Doug Kanter wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


During Clinton's eight years, some 22 million jobs were added to the
economy.

Fun facts (and don't think I'm slamming Clinton's entire record, because
Bush would've done the same thing, if he could figure out how):

One way Clinton created jobs was by personally lobbying the Saudis to be
sure they made a series of enormous commercial aircraft purchases from
Boeing, instead of Airbus. Just one problem: They couldn't afford to pay for
them, so they finagled the cash in a number of other ways. One reason they
couldn't afford the purchase is that Saudi ministers get what they quaintly
call "commissions" when foreign companies sell to them. In the case of the
aircraft, estimates of the commissions range as high as 45% of the purchase
price. Similar commissions are paid for the purchase of military equipment.
Saudi Arabia is the single largest consumer of American defense machinery,
next to our own armed forces. They buy the stuff, but don't use it much,
since we're pretty much their sworn protectors in the region.




What's important is that the Saudis bought from Boeing, not from Airbus,
and while I am aware that Boeing buys supplies from all over the world,
buying Boeing planes means jobs for Americans and buying Airbus planes
mean jobs for overseas workers.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


During Clinton's eight years, some 22 million jobs were added to the
economy.

Fun facts (and don't think I'm slamming Clinton's entire record, because
Bush would've done the same thing, if he could figure out how):

One way Clinton created jobs was by personally lobbying the Saudis to be
sure they made a series of enormous commercial aircraft purchases from
Boeing, instead of Airbus. Just one problem: They couldn't afford to pay
for
them, so they finagled the cash in a number of other ways. One reason
they
couldn't afford the purchase is that Saudi ministers get what they
quaintly
call "commissions" when foreign companies sell to them. In the case of
the
aircraft, estimates of the commissions range as high as 45% of the
purchase
price. Similar commissions are paid for the purchase of military
equipment.
Saudi Arabia is the single largest consumer of American defense
machinery,
next to our own armed forces. They buy the stuff, but don't use it much,
since we're pretty much their sworn protectors in the region.




What's important is that the Saudis bought from Boeing, not from Airbus,
and while I am aware that Boeing buys supplies from all over the world,
buying Boeing planes means jobs for Americans and buying Airbus planes
mean jobs for overseas workers.


Here's the good part: Like feeding Bon Bons to a fat lady who has no self
control, we send a constant stream of salesmen to the Saudis to be sure they
keep buying from us, in return for our oil addiction. Problem: In addition
to their uncontrolled spending at OUR trough, the entire Sa'ud family
competes with one another in terms of spending on yachts & huge homes all
over the world. They're bankrupting the country. The Muslim Brotherhood sees
us as being intimately connected with the likely collapse of the Saudi
economy due to what you or I would agree is completely outrageous behavior
by people in power.

On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 18:22:50 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


During Clinton's eight years, some 22 million jobs were added to the
economy.

Fun facts (and don't think I'm slamming Clinton's entire record, because
Bush would've done the same thing, if he could figure out how):

One way Clinton created jobs was by personally lobbying the Saudis to be
sure they made a series of enormous commercial aircraft purchases from
Boeing, instead of Airbus. Just one problem: They couldn't afford to pay
for
them, so they finagled the cash in a number of other ways. One reason
they
couldn't afford the purchase is that Saudi ministers get what they
quaintly
call "commissions" when foreign companies sell to them. In the case of
the
aircraft, estimates of the commissions range as high as 45% of the
purchase
price. Similar commissions are paid for the purchase of military
equipment.
Saudi Arabia is the single largest consumer of American defense
machinery,
next to our own armed forces. They buy the stuff, but don't use it much,
since we're pretty much their sworn protectors in the region.




What's important is that the Saudis bought from Boeing, not from Airbus,
and while I am aware that Boeing buys supplies from all over the world,
buying Boeing planes means jobs for Americans and buying Airbus planes
mean jobs for overseas workers.


