what is for you a relevant source?...nm
Posted By: * on 2009-05-28
In Reply to: Irrelevant source....try again....nm - Just the big bad
nm
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
How is this relevant? sm
So everyone knows he is an alcoholic. Yes, he is. And what is your point? I swear I don't know. Ted Kennedy is an alcoholic. So what?
How is this relevant?...nm
nm
I believe it is relevant....I don't want someone with zero...
integrity in the white house either. John McCain's temper or the lack thereof has never resulted in bad decisions. It is ridiculous to assume because he got angry and said the F word disqualifies him. YOu might as well disqualify the entire Armed Forces.
He is not as dangerous as Barack Obama who knows absolutely nothing about foreign policy...who wants to sit down and chat with terrorist nations...and would be crippled without Joe Biden.
No thanks.
That's not even relevant...(nm)
x
I hardly think it's relevant to ...(sm)
go back 60 years in history. Times were different then, the mind set was different, so it is not possible to have any kind of logical comparrison. However, if he were still around now doing that, then yes, he would be a war criminal.
The amazing thing is that you guys sound just like the extreme jihadists to me. All you want to do is destroy others and spread your religion. And for what reasons? Fear and revenge. You like to talk about being religious, just like the jihadists, but when it comes to something like revenge or torture, you put that religion aside --that same religion you would have everyone else believe is your life -- and you take your revenge and put it in a box with a bright pink bow to sell it. That is what I call a blight on humanity.
Why I am relevant...very simple!
This is the liberal board and I am a liberal. You are not. You and your playmates enjoy degrading the liberal posters on this board. It gets really tiresome. You and your bully friends need to find a different group to pick on, as it obviously brings you very much perverted pleasure as you CANNOT seem to stop and you REFUSE to quit bashing the posters on this board even when asked to by the moderator multiple times.
Who are you and do you have anything relevant to add to the posts?
If not, I suggest you HaHaHa yourself somewhere else.
the reason that I think it is relevant--
and I am sure that you will attack me for this--is that I seem to hear a lot of people saying that Obama is going to do this and that for them (money issues, etc.). So, I am afraid that if everyone puts their faith in him, our freedoms are going to slip away. More gun control, more government power over our money and our health care, etc. Eventually, we will become vulnerable. If you disagree, that is fine. It was just food for thought.
The most relevant portion of the article was cut out. This is the
Attendees of Bilderberg include central bankers, defense experts, mass media press barons, government ministers, prime ministers, royalty, international financiers and political leaders from Europe and North America.
Some of the Western world's leading financiers and foreign policy strategists attend Bilderberg. Donald Rumsfeld is an active Bilderberger, as is Peter Sutherland from Ireland, a former European Union commissioner and chairman of Goldman Sachs and of British Petroleum. Rumsfeld and Sutherland served together in 2000 on the board of the Swedish/Swiss engineering company ABB. Former U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary and former World Bank head Paul Wolfowitz is also a member. The group's current chairman is Etienne Davignon, the Belgian businessman and politician.
[edit] Mainstream Criticism
Critics claim the Bilderberg Group promotes the careers of politicians whose views are representative of the interests of multinational corporations, at the expense of democracy.[8] Journalists who have been invited to attend the Bilderberg Conference as observers have discounted these claims, calling the conference "not much different from a seminar or a conference organized by an upscale NGO"[9] with "nothing different except for the influence of the participants."[10]
[edit] Conspiracy Theories
The group's secrecy and its connections to power elites encourages speculation and mistrust by such groups or individuals who believe that the group is part of a conspiracy to create a New World Order. This is further encouraged by the frequent use of the term 'New World Order' by its members when referring to their ultimate goal of world integration. The group is frequently accused of secretive and nefarious world plots by groups such as the John Birch Society.[11] This thinking has progressively found acceptance within both elements of the populist movement and fringe politics. [12] According to investigative journalist Chip Berlet, the prominent origins of Bilderberger conspiracy theories can be traced to activist Phyllis Schlafly. [13]
Radio host Alex Jones claims the group intends to dissolve the sovereignty of the United States and other countries into a supra-national structure similar to the European Union. This accusation is also linked with theories asking for a merger of Canada with United States, hoping Canadian influence will be calming to American society and foreign policy.
