Saturday, September 8, 2012

annoy an Obamanoid


--
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.

**JP** Pakistani Doctor find treatment of Thalassemia

 

Re: [PresidentBarakObama] Jobs and Politics: Republicans have the wrong answers for fixing the weak job market.

You remain a self parody of an air headed disco queen drunk

Obama is killing children ever day with drones

You and he are killers

And he stayed silent until after north Carolina outlawed gay marriage and you still suck his dick

On Saturday, September 8, 2012, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, Dubya Bush is the convicted war criminal.
>
> The current administration is ending BOTH of his illegal murderous wars.
>
> Myth Romney and Paul Lyin want to re-invade Iraq, stay in Afghanistan,
> and declare war on Syria, Iran, and Russia.
>
> You are a misinformed Libbie Loon.
>
> On 9/8/12, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:
>> No just partisan idiots like you Tommy
>>
>> The blood of all the kids murdered by predator drones is your rouge,
>> speaking of nasty queens
>>
>> On Saturday, September 8, 2012, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Brucie girl resorts to insulting everyone who disagrees with her.
>>>
>>> What a nasty little queen!
>>>
>>> On 9/8/12, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> But unlike you, they o have a clue
>>>>
>>>> On Saturday, September 8, 2012, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Jobs and Politics
>>>>> Published: September 7, 2012
>>>>>
>>>>> Coming two months before Election Day, the employment report for
>>>>> August is a problem for President Obama. The economy added 96,000 jobs
>>>>> last month, a slow pace that lowered the monthly average this year to
>>>>> 139,000, versus 153,000 in 2011. Even the decline in the jobless rate,
>>>>> to 8.1 percent from 8.3 percent in July, was a disappointment, because
>>>>> it indicated a shrinking labor force as people gave up looking for
>>>>> work.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But properly understood, the report should not encourage voters to
>>>>> support Mitt Romney. That's because boosting tepid job growth requires
>>>>> stimulative fiscal policy — including spending to rehire teachers and
>>>>> to rebuild schools, roads and other infrastructure, as well as loan
>>>>> modifications for underwater homeowners. Mr. Obama has proposed all of
>>>>> that, while Republicans have blocked such measures and the Republican
>>>>> agenda rejects them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Republicans are even increasingly adamant that the Federal Reserve
>>>>> should do nothing to try to help the economy, with Representative Paul
>>>>> Ryan saying on Friday that monetary easing by the Fed would be a
>>>>> "bailout of bad fiscal policy." Really? The Fed, if it acts, would be
>>>>> trying to compensate for the dearth of fiscal solutions, the result of
>>>>> Republican obstructionism. The Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke, has been
>>>>> explicit in asserting correctly that the ailing housing market and
>>>>> contractionary fiscal policy are the biggest threats to the economy.
>>>>> He has indicated that Congressional action to address those issues
>>>>> would be preferable to more Fed easing. Yet the Republican response is
>>>>> to tell the Fed to back off.
>>>>>
>>>>> Worse, the Republican agenda misdiagnoses the cause of slow job
>>>>> growth, blaming taxes and regulation, while championing more tax cuts
>>>>> for the rich and deregulation of the banks and other businesses as a
>>>>> cure. Those policies, however, are precisely the ones that were in
>>>>> place as the bubble economy of the Bush years inflated, and then
>>>>> crashed, with disastrous consequences. They are the problem, yet they
>>>>> are all that Mr. Romney and his party have to offer.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the meantime, the pain of unemployed and underemployed Americans is
>>>>> all too real. Good jobs, like teaching, are being lost, while others,
>>>>> like manufacturing, are getting harder to come by as the global
>>>>> economy slows. In their place are jobs in bars and restaurants and
>>>>> other low-wage activities. Even the college educated are in trouble.
>>>>> In the past year, unemployment among college graduates under age 25
>>>>> has averaged 8.1 percent, no better than the general population. The
>>>>> situation is worse for high school graduates under age 25, whose
>>>>> jobless rates in the past year have averaged nearly 21 percent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tax cuts and deregulation will not help them. Federal spending to
>>>>> create jobs, loan modifications to ease debt burdens and further Fed
>>>>> action wouldhttp://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Comeventwithme
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProJewishProZionistGroup
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stillnotjustmusicanymore
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/whateverreturns
>
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Politics_Dailly
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/House_Of_Trolls
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/The_Free_Abortion_DebatesYahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GaysUnited/
>
> <*> Your email settings:
>     Individual Email | Traditional
>
> <*> To change settings online go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GaysUnited/join
>     (Yahoo! ID required)
>
> <*> To change settings via email:
>     GaysUnited-digest@yahoogroups.com
>     GaysUnited-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     GaysUnited-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

--
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.

