OT: Cities For Peace
WARDOG
people are waking up to what is really going down...as the truth
trickles down, it is helping to re-ignite the anti-war movement on an
even larger scale than what we saw during Vietnam...
I am proud to say that where I live, the Santa Barbara City Council just
ratified a Resolution Against a War With Iraq:
http://www.ips-dc.org/citiesforpeace/resolutions/santabarbara.htm
So has Seattle WA, Madison WI, Washington D.C., Baltimore MD...and
others...coming to your city soon as people discover the truth...
http://www.ips-dc.org/citiesforpeace/resolutions.htm
War without end? Not In Our Name!!!
http://www.notinourname.net/
Thousands of high school and college students took to the streets on
November 20, all across this country as the 20th was the Not In Our Name
National Student/Youth Day of Action Against The War. At ‘Ground Zero’,
thousands of New York City high school and college students gathered in
solidarity to say “NO, NOT IN OUR NAME” to the war on Iraq.
None of the underlying problems which breed terrorism or war have been
solved. The so-called "enabled hatred"...This war is going to be
expensive beyond belief...further threatening the fragile U.S.
economy...
Now, Kissinger has been picked to study what really caused 9/11 ?!?!
That's the wolf watching the chicken shack...
I want to know who knew, what, and when...you think he'll tell you the
truth? He was behind the oil for weapons exchange with the Saudi
Royals...who we are still in bed with!
Just say "NO, NOT IN OUR NAME"...
The Pledge of Resistance:
We believe that as people living in the United States it is our
responsibility to resist the injustices done by our government, in our
names
Not in our name will you wage endless war, there can be no more deaths
no more transfusions of blood for oil
Not in our name will you invade countries, bomb civilians, kill more
children letting history take its course over the graves of the nameless
Not in our name will you erode the very freedoms you have claimed to
fight for
Not by our hands will we supply weapons and funding for the annihilation
of families on foreign soil
Not by our mouths will we let fear silence us
Not by our hearts will we allow whole peoples or countries to be deemed
evil
Not by our will and Not in our name
We pledge resistance
We pledge alliance with those who have come under attack for voicing
opposition to the war or for their religion or ethnicity
We pledge to make common cause with the people of the world to bring
about justice, freedom and peace
Another world is possible and we pledge to make it real.
Act to Save the Children of Iraq- Mairead Corrigan Maguire
http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/02.08/0808maguireiraq.htm
"We are currently in the UN Decade for a Culture of Peace and
Non-Violence for the Children of the World (2001-2010). This challenges
us all to focus on the children and do all in our power to see they have
clean water, food, medicine, and a safe environment and safe world.
Children in Iraq do not have these things because of UN/USA/UK
sanctions. The continuing death and suffering of Iraqi children is
preventable. Let us therefore prevent it.
Oppose US war against Iraq and work for diplomatic options, including
the lifting of economic trade sanctions against the Iraqi people, who
have been living and dying under these brutal sanctions and effects of
war for too long.
Mairead Corrigan Maguire, a member of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s
Advisory Council, is a Nobel Peace Laureate from Northern Ireland and a
founder of Peace People."
WARDOG resident of Santa Barbara, California...a City For Peace
http://www.surfingsports.com
Mike F
"An attempt by any outside forces to gain control of the Persian Gulf region
will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States
of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary,
including military force."
i.e., mess wit my OIL and we're goin to WAR, Muffer!
Mike
"WARDOG" <moon...@cox.net> wrote
Ray Kuntz
the hard way. Notice however that some of the big traditional funding
sources for these activities aren't coming through, guess why. My guess
is that it won't grow very big in the US.
Ray
WARDOG
Ray Kuntz wrote:
>
> Gawd another Children's Crusade. Another generation has to learn > things the hard way.
Not just a "Children's Crusade"...it's a crusade for humanity.
Everyone needs to wake up and realize that we are on this Earth together
and if we don't take care of it and each other, we are ALL going to
learn the hard way.
It's all about being a good citizen and steward...and it's all about
abolishing ignorance, because it's ignorance that breeds fear that
breeds evil...
Part of that ignorance is "ignorness"...that's what's been going on with
people watching their stock portfolios while ignoring our foreign policy
"investments", which are spinning down the drain...
Sending our tax dollars to arm both Iraq and Iran (at the same time, I
might add) , plus the Saudi "Royal" family, was a real brainchild...the
oil for weapons trade that the military-industrial complex pulled off,
made a few CEO's pretty rich...now, there is a price to pay for all of
that cheap foreign oil...kind of like a "use tax"...
only the price is paid in blood.
Mayor Guliani turned down their "blood money"...
http://www.coxnews.com/washingtonbureau/staff/kaplow/110201TER-SAUDI.html
Once again, Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam, finds itself in a
clash between its oil-lubricated relations with the West and the strict
religious fundamentalism that is woven into the country's laws and
loyalties.
It is the country that produced Osama bin Laden, the radical
fundamentalist and prime suspect of directing the Sept. 11 attacks
on the United States. Investigators believe that as many as 15 of the
19 hijackers also held Saudi citizenship.
Among bin Laden's accusations against the West, he charges
America of defiling Muslim holy land with its soldiers and the
"unchaste women" troops among them on Saudi soil.
Saudi Arabia also produced Prince Alwaleed, among the top 10
richest men in the world and a man who fits in naturally amid the
capitalists of Wall Street.
Among his holdings are major stakes in Euro-Disney, Apple
computers and Rupert Murdoch's media empire. He offered $10
million to victims in the World Trade Center, but New York Mayor
Rudy Guiliani rejected the offer after Alwaleed suggested that U.S.
foreign policy helped make America the target of terrorists.
Such strains run throughout the history of U.S.-Saudi relations.
Saudi Arabia is a country that puts the gas in your tank, and helped
create long lines at the pumps with the 1970s oil embargo created,
in part, to protest U.S. support for Israel. In 2000, about 17 percent
of America's oil supply came from the desert monarchy, which sits
on a quarter of world's oil reserves -- eventually worth trillions of
dollars.
We have to get at the root of the enabled hatred being aimed towards us
by other inhabitants of the planet, and if it involves our business
dealings over oil reserves, then we have to examine that, and be
prepared to make sacrifices. We can't continue the sustained depletion
of the Earth's natural resources because of the geopolitical
ramifications of this global gluttony. Most people are just trying to
raise their families, there's no reason to assume that the peoples of
whole countries are evil, because of ignorant leaders.
> it won't grow very big in the US.
It's growth will be directly proportional to the reduction in ignorance.
Our leaders have declared a "war on terror"...that's good...but, realize
that "terror" is but one small piece of ignorance and maybe we need to
rethink the weapons and strategy that has been used to combat it,
because it's not working...pure and simple...time to think outside the
box and international borders...everyone needs to be a citizen of
humanity on a planet without borders...because this is the only one that
we have, and it's gotten too small to sustain everyone's "special
interests".
We need to come to the realization that governments and artificial
borders and the concept of government and borders are obsolete. We
humans hold on to this concept because we have accepted this
conceptually and it's easier not to change it.
Perhaps decades from now it will all be peacefully apparent that we live
on one planet and that borders were the root cause of the "division" of
peoples...tribes of humans have been fighting over land, since the Stone
Age...everyone needs a homeland...that seems to be a part of our human
identity...it's in our DNA and biochemical makeup...
Ask these questions...What is government's function?...Protection and
welfare? Think about the enormous waste of resources being squandered on
the percieved necessity of protection. Ignorance is believing that the
only reason to have weapons is because someone else has them...
It's a concept worth considering, especially when one seriously
"considers" the alternative...
What IF they gave a war and no one came?
This decentralized concept is new, but new things are necessary if we
are to evolve. When human beings evolved from grunting tribalism to the
ideas of city states to kingdoms and empires, the idea was new... when
we human beings evolved to democracy from monarchy the idea was new...
this idea of a world without borders is new and will be inevitable, if
we as a species are to survive.
We are one species...and we need to start acting like this is the only
planet that we have...because, IT IS...
This Thanksgiving, don't forget to include a prayer for peace as you
gather together with your tribe to hold hands and give thanks to your
god of choice...no harm in trying...and we might surprise ourselves...it
could work...let's start with peace, one day at a time, why not today?
Then WE can take it from there...just I M A G I N E ...
Imagine - John Lennon
Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try,
No hell below us,
Above us only sky,
Imagine all the people
living for today...
Imagine there's no countries,
It isn't hard to do,
Nothing to kill or die for,
No religion too,
Imagine all the people
living life in peace...
Imagine no possesions,
I wonder if you can,
No need for greed or hunger,
A brotherhood of man,
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...
You may say I'm a dreamer,
but I'm not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
And the world will live as one.
WARDOG peace out...
http://www.surfingsports.com
Mike F
against "murder for oil"! Placards, chants, tears, anger ... in brainwashed
4- and 5-year-olds! Yet when newspeople ask these toddlers who Saddam
Hussein is, what Iraq is, and who's being murdered, they won't know ...
they'll say, "Ask Mommy; she knows"!
Oops ... I forgot ... That already happened last week in onea them "San"
towns in California.
It's been said a million times: "We start out as idealistic liberals, and
awaken to the conservative realities of life as we mature". I mean, Jeez,
these anti-freedom bleedin' hearts who are unwilling to buckle down and
protect their families and neighbors if necessary think they know more than
the leaders of their party such as Pelosi and Bayh and Lieberman and
Gephardt, who support disarming Saddam even if it requires armed force. Even
Jabba the Kennedy sez all he lacks is revelation of some of the proof Rummy
sez he has.
Mike
"Ray Kuntz" <rku...@ndak.net> wrote in message
news:3DE633D1...@ndak.net...
WARDOG
Mike F wrote:
>
> Next we're gonna see masses of PRE-SCHOOLERS protesting and > petitioning against "murder for oil"!
It's our only hope!!! They are the future of the world...
Can you I M A G I N E ?
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
WARDOG
Mike F wrote:
"It's been said a million times: "We start out as idealistic liberals"
snip....snip...
"the leaders of their party such as Pelosi and Bayh and Lieberman and
Gephardt, who support disarming Saddam even if it requires armed force."
When did the "Golden Rule" change to "Do unto others, BEFORE they do
unto you"???
That wasn't what Jesus preached in his Parable on the Mount...
And don't say, "since 9/11"...because our adversaries think that 3,000
lives is but a drop in the bucket of blood that they have bled
throughout time...as heinous a crime against humanity as that singular
event was, orders of magnitudes more people have perished due to hatred,
ignorance, and intolerance in the Middle East and abroad...
It's time for the ignorance to stop...
Why is it such an "U.S. and them" mentality?
This isn't a political Republican/Democrat issue...ignorance extends
across party lines...there needs to be another "flavor" besides vanilla
and chocolate...
Reflect on these words of Thomas Morton, a Trappist Monk, who has
"thunk" long and hard on these issues:
http://www.thomasmertoncenter.org/Thomas_Merton/merton_on_non-violence.htm
Thomas Merton on Peace and Non-Violence
"I am against war, against violence, against violent revolution, for
peaceful settlement of differences, for nonviolent but nevertheless
radical changes. Change is needed, and violence will not really change
anything: at most it will only transfer power from one set of
bull-headed authorities to another."
"A violent change would not have been a serious change at all. To
punish and destroy the oppressor is merely to initiate a new cycle of
violence and oppression. The only real liberation is that which
liberates both the oppressor and the oppressed at the same time from the
same tyrannical automatism of the violent process which contains in
itself the curse of irreversibility..."
"The most obvious fact about war today is that while everyone claims to
hate it, and all are unanimously agreed that it is our greatest single
evil, there is little significant resistance to it except on the part of
small minorities who, by the very fact of their protest, are dismissed
as eccentric."
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
Mike F
Mike
"WARDOG" <moon...@cox.net> wrote
Brooks
lost one or all of their loved ones in the World Trade Center attack. Wonder
what kind of reponse you would get? Did you not see some of the "innocent"
in the Middle East cheering on the attack of the World Trade Center towers
on TV after it happened? These were the citizens you want to protect and
worried about? The ones that were rejoicing at the fact that we lst over
3,000 truly innocent citizens. I think you need to re-check your priorities.
Eye for an eye! I am not saying innocent people won't/haven't died. And I am
not saying it is right. But that is all part of war. And I am not going to
sit around and push all this peace crap when there is a job to do. And that
is to root out the evil and dispose of it.
And I can't believe you bring up the Golden Rule. I guess you also think
that we need more proof that they are in position of weapons of mass
destruction? Maybe before long, you will start taking their side. I guess we
need another attack and lose another 3,000 or more truly innocent lives
before we can go to war???
Welcome to the world of reality, it is not sweet but it is what it is.
"YION" Yes, In Our Name!
"Mike F" <iso...@urxSpamDam.com> wrote in message
news:pvvF9.15853$EY.14656@fe01...
