Missiles one minute, cheese and crackers the next, bombs out of one plane and wind up radios out the other (what, no MP3 players?).
Today I heard that there were no attacks on Friday, because it's a sacred day for the Muslims:confused: :confused: :confused: Oh but of course.. it's a sacred day (I wonder how many American service men are actually Muslims)!

This is such a sick 'war' if you can call it a war, (after all no one's fighting back, or hardly). Like some demented Disney fantasy (is Bin Ladin a CGI?). What they need is more pop-corn and new prayer mats next Friday! Big Macs on Saturday.

BTW, most of the American food and freebies is being burnt by the hardliners and the Aid agency stuff is collected by merchants who sell it on at war prices!

Well, considering how important this particular religious holiday season is to the Muslims--especially the extremist Muslims--who are using every thing they can to turn this "engagement" into a holy war, (even though moderate Muslims don't want that), I suppose the politicians are covering 'our' butts in ways they think appropriate. They're being choosy about which sore points to poke.

Not everything these world leaders do is going please all. But there is some method to their madness.

It's a precarious balance.

Glad all of these choices aren't left up to me.

I think that the only substanatal opposition President Bush will get will be by anyone who thinks he's being too soft. After Sept. 11, the anti-war crowd was virtually stripped down to its core, and I don't see it growing back any time soon, at least not under these circumastances. Bush and his aides are doing an incredible job of getting their point across, almost genious. By actually being clear in their doctrine that, in fact, they are only hitting the terrorists (and they do that by helping those who critics feared would be negatively affected) they are at once showing that the terrorists are being hit real hard, and that the mission is so efficient that very few others will be hit, only helped. This war is beautiful politics, my friends, brilliant. The fact that Bush is sincere behind the politics makes it incredible.

Originally posted by tablariddim
(I wonder how many American service men are actually Muslims)!


Official number is 4000. Most of them are black and others are converts from Saudia Arabia. While our forces were there. That number increased rapidly after the deployment in Saudi lands.
Info is from NBC meet the press. I am not sure how old was that.

Only hitting the terrorists? Didn't they accidentally wipe out a village and this morning on the radio I heard they had hit a red cross building. OOps...

But in a war one must expect "collateral damage"....even if it's a sensitive, New Age war.

After all, weren't the first four known casualties of the assault United Nations landmine workers who were "too close" to the target? Ouch. Such is war, such is war.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

If I might ...After Sept. 11, the anti-war crowd was virtually stripped down to its core, and I don't see it growing back any time soon, at least not under these circumastancesIt's already happening.

* http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorialsopinion/134354286_raspberry16.html
* http://boston.com/dailyglobe2/289/oped/A_change_for_the_better_or_worse_+.shtml
* http://boston.com/dailyglobe2/289/oped/We_re_losing_the_psychological_battle+.shtml

Mr Raspberry's column I offer without further comment. Mr Carroll writes an interesting piece on what we may or may not accomplish by our actions. Ms Vennochi paints an interesting portrait of the hawkish psychology of the conflict. These are from today, so yes, it is true that these voices had not registered yet when you wrote of the stripped-down peace movement. But that's part of the process.

* http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8710-2001Oct4.html

This piece, written by E.J. Dionne for the October 5 Washington Post reflects on the anti-pacifism that was taking place in the country that week or two.

* http://www.arizonarepublic.com:80/opinions/benson/101301benson.html

A Steve Bensen cartoon from a few days ago; I think it's rather cute. It speaks for itself.

Those who assume such notions as the anti-war movement being stripped down need to recall that we're technically not at war. Nonetheless, the peace movement, composed of pacifists, still has a few problems with the military action undertaken. In the first couple of weeks, activity seemed restricted to reviews of American history (foreign policy especially), appeals for diplomatic solutions, cultural education, cross-cultural solidarity, and other such generally healthy activities that we need more of in our communitites, anyway. Part of the point is that Americans generally don't understand a thing about the people in Afghanistan; another part of that point is that Americans don't understand the full implications of their own history. We treat events as if they are isolated and static, ideals upon which we might reflect. People don't seem to consider the interconnectedness of myriad events. Most of the people I know find no irony in the fact that Poppy Bush's two big military campaigns--Panama and Iraq--both challenged dictators installed by the machinations of the CIA during his own tenure. Why is this? What, did these noble gentlemen corrupt overnight? No, they were vicious and wrong when we built them up. In other words, yes, we need Americans to be more educated and less political in their considerations of war.

But there's where your peace movement's been. And they may have held themselves to that if it wasn't for the, uh, brilliant ( :rolleyes: ) political move of demonizing your own critics during the nation's darkest hour, nor that beautiful ( :rolleyes: ) maneuver of showing our allies the "evidence" but not the people who asked for it before turning someone over to a bloodthirsty nation with a reasonable reputation for duplicity and idiocy.Bush and his aides are doing an incredible job of getting their point across, almost genious. By actually being clear in their doctrine that, in fact, they are only hitting the terrorists (and they do that by helping those who critics feared would be negatively affected) they are at once showing that the terrorists are being hit real hard, and that the mission is so efficient that very few others will be hit, only helped.Well, I don't know about genius. But there's a difference between doctrine and practice, as any Christian can tell you. While it's true that we didn't know about bombing the Red Cross when you wrote your opinion, do you really think we're only hitting the bad guys? The only reason the mission looks so efficient is because they're shooting at fairly obvious military targets, which the citizens should be smart enough to stay the hell away from, and then equipment out in the middle of the desert. We have not, I noticed in today's news, begun attacking "troop concentrations". Besides, it appears we have slammed a few civilian centers by intent or accident, so the efficiency of the mission is only statistically encouraging. You'll notice that when politicians and media talk about the fact that this won't be a "clean war", they're talking about the idea of our military personnel dying in a war. This thought seems to upset some Americans: We should be able to have a war without any of our boys dying! But nobody, it seems, points out that no war is clean, and that "enemy" civilians will die because nobody really cares. The problem with war is that you're killing people for pride.

The larger point being that the peace movement is still strong; its leaders watched carefully, and so far I think it's being careful. The rising media voices reflect thought, hope, and also a duty to remind people that just because one thinks it feels good doesn't mean it's right. Jim McDermott, a Democratic Congressman from Washington state, put it well.McDermott said that he and many other members of Congress considered voting with Lee last month but wanted to support the president and give him a free hand to act.

"In this case, I couldn't bring myself to vote no. He has to have the power to do something, and at that time it wasn't clear what was going on," McDermott said. At the time, he said Bush should act slowly and thoughtfully.

Yesterday, McDermott criticized the speed with which the president acted and his decision to notify only a handful of congressional leaders.

"I miss the point of needing to strike now. He has not made that clear to anybody, either in his public statements or anything I've heard in the Congress," he said. * http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/PrintStory.pl?document_id=134351481&zsection_id=268448406&slug=mcdermott09m0&date=20011009

We'll see if that link works ....

Genius politics would have been to bring the Islamic world to our side for the diplomatic push to hand over bin Laden. Brilliant politics would have been to convince the Taliban to hand over bin Laden. Beautiful politics includes securing China's support in the war against terrorism; I recall reading in the AP wire that they intend to do us the favor of taking out the nasty Tibetan terrorists.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

Tiassa is obviously unaware that the leader of the Taliban is married to Bin Laden's daughter.

Brad Rules

I'm sure there's a point to that you would like to fill us in on.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

The point is..... what kind of person would turn on his brother-in-law? Osama is family, the leader of the Taliban will not turn on him.

Brilliant leadership would be to take out the Taliban and replace it with a government that represents all of Afghanistan, treats women as humans and is not a destabilizing force in the region. Your solutions would leave the Afghanis stuck under a ruthless regime. You may not care what happens to the Afghani people, there are people out there who do.....

The point is..... what kind of person would turn on his brother-in-law? Osama is family, the leader of the Taliban will not turn on him. Well, Brad Rules, what happens when one realizes that one's brother-in-law is endangering one's own vision of fulfilling God's will? We need not here consider that jeopardy coming merely from the idea of sponsoring such evil acts of terrorism, but in the sense that the Taliban will no longer be able to lead their people to God, as such. Are we actually assuming the Taliban has the ability to hand over bin Laden? Al Qaeda can do this to the United States; what can it do to Afghanistan?Brilliant leadership would be to take out the Taliban and replace it with a government that represents all of Afghanistan, treats women as humans and is not a destabilizing force in the region. I agree. We'll call it brilliant when it happens.Your solutions would leave the Afghanis stuck under a ruthless regime. Not necessarily. You're jumping to conclusions because you don't seem to want to think this through.

We have proof that this is bin Laden, right? That is, at the time we started bombing the heck out of things? Now--What is so troubling about the idea of showing that to the Taliban? How is it "negotiating with terrorists" to provide proof of one's accusations? The problem with Bush's approach is essentially one of "I say I have proof and so that's good enough."

So, assuming that we have proof, for a president wouldn't lie, right? So, assuming that we have proof, is there not a diplomatic aspect yet untried? Such as presenting it to nations other than those who have agreed to support us? Perhaps then, the "world's problem" could be handled by the world? As Congressman McDermott of Washington state noted, have we really thought this through? Have we really arrived at this last resort so quickly? Is there truly no other way?

I think you're well out of line with your assertion; like I noted, it would be brilliant to build a proper government in Afghanistan, and we'll call it brilliant when it happens. In the meantime, it's a farcical pseudo-war.You may not care what happens to the Afghani people, there are people out there who do.....Funny how people didn't seem to care about it before 9/11. What, was it right and proper up until then? If this is about "people" in nations, then take a look at what needs to be done in the world. Or should we wait for those other nations filled with people in need to hurt us so we can show them our compassion with bombs? This isn't just about the present; it reflects heavily on the past and will speak much of the future. And that's why warfare is wrong: violence begets future violence.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

Tiassa,


You must have missed Bin Ladens and the Talibans press releases when we started bombing.... in their statements they not only admitted that they were responsible but they made actual demands on our government in order for them to stop the terrorism. One does not have to prove murder to the murderer.... one has to prove it to his peers. The Taliban is controlled by Bin Laden.... you may be the only one on the planet that does not recognize that fact.


The proof in the pudding......

http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/terrorism/diplomacy/1017footsoldiers.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,314413-412,00.shtml


Tiassa, INFORMED opinions are always superior to UNINFORMED opinions.

I think it is comforting to know that many are still asking questions and wanting answers. Time will tell. Considering the faith that we are placing in our leaders--much of it being blind--I think we should demand a satisfactory outcome: an end to terrorism and democracy in Afghanistan. Americans should expect no less. Yes, we deserve that much satisfaction. I could support and sympathize with such a movement.

Originally posted by Brad Rules
Tiassa,


You must have missed Bin Ladens and the Talibans press releases when we started bombing.... in their statements they not only admitted that they were responsible but they made actual demands on our government in order for them to stop the terrorism.

NO ONE has admitted liability, where'd you get your news?

Bin Ladin praised the perpetrators and said they couldn't have done it if God hadn't willed it. But he did not say that he planned it or gave the order for it. That is not an admittance.
Who then? Good question.

