Hathery
Gold Member
- 485
chefsteph07 said:GIVE ME A BREAK
No, it did NOT have to be said. I don't even recall that being a topic for quite some time, like since 91 so get off it.
Yeah, I haven't heard it since '91 either...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
chefsteph07 said:GIVE ME A BREAK
No, it did NOT have to be said. I don't even recall that being a topic for quite some time, like since 91 so get off it.
JAE said:Seriously, do you really think it's just about oil? I am pretty sure nuclear weapons aimed at us is a big reason why we went after Saddam. Though little has been reported about it, we have taken out uranium which was for that purpose. It was reported in even my local paper, but it was just a tiny little article. And, for saftey purposes, it wasn't reported until after the uranium was safely on a ship on it's way to Canada. I don't think Saddam was going to use it for nuclear energy.
There is so much not reported in the mainstream news media. And, there is a lot of information not given out because this is a war. Things have to be secret. This war isn't about oil. It's about freedom. Ours and the world's freedom to be safe from EVIL TERRORISTS! I happen to believe that the USA is not part of the evil terrorists, but many liberals believe we are acting like terrorists. That's just wrong.
I believe what Palin believes from what I've heard from her so far. I would like her to explain what she thinks are President Bush's mistakes. Yes, he's made them, but every president/administration makes them, and everyone has a different opinion on what counts as a mistake.
chefsteph07 said:Then why bring it up just to get a reaction?
That was uncalled for an unnecessary.
chefsteph07 said:It's not about oil, she was bringing something up that didn't need to be...to get a reaction...it was a ridiculous comment.
Well, actually, I may say whatever I want to say. And, I didn't say they had nuclear weapons. They had the technology and the materials to create them. I frankly don't care what your friend in the CIA thinks s/he knows or shares with you. I just want to be clear that I don't believe the war is about the oil. I'm not going to argue with you about the facts.Hathery said:What?? I have no idea what you're talking about.
No, I don't believe the war was all about oil. But it certainly wasn't about terrorists either. And it DEFINITELY wasn't about nuclear weapons, because Iraq never had any (information that was known to the administration well before they made the decision to go to war.)
And don't say that I don't know what the government knew and didn't know...I have a friend who worked for the CIA during that time.
Hathery said:What?? I have no idea what you're talking about.
No, I don't believe the war was all about oil. But it certainly wasn't about terrorists either. And it DEFINITELY wasn't about nuclear weapons, because Iraq never had any (information that was known to the administration well before they made the decision to go to war.)
And don't say that I don't know what the government knew and didn't know...I have a friend who worked for the CIA during that time.
Hathery said:What?? I have no idea what you're talking about.
No, I don't believe the war was all about oil. But it certainly wasn't about terrorists either. And it DEFINITELY wasn't about nuclear weapons, because Iraq never had any (information that was known to the administration well before they made the decision to go to war.)
And don't say that I don't know what the government knew and didn't know...I have a friend who worked for the CIA during that time.
ChefBeckyD said:And that friend is giving you confidential information? And is privy to all of the information from that time? Interesting.
ChefBeckyD said:And that friend is giving you confidential information? And is privy to all of the information from that time? Interesting.
chefsteph07 said:So are you saying that your friend breached confidentiality by telling you things that other people aren't supposed to know?
How can you say it wasn't about terrorists?
How do you know the gov't knew there weren't any supposed weapons? Boy, maybe you should get a job working for the govt w/ all that you know.
It sounds to me like you think you know a whole lot.
chefsteph07 said:EXACTLY my point in my other post! Isn't it interesting though?
Hathery said:Isn't what interesting? That she did something stupid and shared priveledged information? It's not so much "interesting" as it is "scary" and "a poor decision."
ChefBeckyD said:Disgruntled employee?
chefsteph07 said:I certainly wouldn't want to be her friend...someone who lacks judgement and charcter by spilling confidential info. I'd personally be PISSED if one of my friends did that.
Don't tell her any of YOUR secrets...
janetupnorth said:Well, I AM part of a group that deals with the government on Homeland Security issues and other technology issues and while I refuse to repeat ANY of what I read and have access to - to ANYONE, including my spouse (and trust me THAT is rare, but he understands because he was part of the same group for awhile).
Publically, there is enough knowledge to cause concern. ...and yes, there are other countries building weapons that no doubt in the future will be aimed at us...
...and don't you think someone as smart as Saddam with all that desert and all that time would know how to hide/destroy things from us?
If we can't find Bin Laden for this many years, hiding some weapons is a piece of cake!
chefsteph07 said:My husband works in the engineering dept for a company and he designs military and commercial aircraft and he can't discuss anything either. Nor would I ever want him to.
Hathery said:Her judgment is a lot more sound than the people she was working for. That's why it disgusted her and she felt compelled to share. I can totally understand how she wouldn't want to keep something so upsetting to herself.
Hathery said:So we should pre-emptively strike based on what "could be"?
Hathery said:I work for the court system and can't disclose a lot of personal information. I also worked for the Department of Revenue and was privy to much confidential information. I also don't share the information, but that's my choice...some people make better choices than others. Doesn't make me "not want to be their friend."
