Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

I think I would prefer Germany,

Posted By: Switzerland, Finland, on 2008-11-18
In Reply to: Here are other countries that think -- - Harbinger

Austria, Greece, or maybe even Moldova.




Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Would you prefer Obama's arena be less than it was in Germany?

The guy has a great audience and my only fear was he would take on the black agenda when our country if falling apart - There is so much to do. 


Yeah, give the man a stage that at least is proportionate to foreign countries' stage given to an American politician.  Geesh.  


I didn't see crowds gather for anyone else.  When a crowd that size gathers for a person, they can have any darn stage set they want.  As they deserved it. 


Germany is being used. sm
The people bringing these charges are 11 Iraqi and they chose Germany as their *world stage*.   They are being helped by some bleeding heart liberal named Michael Ratner.  

It may be time for the US to close its military bases in Germany and shift them to Poland and the new East European democracies. They are far better allies and understand the importance of freedom and liberty.


Take it to Germany. They liked 0. ;-) lol
nm
Wow....even Germany and canada want O....
now THERE is an endorsement.

The voting jews? Redneck fundamentalist? Geez...BIGOTED much??

Another graduate of the Saul Alinsky Marxist-socialist (DNC) school of thought. This is ugly, ugly, and yet another wonderful reason to NOT vote for the big O and give this kind of bigotry power.
Germany didn't kill
The whole fricken country didn't kill jews - the leadership of that country did!!!!! Just like every Muslim is not a terrorist, every person who lives south of Maryland is not a red neck. I don't agree with prosecuting Rumsfeld for Murder, but let's keep the bigotry off the liberal board and take it back over to the conservative board where it is welcome.
Yeah, in Germany they were called....
Gestapo. In Iran they are called...the Republican Guard. If he even STARTS down that road he should be impeached. And who is the "we" that set the national security objectives and what are those objectives???
Looks more like Germany wouldn't give 'em up to the US. nm

In response to the "take it to Germany" post.

Seems that theybarely have a grasp on DC politics, let alone US imperatives abroad and challenges that America faces outside its borders.  They scoff at American traditions such as diplomacy, alliance, common interests and initiatives aimed at real solutions for fascist dictatorships, human rights abuse, global poverty and terrorism.  BTW, though we may have our own garden of home-grown terrorists, most terrorists live abroad.  The ethnocentric jingoism  expressed in the "America, love it of leave it/hate it and leave it" crowd and the imperial aspirations of their party in its attempts to disregard cultural differences, bomb nations into democracy and turn countries of the world into pitstops for the Americans to make on their resource raping rampages is exactly the kind of behavior that empowers terrorist worldviews to attract followers, strengthens their resolve and emboldens them to carry out their terrorist acts of war. 


We actually DO need to take it to Germany and to all UN/NATO countries, turn a new page on our approaches and come up with new solutions, plans well understood by Obama and brilliantly articulated in his plans for diplomacy and policies on the war on terror.  Biden grocs these concepts.  Mccain, same old same old.  Palin doesn't do foreign policy.  The party obvoiusly does not even recognize the need for it.  


Germany released him, OUR state department up in arms
and protesting the release...what's the point. It only proves that the U.S. don't want this thugs released...
Why do you think Obama campaigned in Europe/Germany last year? sm
Were they voting for him?

Huge red flag went up for a lot of us on that one.

The writing was on the wall, but so many refused to see it.


You hope it's wrong, and so do I. But only time will tell.
No doubt conservative right-wingers can be found in Germany
So let me get this straight. While there, did you actually founnd more than 250,000 Germans who were PO'ed? You did a quick street survey, right?

A picture is worth 1000 words. Your claim does nothing to change the fact that the turn-out was phenomenal, he brought many in the audience to tears, was perceived as the Black JFK and created a sensation all across Europe. Please note, this is not a US media source.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23520458-details/Obama+addresses+200,000+in+Berlin+as+he+calls+for+%5C'walls+between+Christians,+Muslims+and+Jews+to+come+down%5C'/article.do

Germany seek charges against Rumsfeld for prison abuse sm

Friday, Nov. 10, 2006
Exclusive: Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse
A lawsuit in Germany will seek a criminal prosecution of the outgoing Defense Secretary and other U.S. officials for their alleged role in abuses at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo


Just days after his resignation, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is about to face more repercussions for his involvement in the troubled wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. New legal documents, to be filed next week with Germany's top prosecutor, will seek a criminal investigation and prosecution of Rumsfeld, along with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA director George Tenet and other senior U.S. civilian and military officers, for their alleged roles in abuses committed at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The plaintiffs in the case include 11 Iraqis who were prisoners at Abu Ghraib, as well as Mohammad al-Qahtani, a Saudi held at Guantanamo, whom the U.S. has identified as the so-called 20th hijacker and a would-be participant in the 9/11 hijackings. As TIME first reported in June 2005, Qahtani underwent a special interrogation plan, personally approved by Rumsfeld, which the U.S. says produced valuable intelligence. But to obtain it, according to the log of his interrogation and government reports, Qahtani was subjected to forced nudity, sexual humiliation, religious humiliation, prolonged stress positions, sleep deprivation and other controversial interrogation techniques.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that one of the witnesses who will testify on their behalf is former Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the one-time commander of all U.S. military prisons in Iraq. Karpinski — who the lawyers say will be in Germany next week to publicly address her accusations in the case — has issued a written statement to accompany the legal filing, which says, in part: It was clear the knowledge and responsibility [for what happened at Abu Ghraib] goes all the way to the top of the chain of command to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld .

A spokesperson for the Pentagon told TIME there would be no comment since the case has not yet been filed.

Along with Rumsfeld, Gonzales and Tenet, the other defendants in the case are Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone; former assistant attorney general Jay Bybee; former deputy assisant attorney general John Yoo; General Counsel for the Department of Defense William James Haynes II; and David S. Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. Senior military officers named in the filing are General Ricardo Sanchez, the former top Army official in Iraq; Gen. Geoffrey Miller, the former commander of Guantanamo; senior Iraq commander, Major General Walter Wojdakowski; and Col. Thomas Pappas, the one-time head of military intelligence at Abu Ghraib.

Germany was chosen for the court filing because German law provides universal jurisdiction allowing for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that take place anywhere in the world. Indeed, a similar, but narrower, legal action was brought in Germany in 2004, which also sought the prosecution of Rumsfeld. The case provoked an angry response from Pentagon, and Rumsfeld himself was reportedly upset. Rumsfeld's spokesman at the time, Lawrence DiRita, called the case a a big, big problem. U.S. officials made clear the case could adversely impact U.S.-Germany relations, and Rumsfeld indicated he would not attend a major security conference in Munich, where he was scheduled to be the keynote speaker, unless Germany disposed of the case. The day before the conference, a German prosecutor announced he would not pursue the matter, saying there was no indication that U.S. authorities and courts would not deal with allegations in the complaint.

In bringing the new case, however, the plaintiffs argue that circumstances have changed in two important ways. Rumsfeld's resignation, they say, means that the former Defense Secretary will lose the legal immunity usually accorded high government officials. Moreover, the plaintiffs argue that the German prosecutor's reasoning for rejecting the previous case — that U.S. authorities were dealing with the issue — has been proven wrong.

The utter and complete failure of U.S. authorities to take any action to investigate high-level involvement in the torture program could not be clearer, says Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a U.S.-based non-profit helping to bring the legal action in Germany. He also notes that the Military Commissions Act, a law passed by Congress earlier this year, effectively blocks prosecution in the U.S. of those involved in detention and interrogation abuses of foreigners held abroad in American custody going to back to Sept. 11, 2001. As a result, Ratner contends, the legal arguments underlying the German prosecutor's previous inaction no longer hold up.

Whatever the legal merits of the case, it is the latest example of efforts in Western Europe by critics of U.S. tactics in the war on terror to call those involved to account in court. In Germany, investigations are under way in parliament concerning cooperation between the CIA and German intelligence on rendition — the kidnapping of suspected terrorists and their removal to third countries for interrogation. Other legal inquiries involving rendition are under way in both Italy and Spain.

U.S. officials have long feared that legal proceedings against war criminals could be used to settle political scores. In 1998, for example, former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet — whose military coup was supported by the Nixon administration — was arrested in the U.K. and held for 16 months in an extradition battle led by a Spanish magistrate seeking to charge him with war crimes. He was ultimately released and returned to Chile. More recently, a Belgian court tried to bring charges against then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for alleged crimes against Palestinians.

For its part, the Bush Administration has rejected adherence to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on grounds that it could be used to unjustly prosecute U.S. officials. The ICC is the first permanent tribunal established to prosecute war crimes, genocide and other crimes against humanity.


Germany, who killed millions of Jews wants to prosecute Rumsfeld.

That makes sense. 


Nazi Germany was created during a long cold winter
when unemployment was high. People was literally starving and freezing. Leadership had failed to keep the citizens fed and sheltered. Rogue leadership, Hitler, arrives announcing he will bring an end to the suffering. War employs. When there are no jobs, war is the alternative for a country. And pillaging, which is what basically happened, and the attempt at extinctousing an undesirable (to Hitler) nationality. Desperation in a country is a ticket to the empowerment of leadership which could potentially change the course of history. Or maybe we know that as it has just happened to us.
I prefer Olive Oil myself. Anyone? NM

What term would you prefer? I am sure you have
nm
Neighborhood I would prefer
Well, the one I would prefer I can't afford but that ain't the rich guys fault. We live within our means and don't blame everyone else. I ain't a hate all rich people kind of person. Those RICH people you so detest employ people who actually work for a living. Who do you think the folks you know would be working for if not someone with money to start/open/run a business?


