Hostages Taken At Clinton Campaign Office

[PosterChild]

Police Unclear As To How Many People Involved



BOSTON -- An armed man took at least two workers hostage Friday at a Hillary Clinton presidential campaign office in New Hampshire, police said.The incident happened at about 1 p.m. Friday at 28 Main St. in Rochester. Officials said that a man is holding people hostage at the office, but it is unclear how many people are being held.Witness Lettie Tzizik said that she spoke to a woman shortly after she was released from the office by the hostage-taker.
(http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/ibs.bos.news/national;kw=news+square+14737866;ad=true;pgtype=de tail;wx=default;tile=1;sz=300x250;ord=123456789?)
"A young woman with a 6-month or 8-mont-old infant came rushing into the store just in tears, and she said, 'You need to call 911. A man has just walked into the Clinton office, opened his coat and showed us a bomb strapped to his chest with duct tape."There are several police officers positioned across the street from the office, crouched down behind cruisers with guns drawn, according to a reported at the scene."I walked out and I immediately started running, and I saw that the road was blocked off. They told me run and keep going," said Cassandra Hamilton, who works in an office adjacent to the building.Nearby businesses have been evacuated, and the St. Elizabeth Seaton School has been locked down.Clinton, who is not in New Hampshire, is attending a National Democratic Committee meeting in Virginia. Presidential candidate Barack Obama also has an office in Rochester, and it has been evacuated. There were no reports of any injuries.NewsCenter 5 and TheBostonChannel.com will have more information when it becomes available.

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/14737866/detail.html

[PosterChild]

Rumor has that someone was plotting to allow free and fair elections. Hillary learned of the plot...woe to these guilty scoundrels...

[PosterChild]

Report: Suspect wants to talk with Hillary.
Seriously.

[jterrell]

Is Burma around.....

:laugh2:

[ConcordCowboy]

I knew Burmafrd was out of his mind about the prospect of Hillary winning the Presidential election...but come on man...

Let the people go Burm!

[ConcordCowboy]

Is Burma around.....

:laugh2:

:laugh2:

Beat me to it.

[PosterChild]

Edwards and Obama campaign headquarters evacuated as a precaution. Per Foxnews!

[PosterChild]

Ah man, you guys are bad...:eek:

[PosterChild]

CNN says suspect is a campaign staffer...exonerating certain ppl here..

[jterrell]

CNN says suspect is a campaign staffer...exonerating certain ppl here..

hahahaha!

I can't wait to read the Hillary plant threads now.

She planted him to get extra attention... Ice you are slow on this one man, clearly this is another case where Hillary lied about plants.

[ConcordCowboy]

CNN says suspect is a campaign staffer...exonerating certain ppl here..

Means nothing...Burm has been known to go to extremes to get what he wants.

Masquerading as a campaign staffer to further his plans for the destruction of Hillary Clinton...child's play to him.

[silverbear]

hahahaha!

I can't wait to read the Hillary plant threads now.

She planted him to get extra attention... Ice you are slow on this one man, clearly this is another case where Hillary lied about plants.

There are no plants in the Clinton campaign office...

OK, OK, they have a coupla nice marijuana plants in the back store room, but that's just so Slick Willie can not inhale them...

[silverbear]

Means nothing...Burm has been known to go to extremes to get what he wants.

Masquerading as a campaign staffer to further his plans for the destruction of Hillary Clinton...child's play to him.

It worries me that burma hasn't been in here to defend himself... it kinda lends credence to this conspiracy theory... :D

[ConcordCowboy]

It worries me that burma hasn't been in here to defend himself... it kinda lends credence to this conspiracy theory... :D


"Witnesses described the man as in his 40s with salt-and-pepper hair."

Burma's 49 and if he's got any hair left after fretting about Hillary being President...I'm sure it's salt and pepper.

:D

[iceberg]

hahahaha!

I can't wait to read the Hillary plant threads now.