**JP** Daily Quran and Hadith

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

 

 



 





--

Thanks & Best regards,
 
Imran Ilyas
Cell: 00971509483403

****People oppose things because they are ignorant of them****

--
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

The Lady In The Light Green Slacks




burkasrugly posted: "Fellow infidels, Please do not forget our fellow countrymen who died on 9-11.  Constantine tells the story of one woman who perished that day - Burkasrugly Eleven long years after 9-11 I am still haunted by the images of that terrible day. Please n"
Respond to this post by replying above this line

New post on actjonesboroar

The Lady In The Light Green Slacks

by burkasrugly

Fellow infidels,

Please do not forget our fellow countrymen who died on 9-11.  Constantine tells the story of one woman who perished that day - Burkasrugly

Eleven long years after 9-11 I am still haunted by the images of that terrible day. Please notice in the first picture in the fourth window from the right there is a woman, perhaps, in her thirties or maybe older. She has on a light green pair of slacks with a black sleeveless sweater. Fire has totally engulfed the floors below cutting off any possibility of escape. Moment by moment the intensity of the searing heat of the fire is growing. Everyone on the floor is faced with a stark, horrible decision. Do I painfully become a human torch or do I use my only remaining freedom and choose to jump to my death ? This woman was driven by the blistering heat to jump.

Lady in green slacks contemplates an awful fate

In the next photo we see her plummeting to her death. This could have been my sister, my wife or some other female friend. She smashed into the hard concrete sidewalk at about a 160 miles per hour. Decency forbids me describing what this does to the human body. No one should ever have to make that kind of choice about ending their life, burning to death or jumping.

Meanwhile, a few days later in Afghanistan that fiendish fanatic Osama bin Ladin was maniacally laughing over the destruction he caused that ghastly day. Thanks to Seal Team Six he will never have a chance to murder anyone else. His death with a bullet between the eyes was far more merciful than the death suffered by the lady in the light green slacks.

The lady in the green slacks was not a statistic

Then to add injury to insult on the National Day of Remembrance we had to listen to that Imam telling us that "Islam means Peace". This was pure bovine scatology. The first of many lies to be foisted on our beloved nation during the next eleven years.

Joseph Stalin, another ogre of history, cynically remarked, "The death of millions is just a statistic." The lady in the green slacks had parents, perhaps siblings, maybe a husband and children. She was an individual created in the image of a loving God. She had every right to a long and happy life. She was killed by a cruel, sadistic theocratic ideology of hatred called Islam.

Dear lady in the green slacks I will never forget you as long as I live. NEVER !

NEVER FORGET THAT SEPTEMBER DAY ELEVEN YEARS AGO

In hoc signo vinces,

Constantine

burkasrugly | September 8, 2012 at 11:55 am | Tags: 9-11, National Day of Remberence, Osama bin Laden | Categories: Radical Islam | URL: http://wp.me/p1t1Gt-Ia

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/2012/09/08/the-lady-in-the-light-green-slacks/

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.

**JP** The Brave Royalty

The Brave Royalty
 
Capt. Harry Wales – who ?  Harry Wales, who?  Yes, yes, the same Henry Charles Albert David - the Prince Henry of Wales - third in line in succession to the British throne, commonly called Harry Wales. He has began a four-month combat tour in Afghanistan as a gunner on an Apache attack helicopter.  It is his second tenure in Afghanistan and will fly combat missions in the country's restive Helmand province. Earlier  in  2007-08, he had served there as an air traffic controller.
 
Britain has around 9,500 troops in Afghanistan and has suffered 425 deaths since the start of operations.
 
What forced him to expose himself to such a danger?
 
Prince Harry, like any soldier, considers it a great honor to be in the armed forces of his country and go wherever it chooses to deploy him.
 
Imagine, honour to serve in the armed forces, and go wherever ordered to go?!  Strange!!  But where are our Princes being groomed to be the future rulers of this land of the pure?  The nation knows of their imbecility as combat soldiers, but they can at least pay a visit once-in-a-life to Bajaur, SWAT and FATA to boost up the morale of the troops fighting there!!
 
Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd)

 

 

picture of Marx and Obama together



------
 
                    This is the only known photo of
                     Karl Marx and Barrack Hussein Obama together!

--
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.

A lid for every pot



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Meetup
Date: Friday, September 7, 2012
Subject: New Meetup Group: Black Gay Male Couple Looking for Other Couples
To: majors.bruce@gmail.com


 
Meetup
 
New Meetup Group!