Here's the good part: Like feeding Bon Bons to a fat lady who has no self
control, we send a constant stream of salesmen to the Saudis to be sure they
keep buying from us, in return for our oil addiction. Problem: In addition
to their uncontrolled spending at OUR trough, the entire Sa'ud family
competes with one another in terms of spending on yachts & huge homes all
over the world. They're bankrupting the country. The Muslim Brotherhood sees
us as being intimately connected with the likely collapse of the Saudi
economy due to what you or I would agree is completely outrageous behavior
by people in power.


But according to Harry, it's ok as long as they're buying from us and
giving our workers jobs. Perhaps you do see a bigger picture than
Harry does.....

Dave

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 18:22:50 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


During Clinton's eight years, some 22 million jobs were added to the
economy.

Fun facts (and don't think I'm slamming Clinton's entire record,
because
Bush would've done the same thing, if he could figure out how):

One way Clinton created jobs was by personally lobbying the Saudis to
be
sure they made a series of enormous commercial aircraft purchases
from
Boeing, instead of Airbus. Just one problem: They couldn't afford to
pay
for
them, so they finagled the cash in a number of other ways. One reason
they
couldn't afford the purchase is that Saudi ministers get what they
quaintly
call "commissions" when foreign companies sell to them. In the case
of
the
aircraft, estimates of the commissions range as high as 45% of the
purchase
price. Similar commissions are paid for the purchase of military
equipment.
Saudi Arabia is the single largest consumer of American defense
machinery,
next to our own armed forces. They buy the stuff, but don't use it
much,
since we're pretty much their sworn protectors in the region.




What's important is that the Saudis bought from Boeing, not from
Airbus,
and while I am aware that Boeing buys supplies from all over the world,
buying Boeing planes means jobs for Americans and buying Airbus planes
mean jobs for overseas workers.


Here's the good part: Like feeding Bon Bons to a fat lady who has no self
control, we send a constant stream of salesmen to the Saudis to be sure
they
keep buying from us, in return for our oil addiction. Problem: In
addition
to their uncontrolled spending at OUR trough, the entire Sa'ud family
competes with one another in terms of spending on yachts & huge homes all
over the world. They're bankrupting the country. The Muslim Brotherhood
sees
us as being intimately connected with the likely collapse of the Saudi
economy due to what you or I would agree is completely outrageous
behavior
by people in power.


But according to Harry, it's ok as long as they're buying from us and
giving our workers jobs. Perhaps you do see a bigger picture than
Harry does.....

Dave


Dave, I see a larger picture than almost anyone. I chalk this up to my
continual use of old technology: Brains and books. You can learn about the
latter on the web. ROFL! The former....too late for that.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 18:22:50 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


During Clinton's eight years, some 22 million jobs were added to
the
economy.

Fun facts (and don't think I'm slamming Clinton's entire record,
because
Bush would've done the same thing, if he could figure out how):

One way Clinton created jobs was by personally lobbying the Saudis
to
be
sure they made a series of enormous commercial aircraft purchases
from
Boeing, instead of Airbus. Just one problem: They couldn't afford
to
pay
for
them, so they finagled the cash in a number of other ways. One
reason
they
couldn't afford the purchase is that Saudi ministers get what they
quaintly
call "commissions" when foreign companies sell to them. In the case
of
the
aircraft, estimates of the commissions range as high as 45% of the
purchase
price. Similar commissions are paid for the purchase of military
equipment.
Saudi Arabia is the single largest consumer of American defense
machinery,
next to our own armed forces. They buy the stuff, but don't use it
much,
since we're pretty much their sworn protectors in the region.




What's important is that the Saudis bought from Boeing, not from
Airbus,
and while I am aware that Boeing buys supplies from all over the
world,
buying Boeing planes means jobs for Americans and buying Airbus
planes
mean jobs for overseas workers.


