US admits it used napalm bombs in Iraq
_a_da_spam@nospam.com ฿ละลงง
news:10696187...@news1.lynx.bc.ca...
> US admits it used napalm bombs in Iraq
> http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=432201
>
> INDEPENDENT (London) 10 August 2003 By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
>
> American pilots dropped the controversial incendiary agent napalm on
> Iraqi troops during the advance on Baghdad. The attacks caused massive
> fireballs that obliterated several Iraqi positions.
FAR OUT!
Rodrigo Diaz
Steve Walker
Erm.... It's not just a firework display for the hard-of-thinking,
it's a WMD. Kinda marks out some hypocrisy in the US position,
doesn't it?
Also, use of these indiscriminate weapons makes it easier for the
Iraqi's to justify their revenge. They pulled two kids out of a jeep &
slaughtered them like animals today, leaving their bodies in the road.
The crowds around them stood idle or applauded.
Keep this up, and we'll be into a spiral of violence that will cost many
more thousands of lives.
majorbladderinfection
"Steve Walker" <spam...@beeb.net> wrote in message
news:bpr4ev$c3j$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
CH
> ฿ละลงง wrote:
>> "Adriane Langoir" <uabkg...@ebodirn.org> wrote in message
>> news:10696187...@news1.lynx.bc.ca...
>>> US admits it used napalm bombs in Iraq
>>> http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=432201
>>>
>>> INDEPENDENT (London) 10 August 2003 By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
>>>
>>> American pilots dropped the controversial incendiary agent napalm on
>>> Iraqi troops during the advance on Baghdad. The attacks caused
>>> massive fireballs that obliterated several Iraqi positions.
>>
>> FAR OUT!
>
> Erm.... It's not just a firework display for the hard-of-thinking,
> it's a WMD. Kinda marks out some hypocrisy in the US position,
> doesn't it?
Napalm is not a WMD by any definition, it is a tactical battle battlefield
weapon, your twisted truths only display your twisted logic.
--
Cliff
Vescere bracis meis......
Jeff Laventure
>
Jeff Laventure
"CH" <pinkfloppyb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Q69wb.9142$Cw....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
Hey, napalm is God's way in dealing with evil. You know, like fire and
brimestone on Sodom and Gamorroh
>
>
Steve Walker
> "Steve Walker" <spam...@beeb.net> wrote in message
> news:bpr4ev$c3j$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>> ฿ละลงง wrote:
>>> "Adriane Langoir" <uabkg...@ebodirn.org> wrote in message
>>> news:10696187...@news1.lynx.bc.ca...
>>>> American pilots dropped the controversial incendiary agent napalm
>>>> on Iraqi troops during the advance on Baghdad. The attacks caused
>>>> massive fireballs that obliterated several Iraqi positions.
>>>
>>> FAR OUT!
>>
>> Erm.... It's not just a firework display for the hard-of-thinking,
>> it's a WMD. Kinda marks out some hypocrisy in the US position,
>> doesn't it?
> Could you explain how napalm is WMD.
Easy - it's an overwhelming & indiscriminate weapon, which cannot be
aimed with any certainty. What other characteristics does a WMD have?
majorbladderinfection
Why is napalm any different than any other "badly aimed" munition?
"Steve Walker" <spam...@beeb.net> wrote in message
news:bpr7ok$n22$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
majorbladderinfection
Why is napalm any different than any other "badly aimed" munition?
"Steve Walker" <spam...@beeb.net> wrote in message
news:bpr7ok$n22$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
CH
I don't know a lot about fire and brimstone :) but napalm is one heck of a
good weapon in a battle field scenario, not only does it kill hardened
emplacements quite nicely it stikes the fear of death into all those other
survivors in the vicinity. I am glad they had the common sense to use it
because in the long run it possibly saved lives.
Mudda Lann Newz Servus
> > "Adriane Langoir" <uabkg...@ebodirn.org> wrote in message
> > news:10696187...@news1.lynx.bc.ca...
> >> US admits it used napalm bombs in Iraq
> >> http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=432201
> >>
> >> INDEPENDENT (London) 10 August 2003 By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
> >>
> >> American pilots dropped the controversial incendiary agent napalm on
> >> Iraqi troops during the advance on Baghdad. The attacks caused
> >> massive fireballs that obliterated several Iraqi positions.
> >
> > FAR OUT!
>
> Erm.... It's not just a firework display for the hard-of-thinking,
> it's a WMD.
no, it is a response
> Kinda marks out some hypocrisy in the US position,
> doesn't it?
hardly
this administration is not one to pansy around with micro-management of
every single target, instead, it goes for maximizing results
>
> Also, use of these indiscriminate weapons makes it easier for the
> Iraqi's to justify their revenge. They pulled two kids out of a jeep &
> slaughtered them like animals today, leaving their bodies in the road.
> The crowds around them stood idle or applauded.
and they will pay the price
remember, you heard it here first
>
> Keep this up, and we'll be into a spiral of violence that will cost many
> more thousands of lives.
yes
Muslim lives
>
>
>
Mudda Lann Newz Servus
this one is a slam dunk, little Stevie
a 'WMD' is by definition one that is used against non-combatants to create
terror
the napalm bomb, on the other hand, is used against identified opponents in
a war
if you have any more questions about issues that confuse you, y'all come
back and ask, y'hear ?
CH
Why don't you try the REAL definition instead of promoting lies?
Weapons of mass destruction
"a weapon that kills or injures civilian as well as military personnel
(nuclear and chemical and biological weapons)"
Steve Walker
> a 'WMD' is by definition one that is used against non-combatants to
> create terror
By who's definition please? You seem to be saying that an egg is a
WMD, if it is thrown by someone you deem to be a terrorist.
> the napalm bomb, on the other hand, is used against identified
> opponents in a war
So are nuclear warheads, and chemical & biological weapons - which means
they're not WMD's either.
Interesting definitions you've got there, please cite a reputable source
....
Steve Walker
> news:bpr4ev$c3j$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>> Also, use of these indiscriminate weapons makes it easier for the
>> Iraqi's to justify their revenge. They pulled two kids out of a
>> jeep & slaughtered them like animals today, leaving their bodies in
>> the road. The crowds around them stood idle or applauded.
>
> and they will pay the price
> remember, you heard it here first
You dimwit, you don't even know who they were! All you'll be able to
do is visit random slaughter on a few neighbourhoods, which will in turn
cause the Saddamites to dance with joy.
Thousands more will join the resistance after every US over-reaction,
until you're fully plunged into another Vietnam. A few years later,
the US will cut and run, whining that it was really saving democracy by
napalming all those kids. (but remember, you heard it here first)
majorbladderinfection
munitions like napalm, you,ve said stupid things,thats ok,now drop it.news:bpraq6$ftk$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
Jeff Laventure
Now, if they only follow it up with the MOAB.
>
>
majorbladderinfection
majorbladderinfection
"Steve Walker" <spam...@beeb.net> wrote in message
news:bprb4q$pvo$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
majorbladderinfection
Steve Walker
> Just go to bed Steve,we all know the difference between WMD and
> battlefield munitions like napalm, you,ve said stupid things,thats
> ok,now drop it.
In other words, you have no answer to this. You know damned well that
spraying napalm around is a guaranteed way to maim & terrorise
civilians, but you can't admit it.
majorbladderinfection
then i,m sure you could say it was indiscriminate WMD.
Boring and stupid.
Try again.news:bprd7j$rpf$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
Wes
> Napalm is not a WMD by any definition, it is a tactical battle
> battlefield weapon, your twisted truths only display your twisted
> logic.
>
"The Federal Bureau of Investigation sometimes uses an even broader
definition of WMD: "A weapon of mass destruction (WMD), though typically
associated with nuclear/radiological, chemical, or biological agents, may
also take the form of explosives, such as in the bombing of the Alfred P.
Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma in 1995. A weapon
crosses the WMD threshold when the consequences of its release overwhelm
local responders."
Sounds like napalm fits in pretty well with the FBI's opinion.
majorbladderinfection
Dont put too much oil in there. .
"Wes" <u...@uk.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns943CE9882790B...@194.117.133.134...
Steve Walker
> Yawn,sure if there were any civilians mingling amongst Iraqi
> frontline units then i,m sure you could say it was indiscriminate WMD.
Same answer as usual - well we were aiming for the enemy, and we're real
sorry that those kids got in the way. It's a pity that you can only
affect boredom when confronted with your nation's record of slaughter.
Doesn't it bother you at all?
majorbladderinfection
Iraq.
"Steve Walker" <spam...@beeb.net> wrote in message
news:bprfob$lc3$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
CH
Until a moronic individual like yourself comes along and confuses targeting
civilians with targeting legitimate targets in warfare. A difference that I
know is lost on you anyway but I will bring to your attention hoping that it
will sink into that thick skull of yours.................
_a_da_spam@nospam.com ฿ละลงง
news:bprc3k$qnp$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
> What should we do Steve,I,m really confused.
Li'l Stevie will get real quiet when his "people of colour" take out
Picadilly Circus, along with a double-decker bus here and there.
_a_da_spam@nospam.com ฿ละลงง
> Mudda Lann Newz Servus wrote:
> > "Steve Walker" <spam...@beeb.net> wrote in message
> > news:bpr4ev$c3j$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> >> Also, use of these indiscriminate weapons makes it easier for the
> >> Iraqi's to justify their revenge. They pulled two kids out of a
> >> jeep & slaughtered them like animals today, leaving their bodies in
> >> the road. The crowds around them stood idle or applauded.
> >
> > and they will pay the price
> > remember, you heard it here first
>
> You dimwit, you don't even know who they were! All you'll be able to
> do is visit random slaughter on a few neighbourhoods, which will in turn
> cause the Saddamites to dance with joy.
That'll be a bit difficult when they're dead.
> Thousands more will join the resistance after every US over-reaction,
> until you're fully plunged into another Vietnam.
Or until the Chief Exec tires of muslim bullshit and picks up the red phone,
Eurotwit.
_a_da_spam@nospam.com ฿ละลงง
> more thousands of lives.
Guess whose side it'll be on?
http://www.imagedump.com/pics/3090.jpg
Our patience isn't infinite, you know.
Jeff Laventure
>
Wes
news:Htcwb.10559$b91....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net:
> Until a moronic individual like yourself comes along and confuses
> targeting civilians with targeting legitimate targets in warfare. A
> difference that I know is lost on you anyway but I will bring to your
> attention hoping that it will sink into that thick skull of
> yours.................
>
Hey Cliffy I thought the Iraqis just loved them 4th ID boys? Hope those
trooper boy chums enjoyed your ass the other night. Might be the last they
ever get if they're due to be shipped back anytime soon.
Was Kim Phuk a military target, Cliffy?
Wes
Cliffy wrote in post gtWvb.8055
HMMM......I just spent several days with two 4th ID soldiers home for
> their two week leave and they said they love Iraq. The people are
> extremely friendly, the Iraqi people want us to stay and they know
> what is at stake in Iraq. They are really amused at the news reports
> they have seen since they got back and they have no idea where all of
> the news that the iraqi's hate us comes from. They are garrisoned
> right in the middle of the Sunni traingle just outside Balad,
> supposedly the area of the most opposition, so if this is the
> opposition that we are experiencing in the supposed worst area in Iraq
> I won't worry about it as they sure don't. You really should do a
> little research on your own instead of just parroting others, it makes
> you seem like the shallow twerp you must be.
TIKRIT, Iraq, November 23 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) - Three U.S.
soldiers were killed Sunday, November 23, and two others wounded in two
separate attacks across war-ravaged Iraq.
In Baqubah, north of Baghdad, a U.S. soldier was killed and two wounded
when
their vehicle struck an improvised explosive device of the type favored by
Iraqi insurgents, a U.S. military spokesman said, according to Agence
France-Presse (AFP).
"They were in a convoy and they were attacked" in Baqubah at 10:40 am (0740
GMT), said Colonel Bill MacDonald, spokesman for the 4th Infantry Division
which patrols north-central Iraq.
_a_da_spam@nospam.com ฿ละลงง
> it's an overwhelming & indiscriminate weapon, which cannot be
> aimed with any certainty.
Japs, chinks, gooks, and ragheads have learned otherwise:
http://www.danshistory.com/napalm.jpg
http://www.56thvfw.com/images/napalm.jpg
http://www.feuerwehr-halle.de/Feuer/Krieg/a_Napalm.jpg
So far I haven't heard a peep about WP:
http://www.danshistory.com/a1blast.jpg
FAEs are my fave.
CH
> "Cliffy" <pinkf...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:Htcwb.10559$b91....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net:
>
>> Until a moronic individual like yourself comes along and confuses
>> targeting civilians with targeting legitimate targets in warfare. A
>> difference that I know is lost on you anyway but I will bring to your
>> attention hoping that it will sink into that thick skull of
>> yours.................
>>
>
> Hey Cliffy I thought the Iraqis just loved them 4th ID boys? Hope
> those trooper boy chums enjoyed your ass the other night. Might be
> the last they ever get if they're due to be shipped back anytime soon.
>
Not only are you a moron you really have a hard time when faced with the
truth.
Wes
>> Hey Cliffy I thought the Iraqis just loved them 4th ID boys? Hope
>> those trooper boy chums enjoyed your ass the other night. Might be
>> the last they ever get if they're due to be shipped back anytime soon.
>>
>
> Not only are you a moron you really have a hard time when faced with the
> truth.
>
Karl
> "Adriane Langoir" <uabkg...@ebodirn.org> wrote in message
> news:10696187...@news1.lynx.bc.ca...
>
>>US admits it used napalm bombs in Iraq
>>http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=432201
>>
>>INDEPENDENT (London) 10 August 2003 By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
>>
>>American pilots dropped the controversial incendiary agent napalm on
>>Iraqi troops during the advance on Baghdad. The attacks caused massive
>>fireballs that obliterated several Iraqi positions.
>
>
> FAR OUT!
Never forget: you will reap what you sow.
Wes
news:g_fwb.4291$Pm4....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net:
> Wes wrote:
>
Was Kim Phuk a military target, Cliffy?
> Cliff wrote:
> Not only are you a moron you really have a hard time when faced with the
> truth.
Why don't you answer the question, buttfuck boy? I notice you snipped it
fast enough. WAS KIM PHUK A MILITARY TARGET?
Cliff wouldn't know 'Truth' or 'Logic' if he walked in and found them
fucking his mother.
Wes
Jeff Laventure
"Karl" <petersenk...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3fc1e02f$0$13741$afc3...@news.easynet.co.uk...
That explains why Muslims exist (as opposed to live) in such deplorable
conditions.
>
CH
And you wonder why people hate mealy mouthed morons like yourself. Kim Phuck
was a human that got caught up in a war moron, just like many people do. Can
you show me where Kim Phuck was targeted as a civilian? That was your point
wasn't it? Or maybe you really don't have a point here as you are just a
mealy mouthed moron. Too bad you weren't around when this actually happened
then maybe you would have some understanding of the situation. As it is now
you are just another MORON who reads a little bit of history on antiwar.com
to have some ammunition. I won't insult YOUR mother, you insult your mother
enough everytime you make a post.
Funny how you get so enraged about being wrong.....you must have quite the
personality disorder..
Wes
news:3Iqwb.8$f3...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net:
> Wes wrote:
>> "CH" <pinkfloppyb...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> news:g_fwb.4291$Pm4....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net:
>>
>>> Wes wrote:
>>>
>> Was Kim Phuk a military target, Cliffy?
