“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Sunday, August 30, 2009

Overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom traded British honor for oil.


British Honor for Oil Program

Lockerbie bomber 'set free for oil'
Jason Allardyce Times on Line

The British government decided it was "in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom” to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya, leaked ministerial letters reveal.

Gordon Brown’s government made the decision after discussions between Libya and BP over a multi-million-pound oil exploration deal had hit difficulties. These were resolved soon afterwards.

The letters were sent two years ago by Jack Straw, the justice secretary, to Kenny MacAskill, his counterpart in Scotland, who has been widely criticised for taking the formal decision to permit Megrahi’s release.

The correspondence makes it plain that the key decision to include Megrahi in a deal with Libya to allow prisoners to return home was, in fact, taken in London for British national interests.

Edward Davey, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, said: “This is the strongest evidence yet that the British government has been involved for a long time in talks over al-Megrahi in which commercial considerations have been central to their thinking.”



Prime Minister Gordon Brown Lying through his teeth.

Two letters dated five months apart show that Straw initially intended to exclude Megrahi from a prisoner transfer agreement with Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, under which British and Libyan prisoners could serve out their sentences in their home country.

In a letter dated July 26, 2007, Straw said he favoured an option to leave out Megrahi by stipulating that any prisoners convicted before a specified date would not be considered for transfer.

Downing Street had also said Megrahi would not be included under the agreement.

Straw then switched his position as Libya used its deal with BP as a bargaining chip to insist the Lockerbie bomber was included.

The exploration deal for oil and gas, potentially worth up to £15 billion, was announced in May 2007. Six months later the agreement was still waiting to be ratified.

On December 19, 2007, Straw wrote to MacAskill announcing that the UK government was abandoning its attempt to exclude Megrahi from the prisoner transfer agreement, citing the national interest.

In a letter leaked by a Whitehall source, he wrote: “I had previously accepted the importance of the al-Megrahi issue to Scotland and said I would try to get an exclusion for him on the face of the agreement. I have not been able to secure an explicit exclusion.

“The wider negotiations with the Libyans are reaching a critical stage and, in view of the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom, I have agreed that in this instance the [prisoner transfer agreement] should be in the standard form and not mention any individual.”

Within six weeks of the government climbdown, Libya had ratified the BP deal. The prisoner transfer agreement was finalised in May this year, leading to Libya formally applying for Megrahi to be transferred to its custody.

Saif Gadaffi, the colonel’s son, has insisted that negotiation over the release of Megrahi was linked with the BP oil deal: “The fight to get the [transfer] agreement lasted a long time and was very political, but I want to make clear that we didn’t mention Mr Megrahi.

“At all times we talked about the [prisoner transfer agreement]. It was obvious we were talking about him. We all knew that was what we were talking about.

“People should not get angry because we were talking about commerce or oil. We signed an oil deal at the same time. The commerce and oil deals were all with the [prisoner transfer agreement].”

His account is confirmed by other sources. Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Libya and a board member of the Libyan British Business Council, said: “Nobody doubted Libya wanted BP and BP was confident its commitment would go through. But the timing of the final authority to spend real money was dependent on politics.”

Bob Monetti of New Jersey, whose son Rick was among the victims of the 1988 bombing, said: “It’s always been about business.”

BP denied that political factors were involved in the deal’s ratification or that it had stalled during negotiations over the prisoner transfer talks.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman denied there had been a U-turn, but said trade considerations had been a factor in negotiating the prisoner exchange deal. He said Straw had unsuccessfully tried to accommodate the wish of the Scottish government to exclude Megrahi from agreement.

The spokesman claimed the deal was ultimately “academic” because Megrahi had been released on compassionate grounds: “The negotiations on the [transfer agreement] were part of wider negotiations aimed at the normalisation of relations with Libya, which included a range of areas, including trade.

“The exclusion or inclusion of Megrahi would not serve any practical purpose because the Scottish executive always had a veto on whether to transfer him.”

