Bush or Kerry?

[tradingknowledge]

Some of you are making Kerry sound like some kind of saviour.

I rather think he is considered as the less worst of the two seeing some comments from his supporters

* "I know few people enthused about John Kerry. His record is undistinguished, and where it stands out, mainly regrettable. He intuitively believes that if a problem exists, it is the government's job to fix it. He has far too much faith in international institutions, like the corrupt and feckless United Nations, in the tasks of global management. He got the Cold War wrong. He got the first Gulf War wrong. His campaign's constant and excruciating repositioning on the war against Saddam have been disconcerting, to say the least. I completely understand those who look at this man's record and deduce that he is simply unfit to fight a war for our survival. They have an important point--about what we know historically of his character and his judgment when this country has faced dire enemies. His scars from the Vietnam War lasted too long and have gone too deep to believe that he has clearly overcome the syndrome that fears American power rather than understands how to wield it for good."--Andrew Sullivan, endorsing John Kerry, The New Republic, Oct. 26
* "I can't remember ever voting for anybody I disliked as much as I do John Kerry, at least not for president, but vote for him I will. I didn't have much use for Al Gore either, but I don't remember any real sense of hostility before punching the hole next to his name. . . . I can't persuade anybody to vote for a candidate for whom I can muster so little enthusiasm, but there must be an awful lot of people out there who are going to cast votes next week for Kerry who are, like me, discouraged by the prospect and needing one of those you-are-not-alone talks."--Mark Brown, endorsing John Kerry, Chicago Sun-Times, Oct. 27
* "I remain totally unimpressed by John Kerry. Outside of his opposition to the death penalty, I've never seen him demonstrate any real political courage. His baby steps in the direction of reform liberalism during the 1990s were all followed by hasty retreats. His Senate vote against the 1991 Gulf War demonstrates an instinctive aversion to the use of American force, even when it's clearly justified. Kerry's major policy proposals in this campaign range from implausible to ill-conceived. He has no real idea what to do differently in Iraq. His health-care plan costs too much to be practical and conflicts with his commitment to reducing the deficit. At a personal level, he strikes me as the kind of windbag that can only emerge when a naturally pompous and self-regarding person marinates for two decades inside the U.S. Senate. If elected, Kerry would probably be a mediocre, unloved president on the order of Jimmy Carter."--Jacob Weisberg, endorsing John Kerry, Slate, Oct. 26

 

[Bigbusiness]

It is now being reported that there have been at least 100,000 civilian deaths in Iraq during the recent conflict. They also say this is a conservative estimate and the real figure could be twice as many:-

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?storyID=6648908

Was interesting to hear on Question Time last night that the majority of Iraq people want Kerry to win the election.

 

[Perrington]

This is the amazing thing, the world wants kerry, but difference will it make ? virtually none....

bilderbergs will still be pulling the strings whoever is the "official" leader of any nation.

The only tangible difference for me, will be my ability to keep my food down whilst watching any presidential related news articles on TV.

 

[tradingknowledge]

It is now being reported that there have been at least 100,000 civilian deaths in Iraq during the recent conflict. They also say this is a conservative estimate and the real figure could be twice as many:-

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?storyID=6648908

Was interesting to hear on Question Time last night that the majority of Iraq people want Kerry to win the election.

At least medias makes it known unlike - it's interesting to note and ask why - under the "clean" war of Clinton for which they "omitted" to tell the public about this report:

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0420-05.htm

"The Unthinkable is Becoming Normal. Do Not Forget the Horror "

"A study released just before Christmas 1991 by the Medical Educational Trust revealed that more 200,000 Iraqi men, women and children were killed or died as a direct result of the American-led attack. This was barely reported, and the homicidal nature of the "war'' never entered public consciousness in this country, let alone America. "

[...]

"The Pentagon's deliberate destruction of Iraq's civilian infrastructure, such as power sources and water and sewage plants, together with the imposition of an embargo as barbaric as a medieval siege, produced a degree of suffering never fully comprehended in the West. Documented evidence was available, volumes of it; by the late 1990s, more than 6,000 infants were dying every month, and the two senior United Nations officials responsible for humanitarian relief in Iraq, Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponeck, resigned, protesting the embargo's hidden agenda. Halliday called it "genocide".