WARDOG
Brooks wrote:
> Eye for an eye!
If there is a God, he/she will be the judge of that...
Would a bucket full of 6,000 eyes satisfy you?
It's much better and easier for your soul to go down the path of peace,
than be duped and blinded by hatred...
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
Lowjiber
I've stumbled on alt.spam by mistake.
Wardog, your contributions to the newsgroup are often interesting and to the
point. However, I don't give a damn about your political, religious, or
moral views. Please honor the spirit of the web, and put this conversation
on an appropriate group.
John Crumpley (a.k.a. "Lowjiber")
JAWS Jax, Fl
"WARDOG" <moon...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3DE5ACB7...@cox.net...
Brooks
subject for this newsgroup (thank goodness!!!). Sorry for adding to the
useless clammer.
Happy Thanksgiving,
Brooks
"Lowjiber" <lowj...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:EsxF9.52284$842....@news1.fdn.com...
Brooks
As long as those 6,000 eyeballs belong to those that were responsible for
the attacks on our country or who support those attacks, by all means it
will make me feel better. You can send them FedEx if you would like!
Lowjiber,
After this I promise not to add any more comments. Sorry.
Sincerely,
Brooks
WARDOG
Whatever dude...;-)
You don't have to click on the post...I designated it off topic for
you...quick solution if you can't hang, is filter me...or ignore it.
Your life's about to change, it just did with the Homeland Security
Act..that's just the start....stick your head in the sand for now, if
you want...in awhile, if things keep heading in the same direction, you
won't be able to...I would hope that windians would care, at least one
way or the other...complacency is not acceptable.
You wanna know what's interesting to me?
I put more visual windsurfing content up for this NG than practically
everyone else combined and there are times when there aren't many or
even a single comment on some of the work...but, hey...let's talk about
a 10 year old sail or obsolete boards that nobody has heard of...
These incredible vid clips that I edited and shared recently are an
example:
http://www.surfingsports.com/vidstream/wind/robbie_naish.ram
http://www.surfingsports.com/george_greenough.asp
Thousands of people have downloaded them...very few comments here.
Why don't you throw down with some windsurfing content?
So here I am now, entertain me...
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
Davide
the case can be made that who is really at risk of acting like
immature children (with no disrespect to children in general) is the
American adult population.
Here we have it: basically a lunatic, resident Bush, at the head of an
extreme-right-wing administration who make us believe that the way to
defeat terrorists (if that is at all possible) is to attack IRAQ.
Instead of, for example
Solving the Israel/Palestinian problem
Bring real peace to Afghanistan
Deal with the real and proven connection between terrorists
and the Saudi government.
The lunatic and his cronies (last enrolled Kissinger, who personally
masterminded the murder of Allende and the democracy in Cile, and
counteless other terrorist operations in the 70') are not interested
in the war on terrorism: they are perfectly safe and protected.
They want power at the national and international level.
And they are getting it, and the adult children are watching, and the
adult children in this nations, and countless abroad, will die for
their dirty wars
Davide
PS WARDOG: great post
"Mike F" <iso...@urxSpamDam.com> wrote in message news:<tMsF9.15670$EY.3796@fe01>...
Mike F
even about Jimmy Carter's firm international resolve to use war to defend
our access to Middle Eastern oil. It has everything to do with defending
ourselves against a debatably credible vow to kill the non-Islam world and
its first dozen or so mass murders. This is pure, unadulterated
self-defense, maybe with oil as icing on the cake because the civilized
world runs on it. While I would love to hear any dedicated peacenik explain
what they will do when 10 million free world orphans and nuns, the world
economy, baseball, and windsurfing have all been eradicated by Islamic
terrorists, I don't expect them to answer that challenge because it has been
presented in vain to millions of them for millennia. Their inability to
recognize that people like Hitler, Hirohito, OBL, and maybe Saddam don't
recognize flower power as a deterrent to their hatred leaves the pacifists
totally dependent on more rational problem-solvers to protect them. I'd feel
guilty being that dependent on others' dying for me when there's no
alternative, and would feel stupid recognizing that hundreds of millions of
people recognize that at some point there is no alternative. I really think
that if we had films of Saddam furnishing boxcarloads of chem, bio, and
nuclear weapons to OBL, then films of OBL using them on every American city,
that many of these pacifists would continue hiding behind flower power while
their very brothers gave their lives defending them, and go down singing
"Kum Ba Yah" or "Feeeeeeeelings" as clouds of sarin infiltrated their OTHER
smoky cloud.
They have every right to do that; it's their life. And when their la-la-land
mindset persuades an administration to avoid a war somehow independently
proven unnecessary, that's a public service. But when their protests
dissuade a weak administration from defending a nation against a proven
threat -- I'm not saying Saddam qualifies but Afghanistan certainly did --
they have overstepped their boundaries, IMO.
Mike
"WARDOG" <moon...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3DE6A5BD...@cox.net...
Glenn Woodell
>
>The beginning of the New Anti-War movement is strongly underway...
You warned us. OT.
Glenn
Mike F
2. Great idea. Let's put that right below "Avert the next few WTC attacks"
on our To Do list. Oh, yeah ... that's what Bush is doing.
3. Good idea. Let's put cutting Al Qaeda's cash flow right below disarming
Al Qaeda on our To DO list. Oh, yeah ... that's what Bush is doing ...
depending on what North Korea does.
When will pacifists comprehend that terrorists are as dedicated to killing
dissenters as pacifists are to peacefully watching that happen, and that
flower power isn't going to deter the terrorists any more than 200,000,000
U.S. citizens and all of NATO can deter the pacifists?
Mike
"Davide" <dav...@ariel1.ucsf.edu> wrote >
1, > Solving the Israel/Palestinian problem
2. > Bring real peace to Afghanistan
3. > Deal with the real and proven connection between terrorists
> and the Saudi government.
Mike F
talk radio.
Mike
"WARDOG" <moon...@cox.net> wrote
WARDOG
Brooks wrote:
>
> Wardog,
>
> As long as those 6,000 eyeballs belong to those that were responsible > for the attacks on our country or who support those attacks, by all
> means it will make me feel better. You can send them FedEx if you > would like!
Wow Brooks!...for being a lurker you have quite an attitude about my
postings on this NG...come and try to get my keyboard if you're such a
badass...why don't you bring the Kook of Nuke,...he's also suggested
taking away my keyboard...knowledge is power...
I enjoy exercise...I'm like a one-legged man in an arse-kicking contest
and ready to get "Western" with it, anytime it comes my "Constitutional
Rights"...remember those from high school or at least the first one?
First Amendment To The Constitution Of The United States
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances".
Now that we have an understanding about "free speech" in America...
I'm all for bringing the criminals responsible to justice, but fail to
see how the "smart bombs" will discriminate the good from the evil when
they are dropped on the Iraquis...or does it even matter because they
are ALL evil?...I am still waiting for the evidence that connects Iraq
(9% of U.S. oil imports) to OBL...so far, it appears to point towards
the Saudis, who we get 18% of our imported oil from.
I still haven't had the "end game" explained to me, IF, we finally nail
Saddam this time...or what happens when the Israelis take out
Arafat...or blah,blah,blah since this is so boring to you...
Will that solve the problem(s)?
Will we live happily ever after and sail off into the sunset?
I don't know about you, but I want to keep my tax dollars for
windsurfing gear, not bombs destined to annihilate civilain innocents
because we get 1/3 of our oil from them.
"The Saudis last year supplied 18 percent of America's imported oil,
according to the Energy Information Administration. That compares with
the 19 percent imported from South America, 15 percent from Mexico, 14
percent from Canada, 9 percent from Iraq and 3 percent from Kuwait."
http://www.petroleumworld.com/sundayfeature51902.htm
WARDOG peace out...
http://www.surfingsports.com
>
WARDOG
Mike F wrote:
>
> It's a right-wing conspiracy funded by Rufus Murdoch, just like
> conservative talk radio.
Actually, it's the Trilateralists:
http://truedemocracy.net/w01/3.html
"Created in 1973, the Trilateral Commission has exerted a dramatic
effect on the entire Third World. Its effect on the Middle East is due
to the vast amounts of oil in the region and the West's need to have a
cheap source of energy for industry and transportation."
More relevant "Rolling Stone" logic:
Long Time Gone - (David Crosby)
It's been a long time comin'
It's goin' to be a Long Time Gone.
And it appears to be a long,
appears to be a long,
appears to be a long
time, yes, a long, long, long ,long time before the dawn.
Turn, turn any corner.
Hear, you must hear what the people say.
You know there's something that's goin' on around here,
the surely, surely, surely won't stand the light of day.
And it appears to be a long,
appears to be a long,
appears to be a long
time, yes, a long, long, long ,long time before the dawn.
Speak out, you got to speak out against the madness,
you got to speak your mind,
if you dare.
But don't no don't now try to get yourself elected
If you do you had better cut your hair.
`Cause it appears to be a long,
appears to be a long,
appears to be a long,
Time, such a long long long long time before the dawn.
It's been a long time comin'
It's goin' to be a long time gone.
But you know,
The darkest hour is always
Always just before the dawn.
And it appears to be a long, appears to be a long,
appears to be a long
Time before the dawn.
WARDOG (speaking out against the madness)
http://www.surfingsports.com
WARDOG
Mike F wrote:
> I'd feel guilty being that dependent on others' dying for me
War is where old geezers send young men in place of themselves to die...
You all signed up there, Mike?
That shoulder back in shape?
Hell, you only need one good arm to kick their arse, anyway...huh, Mike?
After you, badass...or are you going to fight this war from your
keyboard? Or with your 5 finned board, helmet and face guard:
http://www.surfingsports.com/images/windsurf_warrior.jpg
I wonder who the chicken Shiite really is?...;-)
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Moyers/CIA_TSG.html
"There are 58,000 names on the wall of the Vietnam memorial; 58,000 men
died in Vietnam. Their deaths and all the deaths in Southeast Asia-the
names not on this wall-raise painful questions about our secret
government and our role in the world. Were we certain what we asked
people to die for?"
How about the 558,052 American deaths during our Civil War?...
More Americans lost their lives in that war than any other:
http://www.germantown.k12.il.us/html/deaths.html
By that measure, we must have really solved the countries' problems,
huh?
Dammit, if we'd only completely wiped the Iraquis out in the first Gulf
War, we wouldn't be in this mess today, huh?
I mean we only dropped 85,000 tons of bombs...1/4 million or so...
Yep, more bombs are what we need to solve the problems in Iraq, the
Middle East and to "win" the War on Terror...oops, I almost
forgot...bombs and old men with no conscience or young boys to drop them
from planes...that way you don't have to smell the burning flesh...
More sanitary that way...
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
westoz
>
> "There are 58,000 names on the wall of the Vietnam memorial; 58,000 men
> died in Vietnam. Their deaths and all the deaths in Southeast Asia-the
> names not on this wall-raise painful questions about our secret
> government and our role in the world. Were we certain what we asked
> people to die for?"
>
Brings to mind something I read recently - "what we learn from history is
that we don't learn from history"
But you can't blame the man on the street because they/him/me/you just get
fed the same kind of misinformation and propaganda as do our alleged enemy.
A little soul searching could be in order.
-Tom
MTVNewsGuy
increase or decrease the likelihood of terrorism in the United States" has been
answered "will increase", not decrease. Nobody seriously thinks that kicking
Saddam's ass is going to deter Al Qaeda and the like. They don't need WOM
either.
Michael
US5613
MTVNewsGuy
From: "Marc Rosen" <A HREF="mailto:duck...@qis.net">duck...@qis.net</A>
Date: Fri, Nov 29, 2002 5:47 AM
Message-id: <as7gcg$o9sq8$1...@ID-118229.news.dfncis.de>
Disclaimer:
I make no position statement by this posting but with all the messages pro
and con about the impending "war against Iraq" going on this news group I
thought a bit of levity was in order by copying this little ditty from the
Frank Zappa newsgroup.
(alt.fan.frank-zappa)
By the way, I hope everyone had a day to be thankful for yesterday.
Marc
(Sung to the tune of "If You're Happy And You Know It Clap Your
Hands"]
If we cannot find Osama, bomb Iraq.
If the markets hurt your Mama, bomb Iraq.
If the terrorists are Saudi
And the bank takes back your Audi
And the TV shows are bawdy, bomb Iraq.
If the corporate scandals growin', bomb Iraq.
And your ties to them are showin', bomb Iraq.
If the smoking gun ain't smokin'
We don't care, and we're not jokin'.
That Saddam will soon be croakin', bomb Iraq.
Even if we have no allies, bomb Iraq.
From the sand dunes to the valleys, bomb Iraq.
So to hell with the inspections;
Let's look tough for the elections,
Close your mind and take directions, bomb Iraq.
While the globe is slowly warming, bomb Iraq.
