Hey, did Obama or the Clinton's win the election? Is this really change?

(This article is extension of article below this one)

It doesn't look very promising does it? Is this change? Is it real change? Are these peole going to provide “change”! It looks very doubtful. Okay, I can hear some of you saying “give him a chance, he is not President, not in power, yet”! Yeah okay, but he didn't get elected on the basis of “give me a chance” he got elected on the basis of “change” and I am sure that most people meant “real change” when they voted. So what about his silence or non-action over the Israel – Gaza situation with over 900 dead. Is this change, real change? So the "I am not yet President" silence and non-action, is this a sign of real change? Wouldn't real change have meant doing something, something different from the past, which includes not remaining silent, non-active just because presidency has not yet taken force. Doesn't this mean taking action that is really different from the past, not following routines and ideas from the past, and policies of the past? Even doing something even though the presidency has not yet come into force? Wouldn't this be the real change? Are we truly seeing change here? Change from the Bush policy, the Clinton policy, and all the policies before that! Is this just more of the same, in a different wrapping?

Is this really change? Does this really promise real change? Yeah right, the court is still out on this one! But somehow or other, sadly, I feel it might not be..........

Hey, did Obama or the Clinton's win the election?

Hey, who is running the show folks?

Obama.: More of the same? And the same from whom?

Over 900 dead in Gaza and still Obama says and does nothing! Israel and Jewish influence still is the master!

Obama's determination to carry on the fight in Afghanistan! Does this mean another war loving President?

Hillary Clinton as secretary of state? The papers talk of „...conflicts of interest...“! What conflict of interests? It is possible that some people might see this as some kind of pay-off position, but there is no evidence of that. Of course she is married to an ex-president who still has much power and sway, and whose charitable foundation have received a number of donations from foreign governments and multinational corporations. And who is still actively busy in business and political matters all over the world. She did run for president herself, and only gave up reluctantly (has she really given up?), so she has strong ideas and policies of her own, she was rather quick to vote for the Iraq war (so does this mean she is another warmonger?), Obama and Hillary Clinton clashed on some foreign policy issues during the primary campaign ........So, what conflict of interests?

Robert Gates: a former director of the CIA, appointed Defence Secretary by President Bush and who promoted the military surge in Iraq..................

Eric Holder: another Clinton ...he was number two in the Clinton Administration Justice Department

Susan Rice, to be UN ambassador was also in Clinton administration

Lisa Jackson to head Environmental Protection Agency -worked for the EPA under Bill Clinton

Shaun Donovan: Secretary of Housing/Urban Development - was also in the Clinton Administration

Tom Vilsack: Agriculture Secretary - endorsed Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

Leon Panetta: to head the CIA (?) - former Clinton White House chief of staff

Janet Napolitano: to head the Department of Homeland Security - President Bill Clinton appointed her US Attorney for the District of Arizona.

whose show is this really?

Building a Nuclear Bomb? Bush administration shows you how on internet

The internet is a great place. You can get cooking lessons; learn all about how a car or some piece of machinery works. You can learn how to build a house, or make a film. So why not also publish the details of how to build a nuclear bomb on the internet? Well perhaps some of you might be a little less happy with this idea, but do not worry President Bush’s administration and the Republican Party in Congress have the matter under control.

Moreover, if “they” have it under control there should be no reason for anyone else to worry about anything, should there now? After all, “they” are working to make the world a better and safer place, are they not? Therefore, if they think everyone should have the instructions how to build a nuclear bomb, then please do not grumble and complain, because we have just agreed that they are working to make the world a safer place for all of us.

Of course there is one little bit of bad news for you, if you don’t already have the instructions then you are too late. Apparently, Bush’s administration took the instructions off the internet yesterday. Yeah, I know that is bad news but I am sure it is only a temporary matter, so don’t worry, we can rely on the Bush administration to replace it with some other juicy details. It is only a slight hitch, some busybodies from the International Atomic Energy Agency have been complaining privately, you know how these busybody types are, always sticking their nose into matters that don’t concern them, trying to stop Bush and his administration from making the world a safer place for all of us.

Listen don’t worry, the republican congress was behind this whole idea as well so they will help Bush get this sorted out and have the details back online. That is the trouble these days just too many busybodies getting in the way of Bush who is doing really great work around the world.

(See article at New York Times: U.S. Web Archive Is Said to Reveal a Nuclear Primer, http://www.nytimes.com/)