"As of last July, the United States, backed by the Blair government, was wilfully blocking humanitarian supplies worth $5.4bn, everything from vaccines and plasma bags to simple painkillers, all of which Iraq had paid for and the Security Council had approved. "

 

[TWI]

Some of you are making Kerry sound like some kind of saviour.

It may be unfortunate that he is the only other credible candidate but If he wins, he is a saviour, a saviour from another 4 years of Bush.

As for the battle against Islamic Terrorism, this is battle that GW is losing because he has turned it into a battle not just against the Terrorists but against the rest of the civilised World. He has even removed constitutional rights of his own people. If you do not understands that then I suggest you have not read many of the posts in this thread.

 

[TWI]

The only tangible difference for me, will be my ability to keep my food down whilst watching any presidential related news articles on TV.

LOL

 

[anley]

The world needs a strong leader, even if he is an imbecile on most things.

That's a great line, so funny

PS. Condolences for your relative TP.

 

[tradingknowledge]

They shut their mouth in BOTH PARTIES and even VOTE BY HAND LIKE IN COMMUNIST RUSSIA SO THAT PEOPLE CAN'T KNOW see below Congressman Paul Ron's revelation on Patriot Act ! Why isn't it still denounced in mainstream medias and democrat party supposedly against Patriot Act ? It will never be as above because they play a comedy of opposition.

http://www.restoringamerica.org/archive/hardin/congress_laws_unconstitutional.html

[Congressman Paul Ron] "the USA Patriot Act was not available to read or study before it was voted..

Congress Passes Unconstitutional Laws
by James A. Hardin
March 11, 2002

In an interview with Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), The Beacon has uncovered at least one Congressman that admits that Congress sometimes passes unconstitutional laws. Furthermore, Congressmen know that these laws are unconstitutional at the time that the bills are passed. In addition, Rep. Paul revealed that laws are sometimes passed without the bills being available for reading and that often bills are passed on a "voice vote" (not a roll call vote) so that people back home will not know how a specific Congressman voted.

A recent example cited by Rep. Paul is the USA Patriot Act. This bill violates several constitutional protections and defines a "terrorist" as anyone who opposes a federal government program or policy. According to Rep. Paul, this means that a person who differs with the government on issues such as abortion, gun control laws, Free Trade Agreements, the United Nations, or any number of programs and activities could be defined as a terrorist and investigated by the government even though no crime is committed. The USA Patriot Act also gives the government the authority to establish a National ID Card for tracking and surveillance.

"I've heard many conservative Congressmen expressing disappointment in themselves for voting in favor of this bill now that the American people are beginning to realize that this is a bad bill", said Rep. Paul. Rep. Paul also stated that the USA Patriot Act was not available to read or study before it was voted on and passed.

It seems that's it has become a habit within Congress and BTW this news below means that WAR WILL NOT BE STOPPED AFTER ELECTION. According to a strategic investment newsletter (chaostan) it would be even INTENSIFIED even if Kerry is elected and that war would be lengthy - according to them it would last 30 years !

http://www.optruth.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=draft&lnav=1

"On October 5th, 2004, with no debate and on only hours notice, the House of Representatives voted on a bill that would have reinstated the draft. The proposal was overwhelmingly rejected. Why was it voted on at all? This vote was a political maneuver, intended to put this controversial question to rest before the election."

...

"What are the details of the draft proposal rejected by Congress?
Would it be like the draft during the war in Vietnam?
Titled the “Universal National Service Act of 2003,” this proposal was set forth by Representative Charles Rangel (D-NY) and would require that “all American men and women, as well legal permanent residents, aged 18 to 26, would be subject to compulsory military service or alternative civilian service.”"

 

[Mayfly]

UN stands accused of betraying the people of Iraq

Originally posted by tradingknowledge

The Pentagon's deliberate destruction of Iraq's civilian infrastructure, such as power sources and water and sewage plants, together with the imposition of an embargo as barbaric as a medieval siege, produced a degree of suffering never fully comprehended in the West. Documented evidence was available, volumes of it; by the late 1990s, more than 6,000 infants were dying every month, and the two senior United Nations officials responsible for humanitarian relief in Iraq, Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponeck, resigned, protesting the embargo's hidden agenda. Halliday called it "genocide".

