, and Romney, is an admitted zionist and
> won't put the USA's interests aside from Israel.
> They are not one of our states and do not have anything to offer
> America except as a threat to our security. They spy on us, have
> killed our soldiers, sell our technology and weapons to potential
> enemies, promote socialism and a religious state that excludes
> everyone except jews.
>
> you're either an American or something else
>
> On Sep 27, 1:17 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > September27thCalling All Polite, Rational Cain SupportersTom WoodsThe other day Iwroteabout the Florida straw poll that Herman Cain won by a substantial margin. I didn't call anyone stupid or evil for supporting Cain. I laid out some facts that appear to speak against him to anyone who supports the market economy and a free society. The three I pointed to in the post were his support for TARP, his 2008 endorsement of Mitt Romney (whom Cain supporters claim they despise), and his failure to see the housing collapse coming or even to detect that something might be wrong with the bubble economy. It's worse than that, actually he gave the economy a clean bill of health practically until the collapse came. That is a serious problem. How can we want someone in charge at a critical moment like this whose grasp of the economy is evidently so poor?
> > I did not invent these things. They really happened. They need to be addressed.
> > Here are the replies I received from Cain supporters:1. There's a reason why Mr. Cain has run multi-million dollar corporations amazingly well, and you have not. Mr. Cain knows what he's talking about, and your just a talking head rattling off rhetoric, and nonsense. You think you are better than those who lack your credentials. NEWS FLASH: YOU ARE NOT! Mr. Cain could school you in humility, which you definitely need educated in. get off your damn pedestal, at the end of the day, you aren't special.How many of my concerns are addressed here? Zero. Evidently it is "rhetoric" and "nonsense" to say Cain supported TARP and Romney, and didn't perceive the housing bubble at all. It's "rhetoric" and "nonsense" to say Americans need to understand what causes the booms and busts in our economy.
> > As for Cain's ability to run businesses, what on earth does that have to do with my post?
> > What's more, as Ludwig von Mises showed long ago (inBureaucracy, Yale University Press, 1944), it isliterally impossibleto run government like a business. Business firms make decisions via forecasts of consumer demand, with those forecasts being informed by the existing array of prices, the profits or losses they have earned, and from general entrepreneurial insight. They then decide, on this basis, whether they have too many or too few people in customer service, in order fulfillment, or whatever; whether they should invest in more capital equipment; whether they should discontinue a whole line of products, etc.
> > Government can't do this. It doesn't make profits or losses; it merely seizes what it wants from the public. Thus it has no way of knowing what the public actually wants or the intensity with which it wants it. It can't know if it should produce more of X or more of Y, how it should produce those things, where it should produce them, etc. It must grope in the dark. All the Ross Perots and Herman Cains in the world cannot change the nature of government, which is a non-market institution.2. Herman Cain is by far the strongest supporter of the FairTax. That gets him my vote.Granted, this one also doesn't answer any of my objections, but at least it's polite. My reply:
> > I would think we'd want opponents of taxes, not supporters. He said in Florida that any tax reform must be revenue neutral. That alone disqualifies him.
> > Anything revenue neutral is a bad idea. I guess I just don't share the optimism of the FairTax people, who seem to think the system is basically fine but just needs to be funded differently. Say what?
> > The only way this monster is going to be cut down to size is if serious, radical changes are made, including repealing taxes andnot replacing them with anything. Any other approach is just another shell game, another example of D.C. fakery. "Tax reform" is always and everywhere a D.C. trick. Taxrepealis what we want.3. I have been listening to Mr. Cain for years. Many years. I don't see anyone who is more sincere than he. His wife doesn't want him to be president, I heard the story that said she was miffed when some reporter said how cain couldn't win. Because his whole life…anyone who said he couldn't do something was proved wrong.
> > He's not doing this for glory. He has plenty of other things to do with his time.
> > And when he supported TARP (which I did/do not) – he did get a lot of flak from people. but that's what he thought was a good thing…I think it's a breath of fresh air to have a candidate of ANY party that is free to speak his/her mind. That isn't afraid to not be in lockstep with 'the leadership.'I don't question his sincerity. He could be a decent guy. That's not my gripe. The mention of TARP, which I appreciate because it at least addresses my post, is much more relevant. The fact that he thought it was a good thing isn't an argument. You claim he "isn't afraid to not be in lockstep with 'the leadership,'" but on TARP he sure was!
> > And this is what counts: when the chips were down, he sided with the establishment: the GOP leadership, the Democratic leadership, theNew York Times, and all the rest. Now I've heard it claimed that Cain supported the original rationale for TARP but turned on the program when it went in a different direction. But the original rationale for TARP was rotten, too. Meanwhile, Cain was lecturing "free-market purists" for opposing it.
> > Is that what we need? Someone who will lecture "free-market purists" as if that were the problem in the U.S. today?4. You really can't handle people thinking ON THEIR OWN and believing WHAT THEY WANT and WHO THEY WANT.
> > Go back to Alabama where y'all are safely hidden away with your books and your Stink tank, Mr Woods.So this one makes no argument at all. It says I am upset because people disagree with me. No, I am upset because there are serious problems with Herman Cain that his supporters refuse to address. This comment carries on that tradition.
> > In fact, this comment is completely irrational. People should decide on "who they want" but not actually have to defend that decision, and anyone calling on them to do so is a meanie who should just shut his mouth.5. I have watched the debates and Cain has been the the most coherent of all the candidates. Yes he had some lapses in the libertarian orthodoxy (Jim DeMint also supported Romney in 08) but he carries himself as a leader better than all the other Republican candidates.This is neither insulting nor irrational, so it wins the prize. But it's no real answer.
> > I think we are talking more than just "lapses" in "libertarian orthodoxy." When the chips were down, he went with the establishment and supported TARP. I'm supposed to believe that the next time the chips are down he'll be a maverick? Sure.
> > That someone would make a decision based on something as superficial as how a candidate "carries himself" is deeply disturbing and, unfortunately, quite revealing. If he can't perceive the signs of a bubble economy, I don't care if he's Spencer Tracy on stage.
> > So my question is, are there Cain supporters out there who will reply to my concerns straightforwardly and without insulting me? Again, I want to know why his support for Romney (of all people!) isn't a cause for concern, why his support for TARP isn't an indication that he'll support the next scam the establishment promotes as a necessary emergency measure, and why we should want someone making decisions about the economy who completely failed to diagnose its true condition in the years leading up to the collapse.
> > Meanwhile, I refer people to myresource page on Cainand myYouTubeon the subject.http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/calling-all-polite-rational-cain-support...
--
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.
