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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (116071)	10/22/2011 9:39:55 AM
From: joseffy	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224742

Speaking of DUMB, retard kenneth is still FIXATED out of present time on George Bush, That;s because poor lefty kenneth CANNOT CONFRONT the disaster of his Solyndra, Fast and Furious, loss of AAA rating, Huge Unemployment 'president' Obama. Keep hiding from reality, kenneth, LOL

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (116071)	10/22/2011 9:49:00 AM
From: locogringo	6 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224742

Yo, Troll, if Obama is so smart, how come nobody wants him to be president anymore? Why is he begging for votes as the Messiah? Why is he killing everybody in sight? Why do the Senate Democrats and House Democrats OPENLY ignore him, and his bills? He's washed up, and everyone knows it, except trolls that CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (116071)	10/22/2011 4:21:00 PM
From: TideGlider	8 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224742

You just keep polishing that Obama turd, but you can't sell it to anyone.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (116071)	10/22/2011 5:03:08 PM
From: lorne	5 Recommendations Respond to of 224742

ken...how smart was it for hussein obama to send 30000 more American troops to Afghanistan where there is no hope at all of ever creating a free and democratic country?? How many more Americans have been killed because of hussein obama's stupidity? How many more are still to die for a useless cause. President Bush new that Afghanistan was a waste of American lives and drew down troops...hussein obama on the other hand is not all that bright. The only right thing that hussein obama has done is use drones to rid Planet Earth of radical moslums instead of risking the lives American troops.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (116071)	10/22/2011 7:57:12 PM
From: Paul V.	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 224742

Kenneth, interesting article of the US leaving Iraq in the Wall Street journal. Are we better protected with Hussein gone? I predict we will not be. Islam law well become the governing control of Iraq just like Iran. Remember that the Shiite's Law is the major religion of Islam with a large portion of the population in Iran. Then, we have the Sunni's and Kurds. What a mess! Religious wars will be begin between tribes. But, Bush II would have gotten his revenge against Hussein in his efforts to take out Bush I at the expense on numerous lives and huge cost at $2 billion per day. I have given bold type to the last part of the article which stress the appreciation which Iraq has for the US. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204485304576647060539551484.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories Maliki Takes Hard Line on American Withdrawal By SAM DAGHERBAGHDAD—Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Saturday that disagreement between Baghdad and Washington over the issue of immunity for American soldiers from Iraqi law was the main obstacle to reaching a deal to maintain an American military presence in Iraq beyond the end of the year. Mr. Maliki also signaled that there would be no compromise on this matter even in further discussions to keep a small contingent of American trainers and advisers. "When the issue of immunity was brought up and the Iraqi side was told that the American side won't leave a single soldier without full immunity and the Iraqi answer was that it's impossible to grant immunity to a single American soldier, negotiations stopped regarding the numbers, location and mechanics of training," Mr. Maliki told reporters in Baghdad. *Enlarge Image* APIraqis watch as Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki makes televised remarks in Baghdad on Saturday. *Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki confirmed Saturday that the pull-out of U.S. troops from Iraq will be completed by the end of the year. Courtesy of Reuters.* A Look Back at the Iraq War *View Slideshow* *Khalid Mohammed/Associated PressA U.S. soldier walked past a 'closed' sign at the Camp Victory Base complex in Baghdad Oct. 15.*** Casualty Count*Track the deaths of U.S. and allied troops in Iraq.* *More photos and interactive graphics* He spoke one day after President Barack Obama announced that the some 45,000 U.S. soldiers left in Iraq would all return home by the end of the year, thereby bringing to an end a period of protracted and tense negotiations that took place this year. A deal could have altered a Status of Forces Agreement signed between both sides in 2008 and kept a small contingent of combat troops in the country beyond Dec. 31, 2011. *WSJ Pentagon correspondent Julian Barnes and Mean Street host Evan Newmark discuss President Obama's announcement that U.S. troops will be pulled out of Iraq by year's end. AP Photo.* Meanwhile, in the first reaction from firebrand Iraqi Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr to President Obama's announcement, the official website of his political movement posted on Saturday a photograph of him in military fatigues with a rifle propped on a desk. The image was accompanied by a scanned document in which he responds to a follower's query about a possible increase in U.S. personnel at the embassy in Baghdad after the end of the year. More Coverage *U.S. Troops to Exit Iraq by Year-End* *War Transformed Military* *An Early 'Welcome Home'* *Political Risk of Move* *Concerns Over Iran* *"They are all occupiers and must be resisted after the end of the [withdrawal] period," wrote Mr. Sadr, who has been among the most vociferous opponents of all U.S. military presence in Iraq.* *White House officials have said that the U.S. will maintain between 4,000 and 5,000 security contractors in Iraq to protect American diplomats.* Bringing the Iraq war to a definitive conclusion, the U.S. announces it will pull out all troops by the end of the year. The decision reverses a plan to maintain as many as 5,000 troops for training. Robert Ourlian discusses on The News Hub. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta also left the door open on Friday to the possibility that some American soldiers could return to Iraq after the withdrawal of American combat forces to provide training, especially to the country's air force, which agreed recently to purchase 18 F-16 fighter jets from the U.S. But here, too, Mr. Maliki took a hard line on Saturday, saying that it would be solely up to Iraq to decide how many trainers it needed. He added that the trainers would enjoy no immunity and would be confined to Iraqi bases. He also quashed the possibility for collaboration with the U.S. in the fight against terror groups like Al Qaeda in arrangements similar to those with countries like Pakistan and Yemen. "That's what the Iraqi side will decide from a technical standpoint: the required number, without immunity and present inside Iraqi camps for training only," he said. "As for operations and taking part in operations, that's finished." Although the countries have already a separate Strategic Framework Agreement that calls for defense and security cooperation in broad terms, Mr. Maliki suggested that one less-controversial way forward would be for the U.S. to send military experts as part of Iraqi deals with U.S. defense contractors, but again without immunity. *"This is a matter that has not been concluded yet and is still under discussion," he said.* *It is unclear what the U.S. position is on such a proposal. Vice President Joe Biden is expected to travel to Iraq in the coming two weeks.* Mr. Maliki, who clinched a second term as prime minister in December after a grueling election, sought maximum political gain for Friday's announcement, projecting himself as the guardian of Iraqi sovereignty in the face of American demands. *"This is a huge victory and a massive success for Iraq and its diplomacy and its will and the will of its patriotic political forces," he said in his appearance on Saturday.* He called on Iraqis to take to the streets in celebrations and rallies. So far reaction among average Iraqis has been subdued, in part because Mr. Sadr's associates said they still mistrusted U.S. intentions. "We are worried about secret accords to keep the Americans under other labels such as advisers, security contractors and trainers," said Mushreq Naji, a lawmaker from Mr. Sadr's political movement, which controls 40 of the 325 seats in parliament and six ministries in Mr. Maliki's cabinet. The anti-American cleric played kingmaker by backing Mr. Maliki as the final nominee for prime minister for the country's Shiite majority last year. He also maintains a militia group accused of attacking U.S. interests in Iraq. "It's essential to call to your attention that we remain opposed to the American presence in Iraq and we still label it as occupation and this includes the presence of American trainers on Iraqi soil, whether this happens in accordance with an agreement with the Iraqi government or not," said Mr. Sadr in a televised speech on Wednesday hours after his return to Iraq from Iran. *He said he would only support the presence of American trainers in Iraq if Washington agreed to compensate Iraqis for its invasion in 2003 to topple Saddam Hussein's regime.* *Washington has accused Tehran of arming and bankrolling militia leaders like Mr. Sadr and others.* On Saturday Mr. Maliki sought to ease concerns that Baghdad would firmly move into Iran's orbit of influence after the full withdrawal of American forces and said that Iraq still seeks a special relationship with the U.S. *"We speak about our interest as Iraqis first and we do not speak about the interest of others," he said, without naming Iran.* Ghassan al-Atiyyah, a London-based Iraqi politician and academic, said the breakdown of negotiations between Iraq and the U.S. over immunity sends a message that Washington has lost leverage over the current Iraqi government and opens the door to greater interference by Iraq's neighbors Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia at a very tumultuous and dangerous period for the entire region. *"American withdrawal in this manner, given that Iraq is unstable, opens Pandora's box," he said adding that this could bolster an eventual "Damascus-Baghdad-Tehran axis" in the region.*

