I'M MAD AS HELL!!
ramalane(tm)
yesterdays attacks.
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victims.list.ap/
http://www.msnbc.com/news/627249_asp.htm
Authorities fear that the actual death toll is in the thousands...
Think about all their children being orphaned and then talk shit about
not retaliating against all the terrorist camps in the world!
I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
straight to fuckin' hell.
/kirt
--
"We will not make a distinction between the terrorists and those who
harbor them." -President George W. Bush (September 11, 2001)
Harry S. Truman
<rama...@cotse.com> wrote:
>Here are lists of just some of the innocent people murdered in
>yesterdays attacks.
>
>http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victims.list.ap/
>
>http://www.msnbc.com/news/627249_asp.htm
>
>Authorities fear that the actual death toll is in the thousands...
>
>Think about all their children being orphaned and then talk shit about
>not retaliating against all the terrorist camps in the world!
>
>I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
>Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
>think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
>straight to fuckin' hell.
>
>/kirt
Sadly, I must agree with this post!
"Kill them give them as they give us, slay them, burn their childrens
laughter, on to hell..."
-YES 'The gates of delerium'
Vampi Fangs
>Here are lists of just some of the innocent people murdered in
>yesterdays attacks.
>
>http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victims.list.ap/
>
>http://www.msnbc.com/news/627249_asp.htm
>
>Authorities fear that the actual death toll is in the thousands...
>
>Think about all their children being orphaned and then talk shit about
>not retaliating against all the terrorist camps in the world!
>
>I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
>Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
>think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
>straight to fuckin' hell.
has it at all occurred to you that it is this sort of feeling that motivated the
extremists in the first place?
http://www.ngwrc.org/News/PostWarIraq/default.htm
"Since the end of the 1991 war, over one million civilians in Iraq have died, a
death toll largely attributed to the impact of sanctions, malnutrition, damaged
infrastructure and toxic waste left from the war."
arabs love their children too...
peace..... let the killing stop....
--
V--V
http://www.bigfoot.com/~vfangs
http://www.petitmorte.net/graveyard/
"My own definition of hacking is the clever
circumvention of imposed limits, whether imposed by your government,
your own skills or the laws of physics."
St. Jude Milhon
Harry S. Truman
wrote:
>In article <u3ivpt0mghccmseut...@4ax.com>, Harry S. Truman
><har...@whitehouse.gov> logged on, tripped an Echelon filter, had it
>intercepted and relayed through a secure NSA mail server, who in turn
>posted it to Fluffy's Usenet:
>
>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:56:04 -0400, "ramalane(tm)"
>> <rama...@cotse.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Here are lists of just some of the innocent people murdered in
>> >yesterdays attacks.
>> >
>> >http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victims.list.ap/
>> >
>> >http://www.msnbc.com/news/627249_asp.htm
>> >
>> >Authorities fear that the actual death toll is in the thousands...
>> >
>> >Think about all their children being orphaned and then talk shit about
>> >not retaliating against all the terrorist camps in the world!
>> >
>> >I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
>> >Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
>> >think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
>> >straight to fuckin' hell.
>> >
>> >/kirt
>>
>> Sadly, I must agree with this post!
>> ^^^^^^
>> "Kill them give them as they give us, slay them, burn their childrens
>> laughter, on to hell..."
> ^^^^^^^^
You missed the irony...that was my emotions speaking *not* my brain
>Fortuantely, the people making the desisions don't share your bloodlust
>for innocents...
>
>May it always be so...
Agreed
ramalane(tm)
>
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:56:04 -0400, "ramalane(tm)" <rama...@cotse.com>
> enlightened us:
>
> >Here are lists of just some of the innocent people murdered in
> >yesterdays attacks.
> >
> >http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victims.list.ap/
> >
> >http://www.msnbc.com/news/627249_asp.htm
> >
> >Authorities fear that the actual death toll is in the thousands...
> >
> >Think about all their children being orphaned and then talk shit about
> >not retaliating against all the terrorist camps in the world!
> >
> >I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
> >Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
> >think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
> >straight to fuckin' hell.
>
> has it at all occurred to you that it is this sort of feeling that motivated the
> extremists in the first place?
>
> http://www.ngwrc.org/News/PostWarIraq/default.htm
>
> "Since the end of the 1991 war, over one million civilians in Iraq have died, a
> death toll largely attributed to the impact of sanctions, malnutrition, damaged
> infrastructure and toxic waste left from the war."
>
> arabs love their children too...
>
> peace..... let the killing stop....
So explain to me just how murdering thousands of innocent Americans is
suppose to help the suffering Iraqis...hmm??
/kirt
--
"We will not make a distinction between the terrorists and those who
harbor them." -President George W. Bush (September 11, 2001)
--
"Terrorism against our nation will not stand." -President George W. Bush
(September 11, 2001)
ramalane(tm)
>
> In article <3B9FBDD4...@cotse.com>, ab...@ramalane.com logged on,
> tripped an Echelon filter, had it intercepted and relayed through a secure
> NSA mail server, who in turn posted it to Fluffy's Usenet:
>
> > Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
> > think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
> > straight to fuckin' hell.
>
> you are indistinguishable from them, you actually become them. You are
> simply just another flavor of evil...
>
> Intentionally killing innocents is always evil and wrong. We can win and
> punish the fuckers without becoming as them...
That's bullshit and you know it. We must eliminate the threat of
terrorism, and killing the terrorists will do just that. Does the end
justify the means? Ask me in twenty years.
/ramalane
--
"We will not make a distinction between the terrorists and those who
harbor them." -President George W. Bush (September 11, 2001)
--
"Terrorism against our nation will not stand." -President George W. Bush
(September 11, 2001)
BuZZard
"ramalane(tm)" <rama...@cotse.com> wrote in message
news:3B9FD375...@cotse.com...
Well, it looks like its a vicious circle. It will never end.
Iraq fucked Kawait, The world fucked Iraq, Now they
attacked the world, and the world is going to attack them
again.....then it all starts all over.
I am getting dizzy ! world, kill kill kill, no no no, yes yes yes
*BuZZard passes out*
--
BuZZard
ramalane(tm)
You can bet your sweet ass that Bush, Sr. has told his son not to leave
the job unfinished this time if he wants to be re-elected.
/ramalane
BuZZard
No kiddin, looking at it from a political point of veiw.
You know what I noticed, and maybe some others might
have, is the lack of the *gut* feeling of assurance coming from
the President. I liked how President Reagan use to make his
speeches. There was a President that could bring the collective feelings of
the American people and use it to his
advantage. Example: Iran gave up the hostages because the feared Reagan.
Even tho Carter appeared to have the released, I just had the feeling that
they truely were scared of Reagan.
President Bush....
"We are going to find the folk responsible....."
Sounds like some fucking hillbilly in the country somewhere. I want a
speach like Truman gave!
I want a President that will get in front of the camara's and
pound his fucking fist on the podium, and not look like a scared school kid
that just had his ass kicked. I want to see
a "look" in my President face of "I AM GOING TO FUCKING KILL YOU BASTARDS!!"
......but I have yet to see that.
--
BuZZard
Sadistic Emperor Agente de la Cabala Number Uno of AHM
rt> Cipher wrote:
>>
>> In article <3B9FBDD4...@cotse.com>, ab...@ramalane.com logged on,
>> tripped an Echelon filter, had it intercepted and relayed through a secure
>> NSA mail server, who in turn posted it to Fluffy's Usenet:
>>
>> > I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
>> > Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
>> > think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
>> > straight to fuckin' hell.
>>
>> When you do what they do, you become as evil as they are. At that point
>> you are indistinguishable from them, you actually become them. You are
>> simply just another flavor of evil...
>>
>> Intentionally killing innocents is always evil and wrong. We can win and
>> punish the fuckers without becoming as them...
rt> That's bullshit and you know it. We must eliminate the threat of
rt> terrorism, and killing the terrorists will do just that. Does the end
rt> justify the means? Ask me in twenty years.
The blood of innocents does not wash easily from your hands. Most
countries will stadn by while we conduct operations against the people who
did this, but wholesale slaughter of people who had nothing to do with it,
especially to satisfy some sort of bloodlust is entirely, completely and
horribly wrong. And the rest of the world won't stand for it either. It's
murder for murder, and its not right. If anything it will have the same
effect that the attack on the US did. It solidifies the country, gives
them a focus, a purpose and a goal.
Punishment of the guilty. That's called justice.
Punishment of the innocent. That's called murder. Or terrorism.
You'd rather that we become the next "Terrorist nation" (albeit we'll be
several orders of magnitude more efficient at it) to satisfy your needs to
wade in a river of blood?
ramalane(tm)
Their country won't be left.
Vampi Fangs
enlightened us:
>Sadistic Emperor Agente de la Cabala Number Uno of AHM wrote:
then the rest of the world will be assured that the US are a mob of redneck
terrorists too...
and then maybe the planet won't be left....
will that satisfy your crude instincts?
Sadistic Emperor Agente da la Cabala
> Sadistic Emperor Agente de la Cabala Number Uno of AHM wrote:
> > rt> That's bullshit and you know it. We must eliminate the threat of
> > rt> terrorism, and killing the terrorists will do just that. Does the
end
> > rt> justify the means? Ask me in twenty years.
