| |
Main
Date: 13 Feb 2009 07:15:14
From: risky biz
Subject: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
"It has been 15 months since the release of the National Intelligence
Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government had halted
all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chairman of the
National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only two months
ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those reports, however.
President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear weapon” during a
press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared during his
testimony that “I think there is no question that they are seeking that
capability.”
While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to improve
relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at Iran’s
civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is missing
though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no evidence that
undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration, the
newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good rhetoric."
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
---
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
|
| |
Date: 14 Feb 2009 00:15:11
From: Joe Long
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
risky biz wrote:
...
> While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to improve
> relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at Iran’s
> civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is missing
> though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no evidence that
> undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration, the
> newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good rhetoric."
> http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
Is there ANY piece of left-wing propaganda that you won't accept without
question and espouse?
--
Joe Long aka ChipRider
Somewhere on the Range
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 07:40:11
From: JerseyRudy
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Feb 13 2009 10:15 AM, risky biz wrote:
> "It has been 15 months since the release of the National Intelligence
> Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government had halted
> all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chairman of the
> National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only two months
> ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those reports, however.
>
> President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear weapon” during a
> press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared during his
> testimony that “I think there is no question that they are seeking that
> capability.”
>
> While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to improve
> relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at Iran’s
> civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is missing
> though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no evidence that
> undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration, the
> newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good rhetoric."
>
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
It's understandable given the source, but this article is wrong when it
says that the most recent NIE on Iran "determined that the Iranian
government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon."
The most difficult aspect of creating a nuclear weapon is enriching the
uranium or reprocessing the plutonium. Once that part is mastered,
building the actual weapon is relatively easy. The NIE report was speaking
only to the latter aspect. The is no question from our intelligence
community and from the other countries we are working with on this issue
(Russia, Germany, France and the UK) that Iran is continuing to produce
enriched uranium, a program that Iran has said is designed for civilian
purposes, but the actual centrifuges being used belie this claim, as does
Iran's unwillingness to give the International Atomic Energy Agency access
to their enrichment program. The most recent NIE that is cited in this
article also says that the enrichment program could still provide Iran
with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the
middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from previous
estimates.
We understand that you will be disappointed that Obama's foreign policy is
different than yours (yours being: Israel is a Nazi state; Hamas are
innocent victims; Iran is not a threat), but that's the price you pay for
living in the oppressive USA!
----
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 10:56:40
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Feb 13, 10:27=A0am, "Jason Pawloski" <a679...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
> On Feb 13 2009 10:55 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 13 2009 12:46 PM, Jason Pawloski wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 13 2009 9:28 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 13 2009 11:16 AM, risky biz wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 13 2009 8:40 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Feb 13 2009 10:15 AM, risky biz wrote:
>
> > > > > > > "It has been 15 months since the release of the National
> Intelligence
> > > > > > > Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government=
had
> > > halted
> > > > > > > all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chai=
rman
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > > National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only =
two
> > months
> > > > > > > ago. The Obama Administration didn=92t seem to read those rep=
orts,
> > > however.
>
> > > > > > > President Obama accused Iran of =93development of a nuclear w=
eapon=94
> > > during
> > > > a
> > > > > > > press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared
> during
> > > his
> > > > > > > testimony that =93I think there is no question that they are =
seeking
> > that
> > > > > > > capability.=94
>
> > > > > > > While the Iranian government continues to express its desire =
to
> > improve
> > > > > > > relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations=
at
> > Iran=92s
> > > > > > > civilian nuclear program. There=92s one thing the administrat=
ion is
> > > missing
> > > > > > > though, and that=92s evidence. Officials concede there is no =
evidence
> > > that
> > > > > > > undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration=
, the
> > > > > > > newcomers don=92t seem to want fact to get in the way of good
> > rhetoric."
>
> http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > > It's understandable given the source, but this article is wrong=
when
> it
> > > > > > says that the most recent NIE on Iran "determined that the Iran=
ian
> > > > > > government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon."
>
> > > > > > The most difficult aspect of creating a nuclear weapon is enric=
hing
> the
> > > > > > uranium or reprocessing the plutonium. Once that part is master=
ed,
> > > > > > building the actual weapon is relatively easy. The NIE report w=
as
> > > speaking
> > > > > > only to the latter aspect. =A0The is no question from our intel=
ligence
> > > > > > community and from the other countries we are working with on t=
his
> > issue
> > > > > > (Russia, Germany, France and the UK) that Iran is continuing to
> produce
> > > > > > enriched uranium, a program that Iran has said is designed for
> civilian
> > > > > > purposes, but the actual centrifuges being used belie this clai=
m, as
> > does
> > > > > > Iran's unwillingness to give the International Atomic Energy Ag=
ency
> > > access
> > > > > > to their enrichment program. The most recent NIE that is cited =
in
> this
> > > > > > article also says that the enrichment program could still provi=
de
> Iran
> > > > > > with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime b=
y the
> > > > > > middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from
> previous
> > > > > > estimates.