>>
>>> Cliff wrote:
>>> Not only are you a moron you really have a hard time when faced with
>>> the truth.
>>
>> Why don't you answer the question, buttfuck boy? I notice you snipped
>> it fast enough. WAS KIM PHUK A MILITARY TARGET?
>>
>> Cliff wouldn't know 'Truth' or 'Logic' if he walked in and found them
>> fucking his mother.
>>
>> Wes
>
> And you wonder why people hate mealy mouthed morons like yourself.
Is that a question? You're the only person who hates"mealy mouthed morons"
Cliff. Are you insinuating that I'm a moron? When I've answered fairly
every single point you've challenged me with? I'm waiting for one answer
from you Cliff. WAS KIM PHUK A MILITARY TARGET?
Kim
> Phuck was a human that got caught up in a war moron, just like many
> people do. Can you show me where Kim Phuck was targeted as a civilian?
In her village, Trang Bang. In Vietnam. A village full of civilians, with
no VC or NVA presence - and that's a matter of record. What kind of army
uses WMD (and napalm is a WMD according to the FBI, remember) on a civilian
residential area. Or cluster bombs, for that matter, or uranium tipped
anti-armour munitions?
> That was your point wasn't it? Or maybe you really don't have a point
> here as you are just a mealy mouthed moron. Too bad you weren't around
> when this actually happened then maybe you would have some
> understanding of the situation.
In 1972 I was 12 years old. Just a few years older than Kim Phuk.I saw the
film on the TV news at the time and it scarred me. I've been celebrating
the deaths of American soldiers ever since. So you really know fuck all,
don't you Cliff. Every time you commit your grotesquely stupid comments to
email I laugh my arse off. You're the moron, Cliff. So stupid you don't
even know what "moron" means and without the vocabulary to come up with any
more inventive or hurtful insult.
As it is now you are just another
> MORON who reads a little bit of history on antiwar.com to have some
> ammunition. I won't insult YOUR mother, you insult your mother enough
> everytime you make a post. Funny how you get so enraged about being
> wrong.....you must have quite the personality disorder..
I'm not enraged, mate! And I'm not wrong either. I enjoy these little
exchanges. It amuses me after a good day's work to imagine you seething
with bile - your little peckerhead face all screwed up with hate as you
dream of your Ramboesque revenge, stripped to the waist and toting a chain
gun through a shopping mall full of social democrats. Of course you and I
both know the reality is you'll just sit there in your trailer getting
stewed up on cheap corn liquor before kicking shit out of your wife again.
You know what's really funny, Cliff? You are so fucking dense you cross
post your replies to me even though I only post to one group. Everyone
reading those other groups must think you're one hell of an idiot! Hey
didn't you accuse me of knowing shit about posting? Yet again you show
yourself and your species (Crackerus Americanus) up bigtime! I wouldn't be
at all surprised if your Klan buddies didn't come a-calling on you with a
passel o' whup ass for bringing your species into disrepute.
Oh and before I go... here's that question again. WAS KIM PHUK A MILITARY
TARGET? I really would like an answer, Cliff. Maybe you could find the
answer at keepquietaboutthewarswekeeplosing.com
Wes
>
CH
> "CH" <pinkfloppyb...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:3Iqwb.8$f3...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net:
>
>> Wes wrote:
>>> "CH" <pinkfloppyb...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>>> news:g_fwb.4291$Pm4....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net:
>>>
>>>> Wes wrote:
>>>>
>>> Was Kim Phuk a military target, Cliffy?
>>>
>>>> Cliff wrote:
>>>> Not only are you a moron you really have a hard time when faced
>>>> with the truth.
>>>
>>> Why don't you answer the question, buttfuck boy? I notice you
>>> snipped it fast enough. WAS KIM PHUK A MILITARY TARGET?
>>>
>>> Cliff wouldn't know 'Truth' or 'Logic' if he walked in and found
>>> them fucking his mother.
>>>
>>> Wes
>>
>> And you wonder why people hate mealy mouthed morons like yourself.
>
> morons" Cliff. Are you insinuating that I'm a moron? When I've
> answered fairly every single point you've challenged me with? I'm
> waiting for one answer from you Cliff. WAS KIM PHUK A MILITARY TARGET?
Yes, you are a moron. A moron with obvious mental problems to boot.
> In 1972 I was 12 years old. Just a few years older than Kim Phuk.I
> saw the film on the TV news at the time and it scarred me. I've been
> celebrating the deaths of American soldiers ever since. So you really
> know fuck all, don't you Cliff. Every time you commit your
> grotesquely stupid comments to email I laugh my arse off. You're the
> moron, Cliff. So stupid you don't even know what "moron" means and
> without the vocabulary to come up with any more inventive or hurtful
> insult.
Poor baby, all's you can do is insult. Now maybe you will understand why I
call you a moron. Now I guess I have to call you a mental moron.
> As it is now you are just another
>> MORON who reads a little bit of history on antiwar.com to have some
>> ammunition. I won't insult YOUR mother, you insult your mother enough
>> everytime you make a post. Funny how you get so enraged about being
>> wrong.....you must have quite the personality disorder..
>
> I'm not enraged, mate! And I'm not wrong either. I enjoy these little
> exchanges. It amuses me after a good day's work to imagine you
> seething with bile - your little peckerhead face all screwed up with
> hate as you dream of your Ramboesque revenge, stripped to the waist
> and toting a chain gun through a shopping mall full of social
> democrats. Of course you and I both know the reality is you'll just
> sit there in your trailer getting stewed up on cheap corn liquor
> before kicking shit out of your wife again.
Ha-ha ha your great! I just love it when people get all worked up like that!
You must have a real miserable life to get that worked up after work. I
guess you have a real good family life also.................
> You know what's really funny, Cliff? You are so fucking dense you
> cross post your replies to me even though I only post to one group.
Now I know you are a moron, why don't you pop into these other groups and
see for yourself................
BwaaaaHaaaaaaHaaaaaa what a moron........................
> Everyone reading those other groups must think you're one hell of an
> idiot! Hey didn't you accuse me of knowing shit about posting?
Well when you show the world you are a moron, and then prove it by making a
statement like above, well I and probably others find it hilarious, what
would you expect.
> Yet
> again you show yourself and your species (Crackerus Americanus) up
> bigtime! I wouldn't be at all surprised if your Klan buddies didn't
> come a-calling on you with a passel o' whup ass for bringing your
> species into disrepute.
I would much rather be who I am than some moron with a mental
problem............
> Oh and before I go... here's that question again. WAS KIM PHUK A
> MILITARY TARGET? I really would like an answer, Cliff. Maybe you
> could find the answer at keepquietaboutthewarswekeeplosing.com
And maybe you could answer how you figured that napalm was a WMD. Give us
your rationalisation again about the FBI and the Alfred E Murrow building.
Come on Wes tell us the story again. Make your point, now's your chance.
Byker
"Karl" <petersenk...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3fc1e02f$0$13741$afc3...@news.easynet.co.uk...
>
Looks like you Brits are having a bountiful harvest:
Somebody tell these kaffirs that the Thames is not the Zambesi. The article
below is from October, 2001: "The way in which both bodies were cut up has
sparked fears a form of black magic practised in South Africa may have found
its way to Europe. Police in South Africa estimate hundreds of children may
have been killed by witchdoctors practising a perversion of traditional
"muti" medicine." Had it happened in de mutha country, it wouldn't have
raised an eyebrow in a land where kaffirs are considered just another link
in the food chain. Maybe the savages need to be reminded that Europe
doesn't have any crocs to chow down on the carcasses....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Witchdoctor killing feared in Thames torso murder
A boy whose dismembered torso was found floating in the Thames may have been
the victim of a ritual killing,.