> >
> > The blood of innocents does not wash easily from your hands. Most
> > countries will stadn by while we conduct operations against the people
who
> > did this, but wholesale slaughter of people who had nothing to do with
it,
> > especially to satisfy some sort of bloodlust is entirely, completely and
> > horribly wrong. And the rest of the world won't stand for it either.
It's
> > murder for murder, and its not right. If anything it will have the same
> > effect that the attack on the US did. It solidifies the country, gives
> > them a focus, a purpose and a goal.
>
> Their country won't be left.
So you advocate the genocide of millions to get some feelgood revenge? How
is this any better than what happened yesterday?
If you want to help, donate blood, give to the Red Cross, or for fuck's
sake.... they need IT people up in NYC to help get the Red Cross' network up
and running. Wishing death for millions of people who just had the
misfortune of living in the same country as these guys is sick.
--
chown -R us /yourbase
Don't settle for shampoo. Demand real poo!
vinny
What would mcarther do......
ThePsyko
(Vampi Fangs) wrote:
>On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:56:04 -0400, "ramalane(tm)" <rama...@cotse.com>
>enlightened us:
>
>>Here are lists of just some of the innocent people murdered in
>>yesterdays attacks.
>>
>>http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victims.list.ap/
>>
>>http://www.msnbc.com/news/627249_asp.htm
>>
>>Authorities fear that the actual death toll is in the thousands...
>>
>>Think about all their children being orphaned and then talk shit about
>>not retaliating against all the terrorist camps in the world!
>>
>>I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
>>Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
>>think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
>>straight to fuckin' hell.
>
>has it at all occurred to you that it is this sort of feeling that motivated the
>extremists in the first place?
>
>http://www.ngwrc.org/News/PostWarIraq/default.htm
>
>"Since the end of the 1991 war, over one million civilians in Iraq have died, a
>death toll largely attributed to the impact of sanctions, malnutrition, damaged
>infrastructure and toxic waste left from the war."
>
>arabs love their children too...
>
>peace..... let the killing stop....
umm.... Saddam Hussein has MORE than enough money to feed his
people... whether he chooses to do so is not our problem
ThePsyko
Public Enemy #7
"God told me to skin you alive"
ThePsyko
wrote:
heh... works for me...
Vampi Fangs
enlightened us:
he may have money, but it is the US embargoes and sanctions which has prevented
health supplies reaching civilians...
http://www.lai-aib.org/lai/article_lai.phtml?section=A3ABBDBA&object_id=3427
"Embargo death toll tops 1.5 million
BAGHDAD, July 11 (AFP) - More than 1.5 million Iraqis, 41 percent of them
children under five, have died from the impact of UN sanctions in force against
Iraq since August 1990, the official news agency INA reported Wednesday.
Quoting an official report to the United Nations, it said shortages of medicine,
vaccines and hospital equipment due to the embargo had up until the end of May
claimed a total of 1,520,417 lives .The deaths included 622,887 children under
the age of five, according to the report delivered to UN Secretary General Kofi
Annan by Iraq's ambassador to the world body, Mohammad al-Douri.
The report said that 49 percent of medical orders submitted by Iraq for approval
by the UN sanctions committee had been blocked by US and British representatives
on the committee.
Iraq, whose health ministry last month gave a sanctions-linked death toll of
almost 1.5 million by the end of May, has been under embargo since it invaded
Kuwait in August 1990.
Most of the deaths have been caused by diarrhoea, pneumonia and respiratory
problems, as well as malnutrition, all conditions which were treatable in
pre-sanctions Iraq, it said."
ramalane(tm)
Consider the source. The same page has a link to this story...
"Over the last two years, I've discovered documents of the Defense
Intelligence Agency proving beyond a doubt that, contrary to the Geneva
Convention, the U.S. government intentionally used sanctions against
Iraq to degrade the country's water supply after the Gulf War. The
United States knew the cost that civilian Iraqis, mostly children, would
pay, and it went ahead anyway."
Credibilty, dear? Your source has zero.
/ramalane
--
"We will not make a distinction between the terrorists and those who
harbor them." -President George W. Bush (September 11, 2001)
--
"Terrorism against our nation will not stand." -President George W. Bush
(September 11, 2001)
johnny@.bellsouth.net
Saddam Hussein brought this on his own people, and you blame the United States. You
have never liked "Amerikans", why not just go ahead and admit it. People like you
make me sick. The United States has done more for the people of this earth than any
other country in the world.
Vampi Fangs
us:
>In article <3B9FDD97...@cotse.com>, ab...@ramalane.com logged on,
>Sure it will. As will many millions of their people. Your dream of some
>nukefest isn't going to happen. We will NOT kill everyone, or even a
>sizeable fraction of them.
>
>We need to remove the actual bad guys. All of them... And them alone...
>
>Some assholes defaced a mosque at ODU last night, and I hope they're
>caught and fucking flogged for it.
likewise for the assholes who stoned a busload of arab schoolchildren in
Brisbane yesterday...
ramalane(tm)
>
> In article <3B9FD5C0...@cotse.com>, ab...@ramalane.com logged on,
> tripped an Echelon filter, had it intercepted and relayed through a secure
> NSA mail server, who in turn posted it to Fluffy's Usenet:
>
> > Cipher wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <3B9FBDD4...@cotse.com>, ab...@ramalane.com logged on,
> > > tripped an Echelon filter, had it intercepted and relayed through a secure
> > > NSA mail server, who in turn posted it to Fluffy's Usenet:
> > >
> > > > I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
> > > > Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
> > > > think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
> > > > straight to fuckin' hell.
> > >
> > > When you do what they do, you become as evil as they are. At that point
> > > you are indistinguishable from them, you actually become them. You are
> > > simply just another flavor of evil...
> > >
> > > Intentionally killing innocents is always evil and wrong. We can win and
> > > punish the fuckers without becoming as them...
> >
> > That's bullshit and you know it. We must eliminate the threat of
> > terrorism, and killing the terrorists will do just that. Does the end
> > justify the means? Ask me in twenty years.
> >
> > /ramalane
>
War is hell. Innocent victims are just a part of it. If anybody thinks
that these criminals can hide behind their women and children to deter
U.S. from striking them where they sleep (like Iraq's officers did
during the Persian Gulf War then think again.
>
> Kill enough, you'll actually breed more bin Ladens...
"Gnits make flies." Those bastards should of thought about their
families a long time ago. It's too late for them now. They're doomed.
>
> The end never justifies the means...
Spoken like a man who has never gotten laid.
ThePsyko
(Vampi Fangs) wrote:
isn't that ALREADY what you think of us? from your postings it seems
that way.... so what's to lose? not that I advocate the killing of
innocent people but what's your point?
>
>and then maybe the planet won't be left....
>
>will that satisfy your crude instincts?
ramalane(tm)
>
> In article <9nor33$8m3$1...@chihuahua.databasix.com>, "Sadistic Emperor
> Agente da la Cabala" <specia...@hell-flame-wars.org> logged on,
> tripped an Echelon filter, had it intercepted and relayed through a secure
> NSA mail server, who in turn posted it to Fluffy's Usenet:
>
> > news:3B9FDD97...@cotse.com...
> > > Sadistic Emperor Agente de la Cabala Number Uno of AHM wrote:
> >
> > > > rt> That's bullshit and you know it. We must eliminate the threat of
> > > > rt> terrorism, and killing the terrorists will do just that. Does the
> > end
> > > > rt> justify the means? Ask me in twenty years.
> > > >
> > > > The blood of innocents does not wash easily from your hands. Most
> > > > countries will stadn by while we conduct operations against the people
> > who
> > > > did this, but wholesale slaughter of people who had nothing to do with
> > it,
> > > > especially to satisfy some sort of bloodlust is entirely, completely and
> > > > horribly wrong. And the rest of the world won't stand for it either.
> > It's
> > > > murder for murder, and its not right. If anything it will have the same
> > > > effect that the attack on the US did. It solidifies the country, gives
> > > > them a focus, a purpose and a goal.
> > >
> > > Their country won't be left.
> >
> > So you advocate the genocide of millions to get some feelgood revenge? How
> > is this any better than what happened yesterday?
>
It's collateral damage. Civilians aren't civilians if they're harboring
criminals. You'd better read Section 51 (or 52) of the U.N. charter.
Sadistic Emperor Agente da la Cabala
Yes it is. Fortunately for you, you've never had to face it.
> Innocent victims are just a part of it.
Unfortunately yes. But civilian casualties are kept at a minimum. What
you're describing is like amputating your own arm because you've cut your
finger.
> If anybody thinks
> that these criminals can hide behind their women and children to deter
> U.S. from striking them where they sleep (like Iraq's officers did
> during the Persian Gulf War then think again.
Gee, do you think that's why we have units like Delta, SEAL, SF, Rangers and
Force Recon? We CAN kill them where they sleep. Them and nobody else.
> > Kill enough, you'll actually breed more bin Ladens...
>
> "Gnits make flies." Those bastards should of thought about their
> families a long time ago. It's too late for them now. They're doomed.
Fine. Kill the perps. No need to kill innocent people over it. We have the
capacity to take out whatever target we went, selectively. Want to get rid
of all left handed redheads that are blind in one eye? We can do it. No need
to go overboard.
