http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030728/241/4t7b4.html

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20030728/capt.sge.lff46.280703070650.photo00.default-275x384.jpg

The picture says it all.

The child would be better off dead.

Now that the childs entire world has been shit on by the commands of dictator Bush and his American Hate Party.

The brutality is in letting the child live.

O beautiful for spacious skies,
For amber waves of grain,
For purple mountain majesties
Above the fruited plain!
America! America! God shed His grace on thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!

O beautiful for pilgrim feet,
Whose stern impassion'd stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America! America! God mend thine ev'ry flaw,
Confirm thy soul in self-control,
Thy liberty in law!

O beautiful for heroes proved In liberating strife,
Who more than self their country loved,
And mercy more than life!
America! America! May God thy gold refine
Till all success be nobleness,
And ev'ry gain divine!

O Beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam,
Undimmed by human tears!
America! America! God shed His grace on thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!


The Anti-America crowd here hates the truth slammed in there face.

The child would be better off dead.
So if you were there you'd take your gun and shoot the boy?

Originally posted by Jerrek
The child would be better off dead.
So if you were there you'd take your gun and shoot the boy?


If I was there my prime objective would be to kill as many american soldiers as I could.......

It's reminds me of the psychopaths I had to study for 9 months in the ward in los angeles.

Delusion - A fixed false belief, that will not subside even when presented with contrary truths.

A sad case indeed.

Originally posted by static76
O beautiful for spacious skies,
For amber waves of grain,
For purple mountain majesties
Above the fruited plain!
America! America! God shed His grace on thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!

O beautiful for pilgrim feet,
Whose stern impassion'd stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America! America! God mend thine ev'ry flaw,
Confirm thy soul in self-control,
Thy liberty in law!

O beautiful for heroes proved In liberating strife,
Who more than self their country loved,
And mercy more than life!
America! America! May God thy gold refine
Till all success be nobleness,
And ev'ry gain divine!

O Beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam,
Undimmed by human tears!
America! America! God shed His grace on thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!


The Anti-America crowd here hates the truth slammed in there face.

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
If I was there my prime objective would be to kill as many american soldiers as I could....... Damn. Not another jealous one.

Jealous of what?

I served in the U.S. Navy.

Nothing to be jealous about.

Bullshit. :)

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
It's reminds me of the psychopaths I had to study for 9 months in the ward in los angeles.

I hate to tell you this, but when they had you locked in that mental ward for 9 months, it wasn't because they wanted you to "study" pshycopaths. It was because YOU are one.

Originally posted by Jerrek
Bullshit. :)

As if anyone here takes anything you say as anything other than a poor stand-up joke making fun of yourself?

You're a tool for others pleasure.

You're basically a free sex toy, cheap dirty and well used.

That's nothing new to you I'm sure.

Originally posted by static76
I hate to tell you this, but when they had you locked in that mental ward for 9 months, it wasn't because they wanted you to "study" pshycopaths. It was because YOU are one.

Aww poor baby can't handle truth over emotions.

What a silly little animal, you know you'r eonly living because you have nothing to provide for scientific research.

You're an obsolete animal, a snail oozing........

suck it

You're a tool for others pleasure.
Yup, and I enjoy seeing my gf or bf get pleasure out of me.

You're basically a free sex toy, cheap dirty and well used.
That is bad?

That's nothing new to you I'm sure.
But it sounds like you were last laid... err, ... ok maybe you're not there yet. Nothing to be ashamed about... Might take a few decades for people that were "studying" the psychos in the metal ward (as static pointed out, it isn't really studying y'know).

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
Aww poor baby can't handle truth over emotions.

What a silly little animal, you know you'r eonly living because you have nothing to provide for scientific research.

You're an obsolete animal, a snail oozing........

suck it

WOW! You really are a loon...:p

Damn. Not another jealous one.

But nobody wants to have something they have , but rather for them to not have something , Jerrek

So how can you be jealous when you desire another not to have instead of to have what they have ?

Explain

The picture says it all.

Now lets be honest here , that picture and more so your intentions with it makes me vomit , and you know why , you're not stupid .

So why the need then to twist things into this ? Just propaganda ? I do assume you're not buying it yourself , but are simply using it for justification of your ideal , no ?

Happens to be Ive seen that raid on tv , the child (if it was this one) wasnt that happy as he looks on your picture .

static76

Oh i just know your a true believer . You remind me of that political cartoon with those germans (anyone ?) : U know they had songs just like that .

Sometimes Im getting the feeling its pretty much turning into Pyong Yang on mental levels .

Freedom-cult , well the followers that is . The leaders surely aint that retarded , however Bush is very suspected.

Ghassan - Yeah static is a hopeless case. I guess the best is to wait for their God to kill them and remove them from the Earth.

Anyhow - what were th eintention of the photo I still don't understand???

I guess only a sick twisted mind like statics can come up with something a critical thinker like me can't even delusion about.

That picture looks very arranged. I can almost hear the voice of the excited photographer when realizing the geniousness of his set-up.
It was cute though, the baby...

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
static76

Oh i just know your a true believer . You remind me of that political cartoon with those germans (anyone ?) : U know they had songs just like that .

Sometimes Im getting the feeling its pretty much turning into Pyong Yang on mental levels .

Freedom-cult , well the followers that is . The leaders surely aint that retarded , however Bush is very suspected.
Actually I was against the Iraq war, and think Shrubya Bush is an idiot. This doesn't however, stop me from taking a dislike to the enormous amount of Anti-America drivel said here everyday.


God bless America,
Land that I love,
Stand beside her and guide her
Thru the night with a light from above;

From the mountains, to the prairies,
To the oceans white with foam,
God bless America,
My home, sweet home.
God bless America,
My home, sweet home.

Static - You know, I dislike the possiblity that some logical critical thinking atheists were killed in the sept 11 attacks.

But knowing how much an attack like that hurts your little emotional feelings causes a single cell in my mouth to smile........

While value people for the truth cause may have suffered, it damaged your case much worse than there's.

As anti-american hating as you are, you're what will inevitably cause the death of america.

It's like you're commmitting suicide.

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
Static - You know, I dislike the possiblity that some logical critical thinking atheists were killed in the sept 11 attacks.

But knowing how much an attack like that hurts your little emotional feelings causes a single cell in my mouth to smile........

While value people for the truth cause may have suffered, it damaged your case much worse than there's.

As anti-american hating as you are, you're what will inevitably cause the death of america.

It's like you're commmitting suicide.

:bugeye: What the hell did your parents do to you my friend....

I would attempt to answer your points...but there are none. Are you going to just troll the boards while your here, or are you gonna make a post of value at some time.:rolleyes:

Static
Actually I was against the Iraq war, and think Shrubya Bush is an idiot. This doesn't however, stop me from taking a dislike to the enormous amount of Anti-America drivel said here everyday.


A good reason for anti-amerikanism is the amerikan belief that a person can discharge himself from his democratic responsibilities by merely condemning a specific action without any further relevant consequence whatsoever .

The illusion of having an opinion that matters , very good base for anti-amerikanism there .

Truth, Justice, and the American way.

That would be a first

Atheist
Anyhow - what were th eintention of the photo I still don't understand???

The intention of showing it is obvious like the tital says , showing how humane and wonderfull amerika is in Iraq .

No Iraqi or any Arab that cares for his peoples suffering more than his own personal issues will applaud the "humanity" that the USA tries to present here .

Jerrek ?

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
Static

A good reason for anti-amerikanism is the amerikan belief that a person can discharge himself from his democratic responsibilities by merely condemning a specific action without any further relevant consequence whatsoever .

The illusion of having an opinion that matters , very good base for anti-amerikanism there .

America is a represenative democracy, so while I make not like Bush, this doesn't override those who support him. What do you propose I do, start a revolution?

Man! the propaganda (for both sides) is just flying in here. Usually one side comes out as the more reasonable and realistic of the two but we've got pure, equally distributed fantasy in this thread. Do any of you actually believe the stuff your saying?

America is a represenative democracy, so while I make not like Bush, this doesn't override those who support him. What do you propose I do, start a revolution?

You tell me , your the democrat who has all the freedom . A tip would be to start refusing , dont take toomuch on your shoulders nobody asks you to . Just dont cooperate for anothers destruction , refuse . Sneek out of it , whatever results . At least that is if you would consider such moral ideologic thinking practical to your every day life , wich Im pretty fast to say no it aint and no u wouldnt accept it .

BTW I dont really consider your country democratic , there is a one-party rulership within a 2 (potentially governing) party voting system .

Since I happen to live in a country where there are some 20 or 25 possibilities to choose from oh wich 5 or 6 are ready to govern and eventuall 2 or 3 form coalition , this is quite a big difference to the thing you call the same as whats here : a representative democracy .

buffys
Man! the propaganda (for both sides) is just flying in here. Usually one side comes out as the more reasonable and realistic of the two but we've got pure, equally distributed fantasy in this thread. Do any of you actually believe the stuff your saying?

Im sorry If I feel spoken too unjustfully ,however that is what you get when you put things in to sides and say "you" .

So could you please explain me all the stuff Im saying that would be so unbelieveble , or do you rather specify the peoples you are talking about ?