Would you prefer he receive a

declaration of war from these leaders?  He can't possibly be responsible for RECEIVING letters from people.  This is ridiculous and serves to do nothing but fan the flames of hate and fear.  Please open the link I provided and look at the graphs.  George W. Bush has completely destroyed any trust, respect or credibility the United States once had.  The WORLD wants a leader they can trust.  The WORLD simply doesn't trust the Republicans after eight years of Bush.  Open the link and see for yourself.


And the thread you started above is simply false.  Public service will NOT be mandatory.  He's trying to bring back a "Peace Corps" style attitude to America and wants to REWARD those who CHOOSE to perform community service with help paying for their college tuition.  The rich kids can still float through and don't have to do anything, but the poorer families -- and they are increasing in the USA every day with every job lost -- are offered a way to help pay for college tuition.  That's hardly sinister.


"Ask not what your country can do for you.  Ask what you can do for your country" used to hold a positive meaning in this country. 


Maybe some Americans have gotten too greedy and spiteful for those words to mean anything today, but they still hold meaning for many of us.


I would prefer to teach my

child about it and explain to them that even though this lifestyle is not acceptable, they are people too and we should not treat them poorly.  If parents don't teach their children and they bully gay people, dorks, dweebs, smelly kids, etc........the school has every right to punish them for acting that way whether it be writing sentences over and over, calling the parents, etc.  You do not have to single out homosexuality and teach this to children as an example of tolerance. 


Besides, I said below that on the news they keep talking about how same sex marriage is more accepted by people.....particularly younger people and yet here you are saying that this should be taught in schools because younger people aren't tolerant?   So which is it?


You're being rude and obnoxious and I prefer to not

who simply doesn't "get it."


If you feel that invading Iraq is protecting our borders with Mexico, then you are direly in need of a geography course.


Buh-bye.


I simply prefer not to post here. SM
I have a hectic and stressful enough life as it is, as many MTs do.  I don't know anything about the other issue. I use to go to MTDaily and there was always trouble there with the ISP thing and their own prejudice.  So I don't go there anymore.  I suggest that might be an option for you if you feel the way you do. 
I prefer to think of them as straight thinkers.
Because, unlike you and others on this board, they understand and realise the dangers we face and have chosen to not make it political.  Theirs is not a blind Bush loyalty, much as yours is a blind Bush hatred.  That virulent malignant hatred has put all of this fine country, not my own, but fine nonetheless, at great risk. Somehow, despite contrary facts that are palpably clear in the historic record, American and European leaders have managed to convince themselves and the world that the most terrible wars of the 20th century occurred because nations didn’t do enough talking to resolve their differences when, in fact, they occurred because shortsighted, peace-minded leaders (think Jimmy Carter) allowed good intentions and wishful thinking to take the place of an accurate assessment of the identity and intentions of their adversaries.  Unless the West adapts more quickly than do canny Islamic terrorists in this constantly evolving war, cease your internecine fighting and stop forgetting what we’ve learned about our enemies—there will be disasters to come far worse than Sept. 11.  Sometimes I believe you almost wish for it.  I might also add that your incessant q/Bush lied/q mantra is no defense for your actions.  But we do know, especially after events in Lebanon and the foiled British bomb plot, that we’re in a war in which failure is not an option and for which repeating ‘Bush lied’ is not a strategy. Americans will not put in power a party that accepts the proposition that global warming is a greater threat than terrorism, that thinks Wal-Mart is a plague on the poor and that wants to repeal the job-creating, economy-boosting and deficit-cutting Bush tax cuts. They will not put in power a party that thinks death is a taxable event and that success should be punished. They will not pass the reins to a party that denies us access to energy reserves offshore and in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge and which thinks energy independence means building windmills and hugging caribou. If you want your party to win, stop the constant litany of complaints, with which this board is riddled, and do something constructive.  A litany of complaints is not a strategy.
I would prefer her as HIS running mate, but...
I would be fairly happy with either!  I have mixed feelings about Hillary, but like I've said, I'm sure she would do a fine job.  I just happen to reeeeally prefer Obama.
and you would prefer what, that he say, yes, I am a rock star
x
I'd prefer someone less prone to lying.
Not saying that MO doesn't either. Just saying I would like the First Lady to be more truthful.
I said I prefer to wait for the investigation and
Letting an official process play itself out is what open-minded, objective people do before they make judgments.
Americans prefer O tax plan