Black Gay Male Couple Looking for Other Couples

Listed in: Gay men, Gay Couples, Gay Male Social Group, gay, Gay Friends, and 1 more topic.
Organized by:
Prentice
DISCRETE black male couple looking for other couples to meet, travel, dine and hang with. We LOVE each others' company but would like to make friends with other DISCRETE couples. We are not into the typical gay scenes and activities.  We would like to keep our relationship/ alternative lifestyle as discrete as possible.  

Other Meetups you might like

DuPont Circle Gaming Group
790 Gamers • Washington, DC
Listed in: New In Town, Social, Fun & Games Night, Fun Times, Playing Cards and Board Games, and 9 more topics.
Hiking Homos
173 Hardcore hiking homos • Washington, DC
Listed in: Exercise and Fun, Outdoor Fitness, Adventurers, Outdoor Recreation, Gay men, and 8 more topics.
DC Young Couples
158 Members • Washington, DC
Listed in: New In Town, Friends, Couples, Music, Culture, and 5 more topics.
The Bachata Meet UP
2,000 Bachateros and Bachateras • Washington, DC
Listed in: Travel, Bachata, Salsa, Dance, Singles, and 7 more topics.
African American Couples Seeking Couples
20 Dinner Guest • Washington, DC
Listed in: Polyamory, Open Relationships, Bi-curious, Alternative Lifestyles, Swingers Parties, and 10 more topics.
Interracial Couples and Couple Friends
48 Members • Washington, DC
Listed in: Couples, Interracial Couples & Families, Dating and Relationships, Married Couples, Make New Friends
You might like these Meetups based on your interest in: Glenn Beck, Conservatives, Gay Professionals, Tea Party, Freedom and 152 more topics. Add more interests

Add info@meetup.com to your address book to receive all Meetup emails

To unsubscribe from this email, click here

Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668

Meetup HQ in NYC is hiring! http://www.meetup.com/jobs/


--
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.

Republicans seek to knock libertarians off the ballot in Virginia, Michigan and many states



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mark Axinn
Date: Friday, September 7, 2012
Subject: [libertarian-324] FW: Very bad news: Libertarian Party of Michigan et al v. Johnson Order on Motion to Intervene
To: libertarian-324@meetup.com


The Republican Party clearly sees the Johnson campaign as a viable threat as they have challenged us in PA, IA, OK, VA and MI. Below is the report from Michigan.
 


Order on Motion to Intervene
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 16:51:19 -0600

I am sorry to say that the Judge ruled today in favor of Michigan Secretary of State and the case has been dismissed. We are now in pursuit with Chris Thomas Election Bureau to confirm that we are still in fact able to put Gary E. Johnson from Texas on the ballot. Hopefully, we will hear from them soon. This is a sad day for Michigan Libertarians for the ballot. We worked very hard to get Gary Johnson on the Michigan ballot. I would like for us all to still make sure that we are promoting all effort for Gary Johnson, this should not change what we stand for or for what we believe is the right choice!
 
I will keep you all informed if anything changes.
 
Thank you for your Time
Denee Rockman-Moon
LPM Chair
 

From: WHall@wnj.com
Subject: RE: Activity in Case 2:12-cv-12782-PDB-MJH Libertarian Party of Michigan et al v. Johnson Order on Motion to Intervene
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 20:39:53 +0000

I'm sorry to report that Gary Sinawski reports the Judge ruled in favor of the Michigan Secretary of State and the Michigan Republican Party, dismissing our lawsuit to place Governor Gary Johnson on ballot.  Gary Sinawski indicated the Judge talked a lot about the State's argument that we should have moved faster in pursuing the lawsuit.   He is uncertain of what grounds on which the Judge will base his written decision.  The Judge indicated his formal decision and order will likely be issued tomorrow.

 

We have no idea whether the State will place Gary E. Johnson of Texas on the ballot instead, but they have said nothing to indicate they will not.  In fact, they emphasized in oral argument that the LPM could place anyone it wanted on the ballot, except Governor Gary Johnson.  I suggest that Bill Gelineau try to contact Chris Thomas tomorrow and ask him.

 

Bill Hall

 

From: Bob Roddis [mailto:bobbiswr@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 4:24 PM
To: Hall, William
Subject: Fw: Activity in Case 2:12-cv-12782-PDB-MJH Libertarian Party of Michigan et al v. Johnson Motion Hearing

 

 

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "cmecfadmin@mied.uscourts.gov" <cmecfadmin@mied.uscourts.gov>
To: do_not_reply@mied.uscourts.gov
Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2012 3:52 PM
Subject: Activity in Case 2:12-cv-12782-PDB-MJH Libertarian Party of Michigan et al v. Johnson Motion Hearing

 

This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended.
***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply.

