-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Support Our Troops!
- Thread starter KenH
- Start date
- Status
Terry_Herrington
New Member
The troops I support; it's their ignorant leader I don't support.
Joseph_Botwinick
<img src=/532.jpg>Banned
Amen.
O
OCC
Guest
Just wondering if they would like support from people of other nations?
Well...I'm sure they wouldn't mind but some people may have a problem with it.
Well...I'm sure they wouldn't mind but some people may have a problem with it.
Joseph_Botwinick
<img src=/532.jpg>Banned
If you would like to support our troops and their mission, that would be nice. It is not, however, a neccesity.
Joseph Botwinick
Joseph Botwinick
O
OCC
Guest
I did not say it was a necessity.
prophecynut
New Member
VA Confirms 103,000 Iraq and Afghan Veterans Seek Healthcare
David Espo and Mary Dalrymple, Associated Press
Posted 2005-06-28 15:58:00.0
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/28/AR2005062800545.html
VA Confirms 103,000 Iraq and Afghan Veterans Seek Healthcare: Senate Plans $1.5 Billion Spending Boost for Veterans
By DAVID ESPO
The Associated Press
Tuesday, June 28, 2005; 3:26 PM
WASHINGTON -- Struggling to prevent political damage, Senate Republicans intend to raise spending on veterans programs by $1.5 billion to make up for a shortage caused partly by the return of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, officials said Tuesday.
"I'm glad they have seen the light," said Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada. He said majority Republicans had refused to provide the money when members of his party called for it earlier in the year.
Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, who chairs the Veterans Committee, said a vote was likely Tuesday or Wednesday.
The decision to approve the funds came in response to last week's disclosure that the Department of Veterans Affairs needs $1 billion more for veterans health care this year.
Republicans swiftly retreated on the issue in the Senate, but not in the House.
There, the GOP defeated a Democratic effort to provide an extra $1 billion for veterans health care. The 217-189 vote was along party lines.
"Veterans need to know that no veteran will be without his health care in 2005, nor will they be without their health care in 2006," said House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas. "There are solutions to this problem, and those solutions are being addressed."
Democrats said that wasn't good enough.
Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Texas, accused the GOP of hiding behind procedural excuses _ that the House was debating legislation unrelated to veterans. Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., said that either Veterans Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson misled Congress with his earlier statements or he himself had been kept in the dark by other administration officials.
Reid poked at the Republicans as Democratic officials circulated printed material accusing the GOP of having "ignored early warnings on funding for veterans."
Specifically, it cited an attempt by Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., to add $1.98 billion for veterans health care to a spending bill for the current year and an attempt to raise spending by $2.8 billion for next year. Republicans defeated the first proposal on a vote of 54-46, the second on a vote of 53-47.
VA officials testified last week that the shortage in funds resulted from poor budget forecasting as well as additional costs to provide services to veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.
VA officials have said the agency could juggle its budget to meet the health care needs by taking $600 million from funds earmarked for maintenance and another $400 million in money built in as a cushion.
It was not clear how the additional funds would fit under an overall spending cap that Congress and President Bush have imposed on themselves for the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30.
Presumably, lawmakers could cut funds from another program to stay under the limit, or they could finesse the issue by declaring an emergency and spend the money without having it count as part of the total.
Senate Republicans made their decision as Nicholson told lawmakers in the House and Senate that demand for veterans health programs rose by 5.2 percent this year, more than the 2.3 percent increase that had been forecast.
About one-quarter of this year's $1 billion shortfall results from the services needed by veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, he said, adding that the estimate of roughly 23,000 returning veterans proved far below the actual total of 103,000.{ 1,700 Iraq casualties are far below actual total }
Nicholson said the agency now estimates its earlier forecast for the next fiscal year will leave it about $1.5 billion short.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., told Nicholson the delayed notice about budget shortfalls "borders on stupidity."
Across the Capitol, Senate Democrats took turns criticizing the agency and the administration.
