visionary Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Hmm one of the leaders that Kerry says he can work better with, says to vote for Bush... ------------------------------------------------------------------- Putin urges voters to back Bush By CNN Moscow Bureau Chief Jill Dougherty MOSCOW, Russia (CNN) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin says terrorist attacks in Iraq are aimed at preventing the re-election of U.S. President George W. Bush and that a Bush defeat "could lead to the spread of terrorism to other parts of the world." Putin, speaking Central Asian Cooperation Organization summit in Tajikistan Monday, made his most overt comments of support so far for the re-election of Bush for a second term. "Any unbiased observer understands that attacks of international terrorist organizations in Iraq, especially nowadays, are targeted not only and not so much against the international coalition as against President Bush," Putin said. "International terrorists have set as their goal inflicting the maximum damage to Bush, to prevent his election to a second term. "If they succeed in doing that, they will celebrate a victory over America and over the entire anti-terror coalition," Putin said. "In that case, this would give an additional impulse to international terrorists and to their activities, and could lead to the spread of terrorism to other parts of the world." Putin noted that American voters will not decide the election just on Iraq. "Because of this we must take a realistic approach and be prepared for any development of events," he said. "We respect any choice the American people will make." President Putin made it clear Russia remained opposed to the war in Iraq. "Today, our views on that differ from the views of President Bush," he said. Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/10/18/putin.iraq/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted October 18, 2004 Author Share Posted October 18, 2004 http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/polls/index.html probably old news, but perhaps relevant...or not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted October 18, 2004 Author Share Posted October 18, 2004 Karzai well ahead in Afghan vote 5 killed, including election worker, in blast The Associated Press Updated: 9:05 a.m. ET Oct. 18, 2004 KABUL, Afghanistan - The chief rival of interim President Hamid Karzai said Monday that he has evidence of organized fraud in Afghanistan’s election and accused the U.N.-Afghan electoral commission of ignoring his complaints. Meanwhile, five people — including at least one election worker — were killed by an explosion as they drove near the Pakistan border — the second deadly incident surrounding the election. It was unclear whether the vehicle was targeted or whether they hit unexploded ordnance left over from Afghanistan’s long civil war. Karzai, Afghanistan’s stopgap president since the fall of the Taliban in 2001, had captured 62.6 percent of the 1.04 million ballots counted by Monday — about 13 percent of the vote. That put him on course for the simple majority needed to avoid a run-off. Running second, third The U.S.-backed incumbent’s closest challenger, former Education Minister Yunus Qanooni, was trailing with only 17.7 percent. Ethnic Uzbek warlord Abdul Rashid Dostum was third with 9.3 percent. Ballots so far have been drawn from 29 of Afghanistan’s 34 provinces. Millions of Afghans braved Taliban threats and poor weather to cast their ballots on Oct. 9, an unlikely democratic experiment after a quarter-century of fighting. Observers and officials have acknowledged problems, especially with ink used to mark people’s hands to prevent them voting more than once. A panel of three foreign experts was set up to head off threats by Karzai’s 15 opponents to boycott the results. At a news conference, Qanooni said there is evidence of ballot boxes being filled with Karzai votes in at least four provinces: Ghazni, Herat, Zabul and Kunduz. He says his representatives were threatened when they went to check on suspected ballot-box stuffing in Zabul province. He said he has filed more than 30 written complaints to the U.N.-Afghan electoral commission. “If his excellency Mr. Karzai, my old friend, succeeds in a fair and transparent election, I will congratulate him and cooperate with him,” Qanooni told reporters. “But if the result is fraudulent, the legitimacy of this election will be in question.” Establishing the panel delayed the start of counting, and Qanooni, who served as Karzai’s interior and education minister, has forecast that the figures will turn in his favor as more votes are tallied. Yet four of the five provinces where the count has yet to start are in southern and eastern Afghanistan where Karzai is expected to win. Also, there are no results yet from the 850,000 refugee voters in Iran and Pakistan. Some seals broken Qanooni also complained that his representatives were unable to monitor ballot boxes during transit from polling stations to counting centers. Organizers acknowledge some boxes arrived with broken seals but say they were damaged by clumsy handling. “These violations and cheating were organized in advance,” Qanooni said. Sultan Baheen, a spokesman for the electoral commission, rejected Qanooni’s charges, saying the candidate’s representatives had declined to accompany ballot boxes brought from Iran and Pakistan. “There is no indication of what the candidates are saying, that boxes have been emptied and refilled,” Baheen added. “There’s nothing like that.” Few independent observers believe that Qanooni, a member of the ethnic Tajik minority, could command a country deeply fractured by years of tribal and ethnic warfare. Karzai enjoys strong support among Afghanistan’s traditional rulers, the Pashtuns, and is seen as a bridge to its international backers and a leader untainted by its bloody past. Official results are only expected by Oct. 31, but within this week it should be clear who has won the most votes. 