Officers are exploring the possibility of African witchdoctors using his
body parts for magic potions.
A Scotland Yard spokesman said: "This is one of several lines of inquiry we
are looking into - we are keeping an open mind."
The body of the Afro-Caribbean boy, who is thought to have been five years
old and has yet to be identified, was spotted in the river near Tower Bridge
in London last month. His arms, legs and head were missing.
Detectives are also not ruling out the possibility he could have been the
victim of paedophiles, although there was no overt sign of a sexual attack.
They have also met Dutch police investigating the strikingly similar murder
of a young white girl in Holland.
Dutch detectives have flown to London for a meeting with Scotland Yard
officers, although as yet no firm link has been made.
The girl's dismembered body was found in a lake at Nulde and her head was
found separately by a fisherman many miles away in the Hook of Holland.
The way in which both bodies were cut up has sparked fears a form of black
magic practised in South Africa may have found its way to Europe.
Police in South Africa estimate hundreds of children may have been killed by
witchdoctors practising a perversion of traditional "muti" medicine.
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_425094.html?menu=news.latestheadlines
Check out this little gem: First lumpenproletarian out of the chute and
it'll be a Jamaican-fathered mulatto, with a Gambian-sired aunt or uncle
being diapered and potty-trained at the same time, as the European welfare
state and "multiculturalism" collide. I just love articles like this,
because without the Internet, we'd never get to hear the middle-class
reactions to this interracial, multigenerational fecundity on the other side
of the pond. When read from a TNB point of view, each paragraph --
especially the last -- had me in stitches. Maybe this old boy could make
some guest "commentaries" on Fox......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mother-to-be Amy, 12, rises above it all
By Tom Utley
Sometimes I think that people such as Amy Crowhurst and her mum behave as
they do just for the joy of enraging the middle classes. Amy is the
12-year-old who announced to the world yesterday that she is four months
pregnant after a one-night stand with a 15-year-old Jamaican boy, whose name
she didn't quite catch.
She is thoroughly pleased with her condition, because it means that she will
not have to go to school. Her mother, Rose, doesn't seem much put out by it,
either, although she admitted that she was surprised, "because she knows all
about condoms and that".
Amy, who has piercings in her nose, ears and belly-button, had confided to
her mother that she had been missing her periods. "But I put that down to
smoking," said Rose, who knew that her daughter puffed away like billy-o.
"She is still a giggly little 12-year-old at heart. But she's mature for her
age and I'm sure she'll be a good mum."
Rose's insouciance may be partly explained by the fact that she is no slouch
herself when it comes to popping out babies. She has nine children, of whom
the youngest, four months old, is the product of a fling with a man who has
since returned to his wife and children in the Gambia.
You will not be surprised to learn that she brings up her brood at the
public expense, having been abandoned by the father of her first eight
sprogs three years ago, when he left to shack up with another woman.
All in all, you will agree, the Crowhursts fall a degree or two short of the
average Daily Mail reader's idea of a model family.
But I refuse to be angry with them. There is something magnificent about
both mother and daughter and the way that they shrug off every calamity that
life throws at them as just one of those things.
Let me make it absolutely clear, right now, that I do not think it a good
idea for 12-year-old girls to get pregnant. I was tempted to say that I did,
but I know from the many letters that readers are kind enough to send me
that some people cannot always see my tongue in my cheek, even when I am
pushing it so hard that it hurts. It is a rotten idea - very bad for the
mother, who loses her own childhood, and dreadful for the child, who has to
suffer being brought up by someone who is not ready for the task.
But I give Amy and her mother high marks for taking the whole thing in their
stride - and particularly Amy, for refusing to have an abortion after she
had seen the scan of her child in her womb.
I have no daughters myself, but I know that I would be absolutely horrified
if I discovered that my 12-year-old smoked, or that she had had her
belly-button pierced - let alone that she had fallen pregnant by a boy whose
name she had not bothered to ask. But for Amy and her mum, these little
trials are just a part of life, which must be got on with.
Nor can I get angry about the Ł185 a week that Mrs Crowhurst receives in
state handouts to bring up her vast brood. As I never tire of pointing out,
Britain is in desperate need of children to look after us all in our old
age.
It is ludicrous to say that the Crowhursts are a drain on the economy, since
people are the economy. Money is just paper or metal, or numbers on a
screen. It is a metaphor for human activity, no more.
The childless spinster who squirrels away millions of pounds for her old age
cannot eat her money. She needs other people to have children, who will grow
up to convert her money by their labour into food, clothes, housing and
healthcare.
The wonder for me is that anybody can possibly afford to bring up nine
children on a measly Ł185 a week. If somebody set up a company producing
computers one hundredth part as sophisticated or useful as a human being,
the Government would hand over millions of pounds in investment grants. But
poor Mrs Crowhurst and her daughter have to get by, week by week, on the
price of a meal for two at the Ivy.
Let us have none of that nonsense, by the way, about this being an
overcrowded planet, unable to feed its existing population. Overpopulation
is a philosophical impossibility, for the brutal reason that starving people
die. Mercifully, there is more than enough food on the planet to go round,
and the capacity to produce it 10 times over.
The heart-rending famine in Ethiopia has nothing to do with overpopulation,
and only a little to do with the drought. It is all about the stupid way in
which the world orders its economy, and the propensity of backward countries
to engage in futile wars.
Anybody who believes that the world is overcrowded should just think what
would happen if we lined up half the population of India against a wall and
shot them. The remaining half would be poorer and hungrier, not richer and
fatter.
I have a hunch that Amy Crowhurst will turn out to be a good parent, as her
own mother predicts - loving, tolerant, and with a lesson or two to pass on
to her child from her own mistakes. But if I am wrong, and she finds that
she cannot cope, she will still be performing a public service.
Think of all those tens of thousands of gay couples, yearning to adopt
children, whom Kenneth Clarke gets so worked up and wet eyed about - so
worked up that he is prepared to put the future of the Tory party in
jeopardy on their behalf. Somebody has got to churn out the little blighters
to satisfy the demand. Sure as hell, Eric and Martin will not be able to
manage it on their own
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2002/11/16/do1601
.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2002/11/16/ixopinion.html
> ==================================================
> SPECIAL REPORT: GREAT BRITAIN
> ==================================================
> For more information visit:
>
> Race Issues in Britain
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/racism/
>
> ==================================================
>
> Shots fired as Asian youths gang up to attack skinhead house party
>
> Jeevan Vasagar
> Tuesday May 29, 2001
> The Guardian
>
> A battle between Asian youths and skinheads in Buckinghamshire
> ended in gunshots, witnesses claimed yesterday.
>
> One Asian claimed that the events in the town of Aylesbury began
> on Saturday when an Asian boy was attacked by skinheads in a park.
> Though spat at and abused, the boy was uninjured.
>
> On Sunday night up to 60 Asian youths, and some black teenagers,
> armed with cricket bats, baseball bats, bottles and bricks, descended
> on a house where a group of skinheads had been having a party.
>
> Neighbours claimed the skinheads had been drinking all weekend, and
> described the householder, Paul Butler, as a heavily tattooed Chelsea
> fan who worked as a painter and decorator.
>
> The youths had no difficulty finding the house, as it had a Cross of
> St George flag over the gates.
>
> Witnesses alleged that the skinheads taunted the Asians, saying
> "Combat 18 [a neo Nazi group] are going to get you tonight".
>
> The youths responded with racial abuse, hurling missiles at the windows
> and doors, and smashing three cars and a van parked outside. Then,
> according to neighbours, three shots were fired at the house.
>
> Police said reports of a firearm were "speculation", but one Asian man
> present, Said Khan, 23, said: "One of the Asian boys let off a gun to let
> them know we mean business." Officers were examining what appeared
> to be a bullet hole in the front wall of the house yesterday.