She planted him to get extra attention... Ice you are slow on this one man, clearly this is another case where Hillary lied about plants.

sorry - was tied up on global contract matters for the day job.

and she does lie about them. like everything else. you've already said you don't care if she's lies so you can stop defending the lies at any time now. : )

those are my demands and i won't set anyone free till jt says the world can do w/o hillary.

[PosterChild]

"Witnesses described the man as in his 40s with salt-and-pepper hair."

:D


Research has uncovered there are actually 2 suspects

http://blog.dreamhost.com/images/saltnpepa.jpg

[Danny White]

Reminds me of that South Park episode where terrorists hide a nuke up Hillary's "snizz."

[PosterChild]

From FNC-- The hostage taker may be “Troy Stanley”, man with mental illness and in his 40’s.

Witnesses say Stanley has road flares, not explosives.

[zrinkill]

The hostage taker may be “Troy Stanley”, man with mental illness and in his 40’s.

Well yea ..... I mean he is a Hillary supporter.

[PosterChild]

Seems Mr. Stanley is a conspiracy nut...govt planted bugs.

[jterrell]

Seems Mr. Stanley is a conspiracy nut...govt planted bugs.

he probably is against global warming, hahaha.

[jterrell]

Reminds me of that South Park episode where terrorists hide a nuke up Hillary's "snizz."

that wanted to keep it cold and dry....

if they had stuck in in bill's pants ... think of all the dents.
:)

[PosterChild]

he probably is against global warming, hahaha.

Yeah, the usual suspects...

And I'm not sure it was intended this way, but some reporterette said, "he's Libertarian and paranoid." LOL

[CowboyPrincess]

If he woulda checked Hillary's day planner against his and gotten the date right, he could have saved us all the trouble of hearing Hillary and Bill flip flopping for the next year

[BrAinPaiNt]

If he woulda checked Hillary's day planner against his and gotten the date right, he could have saved us all the trouble of hearing Hillary and Bill flip flopping for the next year

Or we can schedule A Hunting Trip for Hillary...with Cheney as the guide.:eek: :laugh1:

[silverbear]

Or we can schedule A Hunting Trip for Hillary...with Cheney as the guide.:eek: :laugh1:

Now that's what I call creative thinking... perhaps we could all chip in, and buy Deadeye Dick a new flamethrower, errrrr, SHOTGUN... that's it, I meant SHOTGUN... not flamethrower, that would be wrong...

And a case of Jack Daniels, of course...

[Ben_n_austin]

If he woulda checked Hillary's day planner against his and gotten the date right, he could have saved us all the trouble of hearing Hillary and Bill flip flopping for the next year

The "flip flop" buzz term has gotten tired. Particularly after the linear reasoning for why we were in Iraq. First it was this, then it was that... you get my point.

Who do you like this year?

[iceberg]

The "flip flop" buzz term has gotten tired. Particularly after the linear reasoning for why we were in Iraq. First it was this, then it was that... you get my point.

Who do you like this year?

except -

flip flop happens in a span of hours. it changes with the wind.

like bush or hate him - he never left his road.

[silverbear]

except -

flip flop happens in a span of hours. it changes with the wind.

like bush or hate him - he never left his road.

Dubya has had his fair share of monumental flip-flops, too... the most egregious was vowing to "get" bin Laden after 9/11, then months later proclaiming that he wasn't really all that concerned about capturing Osama after all...

Beyond that, I'd suggest that being consistently STUPID is not an admirable trait...

[CowboyPrincess]

The "flip flop" buzz term has gotten tired. Particularly after the linear reasoning for why we were in Iraq. First it was this, then it was that... you get my point.

Who do you like this year?

:D Missed ya BNA

You're right. The term "flip flop" has gotten tired. Every time I hear it I think John Kerry and I really don't wanna have him in my brain. But when I say that I'm wearing thongs, kids laugh at me. So I guess I'm stuck with flip flop..Woo is me :laugh2:

I like Chuck Norris...

opps I mean Huckabee. But it is still really early

[silverbear]

:D Missed ya BNA

You're right. The term "flip flop" has gotten tired. Every time I hear it I think John Kerry and I really don't wanna have him in my brain. But when I say that I'm wearing thongs, kids laugh at me.