> >
> > The end never justifies the means...
>
> Spoken like a man who has never gotten laid.
Spoken like a man who has never faced combat.
ramalane(tm)
>
> In article <3B9FDD97...@cotse.com>, ab...@ramalane.com logged on,
> nukefest isn't going to happen. We will NOT kill everyone, or even a
> sizeable fraction of them.
>
> We need to remove the actual bad guys. All of them... And them alone...
>
> Some assholes defaced a mosque at ODU last night, and I hope they're
> caught and fucking flogged for it.
I'm against nuking Mecca wahtever you may think. And some creep(s) doing
petty vandalism is just stupid. So is dropping bombs on innocent people.
All that I'm saying is that where the U.S. has stopped short by not
going into civilian areas where these criminals hide, all bets are off
now. They shouldn't harbor fugitives from world justice and now they
will pay as if they are the terrorist themselves. Read the first quote
by Bush in my sig, please.
Sadistic Emperor Agente da la Cabala
Now you're changing the criteria, kirt. At least now you're cooling down and
starting to think straight. Before, you were ready to nuke an entire country
of million for the actions of probably a dozen people.
If people are actively harboring terrorists, they're just as guilty. Haven't
I said before that if the Taliban is protecting Bin Laden, and he is found
to be behind this, that I think it's perfectly OK to drop units in
Afghanistan forcibly remove them? We've done it before.
ramalane(tm)
I agree with you. That's cowardly and doesn't achieve anything but
repulsion.
Vampi Fangs
enlightened us:
>hOn Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:42:51 GMT, va...@shad0ws.deletehipcrimecom
some of you are ... but redneckism isn't confined to any particular race...
i am hoping that the sane cool heads prevail...
> so what's to lose? not that I advocate the killing of
>innocent people but what's your point?
my point is that continued atrocities ensure that more atrocities will be
committed in reprisal...
>
>
>>
>>and then maybe the planet won't be left....
>>
>>will that satisfy your crude instincts?
ramalane(tm)
I see this as an opportunity to end terrorism with the support of the
entire world. Let's find out who is responsible and get them, but let's
also get the other terrorist camps that support them and are currently
hiding criminals and/or are training facilities. If we only strike the
ones that actually *did* WTC then the others are surely going to emulate
that act somewhere else in the world.
Vampi Fangs
let me make this very clear to you...
Amerikan == skinhead &&|| redneck &&|| KKK &&|| bloodthirsty luser ==
Asstralian
American == US citizen
Australian == Australian citizen
> People like you
>make me sick. The United States has done more for the people of this earth than any
>other country in the world.
you are entitled to your opinion...
johnny@.bellsouth.net
It's not an opinion, it's a fact.
DaveK
> Cipher wrote:
> >
> > In article <3B9FBDD4...@cotse.com>, ab...@ramalane.com logged on,
> > tripped an Echelon filter, had it intercepted and relayed through a
secure
> > NSA mail server, who in turn posted it to Fluffy's Usenet:
> >
> > > Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly
didn't
> > > think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
> > > straight to fuckin' hell.
> >
> > you are indistinguishable from them, you actually become them. You are
> > simply just another flavor of evil...
> >
> > Intentionally killing innocents is always evil and wrong. We can win
and
> > punish the fuckers without becoming as them...
>
>
An atom bomb is simply not a selective anti-personnel weapon.
DaveK
DaveK
There will be the entire world looking at you and wondering who might be
next. You would be isolated as a pariah state.
DaveK
DaveK
Now that's a far more reasonable suggestion and probably could gather the
support of pretty much the entire world.
But note that this plan does not involve nuking civilian populations.
That is just completely not an option.
OK?
DaveK
Vampi Fangs
enlightened us:
you may try to put your head in the sand however UN agencies and UNICEF have
admitted the post war death toll in Iraq due to sanctions are intolerable...
try these links...
http://www.friendsjournal.org/contents/2001/09september/feature.html
(this Quaker site also contains a reference to the recently declassified DIA
which pinpointed "the vulnerability of the Iraqi water system and predicts the
consequences in civilian suffering."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,232986,00.html
article by John Pilger which indicates "ten years ago, 92% of the population had
safe water, according to Unicef. Today, drawn untreated from the Tigris, it is
lethal.
http://www.mapw.au.nu/media/dh100400.html
"Mr Denis Halliday was Assistant Secretary General to the United Nations (UN)
and Head of the UN Oil-for-food programme in Iraq until he resigned in November
1998 in protest at the effects of the sanctions.
At the time of his resignation Halliday wrote: "I am resigning because the
policy of economic sanctions is totally bankrupt. We are in the process of
destroying an entire society. It is as simple and as terrifying as that ... Five
thousand children are dying every month ... I don't want to administer a
program that results in figures like these." (as reported in the Sydney Morning
Herald Good Weekend, April 8, 2000, p 31) "
http://seattlep-i.nwsource.com/national/iraq052.shtml
http://www.commondreams.org/views/081000-104.htm
http://www.nonviolence.org/archivedsites/iraq/
http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/MiddleEast/Iraq.asp
Double Ought Buck Henry
Done more to bootfuck them, you mean. But hey, I like cheap Nikes.
--
BACK TO SCHOOL SOUNDTRACK
http://www.mp3.com/gortician
Fuck Hip-Hop
http://www.mp3.com/highc
Gortician's Rivals
http://www.mp3.com/festeringsore
Peerless
http://www.mp3.com/thetruerampage
"If it's a crime to love snuh then i'm guilty." - Terrible Tom
johnny@.bellsouth.net
That's about what I would expect from you. Buy more Nikes,
that really helps the U.S.
Vampi Fangs
enlightened us:
>Vampi Fangs wrote:
<snip>
>> Iraq, whose health ministry last month gave a sanctions-linked death toll of
>> almost 1.5 million by the end of May, has been under embargo since it invaded
>> Kuwait in August 1990.
>>
>> Most of the deaths have been caused by diarrhoea, pneumonia and respiratory
>> problems, as well as malnutrition, all conditions which were treatable in
>> pre-sanctions Iraq, it said."
>>
>
>Posts like this lessen my disdain for you considerably.
now i'm worried... ;)
FromTheRafters
"Vampi Fangs" <va...@shad0ws.deletehipcrimecom> wrote in message
news:3ba1f902...@casbah.org...
You seem to have UN and US confused, is
it because they both start with U?
ramalane(tm)
If Saddam Hussein had rebuilt his infra-structure instead of his
military then there wouldn't be a problem. Remember, he denied the
UN inspectors access to all areas and those sanctions which you keep
pointing to are UN sanctions, not just America's.
Vampi Fangs
enlightened us:
you must surely be aware the US and Britain control the Sanctions Committee?
ramalane(tm)
<snip>
> >You seem to have UN and US confused, is
> >it because they both start with U?
> >
>
> you must surely be aware the US and Britain control the Sanctions Committee?
For somebody who says "peace" alot you sure are ignorant.
HTH
/kirt
Vampi Fangs
enlightened us:
the UN Sanctions Committee is controlled by the US and Britain...
as is the Security Council...
furthermore, as John Pilger says in his article...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,232986,00.html
"What are sanctions for? Eradicating Iraq's weapons
of mass destruction, says the Security Council
resolution. Scott Ritter, a chief UN weapons
inspector in Iraq for five years, told me: "By 1998, the chemical weapons
infrastructure had been completely dismantled or destroyed by UNSCOM
(the UN inspections body) or by Iraq in compliance with our mandate. The
biological weapons programme was gone, all the major facilities
eliminated. The nuclear weapons programme was completely eliminated. The long
range ballistic missile programme was completely eliminated. If I
had to quantify Iraq's threat, I would say [it is] zero."
Ritter resigned in protest at US interference; he and his American colleagues
were expelled when American spy equipment was found by the Iraqis. To
counter the risk of Iraq reconstituting its arsenal, he says the weapons
inspectors should go back to Iraq after the immediate lifting of all
non-military sanctions; the inspectors of the international Atomic
Energy Agency are already back. At the very least, the two issues of sanctions
and weapons inspection should be entirely separate."
the most obscene ironies are of course, is that both Saddam and bin Laden were
funded originally by the US to arm up for the Iranian and Russian conflicts
respectively...
Vampi Fangs
enlightened us:
>Vampi Fangs wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> >You seem to have UN and US confused, is
>> >it because they both start with U?
>> >
>>
>> you must surely be aware the US and Britain control the Sanctions Committee?
>
>For somebody who says "peace" alot you sure are ignorant.
>
>http://www.un.org/english/
i stand corrected, neither nation are now members of the Sanctions Committee...
however, both nations are permanent members of the Security Council who
implement or not Sanctions Committee recommendations...
ramalane(tm)
>
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:59:54 -0400, "ramalane(tm)" <rama...@cotse.com>
> enlightened us:
>
> >Vampi Fangs wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> >You seem to have UN and US confused, is
> >> >it because they both start with U?
> >> >
> >>
> >> you must surely be aware the US and Britain control the Sanctions Committee?
> >
> >For somebody who says "peace" alot you sure are ignorant.
> >
> >http://www.un.org/english/
>
> i stand corrected, neither nation are now members of the Sanctions Committee...
>
> however, both nations are permanent members of the Security Council who
> implement or not Sanctions Committee recommendations...
