**JP** AAJ K COLUMN 08 OCTOBER'2011

ASSALAAM-O-ALAIKUM

AUR

SUBAH BAKHAIR.

Kashif Chatha

Sheikhupura

--
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

**JP** the extract from this lecture is....

The extract of this lecture that I took out to remember is, those who create divisions among muslims in any form, are shaitans...whether the division is in the form of political parties, or groups, or military-civilian divide, or countries, or races, or languages.... or any other basis.... it is time to unite, for peace and in love...and that is our job.... to do away with all divisions and bring muslims closer...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTZdb8HtAR8&feature=related

Dark Days Ahead

Dark Days Ahead
Posted by Christopher Manion on October 7, 2011 01:03 PM

Ruminations amidst the ruins:

If Romney wins the GOP nomination, he will lose the general election. If Obama wins, he will be impeached. He will thus buy impeachment insurance next year in much the same way that Bush did – with his selection of an abominable vice-president: he will dump Joe and run with Hillary Clinton. "Now impeach me," he will chortle!

Obama had better think hard on this. On the one hand, the Chicago mob that runs him will tell him it's a no-brainer. One the other hand, the Chicago mob has a longer memory than most pols: they remember JFK's selection of Lyndon Johnson, who Bobby was sure would turn down the offer. Instead, LBJ, accepted, and, after two years of drinking alone in his senate office (as VP and the senate's presiding officer, he had a luxurious office there), he, shall we say, finally used the opportunity to his advantage.

History never repeats itself, of course, but Bill and Hill rhyme, and so does history.

5 questions ... for Ron Paul

5 questions ... for Ron Paul
12:02 AM, Oct. 6, 2011
Written by The Des Moines Register
­ Interviewed by Mary Stegmeir


1. You voted for the initial Afghanistan invasion, targeting those who attacked the U.S. on 9/11. Many people view you as a complete pacifist. Are those people correct or is your foreign policy view misunderstood?

A: I don't like war, I like peace -- and we should have a lot more peace and a lot less war -- but I'm not a pacifist. I'm a stickler for the Constitution. If we fought wars only when they were declared, we'd have a lot less fighting. Going after the people who were responsible for 9/11 is a different story. As a matter of fact, I did vote for the authority (to target the 9/11 terrorists), but immediately I realized that the authority would be abused, so I introduced a resolution to re-emphasize the principle of letters of marque and reprisal, which would be the authority to go after specific groups. They used that in our early history to go after the pirates. I thought this would be a good example where you can't declare war against a country, but you can go after a smaller group. So, I was strongly opposed to occupation and taking over countries that had nothing to do with (9/11). Besides, if they were following that logic, they should have invaded Saudi Arabia. Fifteen of (the 9/11 terrorists) came from Saudi Arabia.

2. Could you beat President Obama in a debate?

A: I would have to believe I could (laughs), but I don't go around talking about that. I think that I've been known to be very, very consistent, and he hasn't been. So I think that would be enough to win the debate.

3. Even in a free market, costs for hospitals, doctors, drug and insurance companies can be high. You don't support Obamacare. What could be done to correct that situation?

A: If you take something that is completely out of the government's realm like computers and cellphones and televisions -- even with inflation -- prices go down because there is competition. Can you imagine if there were one (cellphone) company, or if we had government regulations requiring cellphones for everybody? It would have been a rip-off. The corporations would have run it, and prices would have skyrocketed. So there should be more competition in medicine.… There's too many regulations. The drug companies and the insurance companies come in and they control it. They make more money, and patients get poorer medical care, and the doctor-patient relationship is destroyed.… Prices would go down -- even on services -- if the market was allowed to operate. There's not been a market in medicine since 1965 (when Congress adopted Medicare and Medicaid).

4. Is it true that you have nothing to do with lobbyists? If so, why? And is it true that you accept no campaign donations from corporations?

A: I actually take a position where lobbying is petitioning, and you have to protect the right of all citizens to petition the government. But lobbyists generally stay away from me because they know where I stand…. They're not going to change my vote, so they tend not to come to my office.… As far as funding goes, there are some corporations that believe in free markets, so they would send donations. It's just so small compared to everybody else's.

5. You have many positions that do not resonate well with either Republicans or Democrats. Very simply: How would you get anything accomplished if both sides of the aisle are not willing to work with you?

A: In reality, that sets the stage for me because people are sick and tired of a system that doesn't work. Republicans and Democrats are always fighting. I work very well with opposition. I put coalitions together. You take, for instance, auditing the Fed. I had Democrats and Republicans support that. And a lot of Democrats and progressives don't like the foreign policy that we have, and they're unhappy with Obama. Civil liberties is something that both conservatives and libertarians and Democrats are concerned about. So actually, it's a plus to say that the establishment Republicans and Democrats don't agree with a lot of the things I say.… I think the people are closer to my positions than they are to either party's leadership.




www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20111006/NEWS/310060054/5-questions-for-Ron-Paul

Re: To win

Hey for what it is worth Gary Johnson is mentioned in the Washington Blade (one of DC's and the countries, bigger gay news and politics papers) today (page 20) where they quote two or three paragraphs I used in my politically incorrect gay blog, BigHomo, on the booing of the gay soldier and Obama's response

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Boos for Obama who will never "Evolve Already; why were the individuals booing not identifed?

There is a twitter campaign, #EvolveAlready, led by humor/advice columnist Dan Savage, among others, to get Obama to come out in favor of gay marriage, his position before he ran for and was elected to be President.  Obama keeps saying his position is evolving, and Savage and others keep accepting his invitations to attend fancy White House dinners.  Obama's hypocritical, evasive ass was just saved for another week on this issue by the hecklers at the September 22 GOP debate -- so much so one wonders if they were plants.

Has anyone identified the booers by the way?  If they were tea party organizers the media would have sought them out and interviewed them.  But it didn't seek them out and identify them.  Is that because they might have turned out to have Democratic connections?  Remember when a couple of years ago some rocks were thrown through windows of Democratic Party campaign offices and after a day of blaming the tea party it turned out the people who did it were all Democrats.

I do think Herman Cain, Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or even Jon Huntsman would have helped themselves if they had denounced the two or three louts who booed the gay soldier then and there. But how come if Barack Obama is the president of all America and the commander in chief of this soldier it took him 10 days to say something about it, and then only to score political points speaking at the national dinner of a gay lobby, the Human Rights Campaign. By then Gary Johnson had already denounced the hecklers.

Obama needed this as a talking point at the HRC dinner because even there, among Obama zombies and flaks, he was going to be pressed on his gay marriage flip-flopping.  And he does not want to spend political capital on this issue, as it would prevent him from "evolving" America to a socialist tyranny and a third world debtor nation.

ShareThis

--
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.