Friday, November 11, 2011

JP War Clouds Form over Iran

by Wayne Madsen

November 10, 2011

Israel's all-powerful lobby in Washington, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), an organization composed of Israeli collaborators, infiltrators, and outright traitors to the United States, is steamrolling through the House of Representatives H.R. 1905, which would prohibit the President of the United States, the Secretary of State, members of the U.S. Foreign Service, or any special envoy from engaging in any sort of diplomatic contact, official or unofficial, with any member or agent of the government of Iran. Only when the President informs the requisite committees may he proceed with engaging on diplomatic contact with Iran. Israel has de facto control over the foreign affairs committees of Congress, so any White House notification of the need to contact Iranian officials would be instantly transmitted to Binyamin Netanyahu's office in Jerusalem and Israel would then circumvent any U.S.-Iranian contact. AIPAC, with its resolution, is further making the United States a vassal of the Jewish state.

Israel's strategy is to make certain that its plans to attack Iran's nuclear facilities and, perhaps other targets, meet no opposition from diplomatic circles in the United States… Israel has placed its own interests well beyond and in contravention of those of the United States.

Faced with the prospect of an Israeli attack on Iran, backed by Saudi Arabia – Israel's secret ally in the region – has had ripple effects across the Middle East and Asia.

Countries in Asia are scrambling to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as full members. Confronted by a belligerent United States, NATO, and Israel intent on toppling the governments of Syria and Iran, the economic, cultural, and de facto collective security pact that comprises Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan announced after its prime ministers' summit in St. Petersburg that SCO would soon be opening its doors for full membership for Pakistan, Iran, and India. The Asian nations want to freeze the United States out of interference in Asia.

Ahead of the St. Petersburg summit, Russia and China strongly warned the West against any military attack on Iran. The words being used in international diplomacy are reminiscent of the Cold War era, however, it is the West that is playing to role of the aggressor, albeit an aggressor led around by Israel and its intelligence spies and assets embedded in the upper echelons of governments in Washington, London, Paris, Berlin, and within the United Nations hierarchy.

Even America's vassal state of Afghanistan, eager to break free of the bonds of NATO and Washington, has attained observer status in SCO. Recent comments by the deputy commander of NATO training in Afghanistan, U.S. Army Major General Peter Fuller, that the Afghan government leadership is erratic, ungrateful, and isolated from reality because President Hamid Karzai said Afghanistan would side with Pakistan in an American war on Pakistan, resulted in Fuller's firing. Fuller's comments also resulted in Karzai asking for observer status in SCO as American aggression against the Muslim world and opposition to sovereignty for Palestine has seen Washington's standing around the world plummet.

Another nation where the CIA, Pentagon, has their agents creeping and crawling, Mongolia, is also a SCO observer. There are also SCO "partners in dialogue" -- nations that could attain SCO observer or membership status in the future. Partners in dialogue nations include Belarus, Sri Lanka, and one that should worry Tel Aviv and Washington, Turkey, a NATO member. Moscow and Ankara agree that Turkey should eventually become a full SCO member. Turkey has close historical and cultural links with the Turkic nations of central Asia and with many of the autonomous Turkic republics of Russia, including Tuva, Bashkortostan, and Adygeya.

Turkey has grown tired of Israeli interference in its internal and external affairs, as witnessed by the vicious and bloody Israeli attack on the Turkish Gaza aid vessel, the Mavi Marmara; Mossad support for Kurdish PKK terrorist attacks in Turkey; and covert Israeli entanglement in the Ergenekon "deep state" network in Turkey.

Iran has now seen Israel's most-open secret ally, Saudi Arabia, appoint the former Egyptian intelligence chief and close Netanyahu friend, Omar Suleiman, as an adviser to Saudi heir apparent, Crown Prince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud, who is also the Interior Minister. The Jerusalem-Riyadh axis is being further cemented as the Obama administration is shifting 4,000 troops from Iraq to Kuwait and beefing up other U.S. military assets in Bahrain -- home of the U.S. Fifth Fleet – and Qatar, United Arab Emirates, and Oman. The CIA and Pentagon have set up Predator drone bases in Djibouti, Seychelles, Ethiopia, and, reportedly, Saudi Arabia.

The president-elect of Kyrgyzstan, Prime Minister Almazbek Atambaev, has announced he wants the U.S. and NATO to leave the Manas Transit Center airbase in his country after the current lease expires in 2014. Already, Soros-funded non-governmental organization (NGO) agents in Kyrgyzstan are attempting to suggest that under the new Kyrgyz constitution, Atambaev does not have the authority to close the base. It is this type of U.S. interference in the affairs of the nations of Asia that has SCO readying an expansion of its membership to include two nations that have received direct U.S. military threats: Iran and Pakistan. Suspicion of U.S. intentions and military plans has also made Washington's request to enter SCO as a partner in dialogue a dead issue. Washington's interest in attending SCO summits as a "partner" says more about the CIA's inability to crack into the inner workings of SCO, even through erstwhile "allies" like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Mongolia, than in having any great desire to "dialogue" with SCO members and observers. After all, AIPAC and its minions have managed to jam through the U.S. House a law that prohibits any U.S. diplomatic contact with Tehran's officials.