From "The Hunt for Red Menace:" "The views on intractable godless communism expressed by [Fred] Schwarz were central themes in three other bestselling books which were used to mobilize support for the 1964 Goldwater campaign. The best known was Phyllis Schlafly's A Choice, Not an Echo which suggested a conspiracy theory in which the Republican Party was secretly controlled by elitist intellectuals dominated by members of the Bilderberger group, whose policies would pave the way for global communist conquest. Schlafly's husband Fred had been a lecturer at Schwartz's local Christian anti-communism Crusade conferences." [14]
Jonathan Duffy, writing in BBC News Online Magazine states "In the void created by such aloofness, an extraordinary conspiracy theory has grown up around the group that alleges the fate of the world is largely decided by Bilderberg."[15]
Denis Healey, a Bilderberg founder and former British Chancellor of the Exchequer, decries such theories. He was quoted by BBC News as saying "There's absolutely nothing in it. We never sought to reach a consensus on the big issues at Bilderberg. It's simply a place for discussion."[15]
Some popular media references to the group are in Fredrick Forsyth's novel "The Icon" where the group decides to undermine a nationalist Russian leader loosely modeled on Vladimir Putin (among others).In the movie Nixon by director Oliver Stone, Nixon, played by Anthony Hopkins blames "the cabal" for his defeat, Vietnam war and other things, as the edited portion of the Nixon tapes.
Bilderberg has been accused of having kingmaker power as prominent politicians are seen to attend the group before being elected while their political rivals do not attend. [16]
[edit] Meetings
1954 (May 29-31) at the Hotel DE Bilderberg in Oosterbeek, Netherlands
1955 (March 18-20) at the Hotellerie Du Bas-Breau in Barbizon, France
1955 (September 23-25) at the Grand Hotel Sonnenbichl in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, West Germany
1956 (May 11-13) at the Hotel Store Kro in Fredensborg, Denmark
1957 (February 15-17) at the King and Prince Hotel in St. Simons Island, Georgia, USA
1957 (October 4-6) at the Grand Hotel Palazzo della Fonte in Fiuggi, Italy
1958 (September 13-15) at the The Palace Hotel in Buxton, United Kingdom
1959 (September 18-20) at the Çinar Hotel in Yeþilköy, Istanbul, Turkey
1960 (May 28-29) at the Palace Hotel in Bürgenstock, Nidwalden, Switzerland
1961 (April 21-23) at the Manoir St. Castin in Lac-Beauport, Quebec, Quebec, Canada
1962 (May 18-20) at the Grand Hotel Saltsjöbaden in Saltsjöbaden, Sweden
1963 (May 29-31) in Cannes, France
1964 (March 20-22) in Williamsburg, Virginia, USA
1965 (April 2-4) at the Villa d'Este in Cernobbio, Italy
1966 (March 25-27) at the Nassauer Hof Hotel Wiesbaden in Wiesbaden, West Germany
1967 (March 31-April 2) in Cambridge, United Kingdom
1968 (April 26-28) in Mont Tremblant, Quebec, Canada
1969 (May 9-11) at the Hotel Marienlyst in Helsingør, Denmark
1970 (April 17-19) at the Grand Hotel Quellenhof in Bad Ragaz, Switzerland
1971 (April 23-25) at the Woodstock Inn in Woodstock, Vermont, USA
1972 (April 21-23) at the LA Reserve di Knokke-Heist in Knokke, Belgium
1973 (May 11-13) at the Grand Hotel Saltsjöbaden in Saltsjöbaden, Sweden
1974 (April 19-21) at the Hotel Mont d'Arbois in Megeve, France
1975 (April 22-24) at the Golden Dolphin Hotel in Çeþme, Ýzmir, Turkey
1976 no conference. The 1976 Bilderberg conference was planned for April at The Homestead in Hot Springs, Virginia, USA. Due to the ongoing Lockheed scandal involving Prince Bernhard at the time, it had to be cancelled.