"As of last July, the United States, backed by the Blair government, was wilfully blocking humanitarian supplies worth $5.4bn, everything from vaccines and plasma bags to simple painkillers, all of which Iraq had paid for and the Security Council had approved. "

UN stands accused of betraying the people of Iraq

The $67 billion oil-for-food programme in Iraq, created to ensure that Iraqi families did not suffer as a result of sanctions, was an ambitious humanitarian operation mounted by the United Nations. Over seven years starting in 1996, the regime of Saddam Hussein was allowed to sell oil under UN supervision, on condition that revenues were paid into an escrow account controlled by the UN and used to purchase food, medicine and other essentials. Every contract had to be approved by the UN.

It was always obvious that the scheme was not working as intended; Iraqi children went hungry, and hospitals went without drugs, while Saddam furnished more palaces. Internal secretariat documents record that UN officials knew no later than four years ago that the regime was pocketing kickbacks on contracts, information not passed to the Security Council's sanctions committee.

But it now emerges that this was not merely a defective programme. So inadequate, corrupted and poorly operated were UN controls that Saddam was able to milk the oil-for-food accounts of at least $4.4 billion, as well as smuggling out $5.7 billion worth of oil under the nose of UN inspectors.

On the insistence of Russia and France (whose contractors head the list of profiteers) Iraq was allowed to decide who bought the oil, what goods it wanted and who should provide them. Saddam used this loophole to cream off cash by pricing Iraq’s oil well below its actual sale price on world markets and splitting the difference with corrupt middlemen, and by inserting hefty “commission fees” into inflated import contracts.

This was cheating on an epic scale. Yet not a single contract was blocked on price grounds; UN staff did not consider this to be their job. Saddam used the money to smuggle in arms, purchase loyalty and reward middlemen, and whoever else was in the vicinity.

Some UN-approved imports, US Defence Department auditors drily informed Congress, were “of questionable utility for use by the Iraqi people”. UN officials suspected, they told the Defence Department team, that items such as private gymnasiums, “high-end” Mercedes-Benz sedans and 37,000 other automobiles were used as bribes, or resold at a profit.
The UN stands accused of rank mismanagement, if not outright complicity, in a scandal whose victims were vulnerable civilians, some of whom died for lack of medicines. The loot helped to sustain Saddam in power and, tragically, some of it may still be financing attacks against Iraqi civilians and coalition forces and even UN and other aid and agency officials.

The UN has moral authority, or it has nothing; if it cannot be trusted to manage a humanitarian operation, why should it be trusted with other missions? For all these reasons, and because Iraqis are entitled to know who stole what, and why, and what they can get back, Kofi Annan could have opened a full investigation months ago.

He has now appointed Paul Volcker, the respected former chairman of the US Federal Reserve, to head a three-man panel, which can start work now that Russia has been shamed into dropping its objections to the Security Council resolution giving Mr Volcker the powers he requires.

Yet the UN still refuses to divulge which companies got what contracts. With two parallel inquiries under way in the US Congress, and Iraq’s new Supreme Audit Board poring over the books in Baghdad, at least a few of the facts will emerge and the guilty and the greedy will be identified, pursued and pilloried.

If you want to start talking about genocide then I really think you tell your friends on this board about France's little adventure in Rwanda?

Cheers

Mayfly

 

[frog]

Misguided

Planks and eyes come to mind.
Who has got the contracts now?
Where were the WMD?
How about checking your own backyard?
Do you write for The Sun?

Only half a story in your long post and a rather biased half at that.
Oh! I nearly forgot we're helping Arafat out now.Should be good for a few contracts.

Frog

Simple comme bonjour.

ps: Kerry seems to be doing rather well in T2W poll,hopefully the natives of the US of A will have the same foresight.

 

[TraderPattern]

That's a great line, so funny

PS. Condolences for your relative TP.

Thanks for the condolences. At least his team took out around 20 islamic terrorists, so his patriotic duty to India in the war against terror was not in vain.

 

[Perrington]

Well, for once in my life, Iam virtually lost for words....

