PDA

View Full Version : Hillary gives 900M to support terrorism


xfl2001fan
05-05-2009, 12:22 PM
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=47606&print=on

“In 2007, then-Sen. Hillary Clinton described the PA education system as, quote, ‘the most horrific child abuse', so why is the United States about to give another $900 million to the Palestinian Authority when it’s absolutely clear that the PA has failed in the past and continues to fail to meet a single condition attached to this funding?”

The almost $1 billon that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pledged as humanitarian and economic development aid for Palestinian civilians in Gaza and the West Bank in 2009 also will be used to promote terrorism and teach the next generation of Palestinians to hate non-Muslims and oppose the existence of Israel, a panel said Monday at the Heritage Foundation.

President Barack Obama has pledged his support for the $900 million in aid to the PA and is expected to speak about it when President Abbas meets with him in Washington later this month.

“So let’s ask the question again,” Crook said as she concluded her remarks. “Why is the United States about to write a check for $900 million to the Palestinian Authority when it is very clear from history and present examples that they have not met and continue to not meet the demands of U.S. law?

“The answers range from bureaucratic intransigence – look at USAID’s refusal to monitor the abuses of its funding – to lack of political will, to just plain denial of the facts,” Crook said.

“We are so desperate for peace that we convince ourselves that we have found a partner for peace despite all the evidence to the contrary,” Crook said. “But the fact remains that this loss of control over what is being done with U.S. dollars has resulted in U.S. money being used to promote hatred and terror.”

“[Giving the aid] constitutes criminal negligence,” she said.

There's more to this article...even CNN is starting to get it.

And to think, some people swore up and down that Hilary would have been better than Obama. Not so sure now.

revefsreleets
05-05-2009, 12:32 PM
This is par for the course for the Democratic Party. Look, the condiitions in some of these Palestinian refugee camps is deplorable, and if there was any way to get the aid money directly to those who actually NEED it in the form of basic health care services and food, that's noble and good. Even better, this would be beautiful if somehow actual US CITIZENS, under the auspices and protection of the PA could actually go into these camps and provide the aid directly. THAT'S how you foster goodwill and start changing perception...

But that's not how this works.

This money will be filtered through a corrupt organization that is at least sympathetic to terrorists, if not openly backing them, and the money will be channeled off to actually work against us. What's more, the common people that it's intended to help will never hear of it or know anything about it's original intention or origins.

This is another great example of the Democrats having great and noble intentions and effing it all up during the execution phase of the plan...

Dino 6 Rings
05-05-2009, 12:35 PM
I guess they needed a new TV Character teaching Mickey Mouse Supported Suicide Bombing...got to love the Islam and Satanists.

HometownGal
05-05-2009, 12:38 PM
Nahhhhh. They'd rather spend that $900M on sending food and medical care to a bunch of Shkabibbly terrorist thugs than to spend it on American children and adults who can't afford health insurance and eat beans and rice for dinner every night because they can't afford anything else. :banging:

Change We Can Believe In. :jerkit: :upyours:

fansince'76
05-05-2009, 12:54 PM
This money will be filtered through a corrupt organization that is at least sympathetic to terrorists, if not openly backing them, and the money will be channeled off to actually work against us. What's more, the common people that it's intended to help will never hear of it or know anything about it's original intention or origins.

This is another great example of the Democrats having great and noble intentions and effing it all up during the execution phase of the plan...

Agreed. I can also understand the reasoning behind the aid - it would be nice to try and diminish Hamas' influence in the Palestinian government (who, IMO, are probably the BIGGEST roadblock to any kind of peaceful solution in the Gaza Strip). One of the biggest reasons Hamas got voted into power by the Palestinians to begin with is that they were seen as being "altruistic" by the Palestinians as a whole - besides strapping explosives to women and children and sending them into crowded marketplaces to blow themselves up, Hamas has also frequently built schools, mosques, etc. for Palestinians to use. However, I gotta go with Revs in that all that will happen is that the money will ultimately be used against us.

Vincent
05-05-2009, 12:58 PM
But that's not how this works.

This money will be filtered through a corrupt organization that is at least sympathetic to terrorists, if not openly backing them, and the money will be channeled off to actually work against us. What's more, the common people that it's intended to help will never hear of it or know anything about it's original intention or origins.

