Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AK2004 who wrote (278970)	3/8/2006 2:41:25 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572013

no, that is not the reason to attack but that is a sufficient reason not to trust Iran Like.....ever? That's ridiculous. The Canadians burned down the White House in the early 1800s, should we sever relations with them today?

To: AK2004 who wrote (278970)	3/8/2006 12:20:50 PM
From: paret	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1572013

Muslim Vote Tips the Balance in Netherlands The Brussels Journal ^ \| 2005-03-08 \| Paul Belien Yesterday’s municipal elections in the Netherlands were won by the Left. The Labour Party (PvdA) gained more than 500 town hall seats, an increase of 50 per cent compared with 2002, while the far-left Socialist Party (SP) doubled its number of seats. The Christian-Democrat CDA of Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende and his government coalition partner, the free-market Liberal VVD, suffered heavy losses. Yesterday’s result does not bode well for the Right in next year’s general elections. If the result in 2007 is the same as yesterday’s the PvdA will gain 49 of the 150 parliamentary seats, while the CDA – currently the largest party – will lose 13 of its 44 seats. A government of Labour, the SP and the extreme-left Groen Links (Green Left) Party could replace the current center-right government, leaving the Netherlands with a radical-left coalition similar to that of Norway today. Today the center-left newspaper De Volkskrant writes that the immigrant vote has tipped the balance in favour of the Left. This should not come as a surprise. All across Europe, immigrants tend to vote for the Left. The Left is perceived to be the welfare state’s Santa Claus. Most of the immigrants who came to Europe during the past decades were attracted by the generous welfare benefits which Western Europe lavishly bestows on the “underprivileged.” Today, owing to their demographic growth, the immigrant vote is increasing as more and more young immigrants reach voting age. In many countries the Left has begun to cater for the immigrants, aware that the immigrants guarantee their power. According to the Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies of the University of Amsterdam 80% of the non-indigenous electorate voted for Labour. This explains why cities such as Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Breda and Arnhem succumbed to the Left. 84% of the Turks voted for the PvdA; 81% of the Antillians/Surinamese did likewise. Of the Moroccans 78% voted Labour and 12% voted Green Left. The center-right VVD, the party of famous Dutch policians such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Frits Bolkestein, received only 1% of the immigrant vote. The CDA got 3%, the SP 5% and Green Left 7%. According to De Telegraaf, the largest paper in the country, immigrant voters have become a power block. The effects of the immigrant vote will soon be visible. The Amsterdam borough of De Baarsjes has already decided to remove a white cross which serves as a memorial to the Second World War. The cross is situated not far from the place where a mosque is being built. According to the authorities “Muslims and Jews” take offense at the cross as a war memorial. “We told them that it is a Dutch tradition to refer to the dead with a cross. However, the cross is seen as a reference to Christianity. I can understand this,” the local (Christian-Democrat) councillor, Jan Voetberg, said.

To: AK2004 who wrote (278970)	3/8/2006 12:47:38 PM
From: paret	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1572013

Dubai's 'Boycott Israel' Sheik Funded Bill Clinton NewsMax ^ \| 3 March 2006 \| Carl Limbacher Former President Bill Clinton has accepted at least $1.6 million from the United Arab Emirates, including $300,000 from a Dubai sheik who adamantly backs the country's controversial boycott of Israel. On Jan. 17, 2002, Mr. Clinton was paid $300,000 to address the Science, Technology and Arts Royal Summit in Dubai at the invitation of Crown Prince and UAE Defense Minister Sheik Mohammad bin Rashid Al Maktoum. Less than three months later, Sheik Mohammad urged the United Nations to approve the use of force against Israel's to halt what he called the Jewish state's "butchery" of Palestinians, according to London's Financial Times. Mr. Clinton's benefactor called for then-Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to "stand trial before the International War Crimes Tribunal," where Sheik Mohammad said he would "have a prominent place in the list of world's killers, terrorists and criminals." The Dubai sheik then reminded that "Arabs have a wide room for political, diplomatic and economic moves and have the right, at least, to revive the Arab economic boycott to Israel." Mr. Clinton accepted another $300,000 from the Dubai regime for a speech in 2005. And his presidential library in Little Rock has collected seven-figure sums from several Arab governments participating in the anti-Israel boycott, including Dubai. In Sept. 2005, the New York Sun reported: "When the library opened last year, a computer display in the exhibit halls included information on some, but not all, donors. The Saudi Royal Family and the governments of Dubai, Kuwait, and Qatar all gave $1 million or more." The paper noted that after it published a previous list including Mr. Clinton's Arab donors, "the computer display was shut off. It has not been restored." On Thursday morning, NewsMax called the offices of Mr. Clinton, Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. Charles Schumer, Rep. Peter King and the Anti-Defamation League in New York, inquiring about the appropriateness of Mr. Clinton taking so much cash from a country that boycotts Israel. None of the calls had been returned by presstime.