34 warships sent from US for Obama visit

reply to post by windwaker


Press Trust got it from ND. ND got it from an anonymous source.

Why would India force its media to change the story? It is not the job of the government to tell media what to report. It is up to the people to question the media. Something only a few people on this site are actually doing.

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by windwaker

 

Press Trust got it from ND. ND got it from an anonymous source.

Why would India force its media to change the story? It is not the job of the government to tell media what to report. It is up to the people to question the media. Something only a few people on this site are actually doing.

u dont even know what u talking about!

becuse in THE USA are government tell media what to report. EVERY sec of the day! so BUrrrrrrrr

u in a big boy topic. BYE!!!

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by windwaker

 

Press Trust got it from ND. ND got it from an anonymous source.

Why would India force its media to change the story? It is not the job of the government to tell media what to report. It is up to the people to question the media. Something only a few people on this site are actually doing.

I wonder...if The New York Times published a report like this would people doubt them?

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by HYADEAN2025

 

Can you provide a source for the 34 warships? One that did no originate from an anonymous Indian source?

Do I believe India's news media or Do I believe the U.S Defense Department??hmmmm I need to think about it!!!

I Believe India's news media

Originally posted by windwaker

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by windwaker

 

Press Trust got it from ND. ND got it from an anonymous source.

Why would India force its media to change the story? It is not the job of the government to tell media what to report. It is up to the people to question the media. Something only a few people on this site are actually doing.

I wonder...if The New York Times published a report like this would people doubt them?

YES! just like the guys who on this topic. lmao!!!

reply to post by PatriotsPride


It only means that when and if something happens, they can say "we did our best" and get away without any responsibility.

reply to post by windwaker


If their only source was some anonymous person in India, I would absolutely not believe it.

reply to post by HYADEAN2025


Yes, OUR governments does sometimes tell media what to report, but it is not their responsibility. In fact, if what you say is true, the Indian government SHOULD silence the story. It hurts the security of the fabled 34 warships if the whole world knows exactly where they are.

If we are in a "big boy topic" why are you resorting to personal attacks?

reply to post by PatriotsPride


Another excuse to bash Obama by over exaggeration. No this trip is not going to cost us 200 million per day. This is another ploy to discredit Obama and more corporate kool aid.

Republicans/Corporations are starting to really play dirty because Obama is going over there to try and get some of our jobs back. He's starting to penalize companies "off shoring" jobs and it's getting the TPTB (Who own the press) pissed..........and you are all once again buying it.

The Real Cost of Obama’s Trip to India
November 5th, 2010 by Phil Mattera

The rightwing media machine is up in arms about a dubious report that the cost of President Obama’s trip to India will turn out to be more than $200 million a day, for a 2,000-person entourage. The White House calls the cost figure wildly inflated.

The manufactured controversy about cost is taking attention away from what should be the main story: who is accompanying the President on the trip and what do they hope to get out of it. A big part of Obama’s entourage will be scores of top U.S. corporate executives, who are seeking Obama’s help in initiating or finalizing big deals with the Indian government and Indian corporations. Numerous other U.S. companies are not sending executives on Obama’s trip but are still hoping the visit will advance their interests in India.

Among the deals that have been reported are: the sale of ten military transport planes worth some $5 billion by Boeing and the sale of $800 million in fighter jet engines to the Indian military and $500 million in heavy duty gas turbines to India’s Reliance Energy, both by General Electric. Other dealmakers are said to include Eaton Corp., John Deere, Caterpillar and Harley-Davidson.

In other words, a President endlessly denounced by the Right as a socialist, is serving as a shill for some of the country’s largest corporations. This is far from the first time an American president has acted as salesman-in-chief for American products, and the White House makes no apologies for the trip, claiming that it will result in the creation of thousands of jobs.

The problem is that it is far from clear that landing big deals for U.S.-based corporations will result in many jobs for U.S. workers. The list of companies with executives going to India with President Obama (or that stand to benefit from the trip) include some of the most notorious practitioners of offshore outsourcing.

Take the two heaviest hitters on the trip. Boeing has made a science of shifting work from its traditional manufacturing operations around Seattle to factories around the world. It has clashed repeatedly with its unionized workers over the issue. And when it’s not sending jobs abroad, it moves them to domestic non-union plants, such as its big new operation in South Carolina.

General Electric is another unabashed offshorer. In the early 1990s about one-quarter of the company’s employees were outside the United States; at the end of last year, 56 percent of them were. What’s especially frustrating is that GE is offshoring jobs in emerging fields such as renewable energy, thus depriving many American workers of a shot at the jobs of the future.

Eaton, a diversified manufacturer of industrial products, now has 27 facilities in China with some 10,000 workers as well as four research and development centers in the country. In April, John Deere opened a manufacturing plant and parts distribution center in Russia. It already had factories in low-wage countries such as Brazil, China, Ecuador, India and Mexico. Caterpillar has eight plants in China, eight in Mexico, three in India and many more in other countries. It recently opened a logistics center in China to support what a company press release called its “growing manufacturing footprint” in that country.

Harley-Davidson is an icon of U.S. manufacturing, but it just announced plans to open a new plant in India to assemble U.S.-made motorcycle kits. It is unclear whether this will increase or decrease jobs at the company’s American plants, which have been exporting fully assembled motorcycles to the Indian market.

It’s true that these companies have to do a certain amount of production in countries such as China and India to sell to local customers, yet it is also undeniable that these firms and others seeking benefits from Obama’s trip have been reducing manufacturing operations in the United States that previously supplied goods for both domestic and foreign markets.