Today an Israeli minister was shot dead. The Palestinians ANNOUNCED it immediately. Every time a genuine terrorist organisation commits murder/s of a political enemy for its cause, it ANNOUNCES it. Otherwise there'd be NO POINT would there?

So far, NO ONE has claimed responsibility for the Anthrax scare. And a scare is all it is, designed to keep the sheep in favour of the continuing 'war' against (Moslim) terrorism, but just who's behind it? If they were serious terrorists, wouldn't they have just contaminated some supermarkets or water systems and affected a few thousand victims at once and announce it? Are we to believe that religious fanatics are now in the business of secretly playing terrorising mind games more suited to the X files and dark American culture? Doh, there's a clue!

Bush and his aides are doing an incredible job of getting their point across, almost genious.



If Arafat does not hand over the killers, cabinet secretary Gideon Saar said Israel would "act against the Palestinian Authority in the way currently accepted by the international community to act against a leadership that supports terror."


I got the above quote from an AOL news source. Well, it seems like the word "terror" is quite a liberating platform. A platform upon which unscrutinized governments can justify the use of force. justify it with impunity from the unquestioning masses that stare slack-jawed into the television that bathes their minds in programming designed to promote compliance.

Brad RulesYou must have missed Bin Ladens and the Talibans press releases when we started bombing.... in their statements they not only admitted that they were responsible but they made actual demands on our government in order for them to stop the terrorism. One does not have to prove murder to the murderer.... one has to prove it to his peers. The Taliban is controlled by Bin Laden.... you may be the only one on the planet that does not recognize that fact.


The proof in the pudding......
Um ... if the proof is in the pudding, did you then post the wrong links by accident? I don't see your point validated in there. Where is that admission of responsibility?INFORMED opinions are always superior to UNINFORMED opinions.I tend to agree. Let me know when you get one.

In the meantime, I'm happy to wait for you to fix your links to reflect articles which, uh, "prove" your assertions. But since you're so well-informed, I'm sure it's not too much trouble at all, is it, Brad? Really, man ... I already know you're wrong; I'm just amused by your smugness in light of the fact that you blew the point with citations that don't accomplish anything toward your point.

It's why it's better, Brad Rules to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it.

Let me know when you've got your citations straight.

:rolleyes:,
Tiassa :cool:

Machaeon,

These animals are flying jets into high rises.

These animals are spreading anthrax through the mail.... scaring postal employees so bad that the United States is in danger of losing mail service.

Perhaps you will finally get the picture when these animals release small pox (which Iraq is rumored to have) into our society. With a 90+% mortality rate, western civilization would cease to exist and we would devolve back into the dark ages... just like they desire.

Kill the fungus now or be consumed by it. Paranoid fanatics like you fighten me much more than our government. Fanatics blow up abortion clinics. Fanatics send anthrax in the mail. Fanatic followers of David Koresch burned themselves up in Waco. A fanatic caused the Oklahoma City bombing. Fanatics are responsible for bombing, murder and mayhem all over the world. The worst thing about a fanatic is that they blame the handiwork of other fanatics on government conspiracies. For example, many middle eastern fanatics are saying that the World Trade Center bombing was the result of an Israeli conspiracy. If I was in charge, I would impose the death penalty on lunatics who promulgate conspiracy theorists. It is they who may in the end bring about the end of the world. They are the cancer. They are the disease.

Tiassa, there is no need to be discourteous. Your post was nothing other than a bunch of insults strung together in an attempt to make me feel bad. I will debate you when you decide to be civil again.

Brad,
You have no proof to back up ur statement. There is no official confirmation of Anthrax coming from terrorist groups or and individual like a UniBomber. Who happened to be our countryman. Now every thing we are seeing is from media. None of the so called evidence have been preseneted in front of public. WHY? What is there to hide?? Not enough support to back up their statesments?? I am not saing that he didn't do it but I can't prove that he did either. We are full of S*** right now and using all our BS sources and so called agencies but we can't track the damn mail full of Anthrax. They can track back the postal stamp and then search the whole area for suspects but we are not doing it???or are we?. Now I can assume that we pissed off Jewish lobby so bad during elections I can assume they are taking advantage and doing this??? But I am not. Since there is no backing. Now I have a question for you. Why are you paying for cirmes of Israel??? Why my countrymen pay for some other country? Isn't that one of the main reason that OBL guy is pissed??? Both parties in middle east are wrong but they should let each other live in peace. Let Israel be happy and Let Plastanians live in their own state. I don't know what is so hard about it?
I am not sure I think we went after something bigger then OBL or Afghanistan. I think there is more then what we can see. And for you I think i say think for urself too put some thoughtss togather. Don't belive all you see in media.
:rolleyes:

Brad Rules:
These animals are flying jets into high rises.

These animals are spreading anthrax through the mail.... scaring postal employees so bad that the United States is in danger of losing mail service.


Thus far, the anthrax attacks strike me as similar to the Oklahoma bombing. There has been absolutley no proof of Bin Laden involvement, and the method behind the attacks appears very odd. It is possible, but let's not go blaming anyone before you even have the slightest clue of who's responsible.


The worst thing about a fanatic is that they blame the handiwork of other fanatics on government conspiracies.

The worst thing about a government is that it blames the handiwork of fanatics on other governments. For example, the US and Bin Laden (Afghanistan). The US and the anthrax outbreak (Iraq).

You seem pretty quick to judge yourself anyway, regardless of evidence. As with the conspiracy theorists you argue are unable to see things clearly, I would argue that you only subscribe to theories which conform to your worldview rather than the 'facts', such as they are.

This is not a conflict about the West v. Islam or Palestine v. Israel or Arabs v. US. It's about all of that, and more. The solution really isn't going to be a military one, and it isn't going to be simple.

Tell me, what actually happens when the US gets Bin Laden? String him up, try him, shoot him, imprison him? It makes little difference, he'll become a martyr because the cause if this underlying tension will not be addressed - the symptoms will be treated but that's it. What does the US do? Find someone new to go after? Quietly back off? Retreat into newly unfree US?

There's no way to win like this. I know it feels nice to see all your tax dollars falling on Red Cross depots and disused airfields in Afghanistan. All that sexy hardware and talk of surgical strikes and cool jets with tough, disciplined men in the world's best military doing a man's job. Probably sends a tingle down your spine when you see the nightly video on CNN. Fade in US flag and square jawed American soldier saluting as the star-bangled banner plays. These are powerful images. They have to be, it's nationalism. It's hard to get around the emotion and togetherness when you feel under siege.

But ask youself this, will it really, REALLY make you safer? Deal with the roots of the problem? If yes, we disagree, but try to see an alternative. It's not just about a bunch of wimpy, haven't got the balls, Arab, Bin Laden sympathisers. It's a response to how we can achieve security for all. I'd be first in line to fight Hitler's Germany and show no mercy, there was no other option. But that doesn't mean a military response is ALWAYS the only, or right option. I think in this case it's more harmful than beneficial, and plays right into Bin Laden's hands.

Captain,

What could the American government done to prevent Tim McViegh from blowing up a federal office building in Oklahoma City? What change in their behaviour would have prevented that horror? The way I see it, the only thing they could have done to prevent it was to imprison or kill McVeigh. Terrorists are terrorists. There is only way to stop them.... The terrorist group Osama is part of has been linked to attacks in many countries all over the world. Indonesia, the Phillipines, India, Somalia, Britain, France, etc.... Your explanation seems ignorant to the world wide spread of terror brought by Osama. His goal is to create a world which is ruled by Islam. He wants nothing less than global domination. There is no negotiation possible with a person/organization that has this mind set.

Kill him and all his top advisors. Let those who lead terrorists organizations know that it is they who will die!!! They are used to their followers dying, not themselves. When the financiers, planners and leaders of terrorist organizations die.... they are not nearly as replacable as the rabble which they employ.

Crush some governments along the way, this will re-emphasize the point that payback for attacks on America are something to fear. If middle eastern government leaders believe that they will be killed by American forces due to sponsership of terrorism.... terrorist networks in that country will wither and die. It is all about consequences.

Enough talking, it is time for the towel-headed camel-jockeying women-beating baby-killing islam-spewing sheep-humping terrorist-loving gutter scum to die.... preferably in massive quantities. Time for America to show the world the kind of carnage and terror a superpower can lay on a third world nation. I am hoping for kill ratios on the order of 10,000 to 1.

It is getting more and more obvious from your posts that you are no more than a racist bigot, but never mind, perhaps you might learn something to the benefit of your character here.

I'd like you to ponder something you probably haven't even heard about. For a number of years now, parts of Indonesia have been regurlarly turned into blood baths by warring factions of 'Christians' and 'Moslims'. The method of slaugher between these people who actually live side by side, is unspeakably horrendous and bloodcurdling. The people themselves don't even know WHY they are fighting, it's become a sort of tit for tat thing with no end in sight.
A friend of mine who spent 3 months travelling around with a bunch of Moslim fighters and witnessed atrocities by both sides first hand was recently speaking with an Indonesian official at their embassy in ****** and he told my friend in confidence that Jakarta (the capital) was providing BOTH factions with money and arms. This government is actually promoting the civil war in its own country! Weird no? But somebody must have something to gain out of all this eventually.
Now, do you know who Indonesias greatest benefactor is? I'll give you 3 guesses, one is a U.

Now I'm curious: Divide and conquer? Economy? No hints. Just come out and say what you believe.

More links for those interested:

http://www.flinet.com/~politics/jihad/jihad.htm

http://www.channel4000.com/news/stories/news-980820-153134.html

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/binladen000127.html

http://www.ict.org.il/articles/bin-ladin.htm



In contrast to Osama and the world which he wishes to create, I see the security of ours and the freedom of exchange which we now share here. This guy is not the catalyst of liberation, but of war and starvation and repression. The zealot and his cohorts hold us responsible for the state of their world; but, in truth, it is they who bring to ruin everything which they touch. It would be a greater sin to leave the devil loose and not involve ourselves.

<i>"However, the Saudi regime imposed on the people a life that does not appeal to the <b>free believer</b>. They wanted the people to eat and drink and celebrate the praise of God, but if the people wanted to encourage what is right and forbid what is wrong, they can't. Rather, the regime dismisses them from their jobs and in the event they continued to do so, they are detained in prisons. I have rejected to live this submissive life, by God's favor, Praise and Gratitude be to Him, that is not befitting of man let alone a believer. So, I waited for the chance until, God, Praise and Glory be to Him, has made it possible for me to leave the country of the Two Holy Places. I hope God, Praise and Glory be to Him, would confer upon me His favor to return one day when God's law rules in that country."

--Osama</i>


Are we to believe he is fighting for <i>freedom of religious belief</i>?

Tiassa, there is no need to be discourteous. Your post was nothing other than a bunch of insults strung together in an attempt to make me feel bad. I will debate you when you decide to be civil again.Fair enough; if that's how you perceive things, Brad, I'm fine with that. In the future, however, please make an effort to make your "proof" reflect the assertion. If you find it discourteous to have this pointed out to you, then that's your own damn problem. If you consider your unsupported assertion that bin Laden has claimed responsibility (admitted was your word) for the 9/11 bombings to be informed (your word), that, too, is your own problem.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

<i>"But somebody must have something to gain out of all this eventually. Now, do you know who Indonesias greatest benefactor is? I'll give you 3 guesses, one is a U."</i>

Now I'm curious: Divide and conquer? Economy? Who gains what? U.S. aid dollars? I can see that. I think that is an interesting thought. Please elaborate.

