Amerika, zemlja velika

[Pantelija jr]

Pijem sam u jednom tuznom irskom pabu u jednom velikom IE gradu, pored mene je grupa sredovjecnih, pijanih, dozlaboga odbojnih Amera; prica se o ter. napadu u Bostonu, i oni stvarno Arape zovu "sand niggers". Kolicina odvratnosti je tesko pojmljiva.

[Gandalf]

http://www.politico....anic-90212.htmlTexas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert alleged Wednesday that Al Qaeda operatives were being taught to “act like Hispanic” and cross the border illegally into the United States.“We know Al Qaeda has camps over with the drug cartels on the other side of the Mexican border,” Gohmert said on C-SPAN. “We know people are being trained to come in and act like Hispanic when they’re radical Islamists. We know these things are happening. It’s just insane not to protect ourselves.” :0.6: Edited April 18, 2013 by Gandalf

[3opge]

од јуче је али свеједно.захваљујући безрепој републиканској стоци у конгресу није прошао бил за бекграунд чек.желим им да своју децу и унуке гађају аутоматским пушкама мислећи да су то јелени.никада нисам видео Обаму овако бесног.

[DarkAttraktor]

никада нисам видео Обаму овако бесног.

:lol:inace to za uni.back. check se znalo od preeee 2 nedelje ili tako nest.

[WTF]

http://www.politico....anic-90212.htmlTexas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert...

Kao sto sam rekao vec jednom, ako postoji 1 clan US Congressa koga bih mogao satima da bijem palicom za baseball bez prestanka i bez samilosti, onda je to ovaj retard.

од јуче је али свеједно.захваљујући безрепој републиканској стоци у конгресу није прошао бил за бекграунд чек.желим им да своју децу и унуке гађају аутоматским пушкама мислећи да су то јелени.никада нисам видео Обаму овако бесног.

Slobodno dodaj tu i ono cetvoro demokrata

[DarkAttraktor]

meni Gohmerta zao :(

[angern]

Navijam za slobodni svet, a porobljeni ko j..e

[Prospero]

The United States of America Did Torture, ActuallyFew Americans realize what cruelties have been inflicted in their name.Steve Chapman | April 22, 2013The autopsy gave a spare account of how the 52-year-old man died. He suffered blunt force injuries on his torso and legs, and abrasions on his left wrist indicated he had been tied or shackled down. One of his neck bones was fractured. Death came "as a result of asphyxia (lack of oxygen to the brain) due to strangulation," and it was ruled a homicide.USCG photo by Telfair H. Brown, Sr.It's too much to hope for justice in this case, though. That's because the homicide came at the hands of the administration of George W. Bush. The victim was an Iraqi whose demise occurred while he was in American custody. He was one of some 100 people who since 2001 have died while our government was holding them, some of whom were tortured to death.The advocates of "enhanced interrogation" make it sound simple and effective. An uncooperative terrorist gets waterboarded and quickly agrees to spill vital secrets, or gets weary of being cold and sleep-deprived and divulges plots in time to stop them.Dick Cheney and Co. never dwell on the captives who were subjected to prolonged and escalating brutality that failed to elicit the desired information -- possibly because they didn't have it. Those who favor this approach don't mention the inmates who will never talk because they are in their graves.Some of the tortured survived the ordeal. But living or dead, they have been consistently ignored by the American people, few of whom realize what cruelties have been inflicted in our name.The victims were ignored again last week when an independent commission issued a report that said, "Perhaps the most important or notable finding of this panel is that it is indisputable that the United States engaged in the practice of torture." The report was released Tuesday -- as the Boston Marathon bombs were eclipsing all other news.It deserved far more attention than it got. The panel was not a choir of squeamish liberals and al-Qaida apologists. It included former Rep. Asa Hutchinson, R-Ark., who chaired a National Rifle Association task force after the Newtown massacre, William Sessions, who served as FBI director under President George H.W. Bush, and Thomas Pickering, that president's UN ambassador.The 11 members had no trouble establishing that the Bush-Cheney techniques qualified as torture and "occurred in many instances and across a wide range of theaters" -- from Afghanistan to Guantanamo Bay. They found this approach had "no justification."They determined that Bush and his senior aides "bear ultimate responsibility for allowing and contributing to the spread of illegal and improper interrogation techniques." They found no evidence that torture "produced significant information of value" -- but plenty that much of the information "was not useful or reliable."As president, Bush insisted he was staying within the white lines. He assured the world, "The United States of America does not torture." His champions say the methods he approved did not qualify for that term.But you don't have to take the word of the American Civil Liberties Union on what constitutes torture. You can take the word of the Bush administration. In its assessment of foreign governments, the panel noted, the U.S. government "has routinely and firmly condemned as torture and/or abuse many of the same techniques used by U.S. personnel against detainees over the course of the past decade."It condemned Jordan for subjecting inmates to "forced standing in painful positions for prolonged periods." Waterboarding? A form of torture when used by Sri Lanka and Tunisia. Sleep deprivation? When Iran, Libya and Saudi Arabia do it, it's an outrage.There is no way to prove that in some case at some time, an exercise in sadism might not cause a hardened terrorist to reveal everything. But theoretical payoffs don't excuse practices that the U.S. government has declared off-limits for every other country. Nor can they justify violating the international Convention Against Torture -- signed and celebrated by President Ronald Reagan.That treaty had a provision especially relevant in the aftermath of 9/11. It said, "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture." Torture, as Reagan understood, is not sometimes wrong. It's always wrong.Those who pretended otherwise made a choice that inflicted intense suffering and painful death on enemies real and imagined. For Bush, Cheney and their accomplices, that choice should be a lasting disgrace.