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
You tell me , your the democrat who has all the freedom . A tip would be to start refusing , dont take toomuch on your shoulders nobody asks you to . Just dont cooperate for anothers destruction , refuse . Sneek out of it , whatever results . At least that is if you would consider such moral ideologic thinking practical to your every day life , wich Im pretty fast to say no it aint and no u wouldnt accept it .

I'm no Democrat, I'm an Independant. Political parties are mostly for the drones who don't want to think for themselves.

You seem to have no clue about us Americans.
BTW I dont really consider your country democratic , there is a one-party rulership within a 2 (potentially governing) party voting system .
The same could be said of any other country really. Corporations run the World.
Since I happen to live in a country where there are some 20 or 25 possibilities to choose from oh wich 5 or 6 are ready to govern and eventuall 2 or 3 form coalition , this is quite a big difference to the thing you call the same as whats here : a representative democracy .
America has the best political system in the World(which isn't saying much), so please save the "We have 20-25 canidates" line.

static:

two points

First off yes you are a democratic. You're the definition of one.

Secondly, please start a revolution. And start it off with a bang............right into your head.

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
static:

Secondly, please start a revolution. And start it off with a bang............right into your head.

Peace unto you also my friend.;)

Originally posted by static76
Peace unto you also my friend.;)


I'm already at peace.

I have everything I could want in the world. Except the absence of YOU.

This would bring me peace.

So if you truly want peace unto me - then please remove yourself from the living.

static
I'm no Democrat, I'm an Independant. Political parties are mostly for the drones who don't want to think for themselves.
You seem to have no clue about us Americans.

You being a democrat , I wasnt referring to the political party , but your "democratical" system . The fact you didnt even get that sais enough already , but ofcourse there's much more :

Since I dont see any independants running your country , you must be overrrating your own importance . Seems you dont know much about yourself .

The same could be said of any other country really.
Corporations run the World.

Im not talking about any corporations , Im talking about a one party government in a 2 party system . No its not like that in every other democratic country , its not like that in the country I live for one , as I already mentioned .

America has the best political system in the World(which isn't saying much), so please save the "We have 20-25 canidates" line.

RED SOX RULE
YEAH !!!!!!

:rolleyes:

save me your opinions if they are of this level , without argument for backup .

Your choice is more limited , your influence is more limited .

Behold, President Bush, the great American Satan, hated by all:
http://webpages.charter.net/rylandpage/1.jpg

Poor kid.
http://webpages.charter.net/rylandpage/3.jpg

I'm sure this boy's father is frothing mad over losing the chance to send his son into the Fedayeen where he can rape schoolgirls and torture with impunity:
http://webpages.charter.net/rylandpage/5.jpg

Another poor innocent Iraqi girl who will never know the joy of being abducted and raped by one of Uday Husseins minions:
http://webpages.charter.net/rylandpage/6.jpg

They're waving American flags because they hate us. For destroying the tyrant who ran them from their homelands. For ending the crippling decade of trade embargos, econimic sanctions, and otracization by the global community. And for killing those who persecuted their families.
http://webpages.charter.net/rylandpage/7.jpg

Vestiges of the Ba'ath regime. What an illustrious past it has. Such a shame that those OMG SO EVIL AMERIKKKAN BUTCHERS had to interfere. Right?
http://webpages.charter.net/rylandpage/8.jpg

ooh, some more evil propaganda.
kid yourself not! the smiling iraqis are smiling under the barrell of a gun! or maybe they were paid to kiss Bush's photos.
no, wait, i know! their mothers were raped and disappeared, and their sisters were threatened too... so they decided to do this humiliating task of "high fiving" a US marine.

evil US
:m:

Originally posted by otheadp
ooh, some more evil propaganda.
kid yourself not! the smiling iraqis are smiling under the barrell of a gun! or maybe they were paid to kiss Bush's photos.
no, wait, i know! their mothers were raped and disappeared, and their sisters were threatened too... so they decided to do this humiliating task of "high fiving" a US marine.

evil US
:m: Dude, don't forget the mind control rays beamed down from space by American satellites.

and the large amounts of LSD released into the water supply (by the US gov't)

LogicalAtheist :
Thanks! You show that the sentence "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" is wrong. I don't like Jerrek, I think that Bush is a moron and I want USA to leave Iraq BUT you... you're the worst thing of SciForums. I saw extremists here but even if you're far from their ideas, you're worse than them when you use your keyboard.
You're just a troll...

static76 :
"America has the best political system in the World(which isn't saying much)"
LOL... lol... Wait... are you serious? Do you really believe it?!

Jerrek :
Nice picture! Still using biaised informations... this guy is just protecting a baby from his US friends who are attacking the house. Good job boy : you saved a kid from your bullets!

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
If I was there my prime objective would be to kill as many american soldiers as I could.......

Sorry to say this, but if you're not trolling, then you're ill and should not be free to walk the streets. :(

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
As if anyone here takes anything you say as anything other than a poor stand-up joke making fun of yourself?

You're a tool for others pleasure.

You're basically a free sex toy, cheap dirty and well used.

That's nothing new to you I'm sure.

Why the hell do you even call yourself "logical" or "atheist"? You exhibit none of those properties.

Originally posted by Stokes Pennwalt

...

awsome pictures. Thanks, man.

If it's US brutality we're talking about...

US Marine admits to war crimes. (http://www.unknownnews.net/0728-1.html)
U.S. shifts tactics to counter guerrilla strikes
by Thomas Ricks, Washington Post _ _ July 28, 2003

...

In a Washington Post article reprinted below, the tenth and eleventh paragraphs are as follows:

Col. David Hogg, commander of the 2nd Brigade of the 4th Infantry Division, said tougher methods are being used to gather the intelligence. Wednesday night, he said, his troops picked up the wife and daughter of an Iraqi lieutenant general. They left a note: "If you want your family released, turn yourself in."
Such tactics are justified, he said, because, "It's an intelligence operation with detainees, and these people have info." They would have been released in due course, he added later.

Of course, it's irrelevant whether hostages "would have been released in due course." Taking hostages is a war crime, with no ifs, ands, or buts.
Geneva Convention, Part III, Section I, Provisions Common to the Territories of the Parties to the Conflict and to Occupied Territories, Article 34:

"The taking of hostages is prohibited."

Period, end of section. There's no list of exceptions.
It doesn't say hostage-taking is OK, if the US does it. Or if the women and children are "released in due course." Or if the hostage-takers get the information they want. It says, "The taking of hostages is prohibited."
Col. David Hogg should be arrested and prosecuted. No ifs, ands, or buts.


BAYJI, Iraq - In just a few seconds, an attack by U.S. forces killed Faheema Jassim Khalaf's mother and two sisters, tore apart her right leg below the knee and shattered her ankle. (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030725/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_faheema_s_tragedy)

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20030725/capt.1059104772.iraq_faheemas_tragedy_ny113.jpg

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
static
You being a democrat , I wasnt referring to the political party , but your "democratical" system . The fact you didnt even get that sais enough already , but ofcourse there's much more :

Then don't say "democrat" next time. Am I supposed to decode your ramblings?
Since I dont see any independants running your country , you must be overrrating your own importance . Seems you dont know much about yourself .
Do you really have any knowledge of America??? Independants and moderates are the key swing voters in American elections.
Im not talking about any corporations , Im talking about a one party government in a 2 party system . No its not like that in every other democratic country , its not like that in the country I live for one , as I already mentioned .
America is doing fine with it's so called horrible political system. Where do you live?
save me your opinions if they are of this level , without argument for backup .

Your choice is more limited , your influence is more limited .
:p :p :p

You are pretty funny, yet so delusional...

I'll respect your capabilities and keep it short, Static76.

- Given the amount of poor typing, the number of ESL posters at Sciforums, and the outright illiteracy of some of our American posters, are you sure you're being fair when nitpicking GK's words in order to justify your reaction?

Of course, you did recognize the distinction between Democrat and democrat (you wrote it with a capital "D", GK did not).

J'accuse. What's up, Static? Do you realize how much time we can all waste bitching about "decoding" like you have?

In the meantime, I think Ghassan Kanafani has a point that you seem to be avoiding, and that avoidance is obvious in your sudden ignorance of your own conversation. (You brought up democratic society.)

General Comment

What I actually resent about this topic in general is the uncited photographs presented as a cheap propaganda job intended to whitewash the failures of the American endeavor in Iraq.

Denial ain't just a ... oh, never mind.

I suggest that the proclaimers of American triumph, right, and compassion buy a ticket to Iraq, go door to door to each family that suffered a civilian casualty, and look them in the eye and tell them that they should rejoice that their mother/sister/father/brother/son/daughter/&c. is dead.

A murder trial a couple years ago in Oregon that started with a party gone awry left the incensed family of the victim stunned as witnesses came forward to describe a dead man who was a drug dealer, a rapist, &c. After their public denunciations of the accused killer, they were shocked to realize that the whole fight started when their precious, innocent son started manhandling women. No, it doesn't make the killing right, but technically the world is better off with this SOB dead. But am I really determined enough to make a point out of that to drive down to Lincoln City, knock on their door, and tell them that their son, whom I didn't even know, did the world a favor in getting himself killed?