Tiassa,

Can't we be nice to each other? Your words are like daggers in my heart. I can't stand fighting with you. If only I could reach you.....

You win, your point is conceded. I read the entire transcript and it could be inferred (though not directly stated) from the text that Osama was behind the bombing. His threat of continued violence was more overt.

I did provide a link which explained that Osama is probably pulling the strings of the Taliban. Given that the Taliban and Osama appear to be one and the same, what justification do you have that we should give them any information? If I assist someone in robbing a bank, is the state obligated to prove to me that I did it? I KNOW I did it.... I don't need proof of it. It is for this reason that your contention that we should turn over sensitive intelligence to Bin Laden's henchmen (the Taliban) is wrong. Giving this kind of intelligence to the Taliban is teasonous. It puts Americans at risk. Shame on you for advocating it.

These animals are flying jets into high rises.

I do not think that terrorist attacks on civilians are to be welcomed by inaction by those whose mandate is to protect them from foriegn threats. I am just a little disturbed by the actions which can be justified by the indiscrinimate definition of "terrorism". Also, just because retaliation may be justified does not neccessarily mean it is wise.

The fact that you consider those who execute these deeds, evil or not, as animals, leads me to believe that you have not made a diligent effort to understand the reasoning behind their actions. To operate on the assumption that those who commit horrible acts are not humans that possess intelligence and the power to reason, is not only dangerous, it is counterproductive to understanding how we may prevent succumbing to the same desire to enact violence.

And here is something that I believe addresses the original issue of this thread.

The US Military Machine has spent a lot of its spintime on the generous drops that the Galaxies have been making over the deserts of Afghanistan.
What's inside? Lets take a look. A transister radio with one available station: ours. Some MREs with large emblazoned Stars and Stripes!



They were droped in huge palates into the middle of the desert in a country supersaturated by bouncing betties and personnel land mines.

So, here come these huge palates down from the sky. These people know what a Trojan Horse is. Its not an easy sell. I know that if a palate crashed down on my Camel in the middle of the night, I might be a little apprehensive.

So, in my opinion, this was obviously a ploy. Sugar down with the bitter pill. Like the abusive lover who keeps on telling his wife that he beats her because he loves her.

Eat lead and die you taliban trash.....


http://www.hunting-pictures.com/members/stealthycat/ac_130.jpg

You do confirm the view that you are sexually aroused by the military and death. Slightly worrying, but there are similar people out there. I'm sure you'd be happy surrounded by tough men, gun oil and a howitzer! :D Hey, each to their own. Whatever floats your boat.

But as for your arguments - riddled with inconsistency I'm afraid. Let's take a look:

What could the American government done to prevent Tim McViegh from blowing up a federal office building in Oklahoma City? What change in their behaviour would have prevented that horror?

So, the US can't really do anything until they strike. And you talk of a US terrorist. Let's remeber as you point out - "terrorists are terrorists". Yet...

Crush some governments along the way, this will re-emphasize the point that payback for attacks on America are something to fear. If middle eastern government leaders believe that they will be killed by American forces due to sponsership of terrorism.... terrorist networks in that country will wither and die. It is all about consequences.

So presumably the US must respond to a terrorist attack by killing those responsible and crippling the government. Well, er, shouldn't the midwest have been flattened for McVeigh's crime? Or do we not count the country he's from in this case?

Your explanation seems ignorant to the world wide spread of terror brought by Osama. His goal is to create a world which is ruled by Islam. He wants nothing less than global domination. There is no negotiation possible with a person/organization that has this mind set.

I think you've been watching too many Bond films. He wants the Saudi government to fall, US troops out of the region and ISrael destroyed. Maybe extremist, but hardly world domination.

I never said anyone should negotiate with Bin Laden or not try to get him and try him. Just don't see the need to kill lots of innocent Afghans to achieve it - in fact, it is counter-productive to the aim of defeating terrorism. But hey, it turns you on so that's okay. You wanna lose, go right ahead, just a shame that some of us face more danger because of US stupidity.

I'll let you get back to that 'sexy' gunship. Erm, enjoy....

Captain,

Come on, are you really trying to infer that the United States government aided and abetted Timothy McViegh in much the same manner that the Taliban aided and abetted Bin Laden? That claim is utterly preposterous and unworthy of response. The United States government had Tim killed when they found out he was responsible... they are going to do the same with the scum that perpertrated 9/11....

If your bleeding heart can't stand the sight of good old fashioned American justice, perhaps you should look away.

It is somewhat sad when a person finds themself unable to distinguish between a country "aiding and abetting" terrorists and a country having terrorists in it's borders unknowingly. There is a massaive, catastrophic difference between the two situations.

I'm trying to find out more, will post some thoughts when I get my information.

It is somewhat sad when a person finds themself unable to distinguish between a country "aiding and abetting" terrorists and a country having terrorists in it's borders unknowingly. There is a massaive, catastrophic difference between the two situations.I agree entirely. Now, what are we going to do about the School of the Americas? And why do we strike deals with ugly regimes and give them money and equipment to give terrorists to use against us?

We do aid and abet terrorists with taxpayer money; some of our political allies support terrorists with their own funds as well.If your bleeding heart can't stand the sight of good old fashioned American justice, perhaps you should look away.Good ol' fashioned American justice, eh? Kill everything in the name of peace? People "looked away" while we pressed the indigenous tribes. People "looked away" while we funded death squads until they couldn't help but notice. Judging by the tone of your posts, Brad Rules, I'd say this isn't about Justice, but about your own bloodlust and hatred.

* http://www.sciforums.com/f37/s3cf67691deaa79d5957ebb6c3fe164d6/showthread.php?threadid=4170&pagenumber=1

That invective would have been nice to consider a piece of performance art, a sarcstic representation of the stereotypical war-hawk; but you seem to believe these things are true. Extending from the terrorists, you called for the extermination of all Islam: I was ambivalent about the ragheads until they killed American civillians. Now I hate them from the bottom of my core. Lay waste to them. Bury them all. Annihilate them. This is an understandable sentiment when one is angry, and also a demonstration of why one shouldn't speak when angry. It's also a little ignorant in its generalizations: these are not the first American civilians killed by Muslim extremists; Lebanese terrorists have kidnapped and killed Americans before, as well. Be a little more specific when you're screaming for genocide.

It looks more like typical Western pettiness when you challenge the extremists on such a broad level: Lets take the gloves off and see how powerful their Allah really is. I figure we can wipe them out in the space of a year or so. We have Christians working against liberty in the United States and, yes, extremists have killed American citizens. (Yes, there's a slight difference between a doctor here and there and thousands dead, but that's why you shouldn't generalize hateful invective; you should be very precise about who you want murdered.) Should we, then, take on the Christian God and find out how powerful he really is? Go after the churches that breed fundamentalist intolerance and create the danger? And then take on any Christians who object? Hey, we've got the technology .... :rolleyes: Come on, are you really trying to infer that the United States government aided and abetted Timothy McViegh in much the same manner that the Taliban aided and abetted Bin Laden? That claim is utterly preposterous and unworthy of response. I figure I'm missing a post somewhere, since I don't see this specific claim. I'm reviewing Captain Canada's posts, but so far I'm not seeing it. Which utterly preposterous claim, I'm wondering, are you responding to, despite its unworthiness?

The reasons why the WTC was bombed deserve at least as much respect as who to kill in revenge and how best to do it.

I understand, though, that it's difficult to look at this issue when you want to join the president in pretending we're utterly blameless. But the violence we sponsor and create in Islamic nations has begotten violence against our nation and communities, and that has begotten violence against Afghanistan.
I did provide a link which explained that Osama is probably pulling the strings of the Taliban. I thought it prudent to point out that this claim takes on interesting light in consideration of the USA Today article claiming the opposite, that the Taliban approves of al Qaeda's actions: http://usatoday.com/news/attack/2001/10/18/taliban-approval.htm

This seems to demonstrate that we really don't know what's going on, since the information available seems to indicate disparate situations. Perhaps this is an indicator that Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA) had a valuable point when he asked if our executive had thought this action through; perhaps, indeed, he was correct to question the swiftness of this action. We refuse to show the Taliban our evidence of bin Laden's guilt, and now we see mixed messages concerning the necessary connection 'twixt bin Laden and the Taliban. This fits with the American way: shoot first and figure it out only if we absolutely have to.

And that is the problem with such fiery ejaculations as yours, Brad Rules: the implementation of such aggression and hatred does nothing except make you feel better. It accomplishes no demonstrable good.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

I agree entirely. Now, what are we going to do about the School of the Americas? And why do we strike deals with ugly regimes and give them money and equipment to give terrorists to use against us

What is this nonsense? Where do you get off making scurrilous accusations against the government of our great and benevolent nation?

People "looked away" while we pressed the indigenous tribes.

And now those tribes enjoy a standard of living that surpasses any that has ever existed in the history of mankind. Starvation, constant tribal warfare and appalling living conditions are things of the past for the tribes. They are now part of the greatest civilization on earth, a civilization that billions of people around the world would give anything to be a part of.

Extending from the terrorists, you called for the extermination of all Islam

Of course I did. It is a religion and a culture that is middle ages at best. I have never equivocated on that point. Some cultures must die for the greater good of civilization. Islam has been tried and found wanting. It is time for a good old fashioned crusade, this time we can win.


Go after the churches that breed fundamentalist intolerance and create the danger?

Well duh!!!!!! Of course we should. Not only should be abortion bombers get the death penalty, the organizations that backed them should be dismantled. Bunch of psychopathic freaks in my opinion.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/1019/p11s3-coop.html

I understand, though, that it's difficult to look at this issue when you want to join the president in pretending we're utterly blameless.

We are utterly blameless. The only Americans I blame are apologists and hand wringers like you. Step aside and let our military lay the smacketh down on their camel humping asses. Given that these animals consider women like you less valuable than their livestock, I am perplexed why you would object to our righteous retribution. They have it coming sister... in spades.

I thought it prudent to point out that this claim takes on interesting light in consideration of the USA Today article claiming the opposite, that the Taliban approves of al Qaeda's actions:

Um Tiassa.... that proves my point NOT YOURS. This is the smoking gun. From this it is obvious that the Taliban had to approve the attack on WTC for it to happen. This proves that they are accessories to the murder and are therefor deserving of nothing but death and destruction.

God, I wish I could be in one of those gunships delivering annihilation to the Taliban. Happy hunting to our heroes who are freeing the Afghanis from the Islamic heretics. Take no prisioners my friends..... take no prisoners.

