Chirac ups the nuclear ante (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=2&ObjectID=10364660)
President Jacques Chirac dropped a political bombshell yesterday, threatening to retaliate with nuclear strikes against any state which carried out a large-scale terrorist attack on France.
This is interesting , this statement comes out as more of an intended warning to a third party than a direct threat to a particular mideast nation .
In the biggest shift in French nuclear doctrine for 40 years, President Chirac revealed that the "force de frappe" - the French nuclear deterrent - had already been re-configured to allow it to destroy the "power centres" of any state which sponsored a terrorist assault.
Power centre , thats an interesting term , more on that later .
He appeared to imply that any large-scale, state-sponsored terrorist attack on France - whether or not it used weapons of mass destruction - would invite a closely targeted, nuclear response from France.
Now we know Spain and Britain have each suffered major attacks in their cities from as yet an undetermined origin . On each occasion prior to the attacks on Bali , Madrid and London America issued a general warning of an impending Al CIAda attack in these cities . This implies American foreknowledge and possible collusion with the perpertrators .
The President implied he was talking about a "dirty bomb" but left open the possibility of a nuclear riposte to any state-sponsored terrorist attack.
Now the only nation that has invented this term is America , and it is America that has been saying Al CIAda intends to use a dirty bomb (http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20031016-110337-4698r.htm) on one its cities .

I say that French intelligence has picked on an American orchestrated Al CIAda attack on its soil , a very large one at that . This is a warning that any attack will result in massive retaliation and the term "power centre" becomes clearer .

We know Al CIAda's origin is one of American and Saudi Arabian collaboration . Saudi Arabia , through its American controlled oil industry and US political/military co-operation is the main US power centre in the mideast . I think any attack on French soil , France will immediately link it to Saudi Arabia . This seems more of a warning against American intrigue than anything else .

DONT be stupid... you dont give the muslims enough credit for their own actions.

but i say to the french... yeah, you tell em.

-MT

Brian,

Your posts make absolutely no sense.

Well it's pretty obsolete, since terrorism doesn't require state sponsorship. We already got rid of Afghanistan's support for Al Quida. He seems to be thinking in cold war terms, where the only enemies are states. The new situation is ethnic and religious conflict that transcends national borders.

DONT be stupid... you dont give the muslims enough credit for their own actions.
Jesus mate , you have America stomping all over the mideast unimpeded .
What responsibilty can the Mideast take for its actions ?
but i say to the french... yeah, you tell em.
So do I , France is the only nation bringing anything positive to the mideast , any such attack on France would be meaningless .
Brian,

Your posts make absolutely no sense.
After reading your comments here about black power and slavery , hey ! no surprises here .
Well it's pretty obsolete, since terrorism doesn't require state sponsorship. We already got rid of Afghanistan's support for Al Quida. He seems to be thinking in cold war terms, where the only enemies are states. The new situation is ethnic and religious conflict that transcends national borders.
What country in the mideast would want to attack France ? Doesnt make sense . And the only nation that still thinks in Cold War Terms is America , France pulled out of NATO in 1960 .

After reading your comments here about black power and slavery , hey ! no surprises here .

which ones are you referring to.

The fact is people die in these attacks which terrorist groups proudly admit to.

You bullshit does these people no justice.

I agree that a terrorist attack against France would be pointless and unwarranted considering they've tried their hardest to distance themselves from the United States and it's actions in the Middle East.

So if a terrorist attack hits France, it would be quite suspicious, I'll give you that. But to say it would result in a nuclear strike against Saudi Arabia or the United States is beyond reasonable. An attack against the U.S. is completely out of the question, that will never happen, and an attack against Saudi Arabia would arouse negative reactions from all the countries that benefit from Saudi oil, including the U.S.

Who would France nuke if an attack origionated in France?

What good has France brought the middle east? The Treaty of Sevres that started all of the bs that we are currently dealing with?

