if pelosi.....?

Question

claims she went to syria about america's policy, then why bother going..??? americas policy is no negotiating with them until they stop supporting terrorist organizations.....and stop letteing terrorists and weapons from crossing the border into iraq.....personally...i think she ewent to try and assure the terrorist sponsoring states over there that if a democrat is elected in 08 that we will back off the middle east and the fascists can run things as they see fit...there just doesnt seem to be any other reason.....as devisive as she is, she certainly couldnt be over there to tell them we are going to stick with our policy and hold the threat of military action against them if we catch them red handed....i think she went there to assure them they have supporters in america and in politics in america....

Answer 1

I would like to read a transcript of that conversation....I'm sure that will ever happen. By her actions, she is sending a message that if you bend us far enough, we will break, we are divided. She will stop at nothing to undermine the current administration.

Answer 2

She went there mostly to try and improve her resume and undermine the president. She did not accomplish anything for the U.S and actually upset the leadership of Israel. She knows that she could never be a player in any Governorship or Presidency because of how radical her politics are. Much like the San Franciscans she represents, she is narrow minded and naive.

Answer 3

"i think she went there to assure them they have supporters in america and in politics in america...."

Not exactly, but sorta.

She went there to find out what it would be worth to them to have the support of herself, the DNC, and America.

I honestly don't think she went there to undermine Bush's policies. She doesn't care enough about them to do that.

She went there for her own personal gain.

I find myself hoping that the Bush administration really is spying on everything everyone does, at least to the extent of being able to spot the money that comes to her and/or the DNC as a result of this meeting. I have no doubt that this amounted to a solicitation for political contributions.

Answer 4

Perhaps Ms. Pelosi just does not have a good understanding of the Muslim world and the quest for power and world domination. I am especially convinced of that because she favors establishment of the "nuclear fuel bank" although a country like Iran has the capability of further enriching "nuclear fuel" to be pure enough (U235) to provide fissile material for a nuclear bomb.

On April 10, 2997, an article written by Carla Mariunucci appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle, indicating that Ms. Pelosi and Rep. Lantos are interested in making a "diplomatic trip" to Iran.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/10/BAGV9P6C0S6.DTL
Pelosi, Lantos may be interested in diplomatic trip to Iran
Furthermore, the article quoted Rep Lantos as saying that he co-sponsored legislation with Ms. Pelosi which could pass as early as May that calls for making available to all countries --including Iran -- nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes under international oversight by establishing a "nuclear fuel bank".

I believe that the legislation is:
HR 6 Clean Energy Act of 2007
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h6ih.txt.pdf

Those who advocate the "nuclear fuel bank" consider that clean nuclear technology would be available to all countries. However, those who argue against the "nuclear fuel bank" point out that the uranium enrichment process (using centrifuges to separate isotopes as in the FEP at Natanz, Iran) can also be used to produce a more pure grade of uranium 235 which may be used in a nuclear bomb.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4416482.stm
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/28/opinion/edbuffett.php
http://www.goodharborreport.com/node/295

The head of the Iranian Nuclear Energy Organization, Gholam-Reza Aghazadeh, explains it thus:
The simple way is to inject 0.7% (uranium) and obtain 3.5%, right? Now, if you take this 3.5% and inject it again into the chain (of centrifuges), the result will be 20%. If you inject the 20% back into the chain, the result will be 60%. If you inject this 60%, the result will be 90%.
http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=1120
http://www.memritv.org/Search.asp?ACT=S6&P1=2,148&P3=4

Since Iran has uranium enrichment capabilities at its FEP (fuel enrichment plant) at Natanz, giving Iran nuclear "fuel" enriched to 3.5% might not be a good idea if Iran does have the agenda to develop a nuclear bomb.

The BBC article (listed below) describes the nuclear fuel process.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/sci_nat/05/nuclear_fuel/html/mining.stm

Answer 5

You know Damascus Nancy, just leaps at a chance to show off her burka, and spend our tax dollars when she's betraying our country.

Answer 6

I'll tell you what.... When you are Speaker of The United States House of Representitives you can do it your way. Mean while let Ms. Pelosi do it her way. She is not doing anything different than her two immediate predecessors did.

Answer 7

Well duh... what else could she have done? You think Islamic extremists would take a threat from a female Democrat seriously? That's probably about the first time a woman has ever spoken in public.