What is this nonsense? Where do you get off making scurrilous accusations against the governement of our great and benevolent nation?Scurrilous? The US gov't, through the school of the Americas, has trained soldiers from various backwaters, including Indonesia, Central America, the Carribean, and other nations. Frequently, we're training death squads, such as we saw operating in Central America in the 1980's. Reagan sold weapons to Iran, essentially negotiating with terrorists. Perhaps you missed the congressional hearings into the matter. It was called Iran-Contra, in case you don't remember. Your patriotism has blinded you, it seems. Of course, Emma Goldman noted this in her famous essay on patriotism:What, then, is patriotism? "Patriotism, sir, is the last resort of scoundrels," said Dr. Johnson. Leo Tolstoy, the greatest anti-patriot of our times, defines patriotism as the principle that will justify the training of wholesale murderers; a trade that requires better equipment for the exercise of man-killing than the making of such necessities of life as shoes, clothing, and houses; a trade that guarantees better returns and greater glory than that of the average workingman.

Gustave Hervé, another great anti-patriot, justly calls patriotism a superstition--one far more injurious, brutal, and inhumane than religion. The superstition of religion originated in man's inability to explain natural phenomena. That is, when primitive man heard thunder or saw the lightning, he could not account for either, and therefore concluded that back of them must be a force greater than himself. Similarly he saw a supernatural force in the rain, and in the various other changes in nature. Patriotism, on the other hand, is a superstition artificially created and maintained through a network of lies and falsehoods; a superstition that robs man of his self-respect and dignity, and increases his arrogance and conceit.

Indeed, conceit, arrogance, and egotism are the essentials of patriotism. Let me illustrate. Patriotism assumes that our globe is divided into little spots, each one surrounded by an iron gate. Those who have had the fortune of being born on some particular spot, consider themselves better, nobler, grander, more intelligent than the living beings inhabiting any other spot. It is, therefore, the duty of everyone living on that chosen spot to fight, kill, and die in the attempt to impose his superiority upon all the others.

The inhabitants of the other spots reason in like manner, of course, with the result that, from early infancy, the mind of the child is poisoned with blood-curdling stories about the Germans, the French, the Italians, Russians, etc. When the child has reached manhood, he is thoroughly saturated with the belief that he is chosen by the Lord himself to defend his country against the attack or invasion of any foreigner. It is for that purpose that we are clamoring for a greater army and navy, more battleships and ammunition. It is for that purpose that America has within a short time spent four hundred million dollars. Just think of it--four hundred million dollars taken from the produce of the people. For surely it is not the rich who contribute to patriotism. They are cosmopolitans, perfectly at home in every land. We in America know well the truth of this. Are not our rich Americans Frenchmen in France, Germans in Germany, or Englishmen in England? And do they not squandor with cosmopolitan grace fortunes coined by American factory children and cotton slaves? Yes, theirs is the patriotism that will make it possible to send messages of condolence to a despot like the Russian Tsar, when any mishap befalls him, as President Roosevelt did in the name if his people, when Sergius was punished by the Russian revolutionists.

It is a patriotism that will assist the arch-murderer, Diaz, in destroying thousands of lives in Mexico, or that will even aid in arresting Mexican revolutionists on American soil and keep them incarcerated in American prisons, without the slightest cause or reason.

But, then, patriotism is not for those who represent wealth and power. It is good enough for the people. It reminds one of the historic wisdom of Frederick the Great, the bosom friend of Voltaire, who said: "Religion is a fraud, but it must be maintained for the masses." * http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Goldman/Writings/Anarchism/patriotism.html

It isn't so much that I think Goldman's right, Brad, but the irony that your sentiments pretty well demonstrate exactly what this Anarchist was referring to some eighty-four years ago.And now those tribes enjoy a standard of living that surpasses any that has ever existed in the history of mankind. Starvation, constant tribal warfare and appalling living conditions are things of the past for the tribes. They are now part of the greatest civilization on earth, a civilization that billions of people around the world would give anything to be a part of.And, apparently, quite a few don't want anything to do with. However, what you overlook in this is that you're justifying the means by a personalized assessment of the ends. If you want to speak of appalling living conditions, imagine being chased across three states and into Canada because the great and benevolent Americans told you to move out of your home and onto a reservation? What happened on this continent was a tragedy; Americans attempted and failed to complete a genocide, and it still goes on today. In Washington state there is presently a lawsuit filed against a tribe to dissolve its reservation; apparently, the right of Americans to take what they want for real-estate profit supersedes the treaties signed by the federal government which were forced upon the tribes, essentially, at gunpoint. Real great and benevolent. It is your patriotism that compels you to see only the benevolence in this, I think. The conceit, arrogance, and egotism to which Goldman refers are, in part, motivating factors of how we reached this nexus in the living history. That conceit, arrogance, and egotism is exactly what incites George W Bush to lament that he does not understand why people are so angry with the United States: he cannot conceive that anything we do in the world isn't benevolent.Of course I did. It is a religion and a culture that is middle ages at best. I have never equivocated on that point. Some cultures must die for the greater good of civilization. Islam have been tried and found wanting. It istime for a good old fashioned crusade, this time we can win. You tell me: do you wonder, as our president does, why parts of the international community are so furious with the US? So should we sack England and Germany along the way (Christians sacked Constantinople over doctrinal differences) or sell our children into slavery (this, too, happened)? When the fight is over should we butcher all the refugees? When Dubya said, "Crusade", the entire Islamic world took notice. Falwell's bogus retraction got more press space than George's allegedly genuine regret. When you're the president, is it somehow unwise to think before you speak?Well duh!!!!!! Of course we should. Not only should be abortion bombers get the death penalty, the organizations that backed them should be dismantled. Bunch of psychopathic freaks in my opinion. Well, at least you're consistent. How would you recommend we start the Chrsitian genocide? Should we just round 'em up, line 'em up, and shoot 'em down? Or should we launch a rocket-strike against churches on a Sunday morning? At this point, we might consider exploring your broader position: Who shouldn't be purged from the human endeavor? That is, who should not be subject to genocide, in your opinion?We are utterly blameless. The only Americans I blame are apologists and hand wringers like you. Step aside and let our military lay the smacketh down on their camel humping asses. Given that these animals consider women like you less valuable than their livestock, I am perplexed why you would object to our righteous retribution. They have it coming sister... in spades.Again I must ask why the issues of how conservative Islam treats women is so important now when we consider that it wasn't important on September 10?

However, of being blameless, I suggest you go out and learn a little history before you expound on it. Blameless? We propped up petty dictatorships in Central America, the Carribean, the Middle East, and the Orient. We train, fund, and equip terrorists and death squads. American politics views the world strangely: how can we be blameless when we fund the people who are attacking us? Consider how much we hear about the Northern Alliance; some, but not much of that pertains to how brutal they are, and the notion that Afghanistan will be no better off under Alliance rule gets little play. Will the human rights abuses of any new Afghani regime be put back into the shadows, as unimportant until someone blows up the Hancock tower or Miss Liberty? We, the People, of the United States of America, have consistently authorized our government to operate on the might-is-right basis; well ... someone popped us in the jaw, and hard. And so the idiocies begin again: righteousness, patriotism, and a stubborn refusal to consider how it got this far. It seems that most Americans think that tensions between Muslims and Americans started out of the blue when this bin Laden character rose up from nowhere and started kicking the US in the shins. Unfortunately, this is not true.

We are only blameless if we close our eyes to history, and shut our ears against the voice of common sense. Only if we ignore history altogether can we pretend we haven't wronged people.Um Tiassa.... that proves my point NOT YOURS. This is the smoking gun. From this it is obvious that the Taliban had to approve the attack on WTC for it to happen. This proves that they are accessories to the murder and are therefor deserving of nothing but death and destruction.What's funny is that we won't believe an Islamic agent when he says he bargained with a US president when Reagan negotiated with terrorists for hostages. But we will believe one who says the Taliban controls al Qaeda?

What the conflicting stories indicate is that neither you nor anyone else on this side of the conflict has much of a clue to how the two agencies interact. And what is important here, then, is that the connection 'twixt bin Laden and the Taliban becomes even more difficult to pin down, which means that we're attacking without being sure. A premature ejaculation of rage is exactly what Rep McDermott questioned.

But your point, it seems, originally, was that bin Laden controlled the Taliban. Now another news story says the opposite, and the apparent lack of clarity somehow proves clearly your point?

Of course, we could have skipped this part of the debate if George W Bush and company had bothered to show the evidence of bin Laden's guilt to anyone on the other side. Apparently, though, justifying your request for arrest and extradition with evidence is "negotiating" with terrorists. But apparently, it's unwise to meet such a simple standard when what you really want is to blow stuff up.God, I wish I could be in one of those gunships delivering annihilation to the Taliban. So go enlist. Spare the nation the agony of a draft; you remember how well the last one went, right?Happy hunting to our heroes who are freeing the Afghanis from the Islamic heretics. So when you hunt, do you shoot through everyone else to get to your game? Take no prisioners my friends..... take no prisioners.That's right: shoot first and ask questions never; take no prisoners; one shot, one kill ... :rolleyes:

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

Tiassa, lack of cohesion ruins an argument.

The US gov't, through the school of the Americas, has trained soldiers from various backwaters, including Indonesia, Central America, the Carribean, and other nations. Frequently, we're training death squads, such as we saw operating in Central America in the 1980's. Reagan sold weapons to Iran, essentially negotiating with terrorists. Perhaps you missed the congressional hearings into the matter. It was called Iran-Contra, in case you don't remember

God and Tiassa are the only ones who know what the hell Central America, the Carribean and Indonesia have to do with the crisis in the Middle East. Um.... Tiassa, if you really believe that death squads from the 80's are the backbone of Bin Ladens network, I have some swamp land in Florida you might want to take a look at. Bin Ladens network was formed out of the conflict in Afghanistan. Ok, Reagan sold weapons to Iran 15 years ago and that relates to Afghanistan and the current crisis how?

I personally have NO interest in ANYTHING coming from Berkely. They are nothing but a bunch of socialist sissies who would pee in their pants if they ever had to fight for anything.


And, apparently, quite a few don't want anything to do with. However, what you overlook in this is that you're justifying the means by a personalized assessment of the ends. If you want to speak of appalling living conditions, imagine being chased across three states and into Canada.... blah, blah, blah

Relevance to current topic 0%. Tiassa, in case you hadn't noticed before, everybody on either side of that conflict has been dead for many years. Last time I checked Indians aren't bombing building, sending anthrax in the mail, etc.... By the way, I have a smidge of Indian blood in my own veins. I imagine my great great great great indian grandfather was oppressed by all of my non-Indian relatives.... so friggin what? What is your obsession with this? It is common knowledge that our ancestors owned slaves, committed genocide on native americans, wiped out the native animal species and obliterated forests. That is pretty damn irrelevant to todays society. We aren't doing any of those things today. (Although a genocide in the Middle East sounds real good about now)

You tell me: do you wonder, as our president does, why parts of the international community are so furious with the US?

Nope, I don't wonder and I don't care. The only thing I wonder about is why aren't we killing more of them and why aren't we targetting their civillians. When they demonstrate in the streets we should send in our gunships to strafe them. When they burn American flags we should burn their cities. Absolutely no mercy or quarter should be given. The scorched earth policy of WWII should be invoked. When they come grovelling on their hands and knees like dogs, when it is the blood of their children running in the street, when they finally realize the kind of mayhem America can unleash on their backwoods ignorant assses... then maybe we can relent a little bit. America is the alpha male, America is the final rung of the evolutionary ladder.... it is time for evolution to take it's course and another stone age culture to die.