Meh, France will just surrender
/obligatory french surrender joke

Until France makes amends for their actions in the middle east that they made, they should be as valid of a target as the other imperialist bastards that have torn the region apart.

So if a terrorist attack hits France, it would be quite suspicious, I'll give you that. But to say it would result in a nuclear strike against Saudi Arabia or the United States is beyond reasonable.
I didnt say they would attack America, I claerly said Saudi Arabia . Thats what I deducted from Chiracs language , makes sense .
An attack against the U.S. is completely out of the question, that will never happen, and an attack against Saudi Arabia would arouse negative reactions from all the countries that benefit from Saudi oil, including the U.S.
One of the incentives offered to Iran from The EU is that Iran becomes Europes main oil supply . The US controls Saudi Arabia , hitting that country would do damage to the US . If France links any attack on its soil to Al Qaeda thus Saudi arabia who can argue ?
What good has France brought the middle east? The Treaty of Sevres that started all of the bs that we are currently dealing with?
Thats ancient history , lets deal with now . France got Syria out of Lebanon and organised the election , Syria main political projection is with France , France is the principal component in negotiations with Iran . France has had a very positive presence in that region , leading to any attack on its soil to be done by a 3rd party entity wishing to undermine its standing , maybe Israel could be the object of this warning ?

1920 is hardly ancient history, as the region is still suffering greatly from the actions of France and Britian, though now the Americans have jumped into the region to screw it up as well.

brian foley:
everything i have read of your posts is pure conjecture and speculation.

lets hear some facts, if you are going to open your conspiracy spewing mouth.

The thing is, this kind of a threat is more likely a direct threat toward Iran and Pakistan then anyone else. Everyone knows both Iran and Pakistan sponsors various Islamic Fundementalist groups. The United States envolvement is pure conspiracy, and is not supported by their actions in the Middle East.

I would say Chirac was throwing his hat into the ring in regards to the global Iran ordeal and at the sametime reaffirming the need to continue funding the French nuclear deterrent. Killing two birds with one stone, sounds like good politics to me.

Everything I have read unambiguously points to the Saudis as providing the vast majority of the financial and other support for Islamic terrorists. The terrorist training camps masquerading as schools throughout the Mideast are run with Saudi money. Bin Laden is a member by marriage of the Saudi royal family. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals. Hatred for America is arguably at a higher level among the Saudi citizenry than in any other Muslim country. (If we don't count Palestine as a country.)

If the location of a "power center" for Islamic terrorism is the guide to choosing the target for an attack, the choice is obvious.

Everything I have read unambiguously points to the Saudis as providing the vast majority of the financial and other support for Islamic terrorists. The terrorist training camps masquerading as schools throughout the Mideast are run with Saudi money. Bin Laden is a member by marriage of the Saudi royal family. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals. Hatred for America is arguably at a higher level among the Saudi citizenry than in any other Muslim country. (If we don't count Palestine as a country.)

If the location of a "power center" for Islamic terrorism is the guide to choosing the target for an attack, the choice is obvious.


All of that is very true, in fact I've heard that the Iranian citizens really don't have that much animosity toward the U.S. In other words, we're not seen as a big threat to them. It seems that their animosity is contantly being directed toward Israel, so I can also understand why Israel would be scared to death of the idea of Iran being a nuclear power. And for the Israeli's, they don't want to take a chance either way, and it's reasonable to expect them to attack Iran before Iran can develop a nuke.