Here's the good part: Like feeding Bon Bons to a fat lady who has no
self
control, we send a constant stream of salesmen to the Saudis to be sure
they
keep buying from us, in return for our oil addiction. Problem: In
addition
to their uncontrolled spending at OUR trough, the entire Sa'ud family
competes with one another in terms of spending on yachts & huge homes
all
over the world. They're bankrupting the country. The Muslim Brotherhood
sees
us as being intimately connected with the likely collapse of the Saudi
economy due to what you or I would agree is completely outrageous
behavior
by people in power.


But according to Harry, it's ok as long as they're buying from us and
giving our workers jobs. Perhaps you do see a bigger picture than
Harry does.....

Dave


Dave, I see a larger picture

Drug-induced hallucinations, Doug? Oh, the colors!

On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 19:28:00 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


Dave, I see a larger picture than almost anyone. I chalk this up to my
continual use of old technology: Brains and books. You can learn about the
latter on the web. ROFL! The former....too late for that.



Since you like to contemplate the bigger picture, perhaps you might
enjoy reading this:

http://www.ainsof.com/view.htm

Granted, it's not "old technology", but it does bring an interesting
perspective to our current middle east situation, and makes our
strategy look a little less random, and unguided.

Dave

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 19:28:00 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


Dave, I see a larger picture than almost anyone. I chalk this up to my
continual use of old technology: Brains and books. You can learn about
the
latter on the web. ROFL! The former....too late for that.



Since you like to contemplate the bigger picture, perhaps you might
enjoy reading this:

http://www.ainsof.com/view.htm

Granted, it's not "old technology", but it does bring an interesting
perspective to our current middle east situation, and makes our
strategy look a little less random, and unguided.

Dave

Full of inaccuracies. For instance, Syria is actually very LOW on the list
of contributors to militant Islam. Back in the 1990s, its leader actually
levelled an entire city where it was determined that the Muslim Brotherhood
made its home. The whole city. Granted, the leader did this to ensure his
continuing term in office, but regardless, it worked. This is why al Qaeda
prefers Qatar as a hideout. According to people who know these things, the
Saudis need to take drastic measures to establish law & order.

Naturally, you'll ask for the year these things happened in Syria, the
leader's name and the name of the city which was destroyed, but the book's
at home. You can buy it, though: "Sleeping With the Devil", by Robert Baer,
a retired CIA agent. The subject matter is current through mid-2003.

Full of inaccuracies

Considering the source I'd tend to believe them than those of someone
who gets his news via the mass media.

. For instance, Syria is actually very LOW on the list
of contributors to militant Islam.

Can you substantiate that?


Back in the 1990s, its leader actually
levelled an entire city where it was determined that the Muslim Brotherhood
made its home. The whole city. Granted, the leader did this to ensure his
continuing term in office, but regardless, it worked. This is why al Qaeda
prefers Qatar as a hideout.

Interesting. Al Qaeda hides in the same country that we used as a base
of operations for the Iraqi war? Are we blind or do they just tiptoe
very quietly? I guess they were also very inept for missing the
opportunity to perform terrorist attacks on the nerve center of the
war.


According to people who know these things,

And just how do you determine who actually "knows these things"?

the Saudis need to take drastic measures to establish law & order.

That's rather obvious. They also have to stop the flow of money that
feeds the outer network of support for terrorism.


Naturally, you'll ask for the year these things happened in Syria, the
leader's name and the name of the city which was destroyed, but the book's
at home. You can buy it, though: "Sleeping With the Devil", by Robert Baer,
a retired CIA agent. The subject matter is current through mid-2003.

The problem with books is that anyone can write one. There's no
guarantee that the information contained is either factual or
complete. Nor is the agenda of the author always understood. Most are
either self-serving, or politically motivated, such as Richard Clark's
highly spun recent expose.

It would help to have some verifiable corroborating evidence from
other unconnected sources.

Rush Limbaugh has written several books. Would you absorb his writing
as absolute truth?

Dave