|
Time for another intervention.......
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
How dare you question my intellectual integrity. |
It really isn't that difficult, considering you have none.
| quote: | | I mean, I'm one of the few intellectual honest members in this board, with all due respect. |
Respect is earned, and you've done anything but that on this board and this forum, Arnold. A coward like yourself who's been banned and suspended multiple times, changed his name multiple times, and calls someone out to debate him and runs away from his own challenge demonstrates little intellectual honesty, and certainly deserves no respect.
Therefore, his statement was very much warranted.
| quote: | | It's very sad that this forum has been turned into the chill out section for the far left. |
If that's how you feel, you know where the door is. Don't let it hit your booty on the way out.
But I tell you what's even more sad - your presence even after you've been kicked out multiple times.
But I guess every forum has their little jester troll, so this one really can't be much different.
Oh, about your article - the "secret" talk was actually reported back in June by MSNBC:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/arch...16/1146329.aspx
As you can read, there was nothing sneaky about it at all. What Obama was doing was showing his lack of trust of the Bush Administration negotiating the Iraqi Agreement that consists of:
a Status of Forces agreement -- providing the legal basis for the continued presence and
operation of U.S. armed forces in Iraq once the U.N. Security Council mandate expires on December 31, 2008.
a Strategic Framework Agreement -- covering the overall bilateral relationship between the two countries. -- http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34568_20080711.pdf
As Obama stated rather clearly:
| quote: | | "My concern is that the Bush administration, in a weakened state politically, ends up trying to rush an agreement that in some ways might be binding to the next administration, whether it was my administration or Sen. McCain's administration." |
So just to be clear, the Status of Forces Agreement is NOT a timetable of withdrawal for our troops. The concern here is entirely about making sure there is no binding agreement to the next president (including if it's McCain, as Obama clearly stated) made by the dipstick current lame duck we have in office now. Obama wanted to make sure Bush didn't make such an agreement without the review of Congress. His response to this garbage is quite clear:
| quote: | But Obama's national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said Taheri's article bore "as much resemblance to the truth as a McCain campaign commercial."
In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office, she said.
In the face of resistance from Bush, the Democrat has long said that any such agreement must be reviewed by the US Congress as it would tie a future administration's hands on Iraq.
"Barack Obama has never urged a delay in negotiations, nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades," Morigi said.
"These outright distortions will not changes the facts -- Senator Obama is the only candidate who will safely and responsibly end the war in Iraq and refocus our attention on the real threat: a resurgent Al-Qaeda and Taliban along the Afghanistan/Pakistan border."
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM...sO8ZbiFYsnbIl3A |
As well as this response:
| quote: | An Obama aide accused Taheri of confusing the Status of Forces agreement with a Strategic Framework Agreement, for which Obama has pushed for congressional review.
"This article bears as much resemblance to the truth as a McCain campaign commercial. Barack Obama has consistently called for any Strategic Framework Agreement to be submitted to the U.S. Congress so that the American people have the same opportunity for review as the Iraqi Parliament," said Obama spokeswoman Wendy Morigi. "Unlike John McCain, he supports a clear timetable to redeploy our troops that has the support of the Iraqi government. Barack Obama has never urged a delay in negotiations, nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensm...n.html#comments |
And for the McCain campaign to make some sort of attempt to seize on this looks just a wee bit desperate to me.
Actually, it's kind of hilarious. Even if this situation wasn't completely taken right out of full context by a known serial liar who authored this story (I'll get to that next), I'm more than happy to dig old Reagan's bones out of the grave and charge him with violation of the Logan Act before we jump on Obama for it. Whadya say?
Now, on to your source, the author of this garbage - Amir Taheri, a hard core neocon who's a known liar and has been forced to retract his outright falsehoods in the past:
| quote: | 1. Taheri, who was once editor of a strongly pro-Shah Iranian newspaper during the seventies, left the country after the revolution. Strongly opposed to Iran's current government, he wrote a 1989 book called Nest of Spies: America's Journey to Disaster in Iran. Shaul Bakhash, a specialist in mideast history at George Mason University, reviewed the book for the New Republic and discovered important sections had been fabricated:
(http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog...mir_taheri.html)
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000796.php |
More here on that story:
This one is my favorite, and perhaps best known by this turd:
More on that can be found here:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HE24Ak03.html
and here:
http://www.juancole.com/2006/05/ano...egislation.html
and here:
http://thejewishweek.com/news/newsc...hp3?artid=12511
More fun stuff from Wiki too on this wonderful nutbag:
| quote: | Dwight Simpson of San Francisco State University and Kaveh Afrasiabi accuse Taheri and his publisher Eleana Benador of fabricating false stories in the New York Post in 2005 where Taheri identified Iran's UN ambassador Javad Zarif as one of the students involved in the 1979 seizure of hostages at the US Embassy in Tehran. Zarif was Simpson's teaching assistant and a graduate student in the Department of International Relations of San Francisco State University at the time.[16]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amir_Taheri |
and
| quote: | In a 29 March 2008 opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, Taheri makes the statement that, "The truth is that Sunni and Shiite extremists have always been united in their hatred of the U.S.", and alleges that Iranian Government supports Sunni groups such as Al Qaeda. [17] Under Sunni groups, Taheri mentiones the Talysh nationalist movement in the republic of Azerbaijan the Rastakhiz party in Tajikistan.[17] However, the Talysh are predominantly Shia[18] with a Sunni minority in the mountainous regions.[19] Rastakhiz (Islamic Renaissance Party) was incorported into the United Tajik Opposition (UTO) was an amalgam of nationalist and Islamist parties and movements. The war's greatest destruction and toll in civilian deaths was in the south, where Kuliabis and their allies conducted campaigns of "ethnic cleansing" against local residents of Gharmi and Pamiri origin. The height of hostilities occurred between 1992 and 1993 and pitted Kulyabi militias against an array of groups, including militants from the Islamic Renaissance Party (IRP) and ethnic minority Pamiris from Gorno-Badakhshan. In large part due to the foreign support they received, the Kulyabi militias were able to soundly defeat opposition forces and went on what has been described by Human Rights Watch as an ethnic cleansing campaign against Pamiris and Garmis.[20] The Pamiri people are Ismaili Shiites. In fact Iran does not support the Sunni movement of Tajikistan and is instead betting on a stabilized country linked to it by Persian culture. Iran and Russia, the most important foreign powers in the country, had developed common interests and Iran needs to preserve its cooperative relationship with Russia. Especially after the rise to power in Afghanistan of the mainly Pashtun Islamic Movement of Taliban (Islamic students) with Pakistani and Saudi support, Russia, Iran, and Uzbekistan became even more alarmed about the situation there. All were in different ways aiding the non-Pashtun (Tajik, Uzbek, and Shia Hazara) forces resisting the Taliban in north Afghanistan. Iran and Russia also had similar interests in the Caspian Sea, in limiting Western involvement in Central Asia, and in increasing their leverage over Afghanistan.[21] Shi’ite Iran nearly went to war against the Taliban after the massacre of Afghan Shi’ites and nine Iranian diplomats in Mazar-e-Sharif in 1998. [22]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amir_Taheri |
Yep, you sure got yourself a winner there, Latin.
I'm just wondering, is it really too much to ask a full context for any nutbag neocon? Or will you continually purport authors who, in creationist-like fashion, create contexts to support their own version of events? It really is gosh-darn pathetic.
Edited to remove profane words per threat of the thread-starter who supposedly closes previous threads as a consequence to his ears bleeding from such words......
___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...
Last edited by MisterOpus1 on Sep-18-2008 at 16:14
|