So, pretty much everyone get ready for a Israeli-Iranian war pretty soon, with Israel being backed by the U.S. and Iran being backed by Russia. God, talk about the end of the world, that could easily go nuclear if Israel gets an itchy trigger finger or Iran somehow secretly built a bomb. :eek:

Iran has more than Russia on its side...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/SCO_Map.png

1920 is hardly ancient history, as the region is still suffering greatly from the actions of France and Britian, though now the Americans have jumped into the region to screw it up as well.
That region has been under a continous time since Alexander the Greats time , to the Roman Empire epoch to the Byzantium Empire , right up till the Crusades and from those crusades to the empires of France and Britain . I cant argue outside interference has ruined the region but I think with the advent of petroleum in the 50's the political nature of the mideast in an economic perspective has taken a new approach . Consequently 1920 would be a completely and utterly meaningless in a 21st century concept of current events .
brian foley:
everything i have read of your posts is pure conjecture and speculation.
Okay lets do it , show me where I have not backed a thread of mine without proper sources ?
This thread here I have taken an actual comment that has been said by Chirac . I then have added my thoughts to this and given an explanation and being a public forum it is open for discussion . The other posters here have no problem in discussing my threads points . Thhts what this forum is for discussion , you have problems with it Fuck Off .
lets hear some facts,
Here are 3 facts .
1 ) The link to what Chirac said is a fact .
2 ) The fact America issued terror warnings to Indonesia , Britain and Spain is a fact .
3 ) Saudi Arabia is Americas power base in the mideast is a fact .
if you are going to open your conspiracy spewing mouth.
Hahahahahaha x 15 minutes This from a poster who cant even back up his claims on my Iran thread against GeoffP of all posters .
The thing is, this kind of a threat is more likely a direct threat toward Iran and Pakistan then anyone else. Everyone knows both Iran and Pakistan sponsors various Islamic Fundementalist groups. The United States envolvement is pure conspiracy, and is not supported by their actions in the Middle East.
Iran and Pakistan have actually aided America in its fight against Al Qaeda . Iran especially with the Taleban they were ideological enemies , Al Qaeda also . What you have to take into account is it has only been Al Qaeda or groups affiliated with Al Qaeda which has perpertrated such attacks in Madrid and London . And Saudi Arabia is where Bin Laden and Al Qaeda derive from as well as its funding . 9/11's hijackers were mainly all Saudia and the effort to lauch 9/11 came from saudi Arabia .
I would say Chirac was throwing his hat into the ring in regards to the global Iran ordeal and at the sametime reaffirming the need to continue funding the French nuclear deterrent. Killing two birds with one stone, sounds like good politics to me.
Wouldnt that supposedly feed the Iranians paranoia and make them develop an Atomic device ? It doesnt add up , using that phrase "power centre" conjures up Saudi Arabia .
Everything I have read unambiguously points to the Saudis as providing the vast majority of the financial and other support for Islamic terrorists. The terrorist training camps masquerading as schools throughout the Mideast are run with Saudi money. Bin Laden is a member by marriage of the Saudi royal family. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals. Hatred for America is arguably at a higher level among the Saudi citizenry than in any other Muslim country. (If we don't count Palestine as a country.)

If the location of a "power center" for Islamic terrorism is the guide to choosing the target for an attack, the choice is obvious.
thats was my immediate conclusion , who else could he be implying other than Saudi Arabia . What do you make of Chirac's statement I found it more of a statement with a subliminal warning . We have no idea what goes on behind closed doors .

3 ) Saudi Arabia is Americas power base in the mideast is a fact .

How do you figure? The US military has moved just about everybody out of Saudi Arabia, and CentCom is located in Qatar. Politically, the governments of Israel, Jordan, Qatar, Kuwait and even Egypt are much tighter with America. Saudi Arabia plays a big role as a leading oil exporter and key member of OPEC, but I don't think that makes them America's "power base." Maybe back during WWII that was the case, but things have come a long way since then...

Egypt and Iraq are at least as important as Saudi Arabia to the region, and the true "power base" in the region has long been America's aircraft carriers, which can easily field enough air power to demolish any army in the Middle East.

How do you figure? The US military has moved just about everybody out of Saudi Arabia, and CentCom is located in Qatar. Politically, the governments of Israel, Jordan, Qatar, Kuwait and even Egypt are much tighter with America. Saudi Arabia plays a big role as a leading oil exporter and key member of OPEC, but I don't think that makes them America's "power base."

