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 : Leftwing Agenda to Destroy the US -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (272)	4/10/2006 6:46:45 PM
From: paret	Respond to of 908

Sounds like this thread disturbs poor Dale Baker. Baker is a pathetic, pompous Hate-America lefty whom I have had on ignore for years. Lefties like Dale Baker demand a ONE WAY COMMUNICATION and when anyone shoves their lefty crap back in their faces they scream bloody murder.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (272)	4/11/2006 3:02:13 AM
From: paret	Respond to of 908

America The Infiltrated (Joseph Farah: We Don't Even Have The Will To Kick 'Em Out Alert) Worldnetdaily.com ^ \| 04/11/06 \| Joseph Farah You've got to hand it to Americans. If ever there was a group of people more patient, more willing to turn the other cheek, more forgiving and tolerant – I just don't know who it would be. Every day now, it seems, hundreds of thousands of ungrateful human parasites rally in American cities condemning their host country's lack of hospitality. Think about this. Somewhere around 20 million foreigners have entered this country illegally and stayed here – taking advantage of America's health-care system, educational system, welfare system, taxing its criminal justice system and competing for jobs with those at the very lowest of the economic ladder. They have taken advantage of loopholes in our laws by dropping babies in this country who automatically become U.S. citizens, despite the illegal entry and presence of the parents. They have forced Americans to spend hours a year listening to voice-mail operators give them language options. They have forced Americans to pay the cost of bilingual ballots and for Spanish translators at thousands of government agencies. The very character of our once-cohesive English-speaking country is threatened. These invaders have made it easy for drug dealers, criminals and terrorists to hide behind the skirts of ordinary civilians. After all this – and after U.S. officials steadfastly refuse to enforce the immigration and border security laws already on the books – amazingly, it is not Americans out in the streets protesting, it is the illegal invaders. What is it that they are protesting? The mere threat of action by lawmakers who have been asleep at the switch for the last 25 years. That's what has prompted this uprising by the army of illegal aliens within our midst. I would have thought by now that hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Americans would be rising up angry, filling the streets and protesting the destruction of their country. But that is not the case. It is the people destroying the country who are showing their strength. And while these protesters hurl mean-spirited verbal attacks at their hosts – calling them bigots and racists and intolerant – Americans sit back and watch. I'm afraid most Americans have been successfully fattened up for slaughter. We're just not the same people our forebears were. We're not willing to make sacrifices to preserve our freedom and independence and system of self-government. Washington knows this and has decided you are irrelevant. As wrong as the illegal invaders are, you've got to hand it to them. They know how to push their weight around, and they are willing to march in the streets to get their way. How many Americans are willing to do that any more? How many are willing to make any sacrifice for the way of life they were given by their parents, grandparents and great-grandparents? Brave men gave their lives for over two centuries to defend our Constitution, our independence and the right of the people to govern themselves under the rule of law. For what? So that a slow invasion over 25 years could take away everything Americans had so gallantly fought to protect? I'm sitting here astonished today – watching the latest demonstrations in Phoenix and Dallas and Pittsburgh and all over the country. Thousands of non-Americans with nothing better to do than show their strength, wave their flags, thumb their noses at our laws and dare us to do something about it. They are darn lucky I am not running the country. I would order mass arrests at these events, forcing every single participant to prove their legal right to be in this country or face deportation. I keep hearing about how expensive it would be to find all of the illegals and deport them. They are making it very easy for us with these rallies. The fact that no one is even suggesting roundups shows just how far gone our country is.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (272)	4/11/2006 9:04:00 AM
From: paret	Respond to of 908