I would never, ever laugh at women in thongs... smile, yes; laugh, no... well, unless it was a fat woman... :D

[CowboyPrincess]

Dubya has had his fair share of monumental flip-flops, too... the most egregious was vowing to "get" bin Laden after 9/11, then months later proclaiming that he wasn't really all that concerned about capturing Osama after all...

Beyond that, I'd suggest that being consistently STUPID is not an admirable trait...

I think there is a difference. Bush was changing focus during an active war and looking at the immediate threat.

Hillary is taking two totally different/ opposite stances on issues in a single day or week to suit whatever group she is addressing at that peticular moment.

IMHO

[CowboyPrincess]

I would never, ever laugh at women in thongs... smile, yes; laugh, no... well, unless it was a fat woman... :D

Now I know it is really early in the morning.... you beat BP to the perv remark ;)

[BrAinPaiNt]

except -

flip flop happens in a span of hours. it changes with the wind.

like bush or hate him - he never left his road.

I hate the flip flops, however...

I would prefer an idiotic flip flop that we can all laugh at like Kerry would do on a daily basis...compared to flip flops that get troops killed like bush has done.

NO that does not mean I wanted Kerry as President...I just would rather have a flip flop to laugh at.

Stay the Course...or Not (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FICZGpvOXkQ)

[BrAinPaiNt]

Now I know it is really early in the morning.... you beat BP to the perv remark ;)

:mad: :mad: :mad:

I am slipping.

[CowboyPrincess]

:mad: :mad: :mad:

I am slipping.

I noticed

[BrAinPaiNt]

I noticed

One foot in the grave and the other is on a banana peel.:laugh2:

[ConcordCowboy]

like bush or hate him - he never left his road.

Yeah and that's his problem.

Sometimes you are wrong and have to reverse or change course...but not with Bush.

Rockhead till the end.

Except with Global Warming.

Hmmm.

:D

[iceberg]

Yeah and that's his problem.

Sometimes you are wrong and have to reverse or change course...but not with Bush.

Rockhead till the end.

Except with Global Warming.

Hmmm.

:D

that's true too - but it's a different problem.

[Nors]

Bush has taken an unpopular stand.

It's easy to snipe at what he has done since 9-11. But fact is he proactively took it to the frontlines of where these knuckleheads were operating out of. Seven years later we have not had a second 9-11 incident.

Now had Bush done nothing proactive and we had a rash of 9-11 recurrences he'd have been villafied and majority today would be killing him worse.

In many ways a can't win situation he inherited. That said it is now time to have a clear and defined exit strategy today.

[iceberg]

Bush has taken an unpopular stand.

It's easy to snipe at what he has done since 9-11. But fact is he proactively took it to the frontlines of where these knuckleheads were operating out of. Seven years later we have not had a second 9-11 incident.

Now had Bush done nothing proactive and we had a rash of 9-11 recurrences he'd have been villafied and majority today would be killing him worse.

In many ways a can't win situation he inherited. That said it is now time to have a clear and defined exit strategy today.

he could have won by staying after bin laden and worrying about saddam later. the question is whether or not he intentionally did it to surround iran.

[silverbear]

I think there is a difference. Bush was changing focus during an active war and looking at the immediate threat.

Hillary is taking two totally different/ opposite stances on issues in a single day or week to suit whatever group she is addressing at that peticular moment.

IMHO

I'll grant you that you can't really tell what Hillary believes in on ANYTHING...

But I am past fed up with Republicans using "flip flop" as an attack device, when their politicians are every bit as prone to modifying their positions according to the prevailing political winds...

To tell you the truth, anybody who's NOT guilty of "flip-flopping" from time to time, as they get new input on a subject, is too rigid-minded to hold public office... being consistent isn't such a good thing if you're wrong right from the start... I much prefer somebody with the intellectual flexibility to admit (at least to himself) that he just might be wrong, and adopt a new position... Dubya in particular is completely incapable of doing such a thing...