This is another great example of the Democrats having great and noble intentions and effing it all up during the execution phase of the plan...

I don't believe dems have noble intentions. Their entire history says otherwise.

I dare anyone to read this article... http://tmqblog.com/2009/03/07/obama-administration-has-turned-its-back-on-israel-american-jews%E2%80%8F/

Their intentions are abundantly clear.

But back to diverting funds. Yassir Arafat, the late terrorist and darling of the dems, absconded with billions from aid we had sent. His widow lives in splendor in Paris. Old news, just adding to your point

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/07/60minutes/main582487.shtml

revefsreleets
05-05-2009, 01:05 PM
So ALL DEmocrats are evil and have bad intentions?

WAY too extreme for me...but each to their own, I guess...

Vincent
05-05-2009, 01:10 PM
So ALL DEmocrats are evil and have bad intentions?

WAY too extreme for me...but each to their own, I guess...

No, just their leaders.

I'm jaded by over 50 years observing their systematic destruction of this great Union.

tony hipchest
05-05-2009, 01:11 PM
more "failed" bush policies? bush was giving hundereds of millins to PA, and some members of the democratic led congress were digging its heels in the dirt for fear of it winding up in the wrong hands.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3482779,00.html
Bush administration to pledge $500 million in aid for Palestinians


Congress to vote on new proposal offering record sum in financial aid to Palestinian Authority in West Bank, though legislators say they was assurances that millions won't end up in Hamas' hands

Associated Press Published: 12.14.07, 23:38 / Israel News




The United States will pledge about $500 million for the moderate-led Palestinian government in the West Bank when Arab, European and other nations meet next week, US officials said Friday.

'PA Plan Viable'

IMF supports Palestinian economic reform plan for 2008-2010 / Associated Press

International Monetary Fund says PA proposal 'ambitious but achievable' but first Palestinians must raise $5.6 billion in foreign donations
לכתבה המלאה





The money would go toward a goal of $5.6 billion that former British Prime Minister Tony Blair hopes to raise to rescue the Palestinian economy and reinforce institutions that would become the backbone of any eventual independent Palestinian state.



Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will deliver the pledge at a conference Blair has called Monday in Paris, the officials said.



The money is part of world efforts to improve the Palestinians' financial position as new US-sponsored peace talks begin.



Rice cannot promise that she can deliver on the pledge, which must be approved by the US Congress. The money includes about $400 million that the White House has already announced, but that has not been approved by Congress.



Some members of Congress are worried that money spent to strengthen the West Bank eventually could benefit a rival radical-led government in the other, separate, Palestinian territory of the Gaza Strip. Other legislators want greater assurance that the West Bank government has shed its long reputation for corruption and cronyism.



This is par for the course for the Democratic Party. Look, the condiitions in some of these Palestinian refugee camps is deplorable, and if there was any way to get the aid money directly to those who actually NEED it in the form of basic health care services and food, that's noble and good. Even better, this would be beautiful if somehow actual US CITIZENS, under the auspices and protection of the PA could actually go into these camps and provide the aid directly. THAT'S how you foster goodwill and start changing perception...

But that's not how this works.

This money will be filtered through a corrupt organization that is at least sympathetic to terrorists, if not openly backing them, and the money will be channeled off to actually work against us. What's more, the common people that it's intended to help will never hear of it or know anything about it's original intention or origins.

This is another great example of the Democrats having great and noble intentions and effing it all up during the execution phase of the plan...

:rolleyes: and here we have the typical bullshit propoganda and rhetoric. U.S. Agency for International Development will handle the distribution of the funds just like it has under the current regime. :sofunny:


Nahhhhh. They'd rather spend that $900M on sending food and medical care to a bunch of Shkabibbly terrorist thugs than to spend it on American children and adults who can't afford health insurance and eat beans and rice for dinner every night because they can't afford anything else. :banging:

Change We Can Believe In. :jerkit: :upyours:but that would be considered "redistribution of the wealth" and republicans would bitch about that too.

revefsreleets
05-05-2009, 01:14 PM
Bu...bu....bu....Bush?

Really?

The problem is this was a bad policy, and it continues to be a bad policy, only now it's worse, because we're doubling the money.