There is no guarantee that the jobs Obama hopes to generate with his sales trip to India will end up going to Americans. The companies whose wares he is promoting are in many cases American only in terms of where their headquarters are located. They are all too willing to destroy the livelihood of U.S. workers in their global pursuit of cheaper labor and fatter profits.

Source: dirtdiggersdigest.org...

NDTV has a new story, quoting a real person, denying the silly story. Oh no, which story shall we believe?

Press Trust of India, Updated: November 05, 2010 08:31 IST

Washington: Dismissing news reports as totally absurd, the US has denied that it has moved some 34 war ships around Mumbai, where President Barack Obama would arrive on the wee hours of Saturday, the Pentagon has said.

"That's just comical. Nothing close to that is being done," Pentagon spokesman, Geoff Morrell, told reporters at a news briefing.

Morrell was responding to questions about news reports appearing in various Indian media that the Pentagon has deployed a substantial number of its resources in India before the visit of the US President to India.

There seems to be denial coming from this source

No, Pentagon says, Obama will not be guarded by 34 ships.

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama will not be protected by a vast armada of 34 US warships when he visits Mumbai this weekend, officials said, calling reports from India on security preparations "comical."

The claim that many of the 288-ship US naval fleet would be deployed to waters off Mumbai was "absolutely absurd," Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told reporters on Thursday.

US officials usually decline to discuss details about security precautions for the president, but the media accounts circulating out of India were so off the mark that press officers at the Pentagon and the White House said they felt compelled to speak up.

"I will take the liberty this time of dismissing as absolutely absurd this notion that somehow we were deploying 10 percent of the Navy -- some 34 ships and an aircraft carrier -- in support of the president's trip to Asia," Morrell said.

"That's just comical. Nothing close to that is being done," he said....

www.google.com...

Now I'm getting confused - who to believe?

damn what was it called again?

gunboat diplomacy?

reply to post by die_another_day


No, it's called a myth. Or just plain foolishness.

Article from the same source denying 34 warships are being sent

Dismissing news reports as totally absurd, the US has denied that it has moved some 34 war ships around Mumbai, where President Barack Obama would arrive on the wee hours of Saturday, the Pentagon has said. "That's just comical.

Nothing close to that is being done," Pentagon spokesman, Geoff Morrell, told reporters at a news briefing. Morrell was responding to questions about news reports appearing in various Indian media that the Pentagon has deployed a substantial number of its resources in India before the visit of the US President to India. Read more at: www.ndtv.com...

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by windwaker

 

I also have a very close friend who was told last Christmas or shortly after that he was also being deployed to Afghanistan this year, I asked him why since the war was supposedly over but did not get any real response.

I have way too much respect to push it as he is going career.

Exactly. I didn't want to question those soldiers I met either, because I have respect for the armed forces and I didn't want them to think I wasn't supportive. But I was secretly wondering why they weren't concerned. They might have been, but they are brave soldiers so they can't show that.

This is really ridiculous. Past presidents traveled, and there was nowhere near this amount of uproar. Not even close. President Obama and the First Lady travel, and all of a sudden travel expenses are questioned as if, for the first time, they ever came to light. Of course, a lot of people are upset that he is sitting in the WHITE House altogether, and will take every cheap pot shot at him and his family. Frankly, I'm surprised there isn't a controversy over his dog. Or what their menus consist of. Of how often the lawns are kept, ---or for that matter, why President Obama is not out on the lawn mowing it himself, since apparently he isn't fit to live in the White House. Get over it people. The man won the election.

He won the election and inherited just about the worst HAND-OFF in the history of the country. Not just one war. Two wars. Not just two wars, but two wars that had been POORLY MANAGED. Not only two, poorly managed wars, but an UNPRECEDENTED ECONOMIC COLLAPSE. Not just two wars and an unprecedented economic collapse, but a situation where TOO MANY AMERICANS DID NOT HAVE HEALTH CARE, and not just too many Americans not having health care, but those who had it had POOR health care.

And those are just the biggest headlines. The guy inherited an excrement sandwich. He inherited problems that had been festering for 20 years, and many of them were created just within the last eight. And we skewer him and criticize him for the fact that he single-handedly couldn't solve all our problems in two years with an opposing force employing a brilliantly successful "I hope you fail" strategy (which might have brought Republicans success, but cost the country)? Really?

I'm not a demo or a repub. I'm simply for the best people and the best ideas. That being said, these attacks on President Obama are really cheap shots. WHOEVER would have sat in his seat, say if McCain had won, I'd defend if he/she were being attacked in this way. It's just *easier* for a lot of people to attack President Obama because of their less than ideal perspectives about *who* is allowed and not allowed in the White House.

reply to post by windwaker


I know its what they train for. I think they get off set when you make any kind of implication of it being dangerous, like its a hex on them or something.

and this administration always tells the truth -- doncha know it.

well I live in Mumbai and the media has been going crazy over the planned visit, but never have they mentioned 34 warships coming from the States. they did mention however that there would be warships guarding the coasts. whether it be Indian or American still has to be found out, but not much is around about it. if many of you are still unclear as to why he is here, just read a newspaper. jobs, trade, energy, weapons...the usual stuff. this was supposed to happen twice in the past already but they held it off until now. you guys know that he is going to meet with chinese delegates after India right?

Originally posted by teacup27
and this administration always tells the truth -- doncha know it.

Of course not. They are obviously nothing but a bunch of low life, two bit liars.

Now this completely unnamed source none of you know anything about, now that person is someone we all know we can trust. Hell, just the fact that what they are reporting does not even make sense to anyone that can do math should tell you how reliable this source is, right?

Wait, why do we believe this source again?