Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Senate GOP stalls Hagel nomination by waging filibuster

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


It's more than that. There are ties with Hagel to Hamas.

Not exactly Sec Def material.




posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:00 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


Sorry, I mistakenly assumed this was common knowledge.

Hagel received foreign contributions from the "Friends of Hamas" group. During his confirmation hearing when he was being questioned about it Democrats stopped the session.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


Look of "friends of Hamas" and their support for Hagel... The story has been running rampant lately. Yet it has been difficult to put an actual thumb on "Friends of Hamas" and the truth regarding their existence.

www.washingtontimes.com...



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


Sorry, I mistakenly assumed this was common knowledge.

Hagel received foreign contributions from the "Friends of Hamas" group. During his confirmation hearing when he was being questioned about it Democrats stopped the session.


Still no evidence?

Are we just to take your word as Gospel?



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by BritofTexas

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


Sorry, I mistakenly assumed this was common knowledge.

Hagel received foreign contributions from the "Friends of Hamas" group. During his confirmation hearing when he was being questioned about it Democrats stopped the session.


Still no evidence?

Are we just to take your word as Gospel?


This is why the Republicans are blocking the nomination. Hagel does not want to answer this allegation, and several others. Hiding this won't work.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


Just how behind the times are you? It's like you're stuck in 2011 somewhere.

Or do just get your "news" from the MSM?

edit on 15-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 




1. Loss of our national sovereignty. The treaty was created during the 1970s and according to a report by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), “it is a monument to the failed socialist thinking of a bygone era.” The treaty creates a global government that supersedes all national governments and the U.S. Constitution. That’s why President Reagan refused to sign LOST in 1982, and it has been hanging around like a lost soul ever since.


The limit will still be at 200 miles so where is the loss of national sovereignty? There was no loss before so why after?




2. International taxation. According to LOST, the oil, minerals, fish and other resources of the ocean are the “common heritage of mankind,” so any nation with the capability to harvest those resources must share the wealth. The U.S. would owe a tax of 7 percent on anything it recovers on or under the deep ocean floor, which would be redistributed according to a new International Seabed Authority, headquartered in Kingston, Jamaica. According to Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), “This is the first time in history that an international organization…would possess taxing authority over the United States.”

And we have a winner. All of these companies like Walmart and Apple will start to lose money and make it not worth exploiting slave labor in third world countries.




3. Giving away our technology. LOST requires all states to “cooperate in promoting the transfer of technology and scientific knowledge” to explore and recover resources in the ocean. U.S. innovations in robotics, geologic mapping and deep-water drilling would be transferred to hostile nations and corrupt third-world dictators. In 1994, President Clinton signed the treaty. Although the Senate refused to ratify it, CEI reports that his administration insisted on following this provision of LOST and giving American microbathymetry equipment and advanced sonar technology to China, to prospect for minerals in the ocean. Unfortunately, the technology could also be used for anti-submarine warfare.

Oh please
We have signed so many treaties saying we will share tech it's not even funny. Ones like the NPT saying we will share nuke technology. Take a guess who helped Iran on the nuclear path.



4. Back door cap and trade. “For ten years now, since the Kyoto treaty [was formed], the U.S. House and Senate have rejected over and over again the idea of cap and trade, that would amount to a tax on the American people somewhere between $300 billion and $400 billion,” Senator Inhofe said in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. “They are attempting to do under this LOST treaty what they couldn’t do with legislation.”

Wow two parts whining about taxing corporations which leads to the elite. No wonder they buy so many politicians.
I could go on but crying about the LOST treaty is pretty much a joke.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by BritofTexas
 





If you bothered to read my first post you would have seen that I was blaming Mccain.


Nice blaming MCcain eh just pay no attention to the other 99 senators.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 





he fought against Kyoto Treaty along with Robert Byrd.


OH , he is starting to look better.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


Just how behind the times are you? It's like you're stuck in 2011 somewhere.

Or do just get your "news" from the MSM?

edit on 15-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)


Ok. Third time may be the charm.

Do you have any EVIDENCE to back up your claim.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


I'm not surprised to see that you see nothing wrong with a Global/World Govt. Controlled by the UN. You're a prime candidate to work for the Responsibility to Protect and the International Crisis Groups. All groups united under the UN Flag and the major influence of The Obama Doctrine which continues to fail and leave a path of destruction and bodies in its wake.


The principal purposes of LOST are to
transfer technology and wealth from developed to underdeveloped nations and to increase exposure to international litigation. Consider two quotations
from LOST's Preamble:










"...achievement of these goals will contribute to the realization of a just and equitable international economic order which takes into account the interests and needs of mankind as a whole and, in particular, the special interests and needs of developing countries,"

".the seabed and ocean floor and the subsoil thereof, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, as well as its resources, are the common heritage of
mankind, the exploration and exploitation of which shall be carried out for the benefit of mankind as a whole,"



Read on... Perhaps you can move to a nation which supports this...Better yet a nation lacking a Constitution like ours.

Read more: thehill.com...
edit on 15-2-2013 by jibeho because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 

So he's a republican that's against climate change I'm shocked
And in some was he is right there is no absolute proof that climate is happening the way that some people are saying. Good yes but not absolute if it were then there would not be so many doubters.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by jibeho
 





he fought against Kyoto Treaty along with Robert Byrd.


OH , he is starting to look better.


For some reason people are ignoring why elements of the LEFT don't like him. This whole thread has turned into an argument just for arguments sake. Despite presentation of clear facts regarding Hagel.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by BritofTexas
 





If you bothered to read my first post you would have seen that I was blaming Mccain.


Nice blaming MCcain eh just pay no attention to the other 99 senators.


From your own link, only 39 voted against. All are Republicans. And all because McCain is holding a grudge.

(Reid changed his vote to No, to re introduce the vote.)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
Well let's see how funny the GOP thinks breaking government is the next time there's a republican President... oh wait...

Your right he's a Democrat Republican. Look at how many of Bush's programs he kept. He could have ended the war at day one but how many years have been at war again?



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010
reply to post by jibeho
 

So he's a republican that's against climate change I'm shocked
And in some was he is right there is no absolute proof that climate is happening the way that some people are saying. Good yes but not absolute if it were then there would not be so many doubters.



So, are for or against him? and why. You seem to have skipped around that aspect. If you can't say, what's the point? Why would Obama pick Hagel knowing full well the GOP would have no interest in voting for him and knowing full well that a good portion of the left don't like him? Perhaps Obama is just hell bent on further fueling the partisanship in this nation and on Capital Hill.... How about a candidate that both parties can easily support. There are plenty out there....



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


Yeah I provided more than 1 link this thread people are still free to play the victim card here as always.

Hagel was shot down the first go round big whoop and there comes another vote if some people are under the illusion that the GOP is suppose to approve every nominee they don't have to.

For anyone who watched the hearing that was a given.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   
The guy is inept. Democrats don't even like him. Why make this partisan? Donald Duck would be a better choice.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Isn't that how a healthy system of checks and balances is supposed to work? That is why we have confirmation hearings....Gotta open the book on these people who desire to bear the ultimate authority in our nation..

Let's let the process work...





new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join