[silverbear]

Now I know it is really early in the morning.... you beat BP to the perv remark ;)

I was on top of my game, LOL...

[silverbear]

Bush has taken an unpopular stand.

It's easy to snipe at what he has done since 9-11. But fact is he proactively took it to the frontlines of where these knuckleheads were operating out of.

Uhhhh, no...

Iraq was NOT the "frontlines of where these knuckleheads were operating out of" when we invaded them... they were at best bit players in global terrorism... al-Qaida, the REAL enemy, wasn't even IN Iraq until we invaded...

His "proactive" stance would have been great, if he'd kept his focus on the real target... but he screwed up, big time, when he turned his attention to Iraq, in pursuit of his own agenda...

Seven years later we have not had a second 9-11 incident.

Which is true for one reason, and one reason only-- Dubya made it EASIER for them to kill us, by sending our troops over to Iraq...

More Americans have died at the hand of Islamic extremists since 9/11 than died on that terrible day, so kindly spare me the "no second 9/11 incident" crapola...

Now had Bush done nothing proactive and we had a rash of 9-11 recurrences he'd have been villafied and majority today would be killing him worse.

Except he's not criticized for being "proactive", he's being criticized for being STUPID... NOBODY criticized him when we invaded Afghanistan, we were all in favor of his proactive moves in that area... but then he got stupid, and went and started up with Iraq...

In many ways a can't win situation he inherited.

Nope, a can't win situation he CREATED...

[heavyg]

Nope, a can't win situation he CREATED...

How did Bush creat the attack of 9/11? He hadn't even been in the White house for a year. That attack had to of been planed for some time. I think they underestimated our reaction. Clinton left the US vulnerable by cutting our military in half. So IMO the terrorist thought we wouldn't be able to respond the way we did.

I agree 100% that we should have stayed after Bin Ladin. Should have taken care of him then went after Iraq. We also need to keep a close eye on Iran IMO

[silverbear]

How did Bush creat the attack of 9/11?

His problem is not 9/11, his problem is Iraq... your problem is you keep equating the two, but Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11...

He hadn't even been in the White house for a year. That attack had to of been planed for some time. I think they underestimated our reaction. Clinton left the US vulnerable by cutting our military in half. So IMO the terrorist thought we wouldn't be able to respond the way we did.

I agree 100% that we should have stayed after Bin Ladin. Should have taken care of him then went after Iraq.

The way things were, there was absolutely no need to go after Iraq... they posed us no threat whatsoever...

We also need to keep a close eye on Iran IMO

Or maybe we need to take a close look at how much we're to blame for our current relationship with that country... I'm not saying that Iran is an innocent victim, you understand, but our belligerent approach to Middle East relations under Dubya clearly hasn't worked...

[heavyg]

His problem is not 9/11, his problem is Iraq... your problem is you keep equating the two, but Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11...

He hadn't even been in the White house for a year. That attack had to of been planed for some time. I think they underestimated our reaction. Clinton left the US vulnerable by cutting our military in half. So IMO the terrorist thought we wouldn't be able to respond the way we did.



The way things were, there was absolutely no need to go after Iraq... they posed us no threat whatsoever...



Or maybe we need to take a close look at how much we're to blame for our current relationship with that country... I'm not saying that Iran is an innocent victim, you understand, but our belligerent approach to Middle East relations under Dubya clearly hasn't worked...

So what is your plan. Or better yet has a Dem come up with a plan to pull out? Everyone keeps talking about it but NO ONE has put forth a plan. You can just remove our troops. If we did it would be total caos (sp) over there. I am as ready as the next person to be done with our dealing with the middle east. However, just because we don't have troops over there doesn't mean they will forget about us. Im with you on the Iraq issue. But I believe we still need to take the offensive againts terrorist. They will attack us again.