>
> > > > > > We understand that you will be disappointed that Obama's foreig=
n
> policy
> > > is
> > > > > > different than yours (yours being: Israel is a Nazi state; Hama=
s are
> > > > > > innocent victims; Iran is not a threat), but that's the price y=
ou pay
> > for
> > > > > > living in the oppressive USA!
>
> > > > > They aren't enriching it to anywhere near bomb grade uranium you =
lying,
> > > > > Israel-loving, liberal nazi. The treasured dream of people like y=
ou is
> > > > > that America get plunged into another crippling conflict under fa=
lse
> > > > > pretenses simply because Israel favors a Middle East left in rubb=
le
> that
> > > > > they hope to rule over some day.
>
> > > > OK, thanks for confirming your hatred of Israel and your sympathy f=
or
> > > > those peace-loving leaders of Iran!
>
> > > > Of course, if the peace-loving leaders of Iran would simply allow t=
he
> IAEA
> > > > inspectors access to the enrichment facilities, then we would be ab=
le to
> > > > confirm whether your assumption about them is correct. Seems like a
> simple
> > > > solution to the rest of the world.
>
> > > There's nothing more satisfying than watching two of the better-known
> > > libtards around here duke it out. I also like how some (risky) appare=
ntly
> > > have the same hatred towards each other as you do for conservatives. =
It's
> > > almost as if some (risky) are just hateful pieces of shit.
>
> > Thanks for projecting. And thanks for using your usual respectful
> > language. It's heartening to know that there is no hate coming from you=
!
>
> I don't hate you and there's no hate coming from me. I think you're stupi=
d
> and probably a loser, and wrong about a lot of things, but that doesn't
> mean I hate you.
Same deal. Just because I think you're obviously a moron doesn't mean
you aren't nice to dogs and small children.
> If you were around I would gladly go out and have a beer
> with you or go to some sporting event or something. Just because people
> disagree politically doesn't mean they are personally enemies - that seem=
s
> to be a tenant of liberalism more than anything though.
"Tenet", moron. Let's have a beer!
- Bob T.
>
> --
> "Actually, I will read Jason's posts too. =A0He's smart also." - Paul
> Popinjay, 10/21/2007 (http://tinyurl.com/4bggyp)
>
> _____________________________________________________________________=A0
> * kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more..www.recgroups.com- Hide q=
uoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 08:16:23
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Feb 13 2009 8:40 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> On Feb 13 2009 10:15 AM, risky biz wrote:
>
> > "It has been 15 months since the release of the National Intelligence
> > Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government had halted
> > all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chairman of the
> > National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only two months
> > ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those reports, however.
> >
> > President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear weapon” during a
> > press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared during his
> > testimony that “I think there is no question that they are seeking that
> > capability.”
> >
> > While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to improve
> > relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at Iran’s
> > civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is missing
> > though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no evidence that
> > undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration, the
> > newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good rhetoric."
> >
>
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
>
> It's understandable given the source, but this article is wrong when it
> says that the most recent NIE on Iran "determined that the Iranian
> government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon."
>
> The most difficult aspect of creating a nuclear weapon is enriching the
> uranium or reprocessing the plutonium. Once that part is mastered,
> building the actual weapon is relatively easy. The NIE report was speaking
> only to the latter aspect. The is no question from our intelligence
> community and from the other countries we are working with on this issue
> (Russia, Germany, France and the UK) that Iran is continuing to produce
> enriched uranium, a program that Iran has said is designed for civilian
> purposes, but the actual centrifuges being used belie this claim, as does
> Iran's unwillingness to give the International Atomic Energy Agency access
> to their enrichment program. The most recent NIE that is cited in this
> article also says that the enrichment program could still provide Iran
> with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the
> middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from previous
> estimates.
>
> We understand that you will be disappointed that Obama's foreign policy is
> different than yours (yours being: Israel is a Nazi state; Hamas are
> innocent victims; Iran is not a threat), but that's the price you pay for
> living in the oppressive USA!
They aren't enriching it to anywhere near bomb grade uranium you lying,
Israel-loving, liberal nazi. The treasured dream of people like you is
that America get plunged into another crippling conflict under false
pretenses simply because Israel favors a Middle East left in rubble that
they hope to rule over some day.