Question: Was Bush right to send money in the first place? It CANNOT be both ways (as much as the Dems try to make it so). It's either a bad policy or it's not. It's not dependent upon the party in charge when the policy is enacted. It's NOT bad when Bush does it, and good when Obama does it.

xfl2001fan
05-05-2009, 01:14 PM
It's just ironic (aka HYPOCRITICAL) that Hillary would dis Bush for this in 2007....then turn around and nearly double the amount given a year and a half later.

How do you spin this one Tony?

tony hipchest
05-05-2009, 01:24 PM
It's just ironic (aka HYPOCRITICAL) that Hillary would dis Bush for this in 2007....then turn around and nearly double the amount given a year and a half later.

How do you spin this one Tony?

:link: we have been giving aid to the palestenians for YEARS. the title of your rediculous thread is the only bullshit spin and hypocricy i see. but then again you believe obama hates whites.

oh, and only revs can talk about his boy bush :sofunny:

xfl2001fan
05-05-2009, 01:34 PM
:link: we have been giving aid to the palestenians for YEARS. the title of your rediculous thread is the only bullshit spin and hypocricy i see. Yeah, the terrorism part was a nice little touch. I thought it would do well to get your attention. The Hypcorisy still exists on her part, no matter how much you detest the verbage in the title...it doesn't change the fact that she's a hypocrite on this particular issue. You can't spin this any other way. My title is spin. No doubt about it. Still, nice shot at deflection.

but then again you believe obama hates whites.
No :link: = EPIC FAIL

oh, and only revs can talk about his boy bush :sofunny:

Ahh, I knew some statement would follow that would have absolutely nothing at all to do with the argument.

lamberts-lost-tooth
05-05-2009, 01:43 PM
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0409/hillary_hamas.php3

This article may help clear some things up. I think the Hypocrisy lies not only in Clintons past promises to refuse aid to countries that may filter the funds through terrorist organizations but also in her past non-support of a Palastenian State without an agreement for peace in the region.

tony hipchest
05-05-2009, 01:44 PM
Yeah, the terrorism part was a nice little touch. I thought it would do well to get your attention. The Hypcorisy still exists on her part, no matter how much you detest the verbage in the title...it doesn't change the fact that she's a hypocrite on this particular issue. You can't spin this any other way. My title is spin. No doubt about it. Still, nice shot at deflection.


No :link: = EPIC FAIL



Ahh, I knew some statement would follow that would have absolutely nothing at all to do with the argument.actually, the final statement has everything to do with it. youre following in revs footsteps of inherently flawed "arguments" that are actually nothing more than bullshit propoganda and rhetoric, designed for nothing more than to try and spread :shout:- PANIC!!!

the GOP is crumbling, and they know the only chance in hell of winning any election is to scare the voters into voting for them. its really sad that a once proud party has nothing left to turn to but fear mongering.

still no link, huh? you might wanna check hilarys longtime stance on foreign aide to the palestenians.

tony hipchest
05-05-2009, 01:45 PM
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0409/hillary_hamas.php3

This article may help clear some things up. I think the Hypocrisy lies not only in Clintons past promises to refuse aid to countries that may filter the funds through terrorist organizations but also in her past non-support of a Palastenian State without an agreement for peace in the region.
thank you. and i wouldnt necessarilly call it hypocricy, but due dilligence and ensuring one is doing things right. lets not forget we supplied iraq and the afghans with tons of foreign aid that eventually bit us in the ass, but was a good idea at the time.

xfl2001fan
05-05-2009, 01:59 PM
actually, the final statement has everything to do with it. youre following in revs footsteps of inherently flawed "arguments" that are actually nothing more than bullshit propoganda and rhetoric, designed for nothing more than to try and spread :shout:- PANIC!!!

the GOP is crumbling, and they know the only chance in hell of winning any election is to scare the voters into voting for them. its really sad that a once proud party has nothing left to turn to but fear mongering.

still no link, huh? you might wanna check hilarys longtime stance on foreign aide to the palestenians.

You said that I believe Obama hates white people. Show me where I said it. No :LINK: = EPIC FAIL (Isn't that what you do to GBMelBlount?)