Likewise, if you want to hold up the American ability to accomplish minimal representations of minimal interpretations of minimal goals as a evidence of American nobility, well ... that's part of what's wrong in the US itself. People get up and go about their day and expect to be treated specially just for being alive. In a country where showing up to work each day is considered a mark of quality of character (with no regard to the quality of your work), a few uncredited photos and a heap of classic Western smarm just isn't enough to convince me to forfeit my brain at the door. I'll keep thinking for myself, thank you. I urge the haters to do the same for once.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

Originally posted by tiassa
I'll respect your capabilities and keep it short, Static76.

- Given the amount of poor typing, the number of ESL posters at Sciforums, and the outright illiteracy of some of our American posters, are you sure you're being fair when nitpicking GK's words in order to justify your reaction?

:D

Yes, there are many posters here who have poor English skills, but they still have the ability to make coherent statements.

This is the post I was responding to:
You tell me , your the democrat who has all the freedom . A tip would be to start refusing , dont take toomuch on your shoulders nobody asks you to . Just dont cooperate for anothers destruction , refuse . Sneek out of it , whatever results . At least that is if you would consider such moral ideologic thinking practical to your every day life , wich Im pretty fast to say no it aint and no u wouldnt accept it .
Now sure, MAYBE there's a point in there somewhere, but....:confused:

I'll assume he doesn't want me to sell out to the Bush supporters who want these wars. Which is strange because I already stated that I'm no fan of Shrubya.
J'accuse. What's up, Static? Do you realize how much time we can all waste bitching about "decoding" like you have?
Maybe so, but how much time do we waste having to decode his rants.
In the meantime, I think Ghassan Kanafani has a point that you seem to be avoiding, and that avoidance is obvious in your sudden ignorance of your own conversation. (You brought up democratic society.)
Please tell me his point, I doubt he even knows it.

A good reason for anti-amerikanism is the amerikan belief that a person can discharge himself from his democratic responsibilities by merely condemning a specific action without any further relevant consequence whatsoever .

So what are you implying, Ghassan? My 'democratic responsibility' will be to vote against Bush in 2004 if I don't like his policies. Are you suggesting something else?

Originally posted by tiassa
What I actually resent about this topic in general is the uncited photographs presented as a cheap propaganda job intended to whitewash the failures of the American endeavor in Iraq.

Denial ain't just a ... oh, never mind.

I suggest that the proclaimers of American triumph, right, and compassion buy a ticket to Iraq, go door to door to each family that suffered a civilian casualty, and look them in the eye and tell them that they should rejoice that their mother/sister/father/brother/son/daughter/&c. is dead.Let's go together.

While I'm doing my job listening to the pangs of sorrow from Iraqis with dead/maimed loved ones, you can talk to the relatives of the 10,000 dead Shi'ites that Saddam slaughtered in 1991, or the Kurds who've dealt with more for longer. While I'm explaining that the CEP of JDAMs are 16 feet, and ther isn't a weapon system under the sun that will hit with perfect accuracy, you can explain why their loved one's lives were so worthless that a detached misanthropic elitist sitting behind their computer in the United States can deem them unworthy of salvation.

Face it. The deposition of Saddam Hussein, for whatever ulterior motives the tinfoil wrapped conspiracy theorists might believe, was magnanimous and philanthropic, and there aren't any nations on earth who could've done it better than the US/UK coalition did. Iraq is a better country for it. Some died, yes. But some innocents will always die in war.

You've got to break a few eggs to make an omlette.

Yes we had to break a few heads with a kill ratio over a 1000 to one (averaging both Gulf wars) but we won't be eating an omlette... we will be eating oil.

Of course you can claim that the executive order Bush recently signed is false or a hoax but then you would be lying.

Here are the recent events followed by the executive order of which I speak.

During the initial assault on Baghdad, soldiers set up forward bases named Camp Shell and Camp Exxon. Those soldiers knew the score, even if the Pentagon's talking points dismissed any ties between Iraqi oil and their blood.

The Bush/Cheney administration has moved quickly to ensure U.S. corporate control over Iraqi resources, at least through the year 2007. The first part of the plan, created by the United Nations under U.S. pressure, is the Development Fund for Iraq, which is being controlled by the United States and advised by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The second is a recent Bush executive order that provides absolute legal protection for U.S. interests in Iraqi oil.

In May, the U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1483, which ended sanctions and endorsed the creation of Development Fund for Iraq, to be controlled by Paul Bremer and overseen by a board of accountants, including U.N., World Bank and IMF representatives. It endorsed the transfer of over $1 billion (of Iraqi oil money) from the Oil-for-Food program into the Development Fund. All proceeds from the sale of Iraqi oil and natural gas are also to be placed into the fund.

In the creation and expected implementation of this Development Fund for Iraq, one finds the fingerprints of the global economic structural adjustment that has attracted so much protest in recent years. World Bank and IMF programs, backed by the rigged rules of the World Trade Organization, have imposed dramatic financial restructuring upon much of the world. Developing countries have amassed huge debts in exchange for selling out their natural resources to powerful Northern corporations. This paradigm cloaks corporate welfare and neocolonialism in terms of "poverty alleviation," and now in Iraq as "humanitarian assistance."

New debt for Iraq will accrue through the very program that President Bush pledged would "benefit the people of Iraq." The Development Fund, derived from actual and expected Iraqi oil and gas sales, will apparently be used to leverage U.S. government-backed loans, credit and direct financing for U.S. corporate forays into Iraq. Besides financing reconstruction projects, some of the funds will also be used as collateral for projects approved by the U.S. Export-Import Bank (ExIm), whose mission is not development or poverty alleviation, but rather the creation of U.S. jobs and the promotion of American business abroad.

ExIm recently announced that it was open for business in Iraq and would begin considering applications by subcontractors (that is, companies hired by Bechtel and Halliburton) in Iraq. Corporations have found it next to impossible to obtain private bank credit for work in Iraq, due to the ongoing insecure environment. But ExIm has stepped in to take a lead role in facilitating U.S. business in Iraq.

"The primary source of repayment," explained an ExIm release, "is the Development Fund for Iraq, or another entity established under the auspices of the Coalition Provisional Authority with access to foreign exchange and protection from claims of creditors of the former regime." In other words, the U.S. government is happy to provide credit to any U.S. business wishing to do business in Iraq -- especially because the money comes from Iraq.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
But for the Bush/Cheney administration and their allies in the oil industry, this was not enough. Hours after the United Nations endorsed U.S. control of the "Development Fund" for Iraq, Bush signed an executive order that was spun as implementing Resolution 1483, but in reality went much further towards attracting investment and minimizing risk for U.S. corporations in Iraq.

Executive Order 13303 decrees that "any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void," with respect to the Development Fund for Iraq and "all Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein."
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

In other words, if ExxonMobil or ChevronTexaco touch Iraqi oil, it will be immune from legal proceedings in the United States. Anything that could go, and elsewhere has gone, awry with U.S. corporate oil operations will be immune to judgment: a massive tanker accident; an explosion at an oil refinery; the employment of slave labor to build a pipeline; murder of locals by corporate security; the release of billions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The president, with a stroke of the pen, signed away the rights of Saddam's victims, creditors and of the next true Iraqi government to be compensated through legal action. Bush's order unilaterally declares Iraqi oil to be the unassailable province of U.S. corporations.

In the short term, through the Development Fund and the Export-Import Bank programs, the Iraqi people's oil will finance U.S. corporate entrees into Iraq. In the long term, Executive Order 13303 protects anything those corporations do to seize control of Iraq's oil, from the point of production to the gas pump -- and places oil companies above the rule of law.

Oh shit. Guys, American corporations are rebuilding Iraq! Quick! Somebody stop them before Iraqis end up living in prosperity!

Some are a little graphic; but see the other side of the story: the Other American Liberation war.


Here is Freedom:

Some are too graphic and I didn't want to link them...so go here
(http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2606.htm)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/1_147672_1_6.jpg

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/iraq032403.jpg

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/p56tgic1.jpg

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/Nada_Adman_skull_fracture.jpg

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/1_145818_1_6.jpg

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/iraq6_02apr2003.jpg

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/distrust31.jpg

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/baghdad_market9_mar2003.jpg

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/illegalarrests2.jpg

While I'm doing my job listening to the pangs of sorrow from Iraqis with dead/maimed loved ones, you can talk to the relatives of the 10,000 dead Shi'ites that Saddam slaughtered in 1991, or the Kurds who've dealt with more for longer.
And tell them what? That their ranks are growing because the american army is in town, but hey, in a decade or two they'll be free, just like in Afghanistan?
Remember, the US is in talks with the Taliban to get them back into government in Afghanistan - less than two years after the invasion there. How long before they get into talks with the Ba'athists? And do you really think that the Iraqis don't know that? Their entire history since the 1930s is of that exact same process. Fine, the British were the ones doing it, but all caucasians look alike ;)

While I'm explaining that the CEP of JDAMs are 16 feet, and ther isn't a weapon system under the sun that will hit with perfect accuracy
Can we point out here that a JDAM, while having a CEP of 13 metres (thanks to a GPS-based guidance unit) has a minimum safe distance of approximately one kilometer (thanks to the 2000lb of high explosive strapped to the guidance unit) according to the US navy?