Yay! the clouds of war are storming, bomb Iraq.
If the ozone hole is growing, Some things we prefer not knowing.
(Though our ignorance is showing), bomb Iraq.
So here's one for dear old daddy, bomb Iraq,
From his favorite little laddy, bomb Iraq.
Saying no would look like treason.
It's the Hussein hunting season.
Even if we have no reason, bomb Iraq.
(Author, unfortunately, unknown)
Michael
US5613
Gerald Bothe
you are trying very hard to make your point clear. But what comes after
the IMHO inevitable strike against Iraq? For how long are the US Forces
going to stay there amidst millions of potential terrorists?
If you ask for my opinion I'd say the US will do as they always do:
Leave the mess behind and let the others (EU, NATO, whoever...) handle
the dirty work of _keeping_ peace, just like before in former Yugoslavia
and Afghanistan. The situation might be somewhat different in Iraq
though, because of the oil and the fact that it has already been divided
among the US oil industry.
But will the strike against Iraq bring peace to the world or destroy or
even weaken terrorism? I doubt it!
You have to destroy the source of this islamic terrorism. You cant kill
all muslims, that's not the solution.
Gerald
Jeff Feehan
Gerald Bothe wrote:
>
> If you ask for my opinion I'd say the US will do as they always do:
> Leave the mess behind and let the others (EU, NATO, whoever...) handle
> the dirty work of _keeping_ peace, just like before in former Yugoslavia
gerald,
while i have no interest in the debate that spawned this comment,
it shows a real lack of understanding of u.s. policy, that i have
to comment.
the u.s. position, from the very begining, was that the fall of
yugoslavia was a _european_ problem, and that it needed a _european_
solution. u.s. and nato involvement was a result of the failure
of europe to act to prevent the slaughter. the u.n. involvement
was a disaster - probably worse than no involvement. e.u. help?
are you joking? the e.u. did nothing to stop a terrible slaughter
right in their own back yard.
jeff feehan
Mike F
and puts all kinds of words in my mouth does not mean I support war with
Iraq or killing Muslims. Read what *I* write, not what others SAY I write,
before jumping on me.
IF we can prove Iraq is supporting AL Qaeda, especially with WMD, that must
stop in order to limit Al Qaeda's effort to kill all the world's non-muslims
and all North American muslims ... billions of people. We've tried words
with all these countries and sanctions on the most obvious offenders, to no
avail. The next step is international pressure. That doesn't seem to be
working. Iraq agreed to inspection then and now, so let's get on with it.
How much more time do we give Saddam, and how many more hundreds of
thousands of innocent lives (e.g., Kurds, dissidents) must he be allowed to
ruin or end before someone says, "Enough"? If Saddam fights our inspections,
it MAY be time to inform him thusly: We will inspect or destroy this
facility within 24 hours. The choice is yours." A great deal would depend on
what we know about each facility. My biggest single remaining doubts are 1)
the administration has shown no proof of the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection, and I
trust no administration very far and press even less; 2) we will not find
all of Iraq's WMD; some will be unleashed, and 3) the long-term implications
you refer to.
But if we can limit Al Qaeda's access to WMD, then choke off their funds
from Saudi Arabia, then this, then that, maybe we have a chance to save
billions of lives ... far more than North Korea threatens at the moment.
Simplistic analogy: I hear noises in my driveway, and suspect the burglars
are at it again. I call the cops, and in the meantime walk out --
carefully -- to investigate. I see scum (their fathers' parenting skills are
of *Z*E*R*O* concern)breaking into my vehicle. I tell them to stop and
leave, they come at me. I reveal my shotgun (I'm not stupid), order them
onto the ground. They keep coming. They die. I sleep like a baby because I
did absolutely nothing wrong. I have every moral and legal right to confront
scum attacking my STUFF, at which point THEY determine whether to attack my
PERSON. The minute they attack me, I have every moral and legal right to
whatever steps are required to insure they do not harm a hair on my head. I
do not want to live in a country too cowardly to allow self defense, too
irrational to realize that at some point it's them or us. When they start
it, by God they'd better know when to back off.
Is this the "them or us" point with Iraq? Hell, I don't know. I can only
hope the administration does, and would stand a lot more eagerly behind
whatever action ensues is they would credibly reveal some credible basis for
their actions. But we must at least walk out into the driveway and find out
what the hell is going on there, lest they rule the world.
Even aside from Al Qaeda and Saddam's known WMDs, there's the man's
behavior. We can't police the whole world, but do we at have some obligation
to confront its worst offenders? I think so. If I see a man literally
beating a child or dog in the street, it WILL stop. If I see thieves taking
stuff from someone's car, I will try to stop them. When I hear some bigot
openly berating blacks, women, or whatever, I speak my mind to the pig. Of
course, I must asses the risk to myself; if it's too great, I'll We all have
that responsibility to try to improve our society, and to some degree that
applies world-wide. I don't care if it IS their "bible" and their society
that's telling them to kill me and you; it's their murderous ACTIONS that
must be stopped. Collateral (non-targeted) damage is a cost of war; the WTC
people were TARGETS, not collateral damage. That's sick, and makes their
cause sick.
But I read something yesterday that makes me equally sick. If even 10% of it
is true (I don't know anything about the author or the newspaper), it's time
to squash Saddam, Al Qaeda or no Al qaeda. Here are some paraphrased
excerpts from http://www.frontpagemag.com/images/fp_articles_ppencil.jpg :
* Amnesty International estimates tens of thousands of people unfriendly to
Saddam [may] die in Iraqi prisons.
* The regime rewards citizens who report anyone that has uttered even a
single word
critical of Saddam; ... The fear is so omnipresent you could almost eat it.
... criticizing Saddam in any
way - even saying that his clothes did not match - would be punished by
cutting out the offender's tongue ... which beats being in their prisons.
* Once prisoners are incarcerated for disloyalty to the regime, their
suffering ...starvation diets ... gruesome torture ... electric shocks to
their genitalia ...
scorching metal rods are forced into their body orifices ... their toes are
crushed and their toenails pulled out ... limbs burned off .... they are
slowly lowered into large vats of acid until they
confess or die. Many are poisoned with thallium, which causes its victims
enormous agony before they die. When these prisons periodically get
overcrowded, they are "cleaned out" by means of summary executions.
* Prisoner's wife and daughters are raped, and
sometimes beheaded, as he watches. His children or grandchildren - in many
cases mere toddlers - are burned with cigarette butts; their eyes are gouged
out; all the bones in their feet are crushed; their ears and limbs are
amputated, one at a time. If no confession is forthcoming, the youngsters
are slaughtered. Moreover, some of these prisons actually house the children
of suspected dissidents - children younger than twelve who are packed into
cells and left to rot amid pools of their own excrement, blood, and tears.
* 100,000 Kurds killed by a trifecta of poison gasses even before the Gulf
War.
And Saddam's sons are worse.
What the hell does it take to wake pacifists up ... the Mall of America
being wiped out during Christmas rush by a few light bulbs full of sarin
gas?
Sorry, but I don't have the time to edit or condense this.
Mike
"Gerald Bothe" <g.b...@gmx.de> wrote in message news:3DE8EFBA...@gmx.de
...
Weed Fin
<<The situation might be somewhat different in Iraq
though, because of the oil and the fact that it has already been divided
among the US oil industry.>>
So what companies are getting what?
Mike F
will go to war to protect our access to Mid-east oil. (Hint: he got a Nobel
Peace Prize recently.)
Mike
"Weed Fin" <wee...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021130150956...@mb-mu.aol.com...
Davide
No pacifism here: but disgust for the cronies who sacrifice Americans,
both economicaly (e.g. Enron/California) and now in flesh and blood,
for their political and economic advantage.
The current extreme-right-wing administration has NO interest in
fighting terrorism and they are not fighting it, no matter what they
tell you.
The war on IRAQ will have the effect of increasing terrorism workwide,
AND it will kill a lot of American young and brave who think they are
protecting our country but unfortunately are instead protecting the
political and economic interest of cowards like Bush (or Wolfkowitz,
or Ashcroft, or Rushfield), who dodged service in Vietnam with the
help of his father.
bests
Davide
"Mike F" <iso...@urxSpamDam.com> wrote in message news:<lGyF9.15957$EY.9974@fe01>...
Mike F
> disgust for the cronies who sacrifice Americans,
> both economicaly (e.g. Enron/California) and now in flesh and blood,
> for their political and economic advantage
> fighting terrorism and they are not fighting it, no matter what they
> tell you.
Then why give a Nobel Peace Prize to the very president who declared "We
will go to war for oil"? Why is your opinion that it's all about oil more
valid than my opinion that it's primarily about the OBVIOUS -- defense
against dozens of murderous attacks on the free world's civilians and
military alike and open fatwas to continue doing so? What does it take to
make you perceive a threat? To act?
> The war on IRAQ will have the effect of increasing terrorism worldwide,
Could be. But it will also diminish Al Qaeda's access to WMD IF Iraq is
helping them, as it has promised to do. How many WTC's, military and
civilian people and ships, night clubs, and kids buying pizza have to be
destroyed to persuade some people to at least get out of the way, let alone
actually support action, against the attackers?
> AND it will kill a lot of American young and brave who think they are
> protecting our country but unfortunately are instead protecting the
> political and economic interest ...
And how do you know this "fact"?
> of cowards like Bush (or Wolfkowitz,
> or Ashcroft, or Rushfield), who dodged service
>in Vietnam with the help of his father.
I don't get it. People curse the Viet Nam war because it was wrong (I
agree), yet condemn people who found a legitimate and contributory way out
of direct participation in it. Skipping out to Canada? Chicken-crap! But
finding another way to serve your country without fighting in a "bad" war is
cowardice? And who sez everybody in the National Guard got there because of
Daddy and stayed out of cowardice? Not so for my bud who has a Ph.D. in
laser optics and lives in the same town with the premiere Star Wars laser
research lab yet chooses instead to fly an F-16 in the Guard for half the
pay because he loves it ... despite the fact that Fighter Pilot is one of
the most dangerous professions of all.
I understand that many people place their fear of discord above all other
concerns, letting it run their lives, thus assume the worst when discord --
whether a simple argument at dinner or all-out war -- threatens. But I can't
comprehend why so many irrational people assume that Bush loves to kill and
would do so for oil -- as the Carter Doctrine decrees -- because he's a
Republican or a conservative or speaks with a drawl or isn't a rocket
scientist. We don't need -- hell, I know many of them; we don't WANT -- a
rocket scientist running the country. We want a good leader, a person
foreign leaders tend to trust, a person with a history of standing by his
convictions, a person willing to consider all options yet defend his country
if required. So far, Bush seems to be doing at least adequately in those
arenas, IMO. I plan to read a lot more to see HOW good before my opinion
counts again in the next election, just as I read about Gore before almost
voting for HIM last election.
Besides, I LIKE my oil. The civilized world runs on it, EVERYthing we eat
and drive and wear and play and buy and sell depends on it. Yet so many
people think making a few caribou move to a diffeent patch of tundra is
worse than going to war over it. We just can't expect everything to be
perfect and cost-free.
And even without oil, without Al Qaeda, at what point DO we exert force to
stop an dictator who is trying very hard to equal Adolph Hitler in his
murderous insanity? Given his history, I'd bet Saddam would have done FAR
more harm than he has if we weren't sitting on top of him. Why else would he
be amassing such huge quantities of WMD even a decade after using them on
his own countrymen, enough to kill the world's population several times
over?
Mike
MTVNewsGuy
valid than my opinion that it's primarily about the OBVIOUS -- defense
against dozens of murderous attacks on the free world's civilians and
military alike and open fatwas to continue doing so? What does it take to
make you perceive a threat? To act? >>
Mike, as I pointed out before, most Americans believe that attacking Iraq will
increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks against the U.S., not decrease it.
So it's not "obvious". There are intelligent, brave people in the US and
Europe who are willing to go to war if they feel sufficiently threatened, who
do not agree that Iraq should be attacked at this time (though I think most
people are happy to see inspectors back in Iraq.)
What really needs to happen is for the UN inspectors to find WOMD. That would
advance the situation considerably...if it is proved to the world that he's got
those weapons, then the UN will get to demonstrate whether or not it's worth
anything.
Michael
US5613
Ray Kuntz
With all due respect. Bull shit.
Ray
Mike F
on the free world's civilians and
The proof Saddam has and uses WMD lies in 100,000 Kurd graves, laboratory
analyses of Kurd carcasses and environment, defecting Iraqi military officer
statements, hands-on inspection by the team of New York Times journalists
who wrote the book, "Germs", and on and on and on. No one who has read
"Germs" can credibly argue that Iraq's possession of huge quantities of WMD
is uncertain.