1977 (April 22-24) at the Paramount Imperial Hotel in Torquay, United Kingdom
1978 (April 21-23) at the Chauncey Conference Center in Princeton, New Jersey, United States
1979 (April 27-29) at the Grand Hotel Sauerhof in Baden bei Wien, Austria
1980 (April 18-20) at the Dorint Sofitel Quellenhof Aachen in Aachen, West Germany
1981 (May 15-17) at the Palace Hotel in Bürgenstock, Nidwalden, Switzerland
1982 (May 14-16) at the Rica Park Hotel Sandefjord in Sandefjord, Norway
1983 (May 13-15) at the Château Montebello in Montebello, Quebec, Canada[17]
1984 (May 11-13) at the Grand Hotel Saltsjöbaden in Saltsjöbaden, Sweden
1985 (May 10-12) at the Doral Arrowwood Hotel in Rye Brook, New York, United States
1986 (April 25-27) at the Gleneagles Hotel in Gleneagles, Auchterarder, United Kingdom
1987 (April 24-26) at the Villa d'Este in Cernobbio, Italy
1988 (June 3-5) at the Interalpen-Hotel Tyrol in Telfs-Buchen, Austria
1989 (May 12-14) at the Gran Hotel de La Toja in Isla de La Toja, Spain
1990 (May 11-13) at the Harrison Conference Center in Glen Cove, New York, United States
1991 (June 6-9) at the Steigenberger Badischer Hof Hotel, Schlosshotel Bühlerhöhe in Bühl (Baden) in Baden-Baden, Germany
1992 (May 21-24) at the Royal Club Evian Hotel, Ermitage Hotel in Évian-les-Bains, France
1993 (April 22-25) at the Nafsika Astir Palace Hotel in Vouliagmeni, Greece
1994 (June 2-5) at the Kalastajatorppa Hotel in Helsinki, Finland
1995 (June 8-11) at the Palace Hotel in Bürgenstock, Nidwalden, Switzerland
1996 (May 30-June 2) at the CIBC Leadership Centre aka The Kingbridge Centre in King City, Canada
1997 (June 12-15) at the Pine Isle resort in Lake Lanier, Georgia, United States
1998 (May 14-17) at the Turnberry Hotel in Turnberry, United Kingdom
1999 (June 3-6) at the Caesar Park Hotel Penha Longa in Sintra, Portugal
2000 (June 1-4) at the Chateau Du Lac Hotel in Genval, Brussels, Belgium
2001 (May 24-27) at the Hotel Stenungsbaden in Stenungsund, Sweden
2002 (May 30-June 2) at the Westfields Marriott in Chantilly, Virginia, United States
2003 (May 15-18) at the Trianon Palace Hotel in Versailles, France
2004 (June 3-6) at the Grand Hotel des Iles Borromees in Stresa, Italy
2005 (May 5-8) at the Dorint Sofitel Seehotel Überfahrt in Rottach-Egern, Germany[18]
2006 (June 8-11) at the Brookstreet Hotel in Kanata, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada[19] See picture of meeting location at time of meeting.
2007 (May 31 - June 3) at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel,[2] in Þiþli, Istanbul, Turkey.[20]
2008 (June 5-8) at the Westfields Marriott in Chantilly, Virginia, United States[3]
[4]
[edit] See also
Trilateral Commission
So there has to be a discussion of posts for it to be relevant?
what a stupid, anonymous comment
Would these amendments be relevant for states that - for example - sm
have passed laws allowing medical marijuana use, but the Federal laws are still being used to prosecute patients?
What you say is true, but if relevant evidence is denied sm
or falsified, an objective approach is impossible. This is what the family members faced. They had to force Bush to form that commission to investigate. Coulter is now attacking them for that. They had a list of 400 questions, and got no answers. I agree with you on the wacky theories. I became interested in doing some research on the issue after hearing things around the area I live - Colorado Springs. This is the neocon capital of the United States, and home to Norad and Space Command, Ft. Carson, USAFA, Peterson AFB, Falcon AFB. They live and breathe Bush & military. At first, I thought they were only rumors. Norman Mineta's testimony to the 911 Commission confirmed them to be true. The second question I had was about WTC building 7. This building only had small fires and was not hit by an airplane. It came straight down like the other 2 into a nice neat pile. The owner of the building Silverstein said they made a decision to pull it. This is a demolition term for demolishing the building. Well, this is something that takes careful planning weeks in advance, not several hours. I am also hearing bizarre stories from troops returning from Irag and their family members. Mineta's testimony was shown on C-Span and here is the link. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y&search=mineta
I never saw the movie The Siege. Not a Bruce Willis fan. Anything with Matt McConaughey in it, I have seen.