President Obama is under tremendous pressure from the Israel Lobby during an election year to support an Israeli military strike on Iran, action that will inevitably lead the United States military in the Gulf region into war against Iran on behalf of the Tel Aviv/west Jerusalem regime. At the G-20 summit in Cannes, French President Nicolas Sarkozy was overheard telling Obama, "I cannot bear Netanyahu, he's a liar." To which Obama replied, "you're fed up, but I have to deal with him every day."

The Sarkozy-Obama interchange is instructive. Obama did not disagree that Netanyahu is a patent liar who will do anything or say anything to advance Israeli and global Zionist interests over all else, even to the point of lying about a bogus Iranian nuclear weapons threat to promote a military attack on Iran.

Israel, using its agents of influence in the UN delegations of the United States, Britain, Germany, Canada, Sweden, and the Netherlands, has ensured that International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano has tainted his agency's report on Iranian nuclear developments in a manner that would have never been tolerated by his predecessor, Mohammed ElBaradei. Amano certainly took no interest in the fact that his own nation, Japan, was secretly producing nuclear weapons at the Fukushima nuclear complex in contravention of IAEA rules. The aftermath of the destructive earthquake in Japan laid open the secret work going on at Fukushima. Amano is perfectly willing to act as a cipher for Israel and the Israel Lobby in "discovering" IAEA violations by Iran.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientist's "Doomsday Clock," a measure of how close the world is to nuclear war, now stands at six minutes until midnight. With the machinations of Israel toward Iran, the internal meltdown of Obama's White House staff with the demotion of chief of staff Bill Daley, and the invitation by SCO to Iran to come under the protective security umbrella of Russia and China, the clock has just jumped ahead several minutes.

--
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

Re: Cain's real problem: On foreign policy he's as clueless as Bill O'Reilly

By no means do I think that Iran is any type of world power, capable
of
striking a serious blow to the shores of the Continental United
States......Yet.
I do believe that they would love to have this capability however, and
are
striving to obtain such a goal, and such weaponry.
----
given our interference in their nation's politics they have a good
reason to want to attack the US

On Nov 11, 10:00 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just a quick note here:
>
> By no means do I think that Iran is any type of world power, capable of
> striking a serious blow to the shores of the Continental United
> States......Yet.
>
> I do believe that they would love to have this capability however, and are
> striving to obtain such a goal, and such weaponry.
>
> In the words of Barney Fife: "Nip It! Nip It! Nip it in the bud!"
>
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > *Iranian Navy to Patrol off U.S. Coast, What!?
> > *
> > Read more:
> >http://defensetech.org/2011/09/28/iranian-navy-to-patrol-off-u-s-coas...
> > Defense.org
>
> > "No word on what type of ships Iran will send to establish this "powerful
> > force." Keep in mind, that this light frigate<http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/jamaranmowjclassmult/>known as the Jamaran, is one of Iran's most modern and powerful ships. It
> > carries four Noor class anti-ship missiles with a range of about 125-miles
> > along with four SM-1 anti-aircraft missiles, light torpedoes and a 76 mm
> > gun. Not exactly an Aegis destroyer."
>
> > Read more:
> >http://defensetech.org/2011/09/28/iranian-navy-to-patrol-off-u-s-coas...
> > Defense.org
>
> > On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:32 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> whoop-di-whoop!!!!!! Keith.... Irans capability is 1250 miles. No
> >> more of a threat to the US than one that flies 10 miles or 90 miles.
> >> According to British sources (much more reliable than US sources now
> >> that the Blair Gov. is gone) they have stopped trying to increase
> >> distance as Israel is well within range now.
>
> >> The problem is that to have a massive capability (nuke) Iran has
> >> realized that hitting Israel will kill/affect more Moslims/Arab
> >> nations than Jews and so have the other Moslim nations in the area.
> >> the inverse is not true.
>
> >> On Nov 10, 7:46 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > You better read up on Iran's capabilities Sarge.....You sound like a
> >> > Moonbat this week.
>
> >> > (Good to see ya by the way!)
>
> >> > KeithInTampa
>
> >> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 1:40 AM, SgtUSMC <devildawg...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > Yea, well, Iraq was going to attack us with Scuds that only had a 90
> >> > > mile range. Some people are clueless.
>
> >> > > --
> >> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> >> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> >> > > * Visit our other community athttp://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 seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> >> * Visit our other community athttp://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: Cain's real problem: On foreign policy he's as clueless as Bill O'Reilly

Iraq was going to attack us with Scuds that only had a 90
mile range
----
without a US occupation they wouldn't have a target.

don't be surprised when those the US military attacks shoot back ...
Americans would do the same thing

On Nov 10, 12:40 am, SgtUSMC <devildawg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yea, well, Iraq was going to attack us with Scuds that only had a 90
> mile range. Some people are clueless.