Face it. The deposition of Saddam Hussein, for whatever ulterior motives the tinfoil wrapped conspiracy theorists might believe, was magnanimous and philanthropic, and there aren't any nations on earth who could've done it better than the US/UK coalition did. Iraq is a better country for it. Some died, yes. But some innocents will always die in war.
You've got to break a few eggs to make an omlette.
That's both pig-ignorant of your history, theirs, afghanistan's, and the personal histories of the members of both PNAC and the current US administration.
And no-one with any sense believes that the US is making an omlette in Iraq. A dog's dinner, maybe...

Oh shit. Guys, American corporations are rebuilding Iraq! Quick! Somebody stop them before Iraqis end up living in prosperity!
And where do you think the money to pay those corporations for the work they're doing is coming from?
The sale of Iraqi oil.
In other words, the Iraqis are paying for the priviledge of having US-selected companies do US-designated work rebuilding US-destroyed infrastructure, for a price tag written by the US.

Stokes Pennwalt,

Do not forget to add to the list thousands of dead Iraqi people from American enforced sanctions.

If Saddam is the ultimate evil at #10, then my USA is #8 on that chart.

Originally posted by EI_Sparks

>That's both pig-ignorant of your history, theirs, afghanistan's, and the personal histories of the members of both PNAC and the current US administration.
And no-one with any sense believes that the US is making an omlette in Iraq. A dog's dinner, maybe...


>And where do you think the money to pay those corporations for the work they're doing is coming from?
The sale of Iraqi oil.
In other words, the Iraqis are paying for the priviledge of having US-selected companies do US-designated work rebuilding US-destroyed infrastructure, for a price tag written by the US.


It is very scary to see how Sparks continues to deny that the conditions of tens of millions of iraqis are improving just so he can keep rambling about his bloody oil theories.

FYI, sparks - the conditions in both Afghanistan and Iraq are improving, if slowly. If you deny that, you have your head in the sand.

Originally posted by DJSupreme23
the conditions in both Afghanistan and Iraq are improving, if slowly.
Who is it improving for? Not the people! :eek:

Originally posted by EI_Sparks
And no-one with any sense believes that the US is making an omlette in Iraq. A dog's dinner, maybe...The alternative would have been to leave Saddam in power. How, exactly, would that have been better for Iraqis than a shot at democracy and all the prosperity a free market economy will bring them?
In other words, the Iraqis are paying for the priviledge of having US-selected companies do US-designated work rebuilding US-destroyed infrastructure, for a price tag written by the US. Absolutely. You speak of this as if it's a bad thing. OMG AMERIKA IS DOING IT. So? Do you deny that it will be good for Iraq?
Originally posted by kajolishot
Stokes Pennwalt,

Do not forget to add to the list thousands of dead Iraqi people from American enforced sanctions.Do not forget that the sanctions were UN-mandated and enforced by all members of the allied coalition, not just the United States. The sanctions were Saddam's doing, and as much as dilapidated morons like Bin Laden tries to ascribe them to the United States, Iraq would not have been under sanctioning had they not ruthlessly invaded and plundered a helpless Kuwait in 1990.

I disagree.
Everyone wanted the sanctions taken off

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/jan2000/iraq-j05.shtml

If you feel uneasy about the source, you are free to use google to find other stories about this and I am sure UN's site has that particular vote record online.

Also, these "morons" you speak of are still alive despite full American military might.

Mission: Failed.

The alternative would have been to leave Saddam in power. How, exactly, would that have been better for Iraqis than a shot at democracy and all the prosperity a free market economy will bring them?
Wrong.
Listen carefully:
There were a huge number of options available, and a huge number of them did not involve leaving Saddam in power.
It was not a case of the options being limited to :
[list=1]
The US invades and takes over; or;
Saddam remains in power.
[/list=1]

This is real life - options are never that limited.

Absolutely. You speak of this as if it's a bad thing. OMG AMERIKA IS DOING IT. So? Do you deny that it will be good for Iraq?
I do deny it, because it isn't a good thing. You're assuming that the US has the right to dictate to the Iraqi people what will be done, by whom, and how much it'll cost them.
It doesn't.
If the US was serious about it's claims of humanitarian interests, the Iraqis would be the ones running the tender process and selecting companies, not the US.

Do not forget that the sanctions were UN-mandated and enforced by all members of the allied coalition, not just the United States.
But it was the US that denied medical equipment to Iraq by yelling "dual use" as loudly as they could.

The sanctions were Saddam's doing, and as much as dilapidated morons like Bin Laden tries to ascribe them to the United States, Iraq would not have been under sanctioning had they not ruthlessly invaded and plundered a helpless Kuwait in 1990.
Crap. On two counts. Kajolishot pointed out the sanctions issue, now I'll point out that Kuwait was invaded with full prior knowlege of the US (who gave no objection to Saddam when he asked if it was objectionable before he invaded) and the invasion of kuwait by Iraq was over charges that Kuwait had been drilling for oil on Iraqi land during the Iran-Iraq war, and both Iraq and Kuwait had been negotiating about that for a year prior to the invasion.
So don't go saying that Kuwait was wholly innocent, especially not given the way Kuwait is run...

Earlier, I posted a thread, asking for suggestions on how to remove saddam without military intervaention.

No serious suggestions were made.

Claiming that saddam could be removed, or the condition for the iraqis made better, without direct US intervention is utter bullshit.

While that may be true, the problem that many of us had with our actions in Iraq is that the American public was not allowed to make the decision to support a war of liberation. It was misled by the administration into believing there was an imminent threat to the United States.

This, after the administration repeatedly changed its reasoning for invading another nation as each previous reason was knocked down

:m: Peace.

Static

To note the part of the conversation I'm commenting on:
- Actually I was against the Iraq war, and think Shrubya Bush is an idiot. This doesn't however, stop me from taking a dislike to the enormous amount of Anti-America drivel said here everyday. (Static)

- A good reason for anti-amerikanism is the amerikan belief that a person can discharge himself from his democratic responsibilities by merely condemning a specific action without any further relevant consequence whatsoever. The illusion of having an opinion that matters , very good base for anti-amerikanism there. (Ghassan)

- America is a represenative democracy, so while I make not like Bush, this doesn't override those who support him. What do you propose I do, start a revolution? (Static)

- You tell me , your the democrat who has all the freedom . A tip would be to start refusing , dont take toomuch on your shoulders nobody asks you to . Just dont cooperate for anothers destruction , refuse . Sneek out of it , whatever results . At least that is if you would consider such moral ideologic thinking practical to your every day life , wich Im pretty fast to say no it aint and no u wouldnt accept it . (Ghassan)

- I'm no Democrat, I'm an Independant. Political parties are mostly for the drones who don't want to think for themselves. You seem to have no clue about us Americans. (Static)

- You being a democrat , I wasnt referring to the political party , but your "democratical" system . The fact you didnt even get that sais enough already , but ofcourse there's much more : Since I dont see any independants running your country , you must be overrrating your own importance . Seems you dont know much about yourself. (Ghassan)

- Then don't say "democrat" next time. Am I supposed to decode your ramblings? (Static)
And that's where I stick my nose in.

The highlighted section is what I refer to. I will now attempt a very dubious enterprise, and translate Ghassan's paragraph into a slightly more westernized political dialect. (Ghassan, by all means correct me where I'm wrong.)

- You tell me , your the democrat who has all the freedom. As a member of an allegedly-democratic society, you have recourse short of shooting your governors. The people can fill the streets; in some elections they can recall (e.g. Calif. Gray Davis recall), and we can go to the ballot box to approve or reject either laws themselves or direct instructions to the legislature concerning which laws to pass.

- A tip would be to start refusing, dont take toomuch on your shoulders nobody asks you to. When a President comes before the American people and the Congress to seek authorization for war or other troop deployment, for instance, there seems to be a mad rush to either side of the aisle. The opposition is traditional; the support is traditional. The merits of the action are not well- or sincerely-discussed. In the end, people who supported the safety of American troops and also the prestige (and in a related capacity, the security) of the nation, who opposed the Iraqi invasion for the fact that it was a severe abrogation of America's agreements and a severe blow to our public integrity were not opposed with rational arguments, but condemned as anti-American, pro-Saddam, &c. How it came to be that pacifists were accused of causing all wars (a Sciforums assertion) is beyond me. But we, the people, need not file in like ants behind the wolf in shepherd's clothing.

- Just dont cooperate for anothers destruction , refuse. No translation is required here.

- Sneek out of it , whatever results. There's always a better way than killing people. It's just a matter of finding that way.

- At least that is if you would consider such moral ideologic thinking practical to your every day life , wich Im pretty fast to say no it aint and no u wouldnt accept it . This is a rough generalization that we Americans have earned by proxy of inaction. Morality and progressive idealism are unprofitable to the existing social plutocracy. Even in our domestic issues, organizational abstractions (e.g. money) are more important than the issues they propose to address. This is a choice of the members of our democratic society.

Now, if we go back to the point where I pick up this conversation and examine the point about Anti-America drivel ... this seems to be Ghassan Kanafani's point. Or so says me: There are reasons for the anti-Americanism that Americans generally refuse to think of.