[jterrell]

So what is your plan. Or better yet has a Dem come up with a plan to pull out? Everyone keeps talking about it but NO ONE has put forth a plan. You can just remove our troops. If we did it would be total caos (sp) over there. I am as ready as the next person to be done with our dealing with the middle east. However, just because we don't have troops over there doesn't mean they will forget about us. Im with you on the Iraq issue. But I believe we still need to take the offensive againts terrorist. They will attack us again.

Actually plans have been presented by both the Democratic Congress and the individual Democratic candidates. You may not agree with them but they have been laid out in fine detail.

Hillary would leave bases in Iraq probably eternally, but would leave off continuing to police the country as a whole and thus reduce troop levels dramatically and quickly.

Others would reduce levels but then get out altogether without any bases behind.

I tend to believe Hillary's plan works best. We are within bombing range of Iran without the continued exposure of so many military personnel. If anything were to happen on one of our bases then we'd have every reason to act more aggressively against any purported perpetrators.
From day 1 my take has been this:
If we are offended deeply enough where action is required than nuke.
If it isn't serious enough to nuke then it isn't serious enough to risk American soldier's lives.

We are in a technological era not the era of m16s.
It is time to stop risking lives of those who can be killed in handfuls by 2 dollars worth of combined household cleaners.

[heavyg]

Actually plans have been presented by both the Democratic Congress and the individual Democratic candidates. You may not agree with them but they have been laid out in fine detail.

Hillary would leave bases in Iraq probably eternally, but would leave off continuing to police the country as a whole and thus reduce troop levels dramatically and quickly.

Others would reduce levels but then get out altogether without any bases behind.

I tend to believe Hillary's plan works best. We are within bombing range of Iran without the continued exposure of so many military personnel. If anything were to happen on one of our bases then we'd have every reason to act more aggressively against any purported perpetrators.
From day 1 my take has been this:
If we are offended deeply enough where action is required than nuke.
If it isn't serious enough to nuke then it isn't serious enough to risk American soldier's lives.

We are in a technological era not the era of m16s.
It is time to stop risking lives of those who can be killed in handfuls by 2 dollars worth of combined household cleaners.


IMO Hillary gets no consideration. After her and her husband drastically cut our military she needs to just sit down and be quiet. But thats just my opinion.......lol

Nuke em first? Yeah thats a good idea. Lets start a global nuclear war.

[iceberg]

Actually plans have been presented by both the Democratic Congress and the individual Democratic candidates. You may not agree with them but they have been laid out in fine detail.

Hillary would leave bases in Iraq probably eternally, but would leave off continuing to police the country as a whole and thus reduce troop levels dramatically and quickly.

Others would reduce levels but then get out altogether without any bases behind.

I tend to believe Hillary's plan works best. We are within bombing range of Iran without the continued exposure of so many military personnel. If anything were to happen on one of our bases then we'd have every reason to act more aggressively against any purported perpetrators.
From day 1 my take has been this:
If we are offended deeply enough where action is required than nuke.
If it isn't serious enough to nuke then it isn't serious enough to risk American soldier's lives.

We are in a technological era not the era of m16s.
It is time to stop risking lives of those who can be killed in handfuls by 2 dollars worth of combined household cleaners.

wow. eiter nuke or nothing? if that's something hillary would do we'd have a lot more problems than we do now if she makes it to be president.

we should have stayed after bin laden
if sadam were an issue we should have forced the UNs hand. Saddam when we were at the border about to go in realized we were serious and suddenly he was willing to cooperate. we should have given him 1 more chance but *not* invading would require UN military presence in the continued inspections. we had the upper hand at that point and invading wasn't necessary.

but nuke or nothing - that's pretty ... interesting.

[jterrell]

IMO Hillary gets no consideration. After her and her husband drastically cut our military she needs to just sit down and be quiet. But thats just my opinion.......lol

Nuke em first? Yeah thats a good idea. Lets start a global nuclear war.