How would you recommend we start the Chrsitian genocide? Should we just round 'em up, line 'em up, and shoot 'em down?

Tiassa, nobody in the Christian community supports the terrorist anti-abotion movement. In fact they are strenously disliked by the Christian community because they give it a black eye. Anyone involved in terrorist activities or financing of them should be killed, it is as simple as that. Religious zealots scare the hell out of me.

Again I must ask why the issues of how conservative Islam treats women is so important now when we consider that it wasn't important on September 10?

It really isn't that important to me. It just establishes to the rest of the world that their deaths are no great loss. They have no humanity; therefor, no humanity is required of us when we purge these insects off of the face of the earth. We are killing them because they killed innocent Americans. The fact that they butcher their own civillians makes it that much easier for us.

Let me be clear here, as long as the next regime doesn't threaten America or America's interest, I could care less how they treat their own people. That is their business.

Tiassa, for the record it is common knowledge that Bin Laden called his mother on 9/9 and told her to watch the news because something big was going to happen on 9/11. He told her that she would see it in the news and that she wouldn't hear from him in awhile. That right there is enough evidence in and of itself. Bin Laden and the Taliban are in bed together. As such, providing any information to the Taliban puts the lives of American agents in jeopardy. To a person who is as ambivalent to American lives as you are, this is probably no big thing. The only people calling for the US to provide evidence to the Taliban are the Taliban. Enough information has been leaked to convince people of SOUND mind that Bin Laden was involved.

God and Tiassa are the only ones who know what the hell Central America, the Carribean and Indonesia have to do with the crisis in the Middle East. And as long as you compartmentalize like an American, you can keep on believing that. You're the one who said the US is blameless, not I. All that list comprises is a very few of the myriad reasons people are annoyed with the US, and also a demonstration of our hypocrisy. Stamp out terrorism? We train, fund, and equip terrorists.you really believe that death squads from the 80's are the backbone of Bin Ladens network, I have some swamp land in Florida you might want to take a look at. Bin Ladens network was formed out of the conflict in Afghanistan. Ok, Reagan sold weapons to Iran 15 years ago and that relates to Afghanistan and the current crisis how?It's negotiating with terrorists; hell, even Reagan said he wouldn't do that. Bush says he won't do that, and he's so afraid of doing that he won't ante up the proof to warrant his extradition demand. We prosecuted Clinton over a blowjob; how ridiculous is it that a sworn-to-uphold-the-constitution president is asking a nation to suspend due process in order to facilitate American "justice"? Besides, if we hadn't funded bin Laden and others in the fight against Russia, we wouldn't have empowered them. I keep expecting that, at some point, it will occur to Americans that we're spending a lot of our military fixing our own policy mistakes. The Balkans--okay, it seems the big policy mistake was waiting that long. (Let's put it this way: I remember watching an episode of Webster as a child, and recalling that the Sarajevo footage in the episode was recently outdated by the outbreak of violence; some of those buildings weren't standing. And this is Webster! It took us a while to get there ....) But hello? Noriega? (A Poppy Bush puppet.) Hussein? (A Poppy Bush puppet.) Bin Laden? (Built on American funds.) I'm sorry this conflict is so immediate and restricted to you that you can't see it. I can't explain how foolish you look frothingly supporting a warfare effort that you obviously don't understand.I personally have NO interest in ANYTHING coming from Berkely. They are nothing but a bunch of socialist sissies who would pee in their pants if they ever had to fight for anything. That's a ... bright retort. :rolleyes: I'm sure it has significance somewhere, such as in your own mind.Tiassa, in case you hadn't noticed before, everybody on either side of that conflict has been dead for many years. And your point being? :rolleyes: Look, Brad, that's ridiculous. I could just as easily point out where you wrote that Starvation, constant tribal warfare and appalling living conditions are things of the past for the tribes, and ask what the relevance of the past status of the tribes is compared to our ongoing violations of treaties (both mutual and those forced upon the tribes at gunpoint--e.g. reservations) and the perpetual squandering of tribal money by US-BIA. You seem to hold up a standard of living: yes, once they covered a continent and held their own destinies in their hands; now they're just an inconvenience to Americans. Quite the prestige, eh? It's what happens when bleeding hearts look away. We could have done away with the last 5% of the indigenous population and not even had to deal with the issue, but the bleeding hearts couldn't look away any more; nor could the living hearts.That is pretty damn irrelevant to todays societyI don't think racism, religious supremacy, and cultural extinction are irrelevant to today's society. I think the reason you want the bleeding hearts to turn away is that you envy them: they have hearts that bleed and feel. Your stone heart wills only destruction and division; or so says you.(Although a genocide in the Middle East sounds real good about now)And you wonder why people hate the United States? Look in the mirror, Brad ... after all, you just noted that racism, religious supremacy, and cultural extinction aren't relevant to today's society, yet here you are calling for exactly that, you whining, hypocritical brat. Get over yourself and try thinking for once. Just because A) it bleeds, and B) it isn't you, does not mean it needs to die.Nope, I don't wonder and I don't care. The only thing I wonder about is why aren't we killing more of them and why aren't we targetting their civillians. And you wonder why people hate the United States? :rolleyes: The repugnant philosophies you advocate, should they represent the true sentiment of America, warrant protective action against our encroachment.When they come grovelling on their hands and knees like dogs, when it is the blood of their children running in the street, when they finally realize the kind of mayhem America can unleash on their backwoods ignorant assses... then maybe we can relent a little bit. America is the alpha male, America is the final rung of the evolutionary ladder.... it is time for evolution to take it's course and another stone age culture to die.You go, honey! Woo-hoo! Be all that you can be!

Seriously, go enlist. That way, you can kill everything you want, and, if you're lucky, you'll get to die for America's "honor". And, when that happens, the world will truly be a safer place, bereft of one more frothing, American war-dog.Tiassa, nobody in the Christian community supports the terrorist anti-abotion movement.That's a broad and inaccurate statement. Should we, then, just bomb the ones that do? And then when the Christian community objects, should we bomb them, too? Because, after all, you're either with us or against us.Religious zealots scare the hell out of me.A-ha! There we go. At the heart of the matter ... yes, they scare the hell out of me, too. Your standard, wishing-for-the-end-of-the-world Christian is enough to make me jumpy; these guys with box knives ....

But you've pointed out the essential problem: you're afraid of something, therefore you want to kill it. And since you obviously don't understand what you're looking at, your zealous bloodlust oversteps its scope: it's one of the reasons why warfare is a bad idea. This tends to be the result of it. It is also the reason why religions are, for the most part, a bad idea; this tends to be the result of it.It really isn't that important to me. It just establishes to the rest of the world that their deaths are no great loss. They have no humanity; therefor, no humanity is required of us when we purge these insects off of the face of the earth. We are killing them because they killed innocent Americans. The fact that they butcher their own civillians makes it that much easier for us. And you wonder why people hate the US?Let me be clear here, as long as the next regime doesn't threaten America or America's interest, I could care less how they treat their own people. That is their business.There's that good, old-fashioned, idiotic selfishness that so endears us to the world ... :rolleyes: Tiassa, for the record it is common knowledge that Bin Laden called his mother on 9/9 and told her to watch the news because something big was going to happen on 9/11. He told her that she would see it in the news and that she wouldn't hear from him in awhile. That right there is enough evidence in and of itself. Bin Laden and the Taliban are in bed together. As such, providing any information to the Taliban puts the lives of American agents in jeopardy. To a person who is as ambivalent to American lives as you are, this is probably no big thing. The only people calling for the US to provide evidence to the Taliban are the Taliban. Enough information has been leaked to convince people of SOUND mind that Bin Laden was involved.Considering we've demanded extradition ....? Tell me, Brad, is this a war or a criminal manhunt? Are we after "justice" or defense or revenge? If "justice" is a consideration at all, we must consider that we are the United States of America, and the only thing that separates us from the loathsome tyrannies of the past is due process, which we cannot suspend in the pursuit of justice: by American definition, due process is a necessary part of justice. So, yes, we are obliged to cough up the "proof" to the world at large; if the Taliban says no, and the world agrees with us, then what's so hard about that? If the world says the proof's inadequate, who's going to stop the US from killing everything in its way? It was idiotic to consider due process part of "negotiating" with terrorists. And it still is.

Don't tell me about American freedom if we're ruling by fear. Don't tell me about liberty if we're acting on superstition. Don't tell me about justice if we're out for revenge.

Hatreds like yours, Brad Rules, will destroy us all.

Do you really wonder why people hate the US? Oh, wait ... I've read your posts: of course you don't. You're neither inclined--as per your declaration--nor capable--as per your demonstration.

Go serve your country, Brad Rules. Kill a few people you hate, work it out of your system. After all, when else are you going to get the chance to freely shoot as many "ragheads" as you want?

--Tiassa :cool:

I'm new around here, but can I just say it is refreshing to see that there are some clear thinking Americans.

Keep up the good work, Tiassa.

Um.... Tiassa, if you really believe that death squads from the 80's are the backbone of Bin Ladens network, I have some swamp land in Florida you might want to take a look at. And if you don't think that death squads are still alive and well in Central and South America, particularly Mexico, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you in N.Y.C.

they won the west after all. Just like the lucky ole Afghanis, receiving free food parcels left, right and centre. It's enough to make anyone want to fight the Americans, simply for the perks!

Funny. Good one.

Boohoohoo.... I imagine that poor Tiassa shed an ocean of tears in that last post. Tiassa, I am an alpha male hunter. I was a top athlete in high school. I was a top scholar in high school, college and GRAD school (engineering no less). I have killed two bears with a bow, I have taken out two wounded deer with nothing but a knife. I am a predator, pure and simple. I cut my teeth hunting in the Amazon basin as 5-10 year old. Back then I hunted with nothing more than a hand crafted bow which the native indians helped me build. After careful analysis of your viewpoints and personality, I believe that one word sums up my opinion of you better than any other..... PREY!!

You have an apparent obsession with things that have nothing to do with the crisis in the Middle East. I have no idea what point you are trying to prove with your incessant ramblings on the 19th century, South America and Asia. Very poor diversionary tactics at best.

I believe it is time that uncle Brad Rules sheds a little light on your obviously clouded and dark world view. There is a little country called Sudan. This is the country that has given Mr Bin Laden shelter and aid. What do you know about Sudan? Did you know that the northern part of Sudan is filled with arabic muslims? Did you know that the southern part of Sudan is filled with black christians and animists? Did you know that the islamic leader of Sudan (Hassan Turabi) is leading a program of islamization through genocide? Did you know that Arabic Islamic north plies the slave trade against the south? That is correct, the muslim north uses the non-muslims as sex slaves and free labor. Did you know that the Arabic Islamic north confiscates western humanitarian aid and uses it to coerce the Black south to convert to Islam? Do you know the body count of the number of Sudaneese Black christians butchered by Arabic Islamics in the last decade (heres a hint.... it is in the MILLIONS!!!!!)?