Murray said the disclosures were "another indication this administration has not taken veterans needs seriously."
She added, "Any plan to get us through this year based on borrowing funds from future years is fundamentally flawed."
David Espo and Mary Dalrymple, Associated Press
Posted 2005-06-28 15:58:00.0
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/28/AR2005062800545.html
VA Confirms 103,000 Iraq and Afghan Veterans Seek Healthcare: Senate Plans $1.5 Billion Spending Boost for Veterans
By DAVID ESPO
The Associated Press
Tuesday, June 28, 2005; 3:26 PM
WASHINGTON -- Struggling to prevent political damage, Senate Republicans intend to raise spending on veterans programs by $1.5 billion to make up for a shortage caused partly by the return of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, officials said Tuesday.
"I'm glad they have seen the light," said Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada. He said majority Republicans had refused to provide the money when members of his party called for it earlier in the year.
Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, who chairs the Veterans Committee, said a vote was likely Tuesday or Wednesday.
The decision to approve the funds came in response to last week's disclosure that the Department of Veterans Affairs needs $1 billion more for veterans health care this year.
Republicans swiftly retreated on the issue in the Senate, but not in the House.
There, the GOP defeated a Democratic effort to provide an extra $1 billion for veterans health care. The 217-189 vote was along party lines.
"Veterans need to know that no veteran will be without his health care in 2005, nor will they be without their health care in 2006," said House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas. "There are solutions to this problem, and those solutions are being addressed."
Democrats said that wasn't good enough.
Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Texas, accused the GOP of hiding behind procedural excuses _ that the House was debating legislation unrelated to veterans. Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., said that either Veterans Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson misled Congress with his earlier statements or he himself had been kept in the dark by other administration officials.
Reid poked at the Republicans as Democratic officials circulated printed material accusing the GOP of having "ignored early warnings on funding for veterans."
Specifically, it cited an attempt by Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., to add $1.98 billion for veterans health care to a spending bill for the current year and an attempt to raise spending by $2.8 billion for next year. Republicans defeated the first proposal on a vote of 54-46, the second on a vote of 53-47.
VA officials testified last week that the shortage in funds resulted from poor budget forecasting as well as additional costs to provide services to veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.
VA officials have said the agency could juggle its budget to meet the health care needs by taking $600 million from funds earmarked for maintenance and another $400 million in money built in as a cushion.
It was not clear how the additional funds would fit under an overall spending cap that Congress and President Bush have imposed on themselves for the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30.
Presumably, lawmakers could cut funds from another program to stay under the limit, or they could finesse the issue by declaring an emergency and spend the money without having it count as part of the total.
Senate Republicans made their decision as Nicholson told lawmakers in the House and Senate that demand for veterans health programs rose by 5.2 percent this year, more than the 2.3 percent increase that had been forecast.
About one-quarter of this year's $1 billion shortfall results from the services needed by veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, he said, adding that the estimate of roughly 23,000 returning veterans proved far below the actual total of 103,000.{ 1,700 Iraq casualties are far below actual total }
Nicholson said the agency now estimates its earlier forecast for the next fiscal year will leave it about $1.5 billion short.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., told Nicholson the delayed notice about budget shortfalls "borders on stupidity."
Across the Capitol, Senate Democrats took turns criticizing the agency and the administration.
Murray said the disclosures were "another indication this administration has not taken veterans needs seriously."
She added, "Any plan to get us through this year based on borrowing funds from future years is fundamentally flawed."
poncho
Well-Known Member
I can agree with that Ken, but it's kinda hard to ignore the similarities of the neocon propaganda techniques and legal moves of those of an un-named dictator in Germany. Unless of course your really trying to ignore them or trying to get others to ignore them by using other forms of propaganda like name calling.
poncho
Well-Known Member
If it looks like a duck acts like a duck and walks like a duck we as Christians should be allowed to call it a duck and submit any and all pertinent evidence to support our case.