Bill cut the military, balanced the budget and saw the country excel.
We were never militarily weak at all. Throwing bodies and money at the military does not make it stronger, ask Russia.

And yes, if we have to act then act big.
Fence-sitting gets us no where other than spread thin, in debt and with more enemies than the day before.

As we saw with Afghanistan if someone attacks us in even a minor fashion we will have no problem getting a standing army built up. We have no reason to maintain a hug standing army to twiddle thumbs or act as police overseas.

But, alas, this isn't about Hillary, it is about the fact you were simply wrong in your assertion above. Democrats have detailed plans to get out of Iraq.

[jterrell]

wow. eiter nuke or nothing? if that's something hillary would do we'd have a lot more problems than we do now if she makes it to be president.

we should have stayed after bin laden
if sadam were an issue we should have forced the UNs hand. Saddam when we were at the border about to go in realized we were serious and suddenly he was willing to cooperate. we should have given him 1 more chance but *not* invading would require UN military presence in the continued inspections. we had the upper hand at that point and invading wasn't necessary.

but nuke or nothing - that's pretty ... interesting.

nuke or nothing is all me.
no presidential candidate would advocate that except maybe kucinich or paul. it's far too dramatic.

but to me its like pulling a gun on someone.
don't do it unless you are going to use it.

these aren't toy soldiers.
war should be fought with the intent to end it quickly, not to preside over another country like we are Alexander the Great.

[heavyg]

nuke or nothing is all me.
no presidential candidate would advocate that except maybe kucinich or paul. it's far too dramatic.

but to me its like pulling a gun on someone.
don't do it unless you are going to use it.

these aren't toy soldiers.
war should be fought with the intent to end it quickly, not to preside over another country like we are Alexander the Great.


Your right. Except in the nuke part. Talk about not doing something decisive? Kinda like Clinton did when the Cole was bombed. He just launched a few rockets and said oh well we missed him and let it alone. No nukes. Just all out bomb the crap out of them. I agree with not putting our guys and gals into unesessary danger.........but we don't need to use the nukes......that will cause a whole other problem.

[iceberg]

So what is your plan. Or better yet has a Dem come up with a plan to pull out? Everyone keeps talking about it but NO ONE has put forth a plan. You can just remove our troops. If we did it would be total caos (sp) over there. I am as ready as the next person to be done with our dealing with the middle east. However, just because we don't have troops over there doesn't mean they will forget about us. Im with you on the Iraq issue. But I believe we still need to take the offensive againts terrorist. They will attack us again.

initiate final training plan for centralized government
pull out 30% of the troops in 6 months.
50% in 12 months.
as much as we can if not all in 2 years.

in the end there's likely to be several faction of iraq who will simply not go alogn with anything we put into place. just ain't gonna happen. us dorking around in their country won't change their mind.

the question is - if we leave or pull out, will the fighting stop? i think a lot of what *we're* fighting will fade but there will be a lot of civil unrest while *someone* takes the lead and it could be harsh.

it was harsh before we got there it will be harsh after we leave. this is *their* call for *their* country. will people die and get tortured, or worse? probaby but they were doing that anyway under saddam.

back home, cut dependance on oil in general by 15% in the 1st 2 years. 30% in 3 years. pour research into finding new and cleaner ways to power our cars, homes and so forth.

have plans in place to help private homes "green" up where they can w/solar power.

put incentive programs in place for housing manufacturers to build more "green" homes, not cheapest supplies they can find.

tax break to anyone buying a hybred vehicle that gets 35mpg or better.

work to end the hoopla around GW and focus on what we can do such as above.

that's a start. i'm sure some ideas have more 'work' to do than others and things like 30% in 3 years may be too high, but if we can get the thought process in place do to this it can be done.

i'd like to have a strong foriegn policy, but first and foremost i'd want to take care of our own country first.

