Political Thread [3] - CLOSED

Message boards : Politics : Political Thread [3] - CLOSED
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 12 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Carl Cuseo
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Jan 02
Posts: 652
Credit: 34,312
RAC: 0
Puerto Rico
Message 41270 - Posted: 29 Oct 2004, 19:36:25 UTC - in response to Message 41257.  

The NAACP could lose its tax-exempt status or face a fine if the IRS decides it engaged in political activity.

Under the law, nonprofit groups cannot endorse candidates, contribute money or raise funds for them or "distribute statements for or against a particular candidate."

Even encouraging people to vote for a particular candidate "on the basis of nonpartisan criteria" violates tax laws. The federal tax code also says that organization leaders cannot make "partisan comments" at official events.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Is this the same law that allows evangelical groups who believe GWB has regular visitations with god in the oval office tax exempt status?
Many god groups dont seem to be at all inhibited about vocally endorsing GWB as he's claimed to have inside info regarding the supreme will.

Is organized religion permitted to do that?
ID: 41270 · Report as offensive
Petit Soleil
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 03
Posts: 1497
Credit: 70,934
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 41273 - Posted: 29 Oct 2004, 19:52:55 UTC
Last modified: 29 Oct 2004, 19:53:06 UTC

Pentagon Seeks to Account for Explosives

First they were all gone when we invaded Irak, now we moved and
destroyed them, what's next ?

ID: 41273 · Report as offensive
N/A
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 01
Posts: 3718
Credit: 93,649
RAC: 0
Message 41281 - Posted: 29 Oct 2004, 20:46:46 UTC

Usama bin-Laden speaks! But this time he doesn't sound like his usual cheerful self.

"Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or al-Qaida. Your security is in your own hands... "

"To the U.S. people, my talk is to you about the best way to avoid another disaster," he said. "I tell you: security is an important element of human life and free people do not give up their security."

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. It is known that those who hate freedom do not have dignified souls, like those of the 19 blessed ones," he said, referring to the 19 hijackers.

"We fought you because we are free .. and want to regain freedom for our nation. As you undermine our security we undermine yours."
ID: 41281 · Report as offensive
Profile Misfit
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Jun 01
Posts: 21803
Credit: 2,815,091
RAC: 0
United States
Message 41316 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 1:19:37 UTC - in response to Message 41144.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 1:33:31 UTC

> I never thought I could change you mind, or anyone else's mind. I thought
> this thread was about giving one's own political views. For myself, an
> opinion has no weight if it is not backed up with relevant facts and logical
> analysis. (Not name-calling and insults.)
ditto ditto ditto

> And here I am thinking that we were engaged in debate. Fine then - Detente it
> is.
From the first thread:
This is a thread where we can all opine on topics of a local/national/world political nature. Since this is one thread and since there isnt a Political Forum many topics are welcome. Everyone is encouraged to participate!
ID: 41316 · Report as offensive
Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2940
Credit: 19,179,787
RAC: 6,299
United States
Message 41353 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 4:23:57 UTC

Bin Laden has spoken. His timing is impeccable. NeoAmsterdam said in post 40482 that "The straw that broke Usama bin-Laden's back was the stationing of female troops in Saudi Arabia and that the American troops were stationed more densely at oil stations than in Kuwait"? This time he says he won't attack us if we don't attack him. Well, stationing female soldiers in Saudi Arabia (not in Mosques, just in the country), with the blessing of their government is not an attack; buying Middle East Oil is not an attack; supporting Israel is not an attack. But flying civilian airliners into a civilian building and the Pentagon is clearly an attack.

Now the question: who does Bin Laden want in the White House? Another Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter? Or another George Bush.
ID: 41353 · Report as offensive
Profile Misfit
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Jun 01
Posts: 21803
Credit: 2,815,091
RAC: 0
United States
Message 41358 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 4:53:55 UTC - in response to Message 41353.  

> Bin Laden has spoken.
> This time he says he won't attack us
> if we don't attack him.

