Richie

Joined

• started 23 topics
• posted 546 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Richie

• 
  10

  What type monitor do yo have?

  by JH in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  lcd or a conventional crt monitor?

  i have a crt 17", but will get a lcd 19" very soon, because it's time i get one.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Richie

  I have a flat screen ViewSonic 17" monitor - it's amazing how clear the picture is -

  Richie :*)
• 
  41

  World Court

  by Yerusalyim in

  1. social
  2. current

  so, the world court is upset with israel over it's wall.

  when will this kind of thing be addressed...which explains the reason for the wall.. .

  gaza's killing schoolchildren as young as 10 are being recruited to fight for the palestinian cause.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Richie

  just testing..........................
• 
  25

  The best place to live and why

  by Doubtfully Yours in

  1. social
  2. current

  i believe new england, particularly southern new hampshire, is the best place to live because.... 1- enjoy the 4 seasons.. 2- live free or die.

  less taxes!.

  3- the mountains are just glorious!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Richie

  I love San Diego! I have stayed there many months and it's truly a paradise. The best weather; in the summer it's not too hot but comfortable (not like Arizona where the temp can rise to 115), in the winter it's around 60-70F. You have all the attractions around you such as the possibility to ski, to hike, go to the beach, have plenty of great restaurants, wineries. Real estate is getting expensive (although not as expensive as San Francisco, gas prices are still too high there, but overall it's difficult to beat living there for sure!

  Richie :*)
• 
  12

  Political topic that has'nt been beaten into the ground!!

  by avishai in

  1. social
  2. current

  while the ties between iraq and al queda are tenuous, and i don't necessarily agree w/ the war in iraq, sadaam hussein was supporting terrorism.. he was paying the family's of suicide bombers in israel up to $25,000.00.

  is'nt this significant?

  no one talks about it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Richie

  I don't think it has anything to do with Sept 11 or WoMD which was what the Iraq war was supposed to be about.

  No, it's clear now that the intelligence said there wasn't - it is the politicians who were the ones who said there was.

  Bush now seems to have switched to using the "links to Al Quida" claims with Iran now. God help us. [ insert Fahrenheit 9/11 clip of his "fool me once" ramble ]

  Of course really the US should bomb iteself 'cause they have plenty of proven links to Bin laden !

  The Lies of the "Bush Lied" Crowd

  By Michael Barone July 20, 2004

  Official reports issued the last two weeks have conclusively refuted those who have been arguing that "BUSH LIED" about the dangers from Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction programs. The first report was that of the Senate Intelligence Committee. That committee has been rent by partisan divisions over the last year, but the report was unanimous.
  
  One prime conclusion of the report is that American intelligence organizations, like those of every other major country, did indeed believe that Saddam Hussein's regime possessed weapons of mass destruction and had ongoing WMD programs. That intelligence seems to have been mistaken.

  But given Saddam Hussein's documented development, possession and use of WMDs, and his refusal to account for their disposal, what intelligence evidence could have convinced a reasonable analyst that he no longer had them?

  As the Brookings Institution's Michael O'Hanlon -- a frequent Bush critic -- puts it, "It would have taken an overwhelming body of evidence for any reasonable person in 2002 to think that Saddam did not possess stockpiles of chemical and biological agents."

  So Bush was justified in relying on the intelligence. And "the committee did not fund any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities."

  So much for the wild charges that Bush manipulated intelligence and lied about weapons of mass destruction. He simply said what was believed by every informed person -- including leading members of the Clinton administration before 2001 and Sens. John Kerry and John Edwards in their speeches in October 2002 supporting military action in Iraq.

  The Senate Intelligence Committee report also refuted completely the charges by former diplomat Joseph Wilson that the Bush administration ignored his conclusion, based on several days in Niger, that Iraq had not sought to buy uranium in that country. Democrats and many in the press claimed that Wilson refuted the 16-word sentence Bush's 2003 State of the Union speech, noting that British intelligence reported that Iraq sought to buy uranium in Africa.

  But British intelligence stands by that finding, and the committee noted that Wilson confirmed that Iraq had approached Niger, whose main exports are uranium and goats, and intelligence analysts concluded that his report added nothing else to their previous knowledge. And the report flatly denied Wilson's statements that his wife, CIA agent Valerie Plame, had nothing to do with his mission to Niger -- it quotes Plame's memo taking credit for the appointment.

  The report issued last week in Britain by former civil servant Lord Butler reaches similar conclusions. It finds that Prime Minister Tony Blair did not pressure intelligence organizations to change their findings and that there was no "deliberate distortion" of intelligence or "culpable negligence." It supported the conclusion of British intelligence that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium in Africa.

