akarunway

Or Mexico I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

She can suck my cock and swallow the cum then I'll spit in her face. I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Now 7? We (the U.S.) gonna take on the whole freakin world? How bout some more diplomacy before we start shooting our guns. Jeez>"Without saying what action would be taken against them, the strategy singles out seven nations as prime examples of "despotic systems" -- North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Belarus, Burma and Zimbabwe. Iran and North Korea receive particular attention because of their nuclear programs, and the strategy vows in both cases "to take all necessary measures" to protect the United States against them."____________________________________________ Bush to Restate Terror Strategy 2002 Doctrine of Preemptive War To Be Reaffirmed By Peter Baker Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, March 16, 2006; A01 President Bush plans to issue a new national security strategy today reaffirming his doctrine of preemptive war against terrorists and hostile states with chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, despite the troubled experience in Iraq. The long-overdue document, an articulation of U.S. strategic priorities that is required by law, lays out a robust view of America's power and an assertive view of its responsibility to bring change around the world. On topics including genocide, human trafficking and AIDS, the strategy describes itself as "idealistic about goals and realistic about means." The strategy expands on the original security framework developed by the Bush administration in September 2002, before the invasion of Iraq. That strategy shifted U.S. foreign policy away from decades of deterrence and containment toward a more aggressive stance of attacking enemies before they attack the United States. The preemption doctrine generated fierce debate at the time, and many critics believe the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq fatally undermined an essential assumption of the strategy -- that intelligence about an enemy's capabilities and intentions can be sufficient to justify preventive war. In his revised version, Bush offers no second thoughts about the preemption policy, saying it "remains the same" and defending it as necessary for a country in the "early years of a long struggle" akin to the Cold War. In a nod to critics in Europe, the document places a greater emphasis on working with allies and declares diplomacy to be "our strong preference" in tackling the threat of weapons of mass destruction. "If necessary, however, under long-standing principles of self defense, we do not rule out use of force before attacks occur, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack," the document continues. "When the consequences of an attack with WMD are potentially so devastating, we cannot afford to stand idly by as grave dangers materialize." Such language could be seen as provocative at a time when the United States and its European allies have brought Iran before the U.N. Security Council to answer allegations that it is secretly developing nuclear weapons. At a news conference in January, Bush described an Iran with nuclear arms as a "grave threat to the security of the world." Some security specialists criticized the continued commitment to preemption. "Preemption is and always will be a potentially useful tool, but it's not something you want to trot out and throw in everybody's face," said Harlan Ullman, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "To have a strategy on preemption and make it central is a huge error." A military attack against Iran, for instance, could be "foolish," Ullman said, and it would be better to seek other ways to influence its behavior. "I think most states are deterrable." Thomas Donnelly, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who has written on the 2002 strategy, said the 2003 invasion of Iraq in the strict sense is not an example of preemptive war, because it was preceded by 12 years of low-grade conflict and was essentially the completion of the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Still, he said, recent problems there contain lessons for those who would advocate preemptive war elsewhere. A military strike is not enough, he said; building a sustainable, responsible state in place of a rogue nation is the real challenge. "We have to understand preemption -- it's not going to be simply a preemptive strike," he said. "That's not the end of the exercise but the beginning of the exercise." The White House plans to release the 49-page National Security Strategy today, starting with a speech by national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley to the U.S. Institute of Peace. The White House gave advance copies to The Washington Post and three other newspapers. The strategy has no legal force of its own but serves as a guidepost for agencies and officials drawing up policies in a range of military, diplomatic and other arenas. Although a 1986 law requires that the strategy be revised annually, this is the first new version since 2002. "I don't think it's a change in strategy," Hadley said in an interview. "It's an updating of where we are with the strategy, given the time that's passed and the events that have occurred." But the new version of the strategy underscores in a more thematic way Bush's desire to make the spread of democracy the fundamental underpinning of U.S. foreign policy, as he expressed in his second inaugural address last year. The opening words of the strategy, in fact, are lifted from that speech: "It is the policy of the United States to seek and support democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world." The strategy commits the administration to speaking out against human rights abuses, holding high-level meetings at the White House with reformers from repressive nations, using foreign aid to support elections and civil society, and applying sanctions against oppressive governments. It makes special mention of religious intolerance, subjugation of women and human trafficking. At the same time, it acknowledges that "elections alone are not enough" and sometimes lead to undesirable results. "These principles are tested by the victory of Hamas candidates in the recent elections in the Palestinian territories," the strategy says, referring to the radical group designated as a terrorist organization by the United States. Without saying what action would be taken against them, the strategy singles out seven nations as prime examples of "despotic systems" -- North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Belarus, Burma and Zimbabwe. Iran and North Korea receive particular attention because of their nuclear programs, and the strategy vows in both cases "to take all necessary measures" to protect the United States against them. "We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran," the document says, echoing a statement made by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice last week. It recommits to efforts with European allies to pressure Tehran to give up any aspirations of nuclear weapons, then adds ominously: "This diplomatic effort must succeed if confrontation is to be avoided." The language about confrontation is not repeated with North Korea, which says it already has nuclear bombs, an assertion believed by U.S. intelligence. But Pyongyang is accused of a "bleak record of duplicity and bad-faith negotiations," as well as of counterfeiting U.S. currency, trafficking in drugs and starving its own people. The strategy offers a much more skeptical view of Russia than in 2002, when the glow of Bush's friendship with President Vladimir Putin was still bright. "Recent trends regrettably point toward a diminishing commitment to democratic freedoms and institutions," it says. "We will work to try to persuade the Russian Government to move forward, not backward, along freedom's path." It also warns China that "it must act as a responsible stakeholder that fulfills its obligations" and guarantee political freedom as well as economic freedom. "Our strategy," the document says, "seeks to encourage China to make the right strategic choices for its people, while we hedge against other possibilities." To assuage allies antagonized by Bush's go-it-alone style in his first term, the White House stresses alliance and the use of what it calls "transformational diplomacy" to achieve change. At the same time, it asserts that formal structures such as the United Nations or NATO may at times be less effective than "coalitions of the willing," or groups responding to particular situations, such as the Asian tsunami of 2004. Beyond the military response to terrorism, the document emphasizes the need to fight the war of ideas against Islamic radicals whose anti-American rhetoric has won wide sympathy in parts of the world. The strategy also addresses topics largely left out of the 2002 version, including a section on genocide and a new chapter on global threats such as avian influenza, AIDS, environmental destruction and natural disasters. Critics have accused the administration of not doing enough to stop genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan, responding too slowly to the Asian tsunami and disregarding global environmental threats such as climate change. © 2006 The Washington Post Company___________________________________________ I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

