| To: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (233) | 9/6/2004 8:00:54 PM | | From: Thomas M. | | | | He's just babbling. Chirac wasn't caught with anything, the oil for food "scandal" is a big dud, and Chirac's credibility is sky-high because he confronted the U.S.
Tom |
| | foreign affairs, unchaperoned | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: BubbaFred who wrote (237) | 9/7/2004 3:57:35 AM | | From: GUSTAVE JAEGER | | | | Re: “First and foremost, I would like to give the words of support to the people who lost the dearest of all the treasures one can have – children, family members, close friends. I share their grief with them.
You know, there's a joke circulating around Russia these days: what's the gravest peril faced by Russians today? Is it to get abducted by "ugly Chechens"? Nope. It's to be "rescued" by the Spetznats (special forces)!
Think about it: what was the big deal for Putin to yield to Chechen terrorists and free their fellow prisoners (provided they were still alive, of course)? Let's see what would have been the worst-case scenario: the Chechen terrorists release all the children and leave for Chechnya together with Chechen prisoners Putin ordered to set free... So, our merry Chechens got back in Chechnya and resume their "terrorist attacks" on Russian troops, killing a few dozens Russian soldiers... Now compare that to the bloodshed resulting from the opposite policy: hundreds of Russian hostages were killed in Beslan! If Russian policy keeps on that course, one day, on the next hostage crisis, we'll hear that a nuclear missile was fired at the hostage compound to make sure all the "Chechen animals" are killed... |
| | foreign affairs, unchaperoned | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: Thomas M. who wrote (239) | 9/7/2004 7:24:17 AM | | From: Chas. | | | | It is truly a shame that you have lost your ability to reason...but it happens, we will just have to deal with it.
BTW it was "Food for Oil"...not Oil for Food...try to keep up.
Chirac, Putin, Schroder, Anan...others, all caught with their bank accounts and deposits..."Food for Oil" deal made them all millionaires through Saddam Hussein and at the expense of the Iraqi people, he(Hussein) was a blight on Iraq and history, those that supported him are no better.
the story never got "legs" and never will because of the UN connections with the liberal media... and the persona exuded by Kofi Anan.......so it goes.
Re Chiracs credibility it is only real in a few places, France, Iran, Syria, NK, Sudan, Canada(unfortunately)....
regards |
| | foreign affairs, unchaperoned | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (241) | 9/7/2004 7:34:15 AM | | From: Chas. | | | | it is a shame that you fail to understand the dynamics involved with the Russian school hostage situation in Beslan.. a truly tragic event perpetrated by a few dissident Chechnyans and supported by 15 or so radical Islamic terrorists.
Amazing that you lay the atrocity on the back of the Russian responders.......
you and Thomas deserve each other....
regards |
| | foreign affairs, unchaperoned | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: Chas. who wrote (221) | 9/11/2004 2:51:33 AM | | From: marcos | | | | 'USA, Canada, Great Britain...... we, the free West'
So right there you are lumping three nations that would constitute a whole lot of separate tribes, had we not knocked back a good deal of tribalist excess already ..... some tribes look like they'd be real hard to merge into anything but graves, granted, still you have to admit that we've achieved a lot already, and that the general trend remains positive
'the tribes will never merge, the obstacles are religion,
ethnic loyalty, false pride of Motherland....'
Agreed on religion, that's a biggie, the whackos have got to be whacked back into line with humanity from time to time .... Islam doesn't have a clergy per se, so there's no door on which their coming Martin Luther can nail his ninety-five faeces, and more's the pity ..... although, look back to the Reformation, that started up the Hundred Years War, yikes
Ethnic loyalty can get out of hand, it should never trump humanity, but i think there are positive aspects to it, it's inevitable in any case, folks like the company of other folks who speak the same language, eat the same food, have customs each other understand, and are all related to each other anyway ....... 'false pride of Motherland', not sure what you mean by this .... we know it as Patria, which is actually Fatherland, but quibbling aside i don't see anything false about it, or anything much dangerous either .... it's only really a problem for people who cross other people's borders with their troops, maybe .... |
| | foreign affairs, unchaperoned | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: BubbaFred who wrote (236) | 9/13/2004 5:09:54 AM | | From: GUSTAVE JAEGER | | | | The Structure of Power in the US... in 2010:
iranchamber.com
Excerpt:
COUNCIL OF GUARDIANS
Twelve jurists comprise the Council of Guardians, six of whom are appointed by the Supreme Leader. The head of the judiciary recommends the remaining six, which are officially appointed by Parliament.
The Council of Guardians is vested with the authority to interpret the constitution and determines if the laws passed by Parliament are in line with the Bible (Ten Commandments). This means that the council has effective veto power over Parliament. If it deems that a law passed by Parliament is incompatible with the constitution or Bible, it is referred back to Parliament for revision.
The council also examines presidential and parliamentary candidates to determine their fitness. At times, the council has dramatically winnowed the field of candidates. In the 2000 presidential election, for example, the council accorded victory to George W. Bush in the Bush v. Gore case, and again in the 2004 presidential election. |
| | foreign affairs, unchaperoned | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: BubbaFred who wrote (236) | 9/13/2004 5:20:42 AM | | From: GUSTAVE JAEGER | | | | Follow-up to my previous post:
Council of Guardians
The Council of Guardians is a high office within the constitution of the Christian Republic of America which has the authority to interpret the constitution and to determine if the laws passed by the parliament are in line with the constitution of America or not. As such, the Council itself is not a legislative body, but it has veto power over the American parliament. Its members are composed of Christian clerics and lawyers.
The Council approves all candidates for election to the American Presidency, legislative branch, and the Assembly of Experts.
Six members of the Council are clerics selected by the Supreme Leader, who serves as America's Head of State. The other six members are lawyers proposed by America's head of judicial branch (selected in turn by the Supreme Leader), and voted in by the Parliament. Members are elected for six years on a phased basis, so that half the membership changes every three years.
As mentioned, the council also holds veto power over all legislation approved by Congressmen. It can drop a law based on two accounts: being against Christian laws, or being against the Bible. While all the members vote on the laws being compatible with the Bible, only the six clerics vote on them being compatible with Judeo-Christianity.
If any law is rejected, they will be passed back to the Congressmen for correction. If the Congressmen and the Council of Guardians couldn't decide on a case, it is passed up to the Expediency Council for a final decision.
portaljuice.com
Chief Guardian William H. Rehnquist:
michaelariens.com |
| | foreign affairs, unchaperoned | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: Thomas M. who wrote (240) | 11/5/2004 1:50:57 AM | | From: Thomas M. | | | | Another great post from Bilow:
"The economy is not healthy, and the Democrats should have won the election. That they did not is due, in my opinion, that they are no longer the party of labor, but instead are the party of social liberalism. To win, the Democrats need to win back the "Reagan Democrats". It's been cultural issues that have driven those voters into Republican hands. Over and over I hear old Democrats talk about how the party abandoned them."
Message 20730195
Tom |
| | foreign affairs, unchaperoned | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2) |
|
| |