>
Well, we can't have countries like Australia running things, now can we?
Afterall, we're talking about world issues.
Vampi Fangs
enlightened us:
>Vampi Fangs wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:59:54 -0400, "ramalane(tm)" <rama...@cotse.com>
>> enlightened us:
>>
>> >Vampi Fangs wrote:
>> >
>> ><snip>
>> >
>> >> >You seem to have UN and US confused, is
>> >> >it because they both start with U?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> you must surely be aware the US and Britain control the Sanctions Committee?
>> >
>> >For somebody who says "peace" alot you sure are ignorant.
>> >
>> >http://www.un.org/english/
>>
>> i stand corrected, neither nation are now members of the Sanctions Committee...
>>
>> however, both nations are permanent members of the Security Council who
>> implement or not Sanctions Committee recommendations...
>>
>
>Well, we can't have countries like Australia running things, now can we?
>Afterall, we're talking about world issues.
no, i don't feel we have a world domination mindset here...
it would be great if those sanctions were lifted ...
5,000 kids dying a month is just awful...
ramalane(tm)
>
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:36:02 -0400, "ramalane(tm)" <rama...@cotse.com>
> enlightened us:
>
> >Vampi Fangs wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:59:54 -0400, "ramalane(tm)" <rama...@cotse.com>
> >> enlightened us:
> >>
> >> >Vampi Fangs wrote:
> >> >
> >> ><snip>
> >> >
> >> >> >You seem to have UN and US confused, is
> >> >> >it because they both start with U?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> you must surely be aware the US and Britain control the Sanctions Committee?
> >> >
> >> >For somebody who says "peace" alot you sure are ignorant.
> >> >
> >> >http://www.un.org/english/
> >>
> >> i stand corrected, neither nation are now members of the Sanctions Committee...
> >>
> >> however, both nations are permanent members of the Security Council who
> >> implement or not Sanctions Committee recommendations...
> >>
> >
> >Well, we can't have countries like Australia running things, now can we?
> >Afterall, we're talking about world issues.
>
> no, i don't feel we have a world domination mindset here...
>
> it would be great if those sanctions were lifted ...
>
> 5,000 kids dying a month is just awful...
Mailto:saddam...@iraq.madman
/ramalane
two-legged stule
above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify
the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail.
In article <3bac13db...@casbah.org>
it's quite a coincidence that a member of the echelon network(australian)
would complain about the politics derived from that association with the
U.K. and U.S. you're a fraud. you live under a blanket of security provided
to you by the membership in this alliance, but the dirty aspects of this
alliance are borne by the US and UK?
i fucking dare you to attack my superior intellect you pinko commie. you're
filthy.
MC²
(Vampi Fangs) wrote:
<snipped>
>he may have money, but it is the US embargoes and sanctions which has prevented
>health supplies reaching civilians...
That's bullshit. The sanctions allow the sale of Iraqi oil to pay for
food and medicine.
>http://www.lai-aib.org/lai/article_lai.phtml?section=A3ABBDBA&object_id=3427
>
>"Embargo death toll tops 1.5 million
>
>BAGHDAD, July 11 (AFP) - More than 1.5 million Iraqis, 41 percent of them
>children under five, have died from the impact of UN sanctions in force against
>Iraq since August 1990, the official news agency INA reported Wednesday.
Of course the Iraqi News Agency has an unbiased view of things...
>
>Quoting an official report to the United Nations, it said shortages of medicine,
>vaccines and hospital equipment due to the embargo had up until the end of May
>claimed a total of 1,520,417 lives .The deaths included 622,887 children under
>the age of five, according to the report delivered to UN Secretary General Kofi
>Annan by Iraq's ambassador to the world body, Mohammad al-Douri.
Read that last sentence above again and allow me to remind you, this
report was written by Iraqi officials and not by unbiased parties.
>
>The report said that 49 percent of medical orders submitted by Iraq for approval
>by the UN sanctions committee had been blocked by US and British representatives
>on the committee.
>
>Iraq, whose health ministry last month gave a sanctions-linked death toll of
>almost 1.5 million by the end of May, has been under embargo since it invaded
>Kuwait in August 1990.
>
>Most of the deaths have been caused by diarrhoea, pneumonia and respiratory
>problems, as well as malnutrition, all conditions which were treatable in
>pre-sanctions Iraq, it said."
I saw it on the internet, therefore it must be true...
MC²
(Vampi Fangs) wrote:
>On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:59:54 -0400, "ramalane(tm)" <rama...@cotse.com>
>enlightened us:
>
>>Vampi Fangs wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>> >You seem to have UN and US confused, is
>>> >it because they both start with U?
>>> >
>>>
>>> you must surely be aware the US and Britain control the Sanctions Committee?
>>
>>For somebody who says "peace" alot you sure are ignorant.
>>
>>http://www.un.org/english/
>
>i stand corrected, neither nation are now members of the Sanctions Committee...
>
>however, both nations are permanent members of the Security Council who
>implement or not Sanctions Committee recommendations...
There are 3 other nations on the Security Council besides the US and
Britain with permanent member status.
"Each Council member has one vote. Decisions on procedural matters are
made by an affirmative vote of at least nine of the 15 members.
Decisions onsubstantive matters require nine votes, including the
concurring votes of all five permanent members. This is the rule of
"great Power unanimity", often referred to as the "veto" power."
All 5 of the permanent members must agree for a vote to pass, along
with at least 4 other member nations. Quit putting the entire blame
on the US.
Vampi Fangs
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,232986,00.html
This article is by renowned journalist, John Pilger. I urge you to read it in
its entirety.
Squeezed to death
Half a million children have died in Iraq since UN sanctions were imposed -
most enthusiastically by Britain and the US. Three UN officials have resigned in
despair. Meanwhile, bombing of Iraq continue almost daily. John Pilger
investigates
Saturday March 4, 2000
Wherever you go in Iraq's southern city of Basra,
there is dust. It gets in your eyes and nose and
throat. It swirls in school playgrounds and consumes
children kicking a plastic ball. "It carries death," said
Dr Jawad Al-Ali, a cancer specialist and member of
Britain's Royal College of Physicians. "Our own
studies indicate that more than 40 per cent of the
population in this area will get cancer: in five years'
time to begin with, then long afterwards. Most of my
own family now have cancer, and we have no
history of the disease. It has spread to the medical
staff of this hospital. We don't know the precise
source of the contamination, because we are not
allowed to get the equipment to conduct a proper
scientific survey, or even to test the excess level of
radiation in our bodies. We suspect depleted
uranium, which was used by the Americans and
British in the Gulf War right across the southern
battlefields."
Under economic sanctions imposed by the United
Nations Security Council almost 10 years ago, Iraq is
denied equipment and expertise to clean up its
contaminated battle-fields, as Kuwait was cleaned
up. At the same time, the Sanctions Committee in
New York, dominated by the Americans and British,
has blocked or delayed a range of vital equipment,
chemotherapy drugs and even pain-killers. "For us
doctors," said Dr Al-Ali, "it is like torture. We see
children die from the kind of cancers from which,
given the right treatment, there is a good recovery
rate." Three children died while I was there.
Six other children died not far away on January 25,
last year. An American missile hit Al Jumohria, a
street in a poor residential area. Sixty-three people
were injured, a number of them badly burned.
"Collateral damage," said the Department of Defence
in Washington. Britain and the United States are still
bombing Iraq almost every day: it is the longest
Anglo-American bombing campaign since the
second world war, yet, with honourable exceptions,
very little appears about it in the British media.
Conducted under the cover of "no fly zones", which
have no basis in international law, the aircraft,
according to Tony Blair, are "performing vital
humanitarian tasks". The ministry of defence in
London has a line about "taking robust action to
protect pilots" from Iraqi attacks - yet an internal UN
Security Sector report says that, in one five-month
period, 41 per cent of the victims were civilians in
civilian targets: villages, fishing jetties, farmland and
vast, treeless valleys where sheep graze. A
shepherd, his father, his four children and his sheep
were killed by a British or American aircraft, which
made two passes at them. I stood in the cemetery
where the children are buried and their mother
shouted, "I want to speak to the pilot who did this."
This is a war against the children of Iraq on two
fronts: bombing, which in the last year cost the
British taxpayer £60 million. And the most ruthless
embargo in modern history. According to Unicef, the
United Nations Children's Fund, the death rate of
children under five is more than 4,000 a month - that
is 4,000 more than would have died before
sanctions. That is half a million children dead in
eight years. If this statistic is difficult to grasp, consider, on the day you
read this, up to 200 Iraqi children may die needlessly. "Even if not all the
suffering in Iraq can be imputed to external factors,"
says Unicef, "the Iraqi people would not be
undergoing such deprivation in the absence of the
prolonged measures imposed by the Security
Council and the effects of war."
Through the glass doors of the Unicef offices in
Baghdad, you can read the following mission
statement: "Above all, survival, hope, development,
respect, dignity, equality and justice for women and
children." A black sense of irony will be useful if you
are a young Iraqi. As it is, the children hawking in the
street outside, with their pencil limbs and eyes too
big for their long thin faces, cannot read English, and
perhaps cannot read at all.