We must be getting close. Very close.
ID: 41358 · Report as offensive
Profile Misfit
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Jun 01
Posts: 21803
Credit: 2,815,091
RAC: 0
United States
Message 41359 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 4:54:22 UTC
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 5:12:35 UTC

ID: 41359 · Report as offensive
Profile Misfit
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Jun 01
Posts: 21803
Credit: 2,815,091
RAC: 0
United States
Message 41364 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 5:15:06 UTC - in response to Message 41273.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 20:02:36 UTC

ID: 41364 · Report as offensive
Petit Soleil
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 03
Posts: 1497
Credit: 70,934
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 41371 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 5:54:36 UTC - in response to Message 41364.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 5:58:47 UTC

> U.S. Team Took
> 250 Tons of Iraqi Munitions


I don't believe it. First the pentagon said there was no munitions when
when they removed Sadam, and then after a video showed US military on
scenes with clear indication of the Atomic UN whatever sealed, the pentagon
came up with another story. When you look at this GI on the news he
doesn't look very persuasive. He just said whet they told him to say.
The truth is those munitions are at hands of Irakis or foreigns
fighter in the erea. Who is the Pentagon Boss ? Bush. So it's clear
it's just another cover up. I have learned not to believe a word from
the pentagon, especialy when the news is on FOX...

ID: 41371 · Report as offensive
Profile Darth Dogbytes™
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 30 Jul 03
Posts: 7512
Credit: 2,021,148
RAC: 0
United States
Message 41373 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 6:00:53 UTC - in response to Message 41353.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 6:08:19 UTC

> Bin Laden has spoken. His timing is impeccable. NeoAmsterdam said in post
> 40482 that "The straw that broke Usama bin-Laden's back was the stationing of
> female troops in Saudi Arabia and that the American troops were stationed more
> densely at oil stations than in Kuwait"? This time he says he won't attack us
> if we don't attack him. Well, stationing female soldiers in Saudi Arabia (not
> in Mosques, just in the country), with the blessing of their government is not
> an attack; buying Middle East Oil is not an attack; supporting Israel is not
> an attack. But flying civilian airliners into a civilian building and the
> Pentagon is clearly an attack.
>
> Now the question: who does Bin Laden want in the White House? Another Bill
> Clinton or Jimmy Carter? Or another George Bush.
>
He wants Bush. That would keep the hate factor rising in the Muslim world against the United States. Ergo, more and easier recruiting of terrorists and idiots willing to commit self sacrifice for some twisted idiology. However, no matter how wins the election, he will remain a hunted animal until he's dead.
Account frozen...
ID: 41373 · Report as offensive
Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2940
Credit: 19,179,787
RAC: 6,299
United States
Message 41375 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 6:13:17 UTC - in response to Message 41373.  

> He wants Bush. That would keep the hate factor rising in the Muslim world
> against the United States. Ergo, more and easier recruiting of terrorists and
> idiots willing to commit self sacrifice for some twisted idiology. However,
> no matter how wins the election, he will remain a hunted animal until he's
> dead.
>

I see, so you don't remember what Al Qaeda did in Spain just before the election that ousted a pro-coalition Spanish president?
ID: 41375 · Report as offensive
Petit Soleil
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 03
Posts: 1497
Credit: 70,934
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 41376 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 6:13:55 UTC - in response to Message 41373.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 6:21:55 UTC

> He wants Bush. That would keep the hate factor rising in the Muslim world
> against the United States. Ergo, more and easier recruiting of terrorists and
> idiots willing to commit self sacrifice for some twisted idiology. However,
> no matter how wins the election, he will remain a hunted animal until he's
> dead.

I also think he wants Bush. He already said in the past that bush was the
best president to help there cause. Wich is true in some way (invasion of
Irak, abu prison scandal, etc). A US president that would be able to rise
some sympathy from the Arab world (less support to Israel, help to the
Palestinian cause, etc) would surely not be good for Al Quaida recruiting.
ID: 41376 · Report as offensive
Petit Soleil
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 03
Posts: 1497
Credit: 70,934
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 41378 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 6:19:53 UTC - in response to Message 41375.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 6:28:37 UTC

> I see, so you don't remember what Al Qaeda did in Spain just before the
> election that ousted a pro-coalition Spanish president?

It's not exactly true. The spanish was in vast majority opposed to their
participation in the Irak war. Aznar would have lost the election even
without the Madrid attack. The "real" reasons for the new spanish government
to remove their troops was to get closer to France and Germany in the eve
of the European convention. Spain wanted to get "closer" to Europe's positions
and play with the European big leaders. That is also what the spanish people
wanted. Aznar was hated in Spain.

EDIT The same will happen with Italy and UK at their next election.
Berlusconi and Blair will both be kik out and their new leader will
have to get closer to Europeans position.
ID: 41378 · Report as offensive
Petit Soleil
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 03
Posts: 1497
Credit: 70,934
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 41380 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 6:27:46 UTC - in response to Message 41378.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 6:28:28 UTC

ID: 41380 · Report as offensive
Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2940
Credit: 19,179,787
RAC: 6,299
United States
Message 41384 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 7:19:42 UTC

Marc, Dogbytes,

I say "white", does that mean you automatically have to say "black"? Pick your arguments: you don't have to disagree with everything I say--it just makes you look silly.

