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

Anyone purposely pointing out Hussein

Posted By: You are a hater on 2008-10-15
In Reply to: Oops, left out Barack Hussein Obama - Nanaw

Is just a stupid loser.  You are a racist.  Obama is not Muslim but what if he was????  Timothy McVeigh was a Christian and he blew up government buildings.  There are many good muslims and good Christians AND good atheists.  Can you wrap your hands around that?  Anyone drawing attention to the middle name HUSSEIN is trying to cause trouble or fear that it sounds like a terrorist name.  How small minded you are.  Did you even graduate high school?  I won't be looking for your reply.  I'm busy planning a victory party for Obama.


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

How can you trust him otherwise? He could be purposely disrespecting our flag (sm)
as a sign to those he truly sides with that he is on their team. The mere thought that someone could be elected to be our President while refusing to accept our flag is just insane! Do you have any idea how good we have it in America compared to other countries? Do you want to become a third world country? Do you know how possible it is?
We do not purposely kill, cut off heads, torture.
nm
yea? well someone w/middle name Hussein

I'm not voting for Hillary but....


know that it scares the heck outta me and others, Obama.......his middle name is hussein.....


one of the bibles say something to the effect of when the *stuff* happens (the bad stuff) - it's going to happen from the *inside out* -


but glad you are ALL so trusting.......i trust nobody 100%. 


i cannot stand ALL of these candidates this time around......


JMHO - no flames please


Obama Hussein - Is that the best you can do.
How completely ignorant.
Saddam Hussein set the example
of how the UN's ''stern warnings'' are to be regarded.  One simply ignores them and does as one wishes.  In time, a ''sterner warning'' is issued, which one pays no attention to, etc.  This can go on for years, the warnings becoming more and more urgent, the UN doing nothing about the situation, except hold meetings, blather and warn and sanction.  The difference?  Oh, NK now has nuclear weapons.  Give them several years' worth of warnings and their nuclear program should progress very nicely.  They may actually be able to hit something with a missile eventually.
Saddam Hussein would provide anyone...
with anything if he thought it would be used to help bring down the United States and would make a "deal with the devil" (Al Qaeda) in order to attack the US, and I think anyone who thought differently would be disingenuous to say the least. Mortal enemies are often joined together by their hatred of some other entity....in this case of the United States, and Americans.

As to the 18 generals lined up behind Obama...what about the hundreds not lined up with him?

We will definitely disagree on this one.

Have a good night.
As in Barry Hussein Obama.
xx
Barrack Hussein Obama

"This is the greatest country on the face of the Earth.  Join with me as we change it." -- Barrack Obama 2008


Who else called for change in this fashion? 


Karl Marx.


Joseph Stalin.


Adolf Hitler.


Benito Mussolini.


Fidel Castro.


And you want Obama for president?  Are you NUTS!


Thank you for pointing that out.
However, I still don't understand how the OP can attribute every post that she finds offensive to the same two people. There are a lot of people posting on this forum. Unless someone uses the same moniker all the time, there is no way to know for certain who is posting any particular message.
Thanks for pointing that out...
nm
thank you for pointing that out
;)
Not bent, just pointing out..

Rush just seems to have a problem keeping all his pills straight. What does that tell you. He's was buying stuff in parking lots. He was visiting multiple doctors. He has other people's medications on him and yet, he slams someone about pill use ...hypocritical I say.


We hate Bush, we hate Rush, we hate Rove...that is the right's mantra. Everytime we point out something that the right cannot defend or they just simple disagree with...out comes the ***the left's hatred is so palpable we can feel it. They are so negative and hateful about everything and everyone, ***   That is just not true. I personally have not hated anyone in politics since Nixon and I was young then and did not realize that hating him would accomplish nothing other than making me angrier and angrier. So that ***the left hates*** falls on deaf ears here.