I am pointing out a serious flaw in Hillary Clinton's stance on this. You can call it what you like, but this is more than just flip-flop...this is blatant hypocrisy. I'm not trying to win votes...and if I was...I wouldn't be on a message board chock full of adults...most of whom (among the the active posters) are Conservatives anyways. So you can throw that item out the door as well. This isn't actually about spreading panic, it's shining light on hypocrisy.

The whole "Swine Flu" "Epidemic" is promoting panic. Not this.

and i wouldnt necessarilly call it hypocricy, but due dilligence and ensuring one is doing things right.
Of course you wouldn't call it hypocrisy...it's your party. However, if it was Bush's change in stance and Revs posting this particularly juicy quote, you would pull the Bull$hit flag so fast you might pocket might just tear.

Ooops, I just tore my pocket pulling out the Bull$hit flag.

lamberts-lost-tooth
05-05-2009, 02:01 PM
the GOP is crumbling, and they know the only chance in hell of winning any election is to scare the voters into voting for them. its really sad that a once proud party has nothing left to turn to but fear mongering.

Gotta be honest Tony....I am WAY past caring about parties and politics...I am scared.

My neighbor has lost his job as a pharmacutical rep ....another neighor who works as a machine parts sales rep is cut to 32 hrs a week....My friend lost his job at Bridgestone...and my co-workers husband was just let go from the water department.

I keep hearing that ..."better days lay ahead"...and I see the politicians on both side of the aisle lying...just pissing on my leg while telling me its raining.

Catepillar is about to go belly up...The big automakers are declaring bankruptcy....My son is being told that he may not find a summer job at minimum wage because there are adults waiting in line to work at McDonalds...Yet, we hear that it's the "dawn of a better day" for businesses in the United States.

Almost a billion dollars going to a terrorist country....100's of billions of dollars spent on pork projects...Little to no oversight on how bailout money is distributed or used...

I have a VERY secure job...but my fear is for those who dont and for my country...Gotta say...I am beginning to feel the "panic".

tony hipchest
05-05-2009, 02:07 PM
You said that I believe Obama hates white people. Show me where I said it. No :LINK: = EPIC FAIL (Isn't that what you do to GBMelBlount?)

.it was a tongue in cheek comment suggesting you and revs share the same brain. :noidea: definitely now sharing the same "tactics".

anyone who believes our secretary of state is a supporter of the mass murder of americans is a moron.

this thread = EPIC FAIL

xfl2001fan
05-05-2009, 02:10 PM
it was a tongue in cheek comment suggesting you and revs share the same brain. :noidea: definitely now sharing the same "tactics".

anyone who believes our secretary of state is a supporter of the mass murder of americans is a moron.

this thread = EPIC FAIL

Well, your tongue in cheek comment failed as well. Don't accuse me of beliefs just because someone else here has them.

This thread is only an EPIC FAIL to those who refuse to see the hypocrisy. I know I openly admitted that the Terrorism part of the title was spin. I deliberately used that term to draw attention. My little "tongue in cheek" comment.

Your refusal to admit the hypocrisy is the real EPIC FAIL. As much as you spin, you could join a circus and hold up plates on little sticks. Perform for us some more.

revefsreleets
05-05-2009, 04:12 PM
WTF are you talking about Tony?

I'm saying it's shitty policy under Bush, and doubling it is even shittier policy under Obama.

Palestine is a state that supports terrorism. PERIOD. There's no spin here. No "position". Palestine supports terrorism and we are giving Palestinians money that will almost certainly, directly or indirectly, end up in terrorists hands.

tony hipchest
05-05-2009, 05:29 PM
I'm saying it's shitty policy under Bush, and doubling it is even shittier policy under Obama.
.
and therein lies the hypocricy.

america is trying to buy peace. just another day at the office, and the band plays on....

bu...but. but.. obama... :coffee:

xfl2001fan
05-05-2009, 05:31 PM
and therein lies the hypocricy.

It's a shittier policy...because they're giving more money. It's a shittier policy because they criticized it when Bush was doing it.

That's the hypocrisy.