The FAR bigger question is what we do about that fact. If our military were
as competent (referring to competence here, not sheer horsepower) as
Israel's, I'd say go in and do whatever it takes to disarm and depose the
SOB and his sons. But given our military's poor record in efficiency and
quick effectiveness, especially when artificially restrained by PC, that
scares the hell out of me.
We are just lately developing a network of spies who can operate in the
Middle East. Clinton had cut their numbers from over a hundred to 12, and
George Tenet -- who has been raising the OBL hue and cry since the 1990s --
has only lately won the battle to get 120 through training. Although as
newbies they aren't going to penetrate Saddam's inner circle in time to do
much good there, we must hope they can still surface more facts and
intentions than we had when blinded by PC.
We done good in Afghanistan. 500 operatives did what Russia could not:
dramatically weaken the Taliban and shut down their al Qaeda training camps.
What could they have unleashed on the Middle East, however ... a buncha
starving guys on horseback? It's a little different in Iraq, which has
already promised to pass their arsenal to al Qaeda. We must do an infinitely
better job of sealing Iraqi borders than we did Afghani borders if any form
of military action has any prayer of mitigating the propagation of his WMD
... presuming it hasn't already been done.
I still think he's a more immediate threat than Saudi Arabia's money, and we
should be able to stem cash flow via computers, revelation, scrutiny, and
maybe even peer pressure. That won't work with truckloads of WMD.
Mike
"MTVNewsGuy" <mtvne...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021201101538...@mb-ck.aol.com...
Davide
>
> Could be. But it will also diminish Al Qaeda's access to WMD IF Iraq is
> helping them, as it has promised to do. How many WTC's, military and
> civilian people and ships, night clubs, and kids buying pizza have to be
> destroyed to persuade some people to at least get out of the way, let alone
> actually support action, against the attackers?
=====> Using the same logic, the Italian govenrment should have
lunched strikes against the USA because there where "clear suspicions"
that the CIA and USA was behind much of the terror campaign that
devastated Italy for a decade. Allende, should have attacked the USA
because there was a clear and imminent danger from the USA, too bad he
did not do it, because he lost his life together with the life of
10,000-15,000 people killed in the USA attack to a democratic
government. an attack that, what hirony, took place on 9/11 1973. And
... the list goes on.
> > AND it will kill a lot of American young and brave who think they are
> > protecting our country but unfortunately are instead protecting the
> > political and economic interest ...
>
> And how do you know this "fact"?
======> oh well, you know people die in war, thousands and thousands
of Iraq people will and probably hundreds of Americans
>
> > of cowards like Bush (or Wolfkowitz,
> > or Ashcroft, or Rushfield), who dodged service
> >in Vietnam with the help of his father.
>
> I don't get it. People curse the Viet Nam war because it was wrong (I
> agree), yet condemn people who found a legitimate and contributory way out
> of direct participation in it. Skipping out to Canada? Chicken-crap! But
> finding another way to serve your country without fighting in a "bad" war is
> cowardice?
=====> Oh, no you do get it. There is a really, really,important
difference: those are people that AGREED with the vietnam war, they
did not disagree, they SUPPORTED IT, they thought that is was the
right thing to do to another people (talk about terrorism! In Vietnam
the USA had in place for years rules of engagement which directly
broke the Geneva convention). But even if ther supported it they used
their influence to stay protected at home while others fighted it.
Bush and poeple like him are worse then cowards. Cowardy is not even
an issue for them: they know that their class does not get killed in
war, we do. (By the way, review Bush history: he never served in the
national guard, he was listed in it but never saw a jet and stayed
away from actual duty for whole duration of his" service").
>
Mike F
Mike F
> > > who think they are
> > > protecting our country but unfortunately are instead protecting the
> > > political and economic interest
is a fact?
Would you rather millions of us were killed? Isn't thousands enough?
I don't see any relevance in Italy not attacking us and Bush et.al. dodging
combat in a debatable war (there was some logic in the domino theory, and
South Viet Nam was being ravaged. I haven't studied it in depth, but to me
the problem was not so much the existence of the war but the half-assed,
handcuffed, PC way in which we fought it. We should have either ignored the
problem or kicked ass ... throwing hundreds of thousands of kids in harm's
way without making EVERY effort to back them up was criminal, IMO).
Tip: don't bother trying to debate that war with me. I admit right up front
that I know little about it beyond what the mass media reported, and
extremist points of view are laughable.
In particular, unsubstantiated accusations that Bush skipped out on his
Guard duty do not make it so. That his Alabama Guard Commander doesn't
remember Bush after 32 years proves nothing. Besides, people mature.
As for
> review Bush history: he never served in the
> national guard, he was listed in it but never saw a jet and stayed
> away from actual duty for whole duration of his" service") ...
back it up. Records, flight training, flight logs, and photographs dispute
your claim.
We can't listen to right-wing or left-wing BS. We need to do our best to
ignore that and find some unbiased facts.
"Their class"? Most Guardsmen and reservists I know are serfs like you and
me.
Mike
"Davide" <dav...@ariel1.ucsf.edu> wrote in message
news:df99b736.02120...@posting.google.com...
RickF1ab
read any more of this crap here. If you want to talk about war and
throw around your political views then you should be in another group.
WARDOG <moon...@cox.net> wrote in message news:<3DE5ACB7...@cox.net>...
WARDOG
RickF1ab wrote:
>
> There is enough junk mail in my email account that I don't expect to
> read any more of this crap here.
First off mate, OT means "off topic", it tells wankers like you to skip
it, if you're not interested...that means don't click on the post, if it
doesn't interest you, and click on it, if it does...simple as that...
Secondly, I don't want to talk about war, I'd much rather talk about
peace...and I made the case for peace, and have moved on for now...
The surf is all time and I am getting ready to go to the Baja for a
windsurfari...I hope everyone gets this problem sorted out, before I
return next year...
Some participants want to continue this discourse off topic, that's
their prerogative...address them personally if you have a continuing
issue with it...
Speaking of "crap", Rick...
Care to explain how you are asking about how a mast cam works in June of
this year in one post, that amounts to a troll for a product that you
seem to be associated with, and then in a post a few days ago, you say
that you got one "last Christmas" and "The photos are fantastic! See
www.mastcam.net."?...
Seems like you are not being forthright with us...
Seems you might also want to check your shoe for "crap", before putting
it in your mouth, mate...;-)
I hope your Christmas sales pick up...
> From: RickF1ab (ri...@email.is)
> Subject: Re: Mast camera Question
> Newsgroups: rec.windsurfing
> Date: 2002-06-26 05:03:20 PST
>
>
> Thats why I liked the idea of taking my
> own photos - be the star and photographer at the same time ;-)
>
> I checked out the Mastcam website and their photos at
> http://www.mastcam.net/photos/ - I was pleasantly surprised by the
> quality of the photos. Anyone know how it all works? Anyone got some
> sample photos?
>
> Regards,
>
> Rick
Speaking of "crap"...
> From: RickF1ab (ri...@email.is)
> Subject: Re: Christmas present suggestion?
> Newsgroups: rec.windsurfing
> Date: 2002-11-29 16:08:40 PST
>
>
> I received a Mastcam last Christmas. It allows you take photos whilst
> you windsurf and it is not expensive. The photos are fantastic! See
> www.mastcam.net.
>
> Rick
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
Jay Halford
content. As for the political thing, its taken on a life of its own. Both
Wardog and Mike are WAY into anything related to the windsurfing lifestyle.
So the tangent has grown abit. I would suggest mellowing on the personal
attacks of these guys a litttle. They have opposing viewpoints, but from
what I read, they are only replying to aggressive posts to defend
themselves. They are not perpetuating this thread; while, those that are
attacking their views are doing so. Stop attacking Mike and Wardog (they've
slowed on going after each other), and they will retrun to what they love
and know.
just my 2 cents.
Jay
"WARDOG" <moon...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3DE6B20A...@cox.net...
> Spam!?!?
>
> Whatever dude...;-)
> You don't have to click on the post...I designated it off topic for
> you...quick solution if you can't hang, is filter me...or ignore it.
>
> Your life's about to change, it just did with the Homeland Security
> Act..that's just the start....stick your head in the sand for now, if
> you want...in awhile, if things keep heading in the same direction, you
> won't be able to...I would hope that windians would care, at least one
> way or the other...complacency is not acceptable.
>
> You wanna know what's interesting to me?
> I put more visual windsurfing content up for this NG than practically
> everyone else combined and there are times when there aren't many or
> even a single comment on some of the work...but, hey...let's talk about
> a 10 year old sail or obsolete boards that nobody has heard of...
>
> These incredible vid clips that I edited and shared recently are an
> example:
> http://www.surfingsports.com/vidstream/wind/robbie_naish.ram
> http://www.surfingsports.com/george_greenough.asp
>
> Thousands of people have downloaded them...very few comments here.
> Why don't you throw down with some windsurfing content?
> So here I am now, entertain me...
>
> WARDOG
> http://www.surfingsports.com
>
>
> Lowjiber wrote:
> >
> > Gotta get this computer fixed. It's telling me I'm on rec.windsurfing,
but
> > I've stumbled on alt.spam by mistake.
> >
> > Wardog, your contributions to the newsgroup are often interesting and to
the
> > point. However, I don't give a damn about your political, religious, or
> > moral views. Please honor the spirit of the web, and put this
conversation
> > on an appropriate group.
> >
> > John Crumpley (a.k.a. "Lowjiber")
> > JAWS Jax, Fl
> >
> > "WARDOG" <moon...@cox.net> wrote in message
> > news:3DE5ACB7...@cox.net...
> > > The beginning of the New Anti-War movement is strongly underway as
> > > people are waking up to what is really going down...as the truth
> > > trickles down, it is helping to re-ignite the anti-war movement on an
> > > even larger scale than what we saw during Vietnam...
> > >
> > > I am proud to say that where I live, the Santa Barbara City Council
just
> > > ratified a Resolution Against a War With Iraq:
> > > http://www.ips-dc.org/citiesforpeace/resolutions/santabarbara.htm
> > >
> > > So has Seattle WA, Madison WI, Washington D.C., Baltimore MD...and
> > > others...coming to your city soon as people discover the truth...
> > > http://www.ips-dc.org/citiesforpeace/resolutions.htm
> > >
> > > War without end? Not In Our Name!!!
> > > http://www.notinourname.net/
> > >
> > > Thousands of high school and college students took to the streets on
> > > November 20, all across this country as the 20th was the Not In Our
Name
> > > National Student/Youth Day of Action Against The War. At 'Ground
Zero',
> > > thousands of New York City high school and college students gathered
in
> > > solidarity to say "NO, NOT IN OUR NAME" to the war on Iraq.
> > >
> > > None of the underlying problems which breed terrorism or war have been
> > > solved. The so-called "enabled hatred"...This war is going to be
> > > expensive beyond belief...further threatening the fragile U.S.
> > > economy...
> > > Now, Kissinger has been picked to study what really caused 9/11 ?!?!
> > > That's the wolf watching the chicken shack...
> > > I want to know who knew, what, and when...you think he'll tell you the
> > > truth? He was behind the oil for weapons exchange with the Saudi
> > > Royals...who we are still in bed with!
> > >
> > > Just say "NO, NOT IN OUR NAME"...
> > >
> > > The Pledge of Resistance:
> > >
> > > We believe that as people living in the United States it is our
> > > responsibility to resist the injustices done by our government, in our
> > > names
> > >
> > >
> > > Not in our name will you wage endless war, there can be no more deaths
> > > no more transfusions of blood for oil
> > >
> > >
> > > Not in our name will you invade countries, bomb civilians, kill more
> > > children letting history take its course over the graves of the
nameless
> > >
> > >
> > > Not in our name will you erode the very freedoms you have claimed to
> > > fight for
> > >
> > >
> > > Not by our hands will we supply weapons and funding for the
annihilation
> > > of families on foreign soil
> > >
> > >
> > > Not by our mouths will we let fear silence us
> > >
> > >
> > > Not by our hearts will we allow whole peoples or countries to be
deemed
> > > evil
> > >
> > > Not by our will and Not in our name
> > >
> > > We pledge resistance
> > >
> > > We pledge alliance with those who have come under attack for voicing
> > > opposition to the war or for their religion or ethnicity
> > >
> > >
> > > We pledge to make common cause with the people of the world to bring
> > > about justice, freedom and peace
> > >
> > >
> > > Another world is possible and we pledge to make it real.
> > >
> > > Act to Save the Children of Iraq- Mairead Corrigan Maguire
> > > http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/02.08/0808maguireiraq.htm
> > >
> > > "We are currently in the UN Decade for a Culture of Peace and
> > > Non-Violence for the Children of the World (2001-2010). This
challenges
> > > us all to focus on the children and do all in our power to see they
have
> > > clean water, food, medicine, and a safe environment and safe world.
> > >
> > > Children in Iraq do not have these things because of UN/USA/UK
> > > sanctions. The continuing death and suffering of Iraqi children is
> > > preventable. Let us therefore prevent it.
