Re: U.S. faces threat of nationwide Shiite uprising
Wyatt Earp
The big problem is that America & her loyal allies
are going much too far out of our way to spare the
lives and homes of innocent bystanders. I remember
a time not too long ago when everyone thought that
WWIII would be fought with heavy nuclear and biolo-
gical weapons--not with pansy-assed "pea-shooters"
like they're using so far. I'd say 5000-lb.+ bombs
ought to be the very SMALLEST thing we're throwing
at these barbaric scumbags. No need to hurt 'em or
torture 'em. Put them quickly out of their misery,
and let's be done with it already. Nuke Damascus &
Tehran. Neutron bombs are "humanitarian" enough to
get the job done. Like they say, "on the plains of
hesitation bleach the bones of countless billions".
Our good President GW Bush oughta learn a thing or
two from our late great Presidents Harry S. Truman
& John F. Kennedy. We need to stop phucking around
with these quasi-islamic murderers and send em all
to Hades where they belong. Then we'll go in & mop
up after the dust clears. America's *very* good at
mopping up. Please drop the BIG ONE, Mr. President.
Then watch and see how fast these Islamic infidels
scramble to round-up their Anti-American militants
and execute every last one of them faster than you
can say Hiroshima & Nagasaki baby! Push the button.
^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^
Very Truly Yours,
Daniel Joseph Min
"The true art of diplomacy is to prolong
every crisis."--author unknown
On 23 Apr 2004, tony...@aol.com (TonyZ2001) wrote:
>GEOSTRATEGY-DIRECT INTELLIGENCE BRIEF
>U.S. faces threat of nationwide Shiite uprising
>Underestimated extent to which Saddam kept Iraq together by force
>April 23, 2004
>Moqtada al-Sadr represents a formidable problem for the military in Iraq, the
>U.S. intelligence community has acknowledged, according to Geostrategy-Direct,
>the global intelligence news service.
>
>Al-Sadr might be the bane among Shiite clerics. But over the last year he has
>managed to completely intimidate even the most prominent of clerics, such as
>Ayatollah Ali Sistani.
>Al-Sadr has also managed to win supporters and cooperation within the Sunni
>community. His poster has been pasted in mosques even in hardcore Fallujah.
>U.S. intelligence analysts said al-Sadr has managed to inspire just about
>everybody who opposes the U.S. in Iraq.
>More importantly, al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army have exploited a new class of
>disenfranchised Shiites who are unemployed and have nothing to lose. He has won
>thousands of Shiites - and in some cases Sunnis - with tens of millions of
>dollars of Iranian money.
>The intelligence analysts say the U.S. military underestimated several factors:
>1. The extent to which Saddam Hussein kept Iraq together by pure intimidation.
>2. The absence of a community infrastructure in Iraq.
>3. The vulnerability of a socially- and politically-decimated Iraq to
>neighboring Iran.
>Al-Sadr brings the United States to a crossroad. Over the next few weeks, the
>U.S. will either push hard or bring Sunni and Shiite insurgents to the wall and
>reign by fear until an authoritarian Iraq can rule itself.
>Or, the Iraqi Governing Council and the security forces will disintegrate, with
>soldiers and police doing little more than showing up to work and collecting
>salaries - but failing to impose order.
>The analysts warn that the United States cannot rely on either the Sunni or
>Shiite clergy. Indeed, they have never been in a position of influence on a
>national level.
>In many towns and cities, Shiite clerics took over municipal services but were
>quickly confronted by rivals who stressed their opposition to the United
>States.
>Their analysts' assessment: a Shiite insurgency could go nationwide over the
>next few months.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBQIquw5ljD7YrHM/nEQJCywCguyd4VIO5k/Gt64bGmBpnM8k1/5oAn3Ju
nUvSOlLtk11gwyFN2IIMvn2g
=zPJr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
America Rules!
Yes, that's the essence of the hold-up with Washington D.C.
GW Bush & Co. aren't exactly anxious to slaughter millions
of innocent people in order to eliminate some 666-thousand
guilty murderers among them. Rest assured, this discussion
has come up time and again behind closed doors. Terrorists
are counting on President GW Bush's continued restraint by
avoiding cataclysmic nuclear warfare. Even if there was no
retaliatory nuclear strike, "mutually-assured destruction",
the world will tremble at the repercussions. Russia, China,
et al, they're sure to look the other way. But the islamic
jihad wouldn't die, lest we remove every terrorist enclave
around the globe. Thanks to neutron bombs, I think that is
precisely, exactly, absolutely, what we should do. America
has problems too. Our nation's borders are porous. We need
to eliminate the threats in Mexico, Canada, & our seaports.
Biological weapons (with restricted antidotes) are another
remedy for the situation. Level 4+ oughta get the job done.
In fact, such virulently lethal weapons are an alternative.
Let's inoculate whomsoever we will, and release Armageddon.
This must come without any prior warning or any evacuation.
Every target we hit must be destroyed strictly by surprise.
Collateral damage will be immense. No matter, c'est la vie.
Whatever state-of-the-art weapons we use, by all means let
us use them today... "a weapon unused is a useless weapon".