It's an economic power base. Not even counting their oil, do you realize how much money Saudi Arabia has invested in us? And heck, do you know how much money they have invested in the Bush Administration? I don't know the figures off the top of my head, but it's probably 2nd behind China!

- N

Now we know Spain and Britain have each suffered major attacks in their cities from as yet an undetermined origin . On each occasion prior to the attacks on Bali , Madrid and London America issued a general warning of an impending Al CIAda attack in these cities . This implies American foreknowledge and possible collusion with the perpertrators .


That is a completely stupid and thoughtless conclusion. Your hatred for the U.S. leads you to many such asinine conclusions.

It's actually a result of America working to gather intelligence about the terrorists future plans.

Iran has more than Russia on its side...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/SCO_Map.png


I'm guessing blue = Iran supporters and green = possible supporters? LOL, that's too bad for Israel! Although India helping Iran? India despises Pakistan, who is in line with Iran. I would guess that India would support Israel. Also, Israel would have the backing of the U.S. and any country looking to stay in the United States good favor.

india and pakistan are going to be forced into playing nice by their mutual allies...

I'm guessing blue = Iran supporters and green = possible supporters?

Try right clicking on the picture, and look at the link from where it came from. The SCO? Hmmm, I wonder what that could be?

I'm guessing blue = Iran supporters and green = possible supporters?

I think it's the other way around, seeing as Iran is colored green on the map.


LOL, that's too bad for Israel! Although India helping Iran? India despises Pakistan, who is in line with Iran. I would guess that India would support Israel. Also, Israel would have the backing of the U.S. and any country looking to stay in the United States good favor.

India used to be very tight with Iran, but has recently been selling them out in order to get military and nuclear assistance from the US and Israel. The last year or two have seen a number of landmark agreements between India and the US and Israel. I'd put India in the "possible supporters" column these days. Honestly, though, the only thing "support" means in this context is that they'd continue buying Iran's oil in the event of an embargo. The only country that would actually give them military assistance would be Syria, and who gives a shit about them...

Russia only a possible supporter? No, Russia will be fully supporting Iran in the event of a war, considering they have sold billions of dollars in arms to Iran already. I'll disregard that map.

Russia only a possible supporter? No, Russia will be fully supporting Iran in the event of a war, considering they have sold billions of dollars in arms to Iran already. I'll disregard that map.

Yeah disregard the map just because you are too ignorant to know what it is about.

Like was previously mentioned, quite possiable to right click on the map and then try to cure your ignorance.

Yeah disregard the map just because you are too ignorant to know what it is about.

Like was previously mentioned, quite possiable to right click on the map and then try to cure your ignorance.


No, I've decided to disregard it because of this: Russia and China's conflicting interests have limited the groups' ability to act in a coordinated manner. Immediately after the September 11, 2001 attacks, the SCO was unable to develop a coordinated policy against terrorism and was also unable to deal as a collective body with the United States. The United States was able to significantly increase its influence by offering aid and convincing many of its Central Asian members to allow the United States to use their territory as military bases.

isn't 2001 anymore...

isn't 2001 anymore...


Irrelevent. The point is the U.S. can do whatever it wants, agreements or treaties between countries mean nothing when dealing with the U.S. and it's allies (read:countries it decides to support).

Quarkmoon:

Irrelevent.
No, your point was irrelevant. Squabbling between the members of the SCO in 2001 isn't relevant to 2006.


The point is the U.S. can do whatever it wants,

That must explain why it has invaded Iran... oh wait.

Unlike in Iraq, the U.S is too chickenshit to do anything about the 'rogue' country Iran. Iran has basically stated that they want to wipe the U.S's bum buddy Israhell off the map, and the Americans stand by doing nothing except breath hot air.

The European Countries have also taken to giving the U.S the cold shoulder. Hmm, looks like the U.S is starting to lose its influence...

Quarkmoon:

No, your point was irrelevant. Squabbling between the members of the SCO in 2001 isn't relevant to 2006.

