Obama's the Anti Christ videos
- Karl Heidenreich
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4808
- Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
- Location: San José, Costa Rica
Obama's the Anti Christ videos
I do know I am going to be crucufied for this, regarding our new mass media superstar. However it is very interesting... very....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRP3kAASxVo
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL871CVn ... re=related
Then... if Obama is the Anti Christ then who the hell if the False Prophet: our islamic friendly pope?
Regards,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRP3kAASxVo
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL871CVn ... re=related
Then... if Obama is the Anti Christ then who the hell if the False Prophet: our islamic friendly pope?
Regards,
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill
Sir Winston Churchill
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
''Adding comments has been disabled from this video'' just about sums it up.
In Britain we had Tony Blair, a second rate actor, but an effective political operator, much better than Obama. Now we have a third rate Blair clone as British Prime Minister, but he couldn't even get a majority in an election that Thatcher would have cake-walked.
Now Obama faces re-election in two years time. Not that long to go, but long enough for bubbles to burst. Particulary if the Republican Party can produce a credible candidate. The danger is that instead we will get an incredible candidate from the religous fruitcake wing.
In Britain we had Tony Blair, a second rate actor, but an effective political operator, much better than Obama. Now we have a third rate Blair clone as British Prime Minister, but he couldn't even get a majority in an election that Thatcher would have cake-walked.
Now Obama faces re-election in two years time. Not that long to go, but long enough for bubbles to burst. Particulary if the Republican Party can produce a credible candidate. The danger is that instead we will get an incredible candidate from the religous fruitcake wing.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst
- Karl Heidenreich
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4808
- Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
- Location: San José, Costa Rica
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
Well, I have always find commie tendency speeches very boring. Fidel could talk for hours as Trostky did.Obama was obviously SO intresting to this college kid!
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill
Sir Winston Churchill
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
Yes Karl, but I can remember seeing the last ever public speech that Nicolai Ceacescu made in Romania - and the crowds reaction to it was very interesting......
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
Coming back to Obama, I see that he has publicly called for Tony Hayward, Chairman of British Petroleum,to be fired because of the oilrig accident in the Gulf of Mexico, and that dividends should be stopped by that company.
As a shareholder in BP could I publicly call for the President of the United States to both forfeit his pay and be impeached over British servicemen in Iraq being killed by US ''friendly fire?''
If responsibility goes to the top then it should untversally apply, not just when it suits politicians.
As a shareholder in BP could I publicly call for the President of the United States to both forfeit his pay and be impeached over British servicemen in Iraq being killed by US ''friendly fire?''
If responsibility goes to the top then it should untversally apply, not just when it suits politicians.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
Indeed you can. Just don't expect much of a reaction or for that matter many to listen.RF wrote:... As a shareholder in BP could I publicly call for the President of the United States to both forfeit his pay and be impeached over British servicemen in Iraq being killed by US ''friendly fire?''
...
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4349
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
- Location: Bucharest, Romania
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
Of course responsibility should go all the way to the top.RF wrote:
As a shareholder in BP could I publicly call for the President of the United States to both forfeit his pay and be impeached over British servicemen in Iraq being killed by US ''friendly fire?''
If responsibility goes to the top then it should untversally apply, not just when it suits politicians.
But it's a big difference between a soldier who receives extra-pay, and sometimes is even a volunteer in a certain war, and the mindless destruction of an entire eco-system and the lives of thousands of fishermen and fish-related companies.
In the first case, the risk is mitigated by pay. In the second case, what's the cost of the risk BP places on the eco-system.. ?
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
About 20 billion dollars at the latest count?
The cost has to come to BP, it caused the mess, it has to clean it up and pay for it. I have no argument with that. Just as the oil industry has always been a high risk activity for financial gain.
Serving in the armed forces in an area of conflict is also a high and this time expectedly lethal risk. But the fact that soldiers are paid does not absolve the commanders in chief of their responsibility. Just as the 11 people who were killed at the Deepwater Horizon explosion were being paid for their activities in a high risk industry doesn't mean that BP or its immediate contractors operating the well are absolved from responsibility to them or immediate third parties does it?
The cost has to come to BP, it caused the mess, it has to clean it up and pay for it. I have no argument with that. Just as the oil industry has always been a high risk activity for financial gain.
Serving in the armed forces in an area of conflict is also a high and this time expectedly lethal risk. But the fact that soldiers are paid does not absolve the commanders in chief of their responsibility. Just as the 11 people who were killed at the Deepwater Horizon explosion were being paid for their activities in a high risk industry doesn't mean that BP or its immediate contractors operating the well are absolved from responsibility to them or immediate third parties does it?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
lwd wrote:Indeed you can. Just don't expect much of a reaction or for that matter many to listen.RF wrote:... As a shareholder in BP could I publicly call for the President of the United States to both forfeit his pay and be impeached over British servicemen in Iraq being killed by US ''friendly fire?''
...
That is because there is no political lobby or interest group around to shout their case and grab media attention.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4349
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
- Location: Bucharest, Romania
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
I don't know; I can't decide about that.RF wrote: Serving in the armed forces in an area of conflict is also a high and this time expectedly lethal risk. But the fact that soldiers are paid does not absolve the commanders in chief of their responsibility. Just as the 11 people who were killed at the Deepwater Horizon explosion were being paid for their activities in a high risk industry doesn't mean that BP or its immediate contractors operating the well are absolved from responsibility to them or immediate third parties does it?
You're right, of course, from a strictly humane point of view - after all there can be no "right price" for human lives.
From a more existential perspective (and slighlly cynical) someone could say that both serving in the military and woring on an oil rig are high-risk jobs, and that each "worker" in such high-risk environments decided, when he started this career, that's a risk well worth it (being mitigated by pay). So from this perspective "they had it coming".
I don't know yet what would be the correct position; just some opinions..
Re: Obama's the Anti Christ videos
Working in a high risk job does not normally imply that your employer is permitted to ignore known safety issues.alecsandros wrote:I don't know; I can't decide about that.RF wrote: Serving in the armed forces in an area of conflict is also a high and this time expectedly lethal risk. But the fact that soldiers are paid does not absolve the commanders in chief of their responsibility. Just as the 11 people who were killed at the Deepwater Horizon explosion were being paid for their activities in a high risk industry doesn't mean that BP or its immediate contractors operating the well are absolved from responsibility to them or immediate third parties does it?
You're right, of course, from a strictly humane point of view - after all there can be no "right price" for human lives.
From a more existential perspective (and slighlly cynical) someone could say that both serving in the military and woring on an oil rig are high-risk jobs, and that each "worker" in such high-risk environments decided, when he started this career, that's a risk well worth it (being mitigated by pay). So from this perspective "they had it coming".
I don't know yet what would be the correct position; just some opinions..