--
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: please join this site to discuss ways poverty should be abolished

some people are simply sluggards ... too lazy to lift food from the
plate to their mouths

these people are poor by choice and are not entitled to tax payer
assistance

On Nov 11, 10:08 am, Noelle Finnerty <skylark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> thefestivalofcolor -https://sites.google.com/site/yorktonenvironmentdirectorate/meditatio...

--
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: What Immigration Problem?

the Constitution expressly protects the rights of persons, not just
those of American citizens
---
yep ... illegals should be given a fair hearing and then charged for
their crimes, imprisoned, and then deported after they've paid their
debt to our society

almost every European immigrant group including Italians, Irishmen,
Poles, and Jews were initially not considered to be white!
---
italians - debatable
irish and poles - no question
jews - many are not and some refuse to acknowledge it

In 1965, the goal on non-white immigration first advanced by Jewish
organizations in the 1880s came to fruition when Congress passed the
Immigration Act. It has resulted in immigration becoming 90 percent
non-European.

In 1951 Senator Jacob Javits authored an article called "Let's Open
Our Gates."[876] that called for massive unrestricted immigration.
Javits and Representative Celler figured prominently in the passage of
the bill in 1965. Nine years before passage of the 1965 Immigration
Act, the American Jewish Congress initially proposed the essential
elements of the bill and praised President Eisenhower for his
"unequivocal opposition to the national quota system."

During the decades leading up to opening the borders in 1965, Jewish
groups had piously stated that there should be no discrimination
against any group in immigration and that such could only be good for
America. But, Richard Arens, staff director of the Senate subcommittee
that produced the Walter-McCarran Act, pointed out that the same
Jewish forces which were the most avid promoters of open immigration,
hypocritically opposed ethnic immigration they deemed unfavorable to
their own interests.

One of the curious things about those who most loudly claim that the
1952 act is "discriminatory" and that it does not make allowance for a
sufficient number of alleged refugees, is that they oppose admission
of any of the approximately one million Arab refugees in camps where
they are living in pitiful circumstances after having been driven out
of Israel.

On Nov 11, 11:18 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> What Immigration Problem?bySheldon Richman, November 11, 2011
> Arizona, Alabama, and Georgia have each enacted stringent laws aimed at curbing illegal immigration. Before saying more, let's be clear about the alleged problem. What is an "illegal immigrant"? It's simply a person possessing natural rights, mind you who comes to the United States without the permission of the U.S. government. Now isn't it curious that in this country, which began in rebellion against and secession from an empire, people are upset about other people moving around without government permission? In revolutionary times the smuggler of goods was a hero, and the customs agent was a villain. If we were true to the best parts of our heritage today the "illegal" would be a hero, and the border agent would be a villain.
> This shows how far we have slipped from America's substantially libertarian origins. This is really quite sad.
> Imagine if we Americans needed government permission to move from state to state. We'd be appalled at the hassle, not to mention the grave interference with our freedom. Would we put up with it? I hope not.
> Then what is the justification for having an elaborate, presumptuous, tax-financed bureaucracy whose purpose is to determine who may live in this country? Rights belong to all human beings, not just to Americans. Note that the Constitution expressly protects the rights ofpersons,not just those of American citizens.
> But, we are told, a country is not a country without secure borders. Why? This premise goes unexamined.
> A country is defined by its traditions and attitudes rather than by its border checkpoints and armed guards. It is disheartening to hear people claim to believe that America is not synonymous with government and yet favor harsh measures to "secure our border" and stop free migration.
> All the economic arguments for stemming the flow of immigrants fall when examined even casually. The nativists can't quite get their story straight. Are the newcomers ambitious go-getters trying to "take our jobs," or are they freeloaders planning to collect welfare? Those who are afraid of the former fail to understand that people not only produce when they hold jobs, but also consume. Newcomers expand the market and the division of labor, which Adam Smith taught us is the path to higher living standards. Some opponents of immigration bring up the current high unemployment as an objection. But that is purely a government-produced phenomenon, and it has nothing to do with immigrants. Seriously, scapegoating does not become us.
> As for any government-financed services that immigrants might use, let's not forget that they also pay a good deal in taxes. There's no reason to think they are a net drain on the welfare state.
> But that is really beside the point. If we don't want people living off the taxpayers and this should apply to American citizens as well we should transfer welfare services to private charity and the free market. There is no good reason for government the essence of which is physical force to be running schools and hospitals, which are the tax-financed facilities most likely to be used by immigrants. I really see no moral difference between a citizen and a noncitizen taking advantage of a government program. The most objectionable aspect of government largess is notwhoaccepts it buthowthe politicians obtain the resources that they then distribute. Taxation is robbery.
> Finally, there is a good deal of worry on the Right these days that immigration is making "white America" a thing of the past. Those who hold this view say earlier immigration presented little concern because most newcomers were European and could assimilate into American culture. But this is selective memory in the first degree: virtually every group from Europe was at one time spoken of in the same degrading and alarmist terms as are today's Latino and Muslim immigrants. In fact, as Thaddeus Russell documents in his fascinating book,A Renegade History of the United States, almost every European immigrant group including Italians, Irishmen, Poles, and Jews were initially not considered to be white! As a result, many of the new immigrants felt close to blacks and African-American culture. Only with the passage of time were they admitted into the ranks of the white race by the establishment.
> The more things change, the more things stay the same.http://www.fff.org/comment/com1111i.asp

--
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.