"The change in 10 years is unparalleled, in my
experience," Anupama Rao Singh, Unicef's senior
representative in Iraq, told me. "In 1989, the literacy
rate was 95%; and 93% of the population had free
access to modern health facilities. Parents were
fined for failing to send their children to school. The
phenomenon of street children or children begging
was unheard of. Iraq had reached a stage where the
basic indicators we use to measure the overall
well-being of human beings, including children,
were some of the best in the world. Now it is among
the bottom 20%. In 10 years, child mortality has
gone from one of the lowest in the world, to the
highest."
Anupama Rao Singh, originally a teacher in India,
has spent most of her working life with Unicef.
Helping children is her vocation, but now, in charge
of a humanitarian programme that can never
succeed, she says, "I am grieving." She took me to a
typical primary school in Saddam City, where
Baghdad's poorest live. We approached along a
flooded street: the city's drainage and water distribution system have
collapsed. The head, Ali Hassoon, wore the melancholia that marks Iraqi
teachers and doctors and other carers: those who
know they can do little "until you, in the outside world, decide". Guiding us
around the puddles of raw sewage in the playground, he pointed to the
high water mark on a wall. "In the winter it comes up to here. That's when we
evacuate. We stay as long as possible, but without desks, the children have to
sit on bricks. I am worried about the buildings coming down."
The school is on the edge of a vast industrial
cemetery. The pumps in the sewage treatment
plants and the reservoirs of water are silent, save for
a few wheezing at a fraction of their capacity. Many
were targets in the American-led blitz in January
1991; most have since disintegrated without spare
parts from their British, French and German builders.
These are mostly delayed by the Security Council's
Sanctions Committee; the term used is "placed on
hold". Ten years ago, 92% of the population had safe
water, according to Unicef. Today, drawn untreated
from the Tigris, it is lethal. Touching two brothers on
the head, the head said, "These children are
recovering from dysentery, but it will attack them
again, and again, until they are too weak." Chlorine,
that universal guardian of safe water, has been
blocked by the Sanctions Committee. In 1990, an
Iraqi infant with dysentery stood a one in 600 chance
of dying. This is now one in 50.
Just before Christmas, the department of trade and
industry in London blocked a shipment of vaccines
meant to protect Iraqi children against diphtheria and
yellow fever. Dr Kim Howells told parliament why.
His title of under secretary of state for competition
and consumer affairs, eminently suited his Orwellian
reply. The children's vaccines were banned, he said,
"because they are capable of being used in
weapons of mass destruction". That his finger was
on the trigger of a proven weapon of mass
destruction - sanctions - seemed not to occur to him.
A courtly, eloquent Irishman, Denis Halliday resigned as co-ordinator of
humanitarian relief to Iraq in 1998, after 34 years with the UN; he was then
Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations,
one of the elite of senior officials. He had made his
career in development, "attempting to help people,
not harm them". His was the first public expression of an unprecedented
rebellion within the UN bureaucracy. "I am resigning," he wrote, "because
the policy of economic sanctions is totally bankrupt.
We are in the process of destroying an entire society.
It is as simple and terrifying as that . . . Five thousand
children are dying every month . . . I don't want to
administer a programme that results in figures like
these."
When I first met Halliday, I was struck by the care
with which he chose uncompromising words. "I had
been instructed," he said, "to implement a policy that
satisfies the definition of genocide: a deliberate
policy that has effectively killed well over a million
individuals, children and adults. We all know that the
regime, Saddam Hussein, is not paying the price for
economic sanctions; on the contrary, he has been
strengthened by them. It is the little people who are
losing their children or their parents for lack of
untreated water. What is clear is that the Security
Council is now out of control, for its actions here
undermine its own Charter, and the Declaration of
Human Rights and the Geneva Convention. History
will slaughter those responsible."
Inside the UN, Halliday broke a long collective
silence. Then on February 13 this year, Hans von
Sponeck, who had succeeded him as humanitarian
co-ordinator in Iraq, resigned. "How long," he asked,
"should the civilian population of Iraq be exposed to
such punishment for something they have never
done?" Two days later, Jutta Burghardt, head of the
World Food Programme in Iraq, resigned, saying
privately she, too, could not tolerate what was being
done to the Iraqi people. Another resignation is
expected.
When I met von Sponeck in Baghdad last October,
the anger building behind his measured,
self-effacing exterior was evident. Like Halliday
before him, his job was to administer the Oil for Food
Programme, which since 1996 has allowed Iraq to
sell a fraction of its oil for money that goes straight to
the Security Council. Almost a third pays the UN's
"expenses", reparations to Kuwait and compensation
claims. Iraq then tenders on the international market
for food and medical supplies and other
humanitarian supplies. Every contract must be
approved by the Sanctions Committee in New York.
"What it comes down to," he said, "is that we can
spend only $180 per person over six months. It is a
pitiful picture. Whatever the arguments about Iraq,
they should not be conducted on the backs of the
civilian population."
Denis Halliday and I travelled to Iraq together. It was
his first trip back. Washington and London make
much of the influence of Iraqi propaganda when their
own, unchallenged, is by far the most potent. With
this in mind, I wanted an independent assessment
from some of the 550 UN people, who are Iraq's
lifeline. Among them, Halliday and von Sponeck are
heroes. I have reported the UN at work in many
countries; I have never known such dissent and
anger, directed at the manipulation of the Security
Council, and the corruption of what some of them
still refer to as the UN "ideal".
Our journey from Amman in Jordan took 16 anxious
hours on the road. This is the only authorised way in
and out of Iraq: a ribbon of wrecked cars and
burnt-out oil tankers. Baghdad was just visible
beneath a white pall of pollution, largely the
consequence of the US Air Force strategy of
targeting the industrial infrastructure in January
1991. Young arms reached up to the window of our
van: a boy offering an over-ripe banana, a girl a
single stem flower. Before 1990, such a scene was rare and frowned upon.
Baghdad is an urban version of Rachel Carson's
Silent Spring. The birds have gone as avenues of
palms have died, and this was the land of dates. The
splashes of colour, on fruit stalls, are surreal. A
bunch of Dole bananas and a bag of apples from
Beirut cost a teacher's salary for a month; only
foreigners and the rich eat fruit. A currency that once
was worth two dollars to the dinar is now worthless.
The rich, the black marketeers, the regime's cronies
and favourites, are not visible, except for an
occasional tinted-glass late-model Mercedes
navigating its way through the rustbuckets. Having
been ordered to keep their heads down, they keep to
their network of clubs and restaurants and
well-stocked clinics, which make nonsense of the
propaganda that the sanctions are hurting them, not
ordinary Iraqis.
In the centre of Baghdad is a monument to the
1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, which Saddam Hussein
started, with encouragement from the Americans,
who wanted him to destroy their great foe, the
Ayatollah Khomeini. When it was over, at least a
million lives had been lost in the cause of nothing,
fuelled by the arms industries of Britain and the rest
of Europe, the Soviet Union and the United States:
the principal members of the Security Council. The
monument's two huge forearms, modelled on
Saddam's arms (and cast in Basingstoke), hold
triumphant crossed sabres. Cars are allowed to drive over the helmets of dead
Iranian soldiers embedded in the concourse. I cannot think of a sight anywhere
in the world that better expresses the crime of sacrificial war.
We stayed at the Hotel Palestine, once claiming five
stars. The smell of petrol was constant. As
disinfectant is often "on hold", petrol, more plentiful
than water, has replaced it. There is an Iraqi Airways
office, which is open every day, with an employee
sitting behind a desk, smiling and saying good
morning to passing guests. She has no clients,
because there is no Iraqi Airways - it died with
sanctions. The pilots drive taxis and sweep the
forecourt and sell used clothes. In my room, the
water ran gravy brown. The one frayed towel was
borne by the maid like an heirloom. When I asked for
coffee to be brought up, the waiter hovered outside
until I was finished; cups are at a premium. His
young face was streaked with sadness. "I am always sad," he agreed
matter-of-factly. In a month, he will have earned enough to buy tablets for his
brother's epilepsy.
The same sadness is on the faces of people in the
evening auctions, where intimate possessions are
sold for food and medicines. Television sets are the
most common items; a woman with two toddlers
watched their pushchairs go for pennies. A man who
had collected doves since he was 15 came with his
last bird; the cage would go next. Although we had
come to pry, my film crew and I were made
welcome. Only once, was I the brunt of the hurt that
is almost tangible in a society more westernised
than any other Arab country. "Why are you killing the
children?" shouted a man from behind his bookstall.
"Why are you bombing us? What have we done to you?" Passers-by moved quickly to
calm him; one man placed an affectionate arm on his shoulder,
another, a teacher, materialised at my side. "We do
not connect the people of Britain with the actions of
the government," he said. Laith Kubba, a leading
member of the exiled Iraqi opposition, later told me
in Washington, "The Iraqi people and Saddam
Hussein are not the same, which is why those of us
who have dedicated our lives to fighting him, regard
the sanctions as immoral."
In an Edwardian colonnade of Doric and Corinthian
columns, people come to sell their books, not as in a flea market, but out of
desperate need. Art books, leather bound in Baghdad in the 30s, obstetrics and
radiology texts, copies of British Medical Journals,
first and second editions of Waiting For Godot, The
Sun Also Rises and, no less, British Housing Policy
1958 were on sale for the price of a few cigarettes. A
man in a clipped grey moustache, an Iraqi Bertie
Wooster, said, "I need to go south to see my sister,
who is ill. Please be kind and give me 25 dinars."