So what happens, then, is that while we're willing to call other people all manner of vile names for their crimes, and while we're willing to criticize all manner of people for their failures to satisfy American expectations, we rarely draw the link between our American government and the will of the people. True, there are reasons for this, but ultimately it's the people's fault.

Why do I acknowledge these reasons? Because I don't like little pieces of the country blowing up and killing 3,000 people. I honestly was very surprised and how badly 9/11 shook people; not in terms of the carnage, but as we packed our stuff and left downtown Seattle under a martial closure that morning, only a tiny group of people seemed to understand that it was not so much a matter of "Why did they do this?" as it was, "Well, they finally got us." I do not find any puzzling suggestion in the fact that, as the weeks progressed, the only people I found in my environment who understood this point were internationals. (e.g. a Chinese data-entry manager, the English gent managing statistical tables of Finance/Management, the guy from India who was a coder over at the home office across town, etc.) And in the press, only the extreme left picked it up, and was ridiculed for it.

Yet people in the United States do not generally extend their social responsibility to include their leaders. As the left wing ticked off the histories, the right wing and middling movements rejected history for sentiment. What does Iran have to do with it? That was 50 years ago ... and what do Rumsfeld's actions in the 1980s have to do with anything? That was a different administration.

My dad, for instance, finally snapped a few years ago. Having gone nuts, he's much nicer now. And it took us a few years to shake out the details, but insofar as any of us can tell, all of his presumptions failed him. One of the last to die was the political integrity of his specific brand of fiscal conservatism. For years we'd argued ourselves into a standoff about money, "real life", and so forth. One day he woke up and found everything he trusted in poised to put the knife in. He had time to look at his business partner and say, "Et tu, Brute?" and then it was over.

The point of this is that when the pundits told us that supporting dictators abroad was a good thing for America's security, he believed it. As such, his tax money went, through the (Reagan) administration he endorsed, to directly support the Iraqi tyrant. A few years later, his tax money went, through the (Poppy Bush) administration he endorsed, to repel the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait. Twelve years later, my father had learned his lesson. He paid his taxes, he didn't endorse the administration, and he knows damn well that if the terrorists get him tomorrow, it is, by the standards he advocated, what he deserves.

But many Americans--a majority of Americans--continue to license their leaders with votes and tax dollars, and then appeal to their lack of responsibility for the conduct of those leaders. So what it looks like abroad seems to be a little perverse:

- Leader is elected.
- People cheer.
- Leader takes action.
- People cheer.
- Leader asks for re-election based on success of action.
- People cheer, re-elect.
- Someone responds to the action taken by the leader.
- People wail and cry and wonder what they ever did to deserve it.

And in the United States, because we elect new leaders every 2, 4, and 6 years (depending on office), we like to pretend that "It's a different government. Would you hold the new Iraqi government responsible for the actions of Saddam Hussein?"

Yet when the faces change and the policies are still killing children in your community and supporting local tyrants around the world, the people who bear the consequences of American actions sometimes tend to disagree that disparate executive administrations constitute disparate governments. Sure, this or that president and the people who elected him may not have written the policy, but he's following it. And the people are willing supporters.

Revolution? Well, that's the nice thing about being in an allegedly-democratic society. You don't need to go blowing things up in order to make a change. The clear majority of the Civil Rights movement in the United States was peaceful and civilly disobedient. That movement was peaceful despite violence. What achievements it made and continues to make find their strength in the cooperative spirit, not in the militant.

But if the American people don't want to be held responsible for their actions, they need to set a new precedent. Filling the streets to throw Bush out of office, proclaim a new cooperative era, and demand that the nation return to its pursuit of its proper and human ambitions ... major protests in Washington, New York, Chicago, Miami, Dallas, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles ... a few days of quiet chaos in the streets attempting to recapture America for the free and the brave would be an encouraging sign.

If it broke into open revolution, there would be the danger of foreign interests sending operatives to degrade the situation further.

The blood of revolution need not be literal. It will still feed the tree of Liberty if honestly conceived and executed.

We do have an obligation to restrain our leaders. Our failure to do so combined with the appearance of mass ignorance or apathy toward that obligation spawns much anti-Americanism abroad, and much dissent at home.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

Edit: Corrected "conversation transcript"; erroneous attribution.

Static
Then don't say "democrat" next time. Am I supposed to decode your ramblings?

The only place in the world where the word democrat represents your shitty wannabe-hippy zionist party is in the USA , so keep your centrist views for yourself ok there are more than 280 M peoples on this globe .

Perhaps I should have adapted to your way of reasoning and said democratic instead of democrat , but why should I do that ? Because you think your amerikanist bullpoo has any authority over other peoples minds ?

Do you really have any knowledge of America??? Independants and moderates are the key swing voters in American elections.

I am sure I have more knowledge on the subjects related to amerika relevant in this thread , than you .

And independants are rather irellevant as I dont see any idnependants having an actual say in your countries policy . The fact that they have authority with a small group of swingers , does not mean they have authority in the system .

As for moderate , what is it do you consider your democratic and republican party extremes ? If not , then why do you bring up that moderates are relevant ?

America is doing fine with it's so called horrible political system. Where do you live?

See your new thread

You are pretty funny, yet so delusional...

And this followed by :

Truth, Justice, and the American way.

Can anyone take you seriously like this man ?

Now sure, MAYBE there's a point in there somewhere, but....

You asked weither to start a revolution and you got your response . The fact that you cannot coprehend any of it rather deals with your incapabilities to understand complexity .

I'll assume he doesn't want me to sell out to the Bush supporters who want these wars. Which is strange because I already stated that I'm no fan of Shrubya.

No it wasnt about what your ideas in your head may be about Bush , rather what you are doing with it , your actions , your practices . I dont care who you're a fan of .

Please tell me his point, I doubt he even knows it.

Tiassa has done a terrific job not only explaining my points , but also bring in addition other points I did not even think of . In that tradition I want to add something as well :

* The refusal of financing USA policy through tax dollars .
* The refusal of consumerism in todays post cold war neo-imperialist USA and globalized international market . (Spike : your responsabilities dont end with voting)

You can start with that Static , but you wont , something you could have deciphered from my pervious post as well .

Funny btw , how you dont respond to these huge problems of yours to me , but choose to whine about it to Tiassa .

Im happy has been willing to take the time to explain it to you . Im sorry if nothing changed in your mind . Im sure it didnt .

**********************************************

Stokes
They're waving American flags because they hate us. For destroying the tyrant who ran them from their homelands. For ending the crippling decade of trade embargos, econimic sanctions, and otracization by the global community. And for killing those who persecuted their families.

It is truly beyond all disgust to have to see here amerikanists like yourself propagate such lies with pictures of exceptions , about MY people , about MY land .

Are you serious here in believing the peoples in Iraq love you ?
They dont , no Iraqi and Arab who holds the misery of his peoples higher in importance than the misery of himself , loves you .

Amerika has brought only horror and destruction , there are millions of peoples in Iraq who are not posing for your vomit-inducing pictures .

You Stokes have no idea what WE Arabs think about your shit , and you wonder where those bullits are coming from every day , thinking its Saddam , LMAO .

While I'm doing my job listening to the pangs of sorrow from Iraqis with dead/maimed loved ones, you can talk to the relatives of the 10,000 dead Shi'ites that Saddam slaughtered in 1991,

And I have a friend who is Shiaa and FOUGHT in 91 and you SOLD HIM OUT , he has been imprisoned by Saddam , fortunatly he could escape Iraq . Stop spreading your disgusting lies all over here I know its your job but that says it all doesnt it , Stokes ?

The Shia didnt want your war , they were against your war . Your friends are only highly traumatized peoples who cannot coprehend the value of a nation , but only that of their own shitty lives , oftenly shitty because of you as you betrayed them and as you put Sadam in there .

If you would be honest in wanting to know how the things are going you would try to find out , you can easily even from your chair . But you only care to find those who support your colonism and exploitation .

Some died, yes. But some innocents will always die in war.You've got to break a few eggs to make an omlette.

Nobody accepted your deal , so again what you say has no relevance whatsoever . Nobody likes an omlette nobody wants an omelette.

Oh shit. Guys, American corporations are rebuilding Iraq! Quick! Somebody stop them before Iraqis end up living in prosperity!

zionist coorporations , u ever faced the respons of an Iraqi when you told him who Bechtel is and how they're rebuilding Baghdad ?

Or any Arab for that matter ? U probably dont even know yourself .

The alternative would have been to leave Saddam in power. How, exactly, would that have been better for Iraqis than a shot at democracy and all the prosperity a free market economy will bring them?

Thats not the alternative dont bring in your there-r-only-2-choices fallacy mr Bush .

Absolutely. You speak of this as if it's a bad thing. OMG AMERIKA IS DOING IT. So? Do you deny that it will be good for Iraq?

It is a very bad thing as those coorporations really are not building anything signofocant for the Iraqi peoples but for the new Iraqi regime that will be the ally of the USA .

The sanctions were Saddam's doing, and as much as dilapidated morons like Bin Laden tries to ascribe them to the United States, Iraq would not have been under sanctioning had they not ruthlessly invaded and plundered a helpless Kuwait in 1990.