What Immigration Problem?

What Immigration Problem?
by Sheldon Richman, November 11, 2011

Arizona, Alabama, and Georgia have each enacted stringent laws aimed at curbing illegal immigration. Before saying more, let's be clear about the alleged problem. What is an "illegal immigrant"? It's simply a person possessing natural rights, mind you who comes to the United States without the permission of the U.S. government. Now isn't it curious that in this country, which began in rebellion against and secession from an empire, people are upset about other people moving around without government permission? In revolutionary times the smuggler of goods was a hero, and the customs agent was a villain. If we were true to the best parts of our heritage today the "illegal" would be a hero, and the border agent would be a villain.

This shows how far we have slipped from America's substantially libertarian origins. This is really quite sad.

Imagine if we Americans needed government permission to move from state to state. We'd be appalled at the hassle, not to mention the grave interference with our freedom. Would we put up with it? I hope not.

Then what is the justification for having an elaborate, presumptuous, tax-financed bureaucracy whose purpose is to determine who may live in this country? Rights belong to all human beings, not just to Americans. Note that the Constitution expressly protects the rights of persons, not just those of American citizens.

But, we are told, a country is not a country without secure borders. Why? This premise goes unexamined.

A country is defined by its traditions and attitudes rather than by its border checkpoints and armed guards. It is disheartening to hear people claim to believe that America is not synonymous with government and yet favor harsh measures to "secure our border" and stop free migration.

All the economic arguments for stemming the flow of immigrants fall when examined even casually. The nativists can't quite get their story straight. Are the newcomers ambitious go-getters trying to "take our jobs," or are they freeloaders planning to collect welfare? Those who are afraid of the former fail to understand that people not only produce when they hold jobs, but also consume. Newcomers expand the market and the division of labor, which Adam Smith taught us is the path to higher living standards. Some opponents of immigration bring up the current high unemployment as an objection. But that is purely a government-produced phenomenon, and it has nothing to do with immigrants. Seriously, scapegoating does not become us.

As for any government-financed services that immigrants might use, let's not forget that they also pay a good deal in taxes. There's no reason to think they are a net drain on the welfare state.

But that is really beside the point. If we don't want people living off the taxpayers and this should apply to American citizens as well we should transfer welfare services to private charity and the free market. There is no good reason for government the essence of which is physical force to be running schools and hospitals, which are the tax-financed facilities most likely to be used by immigrants. I really see no moral difference between a citizen and a noncitizen taking advantage of a government program. The most objectionable aspect of government largess is not who accepts it but how the politicians obtain the resources that they then distribute. Taxation is robbery.

Finally, there is a good deal of worry on the Right these days that immigration is making "white America" a thing of the past. Those who hold this view say earlier immigration presented little concern because most newcomers were European and could assimilate into American culture. But this is selective memory in the first degree: virtually every group from Europe was at one time spoken of in the same degrading and alarmist terms as are today's Latino and Muslim immigrants. In fact, as Thaddeus Russell documents in his fascinating book, A Renegade History of the United States, almost every European immigrant group including Italians, Irishmen, Poles, and Jews were initially not considered to be white! As a result, many of the new immigrants felt close to blacks and African-American culture. Only with the passage of time were they admitted into the ranks of the white race by the establishment.

The more things change, the more things stay the same.

http://www.fff.org/comment/com1111i.asp

Paul Plan

Ron Paul Still Top Tier; Some Ponder a Third-Party Bid

Ron Paul Still Top Tier; Some Ponder a Third-Party Bid
Written by Raven Clabough
Thursday, 10 November 2011 14:16

Despite an utter lack of fair coverage in the mainstream media, Texas Congressman Ron Paul continues to hold his own in the race for the GOP primary. In fact, Paul may be doing even better than some are aware. According to a survey conducted by Real Clear Politics, Ron Paul is the only other GOP presidential contender besides frontrunner Mitt Romney to have a chance at defeating President Obama in a 2012 presidential race.

The survey is significant as it uses data acquired from polls conducted by Quinnipiac, Rasmussen Reports, Democracy Corps, Associated Press, Time, PPP, NBC News, Wall Street Journal, CNN, Washington Post, Reuters, and Gallup.

On average, Paul scores 41.5 percent support compared to Obama's 47.6 percent.