Dino 6 Rings
05-05-2009, 05:52 PM
maybe we should teach American Children this type of thing, then the Billion Dollars of "aid" can stay in the USA:

Last summer, Hamas's TV station brilliantly countered criticism of its children's show, Tomorrow's Pioneers, by having the Israelis kill off its main character, Farfour. Last week, Farfour's replacement, Nahool the bumblebee, also died a martyr's death - in a Gaza hospital bed, after Israel refused to allow it to travel outside for medical treatment. But the children needn't worry; a replacement is already waiting in the wings.

GAZA CITY, Feb. 7, 2008 (MENASSAT.COM) – "Who are you and where do you come from?" Sarraa asked. The 11-year-old, veiled host of Al-Aqsa TV's children's program, Tomorrow's Pioneers, seemed just a bit intimidated by the huge yellow bumblebee that had just walked onto the set.

"I am Nahool, Farfour's cousin," said the bumblebee.

"What do you want?" Sarraa asked.

"I want to follow Farfour's path," Nahool answered, "the path of 'Islam is the solution,' the path of heroism, of martyrdom and the mujahedeen. My friends and I will continue on Farfour’s path. We will take our revenge from the enemies of Allah, the killers of the prophets, the killers of innocent children, until we free al-Aqsa [Jerusalem] from their filth."

"Welcome, Nahool," said Sarraa, relieved.

It was July 13, 2007 when the makers of Tomorrow's Pioneers introduced Nahool the bumblebee as the newest character on the Hamas-affiliated station's weekly children's program. Nahool was himself a replacement for Farfour, a Mickey Mouse-lookalike character, whose "martyr" death at the hands of the Israelis Sarraa had announced to the children just two weeks earlier.

Last week, Nahool too became a "martyr." In the February 1 episode of Tomorrow's Pioneers, the bumblebee was seen dying in a hospital bed. Gaza's doctors were unable to treat Nahool for the disease he was suffering from because of the blockade, and the Israeli army did not allow Nahool to travel outside for treatment.

The Link has the Video and Audio

Sure looks like PEACE to me.

http://www.menassat.com/?q=en/news-articles/2891-hamas-tv-continues-prime-time-massacre

tony hipchest
05-05-2009, 05:54 PM
It's a shittier policy...because they're giving more money. It's a shittier policy because they criticized it when Bush was doing it.

That's the hypocrisy.

:link:

what they may have critisized was the republican administration systematically screwing up the impementation of the plan.


This money was filtered through a corrupt organization that is at least sympathetic to terrorists, if not openly backing them, and the money was channeled off to actually work against us. What's more, the common people that it's intended to help will never hear of it or know anything about it's original intention or origins.


....or something like that.

revefsreleets
05-05-2009, 05:55 PM
and therein lies the hypocricy.

america is trying to buy peace. just another day at the office, and the band plays on....

bu...but. but.. obama... :coffee:

Do you know what the definition of hypocrisy is?

I was never a lemming for Bush. Never a blind supporter or cheerleader. I criticized bad policy when I saw it out of the Bush White House, and there was plenty of it. This sucked when Bush fobbed it off, but it's far WORSE now because we should know better, and Obama is supposed to be this uber intelligent dude, and yet...he's not only extending, but expanding yet ANOTHER Bush policy.

You're running low on excuses I see...can't blame ya, really...

xfl2001fan
05-05-2009, 05:59 PM
:link:

what they may have critisized was the republican administration systematically screwing up the impementation of the plan.


This money was filtered through a corrupt organization that is at least sympathetic to terrorists, if not openly backing them, and the money was channeled off to actually work against us. What's more, the common people that it's intended to help will never hear of it or know anything about it's original intention or origins.


....or something like that.

Read the first post buddy. The link is at the very top. Clinton hated it and blasted the Pakistan Authority. That was late 2007. Here it is early 2009 and nothing's changed in Pakistan (or little anyways) but suddenly it's a good idea to nearly double the aid going there?

Nice attempt at covering up for Hillary though. That corrupt organization is still in place. It was corrupt then, it's corrupt now. They even attempted a "truce" with the Taliban (which very recently backfired in a big way.)

Sorry buddy. This policy re-incarnation, the person initiating and all who support it are EPIC FAIL...based on your arguments, so are you.

tony hipchest
05-05-2009, 07:41 PM
Read the first post buddy. The link is at the very top. Clinton hated it and blasted the Pakistan Authority. That was late 2007. Here it is early 2009 and nothing's changed in Pakistan (or little anyways) but suddenly it's a good idea to nearly double the aid going there?