> > >
> > > Oppose US war against Iraq and work for diplomatic options, including
> > > the lifting of economic trade sanctions against the Iraqi people, who
> > > have been living and dying under these brutal sanctions and effects of
> > > war for too long.
> > >
> > > Mairead Corrigan Maguire, a member of the Nuclear Age Peace
Foundation's
> > > Advisory Council, is a Nobel Peace Laureate from Northern Ireland and
a
> > > founder of Peace People."
> > >
> > > WARDOG resident of Santa Barbara, California...a City For Peace
> > > http://www.surfingsports.com
Jay Halford
> I am not sure you get my point:
>
> No pacifism here: but disgust for the cronies who sacrifice Americans,
> both economicaly (e.g. Enron/California) and now in flesh and blood,
> for their political and economic advantage.
>
> The current extreme-right-wing administration has NO interest in
> fighting terrorism and they are not fighting it, no matter what they
> tell you.
>
What fucking planet are you from Davide?
Any American, or human for that matter, that saw those towers fall is VERY
interested in fighting terrorism! Yes, this administration (and all others
before it), have alternative interests; and yes, they can and do, attach
ammendments to these very emotional bills such as we now have in front of
us. But to state that they don't care?? That reeks of an extreme partisan
view. You must hate Bush so much you don't even think he is human. No, I am
not republican. He IS pushing his agenda, BUT, # 1, he is also trying to
protect the American public first, and rest of the world second. Is he
brilliant? No, Does he wish to drill in Alaska? Absolutely (which by your
VERY liberal post, I think is the real issue).
I know an attack is coming(personal). For the record, I almost always vote
independent nationally. I feel you should support the current admin to make
things work, and voice your displeasure only at the next election if things
aren't kosher.
Jay
Greg
> already promised to pass their arsenal to al Qaeda.
So, just for the record, exactly where does this come from? Would it
suprise you that there are people who are part of the Senate
Intelligence Committee who have said there is no credible link between
Iraq and Al Qaeda, or that Bin Laden has called for the death of
Hussien because of the secular SOB he is? Sounds like a couple of old
chums huh? I mean, if your statement were actual fact, I'd totally
support an invasion now. So please, enlighten me, where Hussien has
said, they will give Al Qaeda their WMD? Officially Iraq's position
seems to be they don't have WMD, so am I just reading the wrong
newspaper? I bet Bush must be all over that statement, since that
would in fact be an immediate basis for war that no one in the world
could refute? Funny I've just never heard of it. I mean if he said
it, it must have made the news somewhere and still be on the internet
right? Or is this instead the opinion of some guy on TV? You know,
unfortunately you can completely ruin every single argument you make
when you start to trade opinion for fact, so I'd really hope you're
not doing that.
gh
RickF1ab
> it, if you're not interested...that means don't click on the post, if it
> doesn't interest you, and click on it, if it does...simple as that...
Point taken - my mistake.
> Secondly, I don't want to talk about war, I'd much rather talk about
> peace...and I made the case for peace, and have moved on for now...
> The surf is all time and I am getting ready to go to the Baja for a
> windsurfari...I hope everyone gets this problem sorted out, before I
> return next year...
I am no war monger either!
> I hope your Christmas sales pick up...
Re Mastcam - you may not realise but being from the Southern
Hemisphere, Christmas runs in the middle of summer - not a typical
wintery Christmas as depicted in all movies etc. Whilst the
traditional Chistmas date is very popular, we also have a tradition
here that we celebrate Christmas that coincides with our winter. In
fact, it is quite a common tradition in the South - see
http://www.protestanthour.com/yourti2606.html. My enquiries about
making a mountable camera device led to a Chrissi present of a
Mastcam. If my comment that I received a Mastcam for Christmas misled
you then this may clarify the issue.
Since we are talking about so called self-promotion and "Christmas
sales picking up":
From: WARDOG (moon...@cox.net)
Subject: Re: Christmas present suggestion?
Date: 2002-11-26 20:30:15 PST
Here's a couple of ideas:
http://www.surfingsports.com/holiday_gift_guide.asp
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
Rick
WARDOG
No worries...
Interesting though, that you have such heartburn with a designated off
topic political subject, and your comeback is religious and dogmatic...
Picking a U.S. bible thumper to make your case...problem is, he
tangentiates off course, trying to rationalize that it's OK and good to
get a little and not have guilt...wayulll, yeah!
Let me paraphrase your guest preacher....
God is good, sex is good, God is sex...
Sex is better for Christians, because "God" loves Christians?!?!
" The poet and hymn writer Brian Wren has written a hymn which can help
us, Christians to recover the value of the flesh and to place sexuality
in its proper context. The title of Wren's hymn alone helps us recover
the importance and value of our God given and Christ affirmed flesh.
"Good is the Flesh that the Word has Become" says Wren in the title and
then expands with lines like "Good is the body from cradle to grave,
growing or aging, arousing, impaired, happy in clothing, or lovingly
bared, good is the pleasure of God in our flesh." This goodness of the
flesh that the Incarnation announces is supported by scientific
research. Recently it was reported that married couples who have sexual
relationships at least four times a week look younger, feel better and
live longer than their peers. The study emphasized that the frequency of
sex alone would not produce the same results. The guilt and shame that
often accompany sexual relations outside committed relationships takes
diminishes the positive value of sexuality for the rest of the body.
Good is the flesh that the Word has become indeed. Wren goes on,
"Good is the pleasure of God in our flesh, longing in all, as in Jesus,
to dwell, glad of embracing, and tasting, and smell, good is the body,
for good and for God, Good is the flesh that the Word has become. This
one man who offers us the gift of God's love in the flesh came to be
born among the poor and the outcast, so, the Incarnation also means
that God is involved in the tough realities of life.
We, Christians, are those who are keenly aware of God's love for us and
for the world."
Don't know what that had to do, about arbitrarily changing the "day" of
Christmas...
The problem with "organized" religion is that everyone's god loves them
more than the other's god...then there are more than a few famous
preachers and clergy who have a "little' problem keeping their winkles
in their shorts...Boston's Catholic churches are declaring bankruptcy
because they can't pay to settle all of the sexual abuse cases pending
right now...
I think U2's Bono has it right...
Bono on organized religion:
"Who in Ireland could have too much respect for organized religion?
We've seen it tear our country in two. My mother was a Protestant. My
father was a Catholic, and I learned that religion is often the enemy of
God, actually. And religion is this, sort of, religion is the artifice,
the building, after God has left it sometimes. Like Elvis has left the
building. You hold onto religion rules, regulations, traditions. I think
what God is interested in is people's hearts, and that's hard enough …
Religion often reduces the size of God. God is so big. It's a gigantic
concept in God …"
Maybe Rock n' Roll can save the world?
http://www.time.com/time/musicgoesglobal/europe/mbono.html
"Rock music can change things. I know that it changed our lives," says
Bono. "Rock is really about the transcendent feeling. There's life in
the form. I still think that rock music is the only music that can still
get you to that eternal place where you want to start a revolution,
call your mother, change your job or change your mind. I think that's
what rock music can do."
Bono was on Larry King last night to bring some light to World Aids Day
and celebrate Larry's 69'th B-Day...
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0212/01/lklw.00.html
U2's Bono has teamed up with some of the world's most powerful people
lately...the Pope, Bush, Colin Powell, Secretary O'Neill,
Mandela....etc...to raise 100's of millions of dollars to help stop
death by hunger of 2.5 million kids every year in Africa, help payoff
the enormous debt that burdens their economies.
"It's just so unhip to be talking about debt relief," says
Bono, discussing his passion of the past few years. "The band has been
really supportive about giving me the time to work on this." He first
became interested in Africa's economic plight in the 1980s, after the
Live Aid concerts that raised money for Ethiopian famine victims. "My
wife Ali and I ended up going to Ethiopia for some time doing relief
work. We were so high on the idea that Live Aid raised $100 million—and
then you discover years later that that's what Africa pays every couple
of weeks on old loans. It's kind of a shock. I thought we'd never forget
what we'd been through in Ethiopia, but you go back to your life and
then those images just fade away."
The images may have faded, but Bono's curiosity did not. In 1999, the
singer got involved with Jubilee 2000, now known as Drop the Debt, a
London-based coalition of academics and activists who equated Third
World debt with slavery. In the course of his work with the campaign
Bono has met with Presidents, Prime Ministers and the Pope to get
attention for the issue. He relishes the incongruity of a rock star
talking about world policy, but he backs it up by knowing his stuff. He
reads economics tomes and did some unofficial studying at Harvard. "I
think that politicians are attracted at first by the celebrity," says
Harvard economics guru Jeffrey Sachs, who has huddled with Bono and the
Pope on the debt issue. "But once they meet him, they find that he is an
outstandingly capable interlocutor." Senator Jesse Helms met with Bono
to talk about starving children in Africa and ended up weeping—marking
the first time a rocker has inspired an emotion in the Senator from
North Carolina other than perhaps outrage.
Merry Christmas bro, and Peace on Earth, no matter what day it is...;-)
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
VVVVVVV, VVVVVVVV .VVV. ,VVVVVV, VVVVVVVV ,VVVVVV, VV. VV
VV .VV VV .VV VV. VV '' VV VV' 'VV VVV. VV
VVVVVVV' VVVVVV VVVVVVV VV VVVVVV VV VV VVVV. VV
VV VV .VV VV VV ,, VV VV. .VV VV VVVV
VV VVVVVVV.VV VV.'VVVVVV' VVVVVVVV 'VVVVVV' VV VVV
VVVVVVVV .VVV. VVVVVVV, VVVVVVVV VV VV
VV .VV VV. VV VV VV VV VV
VVVVVV .VVVVVVV. VVVVVVV' VV VVVVVVVV
VV .VV VV. VV VV. VV VV VV
VVVVVVVV.VV VV.VV VV. VV VV VV
/:
///:,
//////:,
.W. ////////:,.
.WWW, ///////////::,.
.WWWWWW, ////////////////::,,.
.WWWWWWWWW,. ////////////////////::,,.
.WWWWWWWWWWWWW,. ///////////////////////////:,. ()
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW,.//////////////////////////////. /
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW:,.//////////////////////////. Y :
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW:,,.///////////////////. : / ()
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW:,,.///////////.,,. Y /
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW:,///.:WWWWWW, :----
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW,//,WWWWWWWWW: /
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW///:WWWWWWWWWW./
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW'///:WWWWWWWWVVV.
'WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW'/////WWWWWWW//''V.
'WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW:,./.,WWWWWW//
'WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW//W,
'WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW//WWW,
'WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW//WWWWW:
'''WWWWWWWWWWW/''WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW:
''''''' ,WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW'
.,,::WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW'
.,,:WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW:'
..,,,,,:WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW::''
'WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW:'''
''WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW'
'''WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW'
'''WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW'
'''WWWWWWWWW'
'''
MTVNewsGuy
It is not "obvious" that attacking Iraq will defend the U.S. or anyone against
"dozens of murderous attacks". While I'm not suggesting that Saddam so armed
is of no concern, the current campaign of murderous attacks is being launched
by other people (al Qaeda) who openly threaten the U.S.
The question that is being argued by some people here (including myself) is why
we are focusing on people who are not threatening us at this instant, WHILE
THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE, who are not only threatening but actually
killing large numbers of people now.
Mike wrote<<
Mike
>>
Michael
US5613
Mike F
has been to protect the United States from another 9-11. That's Job One. .
Do you have a higher priority?
Mike
>
> "Davide" <dav...@ariel1.ucsf.edu> wrote > >
Alan
debate has moved on to how to prevent such an event.
What ARE we going to do about Pakistan? You previously asked for an example
of another country that presented more of a threat than Iraq. I gave it to
you and I never heard a response. Did I overlook your response? Pakistan
just had 20,000 screaming people pack a stadium over the weekend screaming
'Death to Americans' after we executed one of their assassins. The body was
returned to Pakistan. Mistake. Now they have another martyr. Here's a
country that possesses nukes already. Here's a country that is harboring Al
Queda.
Alan
--
Windsurfing Club: http://www.ibscc.org
"Mike F" <iso...@urxSpamDam.com> wrote in message
news:6MNG9.22028$EY.8590@fe01...
Jay Halford
You think we don't want to engineer Pakistan? Hmm? They are giving us access
to other nasties.
That's the way it works. Our State Department isn't stupid. Try looking at
the bios of our top foreign negotiators before you haze em!
Do you have multi grad degrees and experience in the field? C'mon! Support
em or vote em out.
Or at least have a valid argument!
Jay
Mike F
threatened/promised to use his arsenal in two ways if we attack: disperse
some to al Qaeda worldwide and unleash the rest. Whether he used the WMD
term a) I'm uncertain and b) is irrelevant; "his whole arsenal" is pretty
clear, IMO.