Helpless Kuweit ? Why because they are your rich allies who sell out Arab wealth because England has decided some years ago they needed oil for their shitty ships , and it would be nic eif they would have to deal with oil-magnates than millions of peoples ?

Kuweit should not exist , it belongs to the peoples of Arabia .

Othead : ooh, some more evil propaganda.
kid yourself not! the smiling iraqis are smiling under the barrell of a gun! or maybe they were paid to kiss Bush's photos.
no, wait, i know! their mothers were raped and disappeared, and their sisters were threatened too... so they decided to do this humiliating task of "high fiving" a US marine.
Stokes Dude, don't forget the mind control rays beamed down from space by American satellites.
Otheadand the large amounts of LSD released into the water supply (by the US gov't)

Look how pathetic your disgusting attempts to patronize Iraq suffering is . You are trying to make excuses that you believe WE would bring in to try to deny 20 Iraqi's happy about this horrific occupation .

Wel I at least dont , sp keep your pathetic conspiracy-theories for yourself , millions of Iraqi and Arab wish for your destruction , and you know it (well Othead doesnt but thats ok because he's a Hebrew u see) .

**********************************************

DJ
Sorry to say this, but if you're not trolling, then you're ill and should not be free to walk the streets

Sounds like DJ needs another confrontation with reality because he cant understand how a person can have a problem with a hostile military occupying your country . We should have a time machine for peoples like you so we can send them straight to 1940 .

It is very scary to see how Sparks continues to deny that the conditions of tens of millions of iraqis are improving

Its not improving .

the conditions in both Afghanistan and Iraq are improving, if slowly. If you deny that, you have your head in the sand.

Your head is in your ass as Aghanistan is simply at war and Taliban is back on the map , while there is a guerilla war in Iraq .

Earlier, I posted a thread, asking for suggestions on how to remove saddam without military intervaention.
No serious suggestions were made.
Claiming that saddam could be removed, or the condition for the iraqis made better, without direct US intervention is utter bullshit.


Yes there was go read again . Only thing bullshit is that you dont care for responses to your pathetic crap , and simply keep repeating your shit in new threads .

Originally posted by tiassa
Static

To note the part of the conversation I'm commenting on:And that's where I stick my nose in.

The highlighted section is what I refer to. I will now attempt a very dubious enterprise, and translate Ghassan's paragraph into a slightly more westernized political dialect. (Ghassan, by all means correct me where I'm wrong.)

This should be interesting, I'm sure even Ghassan will be surprised that he had a point...
- You tell me , your the democrat who has all the freedom. As a member of an allegedly-democratic society, you have recourse short of shooting your governors. The people can fill the streets; in some elections they can recall (e.g. Calif. Gray Davis recall), and we can go to the ballot box to approve or reject either laws themselves or direct instructions to the legislature concerning which laws to pass.
I would have answer to Ghassan, that I worked in college as a campaign worker with others to help get laws on the books, like medical :m:, in California. We also recalled like you said, our governor Gray Davis for his lies and mismanagement of our budget. Many Americans are politically active and it doesn't take violence to enact change.
- A tip would be to start refusing, dont take toomuch on your shoulders nobody asks you to. When a President comes before the American people and the Congress to seek authorization for war or other troop deployment, for instance, there seems to be a mad rush to either side of the aisle. The opposition is traditional; the support is traditional. The merits of the action are not well- or sincerely-discussed. In the end, people who supported the safety of American troops and also the prestige (and in a related capacity, the security) of the nation, who opposed the Iraqi invasion for the fact that it was a severe abrogation of America's agreements and a severe blow to our public integrity were not opposed with rational arguments, but condemned as anti-American, pro-Saddam, &c. How it came to be that pacifists were accused of causing all wars (a Sciforums assertion) is beyond me. But we, the people, need not file in like ants behind the wolf in shepherd's clothing.
Then I would tell Ghassan that it's up to people to make their dissatisfaction with there public leaders felt in the 2004 elections. Once again, we have recourse in America to recall leaders, or to impeach presidents. Ghassan would have to be blind not to see the outrage by half of the populace of America, and the declining support numbers for Bush.
- Just dont cooperate for anothers destruction , refuse. No translation is required here.
That's a very broad statement. Should the US have not cooperated for the destruction of the Nazis? War is sometimes a necessary evil.
- Sneek out of it , whatever results. There's always a better way than killing people. It's just a matter of finding that way.
I think your misinterpreting Ghassan's thoughts here. He says "whatever results", and that is not an option for me and many others. If a country threatens America's destruction, is Ghassan saying that we should bend over and take it?
- At least that is if you would consider such moral ideologic thinking practical to your every day life , wich Im pretty fast to say no it aint and no u wouldnt accept it . This is a rough generalization that we Americans have earned by proxy of inaction. Morality and progressive idealism are unprofitable to the existing social plutocracy. Even in our domestic issues, organizational abstractions (e.g. money) are more important than the issues they propose to address. This is a choice of the members of our democratic society.
Ghassan shouldn't ass-u-me to know my or the general moral thinking of Americans. Most who supported the Iraq war did it because they thought Saddam was a danger to their families and lifestyle. Bush wrapped himself up in the torn cloth of 9/11, and used it effectively to get this war.
Now, if we go back to the point where I pick up this conversation and examine the point about Anti-America drivel ... this seems to be Ghassan Kanafani's point. Or so says me: There are reasons for the anti-Americanism that Americans generally refuse to think of.

So what happens, then, is that while we're willing to call other people all manner of vile names for their crimes, and while we're willing to criticize all manner of people for their failures to satisfy American expectations, we rarely draw the link between our American government and the will of the people. True, there are reasons for this, but ultimately it's the people's fault.

The same could be said of any other country, America doesn't have a monopoly on this.
Why do I acknowledge these reasons? Because I don't like little pieces of the country blowing up and killing 3,000 people. I honestly was very surprised and how badly 9/11 shook people; not in terms of the carnage, but as we packed our stuff and left downtown Seattle under a martial closure that morning, only a tiny group of people seemed to understand that it was not so much a matter of "Why did they do this?" as it was, "Well, they finally got us." I do not find any puzzling suggestion in the fact that, as the weeks progressed, the only people I found in my environment who understood this point were internationals. (e.g. a Chinese data-entry manager, the English gent managing statistical tables of Finance/Management, the guy from India who was a coder over at the home office across town, etc.) And in the press, only the extreme left picked it up, and was ridiculed for it.
Americans don't understand why they did the 9/11 attacks because they serve no purpose. What cause did they help? What was gained other than alot of deaths. The whole suicide bomber mentality is so twisted that it's very hard to comprehend a reason.

Did they think this would get the US out of the Middle East??? If they did then they're fools. People in America were growing tired of Israel/Palestine conflicts, and dealing with the Mid East area. Now we are totally in that region, and war mongers like Bush/Rummy have all the propaganda they need for their war machine.
The point of this is that when the pundits told us that supporting dictators abroad was a good thing for America's security, he believed it. As such, his tax money went, through the (Reagan) administration he endorsed, to directly support the Iraqi tyrant. A few years later, his tax money went, through the (Poppy Bush) administration he endorsed, to repel the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait. Twelve years later, my father had learned his lesson. He paid his taxes, he didn't endorse the administration, and he knows damn well that if the terrorists get him tomorrow, it is, by the standards he advocated, what he deserves.
Yes, many people bought the BS they were sold by Reagan and the like, but they are not rarities in the World. Every other country has people and factions that believe the bull they are told by leaders.
But many Americans--a majority of Americans--continue to license their leaders with votes and tax dollars, and then appeal to their lack of responsibility for the conduct of those leaders. So what it looks like abroad seems to be a little perverse:

- Leader is elected.
- People cheer.

SOME people cheer...

And is this situation any different in other modern countries?
- Leader takes action.
- People cheer.

LOL, when has this been the case???

Very few laws, bills, or actions get through the House, Senate and White House with great cheer. It's usually a battle.
- Leader asks for re-election based on success of action.
- People cheer, re-elect.

*cough* Pappa Bush.... *cough*
- Someone responds to the action taken by the leader.
- People wail and cry and wonder what they ever did to deserve it.
Don't you mean people get pissed and support the war mongering leader...
Yet when the faces change and the policies are still killing children in your community and supporting local tyrants around the world, the people who bear the consequences of American actions sometimes tend to disagree that disparate executive administrations constitute disparate governments. Sure, this or that president and the people who elected him may not have written the policy, but he's following it. And the people are willing supporters.
America's record in the World is great, the good far outweighs the bad. Ignoring the positives and focusing on the negatives does nothing but alienate people from reform and push them towards overt patriotism.
But if the American people don't want to be held responsible for their actions, they need to set a new precedent. Filling the streets to throw Bush out of office, proclaim a new cooperative era, and demand that the nation return to its pursuit of its proper and human ambitions ... major protests in Washington, New York, Chicago, Miami, Dallas, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles ... a few days of quiet chaos in the streets attempting to recapture America for the free and the brave would be an encouraging sign.
Uh....There were major protest around America at the start of this war...
We do have an obligation to restrain our leaders. Our failure to do so combined with the appearance of mass ignorance or apathy toward that obligation spawns much anti-Americanism abroad, and much dissent at home.
We have the ability to voice our opinions in 2004. The fact though, is that we didn't restrain Bush because he had support for this war.

