Home  >  Community  >  The Vendio Round Table  >  Are You Better Off Now Than 100 Days Ago?


<< previous topic post new topic post reply next topic >>
 This topic is 2 pages long: 1 new 2 new
 Borillar
 
posted on April 2, 2001 09:39:59 PM new
NearTheSea, may I point out Bush's Big Blunder to you on this? The USA's embassy in Russia has been severly understaffed: there were much fewer American workers in the embassy in Russia than Russians in their embasy in Washington.

The blunder comes in the fact that we could ill afford to loose 50 personel from our embassy in Russia. Therefore, the exchange hurt us a LOT MORE than it did the Russians.

It is this sort of non-thinking on the part of Bush and his father's cronies that is hurting us everywhere.



 
 Shadowcat
 
posted on April 3, 2001 01:02:18 AM new
In answer to the question: No.

And it has nothing to do with politics or the economy.




 
 jlpiece
 
posted on April 3, 2001 01:50:58 AM new
It would be foolish for Bush to want to start a war with China, after all didn't Clinton give them all of our nuclear secrets... ;(

 
 krs
 
posted on April 3, 2001 05:33:14 AM new
Shelly,

"krs there were 3 debates, and Bush didn't do well on the first one, but by all reports he 'won' the last 2 debates"

Exactly. The first bushdoggle brought the following market peak, but the market has slid from then. The declines are sharp in Nov. when he seemed to have won, and again sharp in Jan. after the court appointed him. Downhill ever since.

 
 krs
 
posted on April 3, 2001 07:07:08 AM new
"after all didn't Clinton give them all of our nuclear secrets"

No, actually bushdaddy did.

 
 NearTheSea
 
posted on April 3, 2001 07:19:17 AM new
So we are to keep Russian diplomats that were (ok my opinion,whomever said that) in contact with this double agent?

You all have asked 'where are the Republicans' in these Bush bashing threads

This is why,its all my opinion or I just don't know current events or whatever.

The ecomony was due to go down, long before Bush was even thought to be elected, or what you all would say 'selected'.

[email protected]
 
 HJW
 
posted on April 3, 2001 07:43:56 AM new
Hi NearTheSea,

"Whomever, Whatever" who really gives a #*!@.

Right?

Helen

 
 krs
 
posted on April 3, 2001 07:50:08 AM new
"due to go down"

Wanna' publish your schedule?

It's nonsensical to say that because something is good it must get bad. Republican stance goes "It's bad, but it's not our fault" or "it's good, but it'll never last". Bushdaddy said the former and all repubs said the latter for the entire eight years. Went and proved themselves right too. All it took was to seat another republican.

It's not all bad though. Once Seattle is evacuated by economic catastrophe you'll be able to buy a house with money from sales of penny postcards in ebay. Maybe they'll rename the place. Is there an Indian word for 'Foreclosure'?

 
 NearTheSea
 
posted on April 3, 2001 08:17:27 AM new
Whatever

Ok the Republicans are making the damned thing go down. Lets see, you've made that clear since election, oh sorry SELECTION day, over and over again

I think Seattle will survive without about 500 heavy hitters. (the fuselage people are being 'absorbed' somewhere else in Boeing, so no one is losing their job)

You putting down my auctions? I don't know? Is there an Indian word for foreclosure?

outta here
[email protected]
 
 krs
 
posted on April 3, 2001 08:53:03 AM new
For the record, to my knowledge Shelly doesn't sell penny postcards---yet.

 
 jlpiece
 
posted on April 3, 2001 09:34:50 AM new
krs,

"no actually bushdaddy did."

Where in the hell did you get that idea from. The Clinton administration stripped down security at Los Alamos which allowed the theft of most of this country's nuclear secrets, and Reno refused to give the FBI the search warrant for Wen Ho Lee's residence or computer - not until 1 1/2 year later did they finally convince him to willingly allow the FBI to search his hard drives at work and home - by then most of the damage was done, and the majority of the evidence was cleaned up.

In Reno's entire career as Attorney General she only refused the FBI one search warrant...


I'm not here to defend Bush - I don't even like the guy, but facts are facts and it scares me how misinformed some people are. You'd be surprised what you learn when you quit depending on ONE news source for all of your info.


 
 jamesoblivion
 
posted on April 3, 2001 09:38:44 AM new
Wen Ho Lee was exonerated. So why are you referencing him?

 
 jlpiece
 
posted on April 3, 2001 09:45:53 AM new
A) Because he was NOT exonerated in all charges - he was still brought up on one of the charges.