It's our duty as Christians to look at the fruits of these men in power, and if their fruits look similar to an un named dictator in Germany, well then all the more reason to shout it from the housetops. Whether they place an R or D in front of their names makes no difference.
If George W. Bush doesn't want to be compared to Hitler then he never should have aligned himself with people that use many of the same techniques Hitler used.
It's our duty as Christians to look at the fruits of these men in power, and if their fruits look similar to an un named dictator in Germany, well then all the more reason to shout it from the housetops. Whether they place an R or D in front of their names makes no difference.
If George W. Bush doesn't want to be compared to Hitler then he never should have aligned himself with people that use many of the same techniques Hitler used.
prophecynut
New Member
www.truthout.org
I came across a letter to the editor on Truth Out called "The Bush Hitler Thing." The letter is written by a woman whose family members were victims of Hitler's regime. The author spoke to many people growing up, always asking, "How could this have happened? How could you remain silent." She repeats the answers given to her in her letter to Truth Out.
On the comparison of Hitler and Bush she says:
So far, I've seen nothing to eliminate the possibility that Bush is on the same course as Hitler. And I've seen far too many analogies to dismiss the possibility. The propaganda. The lies. The rhetoric. The nationalism. The flag waving. The pretext of 'preventive war'. The flaunting of international law and international standards of justice. The disappearances of 'undesirable' aliens. The threats against protesters. The invasion of a non-threatening sovereign nation. The occupation of a hostile country. The promises of prosperity and security. The spying on ordinary citizens. The incitement to spy on one's neighbors - and report them to the government. The arrogant triumphant pride in military conquest. The honoring of soldiers. The tributes to 'fallen warriors. The diversion of money to the military. The demonization of government appointed 'enemies'. The establishment of 'Homeland Security'. The dehumanization of 'foreigners'. The total lack of interest in the victims of government policy. The incarceration of the poor and mentally ill. The growing prosperity from military ventures. The illusion of 'goodness' and primacy. The new einsatzgrupen forces. Assassination teams. Closed extralegal internment camps. The militarization of domestic police. Media blackout of non-approved issues. Blacklisting of protesters - including the no-fly lists and photographing dissenters at rallies.
I came across a letter to the editor on Truth Out called "The Bush Hitler Thing." The letter is written by a woman whose family members were victims of Hitler's regime. The author spoke to many people growing up, always asking, "How could this have happened? How could you remain silent." She repeats the answers given to her in her letter to Truth Out.
On the comparison of Hitler and Bush she says:
So far, I've seen nothing to eliminate the possibility that Bush is on the same course as Hitler. And I've seen far too many analogies to dismiss the possibility. The propaganda. The lies. The rhetoric. The nationalism. The flag waving. The pretext of 'preventive war'. The flaunting of international law and international standards of justice. The disappearances of 'undesirable' aliens. The threats against protesters. The invasion of a non-threatening sovereign nation. The occupation of a hostile country. The promises of prosperity and security. The spying on ordinary citizens. The incitement to spy on one's neighbors - and report them to the government. The arrogant triumphant pride in military conquest. The honoring of soldiers. The tributes to 'fallen warriors. The diversion of money to the military. The demonization of government appointed 'enemies'. The establishment of 'Homeland Security'. The dehumanization of 'foreigners'. The total lack of interest in the victims of government policy. The incarceration of the poor and mentally ill. The growing prosperity from military ventures. The illusion of 'goodness' and primacy. The new einsatzgrupen forces. Assassination teams. Closed extralegal internment camps. The militarization of domestic police. Media blackout of non-approved issues. Blacklisting of protesters - including the no-fly lists and photographing dissenters at rallies.
prophecynut
New Member
You can view the Hitler type concentration camps below, this has been in the works for a long time.
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/Police%20State/government_internment_camps.htm
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/Police%20State/government_internment_camps.htm
- Status