"living in the USSR" "You don't know lucky you are." I just couldn't resist. Now that song will be stuck in my head all day I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Man. You are like the guy that quits smoking and everyone else has to. Give it up. And by the way. I had 3 DUI's and I know what it CAN do to people. I just don't drink and drive anymore. I still drink tho. Get off your pulpit I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Try HERE>http://www.wramc.amedd.army.mil/ I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Google relented. A portion of the data. A slippery slope getting slicker all the time I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

the only way to stop this is to stop buying your crap at wal-mart. Thank you very much_____________________________________________ I sneak in there once in awhile in a rare emergency but if my union brothers caught me they'd string me up__________________________________________ I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

http://www.historychannel.com/exhibits/stpatricksday/ I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Jeff wins. Draw on the jumps or drinks. I'll by ya a jump anyway if we meet I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Pattys Day. I'll be at Liams Irish Pub in Colton, Ca. Drinks on me. Can win a trip to Ireland for the cover charge. Was there a couple weeks ago /w the family. Paddy Doyle's Boots ROCKED. Have a happy Pattys Day. Can anyone make this thread GREEN?http://www.pdboots.com/music.html I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

LOL. I don't what else to say I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

If he wins I'll buy you a jump. Looks like Jeff right now. I'm in So. Cal. and the ex's are in Fla. Ain't coming that way for a bit I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Looks like Jeff King I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

My bad. I'll get back to you after reading>THIShttp://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=00-949 I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

I did too. It's sad tho. Wouldn't your head be on a swivel if you were deaf and on some train track? Darwins' theory maybe?___________________________________________________ I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