A spokesman for Lord Mandelson said he had not changed his position that the release of Megrahi was not linked to trade deals.


85 comments:

  1. Straw is mentioned in Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales, in the Nun's Priest's Tale, as the leader of a mob targeting foreign workers:

    Certes, he Jakke Straw and his meinee
    Ne made nevere shoutes half so shrille,
    Whan that they wolden any Fleming kille.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's gotta be Rufus's Icon.
    What is your method for finding those images, Deuce?

    ReplyDelete
  3. From the way it's tail is carried, doug, I'd venture there are some Arabian bloodlines in its' ancestry. Though its' head, at that angle, is not looking to "refined".

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is the final nail in the coffin. Gordon Brown and his party will be turned out.

    ReplyDelete
  5. England has been a Giant Pain in the Ass.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I would go so far as to be against any aid to any country that makes religion a central tenent of its' government.

    The US violating at least the spirit of the First Amendment by supporting governments that have established religions, or that religions have established.

    The US supporting the State establishment of religion, by proxy, when providing that aid.

    We should not do it.
    It violates our founding principles.

    Thus we should stop all aid, support and protection to England.....

    ReplyDelete
  7. We can't reasonably predict the outcome of US elections, now we're going to conclude what the Brits are going to do?

    What if Mr Brown sails on, as Prime Minister, sailor? What would portend? That is what we should be thinking about, more than Mr Brown's government dissolving over the redemption and compassionate release of an of the Libyan government, even if he was a terrorist.

    The Brits have a long history of such behavior.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'd be all for that, wi"o". The Brits do not need a single dime of US aid. We can supply moral comfort, individual volunteers can leave the US and sally forth in England's defense, but the US government should CUT THEM OFF.

    The US should leave that island nation, withdrawing the Air Force personnel there, immediately.

    Glad we agree.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dr when you apply your statements against all nations equally (not Just singling out Israel) you would not be considered an anti-semite..

    your statement

    I would go so far as to be against any aid to any country that makes religion a central tenent of its' government.

    The US violating at least the spirit of the First Amendment by supporting governments that have established religions, or that religions have established.

    The US supporting the State establishment of religion, by proxy, when providing that aid.

    We should not do it.
    It violates our founding principles.

    was in fact ONLY aimed at israel...



    start using your arrows EQUALLY at all nations?

    great...

    ReplyDelete
  10. I guess this is just another example of Rufus's "Obsession" with oil, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  11. You see, kiddos, England has just joined that poor, underprivileged class of nations known as "Oil Importers."

    ReplyDelete
  12. The North Sea is going down, Mexico is going down, Prudhoe Bay is going down, Venezuela is going down, Nigeria is going down, Kuwait is going down,

    Get the picture?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Meanwhile Chinese Consumption is going UP, other Asian Consumption is Going UP, Indian Consumption is Going UP, Middleeastern Consumption is Going UP,

    and U.S., and the OECD have cut consumption all that they possibly can.

    How do you like it so far?

    ReplyDelete
  14. A couple of weeks ago it was announced that Brazil had just drilled a $150 Million DRY HOLE in the "Big Discovery," and Saudi Arabia is drilling 2 miles deep, through salt, out in the "Red Sea" where they've never tried, before, and are trying to figure out how to get "Oil" from Tarmat (basically, asphalt buried a mile deep.)

    But, the faerie fart, unicorn sweat specialists (like the one that just had an article in the NYT) assure us that all we have to do is send ol Jed Clampett out with his trusty shootin iron to bring us up some more bubblin crude.

    Who ya gonna believe?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Oh, that is one hell of a piece of Artwork, Deuce.

    ReplyDelete
  16. By the way, what makes us believe that the U.S., through a blank face, or a shrug of the shoulders, at a cocktail party at Whitehall, or the UN, didn't "greenlight this?

    Like we did Saddam's invasion of Kuwait?