Don't be feeding me a bunch of crap about evil America. The Islamic jihad is upon us. They are committing genocide. They are formenting violence. They are formenting hate. As an alpha male hunter/warrior of an alpha male culture, I have blood in my eye and hate in my heart. I would gladly choke every islamic heretic I run across with his own entrails. Unfortunately I am too old to enlist so the killing will be done by some other lucky hero. Kill their leaders then SLAUGHTER THEIR CLERICS. Burn their mosqes and murder their islamic students. They are the virus, we are the innoculation. The time for half measures is past us, it is time for America to step up and save the world from evil Islam.

Boohoohoo.... I imagine that poor Tiassa shed an ocean of tears in that last post. Tiassa, I am an alpha male hunter. I was a top athlete in high school. I was a top scholar in high school, college and GRAD school (engineering no less). I have killed two bears with a bow, I have taken out two wounded deer with nothing but a knife. I am a predator, pure and simple. I cut my teeth hunting in the Amazon basin as 5-10 year old. Back then I hunted with nothing more than a hand crafted bow which the native indians helped me build. After careful analysis of your viewpoints and personality, I believe that one word sums up my opinion of you better than any other..... PREY!!Coming from a man as obsessed with killing as you seem to be, I expect no less.

Alpha male: Great, so you're what, an orangutan with a gun?
Athlete: Yeah? And?
Scholar/engineering: And?
Killed ...: Is bear good eatin'? Or was it one of those self-defense things, where he broke into your living room? Oh, two of those self-defense things?
Wounded deer: And I know a hunter who beat one to death with a friggin' pistol because he was too drunk to load it. There's a reason you hunter types are so annoying. Some of us find better things to talk about than killing.
Predator: Well, technically, so am I. But I'm happy to pay people to do it for me. It's one of the reasons I like civilization instead of the wilderness. I woke up in the middle of the night in a tent that was surrounded by deer; I hadn't known there were that many on the island was the only reason it was surprising. State park notwithstanding, I still wouldn't have shot them. It was cool, getting to chill with the deer. They're sociable if you don't threaten or frighten them. Admittedly, it's a little tough, since predators like you ensure that everything in the world except for cats and dogs would rather be away from us, and we're not really sure about the cats. Speaking of which, my cat is a more respectful hunter than you. Of course, why did you bother telling me all this about you in the first place? All it tells me is you like to wear moose urine.
Prey: Do we expect anything else of you, Brad?You have an apparent obsession with things that have nothing to do with the crisis in the Middle East. I have no idea what point you are trying to prove with your incessant ramblings on the 19th century, South America and Asia. Very poor diversionary tactics at best.Do they teach history to engineering majors anymore? There used to be a term, well-rounded. It did survive into the twentieth century, but proved uneconomical and unprofitable.I believe it is time that uncle Brad Rules sheds a little light on your obviously clouded and dark world view. There is a little country called Sudan. This is the country that has given Mr Bin Laden shelter and aid. What do you know about Sudan? Did you know that the northern part of Sudan is filled with arabic muslims? Did you know that the southern part of Sudan is filled with black christians and animists? Did you know that the islamic leader of Sudan (Hassan Turabi) is leading a program of islamization through genocide? Did you know that Arabic Islamic north plies the slave trade against the south? That is correct, the muslim north uses the non-muslims as sex slaves and free labor. Did you know that the Arabic Islamic north confiscates western humanitarian aid and uses it to coerce the Black south to convert to Islam? Do you know the body count of the number of Sudaneese Black christians butchered by Arabic Islamics in the last decade (heres a hint.... it is in the MILLIONS!!!!!)?I believe Uncle Brad Rules needs to answer a question: Why weren't these things important before when the peace movement you so despise pointed it out the first, second, third, fourth, ad nauseam time?

Don't tell me about atrocities around the world you pathetic, self-righteous hormone. Why the hell was none of this important before September 11, 2001? Why? Because none of 'em had bothered your sorry ass yet. Get over yourself. Don't tell me this justifies war; it didn't before.

It's your own selfish American ass and your own predator's lust. Unkie Brad! Get your gun. You're needed overseas. :rolleyes:

--Tiassa :cool:

Tiassa,

You always bring a smile to my face. You remind of a abused wife. When her husband breaks her jaw, the woman wonders what she did wrong to cause her husband to attack her so. When her husband comes home drunk and proceeds to rape and beat her, she blames herself for not being more understanding. Simply put Tiassa, you make a most excellent victim. Predators will seek you out for they love preying on the weak.

Let see if I can sum up your position.

1] Over a century ago, the white man killed the indians and enslaved the blacks THEREFOR America is evil and the towel heads were justified in attacking us.

2] The CIA traded arms to the Sandinistas and used the proceeds to win the release of hostages from Iran THEREFOR America is evil and the camel humpers were justified in attacking us.

3] We stopped Saddam from butchering the sovereign Kuwaiti citizens and booted his ass back to Iraq THEREFOR America is evil and the imbecelic islamics were justified in attacking us.

4] We spent billions of dollars to supply the Afghani people with weapons to protect them from the Russian invaders and then became their biggest supplier of humanitarian aid after the war THEREFOR America is evil and the sand scum were justified in attacking us.

I guess I would need a full frontal lobotomy to understand your postion.


Tiassa, it appears that you are calling for America's intervention in the Sudan. The amount of hatred for America in the islamic world would be unparalleled if we intervened in the Sudaneese islamic genocide of christians in that region. After we intervened and were universally reviled in the islamic world.... would you then turn around and blame the USA for intervening? Your position appears to be that we are hated by the islamic world for not intervening in the Sudan. That position is utter lunancy.

Islam and it's adherents are evil. They are engaging in murder, terrorism (over 90% of all terrorists are islamic), mayhem and genocide. We need to respond in kind. It is time for a holy crusade to wipe the islamic heretics off the face of the earth. They want a holy war and by god I hope they get it.


MORE INFO FOR POOR TIASSA:

Did you know that The Iranian government has killed over 3 million of it’s own people since their Islamic revolution? I suppose you don't want to talk about that do you?

Should we stop the religious genocide in Iran? Do you think the Islamic world would love us if we did?

But your failure to understand the importance of the history you're trying to wrap your head around makes me wonder if you haven't already had the lobotomy. I agree, brain damage is required to think according to such simplistic devices as you have attributed.You remind of a abused wife. When her husband breaks her jaw, the woman wonders what she did wrong to cause her husband to attack her so. When her husband comes home drunk and proceeds to rape and beat her, she blames herself for not being more understanding. Simply put Tiassa, you make a most excellent victim. Predators will seek you out for they love preying on the weak.I like the fact that the only way this makes any relevant sense is if you're allegorically comparing the United States to a defenseless, battered wife trapped in a codependent, abuse-empowering relationship.

To the other, if you're suggesting that the United States, as the battered, helpless wife, is empowering our opposition to take swings, I agree wholeheartedly.

The most fulsome and fundamental error you've made here is in your repeated mantra that this or that rhetorical point is intended to justify terrorist actions. Perhaps if you pulled your head out of your ass for a few minutes, you might understand that pacifists find violence unacceptable. That is, violence. Frankly, this trend of war-hawks trying to accuse pacifists of justifying violence is rather puzzling; are all war-hawks that friggin' stupid?

Your apathy toward history is compelling, too. On the one hand, you hold it up as an example; to the other, it seems to be inconsequential. You've wailed and whined about how Muslims treated Americans in this or that past situation. If you deny the validity of collected resentment against ongoing foreign-policy idiocies committed by the US government on behalf of its people, then you deny your own right to cite those past abuses of Americans by Muslims. It seems you can only justify warfare if you customize the conditions to meet your preconceived outcome.

Perhaps most stunning is your apathy toward the debate in which you are participating. If you ever stray over to the religion forum, you'll probably catch me picking on Tony1 for his reading comprehension. I seriously question yours at this point.

You've said we're blameless. That such a statement is utter horsepucky does not justify violence against us. It seems you don't care so much about your own assertions, such as blamelessness, as long as you justify the killing of human beings.

I would suggest, Brad, that you take a few hours and read through our debate here again, and spend some time thinking about it in the context of your moronic summary of the points on the table. Each of your four laments is derived from part of our debate; you have made it absolutely crystal clear that you don't understand any of those points. You've also indicated that this debate isn't about the propriety of violence; your obsession with such hateful ideas so randomly splattered all over the topic indicates that this is more personal. It would seem your alpha-male streak is up and running again, Brad, but why try to score such a victory? Since you don't understand the rhetorical, moral, and historical aspects of this debate, why do you bother spewing your stupid pucky at all? You're giving the appearance of someone who is looking for a victory--any victory--and is willing to set up illusory windmills in lieu of actual giants to tilt. And if that's the case, it's even more repugnant than your frothing obsession with death. After all, to think that you would advocate the deaths of that many people just so you can feel better about yourself each night?

I still think you should just go enlist, Brad. Since you're so capable and ready to go, why don't you?

Violence takes little thought, and your posts are indicative of how little thought you've given the current conflict. But I understand that it's just easier to advocate war if you aren't going to fight. And it's much easier, apparently, to fight than it is to think.

But give this debate another try, Brad, and maybe you'll be able to understand it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not expecting much of you in this; after all, you're an alpha male predator.

In fact, you're doing your nation a disservice if I understand your war-hawk notion. Since you're such a good killer, you owe your nation your active participation. Go on, sign on the dotted line, Brad ... it would be cool to get your posts from Afghanistan. You could tell us how many evil Muslim children you killed that day, and we'd all be real impressed.

But do try this debate again, Brad. If it's still too hard for you to understand, we'll figure something out.

:rolleyes:,
Tiassa :cool:

Her arguments shredded into so much confetti she is reduced to childish insults....



Tiassa,

In 1990 I applied to the FBI and the Air Force. I had exceptionally high scores on the entrance tests to both institutions. Unfortunately past drug use (which I freely admitted) resulted in my rejection from both institutions. As I am 35 and now too old, the military will not accept me. It breaks my heart that I will never have the honor of splattering islamic fundamentalists. It is a true shame.

I will make it easy for you. How is America to blame for the current crisis in the Middle East? How much of the blame is the Middle Easts?

Iran butchers 3 million of it's own in a religious genocide and the rest of the middle east turns a blind eye. It has schools dedicated to terrorism whose graduates are sent to countries all over the world. The rest of the middle east turns a blind eye.

Sudan engages in religious/racist genocide and the middle east turns a blind eye. Millions of non islamics are murdered by the islamic scum.

The palestinians engage in terror and indoctrinate their children into it. The entire middle east supports them and their vicious ways. Israel has killed maybe a thousand Palestinians in the last few decades (and always in retaliation to atrocities committed against themselves). The whole middle east holds the terrorists up as martyrs. Lets do the math here, the islamists are butchering millions upon millions of non-islamics in relgious genocides while Israel kills a thousand Palestinians in self defense. America is hated because we support Israel. Israel is the only state in the Middle East that is worth a spit.

The middle east is one big bunch of bigoted islamic fanatics. Bush is really dropping the ball on this one. If he went with the scorched earth policy, we would be much better off. He needs to grow himself some sack and obliterate the arab scum. All of the consensus building with the arab nations is a major mistake. The arab nations had their chance, time for them to die. Time for us to take their oil. Game over Mohammed, game over.