U.S. District Court

Eastern District of Michigan

Notice of Electronic Filing


The following transaction was entered on 9/6/2012 at 3:52 PM EDT and filed on 9/6/2012

Case Name:

Libertarian Party of Michigan et al v. Johnson

Case Number:

2:12-cv-12782-PDB-MJH

Filer:

Document Number:

No document attached

Docket Text:
Minute Entry - Motion Hearing held on 9/6/2012 re [6] MOTION Summary Judgment filed by Denee Rockman-Moon, Libertarian Party of Michigan, Gary Johnson, DENIED, [21] MOTION to Dismiss filed by Republican Party of Michigan, GRANTED, [4] MOTION to Dismiss filed by Ruth Johnson, GRANTED, before District Judge Paul D. Borman. Disposition: granted(Court Reporter Leann Lizza) (DGoo)


2:12-cv-12782-PDB-MJH Notice has been electronically mailed to:

Denise C. Barton     bartond@michigan.gov, albrol@michigan.gov, bosa@michigan.gov, toddw1@michigan.gov

Eric E. Doster     edoster@fosterswift.com, macker@fosterswift.com

Gary Sinawski     gsinawski@aol.com

Nicole Grimm     grimmn@michigan.gov, albrol@michigan.gov, bosa@michigan.gov

Peter H. Ellsworth     pellsworth@dickinsonwright.com, jbanner@dickinsonwright.com

Robert W. Roddis     bobbiswr@yahoo.com, Gsinawski@aol.com

2:12-cv-12782-PDB-MJH Notice will not be electronically mailed to:

 

 





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list (libertarian-324@meetup.com)
This message was sent by Mark Axinn (markaxinn@hotmail.com) from The New York Libertarian Party Meetup Group.
To learn more about Mark Axinn, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | support@meetup.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.

**JP** Fw: (¯`»¦«-A-Capricorn-A-»¦«´¯) " " Kamzoor Shaitan " "



--- On Fri, 9/7/12, Rubina Yasmeen <rubina_yas@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Rubina Yasmeen <rubina_yas@yahoo.com>
Subject: (¯`»¦«-A-Capricorn-A-»¦«´¯) " " Kamzoor Shaitan " "
To: Rubina_Yas@yahoo.com
Date: Friday, September 7, 2012, 1:37 AM

 

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem

Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmath Ullahi Wa Barkatahu

 

 

 
 
Ek Baar AAP Sallalahu Alaihe Wassalam Ne
Shaitan Ko Kamzor Dekha Toh Wajha Puchi Shaitan Ne Kaha Ke
AAP S.A.W ke Ummat Ki 6 Aadatein
Mujhe Kamzoor Kar Deti Hai
 
Har Kaam Karne Se Pehle BISMILLAH Padhte Hain
 
Jab Milte Hain Toh Ek Dusre Ko
ASSALAM ALAIKUM Kehte Hain
 
Jab Aapas Me Milte Hain Toh MUSAHAFA
Karte Hain
 
Jab Bhi Kisi Kaam Ka Irada Karte Hain Toh
INSHA ALLAH Kehte Hain
 
Hamesha ASTHAGFAAR Ka Ward Karte Hain
 
AAP S.A.W Ka Naam Sunte Hi DAROOD Bhejte Hain
 
*******************************
Talib-E-Dua
Mrs Rubina Yasmeen
********************************
 
 
 
 

--
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: Harry Reid in Hell

It is just TERRIBLY difficult for the dems to admit their king pin from Nevada is a Mormon too.
 
Gore TV missed the message
On Friday, September 7, 2012 2:16:47 PM UTC-4, Travis wrote:



Dr. Eowyn posted: "On August 23, 2012, I wrote a post asking if Reuters is turning against the POS. What prompted my query was this photo of the teleprompter president, taken by Reuters' Kevin Lamarque on August 21, 2012, at the POS's campaign event at Capital University i"
Respond to this post by replying above this line

New post on Fellowship of the Minds

Harry Reid in Hell

by Dr. Eowyn

On August 23, 2012, I wrote a post asking if Reuters is turning against the POS.

What prompted my query was this photo of the teleprompter president, taken by Reuters' Kevin Lamarque on August 21, 2012, at the POS's campaign event at Capital University in Columbus, Ohio:

We now have yet another Reuters photo, taken by Jason Reed, this time of Dingy Harry -- Senate Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) -- when he spoke at the 2012 Democratic National Convention yesterday.