(About a penny). He took it, nodded and walked smartly away.
Mohamed Ghani's studio is dominated by a huge
crucifix he is sculpting for the Church of Assumption
in Baghdad. As Iraq's most famous sculptor, he is
proud that the Vatican has commissioned him, a
Muslim, to sculpt the Stations of the Cross in Rome -
a romantic metaphor of his country as Mesopotamia,
the "cradle of Western civilisation". His latest work is
a 20-foot figure of a woman, her child gripping her
legs, pleading for food. "Every morning, I see her,"
he said, "waiting, with others just like her, in a long
line at the hospital at the end of my road. They are
what we have been forced to become." He has
produced a line of figurines that depict their waiting;
all the heads are bowed before a door that is
permanently closed. "The door is the dispensary," he
said, "but it is also the world, kept shut by those who
run the world." The next day, I saw a similar line of
women and children, and fathers and children, in the
cancer ward at the Al Mansour children's hospital. It
is not unlike St Thomas's in London. Drugs arrived,
they said, but intermittently, so that children with
leukaemia, who can be saved with a full course of
three anti-biotics, pass a point beyond which they
cannot be saved, because one is missing. Children
with meningitis can also survive with the precise
dosage of antibiotics; here they die. "Four milligrams
save a life," said Dr Mohamed Mahmud, "but so
often we are allowed no more than one milligram."
This is a teaching hospital, yet children die because
there are no blood-collecting bags and no machines
that separate blood platelets: basic equipment in
any British hospital. Replacements and spare parts
have been "on hold" in New York, together with
incubators, X-ray machines, and heart and lung
machines.
I sat in a clinic as doctors received parents and their
children, some of them dying. After every other
examination, Dr Lekaa Fasseh Ozeer, the oncologist, wrote in English: "No drugs
available." I asked her to jot down in my notebook a list of the
drugs the hospital had ordered, but rarely saw. In
London, I showed this to Professor Karol Sikora who,
as chief of the cancer programme of the World
Health Organisation (WHO), wrote in the British
Medical Journal last year: "Requested radiotherapy
equipment, chemotherapy drugs and analgesics are
consistently blocked by United States and British
advisers [to the Sanctions Committee in New York].
There seems to be a rather ludicrous notion that such agents could be converted
into chemical or other weapons."
He told me, "Nearly all these drugs are available in
every British hospital. They're very standard. When I
came back from Iraq last year, with a group of
experts I drew up a list of 17 drugs that are deemed
essential for cancer treatment. We informed the UN
that there was no possibility of converting these
drugs into chemical warfare agents. We heard
nothing more. The saddest thing I saw in Iraq was
children dying because there was no chemotherapy
and no pain control. It seemed crazy they couldn't
have morphine, because for everybody with cancer
pain, it is the best drug. When I was there, they had a
little bottle of aspirin pills to go round 200 patients in
pain. They would receive a particular anti-cancer
drug, but then get only little bits of drugs here and
there, and so you can't have any planning. It is bizarre."
In January, last year, George Robertson, then
defence secretary, said, "Saddam Hussein has in
warehouses $275 million worth of medicines and
medical supplies which he refuses to distribute." The
British government knew this was false, because UN
humanitarian officials had made clear the problem
of drugs and equipment coming sporadically into
Iraq - such as machines without a crucial part, IV
fluids and syringes arriving separately - as well as
the difficulties of transport and the need for a
substantial buffer stock. "The goods that come into
this country are distributed to where they belong,"
said Hans von Sponeck. "Our most recent stock
analysis shows that 88.8% of all humanitarian
supplies have been distributed." The representatives
of Unicef, the World Food Programme and the Food
and Agricultural Organisation confirmed this. If Saddam Hussein believed he
could draw an advantage from obstructing humanitarian aid, he
would no doubt do so. However, according to a FAO
study: "The government of Iraq introduced a public
food rationing system with effect from within a month
of the imposition of the embargo. It provides basic
foods at 1990 prices, which means they are now
virtually free. This has a life-saving nutritional benefit
. . . and has prevented catastrophe for the Iraqi
people."
The rebellion in the UN reaches up to Kofi Annan,
once thought to be the most compliant of secretary-generals. Appointed after
Madeleine Albright, then the US representative at the UN, had
waged a campaign to get rid of his predecessor,
Boutros-Boutros Ghali, he pointedly renewed Hans
von Sponeck's contract in the face of a similar campaign by the Americans. He
shocked them last October when he accused the US of "using its
muscle on the Sanctions Committee to put indefinite
'holds' on more than $700 million worth of humanitarian goods that Iraq would
like to buy."
When I met Kofi Annan, I asked if sanctions had all
but destroyed the credibility of the UN as a benign
body. "Please don't judge us by Iraq," he said.
On January 7, the UN's Office of Iraq Programme
reported that shipments valued at almost a billion
and a half dollars were "on hold". They covered food,
health, water and sanitation, agriculture, education.
On February 7, its executive director attacked the
Security Council for holding up spares for Iraq's
crumbling oil industry. "We would appeal to all
members of the Security Council," he wrote, "to
reflect on the argument that unless key items of oil industry are made available
within a short time, the production of oil will drop . . . This is a clear
warning." In other words, the less oil Iraq is allowed
to pump, the less money will be available to buy
food and medicine. According to the Iraqis at the UN,
it was US representative on the Sanctions Committee who vetoed shipments the
Security Council had authorised. Last year, a senior US
official told the Washington Post, "The longer we can
fool around in the [Security] Council and keep things
static, the better." There is a pettiness in sanctions
that borders on vindictiveness. In Britain, Customs
and Excise stops parcels going to relatives, containing children's clothes and
toys. Last year, the chairman of the British Library, John Ashworth, wrote
to Harry Cohen MP that, "after consultation with the
foreign office", it was decided that books could no
longer be sent to Iraqi students.
In Washington, I interviewed James Rubin, an under
secretary of state who speaks for Madeleine Albright.
When asked on US television if she thought that the
death of half a million Iraqi children was a price
worth paying, Albright replied: "This is a very hard
choice, but we think the price is worth it." When I
questioned Rubin about this, he claimed Albright's
words were taken out of context. He then questioned
the "methodology" of a report by the UN's World
Health Organisation, which had estimated half a
million deaths. Advising me against being "too idealistic", he said: "In making
policy, one has to choose between two bad choices . . . and
unfortunately the effect of sanctions has been more
than we would have hoped." He referred me to the
"real world" where "real choices have to be made". In
mitigation, he said, "Our sense is that prior to sanctions, there was serious
poverty and health problems in Iraq." The opposite was true, as Unicef's
data on Iraq before 1990, makes clear.
The irony is that the US helped bring Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party to power in
Iraq, and that the US (and Britain) in the 1980s conspired to break their own
laws in order, in the words of a Congressional inquiry, to "secretly court
Saddam Hussein with reckless abandon", giving him almost
everything he wanted, including the means of making biological weapons. Rubin
failed to see the irony in the US supplying Saddam with seed stock
for anthrax and botulism, that he could use in weapons, and claimed that the
Maryland company responsible was prosecuted. It was not: the
company was given Commerce Department approval.
Denial is easy, for Iraqis are a nation of unpeople in the West, their panoramic
suffering of minimal media interest; and when they are news, care is
always taken to minimise Western culpability. I can think of no other human
rights issue about which the governments have been allowed to sustain such
deception and tell so many bare-faced lies. Western governments have had a gift
in the "butcher of Baghdad", who can be safely blamed for everything.
Unlike the be-headers of Saudi Arabia, the torturers of Turkey and the prince of
mass murderers, Suharto, only Saddam Hussein is so loathsome that
his captive population can be punished for his crimes. British obsequiousness
to Washington's designs over Iraq has a certain craven quality, as the
Blair government pursues what Simon Jenkins calls a "low-cost, low-risk
machismo, doing something relatively easy, but obscenely cruel". The statements
of Tony Blair and Robin Cook and assorted sidekick ministers would, in other
circumstances, be laughable. Cook: "We must nail the absurd claim that sanctions
are responsible for the suffering of the Iraqi people", Cook: "We must uphold
the sanctity of international law and the United Nations . . ." ad nauseam. The
British boast about their "initiative" in promoting the latest Security Council
resolution, which merely offers the prospect of more Kafkaesque semantics and
prevarication in the guise of a "solution" and changes nothing.
What are sanctions for? Eradicating Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, says
the Security Council resolution. Scott Ritter, a chief UN weapons
inspector in Iraq for five years, told me: "By 1998, the chemical weapons
infrastructure had been completely dismantled or destroyed by UNSCOM (the UN
inspections body) or by Iraq in compliance with our mandate. The biological
weapons programme was gone, all the major facilities eliminated. The nuclear
weapons programme was completely eliminated. The long range ballistic
missile programme was completely eliminated. If I had to quantify Iraq's threat,
I would say [it is] zero."