Nice attempt at covering up for Hillary though. That corrupt organization is still in place. It was corrupt then, it's corrupt now. They even attempted a "truce" with the Taliban (which very recently backfired in a big way.)

Sorry buddy. This policy re-incarnation, the person initiating and all who support it are EPIC FAIL...based on your arguments, so are you.

taliban? pakistan? :toofunny:

my bad, i thought we were talking about the palestenians and money falling into the hands of the PLO.

you fail on the grandest scale in your own thread,,,buddy. thats what i cal solownage i.e. owning yourself. thanks for saving me the trouble... :chuckle:

xfl2001fan
05-05-2009, 11:04 PM
taliban? pakistan? :toofunny:

my bad, i thought we were talking about the palestenians and money falling into the hands of the PLO.

you fail on the grandest scale in your own thread,,,buddy. thats what i cal solownage i.e. owning yourself. thanks for saving me the trouble... :chuckle:

Let's see here...from the outset, I started with a link, brought up portions of the story that were relevant...then I went on to mention (in this same story that was linked from the outset) how the money was going to a Corrupt government who had a truce with the Taliban...and you missed all of this why? Were you are so quick to jump into spin/deflect mode that you actually didn't see any of the story or the underlying themes?

Not only are you pulling your own "solownage", you spun so fast, you gave yourself an assist. Gratz bro.

steelwall
05-05-2009, 11:29 PM
Its ok xfl... Obama will go over there and bow to some Hammas leader throw an insane amount of money at him call America arrogant, and everything will be just fine....

I'm sorry.... noble 'intentions' by Dems or Repulicans aside.... Why the F is it our responsibility to help any of them? I just do not believe that there is anyway this money can ever be totally accounted for. If they want to use it fund terrorism they will (and I garuntee you they do) there is not a dam thing we can do about it. It does not matter how anyone attemps to change policies or insitute any new conditions... where there's a will, there's a way. They will find a way to channel this money to exactly where they want it, (if they even care to try and hide it) to think differently is just plain stupid.

Like was stated it was a bad policy to begin with and a worse one now.

You cannot talk to them, you can not reason with them. For God sakes look at the shyte they're showing their children.... It was a ridiculous notion to think that ANY American President can just bring peace to those who have been indoctrined their whole lives to hate us.

tony hipchest
05-05-2009, 11:47 PM
Let's see here...from the outset, I started with a link, brought up portions of the story that were relevant....lets see here... from the "outset" YOU said our secretary of state supported terrorism, and then forgot whether you were taliking about palestenians or pakistanis, the PLO or taliban.

sure you brought up "portions" that were 'relative" to the bs spin, rhetoric, propoganda, that were convinient to your agenda, but conviniently left out (in the words of the late great paul harvey) "the rest of the story".

dont blame me for calling you out on it. blame the weak sauce you brought to the board, boss. :thumbsup:

MasterOfPuppets
05-06-2009, 01:05 AM
my question is, with the state our economy is in, what business does ANY politician , EVER have of giving TAXPAYERS money to ANYONE thats not an american citizen. ....people are throwing fits over economical stimulus packages, but in my mind, giving welfare checks to other countries ,when we can't even take care of our own is freakin beyond criminal. :doh:

xfl2001fan
05-06-2009, 07:53 AM
lets see here... from the "outset" YOU said our secretary of state supported terrorism, and then forgot whether you were taliking about palestenians or pakistanis, the PLO or taliban.

sure you brought up "portions" that were 'relative" to the bs spin, rhetoric, propoganda, that were convinient to your agenda, but conviniently left out (in the words of the late great paul harvey) "the rest of the story".

dont blame me for calling you out on it. blame the weak sauce you brought to the board, boss. :thumbsup:

You know what, you're right. I was tired and (eventually) confused the two.

However, her actions in giving money to the PA is still the exact same action that she dissed Bush for. My mistake in the actual nationality is irrelevant in this case. Her mistake is worse because, not only did she bash it initially in 2007, but she also is offering up even more of the non-existent American dollars to people who don't support the US in any way shape or form. None of this is going to help our national debt.

