President's Speech

my first 50

If you lived in the USA and made that statement and someone notified the Secret Service you would be arrested, probably convicted, and be put in prison.

So you're saying they need to put in policies to keep jobs for techies here but not for the working class? You feel different when it's your own profession that seems threatened.

The standard of living would probably seem about the same on average, but if you look at it as a ratio it's way different. The rich are way richer and the poor are way poorer. You may not see it right now in your area, but if you live in a middle class area it's very eminent. Perhaps people are living the same lives, but they don't have the 401k they used to. They're getting more and more into debt and there just aren't jobs for people who need to get back on their feet anymore. It's all well and good to brush this off now, but what's gonna happen come retirement time? Where's the money from the 401k? It's in the hands of the corporations who've taken it, multiplied it, and saved the profit for themselves.

uh....no, he wouldn't be....

do you know why? because we don't live in Iraq.. We live in a free country called America, where you have the right to say whatefver the fuck you want..

and if you have a problem with free speech, go fuck a goat!!!


:-))

Yes, well I live in Australia.

So you can suck my meaty fat one! And so can the FBI and CIA!

Eat a dick, boys!

If you talk to the old timers that lived in the fifties and had families they will tell you that the standard of living has declined in the sense that it took one working person to have what it now, generally speaking, takes two working people to have. In example, buy a home, new car etc.

You are wrong. What he said is a violation of federal criminal law and many people have been prosecuted for it.

You can go to jail for having the anarchist cookbook on your website now. Posessing that material and displaying that you disagree with the government makes you a terrorist. Thanks to the patriot act you can get life for that chief. Welcome to the days of zero tolerance.

I should also throw in the fact that high tech jobs don't exist. 4 years ago I was a sophmore in high school. I went to a college fair at school and I was told that if I get certified in Cisco networking I would be guaranteed a starting salary of either $80,000 a year or $150,000 a year. Now see what happened? Everyone got these high tech degrees and seriously, how many jobs are there in networking? Establishments that need sysadmins have thousands to choose from for a handful of positions. So it's time for these guys to get a blue collar job. Where did all the blue collar jobs go? Countries like China because they can be paid 1/100 to 1/1000 of the salary they'd get here.

Plus you've got the problem of the already poor areas. Kids are born into a situation where they can't get schooling, and can't even get a job at a factory because they're all gone. They have 2 choices: crime or debt. Most choose both.

Now I don't know if any of you are familiar with how life in the hood works, but here it goes:

You need a place so you live in the projects. You've got a place, you need to eat. You either get a refrigerator so you can store your own food or you eat out. Eating out is expensive but you dont have the money for a fridge so you do it anyway. Eventually you decide you really need the fridge but cant afford it, so you rent one. Renting one can end up costing you 10x more than the actual fridge would but you just dont have the cash to get one yourself and in the ghetto you don't have credit. That's an average life in the hood.

Now the middle class seems to be doing good for themselves, but the truth is that they're all in debt, and their assets are losing value like crazy. 401K is going to hell, stocks are going down, the kids who were being trained to be sysadmins and graphic artists are staying home, and their student loans are growing. At the same time gas is getting more expensive, college is getting more expensive, goods are made to be less durable, etc.

In essence, fucked.

you're gay....

you're gay'''''''


gay

gay


gay

Nice idea, but it doesn't stand too much examination: you don't need to look very far to find glaring examples of incompetent executives. Meanwhile many of the most successful individuals came from nowhere so to speak: certainly not from the higher rungs of any corporate ladder.

For that matter does anyone think we would have heard of the Kennedys if Joe hadn't made a fortune running booze during Prohibition? Would GW be president if ability were the deciding factor in rising to the top?

The vast majority of people are average and will make little impact on society one way or another. There are a relatively small number unable to cope without help and even fewer who really have what it takes to make a major contribution in some field or other. Initially at least the distribution of these three types has nothing to do with wealth, but with even modest wealth behind them, many of the average and poor will rise to some sort of influence or authority. On the other hand, most of even the best people born into poverty will live and die in obscurity.