At casual glance, the backdrop of leaping flames behind Reid makes it appear the Demonrat is in hell. LOL

The background actually is a scenic view of Nevada's red canyon rocks, provided by the 2012 DNC, as you can see in this video of Dingy's speech. I suggest you hit your "mute" button first ;)

I'm beginning to really like Reuters....  :D

H/t Drudge Report

~Eowyn

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/2012/09/07/harry-reid-in-hell/

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.

Re: Explosive Confrontation Between Netanyahu and American Ambassador

Nor flux in the price of catsup in Mexico
On Friday, September 7, 2012 12:41:48 PM UTC-4, plainolamerican wrote:
a US attack on iran is not in the best interest of Americans

On Sep 7, 10:38 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/09/intelligence...
> ****
>  Intelligence Committee Chair Describes Explosive Confrontation Between
> Netanyahu and American Ambassador****
>
> *Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. Ambassador to Israel
> Dan Shapiro allegedly argued over the Obama's administration's Iran policy.*
> ****
>
> Rep. Mike Rogers, the Michigan Republican who chairs the House Intelligence
> Committee, says that his much-discussed meeting with Israeli Prime Minister
> Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem late last month did, in fact, devolve into
> an sharp confrontation between Netanyahu and the American ambassador to
> Israel, the former National Security Council official (and former Obama
> campaign Jewish liaison), Dan Shapiro.
>
> Rogers told a Michigan radio interviewer earlier this week that he had not
> previously witnessed such a high-level confrontation, and he described
> Israeli leaders as being at "wits' end" over what they see as President
> Obama's unwillingness to provide them with his "red lines" in the effort to
> stop Iran's nuclear program. He also said that neither the Israelis nor the
> Iranians believe that Obama would use force to stop the nuclear program. (*
> UPDATE*: Rogers said as well he believes the Israelis will "probably" bomb
> Iran if they don't get clearer red lines from the U.S.)
>
> Rogers description of the meeting directly contradicts repeated
> Administration assertions that there is "no daylight" on the Iran issue
> with the Israeli government. Shortly after the meeting took place, Israeli
> press reports appeared suggesting  that Netanyahu and Shapiro had engaged
> in an argument, but Shapiro soon dismissed those reports, calling them
> "silly" and saying, "The published account of that meeting did not reflect
> what actually occurred in the meeting. The conversations were entirely
> friendly and professional."
>
> Rogers, speaking to WJR radio host Frank
> Beckmann<http://www.wjr.com/sectional.asp?id=38702>,
> painted a very different picture. He said the meeting, originally scheduled
> to be a discussion of intelligence and technical issues between himself and
> the prime minister, spun out of control when Netanyahu began lambasting
> Shapiro over the Administration's Iran policy. When Beckmann asked Rogers
> to describe the tenor of the meeting, he said: "Very tense. Some very
> sharp... exchanges and it was very, very clear the Israelis had lost their
> patience with the (Obama) Administration." He went on, "There was no doubt.
> You could not walk out of that meeting and think that they had not lost
> their patience with this Administration."
>
> Rogers said Israeli frustration grows from what they see -- and he sees --
> as a refusal by the Obama Administration to outline an endgame: "(I)t was
> very clear the overarching policy has been frustrating mainly because I
> think it's not very clear. What we walked out of that meeting knowing is
> that the Administration was trying to defend itself." By the end, he said,
> there was a "sharp exchange between the Administration's representative
> there, our ambassador there, and Mr. Netanyahu, which was unusual to say
> the least, but I thought at the end of the day maybe productive."
>
> Beckmann then asked: "Is it inaccurate to say it was a shouting match?"
> Rogers answered: "can say that there were elevated concerns on behalf of
> the Israelis." When asked if he had "ever seen that sort of thing before,"
> Rogers answered: "No not that directly. We've had sharp exchanges with
> other heads of state and in intelligence services and other things, but
> nothing at that level that I've seen in all my time where people were
> clearly that agitated, clearly that worked up about a particular issue
> where there was a very sharp exchange."
>
> Rogers went on to describe what he understands to be the Israeli
> frustration, and, apparently, his frustration, with the impact of
> sanctions: "Here's the problem.  "...I support the sanctions. But if you're
> going to have a hammer you have to have an anvil. You have to have at least
> a  credible threat of a military option. So it's having an effect, yes,
> it's having an effect on the Iranian economy. It is not impacting their
> race on enrichment and other things, and that's very very clear." He went
> on, "I think the Israeli position is, 'Hey, listen, you've got to tell us
> -- I mean, if you want us to wait' --  and that's what this
> Administration's been saying, you've gotta wait, you've gotta wait, you've
> gotta wai -- got that -- 'but then you've gotta tell us when is the red
> line so we can make our own decisions about should we or shouldn't we stop
> this particular program."
>
> And Rogers had harsh words for the Administration, which he says has made
> it very clear to the Israelis what they shouldn't do, but hasn't delivered
> a message to the Iranians with the same clarity: "There's a lot of pieces
> in play on this. But I think again, their frustration is that the
> Administration hasn't made it very clea -- they've made it very clear to
> Israel in a public way that they shouldn't do it, but haven't made it very
> clear to Iran in a public way that there will be tougher action, which
> could include -- and I argue peace through strength, so you just need to
> let them understand that that's an option so we can deter them from their
> program. And right now the Israelis don't' believe that the Administration
> is serious when they say that all options are on the table, and more
> importantly neither do the Iranians. That's why the program is progressing."
>
> I'll post more of this interview as it is transcribed, in a few minutes, in
> this space.
>
> *PART II:* When asked by Beckmann at what he believes the Israelis will say
> "enough is enough," Rogers answered: "Certainly when you walk out of that
> meeting you get the feeling that they are finally at wits' end, and that's
> what concerned me about the meeting."
>
> He went on, "I will say that as a part of their decision point or data
> point when they go through the process of should we or shouldn't we, it was
> clear that our American elections have worked its way into one of those
> data points. I thought, well, maybe that hedges their response until maybe
> after the election. But what I got out of that, walking out of that, wa,s
> yeah they're considering it, but at this point they're very frustrated
> because they don't' know what happens after the election, and their window
> for impacting the program they believe is starting to close."
>
> Rogers also said that what he calls Obama's uncertainty has caused problems
> for the U.S. across the Middle East. "You know, it's a very interesting
> argument when you're in the room and talking about options.The meeting was
> designed, it was supposed to be between Netanyahu and myself on some
> intelligence cooperation matters and other matters, when it came to Iran
> and Syria and other things, and kind of devolved into this meeting where
> the  ambassador was confronted directly... what was very apparent to me was
> a lot of frustration with the lack of clarity and the uncertainty about
> what their position is on the Iranian nuclear program. And that's what I
> think I saw across the Middle East. The uncertainty about where the United
> States' position is on those questions has created lots of problems and
> anxiety that I think doesn't serve the world well and doesn't serve peace
> well."
>
> Rogers spoke, as well, about the Iranian nuclear timeline: "So the big
> question is the dash. And the dash is, we know they have an enrichment
> program, it's highly likely they have a weaponization program. You have to
> have both of those parts for a nuclear weapon program. And the dash is when
> does weaponization mean you can put it on a missile and fire it off?
> The Israelis are upset because that dash question seems to be shortening
> and they already believe they have enough enrichment for more than one
> nuclear bomb. That's why their anxiety is high and the United States
> position isn't all that clear." Beckmann then asked Rogers how close the
> Israelis believe that dash period to be. Rogers: "The Israelis believe it's
> short. I mean, Netanyahu made it very clear he thought it was a matter of
> weeks. If they decide to do the dash it could be four weeks to eight weeks,
> which is a month or two months. Our intelligence analysts believe it would
> be a little longer than that. But the problem is, nobody really knows for
> sure. But we do know, and I think everyone agrees, including, you know, our
> European intelligence allies and other things that they are clearly
> marching down this road."
>
> (Thanks to Armin Rosen for transcribing the radio interview)