And to that I say. Now I'm going to make a stiff drink and go smoke a cigarette before eating my porkloin off the grill. I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Al Gore publicly conceded the election after the December 12, 2000 Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore. The Court voted 7–2 to end the recount on the grounds that differing standards in different counties constituted an equal protection violation, and 5–4 that no new recount with uniform standards could be conducted. The decision was extremely controversial due to the partisan split in the court's 5–4 decision and the majority's extremely irregular instruction that its judgment in Bush v. Gore should not set precedent but should be "limited to the present circumstances". ___________________________________________________Let's see umm. Why couldn't they take more time to allow for a recount? Umm, maybe Gore was getting ahead? I was there. My home state. I was personally disenfranchised in one prior POTUS election due to the incompetence of the election office in Orlando. They took the phone off the fu cking hook so as not to be able to verify change of addresses (or for whatever reason). I myself called an operator (from the voting place) cause they got tired of a getting a busy signal and she told me it was off the hook. The electoral process in this country is a sham, a scam and downright disgraceful. In the end it's ALL ABOUT MONEY I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

The new repost police? Whatever happened to Crazy Ivan?_____________________ I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Banking on illegal immigrants Banks are seeing an untapped resource in providing home loans to undocumented U.S. residents August 8, 2005: 3:39 PM EDT By Shaheen Pasha, CNN/Money staff writer NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The banking industry is opening its doors to a controversial new market: illegal immigrants. Despite heated political debate in Washington over illegal immigration in the United States, an increasing number of banks are seeing an untapped resource for growing their own revenue stream and contend that providing undocumented residents with mortgages will help revitalize local communities. It's a win-win situation, they say. But skeptics worry about the message these home loans send to illegal immigrants: break our laws and we'll reward you with a home. "It's institutionalizing illegality," said Marti Dinerstein, president of Immigration Matters, a New York-based think tank. "Now there's no distinction being made between the people that follow all the rules and those who break our laws by entering the country or overstaying their visas." Dinerstein also worried that lack of knowledge on the part of illegal immigrants could pave the way for abuse in the form of predatory lending. But advocates of the practice say the benefits outweigh any potential downside. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, one million illegal immigrants cross the U.S. borders every year. About 500,000 illegal immigrants lose that status every year either by getting legitimate green cards or returning to their native countries. That leaves a 500,000 annual net increase of illegal immigrants – a market that has unmet banking needs. "This is a huge untapped market with people that live and work in this country and are capable of buying homes to realize the American dream," said Chan Peterson, executive vice president and head of community banking at Banco Popular, one of the earliest banks to enter this field. He added that there's a common misperception that illegal immigrants will be more likely to default on their loans than a documented resident. But the company has found that there is no higher rate of default in this loan portfolio than any other market the company serves. "There's a pride that comes with people moving from renting to owning and we've found that these borrowers are driven to hang on to their homes," Peterson said. Bill Schumer, vice president of product development at Fifth Third Mortgage Co., a unit of Fifth Third Bancorp. (Research), said the company entered the marketplace due to the belief that providing these low-to-moderate income loans will help revitalize communities in the United States, as borrowers buy more run-down properties and rebuild. He added that by introducing this segment of the population to home ownership education, they are also building a foundation to cross-sell their other products. "We've been at this program for the last 8 or 9 months and 68 percent of these borrowers have established three or more banking services with us," he said. While Schumer wasn't willing to disclose how many of mortgages the company provides, he said the product has been well received in the marketplace and is already 4 percent above the level the bank had targeted for the year. And it's growing. That's not surprising, said Alenka Grealish, manager of the banking group at Celent, an independent research and consulting firm. Grealish said while the mortgage banking business in the U.S. continues to be red hot, veterans know that it's a highly cyclical industry that moves with interest rate trends. She said that forward-looking banks are already considering how to grow their business when the pipeline of traditional mortgages begins to dry up. "Illegal immigrants are here to stay and banks are recognizing that," she said. "If you do a niche market well and know how to price it, banks can have some attractive margins." She added that while criticism is rampant, banks are careful to follow guidelines that the government already has in place. Case in point: the government's issuance of individual taxpayer identification numbers, or ITINs. ITINs are a nine-digit tax processing number issued by the Internal Revenue Service to individuals who are required to have a U.S. taxpayer identification number but who don't have, and aren't eligible to obtain, a social security number. Since the IRS doesn't require legal residency to obtain an ITIN, many illegal immigrants use this form of identification to pay U.S. taxes and buy homes. "Illegal immigrants are a huge gray area and it becomes even more gray when you start issuing ITINs," Grealish said. "There's complicity already within the government in which they're saying that they're kind of fine with these people here as long as they pay their taxes." The IRS for its part says that ITINs aren't valid for identification purposes outside of the tax system. But there are no explicit rules banning the use of ITINs in obtaining mortgages. Banco Popular's Peterson added that it would be discriminatory to deny a loan based on an ITIN. For now, community banks are leading the charge when it comes to providing home loans for illegal immigrants. Banking experts say that community banks often have the bilingual capabilities and are more in tune with local community needs and markets. And larger banks are holding out for secondary markets such as Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to agree to buy illegal immigrant mortgages from the banks – thus lowering their risk. Bank of America (Research), which accepts ITINs to open interest-bearing deposit accounts, currently isn't offering a mortgage product to this market but the banking giant is looking into it, said spokeswoman Julie Davis. "Banks are counting on the fact that we do a lousy job with interior enforcement," said Celent's Grealish. "Once you're in the country and you haven't done anything wrong, the chances of being deported are very slim. Banks are banking on that." They also send billions of U.S. Dollars to Old Mexico and a lot of that money is used to get the rest of their families over here. ------------------------------------------------------------ This is a problem that we need to stop. In my opinion, it adds insult to injury. Not only do we have to foot the bill in so many ways for illegals, we also have large volume dollars removed from our economy. There is a correct way, and a wrong way to become a citizen. If you break the law, you're a criminal, and should be treated like a criminal. The mindset of Americans not wanting the fruit pickers jobs is incorrect. I've seen "locals" turned away. I would suggest really looking at the economics before stating that our economy would collapse without them too. I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