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (116071)	10/23/2011 8:26:45 AM
From: lorne	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224742

ken..."Speaking of dumb, Iraq was certainly a dumb war and George W. Bush made the dumbest foreign policy decision since Viet Nam."..... Afghanistan to back Pakistan if wars with U.S.: Karzai updated 10/22/2011 msnbc.msn.com ISLAMABAD — Afghanistan would support Pakistan in case of military conflict between Pakistan and the United States, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said in an interview to a private Pakistani TV channel broadcast on Saturday. The remarks were in sharp contrast to recent tension between the two neighbors over cross-border raids, and Afghan accusations that Pakistan was involved in killing the chief Afghan peace envoy, former Afghan president Burhanuddin Rabbani, by a suicide bomber on September 20. "God forbid, If ever there is a war between Pakistan and America, Afghanistan will side with Pakistan," he said in the interview to Geo television. "If Pakistan is attacked and if the people of Pakistan needs Afghanistan's help, Afghanistan will be there with you." Such a situation is extremely unlikely, however. Despite months of tension and tough talk between Washington and Islamabad, the two allies appear to be working to ease tension. In a two-day visit to Islamabad, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued stern warnings and asked for more cooperation in winding down the war in Afghanistan, but ruled out "boots on the ground" in North Waziristan, where Washington has been pushing Pakistan to tackle the Haqqani network. The Haqqani are a group of militants Washington has blamed for a series of attacks in Afghanistan, using sanctuaries in the Pakistani tribal region along the Afghan border. Pakistan is seen as a critical to the U.S. drive to end the conflict in Afghanistan. Pressure on Islamabad has been mounting since U.S. special forces found and killed Osama bin Laden in May in a Pakistani garrison town, where he apparently had been living for years. The secret bin Laden raid was the biggest blow to U.S.-Pakistan relations since Islamabad joined the U.S. "war on terror" after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. Karzai said tensions between the United States and Pakistan did not have any impact in his country's attitude toward Pakistan. The TV channel, Geo, did not say when the interview was conducted. Afghans have long been suspicious of Pakistan's intentions in their country and question its promise to help bring peace. Karzai repeated that concern in his remarks. "Please brother, stop using all methods that hurt us and that are now hurting you. "Let's engage from a different platform, a platform in which the two brothers only progress toward a better future in peace and harmony," he said. Following the death of Rabbani, Karzai said he would cease attempting to reach out to the Afghan Taliban and instead negotiate directly with Pakistan, saying its military and intelligence services could influence the militants to make peace.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (116071)	10/23/2011 8:26:55 AM
From: chartseer	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224742