The results of the survey break down as follows:

1. Obama vs. Romney: 46.0 (D) 44.3 (R) – Obama +1.7

2. Obama vs. Paul: 47.6 (D) 41.6 (R) – Obama +6

3. Obama vs. Cain: 48.6 (D) 41.2 (R) – Obama +7.4

4. Obama vs. Huntsman: 45.7 (D) 37.0 (R) – Obama +8.7

5. Obama vs. Perry: 49.6 (D) 40.4 (R) – Obama +9.3

6. Obama vs. Gingrich: 48.7 (D) 38.0 (R) – Obama +10.7

7. Obama vs. Bachmann: 51.8 (D) 37.6 (R) – Obama +14.2

A May 2011 CNN poll revealed that Ron Paul had the best chance among Republicans to defeat President Obama in 2012. Following that poll, Sam Mohammadi of The Excavator wrote:

If Paul and Obama were to face-off in a televised debate it is clear who would win: Paul. Obama has no integrity and no ideas of his own. He is a mere puppet, a whore, a cheater. If Obama didn't have the treasonous banks on Wall Street, the Federal Reserve, the Madison Avenue propaganda machine, the military-industrial complex and the shadow government behind him then he would be a nobody.

Despite the constant assertion heard in the mainstream media that Ron Paul is unelectable or a non-viable candidate, these results seem to prove otherwise. What is most significant, perhaps, about these numbers is Paul's consistent popularity and success in his campaign even without the support of the corporate media or lobbyists.

Last week on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, television host Bill O'Reilly declared that Ron Paul "is not going to be the nominee, there's no chance in the world that he will be nominated for the Republican run at President Obama."

The lack of fair coverage in the mainstream media and from the Republican Party has prompted a number of Paul's supporters to call for Paul to run for President on a third-party ticket.

According to a new poll by NBC and the Wall Street Journal, such an endeavor could "transform 2012."

"Paul would earn the support of 18 percent of voters in a three-way race with President Obama and Mitt Romney, according to the poll, with Romney earning 32 percent and Obama receiving 44," reports The Hill.

That figure also reveals the crossover effect Paul has on Independents and Democrats, as the 18 percent is larger than the amount of support Paul has in strictly GOP polls.

Noting the results of that poll, Paul Joseph Watson writes, "Such figures are already impressive given the fact that Paul has not even begun to harness the momentum that a third party big could generate."

It is also worth mentioning that the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that 73 percent of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, with just over half of the country disapproving of the way President Obama is leading the nation.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/9736-ron-paul-still-top-tier-some-ponder-a-third-party-bid

Re: please join this site to discuss ways poverty should be abolished

OK.... it is the job of some people to be unemployed, fruitless and
worthless to society.

This happens with every species of plants and animals that ever
existed. Every single Soviet citizen had a job guaranteed by the
state. How did that work out for their farming and industrial
productivity??

Please try to refute natural order.

On Nov 11, 10:08 am, Noelle Finnerty <skylark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> thefestivalofcolor -https://sites.google.com/site/yorktonenvironmentdirectorate/meditatio...

--
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: Cain's real problem: On foreign policy he's as clueless as Bill O'Reilly

Lets see..... a foreign naval vessel in international waters.... I do not see the problem.

Tell me....EXACTLY.... what is the problem?? Or is the problem solely fear based??

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:

Iranian Navy to Patrol off U.S. Coast, What!?

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2011/09/28/iranian-navy-to-patrol-off-u-s-coast/#ixzz1dPcIen1V
Defense.org

"No word on what type of ships Iran will send to establish this "powerful force." Keep in mind, that this light frigate known as the Jamaran, is one of Iran's most modern and powerful ships. It carries four Noor class anti-ship missiles with a range of about 125-miles along with four SM-1 anti-aircraft missiles, light torpedoes and a 76 mm gun. Not exactly an Aegis destroyer."

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2011/09/28/iranian-navy-to-patrol-off-u-s-coast/#ixzz1dPcA25ID
Defense.org

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:32 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:

whoop-di-whoop!!!!!! Keith.... Irans capability is 1250 miles. No
more of a threat to the US than one that flies 10 miles or 90 miles.
According to British sources (much more reliable than US sources now
that the Blair Gov. is gone) they have stopped trying to increase
distance as Israel is well within range now.

The problem is that to have a massive capability (nuke) Iran has
realized that hitting Israel will kill/affect more Moslims/Arab
nations than Jews and so have the other Moslim nations in the area.
the inverse is not true.

On Nov 10, 7:46 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You better read up on Iran's capabilities Sarge.....You sound like a
> Moonbat this week.
>
> (Good to see ya by the way!)
>
> KeithInTampa
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 1:40 AM, SgtUSMC <devildawg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yea, well, Iraq was going to attack us with Scuds that only had a 90
> > mile range. Some people are clueless.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://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.

--
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.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
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.

Occupier Strategy of the Day: “I Get High” (Video)

New post on Scotty Starnes's Blog

Occupier Strategy of the Day: "I Get High" (Video)

by Scotty Starnes

This is the "99%?" Could anyone imagine how fucked up the country would be if these liberal parasites actually had control. Oops. I forgot. Obama is one of these occupiers. Like them, he leeches off society and was a pot head also.