Now if your point is that you do not believe he has WMD ... ask any news
analyst (no, George Will or Bob Woodward, not Tom Brokaw), ask the labs
which autopsied some of the scores of thousands of dead Kurds and identified
the three deadly gasses he used on them more than a decade ago, ask Iraqi
WMD design defectors such as Hussein Kamel, or read "Germs: Biological
Weapons and America's Secret War" (or just go to the bookstore and read
Chapter 4: "Saddam").
I'd list their WMD manufacturing sites here, but there are too many of them.
For starters, their most vital germ warfare factory in the 1990s was Al
Hakam.
But let me warn you: you cannot read "Germs" without coming away 100.000%
certain that Saddam has the technology (aerosolization, mass production,
packaging, delivery, and dispersal) and quantity (his present reserves could
erase all life on Earth) to literally decimate the Middle East now and
probably eliminate whole continents when he acquires longer range delivery
systems.
If your newfound realization that he has huge quantities of a wide variety
of very advanced WMD doesn't scare you, read some of the credible stories of
what he has been doing to his own people for well over a decade. If even a
small percentage of what some reports say about him is true, he rivals
Hitler, maybe even surpasses him by some measures. Picture Hitler with V2s
loaded with chem/bio weapons, and realize that biological weapons are
arguably more dangerous than nukes (less control, longer legs, unknown
mutations).
Mike
"Greg" <harri...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5c8cfd80.02120...@posting.google.com...
Alan
negotiator). Unfortunately, in North Carolina The Greens weren't even
allowed on the ballot. In the meantime, I'm supposed 'keep in step'?
I'd like to know why you believe putting more resources in to Pakistan
instead of Iraq is not a "valid argument"? What makes an argument valid
anyhow?
Alan (who btw was studying International Relations, Latin America, Spanish,
and Business, before he got pulled into the family business)
--
Windsurfing Club: http://www.ibscc.org
"Jay Halford" <Hal...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:5rOG9.208431$WL3.69816@rwcrnsc54...
Dan Weiss
survivalist. He seems all about power, at any cost but his own hide. If
the US routs him from power I doubt very much we will prefer his successor.
Hardly any budding Jeffersonianians among the alternatives, and makes me
thing a bit more about the precept "better the enemy you know." It is
Hussein's drive to centralize all power that says to me that if the US goes
at it with Iraq we (the US) must prepare for an extended occupation, and it
is the occupation that will cause more anger worldwide than what we now seem
to face. Which hard road do we choose?
-Dan
"Mike F" <iso...@urxSpamDam.com> wrote in message
news:UsOG9.22093$EY.3021@fe01...
Jay Halford
Since you were a student of international studies, I'm curious why you state
all you're skills. (I have an MBA from T-Bird, which means nothing to me,
but might mean something to you since you are throwing bios around.). Fully
fluent in Spanish, Mandarin, and Portugese.
Jay
"Alan" <alannc44@{nospam}ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:RYOG9.43211$sj1.2...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
Alan
>"Do you have multi grad degrees and experience in the >field? C'mon!
Support em or vote em out."
Alan
--
Windsurfing Club: http://www.ibscc.org
"Jay Halford" <Hal...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:4ePG9.208769$P31.80409@rwcrnsc53...
Jay Halford
Tried sending a post personally but was refused, so, my message was:
How do you think we can force this discussion back towards sailing?
Jay
"Alan" <alannc44@{nospam}ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:FjPG9.43686$ID2.3...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
WARDOG
Jay Halford wrote:
> > How do you think we can force this discussion back towards sailing?
Nuclear wind!...;-)
Find out how windy it would be in your neighborhood with Blast Mapper:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/sfeature/mapablast.html
http://www.nonviolence.org/amhvigil/nonuke.html
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
JSTNG
where there is plenty of OT discussion of current events. But rarely
is it as entertaining or colorful as rec.windsurfing. Mike and Warren
are two highly creative guys with the rhetorical finesse to back up
their unique perspectives and deep conscience. And both are masters at
dispensing cortex candy AND a smile in the same phrase. That is rare.
These guys have contributed immensely to the group and our sport and
deserve a collective high-five.
Hugh
"Jay Halford" <Hal...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<wzCG9.198988$NH2.13549@sccrnsc01>...
Mike F
Mike
"JSTNG" <js...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5076920b.02120...@posting.google.com...
WARDOG
"Who you calling enigma, fool?"...
"I got sumthin, makes me want to shout"...
I'M SUPAHBAD!!!
http://www.zefrank.com/supahbad/index.html
http://surfingsports.com/images/Dr_Woof.gif
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
Mike F
"dozens of murderous attacks". I said that defense against further such
attacks is an obvious explanation (as opposed to oil) for our
administration's willingness to go to war if necessary. I agree that it's
not obvious or certain that attacking Iraq will, in the balance, save
innocent lives in general or free world lives in particular. Way too much
depends on how much stuff Saddam releases effectively in his last gasp, and
on how much gets to al Qaeda and is subsequently used.
2. Isn't the "immediate threat" why we went into Afghanistan, why we're
detaining suspects in Cuba, why we're putting money and horsepower into
homeland defense, why we're stretching and/or subverting the Constitutional
rights of some of these suspects, why the dems were allowed to demand that
airport security must be in the hands of people not smart enough to flip
burgers, why Tenet was finally allowed to increase our HUMINT case worker
count (aka "spies") from 12 to 120 to reverse Clinton's cuts, why we have
people on the ground over much of the Middle East and Europe trying to
ferret out terrorists and their supporters ... and, maybe, why we haven't --
yet -- seen the next major attack on our soil? And shouldn't we try to look
down the road and try to short circuit the NEXT level of threat ... al
Qaeda's pipeline, WMD first and cash flow second?
And isn't "Germs" scary as hell?!
Mike
"MTVNewsGuy" <mtvne...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021202133806...@mb-fp.aol.com...
> Yes, Mike, Iraq has WOMD. I've read "Germs" cover to cover.
>
1. > It is not "obvious" that attacking Iraq will defend the U.S. or anyone
against
> "dozens of murderous attacks". While I'm not suggesting that Saddam so
armed
> is of no concern, the current campaign of murderous attacks is being
launched
> by other people (al Qaeda) who openly threaten the U.S.
>
2. > The question that is being argued by some people here (including
Mike F
Mike \m/
"WARDOG" <moon...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3DEBD8F2...@cox.net...
bsinclair
Direct quote, must therefore have a link. Mind sharing it?
bs
"Mike F" <iso...@urxSpamDam.com> wrote in message
news:UsOG9.22093$EY.3021@fe01...
WARDOG
Mike F wrote:
> And shouldn't we try to look
> down the road and try to short circuit the NEXT level of threat ... al
> Qaeda's pipeline, WMD first and cash flow second?
Everyone shares your fears...we are questioning the strategies and smoke
screens...not dealing with the problem directly...
We find ourselves historically in bed with the "bad guys"...
The Saudi Royals and some of our new found friends in Russia are looking
suspicious...
Try looking UP the road for a change...find out where the sh*t comes
from ,because it rolls down hill...
http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/nukenotes/nd02nukenote.html
There is a virtual trove of Russian nuclear and chemical arms at risk...
We know that Russia has WMD...and has had some stolen...
We need to be doing an inventory on this crap, NOW!!!...
instead of the Easter egg hunt in Iraq...
"The investigation revealed that a group of criminals attempted to sell
about 1.5 kilograms of uranium dioxide 235 and 238 in Belarus at the
beginning of the year. Numerous tests on the uranium dioxide failed to
determine its origin, because the identification numbers had been
removed from the uranium rods. However, the invesitgation revealed that
the radioactive metal originates from Ukraine, the Chernobyl nuclear
plant, to be precise."
http://english.pravda.ru/cis/2002/09/27/37350.html
More Uranium theft...
http://www.bellona.no/en/international/russia/nuke-weapons/nonproliferation/24737.html
> In late 1998, an employee at Russia's premier nuclear weapons > laboratory
> in Sarov was arrested and charged with trying to sell secret
> nuclear-weapons designs to agents of Iraq and Afghanistan for $3
> million.
> http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0102/p11s2-cojh.html
>
http://nuclearno.com/index_en.asp
Our liberated Kuwaiti friends aren't as friendly as they were once we
liberated them from Iraq 12 years ago...
A segment of them liberated Kuwaitis hate us now...anti-American
sentiment growing in South Korea...root cause?
Disparity in our incredible wealth and our arrogant attitude towards
their religion...as perceived by the masses...
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/roadtowar_arabs021127.html
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/world/story/0,4386,157046-1038347940,00.html
http://www.dailycamera.com/bdc/nation_world_news/article/0,1713,BDC_2420_1567561,00.html
Africa is getting ready to blow...Korea...Pakistan and India...Israel
and Palestine...
Also...Putin in China....scary times...
WARDOG back to packing for Mex...
http://www.surfingsports.com
If you don't have something to live for, you will find something to die
for...WARDOG - 2002
MTVNewsGuy
"Germs" is terrifying. More people need to read that. For one thing, it is
made abundantly clear in that book that the smallpox strains that the Soviets
were working on (and which we fear may have fallen or may fall into terrorist
hands) were genetically engineered specifically to be impervious to
vaccinations.
Anthrax is a walk in the park compared to smallpox. Engineered smallpox is a
nightmare compared to smallpox.
Michael
US5613
Mike F
oil. It's only in response to that claim that I keep coming back to this
facet of the thread.
I didn't get back to Pakistan because
1) I don't recognize it as being as immediate a threat as Iraq may be IF
Iraq is supplying or about to supply WMD to alQ,
2) I know much less about Pakistan than I do about Iraq,
3) We're taking advantage of Pakistan's cooperative lip service for the time
being,
4) I'm more worried about Saddam's chem/bio arsenal quantity and quality
than about a few Pakistani nukes,
5) We can't fight 'em all at once,
6) I'd have to guess/hope/believe we have covert intelligence and operations
going on all over the Middle East, including Pakistan,
7) I hope we are prioritizing our efforts according to what we learn from
#6, and
8) I hope we're at least partially successful with #7.
Bush may THINK in a knee-jerk format (when Card whispered to Bush in front
of that second-grade class that "A second plane hit the second tower.
America is under attack.", Bush's immediate thought was "They have declared
war on us. We are going to war."), but he heard and heeded Powell's two-hour
briefing on the possible ramifications of a unilateral war before taking any
ACTION.
Doesn't every last one of us operate that way -- mental reaction first,
moderated response later -- when threatened?
And the reaction of so many countries and people like you describe is just a
part of my growing concern that Islam is NOT a nation of peace. If it were,
why have virtually NO Islamic clerics SCREAMED their opposition to terrorism
in general and these attacks in particular? Until I see >90% of its clerics
soundly condemning this behavior from the rooftops and calling upon Muslims
worldwide to actively oppose terrorism, I can only assume this was is with
Islam, not just its Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell equivalents. Think what
millions of good Arabs could do to ferret out alQ personnel and operations
simply by cooperating.
Mike
"Alan" <alannc44@{nospam}ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:MbOG9.169651$dn3.9...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
Mike F
Mike
"Jay Halford" <Hal...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:zUPG9.85902$GR5....@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
WARDOG
Mike F wrote:
>
> No, no, no, Wardog ... that was "enema". ;-)
Funny word association, Mike...no surprise I guess, since you are the
most anal poster here...;-) http://www.tidybutt.com/
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
Mike F
parallel to it is whether the near threat renders your question moot, and I
don't have a valid opinion on that.
We feared your scenario a decade ago, and reduced it within 100 hours to
some guys flying over Iraq for the next 10 years to minimize Hussein's
genocidal tendencies. That was the right approach, IMO, because it contained
the threat to an acceptable (compared to a decade of occupation) level and
rescued Kuwait.
The REAL question now, to me, is whether another few decades of this
Husseion legacy would beat the risk of the escalation we face now. From what
I've read about Saddam's "boys", I must guess, "no, it's time to act", but
ONLY if
a. We have a good handle on where Saddam has hidden most of his WMD and the
facilities to replenish them (we must have millions of satellite photos),
b. We are willing to do whatever it takes to destroy them,
c. We are successful in destroying them, and
d. We permanently remove Saddam and his sons from power and have SOME luck
at replacing them with someone no worse than, say, Ghaddafi Duk.
Mike
"Dan Weiss" <dwusNOSPA...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:TZOG9.4322$bq3....@news.bellsouth.net...
Mike F
radio, TV, Leno, etc.
But a couple of Google clicks popped up
http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jtsm/jtsm021112_1_
n.shtml and http://ca.news.yahoo.com/021007/5/pfl9.html .