My mistake (after the OP) doesn't change the fact that the links were there and you didn't read them, or chose to ignore them for your spin, deflection and weak sauce argument.

So you gain a miniscule point on the specific verbage in regards to nationality, but have yet to answer the actual theme of hypocrisy on behalf of our Secretary of State, and by extension, Obama. For after all, she represents him...and I can't imagine he disapproves of this money being sent to them.

Dino 6 Rings
05-06-2009, 08:16 AM
Read my post, I wasn't confused about the PLO or Hamas or about what they do in Israel and how they teach their kids from childhood to want to kill all the jews.

HometownGal
05-06-2009, 08:45 AM
my question is, with the state our economy is in, what business does ANY politician , EVER have of giving TAXPAYERS money to ANYONE thats not an american citizen. ....people are throwing fits over economical stimulus packages, but in my mind, giving welfare checks to other countries ,when we can't even take care of our own is freakin beyond criminal. :doh:

A-FOOKIN-MEN!!!! :applaudit::applaudit::applaudit::hatsoff:

revefsreleets
05-06-2009, 09:08 AM
Well, to be fair, it's a volatile situation in an unstable region, and a little goodwill never hurt. Just because they effed up "winning their hearts and minds" in Vietnam doesn't mean it's bad policy.

But you cannot filter relief money through a corrupt government that sponsors terror. As I said, whatever actually ends up in the hands of the women and children who need it will NEVER be credited back to the US anyway, and I'm sure a big chuck of this will end up buying RPG's on the black market or something...

Bad policy...and Obama is doubling down on it...

MasterOfPuppets
05-06-2009, 05:57 PM
Well, to be fair, it's a volatile situation in an unstable region, and a little goodwill never hurt. Just because they effed up "winning their hearts and minds" in Vietnam doesn't mean it's bad policy.

But you cannot filter relief money through a corrupt government that sponsors terror. As I said, whatever actually ends up in the hands of the women and children who need it will NEVER be credited back to the US anyway, and I'm sure a big chuck of this will end up buying RPG's on the black market or something...

Bad policy...and Obama is doubling down on it... its kinda like handing a crackhead $50 to go buy a pair of shoes....:doh: ....and don't act like this is anything new.... they all seem to like to spread our tax dollars around the world....

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/59189/steven-radelet/bush-and-foreign-aid

One of the greatest surprises of George W. Bush's presidency so far has been his call to dramatically increase U.S. foreign aid. In March 2002, Bush proposed an increase of 50 percent over the next three years through the creation of a Millennium Challenge Account (mca), a fund that would provide $5 billion per year to a select group of countries that are "ruling justly, investing in their people, and establishing economic freedom." That September, Bush released his National Security Strategy, which gave rare prominence to development and aid alongside defense and diplomacy. Then came his 2003 State of the Union address, in which he called for $10 billion in new funding ($15 billion total) over the next five years to combat hiv/aids in Africa and the Caribbean. This proposal was rapidly signed into law in late May, on the eve of the G-8 summit. And Bush's 2004 budget included two smaller initiatives: a $200 million famine fund and a $100 million fund for "complex emergencies." If these programs are funded as proposed, they will increase U.S. foreign aid from approximately $11 billion in 2002 to $18 billion in 2006 -- the largest increase in decades. Perhaps more important, they will also fundamentally change the way the United States delivers aid by making recipients more involved in setting priorities and by demanding greater accountability for results.
me thinks the bank needs to be closed !!!

revefsreleets
05-07-2009, 10:27 AM
This:

Perhaps more important, they will also fundamentally change the way the United States delivers aid by making recipients more involved in setting priorities and by demanding greater accountability for results.

Is good, though. We give aid. That's what we do. So we might as well attempt to at least hold the recipients somewhat accountable.

St33lersguy
05-09-2009, 10:21 AM
What part of THE TERRORISTS ARE TRYING TO KILL AMERICANS doesn't this corrupt hapless pinheaded administration and that pinhead Hilary Clinton doesn't undrestand.
At this rate this administration will be the worst in U.S. history. Those who think otherwise, name another administration who supported people trying to kill americans. Name another president who condems america in other countries