And 5 years makes that big of a difference? Your hatred is blinding you. The U.S. has been influencing and manipulating the entire world for decades, 5 years is nothing. If the U.S. really wants to make an impact, they can and they will.

That must explain why it has invaded Iran... oh wait.

Unlike in Iraq, the U.S is too chickenshit to do anything about the 'rogue' country Iran. Iran has basically stated that they want to wipe the U.S's bum buddy Israhell off the map, and the Americans stand by doing nothing except breath hot air.

Yes, they haven't invaded Iran... yet. In fact, the U.S. is so influencial, invasion is unecessary, just fund Israel and any other country that wants a piece of Iran. Send in a few tanks and planes of our own, drop a few bombs here and there to give Israel and any other anti-Iran country a helping hand and boom, down goes Iran. Especially if Iran wasn't able to develop a nuke, they will fall quickly.

The European Countries have also taken to giving the U.S the cold shoulder. Hmm, looks like the U.S is starting to lose its influence...

And since when does Europe matter to the U.S.? Name one action taken by the U.S. that was blocked by the EU. Oh, and the last time I checked, the UK was all over George Bush's nuts when he decided to invade Iraq.

Trust me, I would love nothing more than the EU stepping in and asserting some goddamn balls, I'm as against the Iraq invasion as anyone else, but time and time again Europe proves to be no match for United States influence and wealth.

Then again it isn't like the SCO has done any join military operations in the past few years...

I think we all need to take some time and reflect upon how lucky we are to have a paragon of virtue and beacon of truth like Brian Foley, here on the internet, to tell us what is REALLY going on.

edit: Al CIAda. LOL

It's an economic power base. Not even counting their oil, do you realize how much money Saudi Arabia has invested in us? And heck, do you know how much money they have invested in the Bush Administration? I don't know the figures off the top of my head, but it's probably 2nd behind China!

- N
As far as i know, japan is by far the biggest investor in america not the saudis or china, japans investment is alot more important to america, than flaky countries like the saudis or china, chinese banks are all bankrupt with corruption, they wont even open there books up to foreign investors, such is there corruption, & the saudis you can not base your entire economy on oil, they do in 20 years time oil will be finished, then what are they going to sell sand.

Japans economy is based on technology, there is always a need for that, the chinese economy is based on poor quality copy goods, only bargain hunters & idiots are interested in the shit china is selling.

Neildo as usual you have it wrong, japan is more important to america than china & the saudis put together, in 25 years time when there is no oil, who is going to build all these new breed of cars, answer japan.

I think
That was your first problem.

Anyway, I think it's worth mentioning that the rest of the world didn't give a weasel shit about the Middle-East before they found oil. I agree with Vincent in that, soon, oil won't be needed, and once oil is irrevelent, the Middle-East will go back to being as irrevelent as the black gold nobody will need anymore.

Well, it seems Iran hasn't taken to kindly to French President Jacques Chirac's statement that France will have a right to use nuclear force in response to a terrorist attack: French President Jacques Chirac said Thursday that France could respond with nuclear weapons against any state-sponsored terrorist attack.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said Saturday that Chirac's threats reflect the true intentions of nuclear nations, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

"The French president uncovered the covert intentions of nuclear powers in using this lever (nuclear weapons) to determine political games," IRNA quoted Asefi as saying.

http://www.forbes.com/technology/feeds/ap/2006/01/21/ap2466481.html

An attack is inevitable, we might see a nuclear strike within the next few years if things don't cool off.

Al-Foley, you're like an onion. No matter how many layers you peel away, there's always another underneath that stinks even worse.



Now we know Spain and Britain have each suffered major attacks in their cities from as yet an undetermined origin . On each occasion prior to the attacks on Bali , Madrid and London America issued a general warning of an impending Al CIAda attack in these cities . This implies American foreknowledge and possible collusion with the perpertrators...This seems more of a warning against American intrigue than anything else .