Wealth would be a better measure of an individual if we started life on equal terms and we all had to earn our own. But we hand our governments and corporations to the sons and grandsons of successful people with little regard for whether anything except wealth was passed down to them. That isn't a recipe for strength but for weakness: you only need look at the history of European aristocracy to see where it will lead.

THREATS AGAINST PRESIDENT - 18 USC 871, makes it a Federal crime or offense for anyone to willfully make a true threat to injure or kill the President of the United States.

A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt:

First: That the person uttered words alleged to be the threat against the President;

Second: That the person understood and meant the words he used as a true threat; and

Third: That the person uttered the words knowingly and willfully.

A "threat" is a statement expressing an intention to kill or injure the President; and a "true threat" means a serious threat as distinguished from words used as mere political argument, idle or careless talk, or something said in a joking manner.

The essence of the offense is the knowing and willful making of a true threat. So, if it is proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the person knowingly made a true threat against the President, willfully intending that it be understood by others as a serious threat, then the offense is complete; it is not necessary to prove that the person actually intended to carry out the threat.

Good One Joe Six!!

Quite true. I re-read 1984 last week... the last time I read it was about 15 years ago. It scared the fuck out of me last week... much more than it did when I read it those many years ago. Why? With recent events, it seemed to be completely non-fiction. War = Peace. Newspeak. We don't torture prisoners, we torment them. They're not humans; they're illegal combatants... or muslim fanatics... whatever. Scary shit.

The world has been like this for a long time and people have always complained about it. It won't change either. Even without free markets, corruption ensures uneven distributions of wealth. The only lesson learned for our short lives is to be one of the 10% not the 90%. As my grandfather said to me when I was a child "It's better to be in a position to complain about the poor than the rich".

Out of curiosity (and sorry if somebody already mentioned this... no time to read the whole thread)... why do people assume that the Soviet Union failed because of communism? They were doing fine under communism. It was the arms race that did the damage. When the U.S. finally stopped building arms, the Soviets continued building, and continued building, at the expense of the social programs they were supposed to be maintaining. Eventually, their missiles more than doubled ours, but their economy collapsed because they had drained their resources buying missiles. Of course, the U.S. saw that as an opportunity to show the world that communism (and even Socialism is lumped in) can never work.

I don't support communism. But let's at least be honest - it didn't fail.

And on top of that, The Soviet Union weren't true communist. True communism has never been tried.

This is a war of oil. This is not a war against freedom or terrorisim. There are terrorist cells all over the world, yet after 10+ years, the USA goes after Saddam Hussein. Why didn't the USA go after him 10+ years ago and declare then? Needless to say, I would like to hear bush comment on his interests of oil. His family are Oil tycoons!

I wonder if Bush would send a quarter of million soldiers to war if the Oil reserves were given to united nations to split up equally to all UN nations? If his interests were purely freedom, this would be a plausible humanitarian gesture.

Why not ask Microsoft shareholders that bought in 1990 what they think of that

drew

For all you self righteous non Americans out there... I would ask you this...
if you are an aussie (I LOVE Australia) and the sydney opera house was destroyed with a full house (2679 plus employees/performers)
or
you're french and a loaded 747 flys down the street at the arch de triomphe

and you had several pieces of evidence that:

1. you are likely to be atacked again
2. the people that were behind it got funding or were ABOUT to get funding from iraq
3. that iraq has in INSANE amount of VX nerve gas that they cant account for (40mg kills a human guaranteed, and they have tons of the shit)
4. iraq SWORE that they had NONE all through the 90's until in 99, they said, oh ok, you got us, we'll destroy it, and suddently there it was, but not all of it. now we're supposed to believe that they are tellin the truth this time....


If you had this evidence, and you now felt scared to walk the streets, wouldnt you go after iraq? I guess if you're a fucking frog, you would just eat a croissant at them, but I always thought the aussies liked a cowboy that could kick some ass.

Drew

There is not now, nor has there ever been, a nation that practiced communism. In addition you have a poor understanding of the internal affairs of the former Soviet Union.

We were attacked, on November 2nd 2002. A big explosion in Bali, Indonesia, killed about 190 people and hurt more than 300 people.