More education for Miss Tiassa:
Have you ever heard of the Palestinian "Sesame Street"-style childrens show called the "Children's Club"? Did you know that that the show features children between the ages of 4-10? Did you know that they sing songs about beoming "suicide warriors",
"Violence, anger, anger, anger", "Holy war to the end against the Zionest enemy." Did you know that the UN's convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 38 specifically mandates that children under the age of 15 are not to "take a direct part in the hostilities", "State Parties shall refrain from recruiting any person who has not attained the age of fifteen years...."[/b]

Palestinians are clearly and egregiously violating the UN charter. Where is the punishment and condemnation for this violation of human rights? We need to kill their teachers and murder their clerics.... sing it with me sister.

How about we take a gander at some Palestinian Authority textbooks. Here are a few notable quotes:

We do not claim that the collapse of Western civilization, and the transfer of the center of civilization to us [Islam] will happen in the next decade. ...Nevertheless [Wester civilization] has begun to collapse and to become a pile of rubble.

:::::::::

This religion [Islam] will defeat all other religions and it will be disseminated, by Allah's will, through the Muslim Jihad fighter

The most virulent bigotry in the world and Tiassa makes excuses for it. For shame, Tiassa, for shame.

AHA!!!!!!!! I found da smoking gun. I never understood why Tiassa kept on trying to drag the the native american indians into this. I now completely understand. She has been reading from the most lunatic, sick, demencted newspaper to ever disgrace the face of the earth.... Al-Hayat Al-Jadida. Here is a direct quote from this terrorist PLO-sponsered rag from Sept 6, 2001:

The United States of America and the Zionest State are two identical cases of historical development. Each of them came into existence by invasion and mass extermination of the original residents, and [each] still occupies land belonging to others....

Nothing but net for Mr Rules.... nothing but friggin net.


http://www.pmw.org.il/report-32.html


Burn their mosques for that is where they forment their hate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Rules

I was watching <i>The West Wing</i> the other day, and they made a good point:

Fill in the blank:
"Islamic fundamentalists are to Islam what ___ is to Christianity."

Answer: "The Ku Klux Klan".

Don't confuse Islamic fundamentalists with the majority of Muslims. You wouldn't confuse true Christians with the KKK (would you?)

How is America to blame for the current crisis in the Middle East? How much of the blame is the Middle Easts?Hmmm ... well, there's the Cold War. You'll notice that fundamental Islam set in where Communism had once been. This, actually, was pointed out to me only last week in some random newspaper article. Curious, isn't it? What began when the United States betrayed the Bolsheviks on the occasion of their Revolution sets the stage? Fundamentalism arises when there is no educated, enlightened society to temper the superstitions of the uneducated. Poverty is a major factor in violent fundamentalism, as well. As a frothing war-dog, you most certainly will recall that Communism resulted in poverty because of the Cold War. Hmm ... poverty, a collapsing empire and therefore warfare ... how long has Afghanistan been in conflict? Perhaps we shouldn't have played the Cold War in Afghanistan? Or any of these other violent backwaters we're going to have to figure out at some point or another?

It isn't that America is to blame, Brad. If you had paid any attention to the pacifism you so disdain, you might realize that it doesn't limit itself to violence against Americans. Pacifists have long noted other places in the world where there are conflicts. They've had a while to think about why those conflicts are happening, and why not, since nobody's doing anything to break the idiotic cycle of violence. Do you understand that our foreign policy profits America at other nations' expense? It's one of the reasons we're constantly meddling with things. Every once in a while, people get really pissed off. And when the United States government basically disrespects anyone who doesn't get down and suck it off, some people are going to decide that there's no other recourse. For fifty years the West has ignored the Palestinian issue unless it was condemning the Palestinians. Hello? The UN forcibly relocated millions of people and the United States was the muscle. I mean, really ... isn't that sort of intrusion exactly what we feared of the Communists? If it's so reasonable a measure, then why do we spend billions preventing anyone from pushing us around like that?

The Islamic world has been a political pawn in the Cold War, and previously a military foe of the Christian West, of which the United States is the bright and menacing zenith.

It's violent there? Of course it's violent there! There's not enough food; people are sick; education is somewhere between none and woefully poor; and it's not so much that nobody will help you, but that everyone who shows up is just f--king around with you. Economy and education go a long way toward stabilizing the violence that results from such a nightmare.

Of the various violences that you cite in your excoriations of Islam: why are these important now? You seem to forget that pacifists generally mentioned those things. I live near the University District in town, and it's not like there's not always been a plethora of cultural-education events outlining these very plights you lament. They didn't warrant anything in the way of consideration before, much less actual military interention. What is it about September 11 that makes it that much more important? That you're pissed off and oh, hey, here's this convenient little thing that nobody cared about before that we should all care about now so that you can feel more legitimized in your hatred? What the hell is your problem? Why weren't these things important before someone beat our Death Star routine?More education for Miss Tiassa: Yeah, I know. Amazing isn't it? It's worse than televangelism here, but only because they're Western, and prefer money to blood. Like I said ... education and economy. Erase poverty and desperation, educate the people, and they'll start to understand what God is trying to tell them. In this sense, I'm fortunate to only have to put up with Christians. To the other, Christians have been f--king with Islam for centuries. It's an old fight to the Muslims; apathy is the best they expect of us, and spite somewhere about the standard. The most virulent bigotry in the world and Tiassa makes excuses for it. For shame, Tiassa, for shame.Given the things I'm expected as a Westerner to accept of Christian history and present, I can cope with the fact that Islam has fallen to a bad state; instead of doing all we can to foster that violence, we should be trying to fix it. Settling the Palestinian state is a good start. The United States of America and the Zionest State are two identical cases of historical development. Each of them came into existence by invasion and mass extermination of the original residents, and [each] still occupies land belonging to others.... Well? What do you want? It's true. Sure, it's not as sugar-coated as Americans like, but that's your own damn problem.Burn their mosques for that is where they forment their hate.Funny thing is that I read a line today in an article by Aziz al-Akbari which reminds that Rabia, "the great woman Sufi", once noted that she wanted to burn down the Kaa'ba if it stood in the way of the worshipper's way to God. Imagine that, a wise, honored, female Islamic mystic ...

--Tiassa :cool:

Tiassa, you are nothing more than a schill for the terrorist PLO lobby. You hide your bigotry and hate under flowery speeches. At least I am honest and don't try to hide my hatred. Shame on you.

Lets see if I got this right. The islamic world is butchering the non-islamic world in the middle east. This doesn't seem to bother you. The one group of people that has the sack to fight back when the terrorist Islamics attack them is villified by you. I know you would prefer the non-Islamics to roll over and expose their necks to the evil Islamic horde.

Perhaps America should take a REAL close look at the Islamics living within our own borders. It is they who threaten and attack us....

Lets see if I got this right. You didn't, you genocidal, idiotic beast you. Ooh yeah. Talk sexier. Tell me about killing people and how hot it makes you. Come on, baby ... be a dirty little boy and tell me all about your sexy genocide ....

:rolleyes:,
Tiassa :cool:

Iran butchers 3 million of it's own in a religious genocide and the rest of the middle east turns a blind eye. It has schools dedicated to terrorism whose graduates are sent to countries all over the world. The rest of the middle east turns a blind eye.

Can you elaborate on this? And as for the world turning a blind eye, the US persists in self-defeating and pointless sanctions as a 'quick-fix' foreign policy on the cheap. Iran is as close as you get to democracy in the middle east, and the next regional power. Makes sense to be friendly, it will be a great country.

Tiassa wrote:

You didn't, you genocidal, idiotic beast you.

Thank you for that Tiassa. Your previous attempts to disguise your hatred of America and Americans have now been proven as fraudulent. I really don't understand you. Your posts indicate a deep and rabid hatred for America and adulation for the Palestinians. If you hate America so much, why don't you leave? If you love the Palestinians so much, why don't you live with them?

Currently 50% of Americans believe that all Arabs should have ID cards. Before we were attacked, that number would have been 0%. If Arab terrorists strike us that hard again, America will become a very unsafe place for Arabs and Islamics.... I can guarantee you that. The biggest reason for this is that the Arabic community in America is showing more loyalty to the terrorist Arab nations in the Middle East than they are to the country they live in.

I understand your frustration. You can't stand a person more knowledgable about the Midddle East pointing out the bigotry and hatred of the Arab/Islamic nations. You would prefer that information not get out to the public at large. Divert Americas attention from the Islamic genocides in the Phillipines, Indonesia, Sudan, Iran, etc... and focus it on the one nation that resists genocide... ISRAEL. If ISRAEL acted in the same manner as their muslim neighbors.... ALL OF THEIR MUSLIM NEIGHBORS WOULD BE DEAD!!!

Get your priorities straight sister. LOVE AMERICA and STAY. HATE AMERICA and LEAVE!!! We now know that people within our borders who hate our country are capable of mass murder. It is time to evict or imprison these scum, they are wasting our precious oxygen.

Captain,

Heres info on the genocide in Sudan. Look at the number of non-muslims killed or displaced.

http://www.endgenocide.org/genocide/sudan.html


My numbers on Iran were way off. My source turned out to be bogus. My apologies. I should have verified before posting. Rest assured that all other data I have posted is vetted.

http://www.endgenocide.org/genocide/bahai.html

One thing I can say for tiassa, he's consistant. If you have the time, check out the thread 'Chinese Drug War'

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3253&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

I think you might enjoy the exchange.

Brad no offense to your hate and violent views but some thing I came across, So sharing it with you.


Truth is, we’re terrorized because we’re hated By ROBERT BOWMAN

Tell people the truth, Mr. President -- about terrorism. If deceptions about terrorism go unchallenged, then the threat will continue until it destroys us.

The truth is that none of our thousands of nuclear weapons can protect us from these threats. No Star Wars system -- no matter how technically advanced, no matter how many trillions of dollars are poured into it -- can protect us from a nuclear weapon delivered in a sailboat or a Cessna or a suitcase or a Ryder rental truck. Not one weapon in our vast arsenal, not a penny of the $270 billion a year we spend on so-called defense can defend against a terrorist bomb. That is a military fact.

As a retired lieutenant colonel and a frequent lecturer on national security issues, I have often quoted Psalm 33: “A king is not saved by his mighty army. A warrior is not saved by his great strength.” The obvious reaction is, “Then what can we do? Is there nothing we can do to provide security for our people?”

There is. But to understand it requires that we know the truth about the threat. Mr. President, you did not tell the American people the truth about why we are the targets of terrorism when you explained why we bombed Afghanistan and Sudan. You said that we are a target because we stand for democracy, freedom and human rights in the world. Nonsense!

We are the target of terrorists because, in much of the world, our government stands for dictatorship, bondage and human exploitation. We are the target of terrorists because we are hated. And we are hated because our government has done hateful things.

In how many countries have agents of our government deposed popularly elected leaders and replaced them with puppet military dictators who were willing to sell out their own people to American multinational corporations?

We did it in Iran when the U.S. Marines and the CIA deposed Mossadegh because he wanted to nationalize the oil industry. We replaced him with the Shah and armed, trained and paid his hated Savak national guard, which enslaved and brutalized the people of Iran -- all to protect the financial interests of our oil companies. Is it any wonder that there are people in Iran who hate us?