  All this is significant because for the past year most leading Democrats and many in the determinedly anti-Bush media have been harping on the "BUSH LIED" theme. Their aim clearly has been to discredit and defeat Bush. The media continue to fight this battle: contrast the way The New York Times, The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times front-paged the Wilson charges last year with the way they're downplaying the proof that Wilson lied deep inside the paper this year.

  Yale historian John Lewis Gaddis has argued that George W. Bush has transformed American foreign policy, in response to the threat of Islamist terrorism, more than any president since Harry Truman transformed our foreign policy in response to the threat of aggressive communism.

  But there is one big difference. In the late 1940s, Truman got bipartisan support from Republicans like Arthur Vandenberg and Thomas Dewey, even at a time when there were bitter differences between the parties on domestic policy, and received generally sympathetic treatment in the press. This time, George W. Bush has encountered determined opposition from most Democrats and the old-line media. They have charged that "BUSH LIED" even when he relied on the same intelligence as they did; they have headlined wild and spurious charges by the likes of Joseph Wilson; they have embraced the wild-eyed propaganda of the likes of Michael Moore.

  They have done these things with, at best, reckless disregard of the effect their arguments have had on American strength in the world. Are they entitled to be taken seriously?

  ---

  Michael Barone is Senior Writer for U.S. News & World Report.
• 
  42

  Balanced Question for All Politically Interested Posters

  by bisous in

  1. social
  2. current

  we have so many vocal posters here, on both sides of the fence....any of you actually involved in your candidate's campaigns?.

  how many of you are working to get your presidential candidate in to office?

  how much time are you devoting and how?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Richie

  S ometimes a political figure becomes so hated that he can't do anything right in the eyes of his enemies. President Bush has achieved this rare and exalted status. His critics are so blinded by animus that the internal consistency of their attacks on him no longer matters. For them, Bush is the double-bind president. Read this:

  "If he stumbles over his words, he is an embarrassing idiot. If he manages to cut taxes or wage a war against Saddam Hussein with bipartisan support, he is a manipulative genius.

  If he hasn't been able to capture Osama bin Laden, he is endangering U.S. security. If he catches bin Laden, it is only a ploy to influence the elections.

  If he ignores U.N. resolutions, he is a dangerous unilateralist. If he takes U.N. resolutions on Iraq seriously, he is a dangerous unilateralist. If he doesn't get France to agree to his Iraq policy, he is ignoring important international actors. If he supports multiparty talks on North Korea, he is not doing enough to ignore important international actors.

  If he bombed Iraq, he should have bombed Saudi Arabia instead, and if he had bombed Saudi Arabia, he should have bombed Iran, and if he had bombed all three, he shouldn't have bombed anyone at all. If he imposes a U.S. occupation on Iraq, he is fomenting Iraqi resistance by making the United States seem an imperial power. If he ends the U.S. occupation, he is cutting and running.

  If he warns of a terror attack, he is playing alarmist politics. If he doesn't warn of a terror attack, he is dangerously asleep at the switch. If he says we're safer, he's lying, and if he doesn't say we're safer, he's implicitly admitting that he has failed in his core duty as commander in chief.

  If he adopts a doctrine of preemption, he is unacceptably remaking American national-security policy. If the United States suffers a terror attack on his watch, he should have preempted it. If he signs a far-reaching antiterror law, he is abridging civil liberties. If the United States suffers another terror attack on his watch, he should have had a more vigorous anti-terror law.

  Bush's economy hasn't created new jobs. If it has created new jobs, they aren't well-paying jobs. If they are well-paying jobs, there is still income inequality in America.

  If Bush opposes a prescription-drug benefit for the elderly, he's miserly. If he supports a prescription-drug benefit for the elderly, he's lining the pockets of the pharmaceutical companies. If he restrains government spending, he's heartless. If he supports government spending, he's bankrupting the nation and robbing from future generations.

  If he opposes campaign-finance reform, he's a tool of corporate interests. If he signs campaign-finance reform, he's abridging the First Amendment rights of Michael Moore (whose ads for Fahrenheit 9/11 might run afoul of the law).

  If he accuses John Kerry of flip-flopping, he is merely highlighting one of the Massachusetts senator's strengths ? his nuance and thoughtfulness. If he flip-flops on nation-building or testifying before the 9/11 commission, he proves his own ill-intentions, cluelessness, or both.

  If he doesn't admit a mistake, he is bullheaded and detached from reality. If he admits a mistake, he is damning his own governance in shocking fashion.

  If he sticks with Dick Cheney, he is saddling himself with an unpopular vice president, giving Democrats who can't wait to run against Cheney a political advantage. If he drops Cheney, he is admitting that the Democratic attacks against his vice president have hit home, thus giving Democrats who have made those charges a political advantage.