--------
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Feb 2009 09:42:50
From: FL Turbo
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:16:23 -0800, "risky biz"
<risky-biz@sbcglobal.net > wrote:
>On Feb 13 2009 8:40 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
>
>> On Feb 13 2009 10:15 AM, risky biz wrote:
>>
>> > "It has been 15 months since the release of the National Intelligence
>> > Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government had halted
>> > all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chairman of the
>> > National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only two months
>> > ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those reports, however.
>> >
>> > President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear weapon” during a
>> > press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared during his
>> > testimony that “I think there is no question that they are seeking that
>> > capability.”
>> >
>> > While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to improve
>> > relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at Iran’s
>> > civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is missing
>> > though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no evidence that
>> > undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration, the
>> > newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good rhetoric."
>> >
>>
>http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
>>
>> It's understandable given the source, but this article is wrong when it
>> says that the most recent NIE on Iran "determined that the Iranian
>> government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon."
>>
>> The most difficult aspect of creating a nuclear weapon is enriching the
>> uranium or reprocessing the plutonium. Once that part is mastered,
>> building the actual weapon is relatively easy. The NIE report was speaking
>> only to the latter aspect. The is no question from our intelligence
>> community and from the other countries we are working with on this issue
>> (Russia, Germany, France and the UK) that Iran is continuing to produce
>> enriched uranium, a program that Iran has said is designed for civilian
>> purposes, but the actual centrifuges being used belie this claim, as does
>> Iran's unwillingness to give the International Atomic Energy Agency access
>> to their enrichment program. The most recent NIE that is cited in this
>> article also says that the enrichment program could still provide Iran
>> with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the
>> middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from previous
>> estimates.
>>
>> We understand that you will be disappointed that Obama's foreign policy is
>> different than yours (yours being: Israel is a Nazi state; Hamas are
>> innocent victims; Iran is not a threat), but that's the price you pay for
>> living in the oppressive USA!
>
>They aren't enriching it to anywhere near bomb grade uranium you lying,
>Israel-loving, liberal nazi. The treasured dream of people like you is
>that America get plunged into another crippling conflict under false
>pretenses simply because Israel favors a Middle East left in rubble that
>they hope to rule over some day.
>
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-fg-usiran12-2009feb12,0,3478184.story
U.S. now sees Iran as pursuing nuclear bomb
In a reversal since a 2007 report, U.S. officials expect the Islamic
Republic to reach development milestones this year.
By Greg Miller
February 12, 2009
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------
When it was issued, the NIE stunned the international community. It
declared that U.S. spy agencies judged "with high confidence that in
fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program."
U.S. intelligence officials later said the conclusion was based on
evidence that Iran had stopped secret efforts to design a nuclear
warhead around the time of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
Often overlooked in the NIE, officials said, was that Iran had not
stopped its work on other crucial fronts, including missile design and
uranium enrichment. Many experts contend that these are more difficult
than building a bomb.
Iran's advances on enrichment have become a growing source of alarm.
Since 2004, the country has gone from operating a few dozen
centrifuges -- cylindrical machines used to enrich uranium -- to
nearly 6,000, weapons experts agree.
By November, Iran had produced an estimated 1,400 pounds of
low-enriched uranium, not nearly enough to fuel a nuclear energy
reactor, but perilously close to the quantity needed to make a bomb.
A report issued last month by the Institute for Science and
International Security concluded that "Iran is moving steadily toward
a breakout capability and is expected to reach that milestone during
the first half of 2009." That means it would have enough low-enriched
uranium to be able to quickly convert it to weapons-grade material.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
Obama Administration Accuses Iran of Pursuing Nuclear Weapons
Accusations Show New Administration's Clean Break From Intelligence
Estimate
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does all this mean?
I'll tell you what it means, Gomer.
Once Obama started getting the same Military and Intelligence
briefings that a President gets, he understood that Iran is working as
fast as they can to make The Bomb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
"They aren't anti-war so much as they are on the other side"
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 08:28:32
From: JerseyRudy
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Feb 13 2009 11:16 AM, risky biz wrote:
> On Feb 13 2009 8:40 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
>
> > On Feb 13 2009 10:15 AM, risky biz wrote:
> >
> > > "It has been 15 months since the release of the National Intelligence
> > > Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government had halted
> > > all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chairman of the
> > > National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only two months
> > > ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those reports, however.
> > >
> > > President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear weapon” during
a
> > > press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared during his
> > > testimony that “I think there is no question that they are seeking that
> > > capability.”
> > >
> > > While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to improve
> > > relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at Iran’s
> > > civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is missing
> > > though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no evidence that
> > > undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration, the
> > > newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good rhetoric."