[heavyg]

initiate final training plan for centralized government
pull out 30% of the troops in 6 months.
50% in 12 months.
as much as we can if not all in 2 years.

in the end there's likely to be several faction of iraq who will simply not go alogn with anything we put into place. just ain't gonna happen. us dorking around in their country won't change their mind.

the question is - if we leave or pull out, will the fighting stop? i think a lot of what *we're* fighting will fade but there will be a lot of civil unrest while *someone* takes the lead and it could be harsh.

it was harsh before we got there it will be harsh after we leave. this is *their* call for *their* country. will people die and get tortured, or worse? probaby but they were doing that anyway under saddam.

back home, cut dependance on oil in general by 15% in the 1st 2 years. 30% in 3 years. pour research into finding new and cleaner ways to power our cars, homes and so forth.

have plans in place to help private homes "green" up where they can w/solar power.

put incentive programs in place for housing manufacturers to build more "green" homes, not cheapest supplies they can find.

tax break to anyone buying a hybred vehicle that gets 35mpg or better.

work to end the hoopla around GW and focus on what we can do such as above.

that's a start. i'm sure some ideas have more 'work' to do than others and things like 30% in 3 years may be too high, but if we can get the thought process in place do to this it can be done.

i'd like to have a strong foriegn policy, but first and foremost i'd want to take care of our own country first.


Ive said many times Im not 100% behind us being in Iraq. But we are there. However, it is my belief that no matter what we do there or how long we stay once we leave there will be an uprising and another dictator will take over. Its been that way forever and I do not seeing it changing without someone from the outside being there to stop it. I just hope its not us

Our dependance on oil is sad. However, I think we can solve our shortage problems by allowing us to drill in Alaska. AND rebuild the refinaries that were destroyed years ago. But we do need to start moving away from the use of oil.

[iceberg]

Ive said many times Im not 100% behind us being in Iraq. But we are there. However, it is my belief that no matter what we do there or how long we stay once we leave there will be an uprising and another dictator will take over. Its been that way forever and I do not seeing it changing without someone from the outside being there to stop it. I just hope its not us

Our dependance on oil is sad. However, I think we can solve our shortage problems by allowing us to drill in Alaska. AND rebuild the refinaries that were destroyed years ago. But we do need to start moving away from the use of oil.

we're on the same page. i wish we could do more in iraq but the long and short of it is - they don't want us there and anything we do will be removed as soon as we leave.

we should spell out our intentions for a 1 year phase out and do it. they can either get off their hineys and take advantage of our help, or we can go and they can get back to "normal'.

http://www.slate.com/id/2102031/

that's one article talking about refineries.

oklahoma had a drilling boom in the mid 80s - but are they out of oil or did it get too expensive to get it? early call says it's pretty much just not there anymore. anyone know for sure?

[heavyg]

we're on the same page. i wish we could do more in iraq but the long and short of it is - they don't want us there and anything we do will be removed as soon as we leave.

we should spell out our intentions for a 1 year phase out and do it. they can either get off their hineys and take advantage of our help, or we can go and they can get back to "normal'.

http://www.slate.com/id/2102031/

that's one article talking about refineries.

oklahoma had a drilling boom in the mid 80s - but are they out of oil or did it get too expensive to get it? early call says it's pretty much just not there anymore. anyone know for sure?

Thats a good question. Ive only lived here for 3 yrs so I am not real familiar with the oil history of this state. I do know oilfield work is still one of the best paying jobs around here.

IMO the middle east is a lost cause. But we just can't ignore it. If we do we will have another 9/11. We are in a no win situation.

[iceberg]

i think if we stayed after bin laden, we had just cause to go balls out and world support.

i don't think we can ever stop terrorists from terrorizing. but we can ensure the ones who hurt us we get. by not getting bin laden we sent a message to go ahead and do it again cause we'll get political ADD shortly.

[heavyg]

i think if we stayed after bin laden, we had just cause to go balls out and world support.

i don't think we can ever stop terrorists from terrorizing. but we can ensure the ones who hurt us we get. by not getting bin laden we sent a message to go ahead and do it again cause we'll get political ADD shortly.

I can't argue with that