I didn't post the rant in toto because me farting would have more logical tenor, and make more sense.

Whilst huddling around your rifle and canned beans in your fallout shelter, did it perhaps occur to you that coded intercepts by American intelligence were able to identify the targets but not the perpetrators? Or do you always assume that all evidence identifies to source at a 100% rate? You assume collusion is a more rational explanation than the above? My my - well I guess that explains the complete lack of unsolved crimes in the US, to say nothing of abroad. Or wait - no, there's quite a few of those after all, aren't there?

Maybe it's collusion. Damn sneaky Yanks.

Frankly, what your reading of the above actually implies is that besides probably not being too familiar with an actual, literal razor, you have an even more passing familiarity with Ockham's.

Holy thick. Like a whale steak.

Geoff

Whilst huddling around your rifle and canned beans in your fallout shelter

Quoted because that is exactly how I picture him. :D

Al-Foley, you're like an onion. No matter how many layers you peel away, there's always another underneath that stinks even worse.



I didn't post the rant in toto because me farting would have more logical tenor, and make more sense.

Whilst huddling around your rifle and canned beans in your fallout shelter, did it perhaps occur to you that coded intercepts by American intelligence were able to identify the targets but not the perpetrators? Or do you always assume that all evidence identifies to source at a 100% rate? You assume collusion is a more rational explanation than the above? My my - well I guess that explains the complete lack of unsolved crimes in the US, to say nothing of abroad. Or wait - no, there's quite a few of those after all, aren't there?

Maybe it's collusion. Damn sneaky Yanks.

Frankly, what your reading of the above actually implies is that besides probably not being too familiar with an actual, literal razor, you have an even more passing familiarity with Ockham's.

Holy thick. Like a whale steak.

Geoff

***YAWN***

That was your first problem.

Anyway, I think it's worth mentioning that the rest of the world didn't give a weasel shit about the Middle-East before they found oil. I agree with Vincent in that, soon, oil won't be needed, and once oil is irrevelent, the Middle-East will go back to being as irrevelent as the black gold nobody will need anymore.
Dont agree with that the mideast from the time of Alexander The Great to under the Roman Empire right up to the Byzantium Empire and the crusades Europe has always sought control of that region . Be it the Silk Route in Ancient times and a bridge to trade between Europe and the Far East to be exploited by Venetian traders to todays petro ecoonmies its always been a pivotal region never a backwater . If petroleum runs out there is still a large population of consumers to be exploited by the West . That region will always be fought over , you only have to look at WWl and WW2 to see that and that was before oil was found .

Control of what we call the Middle East was at issue long before Europeans even knew where it was. The area has been the focal point of war from time immemorial. The only thing that seems to vary is whether the (stated) motivation was control of trade routes, religion, or oil. I doubt that peace will suddenly assert itself in my lifetime, or yours.

Well lets break down and see where these so called "facts" come from.

Brian Foley
As you can clearly see this is nothing but misinformation sprouted by the FBi who are on an anti-CIA rampage. Now why would the FBi do this? Simple. As we can see:

Brian Foley is really iran.
http://www.iranian.com/Appleton/2003/October/Imagine/

iran knows the CIA causing serious damage to its terrorist plans. As such iran is funding the FBi ie Brian Foley.


Now one might ask, "what about the oley?"

oley is really yole which is a type of Australian boat used by Brian Foley (a confessed Australian) to smuggle drugs into the U.S. to fund the FBi which , as proven here, is run by iran.
http://www.boatsports.com.au/yole.html

Let the truth be known.

"France threatens a nuclear strike if attacked"
What nuclear-armed country doesn't? :bugeye:

Dont agree with that the mideast from the time of Alexander The Great to under the Roman Empire right up to the Byzantium Empire and the crusades Europe has always sought control of that region . Be it the Silk Route in Ancient times and a bridge to trade between Europe and the Far East to be exploited by Venetian traders to todays petro ecoonmies its always been a pivotal region never a backwater . If petroleum runs out there is still a large population of consumers to be exploited by the West . That region will always be fought over , you only have to look at WWl and WW2 to see that and that was before oil was found .I actually doubt that once the "black gold" is gone that the ME will be much of anything.