Ritter resigned in protest at US interference; he and his American colleagues
were expelled when American spy equipment was found by the Iraqis. To
counter the risk of Iraq reconstituting its arsenal, he says the weapons
inspectors should go back to Iraq after the immediate lifting of all
non-military sanctions; the inspectors of the international Atomic
Energy Agency are already back. At the very least, the two issues of sanctions
and weapons inspection should be entirely separate. Madeleine Albright has
said: "We do not agree that if Iraq complies with its obligations concerning
weapons of mass destruction, sanctions should be lifted." If this means
that Saddam Hussein is the target, then the embargo will go on indefinitely,
holding Iraqis hostage to their tyrant's compliance with his own demise. Or is
there another agenda? In January 1991, the Americans had an opportunity to press
on to Baghdad and remove Saddam, but pointedly stopped short. A few
weeks later, they not only failed to support the Kurdish and Shi'a uprising,
which President Bush had called for, but even prevented the rebelling
troops in the south from reaching captured arms depots and allowed Saddam
Hussein's helicopters to slaughter them while US aircraft circled overhead.
At they same time, Washington refused to support Iraqi opposition groups and
Kurdish claims for independence.
"Containing" Iraq with sanctions destroys Iraq's capacity to threaten US control
of the Middle East's oil while allowing Saddam to maintain internal order.
As long as he stays within present limits, he is allowed to rule over a
crippled nation. "What the West would ideally like," says Said Aburish, the
author, "is another Saddam Hussein." Sanctions also
justify the huge US military presence in the Gulf, as Nato expands east, viewing
a vast new oil protectorate stretching from Turkey to the Caucasus.
Bombing and sanctions are ideal for policing this new order: a strategy the
president of the American Physicians for Human Rights calls "Bomb Now, Die
Later". The perpetrators ought not be allowed to get away with this in our name:
for the sake of the children of Iraq, and all the Iraqs to come."
MC²
(Vampi Fangs) wrote:
I read it. Then I did some research on the "renowned journalist". He
is an extremely biased activist(sensationalist) IMHO, making anything
that he writes suspect.
Vampi Fangs
<anm...@freedom.gmsociety.org> enlightened us:
you have overestimated my influence... i am not actively a member of echelon...
>
>i fucking dare you to attack my superior intellect you pinko commie. you're
>filthy.
wow... i bet you're related to Nixon...
Vampi Fangs
please justify your accusations of bias... Pilger is without doubt beyond peer
as a journalist...
Vampi Fangs
here's his potted biography for those who don't check it out for themselves...
http://www.thei.aust.com/sydney/biographies/pilger.html
John Pilger was born and educated in Sydney. he has been a war correspondent,
film-maker and playwright. Based in London, he has written from many countries
and has twice won British journalism's highest award, that of 'Journalist of the
Year', for his work in Vietnam and Cambodia. Among a number of other awards he
has been 'International Reporter of the Year' and winner of the 'United Nations
Association Media Prize'. For his broadcasting, he has won an 'American
Television Academy Award', an 'Emmy' and the 'Richard Dimbleby Award', given
by the British Academy of Film and Television Arts. His latest TV documentary,
his 50th, Apartheid Did Not Die! - will be shown in Australia by the ABC in
June.
'Pilger's strength is his gift for finding the image, the instant that
reveals all: he is a photographer
using words instead of a camera' ... Salman Rushdie
'John Pilger is fearless. He unearths, with steely attention to facts, the
filthy truth, and tells it as
it is ... I salute him.' ... Harold Pinter
-=Be4U=-
taking pen to paper in news:3ba9fe84...@news.earthlink.net and
scribbling:
> hOn Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:42:51 GMT, va...@shad0ws.deletehipcrimecom
> (Vampi Fangs) wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:11:35 -0400, "ramalane(tm)"
<rama...@cotse.com>
>>enlightened us:
>>
>>>Sadistic Emperor Agente de la Cabala Number Uno of AHM wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "ramalane(tm)" <rama...@cotse.com> betrayed the revolution by
uttering <3B9FD5C0...@cotse.com> in alt.hackers.malicious:
>>>> rt> Cipher wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> In article <3B9FBDD4...@cotse.com>, ab...@ramalane.com
logged on,
>>>> >> tripped an Echelon filter, had it intercepted and relayed
through a secure
>>>> >> NSA mail server, who in turn posted it to Fluffy's Usenet:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> > I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
>>>> >> > Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they
certainly didn't
>>>> >> > think twice about the victim' families, did they...send
them all to straight to fuckin' hell.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> When you do what they do, you become as evil as they are. At
that point
>>>> >> you are indistinguishable from them, you actually become
them. You are
>>>> >> simply just another flavor of evil...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Intentionally killing innocents is always evil and wrong. We
can win and
>>>> >> punish the fuckers without becoming as them...
>>>>
>>>> rt> That's bullshit and you know it. We must eliminate the
threat of
>>>> rt> terrorism, and killing the terrorists will do just that.
Does the end
>>>> rt> justify the means? Ask me in twenty years.
>>>>
>>>> The blood of innocents does not wash easily from your hands.
Most
>>>> countries will stadn by while we conduct operations against the
people who
>>>> did this, but wholesale slaughter of people who had nothing to
do with it,
>>>> especially to satisfy some sort of bloodlust is entirely,
completely and
>>>> horribly wrong. And the rest of the world won't stand for it
either. It's
>>>> murder for murder, and its not right. If anything it will have
the same
>>>> effect that the attack on the US did. It solidifies the country,
gives
>>>> them a focus, a purpose and a goal.
>>>
>>>Their country won't be left.
>>
>>then the rest of the world will be assured that the US are a mob of
redneck terrorists too...
Better a mob a rednecks than pussies...in these circumstances, the
choices are black and white.
> isn't that ALREADY what you think of us? from your postings it
seems
> that way.... so what's to lose? not that I advocate the killing of
> innocent people but what's your point?
>
>
>>
>>and then maybe the planet won't be left....
>>
>>will that satisfy your crude instincts?
>
--
-=Mara=-
Jesus loves you.
Everyone else thinks you're an asshole.
Double Ought Buck Henry
ramalane(tm)
>
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:56:04 -0400, "ramalane(tm)"
>
> >Here are lists of just some of the innocent people murdered in
> >yesterdays attacks.
> >
> >http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victims.list.ap/
> >
> >http://www.msnbc.com/news/627249_asp.htm
> >
> >Authorities fear that the actual death toll is in the thousands...
> >
> >Think about all their children being orphaned and then talk shit about
> >not retaliating against all the terrorist camps in the world!
> >
> >I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
> >Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
> >think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
> >straight to fuckin' hell.
> >
>
> You want to wipe out a race of people? That's genocide. That's what
> Hitler tried. There's got to be a better way.
We're talking about war...not Vietnam, but WAR! Justified WAR!
But here, let somebody a bit better explain it to you...
(Excerpt of famous speech by Patrick Henry)
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace,
Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale
that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of
resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we
here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life
so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains
and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may
take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
/ramalane
--
Secretary of State Colin Powell says the coalition being formed will
not stop at getting the people responsible for the attack, but will
go after terrorists wherever they are found. (CNN, September 12, 2001)
Osama/bin/null
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:56:04 -0400, "ramalane(tm)"
> <rama...@cotse.com>wrote:
>
> >Here are lists of just some of the innocent people murdered in
> >yesterdays attacks.
> >
> >http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victims.list.ap/
> >
> >http://www.msnbc.com/news/627249_asp.htm
> >
> >Authorities fear that the actual death toll is in the thousands...
> >
> >Think about all their children being orphaned and then talk shit about
> >not retaliating against all the terrorist camps in the world!
> >
> >I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
> >Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
> >think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
> >straight to fuckin' hell.
> >
> >/kirt
>
> You want to wipe out a race of people? That's genocide. That's what
> Hitler tried. There's got to be a better way.
>
Tell that to Israel...
>
> --
> Meat-->Plow
>
> Error: Keyboard not detected. Press F2 to continue,
> F1 to enter setup.
>
> email me at:
> Merde@petitmorte-dot-net
>
> PGP KEY: http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x5CDAF015
> FINGERPRINT: A412 5513 F0BB 2208 EC1B D42A F51E C5F4
>
> Meow
Daniel Tate
>On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 05:55:37 GMT, va...@shad0ws.deletehipcrimecom
>(Vampi Fangs) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 04:11:06 GMT, emcees...@energy.c0m (MC²) enlightened
us:
>>
>>>(Vampi Fangs) wrote:
>>>
>>><snipped>
[..]
>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,232986,00.html
>>
>>This article is by renowned journalist, John Pilger. I urge you to read it
in
>>its entirety.
>
>I read it. Then I did some research on the "renowned journalist". He
>is an extremely biased activist(sensationalist) IMHO, making anything
>that he writes suspect.
Methinks you jest, sir. John Pilger is a journalist of impeccable character
and credibility. His skill in holding a faithful mirror to events is
unparalleled.
Dan
----- Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News -----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
----- Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! -----
MC²
<danie...@mailandnews.co.uk> wrote:
>>===== Original Message From emcees...@energy.c0m (MC²) =====
>>On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 05:55:37 GMT, va...@shad0ws.deletehipcrimecom
>>(Vampi Fangs) wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 04:11:06 GMT, emcees...@energy.c0m (MC²) enlightened
>us:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:12:09 GMT, va...@shad0ws.deletehipcrimecom
>>>>(Vampi Fangs) wrote:
>>>>
>>>><snipped>
>
>
>[..]