I have a dead cat that knows more about the Middle East than Jesse Jackson does ............................................................... Stop Bush before he attacks Iran-BY JESSE JACKSON sun times ^ \| April 11, 2006 \| Jesse Jackson Here we go again. The administration says ''regime change'' is needed. Warnings are issued about the threat posed by the ''madman'' who leads the oil-rich country. Alarming intelligence estimates are leaked about nuclear weapons programs. The vice president warns ''monumental consequences'' if the alleged efforts to develop nuclear weapons are continued. Neoconservatives call for military action. Administration operatives express scorn for international monitoring. The Pentagon is reported not only to be developing contingency plans for an assault, but already launching mock bombing runs to measure air defense capacities. Covert military incursions are said to be active on the ground. This isn't about the run-up to the Iraq invasion in 2002. These reports concern the administration's drumbeat about Iran and its fundamentalist government. With violence rising in Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden still loose and civil war escalating in Iraq, it is preposterous for the administration to contemplate another war of choice in the Persian Gulf. But all signs point that way. Iran has oil and gas -- lots of it, second only to Saudi Arabia in reserves. It controls the straits of the Persian Gulf, where 40 percent of the world's oil flows each day. It is headed by an Islamist fundamentalist who vows Israel should be wiped off the map. Iran admittedly has a nuclear energy program in process, and many believe that it is committed to building nuclear weapons. But this may well be more about the United States than about Iran. President Bush's polls are at record lows. Republicans face a brutal off-year election. Karl Rove has pledged to make the war on terror a partisan issue in the fall. It surely isn't an accident that the White House is turning up the heat on Iran now, just as it did against Iraq in the run-up to the 2002 elections. The White House preparations are ominous. Bush has said that an Iranian bomb is unacceptable. In dispatching troops to reconnoiter in Iran and airplanes to mock bombing runs, the White House is putting Iran and the world on notice: We're ready to strike if Iran goes on with its program. Despite reservations from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh reports, the White House is contemplating the first use of nuclear weapons to ''take out'' the underground Iranian facilities that may be part of the weapons program. Is it conceivable that a president who sees himself on a divine mission has learned nothing from the debacle in Iraq? Remember the bit about being greeted as ''liberators'' in Iraq? Now, according to an anonymous contractor in Hersh's story, the White House is said to believe that the bombing will turn the people against the mullahs who run the government. That will counter the experience of every bombing effort since the invention of the airplane. The question is whether the Congress and the American people will roll over or stand up and call the administration to account. Surely, this is the time for Republicans to put aside their partisan zealotry and hold hearings -- open and public -- that explore the nature of the threat posed by Iran, the programs already under way by the administration and the intelligence estimates, here and elsewhere, and what they really say. Reportedly, the White House is briefing selected legislators -- those who are cheerleaders for the war in Iraq. It doesn't want hearings because it doesn't want to inform the minority Democrats, much less the American people. The president believes he has absolute authority to launch a war of his choosing, without congressional approval, U.N. mandate or imminent threat. War would destabilize the Persian Gulf. Terrorism would spread. Bin Laden and others would rouse 1.2 billion Muslims with cries that the United States is seeking to destroy Islam. America would be supported by few if any of our allies -- and actively, if not directly, opposed by Russia and China. We need international diplomacy, not unilateral bomb rattling toward Iran. We need a concerted plan for energy independence, reducing our reliance on foreign oil. We need to engage the world's nations in a grand alliance against terrorists -- not isolate America as a rogue nation. It is time for Congress to act boldly and early before the administration rolls out another supposedly cost-efficient war in time for the fall elections.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (272)	4/11/2006 2:41:31 PM
From: paret	Respond to of 908

Environmentalism secrets By Fred Gielow April 1, 2006 eco.freedom.org If you think environmentalism is all about saving the Earth, protecting the whales, stopping pollution, and the like, here's some news. It's not! Listen to what environmental advocates themselves have to say: "I think if we don't overthrow capitalism, we don't have a chance of saving the world ecologically. I think it is possible to have an ecologically sound society under socialism. I don't think it's possible under capitalism." Judi Bari, Earth First! member. [Environmentalism equals replacing capitalism with socialism.] "The environmentalist's dream is an egalitarian society, based on rejection of economic growth, a smaller population, eating lower on the food chain, consuming a lot less, and sharing a much lower level of resources much more equally." Aaron Wildavsky, political scientist and professor. [Environmentalism equals making everybody equal; that is, it's communism.] "No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits... [C]limate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world." Christine Stewart, Canadian Environment Minister. [Environmentalism equals changing the world.] "We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists, and their projects... We must reclaim the roads and plowed land, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers, and return to wilderness millions of tens of millions of acres of presently settled land." David Foreman, EarthFirst! member. [Environmentalism equals a return to primitive living.] "We've got to ride the global-warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing, in terms of economic policy and environmental policy." Timothy Wirth, Clinton Administration U.S. Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs, and one of a number of politicians (including Barbara Boxer, Barney Frank, Al Gore, John Kerry, Christopher Shays, and others) who were designated as "Green Leadership for the '90s." [Environmentalism equals changing policy by claiming – even without substantiation – it's necessary to save the world's environment.] "[W]e have to offer up scary scenarios [about global warming and destruction of the environment], make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts one might have... Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest." Stephen Schneider, Stanford University environmentalist. [Environmentalism equals lies "if necessary."] "We routinely wrote scare stories about the hazards of chemicals, employing words like "cancer," and "birth defects" to splash a little cold water in reporters' faces... Our press reports were more or less true... Few handouts, however, can be completely honest, and ours were no exception... We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment." Jim Sibbison, former EPA press officer. [Environmentalism equals government-sponsored deception.] "Not only do journalists not have a responsibility to report what skeptical scientists have to say about global warming, they have a responsibility not to report what these scientists say." Ross Gelbspan, former editor of The Boston Globe. [Environmentalism equals silencing debate, and stifling contrary opinions.] "I would freely admit that on [global warming] we have crossed the boundary from news reporting to advocacy." Charles Alexander, Time magazine science editor. [Environmentalism equals indoctrination.] Writer John Meredith summarizes: "The radical environmental movement is destroying America. It is turning our society, once based on individual freedom and responsibility, into little more than mindless followers of regulations established at the whim of unelected special-interest groups." Walter Williams has the last word: "While the Soviet Union has collapsed, communism is not dead. It has [been] repackaged under a new name: Environmentalism. Communism is about extensive government regulation and control by elites, and so is environmentalism." ------------------------------------------------------------- Fred Gielow is the author of "You Don't Say," and is involved in property rights activities at: www.youdontsay.org.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (272)	4/12/2006 12:12:40 PM
From: paret	Respond to of 908