B) What justice Department exonerated him in the charges that were dropped? Hmmmm....

 
 krs
 
posted on April 3, 2001 10:05:49 AM new
Oh, I thought you said "gave", you see, but the fact is this:

"since 1989, the President has issued waivers to: (a) allow the delivery to China of military items valued at $36.3 million to close out the U.S. government's pre-1989 defense agreements with China; and (b) license commercial military exports valued at over $312 million--primarily commercial satellite and encryption items; (9)
the rather small amount of EU and U.S. sales of military items to China since 1989 could help address some aspects of China's defense needs; (10) however, their importance to China's modernization goal may be
relatively limited because Russia and the Middle East have provided almost 90 percent of China's imported military items during this period;"

http://www.fas.org/man/gao/nsiad-98-171.htm
http://www.motherjones.com/arms/israel.html

Now I don't consider the U.S. Government Accounting Agency to be exactly a news source, but at least it doesn't suffer the wild distortions of Foxnews (an oxymoron).

blue face away!




[ edited by krs on Apr 3, 2001 10:08 AM ]
 
 krs
 
posted on April 3, 2001 10:07:45 AM new
" What justice Department exonerated him in the charges that were dropped? Hmmmm."

Will you eventually hum "Why, the same one that brought the charges in the first place"?

 
 jamesoblivion
 
posted on April 3, 2001 10:14:44 AM new
He copped a plea and was cleared of 58 charges, but pled guilty to one charge of improperly downloading information. And we all know that pleas are never made to save face by the prosecutors, right? Sure.

Anyway, yours is very circular reasoning. To begin with, you assert that he did steal and gave away most of the countries nuclear secrets. Obviously you have no proof that most of the countries nuclear secrets have been stolen at all. In fact, the man was exonerated. Then, you assert that he eliminated all evidence. And how do you know this exactly? You don't even know for certain that anything was stolen, and you're saying you know what Wen Ho Lee did or did not do with classified information he was cleared of stealing and passing on?

Evidently the charges were unfounded. It is only your personal suspicion of all things Clinton that makes you assume:

a. damage was done just becuz Rush sez so
b. it was covered up at the behest of the Clinton administration
c. Wen Ho Lee is guilty despite no proof and an eventual exoneration (99% pure is still pretty damn good, isn't it?)

 
 krs
 
posted on April 3, 2001 10:24:22 AM new
Well,.......of course he's guilty. He's Chinese isn't he? And everybody KNOWS that Clinton was in cahoots with them, probably still is. It's all part of the great communist plot.

 
 jlpiece
 
posted on April 3, 2001 11:00:55 AM new
Krs & jamesoblivion,

There you two go again assuming - but I guess I have learned to expect as much from your sort. You will defend Clinton to the death - he can do no wrong. I guess your blind devotion could be considered ... charming, or something. Anyway, I do not listen to rush, & my cable provider doesn't even carry Foxnews as far as I know, just the local Fox affiliate with regular old TV programs.) Apparently some of my points were made at those sources should I assume?

Furthermore, we are always dumping off our antiquated defense items to other countries - is that something you just realized krs? Nuclear secrets are a different ballgame. The justice department didn't bring the charges either. The FBI presented their evidence that they gained WITHOUT the help of the Attorney General TO A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR AND THE CHARGES WERE BROUGHT BY AN INDEPENDANT GRAND JURY. Blue face these
hummmmmmmm hummmmmmmmm

As far as how is it known that he erased data pertaining to the secrets, why its a simple matter of searching the binary traces on the hard drives a wiping program was used and the majority of the data was erased but there were pieces left over - enough pieces to warrant the grand jury coming down with 58 charges. As far as plea bargaining goes, it could be said also that "one does not cop a plea when one is not guilty of wrong doing."

As far as the great plot krs... Well I guess any group with designs on power including Capitalists, Christians, Communists, Jews, Chinese, Japanese, Americanese etc all have some sort of a plot to bring themselves to and remain in power. Which side Clinton is on, I couldn't care less. I don't side with these groups.

 
 jamesoblivion
 
posted on April 3, 2001 11:04:32 AM new
My "sort"?

As far as plea bargaining goes, it could be said also that "one does not cop a plea when one is not guilty of wrong doing."

No, it can't. Maybe you don't have better things to do then sit in jail.

 
 jlpiece
 
posted on April 3, 2001 11:17:09 AM new
Been there done that...and I still wouldn't plead guilty to something i didn't do.

 
 krs
 
posted on April 3, 2001 11:27:59 AM new
"my sort"?

There's no doubt that the FBI needed a scapegoat. Ultimately though, they could not make their case and had to bite the bullet of acknowledgement that one of their own was the source of leaked information.

 
 jlpiece
 
posted on April 3, 2001 10:48:40 PM new
No krs, that would be the incident with the "Russian" spy. Wen Ho Lee is not "Russian". I understand that China And Russia are near each other, but they are not the same thing.

 
   This topic is 2 pages long: 1 new 2 new
<< previous topic post new topic post reply next topic >>

Jump to

All content © 1998-2024  Vendio all rights reserved. Vendio Services, Inc.™, Simply Powerful eCommerce, Smart Services for Smart Sellers, Buy Anywhere. Sell Anywhere. Start Here.™ and The Complete Auction Management Solution™ are trademarks of Vendio. Auction slogans and artwork are copyrights © of their respective owners. Vendio accepts no liability for the views or information presented here.

The Vendio free online store builder is easy to use and includes a free shopping cart to help you can get started in minutes!