Yeah, in the past it was a major trade route by now it isn’t. Many historians mark the opening of the Suez canal with the decline of Egypt and then the rest of the ME. Not to mention that the world really doesn’t trade via pack animals much anymore.

The ME is going to have a few major problems to deal with when their main source of income ends, burgeoning populations with very poor work ethic, outdated mode of governance, highly tribal, overtly religious, loads of feuds and historical animosity.

Sure there’ll still be some trade but the place will be as poor as Africa for most people. And I just don’t think that Middle Easterners as a whole have the work ethic (like the Japanese or Chinese) to pull it off when the wells run dry.

Can you think of something that the ME will have to offer when oil runs dry and their economies collapse? If so then what?

Can you think of something that the ME will have to offer when oil runs dry and their economies collapse? If so then what?

Oil will not run dry out for a long time and only if the abiotic oil theory proves to be false, they have time.

Well lets break down and see where these so called "facts" come from.

Brian Foley
As you can clearly see this is nothing but misinformation sprouted by the FBi who are on an anti-CIA rampage. Now why would the FBi do this? Simple. As we can see:

Brian Foley is really iran.
http://www.iranian.com/Appleton/2003/October/Imagine/

iran knows the CIA causing serious damage to its terrorist plans. As such iran is funding the FBi ie Brian Foley.


Now one might ask, "what about the oley?"

oley is really yole which is a type of Australian boat used by Brian Foley (a confessed Australian) to smuggle drugs into the U.S. to fund the FBi which , as proven here, is run by iran.
http://www.boatsports.com.au/yole.html

Let the truth be known.

That's AMAZING! I had no idea that Brian Foley was Iran. But the logic seems sound enough by Foleyan standards.

Geoff

***YAWN***

Hehe. No response? Sad.

Geoff

i, for one, am tired of brian foley stinking up the forum with the same topic over and over again, repeated in every single thread.
if he wanted to talk about israel/the nations that hate israel, isnt there a palestine/israel thread sticky?

come on, mods...lets clean this pigsty up.
:m:

i, for one, am tired of brian foley stinking up the forum with the same topic over and over again, repeated in every single thread.

Hey, man, it's not his fault that Israel has their hands in everything international, especially our current events.

I guess instead of talking about an important threat such as Israel, you'd much rather hear about snakes befriending hampsters or kids swimming in crocodile pools..

- N

naw, my point was that the topic should be discussed in the sticky thread of this sub-forum.
i counted earlier today, and over half of the topics were made by brian foley. every single one of them is about the same damn thing: how much he hates israel, and how the arabs in the middle east are victims.

regardless of my views on this one topic, shouldnt there just be a "brian foley commemorative sticky" or something? i mean...jesus christ....

and ill pass on the hamster/crocodile idea. :D
:m:

I dunno. I don't think Israel "has its hand in everything international", but at the same time I don't think I could much blame them after the treatment the Jews have got for the past 2000 years, to say nothing of 1939, 1941 (Europe and the Middle East), 1947, 1948, 1967 and 1973. I think I'd probably use whatever I could to ensure there'd never be another Holocaust, and this is basically their position as well.

Gentile Geoff

i, for one, am tired of brian foley stinking up the forum with the same topic over and over again, repeated in every single thread.
if he wanted to talk about israel/the nations that hate israel, isnt there a palestine/israel thread sticky?

come on, mods...lets clean this pigsty up.
:m:
Isnt that what you are doing in the religion forum ?
naw, my point was that the topic should be discussed in the sticky thread of this sub-forum.
i counted earlier today, and over half of the topics were made by brian foley. every single one of them is about the same damn thing: how much he hates israel, and how the arabs in the middle east are victims.

regardless of my views on this one topic, shouldnt there just be a "brian foley commemorative sticky" or something? i mean...jesus christ....

and ill pass on the hamster/crocodile idea. :D
:m:
Fuck mate , you need a life of your own , when your not posting religious articles your chasing illusionary anti Christs , and I have the pleasure of being your new fixiation ...........Great .