What is the source for this?
.
source?
What is your source for this info? As in, how do you know this is true - did you see it, hear or, what? I really want to know. Where can it be verified or disproved?
There never will be a source on this
nm
Consider the source.
nm
Consider The Source
Sam, this is the same group of people who thought that what Bill did with all those women was okay, or simply a "private" matter.
So nobody in this bunch has ever had a pg teenager? And if any one of these women here would just throw (that's Demspeak for kill) away a DS baby? It's simply a continuation of what they do is okay and what those nasty conservatives do is just criminal!
Wow, that's just classy.
Source: About.com
su
And your source for this is? nm
.
Source please. nm
.
No source? Of course not.
x
what i the source for this??
I have never seen this before. Where does it come from?
And your source is?....nm
x
One source............sm
is the NYT, but you can Google the quote and find it in several articles and blogs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/26/international/americas/26canada.html
And what source exactly would it take
to satisfy you as being reliable?
SM, you have to consider the source,
this is the network that is fair and balanced, only if you are a democrat. These folks have an Obamachip embedded in their brain. Besides, this is a way to get let the guys and gals on here who are so enamored by their high priest a chance to get their minds off the fact that he could even come close to screwing up something or changing a campaign promise. Don't worry about double standards, they don't apply to Obama.
And your source is????? nm
x
And your source is???? (nm)
x
Well, consider the source............
The majority of those voting for Obama pay NO taxes, never paid a tax in their life, and rarely if ever held down a job...........
So why in the world do they see tax as a bad thing..... they've never paid a tax and will continue to NOT pay taxes and think Obama will just take care of all their needs. This is why they think "rich" is a bad word; they have no ambition, no drive, and never will, so for those that do, they must be punished for succeeding!!??
The lazy and ignorant are running this country through votes they really have no right having.......... IMHO
And your source is????????????? NM
.
And this is a source of pride? nm
The source of your post
I'm not sure why you cut and paste far-right-wing-biased sources as the "truth" in your posts on a liberal forum. In your above post you copied an article from frontpagemag.com and for those who know little about it:
FrontPage Magazine's main focus is on issues pertaining to foreign policy, war, and Islamist terrorism. It regularly condemns official enemies of the U.S. and is a strong proponent of the war on terror, the Iraq War, and Israel's military actions.[citation needed] It has also published articles condemning what it perceives as left-wing organizations and causes, such as the Democratic party, the media, the environmental movement, affirmative action, reparations for slavery, left-wing interpretations of feminism, Islamism, socialism, communism, anarchism, anti-war groups, the United Nations, and other matters.[
consider the source. MM is the sicko....
.
no source listed for this
chart. No footnotes. No data to support numbers. Not enough information to verify veracity - disregarded.
also, moderators have instructed us more than once NOT to copy other websites into posts. Must use links. Please abide by the rules.
Now there's a reputable source--NOT
Huffington Post? Daily Kos (Kooks)? Moveon? Media Matters?
This isn't surprising, just disturbing.
Where is your source? You should not spread
nm
Please cite source........
x
WIKI?? THAT is your source?? lol
edited, changed, and added to by ANYONE, right? You should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself as an MT to cite Wikipedia as your authority for ANYthing. I don't even necessarily like SP but you're making the case to side with her if that's how Barack's followers think/act.
We are still waiting for that source
nm
You're only source is obviously your TV set
xx
Once source we can look forward to where
the war chest. It's time to stop rebuilding Iraq and enricing their surplus coffers, get out of dodge, bring our troops back home and start rebuilding our own country. I would look for that from Obama sooner rather than later and certainly he is not on that 100-year time line of McCain's. The Iraqis gets their country back and get to govern themselves, we get our troops back, the direction of the tax dollars gets reversed and we stop one of the unspoken, yet most significant economic hemorrhages of W's administration.