> > >
> >
>
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
> >
> > It's understandable given the source, but this article is wrong when it
> > says that the most recent NIE on Iran "determined that the Iranian
> > government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon."
> >
> > The most difficult aspect of creating a nuclear weapon is enriching the
> > uranium or reprocessing the plutonium. Once that part is mastered,
> > building the actual weapon is relatively easy. The NIE report was speaking
> > only to the latter aspect. The is no question from our intelligence
> > community and from the other countries we are working with on this issue
> > (Russia, Germany, France and the UK) that Iran is continuing to produce
> > enriched uranium, a program that Iran has said is designed for civilian
> > purposes, but the actual centrifuges being used belie this claim, as does
> > Iran's unwillingness to give the International Atomic Energy Agency access
> > to their enrichment program. The most recent NIE that is cited in this
> > article also says that the enrichment program could still provide Iran
> > with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the
> > middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from previous
> > estimates.
> >
> > We understand that you will be disappointed that Obama's foreign policy is
> > different than yours (yours being: Israel is a Nazi state; Hamas are
> > innocent victims; Iran is not a threat), but that's the price you pay for
> > living in the oppressive USA!
>
> They aren't enriching it to anywhere near bomb grade uranium you lying,
> Israel-loving, liberal nazi. The treasured dream of people like you is
> that America get plunged into another crippling conflict under false
> pretenses simply because Israel favors a Middle East left in rubble that
> they hope to rule over some day.
OK, thanks for confirming your hatred of Israel and your sympathy for
those peace-loving leaders of Iran!
Of course, if the peace-loving leaders of Iran would simply allow the IAEA
inspectors access to the enrichment facilities, then we would be able to
confirm whether your assumption about them is correct. Seems like a simple
solution to the rest of the world.
---
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 09:46:43
From: Jason Pawloski
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Feb 13 2009 9:28 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> On Feb 13 2009 11:16 AM, risky biz wrote:
>
> > On Feb 13 2009 8:40 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 13 2009 10:15 AM, risky biz wrote:
> > >
> > > > "It has been 15 months since the release of the National Intelligence
> > > > Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government had
halted
> > > > all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chairman of
the
> > > > National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only two months
> > > > ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those reports,
however.
> > > >
> > > > President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear weapon”
during
> a
> > > > press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared during
his
> > > > testimony that “I think there is no question that they are seeking that
> > > > capability.”
> > > >
> > > > While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to improve
> > > > relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at Iran’s
> > > > civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is
missing
> > > > though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no evidence
that
> > > > undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration, the
> > > > newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good rhetoric."
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
> > >
> > > It's understandable given the source, but this article is wrong when it
> > > says that the most recent NIE on Iran "determined that the Iranian
> > > government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon."
> > >
> > > The most difficult aspect of creating a nuclear weapon is enriching the
> > > uranium or reprocessing the plutonium. Once that part is mastered,
> > > building the actual weapon is relatively easy. The NIE report was
speaking
> > > only to the latter aspect. The is no question from our intelligence
> > > community and from the other countries we are working with on this issue
> > > (Russia, Germany, France and the UK) that Iran is continuing to produce
> > > enriched uranium, a program that Iran has said is designed for civilian
> > > purposes, but the actual centrifuges being used belie this claim, as does
> > > Iran's unwillingness to give the International Atomic Energy Agency
access
> > > to their enrichment program. The most recent NIE that is cited in this
> > > article also says that the enrichment program could still provide Iran
> > > with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the
> > > middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from previous
> > > estimates.
> > >
> > > We understand that you will be disappointed that Obama's foreign policy
is
> > > different than yours (yours being: Israel is a Nazi state; Hamas are
> > > innocent victims; Iran is not a threat), but that's the price you pay for
> > > living in the oppressive USA!
> >
> > They aren't enriching it to anywhere near bomb grade uranium you lying,
> > Israel-loving, liberal nazi. The treasured dream of people like you is
> > that America get plunged into another crippling conflict under false
> > pretenses simply because Israel favors a Middle East left in rubble that
> > they hope to rule over some day.
>
> OK, thanks for confirming your hatred of Israel and your sympathy for
> those peace-loving leaders of Iran!
>
> Of course, if the peace-loving leaders of Iran would simply allow the IAEA
> inspectors access to the enrichment facilities, then we would be able to
> confirm whether your assumption about them is correct. Seems like a simple
> solution to the rest of the world.
There's nothing more satisfying than watching two of the better-known
libtards around here duke it out. I also like how some (risky) apparently
have the same hatred towards each other as you do for conservatives. It's
almost as if some (risky) are just hateful pieces of shit.