>
> After the shots the Asian crowd melted away, and about seven skinheads
> ran out armed with knives, baseball bats and a nunchuck, a martial arts
weapon.
>
>
> A police helicopter arrived overhead soon after, followed by officers
> who spread out in search of the Asian crowd.
>
> The skinheads retreated into the wrecked house following a brief stand-off
> with police and shouts of "Sieg Heil" were heard by neighbours.
>
> Police arrested 23 men; 11 Asian, nine white, and three black. Two black
> males aged 15 and 16 were released without charge yesterday morning.
>
> In a joint statement with the mayor of Aylesbury, Raj Khan, Thames Valley
> police said the disorder was not being linked to the rioting in Oldham.
>
> Mr Khan said: "Aylesbury does not have major race problems and has had
> no major race problems, otherwise I would not be serving the town as its
mayor.
>
>
> "However, claims of a racial nature have been made in connection with last
> night's incident. Myself and the police are treating these extremely
seriously,
>
> and the police are investigating them thoroughly."
>
> Aylesbury has a population of 60,000, some 4,000 to 5,000 being from
ethnic
> minorities, predominantly Pakistani.
>
> The street where the attack took place was quiet yesterday. Residents
> said it was a mixed area where different races got on well.
>
> ==================================================
>
> Tuesday 29 May 2001
>
> BNP struggles for respectability
> By Sandra Laville
>
> OVER the past two years the British National Party has been striving
> for electoral recognition and respectability under its new leader Nick
Griffin.
>
> Mr Griffin, its Cambridge-educated chairman, has attempted to change the
> image of the extreme Right-wing group cultivated by his predecessor, John
> Tyndall, who was prepared to be photographed in jackboots and armbands
> in front of pictures of Adolf Hitler.
>
> Mr Tyndall, a veteran member of the Far-Right who helped to found the
> National Front in the Sixties, has been jailed three times for membership
> of a paramilitary style group, incitement to racial hatred and possession
of
> offensive weapons.
>
> In an attempt to modernise the party, Mr Griffin has drawn up a new
> constitution,
> expelled members, created a media monitoring unit and a glossy magazine.
> His aim is to gain seats at the local level and he claims that the new BNP
is
> no
> longer racist or anti-Semitic.
>
> But the gloss is thin. Formed in 1992 by Mr Tyndall, the BNP is still an
> organisation reflecting the views of a tiny minority. Its membership is
> estimated at about 600. Whatever Mr Griffin's claims about the BNP's
> new aims, his recent past casts a shadow upon his ambitions for
respectability.
>
>
> In 1998 Mr Griffin, who is standing against Michael Meacher in Oldham
> West, was convicted of incitement to racial hatred. This related to
articles
> denying the existence of the Holocaust. His first publication as the
party's
> chairman was entitled Who are the mindbenders and claimed that the
> media was run by a Jewish conspiracy.
>
> The constitution has changed little, save to alter the wording of the
BNP's
> policy of forced repatriation of ethnic minorities into one of voluntary
> repatriation. While Mr Griffin denies links to the NF and condemned its
> march through Oldham on May 5, he recently tried to merge it with the BNP.
>
> ==================================================
>
> BNP denies stirring racial tension
>
> Staff and agencies
> Tuesday May 29, 2001
>
> The leader of the British National Party has hit back at claims it is
> helping to whip up racial tension in Oldham.
>
> Nick Griffin spoke following three nights of race riots in the former
> mill town resulting in the arrests of 49 whites and Asians.
>
> He is among the BNP candidates standing in Oldham in the general
> election. Cambridge-educated Mr Griffin said it was "ridiculous" for
> police and community leaders to point the finger of blame at his party.
>
> "It's not us who had up to 1,000 people throwing things at the police
> and attacking their neighbours because they are a different colour," he
said.
>
> Mr Griffin, who is standing in Oldham West, said the Asian community
> had overreacted after the home of a pregnant Asian woman was attacked
> on Saturday night, sparking hours of rioting.
>
> "The most the apologists for the Asians can point to is one broken window
> and a woman abused. Days and days of rioting, petrol bombs thrown at
> the police, white homes attacked and their windows put through - it's a
> massively disproportionate response," he said.
>
> Trouble has been brewing in the town for weeks following reports that
> Asian youths, tired of police not responding to attacks on their
community,
> planned to create "no-go zones" for white people.
>
> Recent police figures show a record number of race attacks, with 60% of
> victims white. The National Front has ignored a three-month ban on
political
> marching to stage demonstrations in the town over the last three weeks.
>
> Mr Griffin said: "Until the police grasp the nettle and deal with Asian
racists
>
> it's going to get even worse. White people haven't retaliated so far but
this
> situation can't continue."
>
> Officers were today preparing for a fourth night patrolling the streets of
the
> town where a "zero tolerance" policy is in operation.
>
> Khurshid Ahmed, of the Pakistani Cultural Association, said he would ask
> both whites and Asians to accept they were living in a multi-cultural
society
> and learn to live side by side.
>
> He believed the problems had been caused by the BNP and National Front.
>
> Mr Ahmed added: "People have to start working together. We need regular
> meetings with people at the bottom level in the community. We need to ask
> the opinions of the ordinary people to help Oldham move forward."
>
> ==================================================
>
rwwff
>
> Thousands more will join the resistance after every US over-reaction,
> the US will cut and run, whining that it was really saving democracy by
Sorry, this isn't Vietnam, and never can be. I've posted similar
notes before, but to enumerate a few points:
1. the terrain of Iraq is a US tactitians dream come true, Vietnam was
a nightmare.
2. Vietnam had big time external support for the enemy.
3. we did not have true air supremacy.
4. we did not at the time of Vietnam, follow a "no sanctuary"
doctrine.
5. politicians managed targetting in Vietnam, battlefield commanders
manage targetting in Iraq.
The list of reasons why Iraq will never turn into your Vietnam is way
longer than this, but these top five of the moment are adequate to
make the point.
Wes
>> Oh and before I go... here's that question again. WAS KIM PHUK A
>> MILITARY TARGET? I really would like an answer, Cliff. Maybe you
>> could find the answer at keepquietaboutthewarswekeeplosing.com
>
> And maybe you could answer how you figured that napalm was a WMD. Give
> us your rationalisation again about the FBI and the Alfred E Murrow
> building. Come on Wes tell us the story again. Make your point, now's
> your chance.
Read it here http://www.nti.org/f_wmd411/f1a1.html
And then read this:
"Abu Mezer and Khalil were indicted on
August 28, 1997, by a federal grand jury in the
Eastern District of New York and charged with violating
18 U.S.C. ง 2332A(A) (2) (conspiracy to use a
weapon of mass destruction against persons in the
United States) and งง 924(O) and 3551 (conspiracy
to use and carry a firearm during and in relation to a
crime of violence)."
The weapon of mass destruction in the above case was a home made pipe bomb.
Source:TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES 1997
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/terr97.pdf
Seems the US Dept of Justice and the FBI have a pretty wide definition of
what constitutes WMD when it comes to enemy ordinance. Of course according
to their redneck apologists like Cliffy and his various illiterate inbred
buddies who contribute their bile to these newsgroups, napalm is only a
"tactical battlefield weapon". Good for burning "Japs, chinks, gooks, and
ragheads" - anyone who's not white in other words.
Good to see you've gone into meltdown, Cliff - what a fucking hoot! If your
only response to another's point of view is to call him a moron (9 times in
the last post!) then you know you're on a hiding to nothing. I'm quite
happy to admit I got it wrong when I said I only posted to one newsgroup -
I sussed out the truth too late, by then the post had been sent - big deal!