    ReplyDelete
  17. as the price of oil solidifies at 75 a barrel the world embrace other forms of energy...

    if it goes to 300 a barrel?

    the entire world will use ANYTHING for energy.

    the BEST thing for world peace?

    destruction of opec's supplies...

    shale oil, natural gas, domestic oil, veggie oil, electricity generated by coal, wind, solar, tidal power, hydroelectric generation & more...

    the 1st thing to do?

    destroy OPEC's supplies forever...

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. No, wi"o" your assumptions of my intent are way off base. It was only partially aimed at Israel. but only because they have been the greatest benefactors of US largess.

    If you actually read what I've been writing for years, now, you'd know that I have been opposed to the creation of Islamic Republics in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I also oppose any funding to Pakistan, in fact I think we should have been at war, with Pakistan, on 12Sep01.

    But that view is and was not commonly held. The spin doctors did their magic and the culpable parties skated away to redemption.
    Those two fiascos lead my list of governments that we should never have established, let alone continue to fund. But yes, I do also include Israel on that list of sectarian government that we should.

    You'd know that I also would cut aid to SouK and a whole host of other countries that are fully capable of supporting themselves, as your beloved Israelis certainly can.

    The Israelis do not NEED to be gifted money that my daughter and her friends will have to pay back to the Chinese, as time goes by.

    How would destroy oil that is in the ground, wi"o".
    Nukes will not do it, or those two Japanese cities would not have both been repopulated within 18 months of their destruction.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Martin Luther 'Takes' A Wife

    Liberates 'Kate' (and seven others) from a Nunnery into the freedom of a 'hospital for lust'.

    Only men over seventy can honestly make 'vows of celibacy.


    "The reformers spoke boldly of sex and sexual pleasure, believing that marriage was the only appropriate vessel for sexual expression. As Luther once remarked, marriage was a hospital for lust. To make the theological point, Luther himself married in 1525. Katherine von Bora had been a nun whom Luther arranged to be kidnapped from the convent along with seven other sisters in the back of a fishmonger's wagon among barrels of herring. The two made quite a pair, as was tesfified to by Luther's own writings and that of his students and boarders. Together they raised ten children--six of their own and four orphans. Luther clearly adored Katherine, jokingly referring to her as "my Lord Katie" and "my chain." Of sex, Luther wrote, "This plighted troth permits even more occasion than is necessary for the begetting of children." Marriage vows, unlike clerical celibacy ones, freed men and women to experience romantic love and sexual pleasure as the foundation for Christian union. Historian Lyndal Roper remarks, "This is certainly a positive attitude toward sex within marriage, and Luther can with justice be said to have made a genuine break with pre-Reformation views of sexuality."

    from "A People's History of Christianity"

    There is no point at all to this post other than I thought it was funny, lifting your wife from a nunnery among barrels of herring.

    What a courtship.

    ReplyDelete
  21. can you believe this headline?

    President Obama bids goodbye to Ted Kennedy, 'a kind and tender hero'

    ReplyDelete
  22. He was quoting the waitress that Ted threw on a restaurant table and dry humped, with the warm and tender Sen. Dodd on the other side.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Whatever the strategic or tactical value of some defense missiles in Poland might have been, it's a hell of a way to treat one of the few countries that stood by the US during the Bush era. The situation could have been finessed.

    Obama as Leninoid


    I abducted my wife in a haywagon out of Ohio. It was quite a trip home. She wasn't in a nunnery though. And wanted to come. In defense of Luther, he knew her before, I think, and she seemed happy enough with the deal. Escaped the nunnery in a barrel of herring. What a deal. Heh.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Jack Straw has admitted the Government caved in to Libyan demands that the Lockerbie bomber be included in a prisoner transfer deal with Britain.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Jack is a Straw man.

    Fu-Go Balloons

    When Unca Jerry worked at Boeing during WWII this all caused a lot of concern for awhile, remember him talking about it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. How would destroy oil that is in the ground, wi"o".
    Nukes will not do it, or those two Japanese cities would not have both been repopulated within 18 months of their destruction.



    good question..

    maybe that's the question we need to be asking?

    how do we destroy the economies, the people of opec?

