|
|
#101417 - 06/24/08 12:00 AM
A discreet SOS?
|
Agnostic
Member
Registered: 06/28/03
Posts: 3122
Loc: Chennai, TN, India
|
Many of our members have feared that something bad may happen before the elections. Now, Charlie Black, seems to have sent out a discreet SOS.
Hello! Al Qaeda? Do you hear us? We need some help!!!
Who cares if innocent folk die as long as the person we are lobbying for wins?
_________________________
Harry ----- Most people would rather die than think; in fact, they do so.--Bertrand Russell
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#101418 - 06/24/08 12:09 AM
Re: A discreet SOS?
[Re: Agnostic]
|
ABMT
Member
Registered: 06/07/07
Posts: 1207
Loc: IL, USA
|
That's just ridiculous and hateful to think that that is what he is saying. If a BO supporter had said that I am sure the reaction would be different.
And why in your wording is someone for BO a supporter but someone for McCain a lobbyist? Interesting choice of words and very telling.
_________________________
Ann
Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#101424 - 06/24/08 01:23 AM
Re: A discreet SOS?
[Re: ABMT]
|
MattsKat
Member
Registered: 11/28/04
Posts: 2609
Loc: Here and Now...USA
|
And why in your wording is someone for BO a supporter but someone for McCain a lobbyist?
Uh, did you read the article? It wasn't Harry's choice of words to call Mr. Black a lobbyist. Mr. Black was in fact a lobbyist until just recently:
The comments also returned the political spotlight to McCain's advisers and, in particular, to Black, who has drawn criticism for his long lobbying career and his representation of controversial foreign governments. McCain has been criticized for surrounding himself with top advisers who were lobbyists.
Black earlier this year severed ties to the lobbying firm he founded. Would it be more accurate and/or palatable if the article referred to him as a former lobbyist?
Whatever...It was indeed a ridiculous and hateful thing for Mr. Black to say, but he did say it and now he deeply regrets it:
Traveling with McCain, Black faced reporters in California to acknowledge his mistake. "I deeply regret the comments. They were inappropriate," he said.
_________________________
Those who can laugh at themselves shall never cease to be amused.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#101425 - 06/24/08 01:30 AM
Re: A discreet SOS?
[Re: MattsKat]
|
ABMT
Member
Registered: 06/07/07
Posts: 1207
Loc: IL, USA
|
Matt, Thanks for pointing that out. I did not read it as I am sick of all of the hatemongering going on. I should have though. Thanks for the correction.
Ann
_________________________
Ann
Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#101442 - 06/24/08 09:14 AM
Re: A discreet SOS?
[Re: Agnostic]
|
bobbcat
Member
Registered: 03/27/03
Posts: 6375
Loc: My office.
|
Fact of the matter is though, as tactless as Black's comment was, it is spot on. This is a reflection of just now prone the American public is to knee-jerk reactions, not to mention its rather fickle nature. National security should be a top priority to everyone, regardless of whether or not there is a 'fresh' terrorist strike. Here's a rather tactless comment for you: I'd be willing to bet my next bowling tournament prize that Al Qaeda is purposefully waiting 'til after our election this fall to try anything, as they don't want to help foil Obama's chances of winning it.
_________________________
Bottom line, it's either M-TEC or Andrews.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#101444 - 06/24/08 09:27 AM
Re: A discreet SOS?
[Re: bobbcat]
|
ABMT
Member
Registered: 06/07/07
Posts: 1207
Loc: IL, USA
|
bobbcat, I think that you are right. They want BO to win. They know that he will not stand up to them. .
_________________________
Ann
Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#101453 - 06/24/08 10:17 AM
Re: A discreet SOS?
[Re: ABMT]
|
ahvasquez
Member
Registered: 02/07/03
Posts: 405
Loc: Texas
|
bobbcat, I think that you are right. They want BO to win. They know that he will not stand up to them. . But you call other people's statements hatemongering? I strongly disagree with you.
_________________________
Anne
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#101456 - 06/24/08 10:26 AM
Re: A discreet SOS?