I guess instead of talking about an important threat such as Israel, you'd much rather hear about snakes befriending hampsters or kids swimming in crocodile pools..

- N
Thats the idea , shut down all criticisms of Israel , the dead give away is when they call you a Jew Hater . The funny thing is all my recent posts have been about Iran and America not Israel , yet they equate anything mideast with Israel , the only time Israel is introduced on these threads is by them . This devil I believe is a Zionist/Christian nut similar to Vincent and kiwi .

im jewish.
i was yesterday when i told you that.
i will be tomorrow, as well.
i am not a zionist, as i am against the expansion of israeli influence in the middle east.
just so happens that i disagree with just about every biased thing you have to say.

im jewish.
So we finally get to the rerason of your unprovoked insults .
i was yesterday when i told you that.
You didnt tell me that yesterday .

Well lets break down and see where these so called "facts" come from.

Brian Foley
As you can clearly see this is nothing but misinformation sprouted by the FBi who are on an anti-CIA rampage. Now why would the FBi do this? Simple. As we can see:

Brian Foley is really iran.
http://www.iranian.com/Appleton/2003/October/Imagine/

iran knows the CIA causing serious damage to its terrorist plans. As such iran is funding the FBi ie Brian Foley.


Now one might ask, "what about the oley?"

oley is really yole which is a type of Australian boat used by Brian Foley (a confessed Australian) to smuggle drugs into the U.S. to fund the FBi which , as proven here, is run by iran.
http://www.boatsports.com.au/yole.html

Let the truth be known.

Hey crazy , you also read fortunes ?

"France threatens a nuclear strike if attacked"
What nuclear-armed country doesn't? :bugeye:
Im just trying to figure out why such a comment was made by Chirac and the intended target , thats all .

Well ... the World Events forum has kind of turned into a Iran nuclear discussion forum but I suppose that news is just the most newsworthy, for now.

The endless mudslinging is rather pointless, aside from its entertainment value, and makes up a very large portion of threads like these :p

Russia only a possible supporter? No, Russia will be fully supporting Iran in the event of a war, considering they have sold billions of dollars in arms to Iran already. I'll disregard that map.

Is that 'support' or 'profiteering'?

the dead give away is when they call you a Jew Hater
The dead giveaway of what, exactly?

That you're a Jew Hater.

Geoff

Well it's pretty obsolete, since terrorism doesn't require state sponsorship. We already got rid of Afghanistan's support for Al Quida. He seems to be thinking in cold war terms, where the only enemies are states. The new situation is ethnic and religious conflict that transcends national borders.
The terrorists would be nowhere if they are not funded, supported and protected by (powerful) states. There is no terrorist outfit or individual worth his name who would be there but for state protection and encouragement.

The US of course can't wash its hands off. It has shrewdly created many 'terrorists' where there were none --- for its own economic interests in the Muslim world. It remained silent while the terrorists were gunning down the entire world. The US woke up to the problem quite late, after 9/ 12 happened, and in a a tragic way, it is has brought hope for the rest of the world, because now the US has stopped protecting terrorists in the name of 'freedom'.

Funny, free societies only wake up to the threat of terrorism when their own society or people are threatened. They willingly harbour terrorists in the name of freedom when they kill others.

The terrorists would be nowhere if they are not funded, supported and protected by (powerful) states. There is no terrorist outfit or individual worth his name who would be there but for state protection and encouragement.
Two words: "Fanaticism" and "Businessmen".
These can fund terrorist cells far better than governments.

Fund, yes - but protect? That's another matter.