Man guilty of manslaughter, not murder for stabbing victim 200 times After killing Barzilai, Lakey covered the body and spent hours in the man's apartment talking on a telephone chat line, watching porn videos and stealing many of his belongings, Conviction in fatal stabbing Jury finds man guilty of manslaughter, not murder By TRACY JOHNSON P-I REPORTER seattlepi.nwsource.com A man who stabbed a Microsoft Corp. program manager more than 200 times while high on methamphetamine was found guilty of manslaughter Tuesday when a King County jury couldn't agree to call it murder. A few jurors believed Ronald Lakey was too intoxicated to actually intend to kill David Barzilai four years ago in Barzilai's Belltown apartment, one juror said later, so they settled on the less-serious charge. The juror, who did not want his name made public, said the decision was "extremely hard" and that jurors believed Lakey would take back that night if he could. Though disappointed, King County prosecutors were relieved the jury agreed the crime involved "deliberate cruelty" -- something that will let them ask for a longer prison term than the 14 to 17 years Lakey faces. "It was a little perplexing that someone could be deliberately cruel without being able to deliberately kill someone -- but that finding will allow us to ask for a sentence that will help us protect society from him," Deputy Prosecutor Jimmy Hung said. "It's hard to imagine anything more cruel than what happened to David." Lakey's attorney, C. Wesley Richards, said he was "pleased that they came back with manslaughter, given his mental state at the time." In Lakey's three-week trial, Richards told jurors Lakey killed Barzilai, a 25-year-old man he met on an Internet Web site for gay men, in a state of delirium caused by injecting meth. "He didn't know why he was stabbing Mr. Barzilai," Richards told jurors. "Mr. Lakey clearly had to be out of his mind." Crying on the witness stand, a tearful Lakey, 36, said he couldn't explain why he suddenly began stabbing Barzilai after they'd been intimate in Jan. 4, 2002 -- or why he cut off the man's hand. "To make sense out of it, it looks like rage ... (but) I don't recall any emotion," Lakey told jurors. "I had the knife in my hand, and I didn't stop." Deputy Prosecutor Don Raz argued that a half-gram packet of meth did not attack Barzilai -- Lakey did, and so brutally that he obviously meant to kill. Barzilai's parents and brother declined to discuss the verdict but thanked prosecutors, Seattle police and their victims' advocate in a statement read by their attorney, Jay Krulewitch. "No words can express the depth of our loss," they said. "David will never return to us." Lakey's friend, Lynn Slowinski, who worked with him at the Bon Marche, said it was " a horrible, horrible situation for both sides." She said Lakey, who's been in jail for four years, "feels terrible, doesn't understand it, and he's doing the best he can." After killing Barzilai, Lakey covered the body and spent hours in the man's apartment talking on a telephone chat line, watching porn videos and stealing many of his belongings, police said. He then got in Barzilai's car, headed south and turned himself in to Kelso police, telling them he'd stolen the car but eventually confessing he'd killed someone. Jurors Tuesday also found Lakey guilty of first-degree burglary and two theft charges for his crimes against Barzilai, along with stealing the car. P-I reporter Tracy Johnson can be reached at 206-467-5942 or tracyjohnson@seattlepi.com.