 


I don't think she's arrogant but pointing out the
xx
I believe it is a website pointing out that there are...
people out there who do believe he is the "messiah." Not necessarily sent from God, but has become a deity to them. Did you read all the quotes on the site? Those are real quotes from real people...Obama DID use that "presidential seal" depicted there until people got outraged and he stopped using it. It is very, very concerning. And I think the answer is yes...there are a lot of people out there mesmerized by him. NO matter WHAT comes out of his mouth, they believe it. Did you see the star-gazed way they look at him? The kids "singing for their leader?" Wayyyy too freaky for me. Of course, I was not going to vote for him anyway because he is a flaming socialist, but this site would have given me serious pause if I had even thought about voting for him. Just my opinion.
Unfortunately, ours is pointing at boxes and...sm
and checking off things, but the nurses type in the history and other information themselves.  I was told that basically the only thing I would be transcribing would be a letter here and there, but they have never had very many of them anyway.
Rumsfeld's Handshake Deal With Saddam Hussein

Rumsfeld is full of history (among other substances), but he neglected to share this piece of history with the American majority he criticized.


(I suggest Breaking Up Is Hard To Do as the perfect background music for this.) 















Published on Thursday, December 8, 2005 by CommonDreams.org

Rumsfeld's Handshake Deal with Saddam

by Norman Solomon
 

Christmas came 11 days early for Donald Rumsfeld two years ago when the news broke that American forces had pulled Saddam Hussein from a spidery hole. During interviews about the capture, on CBS and ABC, the Pentagon's top man was upbeat. And he didn't have to deal with a question that Lesley Stahl or Peter Jennings could have logically chosen to ask: Secretary Rumsfeld, you met with Saddam almost exactly 20 years ago and shook his hand. What kind of guy was he?

Now, Saddam Hussein has gone on trial, but such questions remain unasked by mainstream U.S. journalists. Rumsfeld met with Hussein in Baghdad on behalf of the Reagan administration, opening up strong diplomatic and military ties that lasted through six more years of Saddam's murderous brutality.

As it happens, the initial trial of Saddam and co-defendants is focusing on grisly crimes that occurred the year before Rumsfeld gripped his hand. The first witness, Ahmad Hassan Muhammad, 38, riveted the courtroom with the scenes of torture he witnessed after his arrest in 1982, including a meat grinder with human hair and blood under it, the New York Times reported Tuesday. And: At one point, Mr. Muhammad briefly broke down in tears as he recalled how his brother was tortured with electrical shocks in front of their 77-year-old father.

The victims were Shiites -- 143 men and adolescent boys, according to the charges -- tortured and killed in the Iraqi town of Dujail after an assassination attempt against Saddam in early July of 1982. Donald Rumsfeld became the Reagan administration's Middle East special envoy 15 months later.

On Dec. 20, 1983, the Washington Post reported that Rumsfeld visited Iraq in what U.S. officials said was an attempt to bolster the already improving U.S. relations with that country. A couple of days later, the New York Times cited a senior American official who said that the United States remained ready to establish full diplomatic relations with Iraq and that it was up to the Iraqis.

On March 29, 1984, the Times reported: American diplomats pronounce themselves satisfied with relations between Iraq and the United States and suggest that normal diplomatic ties have been restored in all but name. Washington had some goodies for Saddam's regime, the Times account noted, including agricultural-commodity credits totaling $840 million. And while no results of the talks have been announced after the Rumsfeld visit to Baghdad three months earlier, Western European diplomats assume that the United States now exchanges some intelligence on Iran with Iraq.

A few months later, on July 17, 1984, a Times article with a Baghdad dateline sketchily filled in a bit more information, saying that the U.S. government granted Iraq about $2 billion in commodity credits to buy food over the last two years. The story recalled that Donald Rumsfeld, the former Middle East special envoy, held two private meetings with the Iraqi president here, and the dispatch mentioned in passing that State Department human rights reports have been uniformly critical of the Iraqi President, contending that he ran a police state.

Full diplomatic relations between Washington and Baghdad were restored 11 months after Rumsfeld's December 1983 visit with Saddam. He went on to use poison gas later in the decade, actions which scarcely harmed relations with the Reagan administration.