    ReplyDelete
  27. They got it. We gotta have it. We'll be "giving blow-jobs in the parking lot" until they let us have it.

    Or, until China "out-bids" us.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Oil will open at around $73.00 barrel in the morning.

    85 Million Barrels will be used. Tomorrow.

    That's $6,205,000,000.00 worth of Oil, "Tomorrow."

    That's $43 Billion, 435 Million This Week.

    That's $182 Billion, 435 Million this Month.

    Even Goldman Sachs can't push this price around "Too" much, chums.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Oops,

    That's $182 Billion, "427" Million this month.

    OR, to put it another Way, $2 Trillion, 189 Billion, 124 Million this Year.

    "Fill Up," boys, Bin Laden needs the money.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Let's say our "Imports" run 11.5 Million Barrels/Day for the next year. And the price doesn't go up.

    $73.00 X 11,500,00 = $839 Million, 500 Thousand ($839,500,000.00) Day going out of Country. Probably, over half to the "Middle-East."

    That's $306 Billion, 417 Million, 500 Thousand ($306,417,500,000.00) Going Out, Next Year.

    ReplyDelete
  31. DR wrote,
    "The Brits do not need a single dime of US aid."

    Rubbish! Bunk! Nonsense! You need to keep an open mind on the concept of fungibility.

    We spend billions each year maintaining a substantial but mostly illusory military presence in the UK.

    If you don't believe they NEED that "aid", wait to hear the howls of our offended British friends when we finally close up the shop.

    Oh, and what do we get for our dime? We get excuses, trespass, vandalism, and demonstrations.

    On the other hand, within Israel the US has billions of dollars worth of prepositioned assets. There, we get no excuses, no trespass, no vandalism, and no demonstrations.

    ReplyDelete
  32. However, for our economy to make a "recovery, we would have to import 13 Million Barrels/day. This would Have To run the price up to $100.00/barrel.

    So, $1.3 Billion Dollars/Day going offshore. That would be $474,500,000,000 Next Year. Or, about the size of our Defense Budget.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Israel doesn't have any oil. Their seat has been moved over by the door.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Oh, I'd expect the Brits to scream bloody murder if the US were to propose leaving England. That is not any of my concern.

    That the Brits benefit from the US presence, more than the US does, not even argumentable, allen. That they want US to keep subsidizing their defense and economy, true enough.

    You give no reason for US to maintain those subsidies, other than the objections of the Brits, if we were to cease paying their way in the whirled.

    We should withdraw from England, the US has a bankrupt Government, it should start behaving like it.

    ReplyDelete
  35. $70-$100, plus or minus, not necessarily a bad thing. Gives incentives to fledgling technologies to prove themselves, reducing their need for tax eating subsidies, although that's probably expecting too much.

    Also, might stimulate some drilling for that elusive last drop we keep hearing about.

    So, $1.3 Billion Dollars/Day going offshore.

    Here's a good place off shore to put some of that, Rufus: the U.S. continental shelf (and ANWR, though it's not really off shore).

    ReplyDelete
  36. DR,

    I was simply rebutting your statement that the UK gets no "aid", while Israel does. Obviously, the UK benefits from enormous inflows of "defense" dollars.

    As earlier stated, I believe Israel should operate on its own dime. Netanyahu once supported this position as well.

    The day cannot come soon enough for me to have some fun at the expense of those who will scream bloody murder at Israel's high end, high tech military sales to India, China, Russia, S. Korea, Taiwan and Japan, without prior approval from the US.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Well, as long as Israel remains a US dependent and proxy, a ward of the US taxpayer, expect the howls of protest when the behave in ways that are detrimental to US interests.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I don't know, LT. The four largest U.S. oil companies spent $43,000,000.00 on Lobbying, last year. I've heard no rumors of them lobbying for drilling of the "outer continental crust."