H/T to Verum Serum

Scotty Starnes | November 11, 2011 at 10:50 AM | Tags: drugs, hippies, Occupy Portland, Occupy Wall Street | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-68d

Comment

See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/occupier-strategy-of-the-day-i-get-high-video/

Thanks for flying with

WordPress.com

Silent Monks singing

Silent Monks singing the Hallelujah Chorus

It's a group of high school students
Playing silent monks and "singing" the Hallelujah Chorus.
The person who came up with this is brilliant.

http://voxvocispublicus.homestead.com/Index.html

please join this site to discuss ways poverty should be abolished

thefestivalofcolor - https://sites.google.com/site/yorktonenvironmentdirectorate/meditation-events/thefestivalofcolor

Re: Cain's real problem: On foreign policy he's as clueless as Bill O'Reilly

Just a quick note here:

By no means do I think that Iran is any type of world power, capable of striking a serious blow to the shores of the Continental United States......Yet.

I do believe that they would love to have this capability however, and are striving to obtain such a goal, and such weaponry.

In the words of Barney Fife: "Nip It! Nip It! Nip it in the bud!"

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:

Iranian Navy to Patrol off U.S. Coast, What!?

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2011/09/28/iranian-navy-to-patrol-off-u-s-coast/#ixzz1dPcIen1V
Defense.org

"No word on what type of ships Iran will send to establish this "powerful force." Keep in mind, that this light frigate known as the Jamaran, is one of Iran's most modern and powerful ships. It carries four Noor class anti-ship missiles with a range of about 125-miles along with four SM-1 anti-aircraft missiles, light torpedoes and a 76 mm gun. Not exactly an Aegis destroyer."

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2011/09/28/iranian-navy-to-patrol-off-u-s-coast/#ixzz1dPcA25ID
Defense.org

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:32 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:

whoop-di-whoop!!!!!! Keith.... Irans capability is 1250 miles. No
more of a threat to the US than one that flies 10 miles or 90 miles.
According to British sources (much more reliable than US sources now
that the Blair Gov. is gone) they have stopped trying to increase
distance as Israel is well within range now.

The problem is that to have a massive capability (nuke) Iran has
realized that hitting Israel will kill/affect more Moslims/Arab
nations than Jews and so have the other Moslim nations in the area.
the inverse is not true.

On Nov 10, 7:46 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You better read up on Iran's capabilities Sarge.....You sound like a
> Moonbat this week.
>
> (Good to see ya by the way!)
>
> KeithInTampa
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 1:40 AM, SgtUSMC <devildawg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yea, well, Iraq was going to attack us with Scuds that only had a 90
> > mile range. Some people are clueless.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://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: Cain's real problem: On foreign policy he's as clueless as Bill O'Reilly

Iranian Navy to Patrol off U.S. Coast, What!?

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2011/09/28/iranian-navy-to-patrol-off-u-s-coast/#ixzz1dPcIen1V
Defense.org

"No word on what type of ships Iran will send to establish this "powerful force." Keep in mind, that this light frigate known as the Jamaran, is one of Iran's most modern and powerful ships. It carries four Noor class anti-ship missiles with a range of about 125-miles along with four SM-1 anti-aircraft missiles, light torpedoes and a 76 mm gun. Not exactly an Aegis destroyer."

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2011/09/28/iranian-navy-to-patrol-off-u-s-coast/#ixzz1dPcA25ID
Defense.org

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:32 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:

whoop-di-whoop!!!!!! Keith.... Irans capability is 1250 miles. No
more of a threat to the US than one that flies 10 miles or 90 miles.
According to British sources (much more reliable than US sources now
that the Blair Gov. is gone) they have stopped trying to increase
distance as Israel is well within range now.

The problem is that to have a massive capability (nuke) Iran has
realized that hitting Israel will kill/affect more Moslims/Arab
nations than Jews and so have the other Moslim nations in the area.
the inverse is not true.

On Nov 10, 7:46 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You better read up on Iran's capabilities Sarge.....You sound like a
> Moonbat this week.
>
> (Good to see ya by the way!)
>
> KeithInTampa
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 1:40 AM, SgtUSMC <devildawg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yea, well, Iraq was going to attack us with Scuds that only had a 90
> > mile range. Some people are clueless.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://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.

Your Helpful Customer Service, At Last!

New post on Fellowship of the Minds

Your Helpful Customer Service, At Last!

by Dr. Eowyn

We've all talked to this guy.

At last, we have a picture of him.

Mujibar was trying to get a job in India.

The Personnel Manager said, "Mujibar, you have passed all the tests, except one. Unless you pass it, you cannot qualify for this job."

Mujibar steeled himself and said, "I am ready."

The manager said, "Make a sentence using the words Yellow, Pink, and Green."