>
>>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,232986,00.html
>>>
>>>This article is by renowned journalist, John Pilger. I urge you to read it
>in
>>>its entirety.
>>
>>I read it. Then I did some research on the "renowned journalist". He
>>is an extremely biased activist(sensationalist) IMHO, making anything
>>that he writes suspect.
>
>Methinks you jest, sir. John Pilger is a journalist of impeccable character
>and credibility. His skill in holding a faithful mirror to events is
>unparalleled.
>
>
>Dan
>
The man has a gift for writing. I will not argue with that, but his
writings are clearly his perception of things. He puts forth many
figures and statistics without saying where those figures and
statistics originate. The only stories or reports that I could find
to back up his claims come from Iraqi officials. Where is the Red
Cross or any of the other aid agencies of the world? This man has
chosen to make a name for himself by writing these lurid,
heartwrenching stories which I'm sure will win him many awards, but
are, after all, his opinion.
I have no doubt that some of what he reports has basis in fact, but
it's quite obvious to me that he is quite anti-British and
anti-American. The policies of the US and UK are evil, but there's no
mention of the evils perpetrated on the other side. The stories he
writes are ALL one-sided, with only a token mentioning of the "other"
side. This indicates extreme bias, in my opinion.
The policies of the UN concerning Iraq are designed to keep a madman
(Hussein) in check. He chooses to destroy his own people and extend
their suffering rather than bow to the will of the civilized world.
As far as I can see, their blood is on his hands.
Sidenote to V:
I luv you dearly, but you and I will never see things the same on this
subject. I intend to drop this thread with this post.
ramalane(tm)
The propaganda office of Iraq is clearly too much of a match for Mr.
Pilger. In his defense I will concede that I was impressed by their
attempts to circumvent the truth preceding the gulf war and especially
in it's aftermath. Truly the best liars since Joseph Goebbels was
"forced into retirement".
/ramalane
--
"We are coming after you. God may have mercy on you, but we won't,"
declared Sen. John McCain,
R-Arizona. (September 13, 2001)
Vampi Fangs
Pilger is quoting UNICEF figures ...
http://www.unicef.org.uk/index_s.asp?sct=news&filen=../news/iraq1.htm
unicef stats
he also quotes direct sources from within the United Nations, eyewitnesses and
officials...
>I have no doubt that some of what he reports has basis in fact, but
>it's quite obvious to me that he is quite anti-British and
>anti-American. The policies of the US and UK are evil, but there's no
>mention of the evils perpetrated on the other side. The stories he
>writes are ALL one-sided, with only a token mentioning of the "other"
>side. This indicates extreme bias, in my opinion.
my observation is that he reported accurately...
>
>The policies of the UN concerning Iraq are designed to keep a madman
>(Hussein) in check. He chooses to destroy his own people and extend
>their suffering rather than bow to the will of the civilized world.
>As far as I can see, their blood is on his hands.
this policy was callously designed to fail...
>
>Sidenote to V:
>I luv you dearly, but you and I will never see things the same on this
>subject. I intend to drop this thread with this post.
i luv you too, and will reciprocate...
BuZZard
"Vampi Fangs" <va...@shad0ws.deletehipcrimecom> wrote in message
Damn, it was just getting interesting.
--
BuZZard pouts
two-legged stule
above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify
the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail.
In article <3bb4372b...@casbah.org>
> This article is by renowned(in socialist circles)
journalist, John Pilger. I urge you to read it in
> its entirety.
>
> Squeezed to death
<snip bleeding heart propaganda>
who gives a shit about these low life sand niggers? they keep
a leader in power who continues to threaten the security of
the west and the middle east. they can revolt, although they
appear to be cowardly(if they had guns they might be in a
different situation, however, thanks to socialist bleeding
hearts like trampi...)to fight their corrupt goverment. when
they rise up to the challenge of securing their freedom the
USA will support them.
until then..every islam is an abomination.
vinny
"two-legged stule" <anm...@freedom.gmsociety.org> wrote in message
news:6c8dea7933c08087...@freedom.gmsociety.org...
KA Cannon
Fangs), provided proof of it's gullibility when it put this crap
<3bbd43f6....@casbah.org> in the cesspool known as
alt.hackers.malicious:
<snip>
>>The policies of the US and UK are evil, but there's no
>>mention of the evils perpetrated on the other side. The stories he
>>writes are ALL one-sided, with only a token mentioning of the "other"
>>side. This indicates extreme bias, in my opinion.
>
>my observation is that he reported accurately...
So it's accurate to say that the policies of the US and UK are evil?
Since he reported so accurately.
--
K. A. Cannon
troll at hell-flame-wars dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)
"I fear all I have done is awakened a sleeping giant and filled him
with a terrible resolve."
--Admiral Yamamoto after the bombing of Pearl Harbor.
KA Cannon
provided proof of it's gullibility when it put this crap
alt.hackers.malicious:
<snip>
>>
>> who gives a shit about these low life sand niggers? they keep
>Kaveen Abdul Cannon
You are a despicable punk shit Vinny.
Fuck you.
<snip>
Osama/bin/null
> On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 12:18:43 GMT, Osama/bin/null
> <SPAM...@404company.com>wrote:
>
> >"Meat-->Plow" wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:56:04 -0400, "ramalane(tm)"
> >> <rama...@cotse.com>wrote:
> >>
> >> >Here are lists of just some of the innocent people murdered in
> >> >yesterdays attacks.
> >> >
> >> >http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victims.list.ap/
> >> >
> >> >http://www.msnbc.com/news/627249_asp.htm
> >> >
> >> >Authorities fear that the actual death toll is in the thousands...
> >> >
> >> >Think about all their children being orphaned and then talk shit about
> >> >not retaliating against all the terrorist camps in the world!
> >> >
> >> >I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
> >> >Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
> >> >think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
> >> >straight to fuckin' hell.
> >> >
> >> >/kirt
> >>
> >> You want to wipe out a race of people? That's genocide. That's what
> >> Hitler tried. There's got to be a better way.
> >>
> >
> >Tell that to Israel...
>
> Fuck Israel.
>
Hahahaha. There's hope for you, yet.
Osama/bin/null
> It, the it in this case being, va...@shad0ws.deletehipcrimecom (Vampi
> Fangs), provided proof of it's gullibility when it put this crap
> <3bbd43f6....@casbah.org> in the cesspool known as
> alt.hackers.malicious:
>
> <snip>
> >>The policies of the US and UK are evil, but there's no
> >>mention of the evils perpetrated on the other side. The stories he
> >>writes are ALL one-sided, with only a token mentioning of the "other"
> >>side. This indicates extreme bias, in my opinion.
> >
> >my observation is that he reported accurately...
>
> So it's accurate to say that the policies of the US and UK are evil?
> Since he reported so accurately.
>
I'd say that's accurate as hell.
>
> --
> K. A. Cannon
> troll at hell-flame-wars dot org
> (change the orgy to org to reply)
>
> "I fear all I have done is awakened a sleeping giant and filled him
> with a terrible resolve."
> --Admiral Yamamoto after the bombing of Pearl Harbor.
--
BACK TO SCHOOL SOUNDTRACK
http://www.mp3.com/gortician
Fuck Hip-Hop
http://www.mp3.com/highc
Gortician's Rivals
http://www.mp3.com/festeringsore
Peerless
http://www.mp3.com/thetruerampage
"If it's a crime to love snuh then i'm guilty." - Terrible Tom
http://www.superduperpooper.com/
I LOVE GODEN
http://surf.to/eternalfrost
two-legged stule
above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify
the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail.
In article <3baebb03...@news.hotpop.com>
diana...@yahoo.com (little miss naughty) wrote:
> (snip crap)
>
> just the sort of intelligent response i expected from you.
one thing however should be taking into account in my defence, regarding
that above statement, is that i'm exceptionally angry right now. racsist
statements although not right are sometimes uttered by a people in the heat
of the moment.
remember too, your dislike, your hatred and disgust of me are based in
emotion. i have committed no acts or engaged in none of the activities that
you believe i have. therefore you have no rational cause for concern. you
hate me for an attraction i have, an attraction that i myself know is
immoral IF acted upon, hence, will never be.
-linux_lad
http://www.linuxlad.org/payback_time.php
-linux_lad
http://linuxlad.org
ramalane(tm) <rama...@cotse.com> wrote in message
news:3B9FBDD4...@cotse.com...
> Here are lists of just some of the innocent people murdered in
> yesterdays attacks.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victims.list.ap/
>
> http://www.msnbc.com/news/627249_asp.htm
>
> Authorities fear that the actual death toll is in the thousands...
>
> Think about all their children being orphaned and then talk shit about
> not retaliating against all the terrorist camps in the world!
>
> I say annihilate the fuckers once and for all!
> Use hydrogen bombs...Kill their fucking children...they certainly didn't
> think twice about the victim' families, did they...send them all to
> straight to fuckin' hell.
>
> /kirt
> --
>
> "We will not make a distinction between the terrorists and those who
> harbor them." -President George W. Bush (September 11, 2001)
>
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
Check out our new Unlimited Server. No Download or Time Limits!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! ==-----