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/08/27/despite-cnn-distortion-americans-prefer-obama-tax-plan/


I prefer Muslims to Christians!
I find the Muslims I know to be well educated, polite, family oriented, and very gentle people. I cannot say the same for the Christians I have met. This is based on my own personal experience, so there is no need for flaming from the right-wing Christian fanatics.
I would prefer that the government not tear down
even dishonest citizens.
I'd sure prefer lobster to crow. LOL n/m

I prefer my jokes to be funny.
Nothing funny about that post. The only way to describe it is pathetic.
Most of us grownups would prefer to skip the HM
get down to business.
and I prefer the ganja green tea.....nm
x
I prefer Ron Paul..........over Obama or anyone else
__
Not 'spoiled & lazy' just prefer not to live in their

I prefer the definition of economic meltdown.
Ignore it and your campaign will go down in flames.
I prefer to strengthen the Independent Party
nm
I prefer to keep my focus on the positive measures
give the process a chance to unfold. Had enough of the prophets of doom.
You would prefer he not have staff on day 1? Or have a plan of action? sm
He has done nothing that previous Presidents-elect have not done in the days between election and inauguration.
Perhaps you would prefer the "original" I got prior to my editing.....

The Little Red Hen called all of her Democrat neighbors together and said, 'If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?'



'Not I,' said the cow.



'Not I,' said the duck.



'Not I,' said the pig.



'Not I,' said the goose.



 



 



 



'Then I will do it by myself,' said the little red hen, and so she did. The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain.



 



 



 



'Who will help me reap my wheat?' asked the little red hen.



 



 



 



'Not I,' said the duck..



'Out of my classification,' said the pig.



'I'd lose my seniority,' said the cow.



'I'd lose my unemployment compensation,' said the goose.



 



 



 



'Then I will do it by myself,' said the little red hen, and so she did.



 



 



 



At last it came time to bake the bread.



'Who will help me bake the bread?' asked the little red hen.



 



 



 



'That would be overtime for me,' said the cow.



 



 



 



'I'd lose my welfare benefits,' said the duck.



 



 



 



'I'm a dropout and never learned how,' said the pig.



 



 



 



'If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination,' said the goose.



 



 



 



'Then I will do it by myself,' said the little red hen.



 



 



 



She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share. But the little red hen said, 'No, I shall eat all five loaves.'



 



 



 



'Excess profits!' cried the cow. (Nancy Pelosi)



 



 



 



'Capitalist leech!' screamed the duck. (Barbara Boxer)



 



 



 



'I demand equal rights!' yelled the goose. (Jesse Jackson)



 



 



 



The pig just grunted in disdain. (Ted Kennedy)



 



 



 



And they all painted 'Unfair!' picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.



 



 



 



Then the farmer (Obama) came. He said to the little red hen, 'You must not be so greedy.'



 



 



 



'But I earned the bread,' said the little red hen.



'Exactly,' said Barack the farmer. 'That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle.'



 



 



 



And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, 'I am grateful, for now I truly understand.'



 



 



 



But her neighbors became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked bread because she joined the 'party' and got her bread free. And all the Democrats smiled. 'Fairness' had been established.



 



 



 



Individual initiative had died, but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared...so long as there was free bread that 'the rich' were paying for.



 



 



 



EPILOGUE



 



 



 



Bill Clinton is getting $12 million for his memoirs.



 



 



 



Hillary got $8 million for hers.



 



 



 



That's $20 million for the memories from two people, who for eight years, repeatedly testified, under oath, that they couldn't remember anything.



 



 



 



IS THIS A GREAT BARNYARD OR WHAT?


I prefer the Dorothy Parker version

(Look it up, they prolly would not let me use the words here....)


If you prefer your pols to speak AND THINK in sound bites, then W's your man!
you've gotten exactly what you deserve. It's unfortunate for the rest of us -- those who can process whole ideas -- that we got what you deserve as well.
Al Gore is a brillliant, articulate, experienced politician who speaks the truth. This oountry is a train wreck. Intelligent, thoughtful public discourse has been replaced by jingoism. A president spouting platitudes and repeating the same refrains over and over again in answer to serious issues brought us the debacle that is Iraq and the tragic spectacle of the Superdome after Katrina.
I'm pretty sure that what I have to say is going to go over the heads of some of the posters on this board, because it's your fear of real ideas that got us where we are.

I prefer watching re-runs of Colin Powell's
nm
Exactly. Some people prefer sticking their fingers in their ears to
x