Most of the victims were tourists from more than 11 countries such as Australia, U.K., Singapore and Japan. Newspaper reports said that Australians amounted to about 80% of the victims.

For the most part, Australia although sending a lot of high level law enforcement, it was mostly left to the Indonesian government to take care of it (still pending).

Some terrorism comes from racial disputes but most of the recent bombings have some connection with hatred towards the U.S.A., Israel and their allies in relation to the Palestinian problem.

You're right about Iraq misleading America and the UN, but the point to all this anti-war talk is this: Why now? why not finish the job the first time? this is not very good timing... he needs to take care of local issues before taking on the world.

I mean it would have taken less than a month or two for the US to replenish it's war stock after the Gulf war. Taking action at that time, would have had not only my support, but I'm sure the support of millions of people.

This current impending war is based on a personal agenda, an agenda created by George W Bush and his family. You can't sit idle for 12 years and then one day decide it's time... just because an un-related attack on your country has given you the right tools to promote your personal agenda.

In my opinion, George W Bush is an accountable war criminal if only one American or allied soldier dies in Iraq this year.

We have not sat "idle for 12 years". We have spent billions over the last 12 years enforcing the "no fly zones", patroling the Gulf for proscrided shipments of materials by sea, keeping forward positioned troops and materials in the region, and launching more than one airborne attack on Iraq. The word "idle" is not at all applicable.

As for being scared, America is such a huge country. It's a minor risk even if you get attacked. Do you think they could attack you more than once before America unleashes hell on it's attacker? I think not.

Which brings me to a contradiction... how can he jump from Al-Qaeda to Iraq as it were a comedy segway? shouldn't you complete one task before attempting another?

The WTC attack was a major fuckup on the part of the American government. Although caused by someone else, the level of security was so thin, that it would have never been upgraded if not for the attack on that treasured landmark.

Every time Bush tries to make the connection between the WTC and Iraq and terrorism, it makes my stomach churn. As if the only people that were lost were Americans... there is a reason why it was called "World Trade Centre".

It is so self centred to go to war on another country without the total support of your peers. This man is not fit to be president.

For George W Bush to dismiss the UN and not follow the rules before engaging in the act of war, would mean that there are a different set of rules for America... I hate to break it to you, but there aren't. America is just as responsible for their actions as is anyone else who wishes to sit at the global table.

Let's all hope this isn't the fuck up of the century.

The declaration of war on "terrorism" was general in nature and was not just a declaration of war on Al-Qaeda. There are a dozen or so well known terrorist organizations in existence and Iraq is a proven supporter of "terrorist" organizations in Palestine.

In addition it is incumbent upon any administration to protect the country from what it perceives to be an enemy, not the UN, and the UN charter allows for this.

war is ghey. None of you are getting paid by the CIA nor the FBI for your intelligence so why show your ignorance? Stop being armchair political analysts and wave your banter to your local VA or bingo group...


lets give the consipiracy theorists more reason to buy porn..the world is ending!!

Yes, there are alot of ignorant people posting on this board.

It will be the ignorant boys who will be playing with their toys in the sand.

I think too many buy into the news's rating systems.. and draw thier conclusions based on biased opinion....

Bush is given way too much credit... Everyone on this board wants to kill the messenger.. when he is advised by hundreds of other "specialists" and congressmen...

Albert.. your accusation is partly correct.. we want to protect the neighboring countries that the world buys oil from.. true... but if it were to line Bush's own pocket.. we would buy all of our oil from Texas and other oil producing states... at a much higher rate per barrel... keeping fuel costs down and keeping our own reserves high .. is one tactic to help our economy...

IMHO.. this speach was merely a prelude to war... as it appears inevitable... eventually you have to follow through with the threats at hand... Iraq now openly admits to having weapons of mass destruction... so either disarm... or face the consequences...

screw the speech and all of the media propaganda..

LETS GO TO WAR!

i need some entertainment in my life. I hope when CNN covers this war they wont just stick silly graphs and tables, and rather just show loads of bombs and killing!

If you think about it, WAR is more or less one long and extended form of entertainment. God knows how much the good ol media generates cash wise from all the advertising they get on their networks since everyone is tuned in all the time. Times like this when i wish i owned a news media network..