Yes! Except for the "could be" part. The U.S. military knew what the plans were. Do you think we should wait until the missles are in the air pointing towards our country?Hathery said:So we should pre-emptively strike based on what "could be"?
janetupnorth said:That is NOT what I said at all...exactly my earlier point. You cannot read a post and twist it into a viewpoint.
I was stating that I too was involved with information I CANNOT and WILL NOT SHARE.
...and just countering the assumption that no weapons existed. How did you turn that into me saying we should strike any country based on what "could be".
Sounds very similar to the line of questioning directed at Palin this a.m... ...are you SURE you didn't watch that?
chefsteph07 said:I'd never associate w/ someone like that.
JAE said:Yes! Except for the "could be" part. The U.S. military knew what the plans were. Do you think we should wait until the missles are in the air pointing towards our country?
JAE said:Yes! Except for the "could be" part. The U.S. military knew what the plans were. Do you think we should wait until the missles are in the air pointing towards our country?
I'm sure you don't. I'll be back later.Hathery said:There were no "plans." I don't know what "plans" you're referring to.
JAE said:I'm sure you don't. I'll be back later.
janetupnorth said:Fact: Did you know you could see Russia from the shores of Alaska?
I knew that but thought it was a cool fact from Palin's state.
I bumped a thread for that a few days ago for her, but no one posted on it.She has mentioned she is new to PC, grew up in a small town but now lives in Sun Prairie near Madison. She owns a hedgehog...and she can fill in the rest...chefsteph07 said:Hathery, have you ever introduced yourself to this group?
I searched your threads that you have replied to and you have only replied to 3 other ones other than the political ones...
If you have introduced yourself, I'm sorry I must have missed it.
I know Becky made mention of it once last week as well, and I just wondered what your background is, how long you have been w/ PC, etc.
janetupnorth said:I bumped a thread for that a few days ago for her, but no one posted on it.
She has mentioned she is new to PC, grew up in a small town but now lives in Sun Prairie near Madison. She owns a hedgehog...and she can fill in the rest...
chefsteph07 said:I just think it's interesting that someone we don't even know, or knows us, is jumping into a discussion like this
Most people don't jump straight into a heavy political discussion with people they don't know. That is her point.Most of us discussing have known each other for at least 1 year.Plus it ties to the fact she made some pretty inaccurate assumptions of me to start.chefjeanine said:Why? Most of us don't really know each other . . . regardless of how long we've been in the business or been posting on CS. When I first started on here, people didn't make formal introductions. I just asked questions or shared ideas on threads I found interesting.
janetupnorth said:Most people don't jump straight into a heavy political discussion with people they don't know.
chefjeanine said:Safer for some of us to do here rather than with family and friends.
Hathery said:I'll be waiting; I can't wait to hear the details of these "plans."
JAE said:I never said I was going to be sharing detailed plans. My CIA friends don't share information with me, but if you'd like to read a book and listen to the radio programs to which I listen, then I'll share those with you. I just wanted to let you all know that I'm not scared away by this thread. I just had to leave.
One of the books that I've read is Saddam's Secrets by Georges Sada. There are others, but they are making there way around to family members.
Well, I figured if you could dish out sarcasm then you could take it. I wouldn't know if I have an friends in the CIA. Aren't they supposed to keep that secret. (Yes, I'm being sarcastic.)Hathery said:Why would I want you scared away from the thread?
Do you have CIA friends, or are you being sarcastic? If you're being sarcastic...then :yuck:
Thanks for sharing the name of the book; I'll look for it.
JAE said:Well, I figured if you could dish out sarcasm then you could take it. I wouldn't know if I have an friends in the CIA. Aren't they supposed to keep that secret. (Yes, I'm being sarcastic.)
fikibiff said:I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but the first time I heard her on the radio, I thought she sounded just like one of the presenters on the Pampered Chef CD's. She'd be an excellent consultant. Maybe, on Nov. 5th I'll send her an e-mail to see if I can help her with her next career move.
fikibiff said:I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but the first time I heard her on the radio, I thought she sounded just like one of the presenters on the Pampered Chef CD's. She'd be an excellent consultant. Maybe, on Nov. 5th I'll send her an e-mail to see if I can help her with her next career move.
The main appeal of Sarah Palin is that she represents the reverse of Barack Obama, triggering feelings of anger, fear, and suspicion in some Americans who may not want to express these sentiments openly. She also embodies a return to small town values and a rejection of progressivism and globalism.
Palin stands for small town values, ignorance of world affairs, family values, rigid stances on issues like guns and abortion, patriotism, and reform.
Palin reinforces the message that social justice is liberal-radical and that progressivism and globalism are threats. She also supports the idea that minorities and immigrants can be ignored and that change is not necessary.
The concept of the shadow is that it is the part of the psyche that hides negative qualities and rejects positive ideals. Obama's call for higher ideals in politics can be seen as a conflict between progress and inertia, with the shadow representing the forces of inertia.
It is important to have an honest debate about these conflicting forces because it allows for a better understanding of the issues at hand and the values and beliefs held by different individuals. It also allows for a more informed decision-making process in elections.