--
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: Explosive Confrontation Between Netanyahu and American Ambassador

First, and probably most importantly, most all Nations, especially
those
States in the "Middle East/South-West Asia/Northern Africa" are
swayed
heavily, and are dependent upon the United States foreign policy.
This
has been so for over a hundred years. It is not colonialism, it is
because of who we are,; that image of integrity and fairness.
Overtly
and subliminally, the United States' foreign policy in the region
directly affects what these Nations do internally and with their own
domestic and foreign policies.
---
that's their problem

When the United States is not clear on what direction it is taking, or
sends mixed signals, as it has done under the Obama Administration,
thjis
causes nothing but confusion and upheaval.
---
there's no mixed signals ... US politicians are governed by pro-israel
zionists.

There is no consensus to attack Iran, period. The American people do
not
have the stomach for any more nation building, and a Romney
Administration
in my humble opinion, would dare not attempt such operations.
---
opinion noted

Finally, I am confused by our foreign policy to acknowledge
Jerusalem as
Israel's capital. Israel was created by the United Nations, which
also
created a separate Palestinian Nation-State, which Israel now refuses
to
acknowledge or allow. *See* UN Resolution 242. Jerusalem is and was
to
be an "Open City"; because of it's religious significance to
Christianity, Judaism and Islam.
---
let the UN, israel and the pals work it out as it's not an American
decision to make.

