What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
119 Comments
- mickeyknoxxx, on 10/11/2007, -17/+176Dear Dick Cheney,
My son is a U.S. soldier in Iraq. He would like to know if you have made enough money now and he could come home.
Signed,
American Citizen - Atmandk, on 10/11/2007, -4/+85Yeah, we should remove governments that use torture.
- snypa, on 10/11/2007, -6/+75@ grawk
How do you think Saddam managed to commit such crimes?
Do you honestly think that Bush administration give two ***** about how another country treats its people? Come on now, take Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, etc etc, list goes on. These are some of the most oppressed nations on earth, but no, you don't see the US bombing the crap out of them to liberate them.
You have got to be really naive if you think the US is there to free them. - gummih, on 10/11/2007, -10/+73@grawk
In 2005 the number of children deaths in Iraq reached a record high, over 120,000 children under the age of 5 died.
Anyone trying to call that progress is a either a hypocrite or a sociopath.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1621812,00.html , last paragraph - mickeyknoxxx, on 10/11/2007, -13/+76""""Funny, every soldier I've talked to who's been in iraq is behind what we're doing over there.""""
Oh I see.
This must be why the IVAW was created. - mikeneilson, on 10/11/2007, -9/+48The truth doesn't often get Dugg up, I have noticed, but it would be fair to mention that Cheney's pay from Halliburton that, yes, he still DOES receive, is deferred payment (a very common practice for execs who make a lot of cash), so he has no current financial interest salary-wise in the success of Halliburton aside from the fact that if they close their doors (which there is basically no chance of anyway), he won't get paid.
He also has committed to giving all of his gains from Halliburton stock (which he does own) to reputable charities, and to date he has made good on this promise. There are other reasons to dislike the man, I don't see why there is such a need to spread lies about him.
factcheck.org (a great website that you should all be reading if you aren't already) did a great writeup on Cheney and Halliburton, and that is where I got this information. I encourage you all to look into it so that you can make informed arguments instead of this FUD-ridden drivel.
I know you can't defend anyone in this administration and NOT get Dugg down, so I will see you all in the bowels of "collapsed comment" hell. Thanks for expanding this comment to read it! :) - snypa, on 10/11/2007, -7/+43(ran outta time)
grawk, you go on as if such attrocities no longer take place, but here's a fact, they do! Do a huge extent.
You say it's the Baathist's causing the problems, but it's not, its the whole nation against an illegitimate occupying power. Baathist's are only part of a pan-arab nationalist movement. If they don't want the US there, whose to deny them that right? "oh but then the terrorists will win!", they're only winning because we turned Iraq into an Al Aqaeda breeding ground, something which never existed previously. - spinchange, on 10/11/2007, -3/+38Yes, it's much, much worse.
- Cerialthriller, on 10/11/2007, -10/+40hmm.. lets see
US uses torture
US is raping the american people of their rights and tax dollars
US sent 3400 of their people to die in Iraq. Sounds like mass murder to me, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of iraqis who have died during this.
who is going to come help us start another civil war so we can have "freedom"? - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -3/+33@mikenelson, I dugg you up, though you're both right and wrong.
Cheney's deferred salary was a tax dodge, and as such, is _not_ okay with me. He should have received the lump sum bonus and paid tax on it like the rest of us -- especially to avoid the conflict of interest charge (if he cared).
There was a secondary issue of conflict, because if Halliburton went out of business, he might lose that money before he got it. So he got insurance to cover that. And then there was an issue of that insurance being "whole" and therefore considered an investment in and of itself (i.e., he could cash out). And then there was the issue of the stock. It was all a big mess.
And all of this could have been settled before he took office -- stock gets put in a blind trust, deferment doesn't happen, and Cheney doesn't invite Halliburton execs into his secret energy policy meetings. That's now how it went down, and there's no fixing it now.
But I do agree that these aren't his worst crimes. And I believe that even if he'd done the right thing from the start, he'd still be loyal to Halliburton, since he'll probably sit on their board when he's done with messing up the world. - InfamousAtheist, on 10/11/2007, -2/+31FTA: "From 2001 to 2005, Mr. Cheney received “deferred salary payments” from Halliburton that far exceeded what taxpayers gave him. Mr. Cheney still holds hundreds of thousands of stock options that have ballooned by millions of dollars as Halliburton profited handsomely from the war in Iraq."
I am still completely baffled by this gross conflict of interest. Even if he's not allowed to sell the stock while in office, it's pretty clear the man is a war profiteer. The ethical implications are disturbing, let alone the legal questions. Why won't Congress do anything about this? - Atmandk, on 10/11/2007, -4/+30It's disingenuous, naive, and socially pathological to compare the moral imperatives of this war and this administration, which are pure products of 21st century hyper-capitalism, to those of WWII.