I beg you, Mister President. Let's take these bastards out.
Very Truly Yours,
Daniel Joseph Min
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004, "granitegriz" <grani...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>I have said basically the same thing for some time now. If we are going to
>be hated for the fact of being what we are in America anyways no matter how
>humanitarian we try to be, then drop the neutron anyways! But we give the
>women and children one opportunity to stop shielding the ones that are
>hiding behind them in these cities. Then all those that chose to stay most
>likely are those families that hate us and are plotting against us too. Drop
>the heavy ones, spare our lads in uniform and most importantly erase a
>couple of generations of would be terrorist!
>Sorry but it's pure & simple. Let's end this mockery once and for all. To
>think it has gone on this far fighting a bunch of camel jockeys with little
>technology and still costing us so much!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBQIv66JljD7YrHM/nEQJasQCeKQhmIud/Ceb6rxWwyxvyDR1QqVwAoJtb
1eEuthIySANeCjdvWW/DfqmJ
=eV5B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Alan Connor
>
Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and kill
and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
Like DUH.
AC
฿ละลงง
news:rrzic.10399$e4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and kill
> and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
Just like the ragheads did when they entered our home country and killed
3,000 people. Yeah, we took offense, all right. And now the dune coons are
paying for it.
Yeah, Akhmed, whatcha' gonna do next, Mecca-monkey? Set off in nuke in San
Diego or Houston or Charleston? How about a "dirty bomb" attack in a
downtown area? You'd really cream your jeans if one of your sandnigger
brothers assassinated our president, now, wouldn't you, boy? Bet you'd just
LUV to turn on CNN and watch those howling mobs of your fellow camel jocks
from Morocco to Manila all shouting "Allah be praised" when they see the
footage of our Secretary of Defense being blown to smithereens, Rajiv
Ghandi-style, when he makes a public appearance and reaches out to shake the
hand of one of your suicide bombers in the crowd.
Yeah, boy, we'll be watching that footage, too -- OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND
OVER, and we'll see how long your exuberance lasts when you turn on Fox news
and watch all 1,100 of your motherfucking mosques in the America going up in
flames while the local police just stand by and let the mobs rule. If
you're lucky the cops will get to you first and dump your ass off at some
closed military base for further disposal. If not, you just might get a
chance to rattle off one last prayer to Allah before you're splattered with
bacon fat and mowed down.
dd
--
"There's an old saying, that victory has a hundred fathers and
defeat is an orphan ... I am the responsible officer of the
government and that is quite obvious."
- John F. Kennedy
"I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the
midst of this press conference with all the pressure of
trying to come up with an answer, but it hadn't [sic] yet,
I just haven't - you just put me under the spot here and
maybe I'm not quick - as quick on my feet as I should
be in coming up with one."
- George Bush
"฿ละลงง" <na_...@spam.net> wrote in message
news:108m85l...@corp.supernews.com...
Spoken like a true christian.
Too bad you didn't publish your home address...
Dnadan
฿ละลงง
news:108mbbv...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> Spoken like a true christian.
You got that right:
http://dementia.lunaticsworld.com/weird/images3/pissed_jesus.jpg
That turn-the-other-cheek shit got old a long time ago.
RamRod
> news:rrzic.10399$e4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and
kill
> > and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
>
> Just like the ragheads did when they entered our home country and killed
> 3,000 people. Yeah, we took offense, all right. And now the dune coons
are
> paying for it.
>
> Yeah, Akhmed, whatcha' gonna do next, Mecca-monkey? Set off in nuke in
San
> Diego or Houston or Charleston?
Much idiot raving cut
I think Armageddon is supposed to start in the East, so you want America to
start it????
BTW you said...
> > Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and
kill
> > and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
Does America have clean hands in this regard? I think not.
Remember Korea
Remember Vietnam
Etc Etc
Abhijit Bhattacharya
> news:rrzic.10399$e4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and kill
> > and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
>
> Just like the ragheads did when they entered our home country and killed
> 3,000 people. Yeah, we took offense, all right. And now the dune coons are
> paying for it.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
Regards,
Abhijit
jaonajames
ya been Rambutt? miss us ? Alter and the rest will be glag to see ya , stop
by AFN too while your're around. Teehehe
"RamRod" <Ram...@truthonly.com> wrote in message
news:XeKic.9247$qq6....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Matt
That was bought to you by ฿ละลงง from the United States Ministry of
multi-cultural affairs and tourism.
Matt
--
My blog: http://kaiwai.blogspot.com/
"You don't have to live next to me, Just give me my
equality" - Nina Simone (Mississippi Goddam)
"Science without religion is lame, religion without
science is blind." - Albert Einstein
"A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a
statistic." - Joseph Stalin
"Death solves all problems - no man, no problem." -
Joseph Stalin
"There are no morals in politics; there is only
expedience. A scoundrel may be of use to us just
because he is a scoundrel." - Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
Matt
Hey now, don't get all logical with these Americans, they need to believe like
good little sheep that their government is never wrong.
฿ละลงง
news:c6gj69$btnr8$1...@ID-220941.news.uni-berlin.de...