You can't change history; it was Al Qaeda that bombed the trains in Spain, it was just before the election, and even if there were reasons to vote against Anzar, it was Al Qaeda's intent to sway the voters. If you really can't see that, then I am sorry for you, and if you can't see that Bin Laden (not a stupid man) is again trying to influence this election then I don't know what else to say.
ID: 41384 · Report as offensive
Petit Soleil
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 03
Posts: 1497
Credit: 70,934
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 41386 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 7:42:53 UTC - in response to Message 41384.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 7:44:18 UTC

> Marc, Dogbytes,
>
> I say "white", does that mean you automatically have to say "black"? Pick
> your arguments: you don't have to disagree with everything I say--it just
> makes you look silly.
>
> You can't change history; it was Al Qaeda that bombed the trains in Spain, it
> was just before the election, and even if there were reasons to vote against
> Anzar, it was Al Qaeda's intent to sway the voters. If you really can't see
> that, then I am sorry for you, and if you can't see that Bin Laden (not a
> stupid man) is again trying to influence this election then I don't know what
> else to say.

Misunderstanding again. Al quaida did attack madrid in the eve of the election
in the intention of influancing the result, we agree on that. What I wanted
to express was that the election's result would have been the same and spain
would have call their troops back anyway.

Like you said Oussama is far from being stupid. What was his intention behind
sending this tape 4 days before the US election. Bush is always ahead of Kerry
when it comes to the war on terror (I honestly don't understand why) so this
new video would actually be helping Bush. The only negative point for the bush
administration is the fact that this guy is still running free after 3 years !

What would be the real impact on the election result ? I don't know.
Will there be an attack in the US in the next few days ? I hope not but
it is for sure a possibility.
ID: 41386 · Report as offensive
Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2940
Credit: 19,179,787
RAC: 6,299
United States
Message 41387 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 7:59:59 UTC - in response to Message 41386.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 8:02:44 UTC

> Misunderstanding again. Al quaida did attack madrid in the eve of the
> election
> in the intention of influancing the result, we agree on that. What I wanted
> to express was that the election's result would have been the same and spain
> would have call their troops back anyway.
>
You don't know the election result would be the same, and the actual result being what Al Qaeda wanted, it encourages them to try again--see the rest of my comment below.

> Like you said Oussama is far from being stupid. What was his intention behind
> sending this tape 4 days before the US election. Bush is always ahead of
> Kerry
> when it comes to the war on terror (I honestly don't understand why) so this
> new video would actually be helping Bush. The only negative point for the
> bush
> administration is the fact that this guy is still running free after 3 years
> !
>
We agree, Bin Laden is not stupid: his video was low key and conciliatory, saying he would not attack us if we did not attack (I'm paraphrasing here) Muslims. Who of the two presidential candidates is more likely to withdraw from participation in the Middle East? This message was aimed at the American voter, to try and convince (us) that it will get better if our leader backs off; in essence, trying to get us to vote for Kerry in exchange for an implied promise that Al Qaeda's attacks will stop. Look at the text of his message.

[Edit:] I also don't know what the effect will be, but it seems clear what effect he wants to occur.
ID: 41387 · Report as offensive
Profile Carl Cuseo
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Jan 02
Posts: 652
Credit: 34,312
RAC: 0
Puerto Rico
Message 41430 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 12:17:55 UTC - in response to Message 41387.  

If I was taking on a superpower with a relative handfull of soldiers willing to die for the cause against a huge army-

I'd want the commander & chief of that big army to be thought of by the average joe in the street as a liar and a fool.

Bin Laden knows that the people of the US distrust the president. As they watch Iraq go down the tubes and see what a terrible mess GWB has caused this distrust can only grow even if GWB is re-elected.

That's what OBL wants. George back in there....cc
ID: 41430 · Report as offensive
Profile Darth Dogbytes™
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 30 Jul 03
Posts: 7512
Credit: 2,021,148
RAC: 0
United States
Message 41450 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 14:06:16 UTC - in response to Message 41270.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 18:14:18 UTC


Account frozen...
ID: 41450 · Report as offensive
Profile Darth Dogbytes™
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 30 Jul 03
Posts: 7512
Credit: 2,021,148
RAC: 0
United States
Message 41452 - Posted: 30 Oct 2004, 14:08:18 UTC - in response to Message 41450.  
Last modified: 30 Oct 2004, 18:15:36 UTC


Account frozen...
ID: 41452 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 12 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Political Thread [3] - CLOSED


 
©2020 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.