Mujibar said, "The telephone goes green, green,
And I pink it up, and say, Yellow, this is Mujibar."

Mujibar now works at a call center.

No doubt you have spoken to him.

I know I have.

H/t beloved fellow Joseph!

~Eowyn

Dr. Eowyn | November 11, 2011 at 6:58 am | Tags: India, outsourcing, tech support | Categories: Economy, Humor, Technology, United States | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-ax4

Comment

See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/your-helpful-customer-service-at-last/

Thanks for flying with

WordPress.com

Perry

Super Presidents

Re: Ron Paul: Third-party power or GOP kingmaker?

I think Dr. Paul is absolutely clueless as to what the foreign policy
of the US is at this time....or the last 50+ years as well.

Well, shit... so am I !!! I know what they are doing and have done. I
have yet to see a single positive result from the trillions spent. I
have yet to see anything positive actually accomplished... In all this
time I have yet to see a single actual, tangible benefit to the
average US citizen.

Meanwhile the only actual threat to US soil (Mexican police are
actually allowed to operate inside our borders and the cartels are
supplied with US weapons by the US Government) comes from our Southern
border and it is absolutely ignored.

So, clueless or naive (deficient in worldly wisdom or informed
judgment)????? I think not. I think he understands it all too well and
approaches it as a true patriot and constitutionalist.

On Nov 10, 9:27 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Geoffrey!
>
> Dr. Paul is a much more polished, and classy individual than Ross.
> Congressman Paul is just naive as Hell when it comes to foreign policy! It
> baffles the mind, that someone that intelligent, especially with regard to
> economics, could be so disillusioned.
>
> Dr. Paul would make a great Secretary of Treasury! Let's hope the new
> conservative Administration chooses him for the position!
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 8:34 PM, geoffrey theist <gtheist...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > remember ROSS PEROT???!!!
>
> > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:59 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> >> *Ron Paul: Third-party power or GOP kingmaker?
> >> *By Brent Budowsky - 11/08/11 10:30 AM ET
>
> >> Wouldn't you rather I write about Ron Paul than about Herman Cain, who
> >> will soon flame out, or Rick Perry, who has already flamed out? The new NBC/
> >> *Wall Street Journal* poll suggests Ron Paul would win 18 percent as a
> >> third-party candidate running against Obama and Romney!
>
> >> The other underestimated factor in the Republican race is that
> >> proportional representation will give Ron Paul potentially major influence
> >> in choosing the nominee at the convention, and major leverage because he
> >> certainly would be a powerful third-party candidate if he does run.
>
> >> The GOP nominating process has turned into a debacle for the conservative
> >> wing of the party. Donald Trump was a joke. Rick Perry self- destructed, as
> >> I predicted he would. Now conservatives are reduced to making excuses for
> >> Herman Cain as woman after woman emerges with charges of abuse. Frankly it
> >> is pretty sad that certain conservatives, including some highly visible
> >> conservative Republican women, were reduced to invoking Clarence Thomas,
> >> high-tech lynching and the bogus race issue as woman after woman emerges
> >> with charges against Cain.
>
> >> The next question for Republicans will be whether Mike Huckabee, who
> >> would be a formidable candidate, sees a boomlet for him to jump in. And
> >> whether Jon Huntsman makes a serious bid to be a viable alternative to the
> >> "well-lubricated weather vane," Mitt Romney.
>
> >> If the final choice is Obama versus Romney, the campaign would be
> >> purgatory for true liberals and true conservatives, with the final choice
> >> of Romney and Obama being a battle of two Rorschach tests. Can anyone
> >> imagine Ron Paul, Rick Perry and Herman Cain raising Mitt Romney's hand in
> >> triumph at a convention where a Romney nomination would leave many
> >> conservatives appalled and disgusted?
>
> >> Ron Paul has been the constant of the 2012 campaign. If he entered a
> >> general election as a third-party candidate against Romney and Obama with
> >> 18 percent, that number might well rise after presidential debates between
> >> the three of them.
>
> >> There is another scenario. Mitt Romney is obviously having big trouble
> >> rising above 25 to 30 percent of Republican support. If Perry and Cain both
> >> drop out early in 2012, as I predict, Ron Paul's numbers would rise for the
> >> Republican battle.
>
> >> Could Ron Paul win a direct two-candidate contest of Paul v. Romney? I
> >> would like to see a poll about that race. Alternatively:
>
> >> With proportional representation, Ron Paul could have potentially
> >> decisive influence at the convention, if Romney does not have enough
> >> supporters to win the nomination. What would Ron Paul do? This is a very
> >> interesting question.
>
> >> My wild guess today is that Ron Paul could either help lead a dramatic
> >> move to entice a new true conservative to challenge and defeat Romney (such
> >> as Huckabee), or Dr. Paul could emerge as a third-party candidate equal to
> >> or stronger than Ross Perot was.
>
> >>http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/192299-ro...
>
> >> --
> >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> >> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> >> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<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 seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://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.