But that's the difference between you and me, Cliff. If I'm wrong I'll
happily own up and admit it. You sulk and scream and call everyone a moron
- the only insult your underdeveloped mind can come up with. Oh sorry
again... I forgot... 'mental moron'. Showing great promise there, Cliff! I
did say you were so stupid you didn't know what the word 'moron' means. I
thought you might pick up on that but it seems you haven't, so I'll fill
you in. Moron, in the psychiatric meaning, is an obsolete term for a person
whose intellectual development has stalled at around age 8. Someone with an
underdeveloped mind in other words. Oh, there's another definition here
that you might find interesting
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Moron
Just to prove me wrong, Cliff, be a good little boy - put your thinking cap
on and think very very hard to see if you know the answer to this question.
WAS KIM PHUK A MILITARY TARGET? And you'll get a gold star in your
colouring book if you answer correctly.
Wes
CH
>>> Oh and before I go... here's that question again. WAS KIM PHUK A
>>> MILITARY TARGET? I really would like an answer, Cliff. Maybe you
>>> could find the answer at keepquietaboutthewarswekeeplosing.com
>>
>> And maybe you could answer how you figured that napalm was a WMD.
>> Give us your rationalisation again about the FBI and the Alfred E
>> Murrow building. Come on Wes tell us the story again. Make your
>> point, now's your chance.
>
> Read it here http://www.nti.org/f_wmd411/f1a1.html
Hey moron, did you read it? Must not have because here is what it said:
"The Federal Bureau of Investigation sometimes uses an even broader
definition of WMD: "A weapon of mass destruction (WMD), though typically
associated with nuclear/radiological, chemical, or biological agents, may
also take the form of explosives, such as in the bombing of the Alfred P.
Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma in 1995. A weapon crosses
the WMD threshold when the consequences of its release overwhelm local
responders."
Where does it mention napalm? Where? Is that your rationalisation? I laugh
at you, I really do.
> And then read this:
>
> "Abu Mezer and Khalil were indicted on
> August 28, 1997, by a federal grand jury in the
> Eastern District of New York and charged with violating
> 18 U.S.C. ง 2332A(A) (2) (conspiracy to use a
> weapon of mass destruction against persons in the
> United States) and งง 924(O) and 3551 (conspiracy
> to use and carry a firearm during and in relation to a
> crime of violence)."
Yeah well you sure don't know squat. The difference between an indictment
and a conviction are two different things. Why don't you tell us what they
were actually convicted for?
> The weapon of mass destruction in the above case was a home made pipe
> bomb. Source:TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES 1997
> http://www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/terr97.pdf
>
> Seems the US Dept of Justice and the FBI have a pretty wide
> definition of what constitutes WMD when it comes to enemy ordinance.
And a lot of people have varying definitions of WMD's it's the target that
makes the difference in all of these definitions, when you intentionally
target civilians it's usage become one of a WMD. I can blow up a pipe bomb
in my back yard and not be using a WMD but yet if I strapped 5 of them
together and targeted a large population of CIVILIANS it then becomes a
WMD....................You cannot seem to get that through your thick skull
can you?
> Of course according to their redneck apologists like Cliffy and his
> various illiterate inbred buddies who contribute their bile to these
> newsgroups, napalm is only a "tactical battlefield weapon". Good for
> burning "Japs, chinks, gooks, and ragheads" - anyone who's not white
> in other words.
I am sure glad that it is obvious that you are very adept at putting words
in peoples mouths......it was to be expected sooner or later.........usually
people that do not know their as from a hole in the ground have to come up
with something to prove a point so a few words put in someone's mouth always
sounds good to their sick little heads
> Good to see you've gone into meltdown, Cliff - what a fucking hoot!
Meltdown? You must be joking, I am just playing with you. You seem to be the
one making the irrational statements....and in the last post.........and the
one before that............hmmmmmmmm.............. there is a pattern
here....................
> If your only response to another's point of view is to call him a
> moron (9 times in the last post!) then you know you're on a hiding to
> nothing. I'm quite happy to admit I got it wrong when I said I only
> posted to one newsgroup - I sussed out the truth too late, by then
> the post had been sent - big deal!
It just shows that you are really a moron, one of many. It is not an
exclusive club you know, the moron club can be joined by almost anyone but
in your case you are a natural.
<whining drivel snipped>
Wes you should really grow up, you look like a fool
_a_da_spam@nospam.com ฿ละลงง
news:Xns943F1B6BF935A...@194.117.133.134...
> Seems the US Dept of Justice and the FBI have a pretty wide definition of
> what constitutes WMD when it comes to enemy ordinance. Of course according
> to their redneck apologists like Cliffy and his various illiterate inbred
> buddies who contribute their bile to these newsgroups, napalm is only a
> "tactical battlefield weapon". Good for burning "Japs, chinks, gooks, and
> ragheads" - anyone who's not white in other words.
Good for any ethnicity that goes to war against us. Some apparently haven't
yet learned their lesson.
Wes
>> Read it here http://www.nti.org/f_wmd411/f1a1.html
>
> Hey moron, did you read it? Must not have because here is what it
> said: "The Federal Bureau of Investigation sometimes uses an even
> broader definition of WMD: "A weapon of mass destruction (WMD), though
> typically associated with nuclear/radiological, chemical, or
> biological agents, may also take the form of explosives, such as in
> the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City,
> Oklahoma in 1995. A weapon crosses the WMD threshold when the
> consequences of its release overwhelm local responders."
>
> Where does it mention napalm? Where? Is that your rationalisation? I
> laugh at you, I really do.
You can read but you don't comprehend - "A weapon crosses the WMD threshold
when the consequences of its release overwhelm local responders." What does
that suggest to you, Cliff. Seems a pretty good description of napalm to
me.
>
>> And then read this:
>>
>> "Abu Mezer and Khalil were indicted on
>> August 28, 1997, by a federal grand jury in the
>> Eastern District of New York and charged with violating
>> 18 U.S.C. ง 2332A(A) (2) (conspiracy to use a
>> weapon of mass destruction against persons in the
>> United States) and งง 924(O) and 3551 (conspiracy
>> to use and carry a firearm during and in relation to a
>> crime of violence)."
>
> Yeah well you sure don't know squat. The difference between an
> indictment and a conviction are two different things. Why don't you
> tell us what they were actually convicted for?
Anything I can do to help, Cliff...
"Palestinian Gazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer was sentenced in a Brooklyn federal
court to life in prison for plotting to bomb a New York City subway train."
http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0699/9906078.html
>
>> The weapon of mass destruction in the above case was a home made pipe
>> bomb. Source:TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES 1997
>> http://www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/terr97.pdf
>>
>> Seems the US Dept of Justice and the FBI have a pretty wide
>> definition of what constitutes WMD when it comes to enemy ordinance.
>
> And a lot of people have varying definitions of WMD's it's the target
> that makes the difference in all of these definitions, when you
> intentionally target civilians it's usage become one of a WMD. I can
> blow up a pipe bomb in my back yard and not be using a WMD but yet if
> I strapped 5 of them together and targeted a large population of
> CIVILIANS it then becomes a WMD....................You cannot seem to
> get that through your thick skull can you?
Definitions of WMD:
1) http://www.nti.org/f_wmd411/f1a1.html
2) http://hps.org/hsc/wmd_factsheet.pdf
3) http://www.securitymanagement.com/library/SB180_In0501.html
Show me anywhere it specifically states that a weapon needs to be targeted
at CIVILIANS to be classed as a WMD. And note that SECTION 6. IC 35-41-1-29
of the Indiana Code (3) specifically refers to an incendiary device as a
WMD. Of course, I don't expect you to get this through your thick inbreed
skull, banjoboy. And don't go blowing up pipe bombs in your back yard,
Cliff. Not unless you want your LEA chums to blow away your fat burgerboy
ass. You know they're just itching to.
>
>> Of course according to their redneck apologists like Cliffy and his
>> various illiterate inbred buddies who contribute their bile to these
>> newsgroups, napalm is only a "tactical battlefield weapon". Good for
>> burning "Japs, chinks, gooks, and ragheads" - anyone who's not white
>> in other words.