    Remember, 2/3rds of that is open for drilling, now; but, with no takers. I'm a little skeptical.

    ReplyDelete
  39. rufus said...
    Israel doesn't have any oil. Their seat has been moved over by the door.


    actually...

    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1249418582067&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull



    The recently discovered Tamar natural gas well, off the coast of Israel, is projected to contain 16 percent more natural gas than early estimates predicted.

    According to an announcement issued by Noble Energy, Inc. on Tuesday, reserves are estimated at 207 billion cubic meters instead of the previously estimated 178.

    ReplyDelete
  40. rufus,

    Were it not for Israeli technical expertise, you would be having to send your comments via snail mail. If you think not, do some non-commoditized investigating.

    You will rue the day that Israel goes commercial, always selling to the highest bidder. Brush up on your Hindi and Mandarin, you can bet Jews are. That's because we have always known that the world's greatest asset is the human intellect in pursuit of the soul's perfection.

    ReplyDelete
  41. desert rat said...
    Well, as long as Israel remains a US dependent and proxy, a ward of the US taxpayer, expect the howls of protest when the behave in ways that are detrimental to US interests.


    Israel gets 3 billion a year in military aid, of which most is spent on american technology and supplies..

    Israel spends 195 BILLION a year of it's own on it's defense as America, Asia and Europe pump over 2 trillion a year into the wallets of the arabs intent on israel's destruction...

    Israel per captia spending on her DEFENSE is some of the highest in the world..

    america spends 110 BILLION a year on nato

    america gave 6 billion to acorn

    america gives over 4 billion a year in direct aid to egypt, the palestinians & jordanians

    america provides (at no charge) BILLIONS in aircraft carrier battle groups and ships to keep international shipping lanes run...

    we even gave Arabia economic AID last year...

    so according to DR the world is america's ward....

    however the TINY amount that Israel receives is well spent as compared to any other nation on the planet, the UN voting record of Israel supports america closer than England, the population (although 96% think obama is propalestinian and anti-israel) Israel LOVES america and americans...

    Israel (who sits on 1/650th of the middle east) who's population is barely 9 - 10 million (verses the 330 million arabs and 1.3 BILLION moslems) fights a war of survival...

    America and Americans overwhelmingly support the security and existence of Israel and have since the beginning of the Nation of America...

    ReplyDelete
  42. Are you kidding? We all know "Al Gore" invented the internet.

    Soul is fine, Allen. But, when the Hitlers of the world come calling, you need Airplanes, Tanks, Ships, and Oil.

    Look, Bubba, I'm not trying to start another fight; I'm just telling it like it is. If you don't have oil you will just be out on the parking lot, shouting.

    Ain't my Druthers. It's, how do you say it? The "Big Guy's" rules?

    ReplyDelete
  43. weeoh, you like not capitalizing "America?"

    Fuck you, cocksucker.

    ReplyDelete
  44. He is not really one of US, rufus, his loyalties are to one of the "others" of the whirled.

    He's a sectarian, first and foremost

    Like you didn't already know that.

    ReplyDelete
  45. The Israels, sectarian, do not spend a dime or a Shekel defending US.
    Not a single one.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Allen,

    Your premise simplified, implies that if Israel does not receive American aid, then Israel would be free to pursue economic interests that could be adverse to US security and interests, specifically noted by you, by selling advanced military technology.

    That has more the whiff of blackmail than it does indivisible fraternal bonds. Is that your believe or am I misreading you?

    ReplyDelete
  47. Begging for my fucking money, and refusing to Capitalize the name of my Country?

    And, they wonder why normal people are sick of their asses.

    ReplyDelete
  48. They're whores, deuce, by allen's own admission.

    Our "deal" better than the rates they'd receive on the open market.

    Or they'd be selling their wares, there. Which they already do.

    Burning that candle at both ends.

