Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

George W. Obama


Phaeton80

Recommended Posts

El Espectador, Colombia

George W. Obama

By Santiago Villa

Translated By Talisa Anderson

11 June 2013

Barack Obama lied when he promised to defend the right to privacy and the values of transparency on which his predecessor trampled.

The last two weeks have been perhaps the most enervating for the image of the president of the United States since he assumed office, because his hypocrisy has been laid bare. Barack Obama, who during the 2008 elections presented himself as a candidate who would correct the totalitarian offenses of George W. Bush, once in office, opted to expand the most controversial policies of his predecessor.

The hardest hitting were the revelations of Edward Snowden, a systems technician who worked as a contractor for the National Security Agency. Snowden revealed that, through two secret programs, the NSA collects data communication of hundreds – or thousands – of millions of people around the world.

http://watchingameri...orge-w-obama-2/

Edited by Still Waters
Shortened amount of copied text
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm... maybe it is Barack H. Bush?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why was the text shortened? Is it policy to not include complete articles and force people to go to the source? Important parts o/t article are now cropped..

Edited by Phaeton80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why was the text shortened? Is it policy to not include complete articles and force people to go to the source? Important parts o/t article are now cropped..

It's the Obama administration trying to stop you from voicing your slandering and propaganda.

Edited by krypter3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the Obama administration trying to stop you from voicing your slandering and propaganda.

Its a serious question. I just dont see the advantage of cropping any article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a serious question. I just dont see the advantage of cropping any article.

Do you bother to read the rules before posting on sites?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not. My apologies, what was I thinking asking the logic of anything when its defined as 'a rule'.

Please forgive me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not. My apologies, what was I thinking asking the logic of anything when its defined as 'a rule'.

Please forgive me.

See, let me explain it to you, this site belongs to Saru, so he gets to make the rules. And as long as he pays for this service you certainly have no right to question his rules, if you don't like them feel free to stay away.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the article

As Ron Fournier, National Journal commentator, said, “the Bush-Obama era will long be remembered for curbing the Constitution.”
I hope this is right and not the beginning of the new norm. Edited by Hilander
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the article

I hope this is right and not the beginning of the new norm.

Fournier's comment is gross understatement.

As Kissinger famously stated, the illegal we can do now, the unconstitutional takes a little bit longer.

Obama governs like Bush on steroids. :td:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, let me explain it to you, this site belongs to Saru, so he gets to make the rules. And as long as he pays for this service you certainly have no right to question his rules, if you don't like them feel free to stay away.

I dont care for your disrespectful tone and simplistic attempts to put words in my mouth. I was merely asking the logic of the rule, nothing more.

Or is it a rule not to ask about the logic of a rule? (thats rhetorical, please feel free to not supply me with another one of your gems in response, mr. questionmark)

Edited by Phaeton80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont care for your disrespectful tone and simplistic attempts to put words in my mouth. I was merely asking the logic of the rule, nothing more.

Or is it a rule not to ask about the logic of a rule? (thats rhetorical, please feel free to not supply me with another one of your gems in response, mr. questionmark)

Ok, let me try to explain it at your level: Who pays makes the rules, if you don't like the rules you don't have to use the free service provided by them. Freeloading and the complaining is quite rude. But with $120 a month and some free software (which seems to be what you like FREE) you can make your own site, and the rules. Have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not. My apologies, what was I thinking asking the logic of anything when its defined as 'a rule'.

Please forgive me.

It is because some articles are several pages long and they would take up a lot of bandwidth. For members who have dialup loading can get extremely slow. Therefor to speed everything along it is requested not to post entire articles and provide a link to it in it's entirety.

At least that is what I understand.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is because some articles are several pages long and they would take up a lot of bandwidth. For members who have dialup loading can get extremely slow. Therefor to speed everything along it is requested not to post entire articles and provide a link to it in it's entirety.

At least that is what I understand.

Quite right, but that is certainly not the point of contention here: The point is this site belongs to Saru and that he gets to make the rules. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is because some articles are several pages long and they would take up a lot of bandwidth. For members who have dialup loading can get extremely slow. Therefor to speed everything along it is requested not to post entire articles and provide a link to it in it's entirety.

At least that is what I understand.

Thank you Michelle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Michelle.

You're welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite right, but that is certainly not the point of contention here: The point is this site belongs to Saru and that he gets to make the rules. Period.

The 'point of contention' soully exists in childish little questionmark's mind. For the rest of us, there was only a question.

Your life must truely be miserable for you to [re-] act as sour as you do. Good luck with that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite right, but that is certainly not the point of contention here: The point is this site belongs to Saru and that he gets to make the rules. Period.

I bet when your children were little and they questioned a rule you told them, "Because I said so." :lol:

I never did like that answer because I felt like they were talking down to me...like I wouldn't understand the logic behind the rule.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 'point of contention' soully exists in childish little questionmark's mind. For the rest of us, there was only a question.

Your life must truely be miserable for you to [re-] act as sour as you do. Good luck with that.

If it was a question you would have done the obvious: PM Saru and ask him to change the rules instead of starting a stink here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet when your children were little and they questioned a rule you told them, "Because I said so." :lol:

I never did like that answer because I felt like they were talking down to me...like I wouldn't understand the logic behind the rule.

Not quite, but as there are no children here posting I expected that a grown person would do the proper thing: Twist the rules a little and when get caught accept it. And as I have pointed out above, the discussion should be with Saru, not here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was a question you would have done the obvious: PM Saru and ask him to change the rules instead of starting a stink here.

..Says the member who is passionately trying to bait using his poignant nasty / funky freak feet avatar.

In any case, thanks for the midday [FREE] comedy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fournier's comment is gross understatement.

As Kissinger famously stated, the illegal we can do now, the unconstitutional takes a little bit longer.

Obama governs like Bush on steroids. :td:

It seems like there is no difference between Democrats or Republicans, anymore....

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like there is no difference between Democrats or Republicans, anymore....

The same is said about our own political parties over here.. Many will say, the republicans ( not the same as the US ) and the conservative, along side many others.. It's like they have slowly but surely merged into one...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like there is no difference between Democrats or Republicans, anymore....

Not quite true, the Democrats can at least rally behind something. The Republicans can't even get together to pass a measure benefiting their most loyal constituents. See the Farm Bill, as example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like there is no difference between Democrats or Republicans, anymore....

The Republic is dead! Long live the Corpocracy!

Ike had warned us all about this eventuality but really few Americans really care. We got the NFL, NASCAR, and Disney life is truly wonderful!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.