We did it in Chile. We did it in Vietnam. More recently, we tried to do it in Iraq.

And, of course, how many times have we done it in Nicaragua and all the other banana republics of Latin America? Time after time we have ousted popular leaders who wanted the riches of the land to be shared by the people who worked it. We replaced them with murderous tyrants who would sell out their own people so the wealth of the land could be taken out by the likes of Domino Sugar, the United Fruit Company, Folgers and Chiquita Banana.

In country after country, our government has thwarted democracy, stifled freedom and trampled human rights. That’s why it is hated around the world. And that’s why we’re the target of terrorists.

People in Canada enjoy democracy, freedom and human rights. So do the people of Norway and Sweden. Have you heard of Canadian embassies being bombed? Or Norwegian, or Swedish?

We are not hated because we practice democracy, freedom and human rights. We are hated because our government denies these things to people in Third World countries whose resources are coveted by our multinational corporations. That hatred we have sown has come back to haunt us in the form of terrorism -- and in the future, nuclear terrorism.

Once the truth about why the threat exists is understood, the solution becomes obvious. We must change our ways. Getting rid of our nuclear weapons -- unilaterally if necessary -- will enhance our security. Drastically altering our foreign policy will ensure it.

Instead of sending our sons and daughters around the world to kill Arabs so we can have the oil under their sand, we should send them to rebuild their infrastructure, supply clean water and feed starving children. Instead of continuing to kill thousands of Iraqi children every day with our sanctions, we should help Iraqis rebuild their electric power plants, their water treatment facilities, their hospitals -- all the things we destroyed and prevented them from rebuilding with sanctions.

Instead of training terrorists and death squads, we should close the School of the Americas. Instead of supporting insurrection, destabilization, assassination and terror around the world, we should abolish the CIA and give the money to relief agencies.

In short, we should do good instead of evil. Who would try to stop us? Who would hate us? Who would want to bomb us?

That is the truth, Mr. President. That’s what the American people need to hear.

Robert Bowman flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is presently bishop of the United Catholic Church in Melbourne Beach, Fla.

National Catholic Reporter, October 2, 1998

The Lies About Taliban Heroin

Russia and Oil the Real Objectives With Heroin As A Weapon of War

A Replay of CIA’s Vietnam-era Drug Dealing

FTW Revises Its Map On Economic Impacts

by

Michael C. Ruppert

[© Copyright 2001, Michael C. Ruppert and From The Wilderness Publications, www.copvcia.com. May be reproduced or distributed for non-profit purposes only]

FTW, October 10, 2001 – The governments of the United States and Britain - along with a lap-dog mainstream media all too willing to regurgitate falsehoods - are feeding us a line of demonstrably inaccurate lies about the Taliban and opium. We are being warned of a “new flood” of al-Q’aeda opium as the war expands. As British Prime Minister Tony Blair boasts, “We will bomb their poppy fields,” he neglects to mention that there aren’t any poppy fields in Taliban controlled areas to bomb. This outrageous deception of the public, in an effort to stir up support for the war effort, is further evidence that most of the rest of the government’s line following the attacks of September 11, is simply not credible.
A simple side-by-side comparison of reports from the UN and the U.S. government, along with major media stories from before and after the Sept. 11 attacks exposes the lie.

Even the U.S. State Department (www.state.gov/www/regions/sa/facts_taliban_drugs.html.) acknowledges that in July 2000, Mullah Omar of the Taliban ordered a ban on poppy cultivation in all Taliban controlled regions of Afghanistan. That State Department Fact Sheet, published after Jan 1, 2000, however, expresses U.S. disbelief in the ban’s effectiveness. This position is, however, flatly contradicted by some very credible sources, including Secretary of State Colin Powell. He gave the Taliban $43 million this May to replace the income lost to Afghani farmers as a result of the ban. Their wheat crops had failed due to the drought and they had no money from opium harvests to buy food. The middlemen who had stockpiled the opium had income. But the farmers, who had harvested in the summer of 2000, had already been paid.

In February 2000 citing reports from Agence France-Presse, the AP, and UPI, FTW published a story describing the Taliban’s successful destruction of their poppy crop. We viewed this at the time – possibly incorrectly – as a move by the Taliban to take $90 billion in drug cash out of the western banking system. That sales remained stable, however, is reflected in the fact that heroin prices fell only slightly in 2000. Had Afghanistan stopped selling altogether, then Western Europe, which gets its opium from Afghanistan, would have seen a steep increase in prices. It did not. So why then did Powell give Afghanistan the $43 million? I wish I knew.

Now, based upon new evidence, we know that in 1999 Afghanistan produced a bumper crop of 4,600 metric tons of opium and that this has been verified by a number of sources including the United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP) as well as in a multitude of press stories. The 2000 harvest was close to 3,300 metric tons. The result, as Colombia expanded poppy cultivation in the late 1990s, and as the Golden Triangle in Southeast Asia showed only a minor drop in output, was a glut. Therefore the Taliban’s ban on production would have had the impact of creating a price support by reducing supplies. How successful was the ban and destruction of crops? Well, aside from the above reports, which all indicated that inspections confirming the ban had taken place, consider the following:

- On January 3, 2001 an ABC News story, posted on their web site stated, “Pakistan’s Foreign Secretary Inam ul-Haq’s claim to have eliminated all opium plantations in Taliban controlled territories – reported by Agence France-Presse -- seems to have been confirmed by a UN survey.

“This development could have several important ramifications for both the geopolitical situation in the region and the world drug trade...

“The center of world drug production will shift from Afghanistan, which accounted for 75 percent of world opium production last year, to Colombia and the Golden Triangle on the border between Myanmar (Burma) and Thailand.

A February 16, 2001 AP story by Kathy Gannon was headlined, “Taliban virtually wipes out opium production in Afghanistan.” It opened with these lines:

“U.N. drug control officers said the Taliban religious militia has virtually wiped out opium production in Afghanistan – once the world’s largest producer – since banning poppy cultivation in July.

“A 12-member team from the U.N. Drug Control Program spent two weeks searching most of the nation’s largest opium-producing areas and found so few poppies that they do not expect any opium to come out of Afghanistan this year.

“’We are not just guessing. We have seen the proof in the fields,’ said Bernard Frahi, regional director for the U.N. program in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He laid out photographs of vast tracts of land cultivated with wheat alongside pictures of the same fields taken a year earlier – a sea of blood red poppies.

On May 24, 2001 Barry Berak of the New York Times wrote a story entitled, “Taliban Ban on Drug Crops Is Working, U.S. Concludes.” Here are the lead paragraphs:

“ELMAND PROVINCE, Afghanistan, May 20 – This has been heroin’s great heartland, where the narcotic came to life as an opium resin taken from fragile buds of red and white poppies. Last year, 75 per cent of the world’s opium crop was grown in Afghanistan, with the biggest yield sprouting from here in the fertile plains of the country’s south, sustained by the meander of the Helmand River.

“But something astonishing has become evident with this spring’s harvest. Behind the narrow dikes of packed earth, the fields are empty of their most profitable plant. Poor farmers, scythes in hand, stoop among brown stems.

“Mile after mile, there is only a dry stubble of wheat to cut from the lumpy soil…

“But American narcotics officials who visited the country confirmed earlier United Nations reports that the Taliban had, in one growing season, managed a rare triumph in the long and losing war on drugs…”

Before looking at what the press is saying since the WTC attacks, take three facts and lock them firmly in your brain. First, the opium-growing season in the region, according to the UN and other drug monitoring agencies, is a planting in October and November with a harvest in May and June. There have been no crops planted or harvested in Afghanistan or Pakistan since the summer of 2000. The Taliban and farmers have been sustaining themselves by selling stockpiles, with the prices fairly stable since the ban.

Second, Afghanistan, for the last four years, has been suffering under one of the worst droughts in its history. The last year has been the worst.

Third, Central Asian expert, Vladimir Davlatov, writing for “1 world media,” from the Tajikistan capital of Dushnabe, interviewed a General [Rustam Nazarov] in command of Tajik border guards charged with intercepting heroin supplies smuggled out of Afghanistan. The August 31 story (Issue No. 67) quoted the General as saying, “The quality of Afghan heroin has recently deteriorate[d].”

The Propaganda

- “The West At War: Drugs Wipeout – We’ll Bomb Poppy Fields – Blair Targets Terror Profits – Poppy fields which supply the Taliban’s multi-billion pound drugs trade are to be a key target of military strikes in Afghanistan” read the headline of a September 30, 2000 story in the British paper, The Sunday Mirror. The story said:

“A senior Downing street aide said: ‘We have reliable information that the Taliban are planning to use money from drugs to finance military action, and that bin Laden has ordered farmers to step up production…” How can they step up production? It takes six months to grow a crop and they have to plant one first. The planting doesn’t start until November. Meantime we’re bombing the region to smithereens. Is this a new form of plowing the soil?

“There is an estimated 3,000 tonnes of opium stockpiled inside Afghanistan …” OK, what have they been selling for the last year, wheat? Mushrooms?

- “Flood of Cheap Afghan Heroin,” blazed the headline of a story in the Times of London dated September 25, 2001. The lead sentences of that story read:

“AFGHAN farmers are ready to swamp world markets with heroin amid signs that the Taleban has dropped its ban on opium growing.

“The ban was imposed by Mullah Muhammad Omar last year, leaving many farmers ruined. But the sudden halving of the price of raw opium to $250 a kg suggests the decree has been reversed.” So whose heroin is flooding the markets?

- The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times and the Washington Post, along with every network, have all reported that the Taliban’s response to U.S. attacks will be to increase heroin production. Strange for a country that is now militarily sealed off and has no remaining operable airfields and whose land borders are now sealed by the U.S. military. That gives a whole new meaning to the term “Thunder Road.”

- On September 30 The Chicago Tribune published a story entitled “Panicked Opium Traders Unload Huge Stocks. Implying that it was the Taliban doing so, the story opened with the lead:

“ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – Just as the Dow Jones industrial average fell precipitously in the wake of the terrorist attacks in the U.S., so did the main economic marker in the ramshackle street bazaars of Pakistan’s North West Frontier province.

“Traders from Peshawar reported that the price of opium had plunged from $700 a kilo to $90 since September 11…”

There is no mention in the story of the fact that Pakistan itself grows the opium poppy or that the Pakistani government of Musharraf Pervez – our erstwhile ally – has been dependent upon drug money to sustain itself for at least ten years. How come the story doesn’t look to the Pakistani issue?

- The Ananova press agency reported on September 29th, “…A Downing Street spokesman says there is evidence of a sudden movement of opium out of neighboring Pakistan where it was being stockpiled.” Now let me get this straight. The stockpiles are in Pakistan so we’re going to bomb Afghanistan for it. That makes real good sense!

********************IMPORTANT********************
- In this most outrageous propaganda of all, the Indian news service PTI in New Delhi, published a story on October 4, headlined, “Laden Planned to Wreak Havoc in U.S. Through Super Heroin.” It’s lead paragraph reads:

“The most wanted terrorist Osama bin Laden had planned to develop a ‘super heroin’ drug and export the same to United States and West Europe to wreak havoc there much before the deadly September 11 attacks. ‘The terror network headed by Osama bin Laden has t