Obama Lands in Afghanistan

Source: New York Times



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/us/politics/20OBAMA.html

He said Barak was going to Iraq. However, if not there, where?

Surely not to AFGANISTAN!! Where they might kill him.

McCain surely wouldn't think of tipping off the drug lords who have a vested interest in an incompetent Republican adminestration continue. :smoke:

wouldn't what McCain did be in violation of that? He put one of their charges at risk. Can't they do something about that?

Wonder what the Secret Service thinks about Obama, or if their loyalty lies with the bozo in office?

I was talking to a friend yesterday who said her new job was wonderful since it was great to finally be working for someone who has a clue. Let's hope they feel that way about the Obamas, instead of having to babysit a bunch of dysfunctional twits.

(quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
Who will guard the guards themselves?

Do you think the media will be allowed to show cheering throngs or a multitude of soldiers greeting Obama, or will the shots be framed or Photoshopped? The Booshies cannot be trusted.

Inquiring minds want to know.

not cropped for hype either

If this is the place where the ruling elite get rid of the Obama problem. After all, what can you say, one of them thar evil terrorists did him in and well gee, it looks like there's not enough time to put someone else on the ballot.

Hopefully, I am wrong on this one, and given the ability of distributive computing to alter elections quietly, I should be but, the point is people need to wake up, this so called election coming up has already been decided. Anyone, at this point, who does not understand that simply doesn't understand the problem we are currently up against.

What does distributed computing have to do with election results?

that manipulating election results has been a big sport in America since there have been elections. My mother use to tell me stories about how the Daley machine in Chicago use to work. However, the problem in the past with manipulating elections was the abnormalities we're confined into one area or just a very few areas, which makes auditing easier.

However, under a distributive model, which is based off of studies of the results in Ohio during the 04 general election and the IP records of how data was moved, would bring to light the possibility of altering an election, ever so slightly in many different precincts, and therefore making it much more difficult to put all the pieces together after the fact.

for the Democratic party.

If we don't have a Real Plan in place to stop it, they will "win in the last 49 hours" as McCain predicted in hisx crystal ball.

This coming election is already a done deal, save for the 2 day media event that will proclaim the forgone results.

America really needs to wake up and realize the problem we are up against is not a ballot box problem.

Note: I am not suggesting anything just pointing out a fact.

I understand what you are suggesting.

I'm confused by your use of the term "distributive." Are you talking about distributed computing?

I ask because, if you are, this is a new wrinkle, and I'd like some links or citations. I'm fairly familiar with the literature on problems with electronic voting mechanisms, and I'm wondering how I missed that the voting machines are on a distributed network. (If Diebold or some company is doing this with distributed computing, that could be the new poster-child for overkill.)

Your use of the word "distributive" possibly suggests you're talking about something else entirely.

Not trying to be a contrarian, just wanting to understand what you're talking about.

But I think we are both talking about the same thing.

Distributive computing, as I have always understood the term during my 20 years in network computers, as contrasted to centralized computing (mainframe) refers to the work can be spread among several different nodes throughout the network and then in this instance deposited in a single location.

It has been awhile since I come across this information as it was in one of the, not mainstream, areas of the net, and I would not know any longer where it is. However, I can suggest that if you look into the election results and then look for a company in Knoxville TN, which is GOP owned, that is in the computer field, specifically server hosting. (Now that I think about it they might be the company that operates GOP.com, or it could have been rnc.org, I just don't have the time to track it down right now) you might come up with some useful information there. While the sites GOP an Rnc show as being in D.C. you are looking for where the are actually hosted at, i.e. location of the servers.

But from the information I saw, which would not surprise me if it is gone now, data was routed from Ohio, to Knoxville and then back to Ohio, in the dead of night no less, and viola we have a winner.

Just a point of information but track it down if you have the time.

We're nominally talking about the same thing.

I don't think voter tabulation is done through a truly distributed network (but I could be wrong ... still, it's overkill of vast proportions, and I don't understand it, but would like to see evidence of it if it is happening), but, yes, the data is thrown around across a network, which opens it up to manipulation.

The Ohio case with which I'm familiar involves data compiled locally via parallel processes on a single machine, one of which had precedence at the point of final tally, and it was weighted in favor of Republicans. Same thing happened in Georgia during Max Cleland's last Senate contest.

Anyway ... thanks. I'll look further.

are you saying that there is a problem when the data is sent from the precinct to the central tabulator?