--
"Actually, I will read Jason's posts too. He's smart also." - Paul
Popinjay, 10/21/2007 (http://tinyurl.com/4bggyp)
________________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 09:55:19
From: JerseyRudy
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Feb 13 2009 12:46 PM, Jason Pawloski wrote:
> On Feb 13 2009 9:28 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
>
> > On Feb 13 2009 11:16 AM, risky biz wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 13 2009 8:40 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Feb 13 2009 10:15 AM, risky biz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "It has been 15 months since the release of the National Intelligence
> > > > > Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government had
> halted
> > > > > all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chairman of
> the
> > > > > National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only two
months
> > > > > ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those reports,
> however.
> > > > >
> > > > > President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear weapon”
> during
> > a
> > > > > press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared during
> his
> > > > > testimony that “I think there is no question that they are seeking
that
> > > > > capability.”
> > > > >
> > > > > While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to
improve
> > > > > relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at
Iran’s
> > > > > civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is
> missing
> > > > > though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no evidence
> that
> > > > > undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration, the
> > > > > newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good
rhetoric."
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
> > > >
> > > > It's understandable given the source, but this article is wrong when it
> > > > says that the most recent NIE on Iran "determined that the Iranian
> > > > government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon."
> > > >
> > > > The most difficult aspect of creating a nuclear weapon is enriching the
> > > > uranium or reprocessing the plutonium. Once that part is mastered,
> > > > building the actual weapon is relatively easy. The NIE report was
> speaking
> > > > only to the latter aspect. The is no question from our intelligence
> > > > community and from the other countries we are working with on this
issue
> > > > (Russia, Germany, France and the UK) that Iran is continuing to produce
> > > > enriched uranium, a program that Iran has said is designed for civilian
> > > > purposes, but the actual centrifuges being used belie this claim, as
does
> > > > Iran's unwillingness to give the International Atomic Energy Agency
> access
> > > > to their enrichment program. The most recent NIE that is cited in this
> > > > article also says that the enrichment program could still provide Iran
> > > > with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the
> > > > middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from previous
> > > > estimates.
> > > >
> > > > We understand that you will be disappointed that Obama's foreign policy
> is
> > > > different than yours (yours being: Israel is a Nazi state; Hamas are
> > > > innocent victims; Iran is not a threat), but that's the price you pay
for
> > > > living in the oppressive USA!
> > >
> > > They aren't enriching it to anywhere near bomb grade uranium you lying,
> > > Israel-loving, liberal nazi. The treasured dream of people like you is
> > > that America get plunged into another crippling conflict under false
> > > pretenses simply because Israel favors a Middle East left in rubble that
> > > they hope to rule over some day.
> >
> > OK, thanks for confirming your hatred of Israel and your sympathy for
> > those peace-loving leaders of Iran!
> >
> > Of course, if the peace-loving leaders of Iran would simply allow the IAEA
> > inspectors access to the enrichment facilities, then we would be able to
> > confirm whether your assumption about them is correct. Seems like a simple
> > solution to the rest of the world.
>
> There's nothing more satisfying than watching two of the better-known
> libtards around here duke it out. I also like how some (risky) apparently
> have the same hatred towards each other as you do for conservatives. It's
> almost as if some (risky) are just hateful pieces of shit.
>
Thanks for projecting. And thanks for using your usual respectful
language. It's heartening to know that there is no hate coming from you!
______________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 10:27:57
From: Jason Pawloski
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Feb 13 2009 10:55 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> On Feb 13 2009 12:46 PM, Jason Pawloski wrote:
>
> > On Feb 13 2009 9:28 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 13 2009 11:16 AM, risky biz wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Feb 13 2009 8:40 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Feb 13 2009 10:15 AM, risky biz wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > "It has been 15 months since the release of the National
Intelligence
> > > > > > Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government had
> > halted
> > > > > > all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chairman
of
> > the
> > > > > > National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only two
> months
> > > > > > ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those reports,
> > however.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear weapon”
> > during
> > > a
> > > > > > press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared
during
> > his
> > > > > > testimony that “I think there is no question that they are seeking
> that
> > > > > > capability.”
> > > > > >
> > > > > > While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to
> improve
> > > > > > relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at
> Iran’s
> > > > > > civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is
> > missing
> > > > > > though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no evidence
> > that
> > > > > > undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration, the
> > > > > > newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good
> rhetoric."
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
> > > > >
> > > > > It's understandable given the source, but this article is wrong when
it
> > > > > says that the most recent NIE on Iran "determined that the Iranian
> > > > > government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon."