This wouldn't be the same Kathy Harris that, ah, nevermind_________________________________________Reports of illegal contributions dog Senate candidacy. Tamara Lytle | Washington Bureau Chief Posted March 12, 2006 Republican may take on Harris bid Mar 10, 2006 WASHINGTON -- Rep. Katherine Harris fueled already rampant speculation about the status of her campaign for the U.S. Senate when she released a statement Saturday promising a "major announcement" about her future this week. The Longboat Key Republican's campaign is barely stumbling along after revelations that she took thousands in illegal contributions from a defense contractor who bribed a California congressman. And while she has had little to say about the matter, many others are talking, including Republicans worried about losing the Senate race and Democrats emboldened by the financial and political woes confronting Harris. It didn't help when rumors circulated last week that Harris might not stay in the race. In her statement, Harris acknowledged all the speculation, notifying Republican activists at a meeting in Memphis that she was canceling her scheduled appearance there Saturday night "as I prayerfully prepare with my family, friends and advisors to finalize the strategy for a major announcement next week concerning my candidacy for the U.S. Senate." Harris continued: "I will continue to look to our founding fathers, who pursued their vision with integrity and perseverance, to discern the best course of action for the state of Florida and our nation." Tallahassee Republican strategist Rick Wilson said Harris is likely feeling whipsawed, with some advisers pushing her to get out of the race and others telling her to keep running. But Saturday's announcement, he said, will make it all that much harder to quash speculation that she's dropping out. While she told The Associated Press last week that she was staying in, the pressure has not eased. Wilson and other Republicans have been worried that Harris will bring down other candidates if she runs. "I have no happy fairyland vision that she can win," Wilson said. Republican consultant Geoffrey Becker said the race has gotten out of her control. "It sounds like she's thinking of a way to get out," he said Saturday. GOP lobbyist John "Mac" Stipanovich noted the letter comes on the heels of Harris canceling some campaign appearances, although she had five events Saturday. "If it's not a prelude to withdrawal, it surely is an unusual strategy," Stipanovich said. Even before her latest crisis involving the illegal contributions, Harris faced some formidable obstacles in her quest to unseat Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson. When her campaign began last year, unenthusiastic Republican leaders tried to lure others into the race. Then came the distraction caused by staff turmoil in her campaign and her congressional offices. One big necessity for a successful campaign -- money -- hasn't exactly been in great supply. At the end of the year, Harris had $1 million in the bank, compared with Nelson's $8 million. The polls have been pretty rough, too. In the latest Quinnipiac survey, she trailed Nelson by 22 percentage points. And that was before a defense contractor admitted giving her illegal campaign donations while asking her to help him win $10 million in federal aid. Harris said she did not know the $50,000 was illegal, and she has since donated it to charity. "Things are beginning to spiral out of control," said David E. Johnson of Atlanta, a pollster and GOP consultant with Strategic Vision LLC. "If she cannot right her campaign, the thing to do for the good of the party would be to get out." But people who have known Harris for years say she doesn't bend to pressure. I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Stay safe man. No matter my opinions I'm w/ you guys over there. Hope to see you'll back soon I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