- jaycliche, on 10/11/2007, -3/+28"I don't know what soldiers you are talking to, but the ones I know here sure as hell know better."
Gawk "met" them through his friend "Television". - Beatmiser, on 10/11/2007, -2/+26@grawk :
I live with one soldier just back from Iraq, and her husband about to leave. Their friends who have served in Iraq are regulars at our house. I don't know what soldiers you are talking to, but the ones I know here sure as hell know better. - HolyCrapYo, on 10/11/2007, -9/+30Dear mickeyknoxxx,
No.
Signed,
Dick Cheney - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+22@mikeneilson, well said...on the surface it seems that Cheney is keeping his word...but considering the prefferential treatment Halliburton has gotten from this administration I'd say the situation bears watching closely. Not all deals are done on paper.
- fnaqzna, on 10/11/2007, -2/+20@jaycliche
"We are hardly the America of the 1940s."
--
I don't believe the America of the 1940's would have invaded Iraq.
So yeah... you're right. We're not. - jaycliche, on 10/11/2007, -3/+21"Can you imagine what the reports would be like if the battle of the bulge happened today?"
We are hardly the America of the 1940s. - jaycliche, on 10/11/2007, -2/+19"And anyone who would say that the removal of a government that used rape rooms, torture, and mass "
With one that does the same... - Atmandk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17All right, I generally agree with that. My comment was aimed more at the general WWII comparers than at you specifically. My more serious concern is the danger that lies in letting the crooks off the hook by de-legitimizing criticisms against them. I also agree with the preaching to the choir bit, but then it begs the question of how do you call the ***** without being a partisan hack?
-you got me on the ad hominem - damn on-line discussion dynamics! - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16@viperdaimo: "Does the submitter/writer even know what Halliburton does?"
Do you? Their slogan is "Release the Energy."
http://www.halliburton.com/ps/
They may not sell it at the pump like Exxon, but they're deep into oil services, drilling, and related technologies. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16@swrostmore, from personal experience, yes you need sarcasm tags - no matter how outrageous your comment is, someone is going to take it literally.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15Yeah. I didn't say the tax dodge was illegal. But given that it lead to conflict of interest charges, and given that he's already stinking rich, I think he should have and could have easily avoided the whole mess and paid 5-10% higher taxes. That's poor judgment on his part. It's not the first, and certainly won't be the last issue I have with his judgment.
It's only a question of what I'd personally do if I were also about to step into elected office. If he was a private citizen, I wouldn't be criticizing his finances like this. - Delphium226, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15@grawk
Thanks for taking the time out to re-introduce us to a few of the old republican talking points on your way to the local USMC recruiting station. It's nice to know your sort doesn't just fight the war from the comfort of your keyboard but that you are willing to put yourself in harms way for your deeply held convictions.
After you get there, try and take some time out of your busy schedule - handing out sweets, refilling pots of purple ink at polling stations, improving electricity and water supplies, learning the local languages and cultures, and making new and interesting friends - and do pop back in here to let us know how you're doing.
Hurry now! You want don't want to miss your plane! We'll miss you!
Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!! - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15Yes and no. They'd want most institutions/powers to return to the states, making it a more anti-federalist approach. Most would say this is strictly in line with the constitution -- only explicitly federal powers can be expressed at the national level. But I get the sense from some libertarians that the ultimate goal is privatization of everything, which makes it seem more like anarchism to me (e.g., if law enforcement is private, then what's the difference between that and anarchy?)
- spinchange, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13On a serious note, privatization of vital national institutions is part of the Libertarian and/or Ron Paul agenda, isn't it? (Click Reply)
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -6/+15come on, did that comment really need a sarcasm tag?
- Gtitian, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11Hey Gawk,
If you think the enemy in Iraq is as much a threat to us or the world as the Nazi's were then maybe you need to read some more history. The Nazi's controlled Europe, these guys can't control themselves. On a second note, the battle of the bulge would never happen today, because we simply do not fight like that anymore, today it would be a pointless waste of human life, because we have better tools, back then the only tool we had was people. - ZWarren69, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8FV, I couldn't figure out what side of the spectrum you fell under, so I just guessed douchbag.
- kevin1987, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9I cannot begin to express the disgust I have for what the current administration has done to my country. I hope that once they are out (ASAP) they are made to pay for it and regret it for the rest of their lives. I don't see how they can't be so ashamed of themselves, nearly the ENTIRE WORLD hates them for what they are doing - Who do they think they are?
***** them. - jaycliche, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9"What? Halliburton is not an "energy giant". Does the submitter/writer even know what Halliburton does?"
They make supplies, administer oil facilites. One example, they own a company that makes custom drill bits for oil drilling. They also have a division that washes clothes, makes food, etc for the US military and/or temp drill sites. Ask yourself why an "non" oil company would move it's world headquarters to one of the richest oil countries in the world (Kuwait)?