    ReplyDelete
  49. If their technology is so damned great, why do they need our PAC 3's?

    You'd think before they would sell our "Patriot" to the Chinese they would have, at least, had the "upgrade" ready.

    Where's their F-22, or B2?

    What a load of shit. When we pull out, they're fucked. If they ever do develop anything useful, they'll just sell it to their enemies.

    ReplyDelete
  50. rufus said...
    weeoh, you like not capitalizing "America?"

    Fuck you, cocksucker.



    rufus...

    i dont usually cap most things...

    so pull your head out of your ass...

    ReplyDelete
  51. rufus...

    here ya go...

    America and Americans overwhelmingly support the security and existence of Israel and have since the beginning of the Nation of America...


    see lot's of caps....

    ReplyDelete
  52. desert rat said...
    He is not really one of US, rufus, his loyalties are to one of the "others" of the whirled.


    Dr, really...

    up yours...

    ReplyDelete
  53. They dick around and come up with a halfway serviceable UAV, and they can't wait to sell it to the Russians, so they can give it to the Syrians.

    Real, buncha Brainiacs.

    And, by the way, why DO they supply Gaza with electricity?

    ReplyDelete
  54. So Hamas won't "strain" their little eyes while they're assembling those rockets?

    Comparing Israelis is grossly unfair to millions of fine, hard-working whores, Rat.

    ReplyDelete
  55. rufus: What a load of shit. When we pull out, they're fucked. If they ever do develop anything useful, they'll just sell it to their enemies.


    Israel has been fucked over by the USA before and will again..

    America looks after it's own interest...

    After all in 1967 America (like the caps?) fucked over israel (notice no caps?) by not living up to it's treaty obligations...

    but your point is taken... obama is certainly pro-palestinian and if noone in the world supports israel then israel will take it on the chin..

    but dont come bitching when oil hits 500 a barrel after israel (no caps) nukes a few arabian, iranian & others oil infrastructure...

    ReplyDelete
  56. You sorry piece of diseased, dogshit; if I were there you WOULD Capitalize the name of MY Country. I'll double-guarantee it.

    And, it wouldn't be My head stuck dead up an STD-Ridden asshole.

    ReplyDelete
  57. desert rat said...
    They're whores, deuce, by allen's own admission.

    if israelis are whores what does that make us?

    we sell dictators, pakistanis, palestinians, jordanians and arabians (and others) tons of shit that end up killing AMERICANS (like the caps rufus?)

    AMERICA just lifted the syrian accountablity act so now we can sell syria IT & airplane parts to syria that will end up in iran...

    people in glass houses should not throw stones...

    ReplyDelete
  58. Looks like you found the Caps key, here:

    Israel per captia spending on her DEFENSE is some of the highest in the world..

    america spends 110 BILLION a year on nato

    america gave 6 billion to acorn

    america gives over 4 billion a year in direct aid to egypt, the palestinians & jordanians


    For the word, Israel, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  59. rufus said...
    You sorry piece of diseased, dogshit; if I were there you WOULD Capitalize the name of MY Country. I'll double-guarantee it.

    rufus you stupid inbred asshole...

    america aint the NAME of MY country...

    it's the "United States of America"

    maybe your wife/sister has perfect punctuation, i dont....

    ReplyDelete
  60. This has got my blood pressure up.

    I'll see you all tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  61. rufus said...
    Looks like you found the Caps key, here:


    yeah read the entire posting and America was CAP'd 3 times and not 4 times...

    pull your head out of your ass....

    ReplyDelete
  62. You're not an American, wio. No goddamned way an American would not capitalize, America.

    ReplyDelete
  63. I don't think there was a slight intended by the use or non-use of caps. I am intrigued by the premise put forth by Allen, if I am reading it correctly.

    Should Israel ever forego American support, which it won't, it would do as well as those green houses left in Gaza.

    Israel needs the American shield, not for protection, but to give Israel the opportunity to come to workable accommodations with her enemies. To think otherwise ignores 40 years of history.