A quote from Jane's:
"If the US and its allies wage war on Iraq, Saddam Hussein could order
chemical and biological weapons to be unleashed - potentially directly into
Western or allied cities. Additionally, an invasion might actually increase
the likelihood of terrorist access to and acquisition of Iraq's chemical and
biological assets"
Mike
"bsinclair" <bsin...@SPAMINATORhawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:lkRG9.64819$2z1.22...@twister.socal.rr.com...
Davide
> Davide,
> With all due respect. Bull shit.
> Ray
Great argument, congratulations
Mike F
Mike
"Davide" <dav...@ariel1.ucsf.edu> wrote in message
news:df99b736.02120...@posting.google.com...
Davide
> No, no, no ... how do you know
> > > > who think they are
> > > > protecting our country but unfortunately are instead protecting the
> > > > political and economic interest
> ... not "people will die"
> is a fact?
>
> Would you rather millions of us were killed? Isn't thousands enough?
>
> I don't see any relevance in Italy not attacking us and Bush et.al. dodging
> combat in a debatable war
Really? Maybe a few hundred italians are not important, but what about
Chile is 10,000 enough? isn't it disgusting that the mastermind of
that massacre (that took place on a 9/11) is now appointed to
investigate another 9/11 tragedy? you do not see the relevance there
too? or what about Guatemala? an estimated 100,000 Maja killed with
the help of the USA? Or what about Panama, oh sorry, that was only
1,000 or so? Or what about Greece: 30 years of dictatorship? or what
about IRAN ot Indonesia? and the list can go on
Jeff Feehan
JSTNG wrote:
> Here here! Or is it hear hear!?
it's Hear Hear!
"Hear Hear" is short for "Hear him, Hear him"
jeff feehan
Mike F
Mike
"Davide" <dav...@ariel1.ucsf.edu> wrote in message
news:df99b736.02120...@posting.google.com...
bsinclair
direct quote?
bs
"Mike F" <iso...@urxSpamDam.com> wrote in message
news:qnSG9.22401$EY.1149@fe01...
Mike F
reading including ~20 years of formal education.
Saddam's statement (actually a series of them, or at least referenced
repeatedly over a period of time) was quoted all over the news a few weeks
ago (maybe back on Oct 6, as the Reuters link alludes to?), but was
discussed pretty briefly as typical bombast and rhetoric rather than as some
big deal. I heard it far too many times to suspect I misheard it.
Mike
"bsinclair" <bsin...@SPAMINATORhawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3QUG9.79819$%k2.20...@twister.socal.rr.com...
Gerald Bothe
On 12/2/2002 8:31 PM Mike F wrote:
> It was all over the mass media print and network news weeks ago that Saddam
> threatened/promised to use his arsenal in two ways if we attack: disperse
> some to al Qaeda worldwide and unleash the rest. Whether he used the WMD
> term a) I'm uncertain and b) is irrelevant; "his whole arsenal" is pretty
> clear, IMO.
But Mike there are several other sources to get WMD or their major
ingredients from. All over the former soviet union there are millions of
poor, freezing and sometimes starving people and even military
personnel. They will sell almost anything for money... One of Russias
former chemical or biological test labs on an island on Aral Lake is
still off limits but nobody enforces it. With the lake ever receding in
a couple of years the island will be accessible by land... (IIRC there
is also this little island in the North Sea or Atlantic off the Scottish
coast that's infestet with anthrax bacteria. What about the Anthrax that
was sent by mail last year? Is it all spent? Where could it have been
sold?) Miniature nuklear reactors that used to power lighthouses in
Siberia where dismountet and found in the surrounding villages used by
people to heat their rooms. The term radiator gets a bitter connotation.
The story goes on and on...
What about North Korea that puplicly anounced that is has the nuclear
bomb? North Korea has sold missiles and technology before.
Not to mention those weapons (not only) the CIA has spread around the
world. I suppose you heard about the Stingers that leaked out of
Afghanistan and reappear in hot spots all over. Not to mention the
various SAMs of russian decent.
I am sure that a strike against Iraq or any ohter nation as a whole will
only increase the proliferation of WMD. The world is by no means going
to be a safer place afterwards and the US will have an even worse
standing in the world.
Instead of treating the symptoms you have to cure the sickness.
Gerald Bothe
> And the reaction of so many countries and people like you describe is just a
> part of my growing concern that Islam is NOT a nation of peace.
If you go by the Koran it is. You just should be carful wiht the
interpretation of the written words, as always. The same holds true for
the Bible, of course.
Is it a coincidence that Wahabite fundamentalism coexisted for decades
with the ruling clans in Saudi Arabia? Even though the Koran does not
promote mission Wahabite mosques have been popping up like mushrooms on
the balkan after the war. This fundamentalist kind of Islam was totally
alien to the peoples of the Balkan beforehand
> If it were,
> why have virtually NO Islamic clerics SCREAMED their opposition to terrorism
> in general and these attacks in particular?
Maybe your media did not cover it because it did not promise enough
viewers/readers?
> Until I see >90% of its clerics
> soundly condemning this behavior from the rooftops and calling upon Muslims
> worldwide to actively oppose terrorism, I can only assume this was is with
> Islam, not just its Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell equivalents. Think what
> millions of good Arabs could do to ferret out alQ personnel and operations
> simply by cooperating.
Bush has failed to coin in on the strong alliance against terrorism
right after 9/11, even among the muslims. With the pending war on Iraq
most of the world is turning against him because the US are not directly
threatening terrorists but a whole nation with millions of innocents.
Why not bomb Iran at the same time, while you're at it? They have been
promoting and funding terrorism in Palestine for decades. By now
thousands of youngsters with nothing to loose and indoctrinated by
fundamentalists are only waiting for their chance to finally become a
martyr while fighting for "the cause"
Gerald
Gerald Bothe
On 11/30/2002 6:48 PM Jeff Feehan wrote:
> the u.s. position, from the very begining, was that the fall of
> yugoslavia was a _european_ problem, and that it needed a _european_
> solution. u.s. and nato involvement was a result of the failure
> of europe to act to prevent the slaughter.
I majorly agree with you until here.
> the u.n. involvement
> was a disaster - probably worse than no involvement. e.u. help?
> are you joking? the e.u. did nothing to stop a terrible slaughter
> right in their own back yard.
Talking about back yards, what about the frequent clashes in the region
of Chiapas, Mexico?
But who is now in Kabul trying keep the ever hostile factions apart?
What about the rest of Afghanistan? Is it safe again after the (open)
war? Is the so called Northern Alliance any better than the Taliban? Who
is training the police and the new army?
Gerald
Ray Kuntz
Ray Kuntz
still not dazzled by it's brilliance.
Ray
Mike F
said many times that his most important task is digesting his daily
intelligence briefings, discussing it with his advisors, and formulating a
course of action from all the What Ifs. That's why they get paid the big
bucks ... about as much collectively as Seinfeld got paid for each episode.
In case anyone cares, here's the longer reply. It was already spewing out
before I could stop my fingers.
"Gerald Bothe" <g.b...@gmx.de> wrote
> there are several other sources to get WMD or their major
> ingredients from. All over the former soviet union ...
> What about North Korea?
Yes, and both OBL and Saddam have been doing their level best to cash in on
that, just as we have been trying to stop that leak by several means,
including paying scientists not to go to the Middle East (the USSR had
20,000 scientists working full time on chem/bio weapons), working shoulder
to shoulder to disable USSR WMD, appeals and negotiations, etc. And I'm sure
North Korea is on our *hit list and is being worked on, just not at top
priority right now. Would you recommend we fight both NK & Saddam at the
same time? We must pray those two don't get in cahoots and force us to do
that. I'm surprised that hasn't happened; it's an obvious threat now that
Unohu has cut our military back. Certainly neither you nor I has the
information available to outguess the people who DO have all the info
available. I'm just damned glad Bush had the good sense or dumb luck to
appoint Powell; he is a highly political wonk and a wuss, but he has
performed his check and balance duty admirably. Think where we'd be if Bush,
Cheney, and Rumsfeld were all we had up there.
> What about the Anthrax ... Miniature nuklear reactors .... Stingers ...
SAMs ...
> The story goes on and on...
Yep. And so does the challenge. IF I recall correctly, the USSR had six
suitcase nukes, now unaccounted for. And as Michael implied, Anthrax is
powdered sugar compared to designer smallpox and other bio weapons. You
assess the threats, assess your resources, and do what you can. The task is
monumental, no pres in recent memory except maybe Bush Sr. (because he
achieved the mandated mission and stopped) has handled it well, IMO, and we
can only hope that history says 20 years from now that Bush Jr. did a good
job. I think he leans to far towards going to war, but a president NOT
willing to go to war has no business defending the free world. Our Marine
barracks are bombed, and Unohu just lobs some missiles at 'em? THAT sure
scared OBL, didn't it?
> I am sure that a strike against Iraq or any other nation as a whole will
> only increase the proliferation of WMD. The world is by no means going
> to be a safer place afterwards and the US will have an even worse
> standing in the world.
Your being sure doesn't make it so, but you may still be right. But, you
know, the more I see Islamic clerics around the world not condemning and
even praising Al Qaeda, the less I care about what that part of the world
thinks. Even discounting the right wing tripe, Islam scares me more with
every new round of their cheers for OBL.
> Instead of treating the symptoms you have to cure the sickness.
Great objective. Ideas?
Decades before I had my first informed political thought, I saw seas of
hundreds of thousands of Middle Eastern faces on TV screaming and waving and
rousing rabble over absolutely NOTHING -- at least by western standards --
and said, "What the hell's WRONG with these people? Is FIGHTING all they
have ANY interest in? Can't they et a damn LIFE!".
I have my answer.
Mike
Mike F
NOT have covered it? I've not seen it on the BBC, either.
Mike
"Gerald Bothe" <g.b...@gmx.de> wrote
Mike wrote
Greg
of messages down from this with: "Do you appreciate the difference
between an analysts speculation and a direct quote?"
Not only that, but your 'fact' that Iraq has promised to give weapons
to Al Qaeda simply derives from a statement that they will use their
entire aresenal at us... should we attack. I think it's fair to say
everyone with a clue already expects that. Yes, it is a veiled threat
about using Chem/Bio weapons on us if we attack, but it's also in the
context of self-defense which you completely omit and there is still
no specific link between Al Qaeda in it either cause SH would be an
idiot to say so. If you want to state it as your opinion, that's
fine, it's not unsupported, but don't call it fact and use it within
it's proper context. Anything less is dishonest, even if you don't
mean to be. My other point to this is you are helping to destroy your
own arguments this way, because your "facts" then become suspect. I'm
sure that's not what you're intending to do.
2. I do not doubt SH has Chem/Bio weapons. Never have. Nor do I
claim that there is no logic for an invasion of Iraq. However, I do
dispute anyone who says we know exactly what Iraq currently has out
there, since that seems to be something even the former weapons
inspectors debate within their own ranks. There are Chem/Bio weapons
which are unaccounted for and a large amount that have been destroyed.
What's happened since '98 is anyone's guess.
3. While your scenarios of SH are all very bad, I dare ask you why he
would unleash any of these things? I'm sure you've heard of MAD
(Mutually Assured Destruction)? Saddam's not in a powerful position
under that analysis. Personally, I think the madman argument is a cop
out. Mabye he'd decide to act as a suicide state? I think that's
highly unlikely since SH and co. are a bunch of fat cats, not
religious fundamentalists. And what of any potential Al Qaeda link?
Do you think the result to Iraq would be any different if he gave Al
Qaeda the weapon or did it himself? I don't. Blackmail for policy or
territorial gains, a much better argument, but that's also going to
ride a very razor thin edge for his own destruction. I suppose you
can argue regime change is just what has to happen before we can lift
sanctions, which is maybe the best argument of them all. Cause
everyone should really understand: We've basically been at war with
Iraq for the last ten years, just no one in the US is dying and we're
not doing anything to end the war, which is a very sad situation in
itself.
greg
"Mike F" <iso...@urxSpamDam.com> wrote in message news:<UsOG9.22093$EY.3021@fe01>...
> It was all over the mass media print and network news weeks ago that Saddam
> threatened/promised to use his arsenal in two ways if we attack: disperse
> some to al Qaeda worldwide and unleash the rest. Whether he used the WMD
> term a) I'm uncertain and b) is irrelevant; "his whole arsenal" is pretty
> clear, IMO.
>
Davide
disarm Saddam because he represents a proven danger. Using the same
logic, and considering the partial list reported above, the USA should
disarm too.
So you have it: this is not about moral grounds or ethics or
democracy. It is about power and the use of violence. We have it, they
don't. We can use violence with impunity, they cannot. We do as we
please, including spreading terrorism on a planetary scale for half a
century and never be help responsible for it.
"Mike F" <iso...@urxSpamDam.com> wrote in message news:<2iUG9.22578$EY.14881@fe01>...
Mike F
I
heard
it
on
numerous
news
reports
quoted
from
the
man's
lips.