[Re: ahvasquez]
|
ABMT
Member
Registered: 06/07/07
Posts: 1207
Loc: IL, USA
|
bobbcat, I think that you are right. They want BO to win. They know that he will not stand up to them. . But you call other people's statements hatemongering? I strongly disagree with you.
Ahvasquez, how in the world do you see that as hatemongering? It is saying he is too weak on his positions to stand up to terrorism. I am addressing an issue here. You are reading into it somehow.
_________________________
Ann
Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#101459 - 06/24/08 10:31 AM
Re: A discreet SOS?
[Re: ahvasquez]
|
bobbcat
Member
Registered: 03/27/03
Posts: 6375
Loc: My office.
|
You might find the following excerpt from this excellent piece written by Bill Bennett to be interesting:Barack Obama’s foreign policy is dangerous, naïve, and betrays a profound misreading of history. For at least the past five years, Democrats and liberals have said our standing in the international community has suffered from a “cowboy” or “go-it-alone” foreign policy. While politicians with favorable views of our president have been elected in Germany, Italy, France, and elsewhere, Barack Obama is giving cause to make our allies even more nervous. This past Sunday’s Washington Post reported, “European officials are increasingly concerned that Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign pledge to begin direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program without preconditions could potentially rupture U.S. relations with key European allies early in a potential Obama administration.”
Barack Obama’s stance toward Iran is as troubling as it is dangerous. By stating and maintaining that he would negotiate with Iran, “without preconditions,” and within his first year of office, he will give credibility to, and reward for his intransigence, the head of state of the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism. Such a meeting will also undermine and send the exact wrong signal to Iranian dissidents. And, he will lower the prestige of the office of the president: In his own words he stated, “If we think that meeting with the president is a privilege that has to be earned, I think that reinforces the sense that we stand above the rest of the world at this point in time.” Not only has his stance toward Iran caused concern among our allies in Europe, U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton called it, “Irresponsible and frankly naïve.”
Barack Obama’s Iraq policy will hand al-Qaeda a victory and undercut our entire position in the Middle East, while at the same time put a huge source of oil in the hands of terrorists. Barack Obama brags on his website that “In January 2007, he introduced legislation in the Senate to remove all of our combat troops from Iraq by March 2008.” His website further states that “Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months.” This, at the very time our greatest successes in Iraq have taken place. And yet, as Gen. David Petraeus has stated (along with other military experts from Michael O’Hanlon at the Brookings Institution to members of the U.S. military), our progress in Iraq is “fragile and reversible.”
Obama’s post-invasion analysis of Iraq is anything but credible or consistent, leading one to even greater doubt about his strategy as commander-in-chief. When President Bush announced the surge strategy in January 2007, Barack Obama opposed it, saying it “would not prove to be one that changes the dynamics significantly,” and that “the President’s strategy will not work.” Of course, the surge is one of the greatest achievements in Iraq since the initial months of the invasion, and is has reversed much of the loss suffered since the invasion.
Beyond these miscalculations and poor judgment on Iraq strategy, Obama has been anything but consistent on Iraq. For example, the same year (2007) he stated it would be a good idea to bring home the U.S. troops from Iraq within March of 2008, three months later he stated, we should bring them home “immediately…. Not in six months or one year — now.” In what way would foreign leaders, regardless of political stripes, walk away from these facts and not think that BO is weak on foreign policy?
_________________________
Bottom line, it's either M-TEC or Andrews.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#101461 - 06/24/08 10:31 AM
Re: A discreet SOS?
[Re: ABMT]
|
Kimmbberr
Member
Registered: 10/04/99
Posts: 1843
Loc: Corvallis, Oregon
|
As unfortunate of a statement that was, I can't help but think it was truthful. I don't believe he said he wanted an attack.
Freedom of speech means you can say any stupid thing you want. I say let these guys talk, they are just digging a deeper hole for themselves.
_________________________
Kimi
What Washington needs is adult supervision. Obama, 2006
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|