5 Afghans killed Monday’s explosion targeted a vehicle of the Joint Electoral Management Body near Yahya Khel, a town in Paktika, a troubled province on the Pakistani border, JEMB spokesman Sultan Baheen said. One employee of the commission, the driver of the vehicle and three other civilians were killed, he said. All were Afghans. On election day, three police officers died in a shootout with suspected militants as they escorted a convoy carrying ballot boxes in central Uruzgan province. © 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6234283 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ross3909 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 That is funny that he will go right up to the line of saying that Iraq needed to be dealt with but not say it because it would be admitting that Russia was on the wrong side of history. And now that his own country has been hit with terror he is looking for strong allies to help him...think France will help out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sick Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by ross3909 That is funny that he will go right up to the line of saying that Iraq needed to be dealt with but not say it because it would be admitting that Russia was on the wrong side of history. And now that his own country has been hit with terror he is looking for strong allies to help him...think France will help out? Russia has been dealing with Chechen terrorists for quite a while now, probably longer than we have. Both men use fear and tragedy as excuses to cut down on personal and constitutional freedoms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinthePRF Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by ross3909 That is funny that he will go right up to the line of saying that Iraq needed to be dealt with but not say it because it would be admitting that Russia was on the wrong side of history. And now that his own country has been hit with terror he is looking for strong allies to help him...think France will help out? Putin has been getting his a55 kicked by Chechen terrorists since before the war in Iraq. But I truly doubt Middle Eastern terrorists could really care who is in office. Was the bombing of the Cole/'93 Tower attack in hopes of getting Clinton out of office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted October 18, 2004 Author Share Posted October 18, 2004 Not really, JW. To compare the US to Russia in restricting Freedom is laughable. Also the point of my post was that Kerry is supposed to get along better with foreign leaders, insulting their armies and the Iraq Interim President aside...that is his main claim to being better on foreign policy if he can't even prove that he would get along better with the leaders then he is looking kind of bad in his supposed strongest asset in a very weak area for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ross3909 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by KevinthePRF Putin has been getting his a55 kicked by Chechen terrorists since before the war in Iraq. But I truly doubt Middle Eastern terrorists could really care who is in office. Was the bombing of the Cole/'93 Tower attack in hopes of getting Clinton out of office? To compare the attack that Russia just went through with all the other attacks just shows a total disconnect with reality. Their is a difference between bombings and the planned tourture and slaughter of innocent women and children. If this had happened in the US you would no longer be hearing from the people who think that there is nothing worth fighting for. People would start to wake up to the ugly realization that there is a whole lot of people out there who have been trying to get our attention since the late 80s, that want nothing except the complete destruction of all non Fundemental Muslims. Bush believes in going after this threat where it comes from and destroying it. Kerry believes that you can prosecute the individual terrorists after an attack, just like the failed policies of Clinton. Who do you think the Terrorists want in the White House??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinthePRF Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by ross3909 To compare the attack that Russia just went through with all the other attacks just shows a total disconnect with reality. Their is a difference between bombings and the planned tourture and slaughter of innocent women and children. If this had happened in the US you would no longer be hearing from the people who think that there is nothing worth fighting for. People would start to wake up to the ugly realization that there is a whole lot of people out there who have been trying to get our attention since the late 80s, that want nothing except the complete destruction of all non Fundemental Muslims. Bush believes in going after this threat where it comes from and destroying it. Kerry believes that you can prosecute the individual terrorists after an attack, just like the failed policies of Clinton. Who do you think the Terrorists want in the White House??? Hmmmm, just prosecute terrorists AFTER an attack? I'd love to see this quote from Kerry's camp. You're misguided if you think this is Kerry's plan against terrorism. I don't mind Bush taking it to terrorists, I just wish he stuck to taking it terrorists. Which the war in Iraq has little to do with protecting us from terrorism in our country. Or are you one of those determined to link 9/11 to Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 You know the title could read... Former KGB Chief approves Bush Policies... Somehow, getting a high five from Putin does not make me sleep better. He is not exactly a saint, you know? To paraphrase Mrs. Cheney, "Mr. Putin in not a good man." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancalagon the Black Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 I love the spin. If Putin were to support Kerry, people in this forum would be foaming at the mouth about how a corrupt regime who stubbornly refused to go into Iraq with us would naturally support the no-good peacenik liberal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC4 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Isn't it funny how CNN reads into that story that Putin says, "Vote for Bush", and yet AP does an article about basicly the same story, which says Putin NEVER said who he favors: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041018/ap_on_re_eu/russia_us_election_1 Putin: Terror Attacks Aimed at Bush Mon Oct 18,11:16 AM ET DUSHANBE, Tajikistan - Russian President Vladimir Putin said Monday that terrorists are aiming to derail U.S. President George W. Bush's chances at re-election through their attacks in Iraq. "I consider the activities of terrorists in Iraq are not as much aimed at coalition forces but more personally against President Bush," Putin said at a news conference after a regional summit in the Tajik capital, Dushanbe. "International terrorism has as its goal to prevent the election of President Bush to a second term," he said. "If they achieve that goal, then that will give international terrorism a new impulse and extra power." Still, Putin didn't say which candidate he favored in the Nov. 2 U.S. presidential election. "We unconditionally respect any choice of the American people," he said. "I don't want to spoil relations with either candidate." Putin also noted his continuing disagreement with Bush on Washington's invasion of Iraq, which Russia strongly opposed as a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council. "Russia was always against the military operations in Iraq," he said. Despite their differences, Bush and Putin have cooperated closely in the international war on terror, with Russia assenting to the deployment of U.S. forces in former Soviet Central Asia for operations in neighboring Afghanistan (news - web sites). In exchange, Washington has mostly looked the other way on Moscow's continuing war in breakaway Chechnya, which Russia alleges is being fueled by international terror groups. On his last visit to Central Asia in June, Putin appeared to be backing Bush's assertion that Iraq was a threat, saying at a summit in Kazakhstan that Russia had notified Washington about intelligence that Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s regime was preparing attacks in the United States and its interests abroad. No further details were given, and Putin also said then that the warning didn't change Moscow's opposition to the Iraq war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Only the citizens need to support someone: The newspapers are wrong to do it. The world leaders are wrong to do it. The Unions are wrong to do it without a plurality(sp)... Only the people matter.