> > > > >
> > > > > The most difficult aspect of creating a nuclear weapon is enriching
the
> > > > > uranium or reprocessing the plutonium. Once that part is mastered,
> > > > > building the actual weapon is relatively easy. The NIE report was
> > speaking
> > > > > only to the latter aspect. The is no question from our intelligence
> > > > > community and from the other countries we are working with on this
> issue
> > > > > (Russia, Germany, France and the UK) that Iran is continuing to
produce
> > > > > enriched uranium, a program that Iran has said is designed for
civilian
> > > > > purposes, but the actual centrifuges being used belie this claim, as
> does
> > > > > Iran's unwillingness to give the International Atomic Energy Agency
> > access
> > > > > to their enrichment program. The most recent NIE that is cited in
this
> > > > > article also says that the enrichment program could still provide
Iran
> > > > > with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the
> > > > > middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from
previous
> > > > > estimates.
> > > > >
> > > > > We understand that you will be disappointed that Obama's foreign
policy
> > is
> > > > > different than yours (yours being: Israel is a Nazi state; Hamas are
> > > > > innocent victims; Iran is not a threat), but that's the price you pay
> for
> > > > > living in the oppressive USA!
> > > >
> > > > They aren't enriching it to anywhere near bomb grade uranium you lying,
> > > > Israel-loving, liberal nazi. The treasured dream of people like you is
> > > > that America get plunged into another crippling conflict under false
> > > > pretenses simply because Israel favors a Middle East left in rubble
that
> > > > they hope to rule over some day.
> > >
> > > OK, thanks for confirming your hatred of Israel and your sympathy for
> > > those peace-loving leaders of Iran!
> > >
> > > Of course, if the peace-loving leaders of Iran would simply allow the
IAEA
> > > inspectors access to the enrichment facilities, then we would be able to
> > > confirm whether your assumption about them is correct. Seems like a
simple
> > > solution to the rest of the world.
> >
> > There's nothing more satisfying than watching two of the better-known
> > libtards around here duke it out. I also like how some (risky) apparently
> > have the same hatred towards each other as you do for conservatives. It's
> > almost as if some (risky) are just hateful pieces of shit.
> >
>
> Thanks for projecting. And thanks for using your usual respectful
> language. It's heartening to know that there is no hate coming from you!
I don't hate you and there's no hate coming from me. I think you're stupid
and probably a loser, and wrong about a lot of things, but that doesn't
mean I hate you. If you were around I would gladly go out and have a beer
with you or go to some sporting event or something. Just because people
disagree politically doesn't mean they are personally enemies - that seems
to be a tenant of liberalism more than anything though.
--
"Actually, I will read Jason's posts too. He's smart also." - Paul
Popinjay, 10/21/2007 (http://tinyurl.com/4bggyp)
_____________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 10:32:04
From: JerseyRudy
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Feb 13 2009 1:27 PM, Jason Pawloski wrote:
> On Feb 13 2009 10:55 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
>
> > On Feb 13 2009 12:46 PM, Jason Pawloski wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 13 2009 9:28 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Feb 13 2009 11:16 AM, risky biz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Feb 13 2009 8:40 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Feb 13 2009 10:15 AM, risky biz wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > "It has been 15 months since the release of the National
> Intelligence
> > > > > > > Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government had
> > > halted
> > > > > > > all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing chairman
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > > National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only two
> > months
> > > > > > > ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those reports,
> > > however.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear weapon”
> > > during
> > > > a
> > > > > > > press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared
> during
> > > his
> > > > > > > testimony that “I think there is no question that they are
seeking
> > that
> > > > > > > capability.”
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to
> > improve
> > > > > > > relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations at
> > Iran’s
> > > > > > > civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration is
> > > missing
> > > > > > > though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no
evidence
> > > that
> > > > > > > undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration,
the
> > > > > > > newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good
> > rhetoric."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It's understandable given the source, but this article is wrong
when
> it
> > > > > > says that the most recent NIE on Iran "determined that the Iranian
> > > > > > government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The most difficult aspect of creating a nuclear weapon is enriching
> the
> > > > > > uranium or reprocessing the plutonium. Once that part is mastered,
> > > > > > building the actual weapon is relatively easy. The NIE report was
> > > speaking
> > > > > > only to the latter aspect. The is no question from our
intelligence
> > > > > > community and from the other countries we are working with on this
> > issue
> > > > > > (Russia, Germany, France and the UK) that Iran is continuing to
> produce
> > > > > > enriched uranium, a program that Iran has said is designed for
> civilian
> > > > > > purposes, but the actual centrifuges being used belie this claim,
as
> > does
> > > > > > Iran's unwillingness to give the International Atomic Energy Agency
> > > access
> > > > > > to their enrichment program. The most recent NIE that is cited in
> this
> > > > > > article also says that the enrichment program could still provide
> Iran
> > > > > > with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by
the
> > > > > > middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from
> previous
> > > > > > estimates.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We understand that you will be disappointed that Obama's foreign
> policy
> > > is
> > > > > > different than yours (yours being: Israel is a Nazi state; Hamas
are
> > > > > > innocent victims; Iran is not a threat), but that's the price you
pay
> > for
> > > > > > living in the oppressive USA!