We then turn our attention toward reversing the power and economic stranglehold the corporations hold over us by instituting taxpayer-friendly policies that put corporate welfare behind the welfare of our citizens. We build an economy from the ground up instead of the top down. Sound familiar? We've done it before and we can do it again. Once we do that, W's legacy of fear and division will takes its rightful place in annals of history and seem like just another bad dream we all had.
Well sure, look at the source of her income or
!!
This is a laughable source of
.
Not exactly an unbiased source!
Charles Krauthammer isn't someone whose judgment I would trust. He's been 100% pro-war policy all the way. Not surprising at all that he'd opt for McCain. What we really see is a lot of former Bush policy supporters abandoning that destructive policy and endorsing Obama instead. Can anyone cite an instance of a well-known real Democrat opting for McCain over Obama? I've been keeping my eye out (fair is fair), but have yet to see one endorsement of that type.
reliable source for this please. nm
.
Not a reliable source - sm
The Huffington post is not a reliable source. It's radical left-wing propaganda. It's even less credible than MSNBC.
The source is not the issue
the voting record is.
I just did and cited my source.....sm
so what are you speaking of?
Not a credible source
Can you point me to somewhere on Obama website that gets anywhere close to what this guy is talking about? The youtube was made by some obscure person, NOT showing the alleged speaker at any time. I have found no credible source for "barracks and uniforms" anywhere.
Personally I would support an addition to school curriculums that required community service as part of social studies. A local 4-H club leader called me the other day and asked if I could help her find community service opportunities for her 22 kids. I could and I did. I think before this economic mess is done we'll all help each other or we won't survive. There are a lot of opportunities for input on the Obama website. Time might be better spent flooding that site with your thoughts and concerns rather than posting here. I can promise you that I'm doing my part to flood the suggestion boxs, are you?
I worry more about the Clintons continued involvement in the government....like Ole Bill's "Foundation." .
According to you nothing is a credible source
and other liberal outlets who go ga-ga for the O while they sip the kool-aid.
Luckily there are plenty of other sources and articles about this. If you don't like an article that's one thing.
You should have said "I don't agree with what Obama said in the video. I don't believe he is saying it himself. I don't think he's a credible source because it goes against everything he's been telling us".
Get off the credible source issue. This argument has become a lame excuse therefore is laughable when we read that.
Source not credible
This is an article published by msnbc. We all know msnbc is a left-wing liberal rag. They have a lot to lose if the O is found ineligible, hence, they "use" their positions in the media to lie and try to sweep the issue under the rug.
The judge that ruled against the case was from Philadelphia. This judge was also afraid to rule against Obama. Judge R. Barclay Surrick is also a Clinton appointee. Hence, he wants a democrat president. Additionally, this was not Judge Surrick's decision to dismiss the case. Judge Surrick was faxed the ruling. On this faxed copy from Judge Surrick, the senders information is blank. That way the sender's identity could not be seen. But wait...this gets better. Judge Surrick received the fax from none other than a former law clerk of his, Christopher B. Seaman (they forgot to remove the fax number at the top of the fax page that shows where it came from). Christopher B. Seaman now works as an attorney for Sidley Austin LLP, and Sidley Austin LLP is the same firm that employed Michelle Obama, Bernadine Dorn (wife of William Ayers), and where Barack met Michelle. This is a clear case of "Conflict of Interest". It is most obvious that the order to Judge Surrick was written by DNC laywers. My my...what a small world.
The case is being brought to the Supreme Court to include the above reasons. Additionally, Berg stated...
What happened to ‘…Government of the people, by the people, for the people,…’ Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address 1863.
Additionally, the people in Hawaii who keep claiming they've viewed Obama's bc and "it is okay (take my word for it, I've seen it)" are none other than Obama supporters and backers.
I for one am glad this is going to the Supreme Court. If they determine it is not okay and the O is ineligible, you will still have a democrat as President, so what is everyone whining about.
|