As the most senior U.S. official to visit Iraq in six years, Rumsfeld had served as Reagan's point man for warming relations with Saddam. In 1984, the administration engineered the sale to Baghdad of 45 ostensibly civilian-use Bell 214ST helicopters. Saddam's military found them quite useful for attacking Kurdish civilians with poison gas in 1988, according to U.S. intelligence sources. In response to the gassing, journalist Jeremy Scahill has pointed out, sweeping sanctions were unanimously passed by the U.S. Senate that would have denied Iraq access to most U.S. technology. The measure was killed by the White House.

The USA's big media institutions did little to illuminate how Washington and business interests combined to strengthen and arm Saddam Hussein during many of his worst crimes. In the 1980s and afterward, the United States underwrote 24 American corporations so they could sell to Saddam Hussein weapons of mass destruction, which he used against Iran, at that time the prime Middle Eastern enemy of the United States, writes Ben Bagdikian, a former assistant managing editor of the Washington Post, in his book The New Media Monopoly. Hussein used U.S.-supplied poison gas against Iranians and Kurds while the United States looked the other way.

Of course the crimes of the Saddam Hussein regime were not just in the future when Rumsfeld came bearing gifts in 1983. Saddam's large-scale atrocities had been going on for a long time. Among them were the methodical torture and murders in Dujail that have been front-paged this week in coverage of the former dictator's trial; they occurred 17 months before Rumsfeld arrived in Baghdad.

Today, inside the corporate media frame, history can be supremely relevant when it focuses on Hussein's torture and genocide. But the historic assistance of the U.S. government and American firms is largely off the subject and beside the point.

A photo of Donald Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand on Dec. 20, 1983, is easily available. (It takes a few seconds to find via Google.) But the picture has been notably absent from the array of historic images that U.S. media outlets are providing to viewers and readers in coverage of the Saddam Hussein trial. And journalistic mention of Rumsfeld's key role in aiding the Iraqi tyrant has been similarly absent. Apparently, in the world according to U.S. mass media, some history matters profoundly and some doesn't matter at all.

Norman Solomon is the author of the new book War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death. For information, go to: www.WarMadeEasy.com.


I disagree...I do not think Saddam Hussein left to do what he would in Iraq....
would have helped this country's security. I still believe there was WMD and I believe it is in Syria. He obviously had WMD in form of chemicals, he used them on his own people. That all had to go somewhere. But people totally discount that. What if Hussein had given AL Qaeda a container of Ricin that they released in New York City in the subway system?

I want a man in the white house that AL Qaeda is afraid would retaliate and will keep their feet to the fire. I don't think that man is Obama.

I respect your take on it...I just have a different take on it.
Oops, left out Barack Hussein Obama
in the above post.
PRESIDENT ELECT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA ! ! ! ! ! !
x
And if his moral compass was pointing sm
to true north, he would have declined representing those clients.

You can argue the difference between ethics and legal ethics till the chickens come to roost, but if this man would represent these kinds of clients and make thse kinds of oppositions, I don't think he is fit to be the second in command of the DOJ.
EXCELLENT! Thank you for pointing that fact out. nm
x
Pointing to reality is "fearmongering"

February 8, 2009


IT AIN'T FEARMONGERING IF IT'S TRUE.... Just today, the LA Times has a good report on the unprecedented pressure on state budgets right now -- pressure that will not be alleviated by the federal recovery plan because Sens. Collins & Co. believe state aid isn't stimulative enough. While state shortfalls will lead to painful cuts in practically every state, Nevada is poised to get hit much harder than most.


The Times report noted, for example, that Nevada is "facing the most serious shortfall," and lawmakers will have to cut a striking 38% from its state budget. The impact across the state will be both drastic and unavoidable, most notably in the state's public schools, which will soon face a 15% cut.


It wasn't surprising, then, that Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) criticized Senate "centrists" for cutting $40 billion in state aid from the stimulus package, noting that the aid, which appeared in the House version, was intended to stop states from "laying off cops and firefighters, money to help keep teachers going." Republican Sen. John Ensign of Nevada rejected Frank's comments, labeling the remarks "fearmongering." Indeed, Ensign seemed encouraged by the fact that state budgets, including his own, would have to be slashed, calling the budgets "bloated." He said, "What we should be doing is cutting back."