I didn't agree with Bush, I thought this was the right war at the wrong time for us. But it was the failure of the UN to enforce their own rules that led us to this.

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
Static


The only place in the world where the word democrat represents your shitty wannabe-hippy zionist party is in the USA , so keep your centrist views for yourself ok there are more than 280 M peoples on this globe .

Perhaps I should have adapted to your way of reasoning and said democratic instead of democrat , but why should I do that ? Because you think your amerikanist bullpoo has any authority over other peoples minds ?

Learn to communicate, then we'll talk....
I am sure I have more knowledge on the subjects related to amerika relevant in this thread , than you .
LOL! :p

Humor is a wonderful thing.
And independants are rather irellevant as I dont see any idnependants having an actual say in your countries policy . The fact that they have authority with a small group of swingers , does not mean they have authority in the system .
Let me explain this to you again. In America, Indys and moderates are the key swing voters that Democrats and Republicans fight over. Everyone's vote in America counts, that's the great thing about democracy.
And this followed by :

Truth, Justice, and the American way.

Can anyone take you seriously like this man ?

Most people probably realize that I was a "Justice League of America" fan growing up. But considering your lack of knowledge on our culture, I'll give you a pass.
You asked weither to start a revolution and you got your response . The fact that you cannot coprehend any of it rather deals with your incapabilities to understand complexity .
Complexity isn't needed with your words, my friend.
No it wasnt about what your ideas in your head may be about Bush , rather what you are doing with it , your actions , your practices . I dont care who you're a fan of .
See post above....
Tiassa has done a terrific job not only explaining my points , but also bring in addition other points I did not even think of . In that tradition I want to add something as well :
Tiassa did a great job of giving your posts revelance.

* The refusal of financing USA policy through tax dollars .
We elect the leaders of our country, so it makes no sense to refuse tax dollars. We can simply throw out the leader if we disagree with his policy. See Gov. Gray Davis of California
* The refusal of consumerism in todays post cold war neo-imperialist USA and globalized international market . (Spike : your responsabilities dont end with voting)
Consumerism runs the WORLD. America is not unique in it's love of goods. Do you think the US is the only one that supports third world sweatshop labor, or the only ones trapped in this modern wave of materialism??

The whole industrialized World is infected with the disease of consumerism.

Not all governors in the US face recall. The extent of democracy in the several states varies from one to the next.

For instance, President Bush was quoted this very morning, in response to a question about the Davis recall: You know, it's kind of a -- we're not used to recalls in Texas, for example, thankfully.

The only tax protest that would work, of course, would be a mass tax protest, and unless people are cutting funding to schools, libraries, or emergency services, mass tax protests are rare among Americans despite the prominence of the Boston episode in our national legends.

But Americans tend to just wait until the next presidential election. Who wants to worry about an impeachment when we can vote him out next year? A blowjob? Impeach the bastard. Lies to warrant an illegal war? We can wait, and besides, we just might actually elect him this time around.

But even if we presume for the moment that Bush is defeated and leaves office in January, 2005, that's a huge difference if you're out in the world suffering and trying to make heads or tails of the American foreign policy that contributes to or even causes the situation.

And if you look across the oceans and see the people taking luxury while people are hurting and dying, well ... there's some more anti-American sentiment we'll get to put up with.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

Having lost our way, our confusion and frustration will continue to turn brutal until the bold new American misadventures of revenge and exploitation finally end in a whimper.

From Infromation Clearing House 7/28:

"Yet again, false informers, ill-trained American soldiers who appeared to exercise no fire control and a lack of military planning has created a tragedy among the people the Americans claimed to be 'liberating' from Saddam Hussein only 15 weeks ago. " (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4245.htm)

our confusion and frustration will continue to turn brutal until the bold new American misadventures of revenge and exploitation finally end in a whimper.

if only we were so lucky, from the little i know of history this trend tends to escalate not whimper out. i have a bad feeling those of us alive now will find this disastrous course defining a whole generation if not more.

Originally posted by EI_Sparks
Wrong.
Listen carefully:
There were a huge number of options available, and a huge number of them did not involve leaving Saddam in power.
It was not a case of the options being limited to :
[list=1]
The US invades and takes over; or;
Saddam remains in power.
[/list=1]

This is real life - options are never that limited.Elaborate. Tell me how Saddam would be deposed with anything short of an invasion.

I do deny it, because it isn't a good thing. You're assuming that the US has the right to dictate to the Iraqi people what will be done, by whom, and how much it'll cost them.
It doesn't.
If the US was serious about it's claims of humanitarian interests, the Iraqis would be the ones running the tender process and selecting companies, not the US.
Everybody in Iraq capable of making a decision in this regard was either dead, deported, or a Ba'athist. Thus, foreign intervention is required, in the initial phase.

But it was the US that denied medical equipment to Iraq by yelling "dual use" as loudly as they could.
Bullshit. That the sanctions did not allow food and medical supplies to reach Iraq was a complete lie, but some people have heard it enough to believe it to be true.
UN Resolution 687, Paragraph 20:

20. Decides, effective immediately, that the prohibitions against the sale or supply to Iraq of commodities or products, other than medicine and health supplies, and prohibitions against financial transactions related thereto contained in resolution 661 (1990) shall not apply to foodstuffs notified to the Security Council Committee established by resolution 661 (1990) concerning the situation between Iraq and Kuwait or, with the approval of that Committee, under the simplified and accelerated "no-objection" procedure, to materials and supplies for essential civilian needs as identified in the report of the Secretary-General dated 20 March 1991, and in any further findings of humanitarian need by the Committee;Link (http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm). Food and medical supplies were allowed into Iraq. Problem solved.

Furthermore, Iraq rejected the Smart Sanctions because "smart" sanctions means, lifting them entirely, further allowing them to violate their cease-fire agreement. Link (http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/07/02/iraq.sanctions/index.html).
Crap. On two counts. Kajolishot pointed out the sanctions issue, now I'll point out that Kuwait was invaded with full prior knowlege of the US (who gave no objection to Saddam when he asked if it was objectionable before he invaded) and the invasion of kuwait by Iraq was over charges that Kuwait had been drilling for oil on Iraqi land during the Iran-Iraq war, and both Iraq and Kuwait had been negotiating about that for a year prior to the invasion.
So don't go saying that Kuwait was wholly innocent, especially not given the way Kuwait is run... Um, no. Unless you honestly believe Tareq Aziz's fallacious interpretation of conversations with US State Dept. officials prior to August of 1990, in which case, I cannot help you.

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
It is truly beyond all disgust to have to see here amerikanists like yourself propagate such lies with pictures of exceptions , about MY people , about MY land . The pictures are real. Disagree with their message all you want, but you must accept that there are others in this world who hold different beliefs than yourself. You're an Arab who hates America and believes it can do no good. Bush is Satan incarnate. That's wonderful. However, not everybody in this world sees reality through the same lens that you do.

Static

I'm sure even Ghassan will be surprised that he had a point...

Im surprised you are still trying to make one with patronizing something your narrow path cant grasp because of her simplistic makeover .

Many Americans are politically active and it doesn't take violence to enact change.

* how many ?
* what effect on actual policy do they have if they switch away from a mainstream position ?
* nobody said anything about violence . If you're the democracy you pretend to be you would be more then 2 options . Or are the only 2 kind of peoples in your country ?

Also , as coorporatism rules in USA we obviously see the free-market in your elections , I mean its amazing to actually even mention democracy when you are confronted with such practices , where is the democratic moderacy ?

it's up to people to make their dissatisfaction with there public leaders felt in the 2004 elections. Once again, we have recourse in America to recall leaders, or to impeach presidents. Ghassan would have to be blind not to see the outrage by half of the populace of America, and the declining support numbers for Bush.

And you think there is where the responisbility for a government ends ? Where peoples can vote for another ? So when you voted another , its none of your fault ? No responsibility whatsoever ?

And we'll see elections next year , and no I dont see outrage by half populance of amerika (140 m) , and funny this would go with a mere declining for Bush . You dont make much sense now do you ?

Anyways , I think you're a bit toomuch cought up into the american daydream .

That's a very broad statement. Should the US have not cooperated for the destruction of the Nazis? War is sometimes a necessary evil.

You can try to make a failed theoretical rule out of it , practice however shows actuality , and look : Iraq , Afghanistan , no Nazi-Germany there see ? Oh wait , forgot about Israel . Oh wait , they're your friends :bugeye:

If a country threatens America's destruction, is Ghassan saying that we should bend over and take it?

Another theoretical issue , nobody amerika attacked did threaten them , not Afghanistan nor Iraq .

Most who supported the Iraq war did it because they thought Saddam was a danger to their families and lifestyle. Bush wrapped himself up in the torn cloth of 9/11, and used it effectively to get this war.

Does the fact the peoples had a different idea of it because they are moronic , change any of their responsibility ?

\The same could be said of any other country, America doesn't have a monopoly on this.

Although there are more periods of time , this century amerika surely is the winner , no doubt about that when ussr and nazi germany are gone . Since they're still standing , they surely do have a monopoly .