[Indy]

:zrikavci:

[Indy]

Za bookmarkovanje.

[Аврам Гојић]

Za bookmarkovanje.

50 minijatura na jednoj strani :ziga:

[Prospero]

odavde crpe definiciju WMD-aAccording to U.S. law (18 USC § 2332):

the term “weapon of mass destruction” means—(A) any destructive device as defined in section

921

of this title;(B) any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursors;© any weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vector (as those terms are defined in section

178

of this title); or(D) any weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life;

Chemical and biologial agents clearly aren't at issue here, but "destructive devices" are. So a peek at 18 USC § 921 reveals:

The term “destructive device” means—(A) any

explosive, incendiary

, or poison gas—(i)

bomb,

(ii) grenade,(iii) rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces,(iv) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce,(v) mine, or(vi)

device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses

;(B) any type of weapon (other than a shotgun or a shotgun shell which the Attorney General finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes) by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, and which has any barrel with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter; and©

any combination of parts either designed or intended for use in converting any device into any destructive device described in subparagraph (A) or (B) and from which a destructive device may be readily assembled

.The term “destructive device” shall not include any device which is neither designed

nor redesigned

for use as a weapon; any device, although originally designed for use as a weapon, which is redesigned for use as a signaling, pyrotechnic, line throwing, safety, or similar device; surplus ordnance sold, loaned, or given by the Secretary of the Army pursuant to the provisions of section 4684 (2), 4685, or 4686 of title 10; or any other device which the Attorney General finds is not likely to be used as a weapon, is an antique, or is a rifle which the owner intends to use solely for sporting, recreational or cultural purposes.

[Prospero]

luda nacija, tu nema pomoći, ko poslednji izađe nek ugasi svetlo itd: George W. Bush’s approval rating just hit a 7-year high. Here’s how.Posted by Chris Cillizza and Sean Sullivan on April 23, 2013 at 6:30 amDays before the official opening of his presidential library, George W. Bush is experiencing something of a comeback when it comes to his public image.Former President Bush with former First Dog BarneyAlmost as many people (47 percent) approve of how Bush handled his eight years in office as disapprove (50 percent), according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. That’s the highest approval rating for Bush since December 2005. Bush’s approval dipped all the way to 23 percent in Post-ABC polling in October 2008 and was just 33 percent in January 2009 when he left office. (His approval rating was below 40 percent for 26 consecutive months before his term ended, the longest streak of sub-40 presidential ratings since polling began in the 1930s.)And, what’s fascinating is that it’s not just Bush’s overall job approval numbers but the intensity measures. In the new Post-ABC poll, 34 percent say they “strongly” disapprove of the job he did while in office; that’s the lowest strong disapprove number for Bush since January 2005.Bush’s biggest gains over the past few years have come among seniors (30 percent approval in 2008, 57 percent approval today), non-college whites (34 percent in 2008, 57 percent now) and moderate/conservative Democrats (10 percent in 2008, 33 percent now).Who hasn’t changed their views of Bush? African Americans (90 percent disapproval in 2008, 84 percent disapproval now) and Democrats (90 percent disapproval in ’08, 73 percent now).Here’s a chart — courtesy of the good people at Capital Insight — detailing the comparison between Bush’s aggregate 2008 numbers and his showing in the new Post-ABC poll across a variety of subgroups.That said, majorities still disapprove of Bush’s handling of the economy (53 percent) and the war in Iraq (57 percent); intense disapproval (43 percent) remains for Bush’s performance on Iraq. What those set of numbers suggest is that the former president’s political comeback has a relatively low ceiling given his continued poor ratings on the two defining issues of his eight years in office.What accounts for Bush’s resurgence? It’s likely due to a well-documented trend when it comes the public and their politicians: No matter how much people dislike someone when he/she is in office, the longer that person is out of office the more difficult it is to sustain that dislike. We have very short collective political memories. (That trait also explains why political second chances — Mark Sanford, Anthony Weiner — can work in American society.)That collective forgetting goes double for Bush, who, more than any recent president, has stayed out of the public eye since leaving office. He is rarely quoted on any subject and largely eschews any attempts – beyond his memoir — to analyze what went right and wrong with his presidency.Plus, to the extent there is any news about Bush, it tends to be on the personal side. His father’s illness (and recovery) and his daughter’s newborn daughter are the sort of stories that paint a softer portrait of Bush and one that is far easier to like.There is a certain group of people — Democrats, mostly — that will never forgive Bush for the war in Iraq and his handling of Hurricane Katrina (among other things). But, for a large swath of the public, Bush’s mistakes in office are in the past and what they have heard about him over the past five-ish years makes them like him more than they did when he was serving as president.

[DarkAttraktor]

cisto da ne ostane nezabelezeno:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07MH-WhrlK8

[Turnbull]

Ali jebote, pazi tu imaginaciju, uvek je primer crnja lik koji pljačka liquor store i koga imaš prava da kokneš.

Edited April 25, 2013 by Syme