The oil industry wouldn't be the oil industry without Halliburton...and you Sir are talking out your ass. - GabrielS, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Some of the NY Times bullet points are wrong. It's their opinion, but it clouds the legitimate points they do make about Cheney trying to hide the visitors to his office. If he wants to hide the visitors to his office, go work as a NOC at the CIA. As VP, even we are entitled, upon official request, to see the list of visitors to his office.
Cheney lost the case trying to protect the list of participants in his energy consulting meetings. He'll lose this case too, but he's already destroyed the records. - masperos, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9I motion to outsource the Executive Branch to India.
- pigfister, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7President Bush asks what's our OIL doing under their sand? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWiLshk6fSU
30/10/2000 Iraq changes form $ to euro’s for oil sales. (axis of evil 1)
2001 Iran switch form $ to euro’s for oil sales. (axis of evil 2)
7/12/2002 North Korea switches all trading from the $ to euro’s, not just oil. (axis of evil 3)
Hugo Chavez Venezuela held chairmanship of Opec & puts on the table for all petroleum sales to be
Switched from $ to euro would collapse the $ so America turns to anti propaganda towards Venezuela
to oust a democratically elected leader and so America starts the (FAILED) 2002 coup d'état
aided by broadcasters that are now finding, that they cannot get their licences renewed!
http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/
did someone say "Military Industrial Complex"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military-industrial_complex
Operation Northwoods:
In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in US cities to create public support for a war against Cuba including crashing planes into key American structures!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Scanned%20Documents/declassified%20NORTHWOODS.pdf - ZWarren69, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8I live in a red state, with many soldier friends. Everyone I have talked to expressed major dissent. Why the ***** do you think the AWOL rate is at an all time high?????
- polyGone, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Too bad Bush feels he shouldn't have to testify under oath....No wonder he never lied under oath.....
- ecorona, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Do you guys ever think that maybe the Democrats don't do anything to stop Bush and Cheney in order for us to get outraged and vote the Republicans out of office? I simply can't understand what the hell is holding the Dems back on kicking some ass. Are they really such pussies?
- fatkiduluv, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5The same thing that qualified me to be reviewed and accepted. Nothing but the will to do the job. He didnt get setup as a CIA international spook. He will most likely ferry red folders between staterooms on a command ship.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5If you're willing to move it to Saudi Arabia, I'd say it's a done deal.
- CogitatorX, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7"real controversy in the Bush Administration"
Yeah because there have been NO real controversies in the Bush Admin.
Oh and it's KARL you tool. No wonder you think every thing's hunky dory. - viviwanu, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Die Dick! Die!
- ZWarren69, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8grawk heard them on Faux news
- GabrielS, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4The Democrats are doing what every political party does when they return to the majority. They do everything they can in the first year of control to cement themselves as the majority party for as many years as possible. They know that a Congress is only organized for two years, and 6 months of that is almost entirely devoted to getting re-elected to the House for 435 members. Ergo, the first year is basically awash in naivete. If you look at the Congressional hearings, one would have to conclude that Global Warming is the biggest priority for Democrats on the Hill. This is the most common subject of hearings.
- GabrielS, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Not every institution. It's probably wants to first take back the power ceded to the Federal Reserve System that is the roots of our out of control spending, policy engagements, etc.
I don't know many libertarians that wouldn't want to dismantle the Federal Reserve System as their first order of business. Well, maybe ending drug prohibition would be first. - polyGone, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6ohhh you liberal leftist hippy moonbat liberalist fact-havers!!!!!
- mikeneilson, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5@nblsavage:
I agree completely with that, and won't argue that we don't need to keep an eye on some of those dealings. The other side of that is that it would be completely unfair to the employees, investors, and other stakeholders of Halliburton to say that Halliburton can't win any contracts related to the war, so it is a fine line to walk, for sure.
I am just arguing that the people who glance at a story like this without understanding any of the other facts are grossly misinformed, and it is kind of a shame. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@7shadesofcrazy,
Whatever the amount, it's certainly more than they'd need to pay anyone to make it happen. As bribes go, American politicians are amazingly cheap.
$3k for a rider on a bill.
$50k to steer a multi-million-dollar contract.
A few million in campaign contributions to send your country to war.
What a bargain! - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"It's a blind trust. He cannot direct its activity at all. "
You are being obtuse. He doesn't have to do anything. He just has to direct government funds to stocks in his "blind" trust.
Damn, it's not even difficult. - ZWarren69, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3You are a moron, unless that was sarcasm.
- demonsnake69, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Cheney could stab a person in the kidney, and make that person apologize for accidentally getting in the way of his knife--that's just pure badassness.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 119 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is