People talk about the brits, the french the americans the russians..... the people with the power are all made of the same material, once they have power, they abuse it for self interest. Its clearly an individual human issue as opposed to a nationality issue. So whats the common theme to be established out of this knowledge ? Its quite simply a conservative issue again, these people in power are all fundamentally conservative's (greedy, uncaring, no morals, maggots) whether it be a french conservative, and english conservative (tony blair) an american conservative etc etc.

 

[LION63]

Post after post without any policies of substance (cannot recall seeing any policies) from the Kerry supporters/Bush bashers, that is how John Kerry has conducted his campaign. All that has been said is negative, nothing of any real relevance to the man on the street, nothing regarding pensions, health care, education, deficits, trade etc.

Someone even had the cheek to say "Conservative maggots"; what a clever observation. Others have claimed that the right is made up of lunatics and people on the fringe of society, what a bunch of hypocrites. You may well be quick to dismiss those that have different views and ideas but you fail to come up with alternatives or propose anything that will make a difference.

 

[Perrington]

LION63 A maggot should be proud to be a maggot but they aint proud, because deep down, being a maggot, is not good for the inner self. So maggots attempt to make up for this condition by being greedy, hoping that it will provide some personal equlibrium, alas, never enough for the true conservative is there !

 

[Noahedwinbeach2]

Post after post without any policies of substance (cannot recall seeing any policies) from the Kerry supporters/Bush bashers, that is how John Kerry has conducted his campaign. All that has been said is negative, nothing of any real relevance to the man on the street, nothing regarding pensions, health care, education, deficits, trade etc.

Someone even had the cheek to say "Conservative maggots"; what a clever observation. Others have claimed that the right is made up of lunatics and people on the fringe of society, what a bunch of hypocrites. You may well be quick to dismiss those that have different views and ideas but you fail to come up with alternatives or propose anything that will make a difference.

Ok this is my final post lol. I have to agree with LION on this one. I am not going to bash the democrats, but Americans who are still undecided still do not know what Kerry's policies on anything are. I went to his website and it isn't clear at all. I downloaded his book on there and it was just a lengthy campain add basically with no real outline. Kerry should have had a clear outline of what he intends to do if elected President. Instead all I hear from him is how terrible this current administration is. How do we know if Kerry will not get in there and be worse? We do not know his position on anything or how he will change it. It is just like his comment on the current video of Bin Laden. He said he would stop at nothing absolutely nothing to get these terrorists. Well that seems to me what Bush has already done. He isn't stopping for anyone and that includes the UN and there crooked food for oil program. I do not understand this. Kerry isn't going to pull troops out of Iraq and if he does he is going against what he just said on video. Diplomacy hasn't worked with these people and that is why we used military force.

 

[Noahedwinbeach2]

Well, for once in my life, Iam virtually lost for words....

People talk about the brits, the french the americans the russians..... the people with the power are all made of the same material, once they have power, they abuse it for self interest. Its clearly an individual human issue as opposed to a nationality issue. So whats the common theme to be established out of this knowledge ? Its quite simply a conservative issue again, these people in power are all fundamentally conservative's (greedy, uncaring, no morals, maggots) whether it be a french conservative, and english conservative (tony blair) an american conservative etc etc.

No morals? Liberals are the ones who support abortion and homosexuality!

 

[lightning bolt]

haha. awesome post.

 

[Roberto]

How do we know if Kerry will not get in there and be worse?

We don't; but that's inevitably the case in every election in which the opposition candidate hasn't previously held the position, and is hardly a reason for maintaining the status quo.

 

[Mayfly]

Look at Bush's enemies

Originally posted by Roberto

We don't; but that's inevitably the case in every election in which the opposition candidate hasn't previously held the position, and is hardly a reason for maintaining the status quo.

Gerard Baker gave "us" a reason in Thursday's White Times in an article entitled "Look at Bush's enemies: they are the reason why he deserves re-election"

You can read the article here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,482-1332174_1,00.html

You may have to register with timesonline.

Cheers

Mayfly

 

[LION63]

Perrington,

It is sad that you feel it is necessary to label a conservative a maggot and that you actually believe that they are greedy just for the sake fo being greedy etc. Is it wrong to want the finer things in life or to go that extra mile to fulfil oneself? Are you saying that all those that measure their achievements in Pounds and Dollars are "maggots".

I do not see any policy statement or alternatives in your post or is it that you are simply against those that strive to make their world a better place?