Happy Veterans day.....Yeah, right....

It is only 8:40 AM and I am already tired of hearing it and the
bullshit line "Thanks for your service"

I entered military service as a brainwashed, "patriotic" idiot.

Vietnam had nothing to do with "Patriotism", national security or
freeing the "oppressed".

And none of the conflicts since have either. Instead the true cost of
all of these transgressions has been a loss of liberties, freedoms and
security to every citizen of the nation.

The soldier/military supposedly fights to retain these things. It
would seem that when the known and obvious result is exactly the
opposite they and the public would wake up.

Sadly, that is not the case. Other than the loss of life (both sides),
the loss of massive revenues, the loss of constitutional rights/
protections, the loss of standing in the world, the creation of even
more fundamental Sharia based governments, the planting, production
and open distribution of more Opium with a military force flying right
over it (and purposely NOT touching it or interfering), the arming of
the drug cartels on our doorstep....ad nausea......

Please tell me exactly what our true GAINS have been and exactly who
the US military is actually serving.

--
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: Cain's real problem: On foreign policy he's as clueless as Bill O'Reilly

whoop-di-whoop!!!!!! Keith.... Irans capability is 1250 miles. No
more of a threat to the US than one that flies 10 miles or 90 miles.
According to British sources (much more reliable than US sources now
that the Blair Gov. is gone) they have stopped trying to increase
distance as Israel is well within range now.

The problem is that to have a massive capability (nuke) Iran has
realized that hitting Israel will kill/affect more Moslims/Arab
nations than Jews and so have the other Moslim nations in the area.
the inverse is not true.

On Nov 10, 7:46 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You better read up on Iran's capabilities Sarge.....You sound like a
> Moonbat this week.
>
> (Good to see ya by the way!)
>
> KeithInTampa
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 1:40 AM, SgtUSMC <devildawg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yea, well, Iraq was going to attack us with Scuds that only had a 90
> > mile range. Some people are clueless.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://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.

Google, Microsoft collect data "behind your back"

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/zuckerberg-google-microsoft-collect-data-8220behind-your-back-8221/5111?tag=nl.e550

Google, Microsoft collect data "behind your back"

By Emil Protalinski | November 9, 2011, 12:00pm PST

Summary: In a recent interview, Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg explained how Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft collect data on users "behind their back" while the social network is more transparent.

Last week, Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg as well as the company's COO Sheryl Sandberg sat down with PBS broadcast journalist Charlie Rose. The interview aired earlier this week and contains many juicy details on a variety of topics.

One of the subject matters discussed was collecting data on users, which Facebook is frequently accused of. Zuckerberg explained how Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft are much worse at the practice than his company is:

Mark Zuckerberg: I mean, when you're saying that we're the light, it's because, sure people have a lot of information on Facebook. But that's information that they've put into the service.

Sheryl Sandberg: Exactly.

Mark Zuckerberg: If you look at companies, whether it's Google or Yahoo or Microsoft, right, that have search engines and ad networks, they also have a huge amount of information about you. It's just that they're collecting that about you behind your back, really. And it's like you're going — you're going around the Web, and they have cookies, and they're collecting this huge amount of information about who you are. But you never know that. And I mean, some of these companies make an effort to give you a product where –

Charlie Rose: But do you find that a bit scary?

Mark Zuckerberg: Well, I just - I think it's — it's just less transparent –

Sheryl Sandberg: There's no light.

Mark Zuckerberg: — than what's happening on Facebook.

Sheryl Sandberg: It's the dark.

Mark Zuckerberg: So on Facebook someone wants to –

Sheryl Sandberg: Contact.

Mark Zuckerberg: — target say, okay, I want to — I want to advertise — like I'm a band, and I'm to coming to the Bay Area, I'm going to advertise to people who like a band, and they're going to — those people only fit if they've put in that they like that band.

Charlie Rose: Right.

Mark Zuckerberg: On those other services, you can still do that kind of advertising, but you're going to find people based on what they've browsed around on the Web and the people have little or no control over the information that a company like Google or Yahoo or Microsoft has about you. And, I don't know, I think that some of those companies have made an effort to give people to give a payage that they can go see all information that the company has about them. But, I mean, very few people are actually going to go do that. So in reality I think that these companies with big ad networks are basically getting away with collecting huge amounts of information, likely way more information than people are sharing on Facebook about themselves. But I think because people can see how much information people are sharing about themselves on Facebook –

Sheryl Sandberg: Yes.

Mark Zuckerberg: it appears scarier. But in reality, you have control over every single thing that you've shared on Facebook.

Zuckerberg is walking a fine line here. Criticizing Google is nothing new: the two companies are constantly at each other's throats. The same cannot be said, however, for Yahoo and Microsoft.

Yahoo is more and more heavily relying on Facebook and has changed from downplaying the social network to leveraging it. Microsoft has a small stake in Facebook, and the two regularly work together. I'm not sure it's wise to talk down these two, especially when the point is to explain why Facebook is superior.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.