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancalagon the Black Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Newpaper editors and world leaders aren't people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Putin is a thug( nothing has really changed in Russia), if anything his endorsement reinforces my belief that Bush has to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Putin is a tyrant and the Russian people are stupid for keep that power hungry jerk in office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sick Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Originally posted by visionary Not really, JW. To compare the US to Russia in restricting Freedom is laughable. Actually not laughable. What I was referring to is that in the past few years, both countries have seen major rollbacks in restricting freedom. The media crackdown by Putin has a chilling effect on freedom of speech, especially. Both are regressing. Russia was able to curb some of the free market reforms using the spectre of terrorism. I was not trying to compare US vs. USSR! : ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Punani2 Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Originally posted by Jackson's Ward Actually not laughable. What I was referring to is that in the past few years, both countries have seen major rollbacks in restricting freedom. The media crackdown by Putin has a chilling effect on freedom of speech, especially. Both are regressing. Russia was able to curb some of the free market reforms using the spectre of terrorism. I was not trying to compare US vs. USSR! : ) I don't know how you can compare the two. I believe Putin himself directed those rollbacks in freedom of the press while the Patriot Act (if your talking about this) was passed overwhelmingly by Dems and Reps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 The fact that a hard line semi dictator lieks Bush does scare me a bit but it would scare me more if he liked Kerry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted October 19, 2004 Author Share Posted October 19, 2004 Just because Putin is a **** does not mean that he is wrong...in this case. I thought more than a few dictators endorsed Kerry, though we have not heard too much about it lately. Anyway the article still brings into question one of Kerry's main arguments for dumping Bush and electing him, that he can get get along better with Putin (specifically) and others and not piss them off. Of course we already know that this is not true, after he said that Allawi was in Cahoots with Bush and he continually insults the military men and women of our allies. But this only goes to further prove that Kerry is not much better and is maybe worse than Bush in some of the few areas that he is considered stronger in (by the general public). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panel Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 You gotta be consistant. I don't want people from other counties telling me how to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 "Newpaper editors and world leaders aren't people?" try to think a little deeper on his comment. Of course editors and world leaders can have their opinions on who should be president, but when an editor uses his position at a public trust to mold news to fit his opinion on an election hes doing a diservice to the american people when he calls his news outlet a news outlet. As to world leaders putin said it best, he wants to maintain a good relation with both candidates endorsing one over the other would hurt his interests if he was on the wrong side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancalagon the Black Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Originally posted by dreamingwolf "Newpaper editors and world leaders aren't people?" try to think a little deeper on his comment. Of course editors and world leaders can have their opinions on who should be president, but when an editor uses his position at a public trust to mold news to fit his opinion on an election hes doing a diservice to the american people when he calls his news outlet a news outlet. As to world leaders putin said it best, he wants to maintain a good relation with both candidates endorsing one over the other would hurt his interests if he was on the wrong side. Your first point is valid, but I took T-bear's original post to be a criticism of newpapers endorsing candidates (that's why, in my opinion, he said "newspapers" specifically, rather than "the media"). That is a legitimate function of an editorial board. As for world leaders, well, they will use their positions of influence to try to affect world events. That's their job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Originally posted by Ancalagon the Black Newpaper editors and world leaders aren't people? Sure they are, but neither have a right to publicly state their opinion as an "entity" to effect the U.S. election... Putin is an idiot to begin with... Did anyone see the NY Times endorse Kerry and say: Wow! didnt see that one coming.. Later, when everything is slanted you see it and say, but of course... Substitute NY Times with Washington Times and Bush.. same, same... Again, not talking about the people behind the scenes... Talking about the Papers themselves... The Grey Lady that stands for Truth and all thats fit to Print right? Endorses a candidate as opposed to reporting the news... correctly. The Editorials are not really the news right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancalagon the Black Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Originally posted by Thiebear Endorses a candidate as opposed to reporting the news... correctly. The Editorials are not really the news right? Yes. I still don't see the problem. Endorsements are on the editorial page, not the news page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.