>
> I am sure glad that it is obvious that you are very adept at putting
> words in peoples mouths......it was to be expected sooner or
> later.........usually people that do not know their as from a hole in
> the ground have to come up with something to prove a point so a few
> words put in someone's mouth always sounds good to their sick little
> heads
I put those words into you and your friend Badass' mouths Cliff??? How the
fuck did I manage that? What on Earth are you raving about?
>
>> Good to see you've gone into meltdown, Cliff - what a fucking hoot!
>
> Meltdown? You must be joking, I am just playing with you. You seem to
> be the one making the irrational statements....and in the last
> post.........and the one before
> that............hmmmmmmmm.............. there is a pattern
> here....................
Every statement I make I back up with sources, pal. Of course, being
uneducated you don't realise the importance of that.
>
>> If your only response to another's point of view is to call him a
>> moron (9 times in the last post!) then you know you're on a hiding to
>> nothing. I'm quite happy to admit I got it wrong when I said I only
>> posted to one newsgroup - I sussed out the truth too late, by then
>> the post had been sent - big deal!
>
> It just shows that you are really a moron, one of many. It is not an
> exclusive club you know, the moron club can be joined by almost anyone
> but in your case you are a natural.
Heh heh heh! There you go again. Jee-zo! What a fucking dil you are, Cliff!
>
> <whining drivel snipped>
Here's the 'whining drivel' you snipped Cliff -
"But that's the difference between you and me, Cliff. If I'm wrong I'll
happily own up and admit it. You sulk and scream and call everyone a moron
- the only insult your underdeveloped mind can come up with. Oh sorry
again... I forgot... 'mental moron'. Showing great promise there, Cliff! I
did say you were so stupid you didn't know what the word 'moron' means. I
thought you might pick up on that but it seems you haven't, so I'll fill
you in. Moron, in the psychiatric meaning, is an obsolete term for a person
whose intellectual development has stalled at around age 8. Someone with an
underdeveloped mind in other words. Oh, there's another definition here
that you might find interesting
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Moron"
Yeah, the truth hurts, don't it Cliff. I can understand it making you whine
and drivel, but snipping it out ain't gonna heal the hurt. You should think
about what I said and maybe then you'll understand why it is you can only
respond by calling people morons. See what I mean about the importance of
quoting the source?
>
> Wes you should really grow up, you look like a fool
Well that's a good one. Couple of days ago I SOUND like an idiot! Today I
LOOK like a fool! You must be real smart to be able to tell what I look and
sound like from an email.
Okay, Cliff, no plasticine play for you till you answer the question - WAS
KIM PHUK A MILITARY TARGET? Oh hey... I just thought Cliff. If the yanks
targeted a CIVILIAN target like Trang Bang with napalm.... that must make
it a WMD!!
Wes
CH
>>> Read it here http://www.nti.org/f_wmd411/f1a1.html
>>
>> Hey moron, did you read it? Must not have because here is what it
>> said: "The Federal Bureau of Investigation sometimes uses an even
>> broader definition of WMD: "A weapon of mass destruction (WMD),
>> though typically associated with nuclear/radiological, chemical, or
>> biological agents, may also take the form of explosives, such as in
>> the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma
>> City, Oklahoma in 1995. A weapon crosses the WMD threshold when the
>> consequences of its release overwhelm local responders."
>>
>> Where does it mention napalm? Where? Is that your rationalisation? I
>> laugh at you, I really do.
>
> You can read but you don't comprehend - "A weapon crosses the WMD
> threshold when the consequences of its release overwhelm local
> responders." What does that suggest to you, Cliff. Seems a pretty
> good description of napalm to me.
Well I guess maybe you would think so, but so far you have proven yourself
to be a moron........little difference in the target there little boy but I
know that is waaay to much for you to understand.
>
>>
>>> And then read this:
>>>
>>> "Abu Mezer and Khalil were indicted on
>>> August 28, 1997, by a federal grand jury in the
>>> Eastern District of New York and charged with violating
>>> 18 U.S.C. ง 2332A(A) (2) (conspiracy to use a
>>> weapon of mass destruction against persons in the
>>> United States) and งง 924(O) and 3551 (conspiracy
>>> to use and carry a firearm during and in relation to a
>>> crime of violence)."
>>
>> Yeah well you sure don't know squat. The difference between an
>> indictment and a conviction are two different things. Why don't you
>> tell us what they were actually convicted for?
>
> Anything I can do to help, Cliff...
> "Palestinian Gazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer was sentenced in a Brooklyn
> federal court to life in prison for plotting to bomb a New York City
> subway train."
> http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0699/9906078.html
And were they convicted of "(conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction
against persons in the United States) ?
>>
>>> The weapon of mass destruction in the above case was a home made
>>> pipe bomb. Source:TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES 1997
>>> http://www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/terr97.pdf
>>>
>>> Seems the US Dept of Justice and the FBI have a pretty wide
>>> definition of what constitutes WMD when it comes to enemy ordinance.
>>
>> And a lot of people have varying definitions of WMD's it's the target
>> that makes the difference in all of these definitions, when you
>> intentionally target civilians it's usage become one of a WMD. I can
>> blow up a pipe bomb in my back yard and not be using a WMD but yet if
>> I strapped 5 of them together and targeted a large population of
>> CIVILIANS it then becomes a WMD....................You cannot seem to
>> get that through your thick skull can you?
>
> Definitions of WMD:
> 1) http://www.nti.org/f_wmd411/f1a1.html
> 2) http://hps.org/hsc/wmd_factsheet.pdf
> 3) http://www.securitymanagement.com/library/SB180_In0501.html
>
> Show me anywhere it specifically states that a weapon needs to be
> targeted at CIVILIANS to be classed as a WMD. And note that SECTION
> 6. IC 35-41-1-29 of the Indiana Code (3) specifically refers to an
> incendiary device as a WMD. Of course, I don't expect you to get this
> through your thick inbreed skull, banjoboy. And don't go blowing up
> pipe bombs in your back yard, Cliff. Not unless you want your LEA
> chums to blow away your fat burgerboy ass. You know they're just
> itching to.
You are one moronic individual. Nice insults, but I learned along time ago
that people like you that have nothing but insults are morons. And again you
are a natural.
>>> Of course according to their redneck apologists like Cliffy and his
>>> various illiterate inbred buddies who contribute their bile to these
>>> newsgroups, napalm is only a "tactical battlefield weapon". Good
>>> for burning "Japs, chinks, gooks, and ragheads" - anyone who's not
>>> white
>>> in other words.
>>
>> I am sure glad that it is obvious that you are very adept at putting
>> words in peoples mouths......it was to be expected sooner or
>> later.........usually people that do not know their as from a hole in
>> the ground have to come up with something to prove a point so a few
>> words put in someone's mouth always sounds good to their sick little
>> heads
>
> I put those words into you and your friend Badass' mouths Cliff???
> How the fuck did I manage that? What on Earth are you raving about?
So now it's me and my friend Badass? You are a loon......
>>> Good to see you've gone into meltdown, Cliff - what a fucking hoot!
>>
>> Meltdown? You must be joking, I am just playing with you. You seem to
>> be the one making the irrational statements....and in the last
>> post.........and the one before
>> that............hmmmmmmmm.............. there is a pattern
>> here....................
>
> Every statement I make I back up with sources, pal. Of course, being
> uneducated you don't realise the importance of that.
Educated? In what moronic behavior? What school did you go to? The Moron
school of logic?
>>
>>> If your only response to another's point of view is to call him a
>>> moron (9 times in the last post!) then you know you're on a hiding
>>> to nothing. I'm quite happy to admit I got it wrong when I said I
>>> only posted to one newsgroup - I sussed out the truth too late, by
>>> then
>>> the post had been sent - big deal!