Is that why he has ended it? Or is Iran throwing him out of Iraq? It was sort of comforting having troops on two of Iran's borders.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (116071)	10/23/2011 8:28:14 AM
From: lorne	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224742

ken, typical democrats? :-) Fraud case leaves California Democrats scrambling By Mary Slosson \| Reuters news.yahoo.com ..LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Stunning accusations that a top California Democratic campaign treasurer looted the war chests of her big-name clients have left candidates across the state scrambling to raise more money as election season looms. Kinde Durkee, who controlled the funds of roughly 400 candidates and groups, ranging from Senator Dianne Feinstein to local Democratic youth clubs, was arrested in September and charged with fraud. While the extent of the losses isn't yet clear, the coffers of dozens of Democratic politicians have been frozen, prompting the crippled campaigns to ask the California Fair Political Practices Commission to permit further donations from contributors who have already given the maximum. Feinstein, seeking re-election in 2012, has been forced to start from "square one" to raise campaign money, said Bill Carrick, political strategist and consultant to the Senator. But a commission official said it wasn't that simple. "It's quite clear that we can't just say 'the contribution limit is set aside'," California Fair Political Practices Commission chair Ann Ravel said, adding that the commission's legal team was researching what options were permissible by law. Feinstein donated $5 million of her own money to her re-election bid after the campaign lost access to an estimated $5.2 million, Carrick said. The senator has sued Durkee for fraud and breach of contract in a lawsuit that also accused First California Bank of aiding that fraud. Durkee, the 58-year-old daughter of a Hollywood pastor, is accused of co-mingling money in the roughly 400 accounts she controlled at the bank, making it unclear to whom any recovered money actually belongs. The bank reported $2.5 million in Durkee-controlled accounts, according to court documents, far less than the at least $9.8 million that her clients had raised, according to the Los Angeles County Democratic Party. "We lost at least $200,000 and the impact of that, for us, is much more immediate than it is for most candidates," Los Angeles County Democratic Party Chair Eric Bauman said. "We've got more than 50 races on the November 11 ballot. Our ability to support our endorsed candidates in these local elections is significantly affected," Bauman said, adding that the loss represents 90 percent of the party's total funds. 'GOING TO BE TOUGH' If a donor's campaign contributions were never received, Ravel said, there is a possibility that they could donate again. The commission hopes to decide if and how donors could contribute again by its next hearing on November 10. That deadline, however, would be too late for local elections slated for the following day, and the sudden loss of funds will be most acutely felt in grass-roots operations. "It's definitely going to be tough," Carrick said. "It's going to be very difficult for them to replenish that kind of money." Not everybody is as sympathetic to the sudden fund-raising challenges facing the California Democratic campaigns. "Most of these Democrats are very influential, powerful incumbents, and the political parties are able to contribute as much as they want to the candidates," said Allan Hoffenblum, a former Republican political consultant. "I don't think any client of (Durkee's) will lose because of this. There's plenty of money out there," he said Durkee, who has been called the "Bernie Madoff of campaign finance treasurers" by one former client, Representative Susan Davis of San Diego, admitted to using campaign funds for her own personal expenses, according to court documents. The mail fraud case against her in federal court alleges that Durkee used campaign donations to make mortgage payments and pay her American Express bills. "Durkee admitted that she had been misappropriating her clients' money for years and that forms she filed with the state were false," according to an account of an interview by Federal Bureau of Investigations agents in September, according to the federal complaint. The bank angered clients when it handed over control of the 398 bank accounts associated with Durkee to a California state court on September 23, recusing itself from sorting out how much of the recovered money should be doled out to whom. "In yet another attempt to escape liability for the fiasco that they helped create, First California Bank has turned most of the accounts that Durkee controlled over to the courts," the Los Angeles County Democratic Party said. It added that smaller parties who lost funds lack the financial resources to fight in court to get their money back. First California Bank marketing director Diane Dickerson told Reuters: "It will all come out in time, I promise." She declined further comment. Durkee is next expected to appear in court in December. Her attorney could not be reached for comment and a phone number listed in court documents as belonging to her appeared to have been disconnected. (Editing by Dan Whitcomb and Cynthia Johnston) ..