> > > > >
> > > > > They aren't enriching it to anywhere near bomb grade uranium you
lying,
> > > > > Israel-loving, liberal nazi. The treasured dream of people like you
is
> > > > > that America get plunged into another crippling conflict under false
> > > > > pretenses simply because Israel favors a Middle East left in rubble
> that
> > > > > they hope to rule over some day.
> > > >
> > > > OK, thanks for confirming your hatred of Israel and your sympathy for
> > > > those peace-loving leaders of Iran!
> > > >
> > > > Of course, if the peace-loving leaders of Iran would simply allow the
> IAEA
> > > > inspectors access to the enrichment facilities, then we would be able
to
> > > > confirm whether your assumption about them is correct. Seems like a
> simple
> > > > solution to the rest of the world.
> > >
> > > There's nothing more satisfying than watching two of the better-known
> > > libtards around here duke it out. I also like how some (risky) apparently
> > > have the same hatred towards each other as you do for conservatives. It's
> > > almost as if some (risky) are just hateful pieces of shit.
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for projecting. And thanks for using your usual respectful
> > language. It's heartening to know that there is no hate coming from you!
>
> I don't hate you and there's no hate coming from me. I think you're stupid
> and probably a loser, and wrong about a lot of things, but that doesn't
> mean I hate you. If you were around I would gladly go out and have a beer
> with you or go to some sporting event or something. Just because people
> disagree politically doesn't mean they are personally enemies - that seems
> to be a tenant of liberalism more than anything though.
Oh ok. That sure convinces me, but then again I'm just "stupid" and
"probably a loser."
--------
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 10:54:41
From: Jason Pawloski
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Feb 13 2009 11:32 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> On Feb 13 2009 1:27 PM, Jason Pawloski wrote:
>
> > On Feb 13 2009 10:55 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 13 2009 12:46 PM, Jason Pawloski wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Feb 13 2009 9:28 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Feb 13 2009 11:16 AM, risky biz wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Feb 13 2009 8:40 AM, JerseyRudy wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Feb 13 2009 10:15 AM, risky biz wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "It has been 15 months since the release of the National
> > Intelligence
> > > > > > > > Estimate on Iran which determined that the Iranian government
had
> > > > halted
> > > > > > > > all efforts to create a nuclear weapon, and the outgoing
chairman
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > National Intelligence Council reaffirmed those findings only
two
> > > months
> > > > > > > > ago. The Obama Administration didn’t seem to read those
reports,
> > > > however.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > President Obama accused Iran of “development of a nuclear
weapon”
> > > > during
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > > press conference. Incoming CIA director Leon Panetta declared
> > during
> > > > his
> > > > > > > > testimony that “I think there is no question that they are
> seeking
> > > that
> > > > > > > > capability.”
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > While the Iranian government continues to express its desire to
> > > improve
> > > > > > > > relations, Obama and associates just keep hurling accusations
at
> > > Iran’s
> > > > > > > > civilian nuclear program. There’s one thing the administration
is
> > > > missing
> > > > > > > > though, and that’s evidence. Officials concede there is no
> evidence
> > > > that
> > > > > > > > undercuts the 2007 findings, but like the Bush Administration,
> the
> > > > > > > > newcomers don’t seem to want fact to get in the way of good
> > > rhetoric."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/02/12/obama-administration-accuses-iran-of-pursuing-nuclear-weapons/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's understandable given the source, but this article is wrong
> when
> > it
> > > > > > > says that the most recent NIE on Iran "determined that the
Iranian
> > > > > > > government had halted all efforts to create a nuclear weapon."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The most difficult aspect of creating a nuclear weapon is
enriching
> > the
> > > > > > > uranium or reprocessing the plutonium. Once that part is
mastered,
> > > > > > > building the actual weapon is relatively easy. The NIE report was
> > > > speaking
> > > > > > > only to the latter aspect. The is no question from our
> intelligence
> > > > > > > community and from the other countries we are working with on
this
> > > issue
> > > > > > > (Russia, Germany, France and the UK) that Iran is continuing to
> > produce
> > > > > > > enriched uranium, a program that Iran has said is designed for
> > civilian
> > > > > > > purposes, but the actual centrifuges being used belie this claim,
> as
> > > does
> > > > > > > Iran's unwillingness to give the International Atomic Energy
Agency
> > > > access
> > > > > > > to their enrichment program. The most recent NIE that is cited in
> > this
> > > > > > > article also says that the enrichment program could still provide
> > Iran
> > > > > > > with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by
> the
> > > > > > > middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from
> > previous
> > > > > > > estimates.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We understand that you will be disappointed that Obama's foreign
> > policy
> > > > is
> > > > > > > different than yours (yours being: Israel is a Nazi state; Hamas
> are
> > > > > > > innocent victims; Iran is not a threat), but that's the price you
> pay
> > > for
> > > > > > > living in the oppressive USA!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > They aren't enriching it to anywhere near bomb grade uranium you
> lying,
> > > > > > Israel-loving, liberal nazi. The treasured dream of people like you
> is
> > > > > > that America get plunged into another crippling conflict under
false
> > > > > > pretenses simply because Israel favors a Middle East left in rubble
> > that
> > > > > > they hope to rule over some day.