    ReplyDelete
  64. rufus said...
    You're not an American, wio. No goddamned way an American would not capitalize, America.

    rufus....

    I am an AMERICAN, 100%

    I am lazy in typing... period

    you calling me the names you called me for not using a cap or two without even ASKING WHY BEFORE YOU MADE YOUR COMMENTS?

    makes you an ass..

    I may be a lazy typist... (as are most of the people here) but your being a dick

    ReplyDelete
  65. Acorn is a domestic US organization, four square in today's political enviorment.

    That it irritates you that the Federals fund it, funny.

    But not at all comparable to spending money on foreigners that are not appreciative of US largess.

    ReplyDelete
  66. desert rat said...
    Acorn is a domestic US organization, four square in today's political enviorment.

    That it irritates you that the Federals fund it, funny.

    But not at all comparable to spending money on foreigners that are not appreciative of US largess.




    America spends HUNDREDS of billions a year on enemies of America and you dont say shit...

    America gives israel 3 billion (to be spent supporting American jobs) and you have a shit fit...

    ReplyDelete
  67. Aid to Israel is a Rorschach test.

    We give roughly the same amount to Egypt and have for years--didn't this aid arise out of the peace process?-- and many never mention it.

    We give more to ACORN and some praise it.

    Happily, my daughter just walked in the door, so I'll miss the rest of the conversation. Which seems a replay of many previous. I know how it will play out, already.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Bullshit, wi"p", I protest sending any of them our hard borrowed cash.

    It is just that there is only one word that jumps out at you, when you read.

    That word is Israel, a little Country founded by terrorists, supported by US, or it would not even be, a country.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Speaking in a press conference with Solana, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem stressed that "the Palestinian dossier takes precedence," whether it is "freezing settlements, lifting the blockade on Gaza or making East Jerusalem Jewish."

    Solana next heads to Israel for talks with hardline Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the leading members of his government, before going to Ramallah to see Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad.

    On Tuesday he will be in Lebanon and will round off the trip in Egypt on Wednesday.


    UN Rulings

    ReplyDelete
  70. Enough with the "Problems." Let's get with the Solutions. This One is starting to get my attention.

    Rat, we might need a couple thousand acres of that Desert land. What does it sell for? I mean, the really, really, worthless, cactus-ridden, snake infested, rocky sand.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Damn, that is interesting, drink it or drive it.

    ReplyDelete
  72. A wide range of engines will be available – and the 9-5 wouldn't be a Saab if these didn't include turbos and ethanol-powered options.

    But now the Saab story has come full circle. The company is being sold by GM to a consortium including the sports-car manufacturer Koenigsegg, and could once more become a small Swedish player developing new models solo on a shoestring.

    If history and the original 99/900 are anything to go by, this 9-5 could still be around in some form or another in 2030.


    Next-gen 9-5

    ReplyDelete
  73. Doesn't need hardly any water. Looks like six, or seven inches/yr will catch it. Phoenix gets that much.

    We've got an awful lot of worthless desert in the Southwest.

    At $73.00 Oil it would almost have to work.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Those plants grow like weeds.
    But slowly.

    The Federals have millions of acres of desert, rufus. Hundreds of millions, really.

    ReplyDelete
  75. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  76. [url=http://firgonbares.net/][img]http://firgonbares.net/img-add/euro2.jpg[/img][/url]
    [b]oem software canada, [url=http://firgonbares.net/]buy for photoshop[/url]
    [url=http://firgonbares.net/][/url] nero 9 buy photoshop online
    adobe creative suite 4 master collection torrent [url=http://firgonbares.net/]office 2003 vista[/url] software resellers australia
    [url=http://firgonbares.net/]store creation software[/url] line software store want
    [url=http://firgonbares.net/]autocad drawing[/url] software reseller in singapore
    software resellers in [url=http://firgonbares.net/]download acdsee pro free[/b]

    ReplyDelete