It would seem to me that the United States' foreign policy should be
an
uncompromising demand for the Jews to remove their illicit,
expansionist encampments in East Jerusalem and the West Bank and for
Israel
to allow for and acknowledge a separate Palestine. That alll Arab
Nation-States must acknowledge Israel's sovereignty and right to
exist. It
goes without saying that Israel has a right to defend itself.
---
on these things we agree

On Sep 7, 1:56 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Guten Abend from Köln Everyone!
>
> Simplified,  a couple of thoughts, as well as observation.....
>
> First, and probably most importantly, most all Nations,   especially those
> States in the "Middle East/South-West Asia/Northern Africa"  are swayed
> heavily, and are dependent upon the United States foreign policy.   This
> has been so for over a hundred years.   It is not colonialism,  it is
> because of who we are,;  that image of integrity and fairness.   Overtly
> and subliminally,   the United States'  foreign policy in the region
> directly affects what these Nations do internally and with their own
> domestic and foreign policies.
>
> When the United States is not clear on what direction it is taking, or
> sends mixed signals,  as it has done under the Obama Administration, thjis
> causes nothing but confusion and upheaval.
>
> There is no consensus to attack Iran,  period. The American people do not
> have the stomach for any more nation building, and a Romney Administration
> in my humble opinion,  would dare not attempt such operations.
>
> Finally,   I am confused by our foreign policy to acknowledge Jerusalem as
> Israel's capital.   Israel was created by the United Nations,  which also
> created a separate Palestinian Nation-State,  which Israel now refuses to
> acknowledge or allow.   *See* UN Resolution 242.  Jerusalem is and was to
> be an "Open City";  because of it's religious significance to
> Christianity,  Judaism and Islam.
>
> It would seem to me that the United States' foreign policy should be an
> uncompromising demand for the Jews to remove their illicit,
> expansionist encampments in East Jerusalem and the West Bank and for Israel
> to allow for and acknowledge a separate Palestine.   That alll Arab
> Nation-States must acknowledge Israel's sovereignty and right to exist.  It
> goes without saying that Israel has a right to defend itself.
>
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 6:41 PM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > a US attack on iran is not in the best interest of Americans
>
> > On Sep 7, 10:38 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/09/intelligence...
> > > ****
> > >  Intelligence Committee Chair Describes Explosive Confrontation Between
> > > Netanyahu and American Ambassador****
>
> > > *Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. Ambassador to Israel
> > > Dan Shapiro allegedly argued over the Obama's administration's Iran
> > policy.*
> > > ****
>
> > > Rep. Mike Rogers, the Michigan Republican who chairs the House
> > Intelligence
> > > Committee, says that his much-discussed meeting with Israeli Prime
> > Minister
> > > Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem late last month did, in fact, devolve
> > into
> > > an sharp confrontation between Netanyahu and the American ambassador to
> > > Israel, the former National Security Council official (and former Obama
> > > campaign Jewish liaison), Dan Shapiro.
>
> > > Rogers told a Michigan radio interviewer earlier this week that he had
> > not
> > > previously witnessed such a high-level confrontation, and he described
> > > Israeli leaders as being at "wits' end" over what they see as President
> > > Obama's unwillingness to provide them with his "red lines" in the effort
> > to
> > > stop Iran's nuclear program. He also said that neither the Israelis nor
> > the
> > > Iranians believe that Obama would use force to stop the nuclear program.
> > (*
> > > UPDATE*: Rogers said as well he believes the Israelis will "probably"
> > bomb
> > > Iran if they don't get clearer red lines from the U.S.)
>
> > > Rogers description of the meeting directly contradicts repeated
> > > Administration assertions that there is "no daylight" on the Iran issue
> > > with the Israeli government. Shortly after the meeting took place,
> > Israeli
> > > press reports appeared suggesting  that Netanyahu and Shapiro had engaged
> > > in an argument, but Shapiro soon dismissed those reports, calling them
> > > "silly" and saying, "The published account of that meeting did not
> > reflect
> > > what actually occurred in the meeting. The conversations were entirely
> > > friendly and professional."
>
> > > Rogers, speaking to WJR radio host Frank
> > > Beckmann<http://www.wjr.com/sectional.asp?id=38702>,
> > > painted a very different picture. He said the meeting, originally
> > scheduled
> > > to be a discussion of intelligence and technical issues between himself
> > and
> > > the prime minister, spun out of control when Netanyahu began lambasting
> > > Shapiro over the Administration's Iran policy. When Beckmann asked Rogers
> > > to describe the tenor of the meeting, he said: "Very tense. Some very
> > > sharp... exchanges and it was very, very clear the Israelis had lost
> > their
> > > patience with the (Obama) Administration." He went on, "There was no