OK. I HAVE to comment on this one. Was alone one nite a guy sucker punched me, kicked my ass. I walked away. Few days later got a couple buds (I'm a small guy) went back,(they where there to make sure he couldn't run) beat that MF half to death w/ a pickaxe handle. Got arrested. (he had also stolen from me). Cop asked me if it was worth it. I said hell yes. Beat the case cause the pussy WAS TO AFRAID TO SHOW HIS FACE IN COURT. SOMETIMES A MANS GOTTA DO WHAT A MANS GOTTA DO. DAMN THE CONSEQUENSES. And as someone else said. If you wanna go partying take a good friend w/. ALWAYS "And he who walks away lives to fight another day" I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.

Maybe we should TEST this one on Iran. How come we can have nukes and they can't? Just a question for debate.>_______Revealed: UK develops secret nuclear warhead Michael Smith Full text of Trident report by Foreign Policy Centre BRITAIN has been secretly designing a new nuclear warhead in conjunction with the Americans, provoking a legal row over the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The government has been pushing ahead with the programme while claiming that no decision has been made on a successor to Britain’s Trident nuclear deterrent. Work on a new weapon by scientists at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston in Berkshire has been under way since Tony Blair was re-elected last May, and is now said to be ahead of similar US research. The aim is to produce a simpler device using proven components to avoid breaching the ban on nuclear testing. Known as the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW), it is being designed so that it can be tested in a laboratory rather than by detonation. “We’ve got to build something that we can never test and be absolutely confident that, when we use it, it will work,” one senior British source said last week. The secret programme to build a new warhead in close co-operation with the Americans will spark anger among Labour opponents of any replacement of the Trident programme, which is estimated to have cost nearly £10 billion. Developing a new weapon would also, according to expert advice from Cherie Booth’s Matrix chambers, be a material breach of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The office of Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, refused to comment on whether it had been asked for legal advice by No 10. Both Labour backbenchers and the Liberal Democrats accused the government of introducing a replacement nuclear weapon by the back door without a parliamentary debate. Paul Flynn, a Labour backbencher who has drafted parliamentary motions questioning the need for a Trident replacement, insisted there had to be a proper debate. “The Trident missiles will last for another 20 years,” he said. “Who on earth are we going to take on with them anyway? Replacing them wrecks any standing we have when we preach non-proliferation to countries like Iran.” Michael Moore, the Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesman, called for a statement. “This work would appear to pre-empt the proper debate the prime minister has promised,” he said. The controversy is set to ignite this week with an embarrassing report by the Foreign Policy Centre (FPC), set up under Blair’s patronage, calling for Trident to be scrapped and not replaced. On Tuesday the defence select committee will take evidence from experts, most of whom are expected to say that there is no need for a new nuclear deterrent. The FPC report says that Britain’s independent deterrent is an illusion. The missiles are stored in the United States and have to be collected by a British submarine before it goes on patrol. Aldermaston is run by a consortium headed by Lockheed Martin, a US company, and there are 92 Americans working there, including the managing director and four of his senior managers. “The UK should cease to try to keep up appearances and adopt a policy based on the reality that it is not an independent nuclear power,” the FPC report concludes. “Trident should not be replaced and should be phased out now.” Blair is said to want to decide on Trident’s replacement before he steps down. “It is a huge decision for the country and it will probably be done in a far more open way than the decisions have been taken before,” he said last month. As he spoke, work was well advanced at Aldermaston on designs for the RRW. The US Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore nuclear laboratories began a competition to produce an RRW last May. But Washington sources say the British have been designing their own Reliable Replacement Warhead and “are now ahead of the Americans”. One possible way to avoid breaching the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is for Blair to announce that the new deterrent will have fewer warheads. We currently have about 200. __________________________________ I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all.