Americans don't understand why they did the 9/11 attacks because they serve no purpose. What cause did they help? What was gained other than alot of deaths. The whole suicide bomber mentality is so twisted that it's very hard to comprehend a reason.

Whats pretty twisted is your equalization of a suicide-bomber mentality and a hit on these amerikan targets .

The difference between purpose and not a purpose , is the difference between winner and loser .

Did they think this would get the US out of the Middle East??? If they did then they're fools.

The cause was besides retalliation obviously to make awareness .
But its difficult to do that with such a mental Pyong Yang the USA is .

And is this situation any different in other modern countries?

well they're at least more moderate

but anyways others having the same issues doesnt make your issue go away

America's record in the World is great, the good far outweighs the bad. Ignoring the positives and focusing on the negatives does nothing but alienate people from reform and push them towards overt patriotism

U wanna compare ? Oh my how amazing to believe that USA has a good record , how many peoples have profitted because of the USA and how many have suffered because of the USA ? Are you even aware ? Cold war mean anything to you ?

Uh....There were major protest around America at the start of this war...

Very influential ?

I didn't agree with Bush, I thought this was the right war at the wrong time for us. But it was the failure of the UN to enforce their own rules that led us to this.

Sure blame another for your own actions , why not ? In any ways you responsibilities for your countries policy does not end with your little voting game .

Learn to communicate, then we'll talk....

I seem to have only problems communicating with the lesser gifted section of sci .

Now again , your definition for democrat by what you base by defintion to be rambling , is a definition that is only upheld in the USA , and nowhere else on this globe . As there are more than 280 m peoples on this planet , you ought to be considered very centric , witch shows u should rather be playing outside with your cowboy friends rather than try to debate on an international level .

Your comment please ?

Humor is a wonderful thing.

Laughing at a person who's laughing at his imagination is better even .

Let me explain this to you again. In America, Indys and moderates are the key swing voters that Democrats and Republicans fight over. Everyone's vote in America counts, that's the great thing about democracy.

And you're not getting it , again . The fact that the competition is between 2 parties is not a reflection of society , nor of a worthy representative democracy . Nobody's votes counts , as you already have 2 answers to everything before anyone is asked . 2 options , your system is a logical fallacy . No wonder Bush had such a great about about the "us" "them" situations . Its only natural for you .

Most people probably realize that I was a "Justice League of America" fan growing up. But considering your lack of knowledge on our culture, I'll give you a pass.

Not knowing your lil' whatever does not equalize not having knowledge of the various cultures you have in your USA .

Seems you're just talking 'bout yourself and your culture again .

And as usual u missed the entire point of those 3 words going bad together .

Complexity isn't needed with your words, my friend.

You didnt understand that there was a respons to your question , I dont know whats needed to understand that but surely you didnt have any .

See post above....

Why dont u go chear for your hockey team man if you wanna yell out irellevant independant rantings .

Tiassa did a great job of giving your posts revelance.

Tiassa has done a better job ridiculing your coprehension-capabilities , beautifully illustrated by your actual failure to coprehend once again .

We elect the leaders of our country, so it makes no sense to refuse tax dollars. We can simply throw out the leader if we disagree with his policy. See Gov. Gray Davis of California

It makes sense if you don want to have a relevant link between you or your governments policy . You pay tax you are responsible for what happens with that money . Weither you like Bush or dont and who ure a fan of is none of my business nor concern , what is , is that your money is been killing my peoples through your democratic system that upholds freedom so much .

Consumerism runs the WORLD.

World is not equal to western society .

America is not unique in it's love of goods. Do you think the US is the only one that supports third world sweatshop labor, or the only ones trapped in this modern wave of materialism??

Not the only one , but the most relevant one because of its impact and quantity . Nbody is talking about uniqueness .

The whole industrialized World is infected with the disease of consumerism.

since communism fell yes , and also not the whole world is industrialized .

But thanks , you didnt really answer any points I made . Just made pseudo-nuevo comments pretty irellevant to the quoted selection .

Thanks for your time .

:rolleyes:

Stokes

Elaborate. Tell me how Saddam would be deposed with anything short of an invasion.

* You could have taken him out yourself in 91
* You could have NOT sell out on the Shia who incited a revolution
* You could assasinate
* You could organize a new revolution

The thing that bothers most is , that it has never come further than theoretical consideration in the minds of political analysts . It has never reached consideration in the USA , nor have serious attempts have been done .

But we all know it never was about Saddam , but any strong opposition for Israel in the Arab world and a oil-source going to waste .

Everybody in Iraq capable of making a decision in this regard was either dead, deported, or a Ba'athist. Thus, foreign intervention is required, in the initial phase.

Every person in Iraq is capable making such decision as it is about his own life . Do you deny souvereignity to one ones existence ? Also foreign intervention if necesary ought to be as broad as possible to have any objectivity , again this isnt the case .

The pictures are real. Disagree with their message all you want, but you must accept that there are others in this world who hold different beliefs than yourself. You're an Arab who hates America and believes it can do no good. Bush is Satan incarnate. That's wonderful. However, not everybody in this world sees reality through the same lens that you do.

* I never said the pictures are not real
* The pictures are exceptions and not rule , not mainstream .
* I dont believe amerika cant do good .
* I dont believe in Satan nor his reincarnation in Bush .
* The problem with your reality , is that its not the opinion of an Iraqi nor almost any Arab . Your reality is that of your own beloved amerika , a country few arabs love .

There are reasons for this , and you know so . Now you can be in favor of Arab genocides all you want for all I care ,but please dont try to replace Arab opinion with your imagination propaganda .

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
But we all know it never was about Saddam , but any strong opposition for Israel in the Arab world and a oil-source going to waste .
[/B]

Interestingly, roughly similar for the British reasons to infiltrate the country. Interestingly, there were also a high number of Jews politically active in Britain at the time.

Interestingly, roughly similar for the British reasons to infiltrate the country. Interestingly, there were also a high number of Jews politically active in Britain at the time.

I dont care for the zionist to be a jew , a christian or just a moneyhungry capitalist without cover-up morals .

Do you ?

zionist have been politically & economically active in England for quite some time . Its nothing new in Europe , there's been a world war over it .

Originally posted by Stokes Pennwalt
Elaborate. Tell me how Saddam would be deposed with anything short of an invasion.
The same way the government he was hired (by the US) to eliminate was ousted. A bullet to the head.
Yes, I know, it's not the best solution. But it is a damn sight more humane than killing ten thousand innocent civilians. And that's just the first idea from my head. Given time and resources, I have confidence a legal solution could have been found.
But that wasn't in the best interests of the US, and besides which, the decision to invade was taken on 13/09/01, NOT on the basis of any report from Hans Blix.

Bullshit. That the sanctions did not allow food and medical supplies to reach Iraq was a complete lie, but some people have heard it enough to believe it to be true.
Not bullshit, recorded fact. I didn't say "medical supplies", I said "medical equipment". There's a difference.

Food and medical supplies were allowed into Iraq. Problem solved.
I know. I even pointed it out when we were discussing whether or not sanctions in Iraq ought to be lifted after the invasion, when I pointed out that they didn't have to be lifted to do humanitarian work and that it was a better idea at the time to leave them in place temporarially.
Except that that would have interfered with the free sale of Iraqi oil by the US, and so what happened? They were lifted.

Um, no. Unless you honestly believe Tareq Aziz's fallacious interpretation of conversations with US State Dept. officials prior to August of 1990, in which case, I cannot help you.
Why would I believe him less than I believe the US state department? It's not like they have a better record, after all.

The pictures are real.
The pictures of saddam's statue being toppled were real as well - but they were taken in a way designed to give an impression that other angles (or more detailed examination) don't give.
I.E. A photo can be a real, undoctored photo and still be misleading or false.

Something just occurred to me.

How many people clicked on the link and actually read the caption to the topic post?

I'm just curious, now that I think about it, what this topic was supposed to discuss.

The "inevitable" reaction seems to have responded to a certain perception of intent. I'm curious what it is about a US soldier holding a child taken in a middle-of-the-night raid that has to do with either the response or the crappy sarcasm that appears to have invited it.

Nonetheless, for obvious reasons, I'll not post the picture of the burned-up vehicle from a weekend raid in Mansur, Baghdad, that took several civilian lives. Nor will I post the picture of angry tribal Iraqis protesting the weekend raids. This topic is already heavily-laden with images and must be sucking down the bandwidth. We've seen enough propaganda photos lately for me to bother you all with something that so obviously isn't real.

So what was the point of this topic? Was it really as simple as it seems, Jerrek?

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

And you forgot :
One reason is that just 32 per cent say that everyday life is better now than it was a year ago. Twice as many say it is either just as bad (16 per cent) or actually worse (47 per cent). (full article) (http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/07/week_3/16_poll.html)

I never mentioned (to revert to the inception of this thread) that any foreign soldier removing, however gently, your sleeping infant from your house is clearly no cause for jubilation and acceptance of foreign administration.

Jerrek, do not scurry away when your heroes are exposed as bumbling, miscalculating, and murderous. Even your chosen frames of the occupation of Iraq betray the truth.

Imagine your own son being carried out of your own house at 3 am by a Chinese infantryman. How very warm and fuzzy.