> > doubt.
> > > You could not walk out of that meeting and think that they had not lost
> > > their patience with this Administration."
>
> > > Rogers said Israeli frustration grows from what they see -- and he sees
> > --
> > > as a refusal by the Obama Administration to outline an endgame: "(I)t was
> > > very clear the overarching policy has been frustrating mainly because I
> > > think it's not very clear. What we walked out of that meeting knowing is
> > > that the Administration was trying to defend itself." By the end, he
> > said,
> > > there was a "sharp exchange between the Administration's representative
> > > there, our ambassador there, and Mr. Netanyahu, which was unusual to say
> > > the least, but I thought at the end of the day maybe productive."
>
> > > Beckmann then asked: "Is it inaccurate to say it was a shouting match?"
> > > Rogers answered: "can say that there were elevated concerns on behalf of
> > > the Israelis." When asked if he had "ever seen that sort of thing
> > before,"
> > > Rogers answered: "No not that directly. We've had sharp exchanges with
> > > other heads of state and in intelligence services and other things, but
> > > nothing at that level that I've seen in all my time where people were
> > > clearly that agitated, clearly that worked up about a particular issue
> > > where there was a very sharp exchange."
>
> > > Rogers went on to describe what he understands to be the Israeli
> > > frustration, and, apparently, his frustration, with the impact of
> > > sanctions: "Here's the problem.  "...I support the sanctions. But if
> > you're
> > > going to have a hammer you have to have an anvil. You have to have at
> > least
> > > a  credible threat of a military option. So it's having an effect, yes,
> > > it's having an effect on the Iranian economy. It is not impacting their
> > > race on enrichment and other things, and that's very very clear." He went
> > > on, "I think the Israeli position is, 'Hey, listen, you've got to tell us
> > > -- I mean, if you want us to wait' --  and that's what this
> > > Administration's been saying, you've gotta wait, you've gotta wait,
> > you've
> > > gotta wai -- got that -- 'but then you've gotta tell us when is the red
> > > line so we can make our own decisions about should we or shouldn't we
> > stop
> > > this particular program."
>
> > > And Rogers had harsh words for the Administration, which he says has made
> > > it very clear to the Israelis what they shouldn't do, but hasn't
> > delivered
> > > a message to the Iranians with the same clarity: "There's a lot of pieces
> > > in play on this. But I think again, their frustration is that the
> > > Administration hasn't made it very clea -- they've made it very clear to
> > > Israel in a public way that they shouldn't do it, but haven't made it
> > very
> > > clear to Iran in a public way that there will be tougher action, which
> > > could include -- and I argue peace through strength, so you just need to
> > > let them understand that that's an option so we can deter them from their
> > > program. And right now the Israelis don't' believe that the
> > Administration
> > > is serious when they say that all options are on the table, and more
> > > importantly neither do the Iranians. That's why the program is
> > progressing."
>
> > > I'll post more of this interview as it is transcribed, in a few minutes,
> > in
> > > this space.
>
> > > *PART II:* When asked by Beckmann at what he believes the Israelis will
> > say
> > > "enough is enough," Rogers answered: "Certainly when you walk out of that
> > > meeting you get the feeling that they are finally at wits' end, and
> > that's
> > > what concerned me about the meeting."
>
> > > He went on, "I will say that as a part of their decision point or data
> > > point when they go through the process of should we or shouldn't we, it
> > was
> > > clear that our American elections have worked its way into one of those
> > > data points. I thought, well, maybe that hedges their response until
> > maybe
> > > after the election. But what I got out of that, walking out of that, wa,s
> > > yeah they're considering it, but at this point they're very frustrated
> > > because they don't' know what happens after the election, and their
> > window
> > > for impacting the program they believe is starting to close."
>
> > > Rogers also said that what he calls Obama's uncertainty has caused
> > problems
> > > for the U.S. across the Middle East. "You know, it's a very interesting
> > > argument when you're in the room and talking about options.The meeting
> > was
> > > designed, it was supposed to be between Netanyahu and myself on some
> > > intelligence cooperation matters and other matters, when it came to Iran
> > > and Syria and other things, and kind of devolved into this meeting where
> > > the  ambassador was confronted directly... what was very apparent to me
> > was
> > > a lot of frustration with the lack of clarity and the uncertainty about
> > > what their position is on the Iranian nuclear program. And that's what I
> > > think I saw across the Middle East. The uncertainty about where the
> > United
> > > States' position is on those questions has created lots of problems and
>
> ...
>
> read 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.