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, thanks for confirming your hatred of Israel and your sympathy for
> > > > > those peace-loving leaders of Iran!
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course, if the peace-loving leaders of Iran would simply allow the
> > IAEA
> > > > > inspectors access to the enrichment facilities, then we would be able
> to
> > > > > confirm whether your assumption about them is correct. Seems like a
> > simple
> > > > > solution to the rest of the world.
> > > >
> > > > There's nothing more satisfying than watching two of the better-known
> > > > libtards around here duke it out. I also like how some (risky)
apparently
> > > > have the same hatred towards each other as you do for conservatives.
It's
> > > > almost as if some (risky) are just hateful pieces of shit.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for projecting. And thanks for using your usual respectful
> > > language. It's heartening to know that there is no hate coming from you!
> >
> > I don't hate you and there's no hate coming from me. I think you're stupid
> > and probably a loser, and wrong about a lot of things, but that doesn't
> > mean I hate you. If you were around I would gladly go out and have a beer
> > with you or go to some sporting event or something. Just because people
> > disagree politically doesn't mean they are personally enemies - that seems
> > to be a tenant of liberalism more than anything though.
>
> Oh ok. That sure convinces me, but then again I'm just "stupid" and
> "probably a loser."
True.
--
"Actually, I will read Jason's posts too. He's smart also." - Paul
Popinjay, 10/21/2007 (http://tinyurl.com/4bggyp)
______________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 14 Feb 2009 01:05:10
From: Pepe Papon
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:54:41 -0800, "Jason Pawloski"
<a6794a4@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
> Just because people
>> > disagree politically doesn't mean they are personally enemies - that seems
>> > to be a tenant of liberalism more than anything though.
>>
>> Oh ok. That sure convinces me, but then again I'm just "stupid" and
>> "probably a loser."
>
>True.
And certainly, intelligence is a "tenant" (sic) of wingnuts like you.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 10:05:35
From: John_Brian_K
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
> Thanks for projecting. And thanks for using your usual respectful
> language. It's heartening to know that there is no hate coming from you!
He is Polish and he doesn't mean anything by it. He prolly had 2 beers
and cannot think straight right now. Or would that be 'think not
straight'?
==========================================
You must not think me necessarily foolish because I am facetious,
nor will I consider you necessarily wise because you are grave.
==============================
47.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
JBK
-----
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 10:26:17
From: Jason Pawloski
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
On Feb 13 2009 11:05 AM, John_Brian_K wrote:
> > Thanks for projecting. And thanks for using your usual respectful
> > language. It's heartening to know that there is no hate coming from you!
>
> He is Polish and he doesn't mean anything by it. He prolly had 2 beers
> and cannot think straight right now. Or would that be 'think not
> straight'?
>
> ==========================================
> You must not think me necessarily foolish because I am facetious,
> nor will I consider you necessarily wise because you are grave.
> ==============================
> 47.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
> JBK
It takes a bit more than 2 beers to get the job done, lightweight.
--
"Actually, I will read Jason's posts too. He's smart also." - Paul
Popinjay, 10/21/2007 (http://tinyurl.com/4bggyp)
_____________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 11:19:26
From: John_Brian_K
Subject: Re: Obama- "we're the change that stays the same"
|
> It takes a bit more than 2 beers to get the job done, lightweight.
I was literally taking a poke at your heritages lack of reputation in that
regard.
==========================================
You must not think me necessarily foolish because I am facetious,
nor will I consider you necessarily wise because you are grave.
==============================
47.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
JBK
____________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
|