  If he loses in November, the voice of the American people has spoken a devastating verdict on his presidency. If he wins, he stole the election."
• 
  4

  Al Jazeera Finds A New Home In Canada

  by Richie in

  1. social
  2. current

  al jazeera, the middle eastern arab propaganda television station has been granted a licence to broadcast in canada on cable and satellite television by the crtc (the federal watchdog for communication in canada).

  both issues are outrageous!.

  the crtc will not let canadians watch the us fox television news network, which is the most viewed american news provider.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Richie

  Fox and Gophers
  July 19, 20040 (The Wall Street Journal)

  When it comes to Canadian identity, Fox News Channel is apparently a threat. Al-Jazeera, on the other hand, is just another point of view enriching Canadian culture. That's the message sent last week when the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) granted the Qatar-based, anti-American al-Jazeera a Canadian license. Fox has wanted into Canada since 1999 but has so far been shut out -- except in Ottawa, at the Canadian Parliament, which requested and got a Fox feed last August.

  The official justification for this double news standard is that al-Jazeera doesn't compete with any local Canadian-owned company. More than 100,000 Italian-Canadians petitioned in favor of a license for Italy's RAI International, for example, but on the same day that al-Jazeera got the green light RAI was sent packing because it would compete with Canadian-owned Telelatino.

  Then there are the sensitivities of Canada's culture police. A large chunk of Canada's political establishment truly believes that, left unfettered, the Canadian market would be overrun by American culture, as if it isn't already. A few years back the CRTC told Fox it could enter Canada, as long as its 24-hour programming had 35% Canadian content. That may have implied a little too much televised gopher hunting on Baffin Island, so Fox stayed home.

  What doesn't seem to matter to Ottawa's information gate-keepers are the wishes of Canadian viewers. Canada's cable industry estimates that up to one million Canadian households grab U.S. signals illegally, and the Fox network has received thousands of calls and e-mails requesting the news channel. Yet Canadians are stuck with CNN, which was grandfathered under Canadian law.

  The darkest interpretation of all of this is that Canada's liberal political elites find al-Jazeera's view of the world more compatible than Fox's. The Arab network is always putting the worst face on U.S. policies, while Fox doesn't mind suggesting that it is rooting for America to win when it goes to war. We prefer to think better of our neighbors to the north, but it would be nice if they gave Americans the same benefit of the doubt that they give to our enemies.
• 
  42

  Balanced Question for All Politically Interested Posters

  by bisous in

  1. social
  2. current

  we have so many vocal posters here, on both sides of the fence....any of you actually involved in your candidate's campaigns?.

  how many of you are working to get your presidential candidate in to office?

  how much time are you devoting and how?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Richie

  Even though I live in Canada and have little interest in Canadian politics, I love American politics. If I were living in the USA, I would definitely be involved in the Republican campaign for the re-election of Bush. Even though I am a (Canadian) bystander, I read and dissect many commentaries every day on political issues - I find them fascinating, especially during election time...never a dull moment!

  Richie :*)
• 
  20

  I, ROBOT

  by Yerusalyim in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  i took the wife and kids to see i, robot with will smith last night....great movie.

  my son is a real issac asimov fan.

  he said asimov would have hated the movie, but that he really enjoyed it.. come to think of it, i'd be hard pressed to name a will smith movie i don't like.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Richie

  I will see this movie soon - Also I can't wait to see the follow up of the Bourne Identity. I think it's called the Bourne Supremacy. I love those kind of movies - you literally sit on the edge of your seat, great action and suspense!

  Richie :*)
• 
  19

  Beck's beer = best beer

  by doogie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the german purity law.

  no preservatives.

  which means no hangover.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Richie

  Whenever I would visit Germany to see my mother (near Emmerich, Germany), I would make sure to drink the "Kolsch" beer (German beer orginating from Cologne or Koln) - it's so tasty and somewhat dark in color - I could drink umpteenth glasses and still not feel any ill effect - mind you the glasses they serve the beer in were rather small. I also like Sleeman and Labatt Blue (both are Canadian beers) - although I must say I am not a regular beer drinker - prefer my wine and occasional hard liquor with company. Cheers.....!

  Richie :*)
• 
  10

  new world translation inaccuracies

  by doogie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey guys.. i know, it's a little early for this...but i started thinking about it last night and couldn't get past it.. i'm in the process of moving and last night i was packing up some books.

  lo and behold...i come across a copy of the new world translation.

  should i pack it?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Richie

  yw Bubba - hope your printer works by now - if not, you could always email the link and send it to anybody with a (working) printer - good luck

  Celtic, it's good to look things over just in case you meet a "overbearing" witness LOL - cheers!

  Richie :*)