>>
>> It just shows that you are really a moron, one of many. It is not an
>> exclusive club you know, the moron club can be joined by almost
>> anyone but in your case you are a natural.
>
> Heh heh heh! There you go again. Jee-zo! What a fucking dil you are,
> Cliff!
>>
>> <whining drivel snipped>
>
> Here's the 'whining drivel' you snipped Cliff -
>
<whining moronic drivel snipped AGAIN>
Moron..............
Wes
So you have no coherent answer to anything I've written, and no intelligent
comment to make on any matter whatsoever. Fine! I guess that makes you a
moron, Cliff.
I'll answer the question for you. Kim Phuk was 9 years old. Neither she,
nor her village was a military target - not in any sense that would be
recognised by any professional military organisaton at least. However this
is the US military we're talking about of course.
Case closed.
Wes
rwwff
> rw...@yahoo.com (rwwff) wrote in message news:<8c88725.03112...@posting.google.com>...
> gave aid and comfort to the enemy.
See my #2.
> (2) Slanted media coverage calculated to turn Americans sour on
> pursuing the war, i.e., constant around the clock coverage of dead
> soldiers returning at Dover Air Force Base and blowing up the Calley
> incident.
>
> (3) Johnson's refusal to cut loose the B-52's to absolutely destroy
> those dikes in and around Hanoi - or even Hanoi itself. This was very
> doable and would have brought Hanoi to its knees immediately.
See my #4. Your 2&3 follow from a lack of a no-sanctuary doctrine.
If there had been real, tangible, and exciting military progress being
made, the press would have covered it.
> (4) Rampant drug abuse, anti-Americanism and lack of personal
> discipline amongst enlisted men (the sixties influence writ large).
This follows from a draftie army, which, though I did not mention it,
is also a huge difference, and not just in the drug abuse category.
Bigger than the drug issue in my opinion is the willingness of a
soldier to take an aimed shot. A highly trained, motivated volunteer
is going to take the aimed shot that kills the enemy; the untrained
draftie sticks his gun around a corner, discharges a full magazine
without looking (hitting nothing but dirt, grass, and trees), and
thinks he's done his job.
The visual from Iraq that sticks in my mind was of this guy riding
atop an armored vehicle, he uses the machine gun for a burst, then
stops, picks up his rifle and takes three aimed shots. We didn't get
to see the downrange shot of that one, so we don't really know
anything more than that; but it speaks volumes about the superior
quality of the training.
Karl
List the Muslim countries you've visited.
I thought not.
Jeff Laventure
Iraq, Egypt, Libya and Indonesia just to name a few. Like you said: you
will reap what you sow.
BTW, thinking not, may be your problem
>
_a_da_spam@nospam.com ฿ละลงง
> List the Muslim countries you've visited.
List the muslim country your ancestors came from, Euro-wannabe. You're not
fooling anyone with that "Karl Peterson" crap. More likely you're "Kareem
Pramayana" or something like that.
T Grasso
they are poor, starving, sick, and dying because of their faith? Seems to
me that idiots cannot seperate the people from their faith because they
cannot seperate themselves from it (or a lack of it). Because most Muslim
countries have little in the way of natural resources (except Iraq, Saudi
Arabia, etc.) they are indeed poor. But I bet the average citizen there
does more for his neighbor than "Badass" (how gay) does. Their faith keeps
their rather impoverished conditions from entering into how the exist. This
is where you are wrong, and will always be wrong. A Christian priest
fondling young boys; deplorable. A Christian lynching a man because he is
black; deplorable (nearly ALL hate groups in the US are christian based
fundamentalist organizations). The worst terror attack in the US up to 9/11
was done by white christians. Atheists commit crimes against humanity (I
doubt the Bloods and the Crips believe in God). I think it quite ironic
that we are able to seperate the faith from the act in every case except the
Arab struggle against Israeli oppression, in which case we side with the pig
bastards who murder innocent men, women and children as a general rule.
Wake up you f**ing moron before its too late.news:3fc7687b$0$27466$afc3...@news.easynet.co.uk...
Jeff Laventure
"T Grasso" <tee...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:KTNxb.6496$UG2....@nwrdny03.gnilink.net...
> Well now, I see Christians in poverty all over the world.
You see some Christians in poverty all over the world. There is not one
Muslim country, let alone Arab country, who has even a semblance of life
above poverty.
Are we saying
> they are poor, starving, sick, and dying because of their faith?
It seems you are but that is not what I am saying. I am saying Islamic
countries are dirt poor entirely because of their belief system.
Seems to
> me that idiots cannot seperate the people from their faith because they
> cannot seperate themselves from it (or a lack of it). Because most Muslim
> countries have little in the way of natural resources (except Iraq, Saudi
> Arabia, etc.) they are indeed poor.
And I suppose South Korea and Taiwan are teeming in natural resources? How
about Singapore and Hong Kong? It's all about culture and desire.
But I bet the average citizen there
> does more for his neighbor than "Badass" (how gay) does. Their faith
keeps
> their rather impoverished conditions from entering into how the exist.
It's their faith which keeps them in poverty. Poverty both spiritually and
economically.
This
> is where you are wrong, and will always be wrong. A Christian priest
> fondling young boys; deplorable.
A Muslem man fondling his little slave boy (which he bought in the open
market); deplorable.
A Christian lynching a man because he is
> black; deplorable (nearly ALL hate groups in the US are christian based
> fundamentalist organizations).
A Muslim exploding a human bomb and killing civilians; deplorable (nearly
ALL hate groups in the Mideast are Islamic based fundamental organizations).
Mindless hate of Jews taught to Muslims from early childhood with the sole
intent of instilling hatred of another group.
> fundamentalist organizations).
The worst terror attack in the US up to 9/11
> was done by white christians.
The worst terror attack in the US (9/11) was done by multiple Muslim
murderers and organizaed by an international Muslim murder corporation
funded by Muslims throughout the world and was done by an Arab Muslim.
Atheists commit crimes against humanity
Muslims live by the creed of the worse the human mutilation the better they
appear or God.
(I
> doubt the Bloods and the Crips believe in God). I think it quite ironic
> that we are able to seperate the faith from the act in every case except
the
> Arab struggle against Israeli oppression,
And they join faith with their ungodly acts.
in which case we side with the pig
> bastards who murder innocent men, women and children as a general rule.
You are entirely wrong. We rarely side with Muslims.
Karl
> "Karl" <petersenk...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:3fc7687b$0$27466$afc3...@news.easynet.co.uk...
>
>>List the Muslim countries you've visited.
>
>
> List the muslim country your ancestors came from, Euro-wannabe.
You're right - as a Jew, some of my ancestors came from countries which
are now Muslim.
> You're not
> fooling anyone with that "Karl Peterson" crap. More likely you're "Kareem
> Pramayana" or something like that.
Hmmm - sounds a bit Hindu to me.
Karl
> "T Grasso" <tee...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:KTNxb.6496$UG2....@nwrdny03.gnilink.net...
>
>>Well now, I see Christians in poverty all over the world.
>
>
> You see some Christians in poverty all over the world. There is not one
> Muslim country, let alone Arab country, who has even a semblance of life
> above poverty.
The depth of ignorance you display is shocking. On what basis do you
make that claim? I've been to a number of Muslim (including Arab)
countries and everywhere I've seen people living modern, civilised
lifestyles. And unlike you, most Arabs are well educated.
I've never been to a Muslim town or city that has as many homeless
people as any US city.
Byker
news:50unsvkl506kie66m...@4ax.com...
> Our homeless people live like kings compared to the inhabitants of
> their shanty towns.
America's worst ghettos are like Disneyland to these turd-word muds...
Karl
> their shanty towns.
Another American without a passport. Try travelling - the world is very
different to what you appear to have been told.