2. Who says anyone knows exactly what he has now?
Why does exactly WHAT he has affect WHETHER to take action ?
The one guess I doubt anyone would oppose is that Saddam hasn't destroyed
much since 1998.
3. I have no idea how the man would behave when truly, hopelessly cornered.
I must assume he would do all in his power to take anyone and everyone down
with him by any means possible, which by logic and by his own promise (see
#1) includes releasing stuff and giving stuff to Al Qaeda. Do you think he
made enough stew to kill billions just to slay some Kurds? Besides, what I
heard or did not hear is not going to affect that; it's Ashcroft, not
Saddam, who's tapped into my computer.
Hi, John.
Mike F
Terrorism: deliberately targeting innocent civilians.
Name one single incidence of deliberate U.S. "terrorism". (Me Lei does not
count; that was a loose cannon scared out of his gourd, both by written
accounts and by my personal discussion with his closest peer from right
there in the jungle, not U.S. policy.)
Mike
"Davide" <dav...@ariel1.ucsf.edu> wrote
> We do as we
> please, including spreading terrorism on a planetary scale for half a
> century >
Davide
is the only one of thousand of war operations targeting civilians that
took place in vietnam. We killed 1-2,000,000 people in Vietnam. We
destroyed whole ecosystems in vietnam. For years the USA army made no
difference between civilian and combatants casualties in vietnam: they
where all counted as enemy and reported in the daily news. We never
payed a dime in reparation even if we lost the Vietnam war. We never
even said that we are sorry to the vietnamese people as a nation.
all the examples I mentioned were attacks against innocent civilians:
please rememeber Chile 9/11 1993: attack against the Chilean
democratically elected government that targeted EXCLUSIVELY civilians
and killed an estimated 10,000 including the president, the
president!!! what would you say if the same happened here, a bunch of
generals payed and supported by some country kill the cronies in the
White house, abolish democracy, round up thousands of innocent
civilians kill a good percent of them and establish state sponsored
terrorism with deats-squads etc.. which last for 16 years? How do you
call that? And was our responsability and we never payed a dime and we
never even said that we are sorry. No we put the butcher of Allende
(Kissinger) in charge of the inquiry about "our" 9/11.
"Mike F" <iso...@urxSpamDam.com> wrote in message news:<PD8H9.23977$EY.6410@fe01>...
Gerald Bothe
>>Instead of treating the symptoms you have to cure the sickness.
>
>
> Great objective. Ideas?
>
> Decades before I had my first informed political thought, I saw seas of
> hundreds of thousands of Middle Eastern faces on TV screaming and waving and
> rousing rabble over absolutely NOTHING -- at least by western standards --
> and said, "What the hell's WRONG with these people? Is FIGHTING all they
> have ANY interest in? Can't they et a damn LIFE!".
I think the ongoing war in Palestine is the major source. Israel should
be forced to comply with UN resolutions and the conflict must be settled.
This of course can only be done if you give the Palestine people a real
chance of economical and politcal development. Political development
doesn't necessarily mean democracy by our (western) standards. I don't
think the arabs are ready for this, yet. This development has to evolve
from within not to be imposed from the outside...
For this to happen the Palestine people needs a homecountry. What they
currently have are patches of unconnected soil (sometimes connected by
streets with high fences on either side). The ongoing construction of
Israelen settlements in mostly Palestine regions is a slap in the face.
The daily battles and deaths of this conflict are the ammunition of
fundamentalist islamic clerics to recruit ever more Kamikaze fighters
for the "just cause". Do you know how many Palestine refugees there are
living in Israel and the neighbouring countries? They mostly live in
refugee camps that are figuratively speaking fast breeders for terrorists.
Gerald
Gerald Bothe
On 12/3/2002 7:08 PM Mike F wrote:
> Did it happen? If so, why would our liberal, anti-war, anti-Bush mass media
> NOT have covered it? I've not seen it on the BBC, either.
I wouldn't consider any media that is being payed based on the number of
viewers/readers as being liberal and impartial.
IIRC right after 9/11 almost any islamic cleric that was addressed told
that he condemned this unislamic act of atrocity and that islamic
fundamentalist terrorists are not to be mistaken with Islam as a whole.
Gerald
Alan
I'm not sure what your interest in Chile is. I lived there in 1976 and 1980.
Quizas seas chileno, que se yo... As I discovered, there were and are, many
Chileans who supported Pinochet and the military. I was often chided for
bringing up the topic of how long the 'milicos' would be in power since many
of the people I spoke to weren't in any rush to return to 'Communism'.. It
became apparent to me that there was a large percentage of the population
that asked for help to rid themselves of Allende and the expropriates (for
lack of a better word). I'm not saying it was right for The U.S. to have
supported Coca Cola or Kennicott Copper for throwing out Allende, (and I
remember all too well Kissinger visting Santiago with his wife, ostensibly
as tourists) but Chileans have to take some responsibility. Actually, I
think they do. HOWEVER, I don't want the thread to degenerate into a
discussion about Chile specifically. I can talk to you about it privately if
you want.
A major problem the U.S. has, whether it is Kuwait, Iraq, Chile, etc., is
that there are vociferous groups within every country who come knocking on
our door asking for help. Often we end helping the wrong people. Sure, the
blame belongs to us if we meddle in sovereign countries, or help the bad
guys, but, for some reason, Americans feel this need to help out whoever
comes to our door. Too often that help is delivered militarily. Perhaps it's
'noblese oblige'. I think many Americans are resentful for becoming the
world's police. I know I am as a taxpayer.
Now it has become revealed that the little 15 year old girl from Kuwait who
so eloquently spoke to Congress in 1991 about hospital atrocities
perpetrated by Iraq within Kuwait, as well as the satellite images of
massive buildups along the Iraqi-Kuwaiti border, were all fabricated lies.
This morning I read an article about an Al Qaida operative arrested in
Bosnia. Wasn't the U.S. just recently in Bosnia to help break up the confect
between Muslims and Christians?
Do we owe "apologies"? Many of these situations are two-way.
Regards,
Alan
--
Windsurfing Club: http://www.ibscc.org
"Davide" <dav...@ariel1.ucsf.edu> wrote in message
news:df99b736.02120...@posting.google.com...
Ray Kuntz
Even IF your "facts" and your interpretation of them are correct, and
that's certainly debatable, US behavior compared to that of Communist
Block of the time was quite restrained. Would you really have rather had
them as everyone's overseers?
Ray
WARDOG
>
> Davide,
>
> I'm not sure what your interest in Chile is. I lived there in 1976 and 1980.
Alan,
You may find this interesting:
War Crimes Investigated in Chile:
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kcet/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=348825
Interview with Marc Cooper, Allende's translator who was there as
Pinochet was being put in power...and Charles Horman, an American was
executed, forming the basis of the Jack Lemmon movie, "Missing".
Our old buddy Kissinger was involved...Our "friends" in Vietnam have
even gone so far as to accuse old Henry of being a war criminal for the
massive carpet bombing of Cambodia...interesting that he had direct
business dealings with Saddam Hussein, that led to a congressional
investigation for his role in the:
> $4-billion bankrolling of Saddam Hussein in the late 1980s by the
> Atlanta office of Italy's BNL bank. Kissinger
> Associates then included Brent Scowcroft, who became
> national security advisor for President George H.W. Bush,
> and Lawrence Eagleburger, secretary of State in that
> administration.
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kcet/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=425952
You know what is really amazing to me, is how difficult it is for the
federal government to carry out capital punishment against deserving
criminals...Tim McVey, eg...and spend tens of millions on their trials
so that they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and their civil
liberties are upheld, yet, turnaround and carpet bomb millions of
civilians and innocents in other countries without conducting
trials...you are guilty by association...because you reside between
imaginary borders...you are dead...bang, bang, bang...KABOOOOM...
I saw an interesting interview with Presidential historian Michael
Beschloss, http://www.annenberg.nwu.edu/fellows/beschlos.htm
who has a new book out that discusses how Franklin Roosevelt and Harry
Truman decided the fate of a defeated Nazi Germany and how American
officials and their Allied counterparts come to draw the map of postwar
Europe.
The Conquerors: Roosevelt, Truman and the Destruction of Hitler's
Germany, 1941-1945
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=6V0UNOQEAT&isbn=0684810271
Beschloss studied newly released documents from the FBI and the
former Soviet Union, which helped to unravel one of the last untold
stories of WWII.
Chapter 1: Fascinating...
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?userid=6V0UNOQEAT&isbn=0684810271&displayonly=chapter
Other tidbits...FDR decided not to bomb the Nazi death factories because
he thought it would make him look like he cared for the Jewish people
too much and questions still arise concerning the Office of Naval
Intelligence and what they knew prior to the bombing of Pearl Harbor...
Well, as you know, we helped form the nation of Israel in 1948...
we helped rebuild Germany and it was democratized...
We also helped rebuild Japan...question begs...are we willing to help
rebuild the Middle East after it is destroyed?
How much would it cost to set up a Palestinian homeland?
Maybe a better investment of our tax dollars would be Korea?...
They are peeling the bark off of trees to eat because they are
hungry...pay now, or pay later...
China and Russia Urge US to Honor 1994 N. Korea Weapons Deal
"Under that 1994 agreement, North Korea promised to stop trying to
develop nuclear bombs in return for foreign energy aid from the United
States and its allies."
http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=2D6291D6-FB9B-42D4-991C09BE179B0865
History is fun ain't it? That's why Clay Feeter shut the best
windsurfing mag in the world down...to study the Civil War...
I have to say, with the help of Ken Burns, I've gotten into it as
well...http://www.pbs.org/civilwar/cwimages/portraits/
Will we ever learn?
I hope you smart fellers get this all figured out pretty soon, it's a
buzzkill for people that want to read about windsurfing...
speaking of which...I hear that it's been "Nukin'" for weeks down in the
Baja and we have waaaay too much new windsurfing gear to test and we're
burning daylight...;-)
WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com
Alan
Wardog,
The Chilean problem has been the topic for intellectuals for the past 30
years. It is fascinating, mostly because there is so much information from
so many reliable sources. Other countries have had just as tumultuous coups,
if not more so. In Chile's case, the country has so many ties from trade,
and so many literate people, that the information is still coming out.
Kissinger. I see where he was recently appointed by W. to head up the
commission whose task it is to get to the bottom of 911. Some remarks were
made in our local rag, "Creative Loafing" about putting a "terrorist" in
charge of ferreting out fellow terrorists. Who could be more qualified? You
just touched on that guy's history. What about Indonesia and Timor in 1975?
Or, Argentina where he told the military during the 'Dirty Wars', he was
"with them". There are apparently four international indictments against him
currently.
Baja. GET GOING MAN! M&O are on their way. Are we going to hear from you
while you and Debdog are down there? Give our regards to Debbie.
Alan
(No fomenting revolution while down there, ya hea?)
--
Windsurfing Club: http://www.ibscc.org
"WARDOG" <moon...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3DEE313D...@cox.net...
Alan
"Sleet and snow possibly mixed with freezing rain changing to freezing
rain...sleet...or snow late in the afternoon."
And these guys are Phd's?
Alan
--
Windsurfing Club: http://www.ibscc.org
>
Greg
> 1. One last time. It is fact, not opinion, that:
> I
> heard
> it
> on
> numerous
> news
> reports
> quoted
> from
> the
> man's
> lips.
>
Unfortunately, the "I heard it from someone on TV" doesn't hold a lot
of water because it's unverifiable. I've simply asked for something
that is and you still haven't provided it. News agencies keep their
stories for years on their sites. If it was a story repeated all over
the place, it wouldn't be that hard to find and post some links about
them.
gh
MTVNewsGuy
his appointment by Maureen Dowd in the New York Times. I'm no fan of the
Times, but I do like this editorial. My wife likes this quote:
"If you want to get to the bottom of something, you don't appoint Henry
Kissinger. If you want to keep others from getting to the bottom of something,
you appoint Henry Kissinger."
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/01/opinion/01DOWD.html
Michael
US5613
Juan E Navarro
>
> What on earth are you talking about?
> Terrorism: deliberately targeting innocent civilians.
> Name one single incidence of deliberate U.S. "terrorism".
I can name two: Hiroshima, Nagasaki. They fit your definition perfectly.
++*Juan--
(who has been following this thread with interest).
MTVNewsGuy
war, started by the Japanese. Also, I think more people died in Tokyo during
conventional bombing.
I don't think there's anyone (including the Japanese) who does not understand
the military decision behind Hiroshima. I know there's some debate on
Nagasaki.
Let's stay focused.
-Michael (who thinks we need UN support if we're going to attack Iraq.)
Michael
US5613
bsinclair
1980.
the coast results in surf that rival Hawaii in power. Ever sail there?
bs...sorry for the digression;-)
"Alan" <alannc44@{nospam}ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:HRmH9.49781$sj1.2...@twister.southeast.rr.com...