What's Cheney been up to lately?

go to Iran and Afghanistan. His itinerary would need to be provided to State. Evil rat face GW comes out on Friday with total BS about a "General Horizon Time" plan to withdraw troops from Iraq. His minion Chipmunk McCain announces that although he does not know Obama's schedule he "believes" that Obama will be arriving in Iraq on Friday or Saturday. Why don't the Republicans just stop the shell game and announce that they are scared shitless of Obama and that they have had top level discussions about his trip--and they have obtained information regarding what Obama intends to say to the Generals, the clerics and al Maliki about a withdrawal timetable. Al Maliki, the generals and clerics intended to gift Obama with an announcement about US withdrawal from Iraq. And the Afghanistan government intended to ask for more troops. Shouldn't GW be at home cleaning up the urine stains from his single bed. He has now transcended to crafting foreign policy positions based on Obama's stance. GW rolls over in the bed and whispers Obama's itinerary in the ear of of his bosom buddy Mccain. Its no coincidence that Bush and McCain speak out on a Friday regarding a "withdrawal" and an "itinerary." I hope the urine soaked bed was worth it for McCain to get that snippet of information. Maybe if he is real loyal to GW, he'll get information about what Obama intends to dine on in Iraq. CHicken pot Pie? Beef Stroganoff? Beef Steak? I bet Cheney had the plane bugged. Why Condi is probably set to touch down in Iraq an hour after Obama. And Gates is moving troops from Iraq to Afghanistan already. This bunch of clueless criminals is running in circles after themselves. Eventually, even the least educated American voters can craft a better policy than the Bush administration.

There is nothing I would not put pass them.
Nothing.

Every one of them.

~

Here is the BBC reporting of this trip:

Obama opens foreign tour in Kabul

Page last updated at 11:54 GMT, Saturday, 19 July 2008 12:54 UK

Asked what message he would convey to Afghan and Iraqi leaders, Mr Obama said: "I'm more interested in listening than doing a lot of talking."

Speaking to reporters before leaving, he added: "I'm going over there as a US senator. We have one president at a time, so it's the president's job to deliver those messages."

Mr Obama also said he would talk to commanders both in Afghanistan and Iraq to find out about their concerns.

This BBC's Martin Patience in Kabul says the visit is widely seen as an attempt by the Democratic hopeful to strengthen his security credentials.

He will be accompanied by news anchors from America's major television networks during his foreign tour.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7515179.stm

That's a very intelligent thing to say.

no pun intended.

Senator Obama addresses the troops in Kuwaut duting his July, 2008 mideast trip. Poor audio quality, but you can tell these guys love him!



http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=319_1216506596

not easy to understand but there it is

posted from that link? They're mostly a bunch of racists.

Your going to have to hold Karzai's hand if you want him "to climb out of his bunker'



KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) - U.S. presidential contender Barack Obama pledged steadfast aid to Afghanistan in talks with its Western-backed leader Sunday and vowed to pursue the war on terror «with vigor» if he is elected, an Afghan official said.
On the third day of an international tour designed to burnish his foreign policy credentials, Obama
and other American senators held two hours of talks with
President Hamid Karzai at his palace in the Afghan capital.
Obama has chided Karzai for not doing more to build confidence in the Afghan government, whose grip remains weak eight years after the ouster of the Taliban.
He has said the war in Afghanistan, where Taliban and al-Qaida-linked militants are resurgent, deserves more troops and more attention as opposed to the conflict in Iraq.
snip
On Saturday, the delegation received briefings from U.S. commanders and a former Afghan warlord who is now the governor of Nangarhar, a province in eastern Afghanistan where militant attacks are spiraling
snip
.S. military officials say the number of attacks in eastern Afghanistan, where most of the U.S. forces in the country operate, has increased by 40 percent so far in 2008 compared to the same period in 2007.
Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told The Associated Press on Saturday that after intense U.S. assaults there, al-Qaida may be considering shifting focus to its original home base in Afghanistan, where American casualties are recently running higher than in Iraq.
Obama has also expressed weariness with efforts by Afghanistan's neighbor, Pakistan, to go after militants in its territory. That frustration may strike a chord with Karzai, who has accused Pakistan's intelligence service of supporting the Taliban insurgency _ a claim that Pakistan denies.
But Obama has also chided Karzai and his government, saying it had «not gotten out of the bunker» and helped to organize the country or its political and security institutions.



http://www.pr-inside.com/obama-tells-karzai-us-will-continue-r713512.htm

Banizir Bhutto didn't believe in hunkering down. She stayed with the people to the very end.

A risk worth taking ?
Running for POTUS is also a risk worth taking if change is to happen . We'll have to see how the world covers certain war stories and how the US MSM spins them in the coming months

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/darticlen.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/2008/July/middleeast_July524.xml§ion=middleeast&col=

Listen to what the Afghanis have to say if they were allowed to talk to Barak.
Very insightful. One guy wishes the European Nato troops would leave the city and go where the fighting is

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=631_1216559243

You can't allow any body just walk up to Obama on an Afghan street. That would be suicidal imo.

I wonder what some of these stringers would have to say about what they have reported covering other Afghan news

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//080713/481/01608240c66147208b2f5c8fdbdf3837/


Thats freedom of the press ;)