Got that? As the recession worsens, and government spending is needed to prevent more Americans from losing their jobs, a leading Republican senator whose own state is about to get pummeled, believes it's a good idea to "cut back."
I can think of a variety of ways to respond to this nonsense, but I think Matt Yglesias summed things up nicely:

The idea that it would be good for states to cut back in the midst of the recession is stupid. The idea that the recession won't, absent federal aid, lead to layoffs of state employees such as teachers and firefighters is also stupid. But the idea that it's simultaneously true that the reason we should eschew aid is that states need to cut back and also true that it's fearmongering to warn of layoffs is doubleplus stupid. What does Ensign think cutbacks consist of? States will be reducing vital services. The cutbacks will have the immediate impact of reducing the incomes of laid-off families and beneficiaries of state programs. That will have an additional impact on businesses where the newly laid-off teachers and cops used to work.


And the reduced level of service will have its own bad economic impacts. Cutting back public safety budgets will mean fewer cops on the beat. That means more crime which will further reduce economic activity. State cutbacks to child care subsidies will make it harder for people who lose jobs to find and accept new ones. The cutbacks to mass transit services that are happening across the country will introduce additional rigidity into the labor market and reduce patronage of businesses that people are accustomed to reaching via transit. And in the most severe cases, cutbacks in assistant to the severely impoverished will have a decades-long impact on the well-being of their children.


Sen. John Ensign is entirely comfortable with all of these developments -- those dreaded state budgets are "bloated," after all -- but doesn't want anyone to acknowledge this publicly. Pointing to reality is "fearmongering."
It's not enough for congressional Republicans to stand in the way of sound economic policy during a crisis; they also want to discourage everyone from talking about it


Ever heard of Barack Hussein Obama before he started running?
that argument doesn't play out either! and she's the VP not the president!
Do you honestly believe that a evil tyrant like Sadam Hussein would NOT have WMDs?
He used chemical warefare on the Kurds in the 1980s. They exist.  They were well hidden and are probably now well hidden just across the border into Iraq or Syria.  Stop kidding yourselves! 
Resorting to the 2nd grader finger-pointing and
Don't you recognize when you have run out of anything pertinent to say?
No scare tactics. Just pointing out that we don't live
If we don't start talking with some of these countries, and trying to find a way to get them thinking of other things to do with their artillery than aim it at us, then sooner or later, our little plastic bubble could get blown to bits. We're not invincible.
Pointing out that middle name is hateful and racist sm
You know that is designed to stir trouble. Muslims are not all evil and Barack isn't even a muslim. Yeah that is his middle name SO WHAT RACIST?
With all the juvenile name calling and finger pointing
exactly who introduced the use of the word "idiots" into the post. BTW, for you first, second and third responder(s), posting the same thing 2 or 3 times makes for a pathetic majoriy of one. Read my lips. PA-THE-TIC.
Afghanistan - war on Al Quaeda and Taliban; Iraqi FREEDOM - kill Saddam Hussein
Two different wars based on entirely different premises.........
name calling and finger pointing, again with no real facts but your opinion. sm
I expect no less from Palin haters
We're not defending Bush we're pointing out the obvious
All you see in your view is Bush, Bush, Bush. Nobody else exists. You have yet to answer any of the questions I posed yesterday. We're not the one obsessing about Bush. I'm sure you'll counter that with I don't owe you any answers! It's really telling that for five or six days this board was mute about the Israel/Lebanon situation. You were too busy posting trash news about Bush like nothing was even happening, but I know that the left has wait for its talking points. You all cannot formulate opinions on your own. You have boilerplates ready to go though. *This is Bush's fault because _____________ but you have to wait on Howard Dean, Bill Clinton, etc. etc. to fill in the blanks for you. It's not just a phenomenon here but with all the left. You can count on at least two days of silence when something unforseen breaks out in the world, because they have to retreat to their bunkers to get their talking points straight, but it will always start with *This is Bush's fault because....