> That was bought to you by ฿ละลงง from the United States Ministry of
> multi-cultural affairs and tourism.
It's interesting how for awhile there was a curious lack of anti-American
rants from ".au" ISPs after the Bali bombings.
฿ละลงง
"The Orchardist" <The_Orc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dl2m80p3nt5fsttji...@4ax.com...
They'd do well to remind the ragheads of what happens when we get pushed
over the edge:
http://www.history.independence.co.jp/ww2/eng/phtop.html
And it doesn't take nukes to do it either.
Billyblastoff
> Abhijit Bhattacharya wrote:
>
>> "฿ละลงง" <na_...@spam.net> wrote in message
>> news:<108m85l...@corp.supernews.com>...
>>
>>> "Alan Connor" <zzz...@xxx.yyy> wrote in message
>>> news:rrzic.10399$e4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>>> Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country
>>>> and kill
>>>> and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
>>>
>>>
>>> Just like the ragheads did when they entered our home country and killed
>>> 3,000 people. Yeah, we took offense, all right. And now the dune
>>> coons are
>>> paying for it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Abhijit
>
>
> Hey now, don't get all logical with these Americans, they need to
> believe like good little sheep that their government is never wrong.
>
> Matt
Perhaps when the terrorists decide to give your country its own 9/11,
you'll change your tune. Until then, fuck off.
Billyblastoff
Indeed. When something happens on their own soil, Matt's tune will
change. Unless, of course, he's a hard-core Islamabot, in which case,
he'll probably be one of the first victims of the backlash.
฿ละลงง
> Hey now, don't get all logical with these Americans, they need to believe
> like good little sheep that their government is never wrong.
One day soon you Aussies will discover that you can't dodge the Islamic
bullet forever, and since the dune coons like to go after symbolic targets
it won't come as any real surprise for us Yanks to turn on MSNBC and see the
aftermath of, say, a botched hostage-rescue attempt at the Sydney Opera
House after its takeover by some of your Islamic "people of colour."
Somehow I get the feeling that Nauru will in for a sudden population
explosion.
Matt
We don't go out of our way to piss people off. Funny, New Zealand has troops
in Iraq and Afghanistan and yet, you never here a threat against us.
Interesting indeed.
Matt
Funny, and you call me an Aussie when I clearly am not one.
Matt
Then again, I'm not Australia dick head. If you actually spent time in
alt.politics.homosexuality, you would realise that.
Matt
how funny, a gay "Islamabot". Here is a hint, I'm not Australia.
ArKLyte_
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 107.a.001.cba.iprimus.net.au (210.50.171.107)
>
>฿ละลงง wrote:
>
>> "Matt" <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:c6gj69$btnr8$1...@ID-220941.news.uni-berlin.de...
>>
>>>That was bought to you by ฿ละลงง from the United States Ministry of
>>>multi-cultural affairs and tourism.
>>
>>
>> It's interesting how for awhile there was a curious lack of anti-American
>> rants from ".au" ISPs after the Bali bombings.
>
>Then again, I'm not Australia dick head. If you actually spent time in
>alt.politics.homosexuality, you would realise that.
Really?
NNTP-Posting-Host: 107.a.001.cba.iprimus.net.au (210.50.171.107)
Then, why do you post from IPRIMUS.NET in Australia?
--
( W W P D ) - What Would Patton Do?
ArKLyte_
>> Indeed. When something happens on their own soil, Matt's tune will
>> change. Unless, of course, he's a hard-core Islamabot, in which case,
>> he'll probably be one of the first victims of the backlash.
>
>how funny, a gay "Islamabot". Here is a hint, I'm not Australia.
>
>Ma
Really?
NNTP-Posting-Host: 107.a.001.cba.iprimus.net.au (210.50.171.107)
Why do you post from IPRIMUS.NET in Australia?
ArKLyte_
>Funny, and you call me an Aussie when I clearly am not one.
>
>Matt
Really?
Billyblastoff
Australia and New Zealand enjoy an isolation of sorts due to their
geographic position on the globe. But that won't last forever, as you
will soon find out.
Coming soon to a country near you: Islamic Terrorism.
Billyblastoff
> Billyblastoff wrote:
>
>> ฿ละลงง wrote:
>>
>>> "Matt" <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:c6gj69$btnr8$1...@ID-220941.news.uni-berlin.de...
>>>
>>>> That was bought to you by ฿ละลงง from the United States Ministry of
>>>> multi-cultural affairs and tourism.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's interesting how for awhile there was a curious lack of
>>> anti-American
>>> rants from ".au" ISPs after the Bali bombings.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Indeed. When something happens on their own soil, Matt's tune will
>> change. Unless, of course, he's a hard-core Islamabot, in which case,
>> he'll probably be one of the first victims of the backlash.
>
>
> how funny, a gay "Islamabot". Here is a hint, I'm not Australia.
>
> Matt
Your news posting headers indicate you are in Australia. If you aren't
Australian by birth, you are by location.
No One
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 02:54:52 +1000, Matt <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> >Funny, and you call me an Aussie when I clearly am not one.
> >
> >Matt
>
> Really?
>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 107.a.001.cba.iprimus.net.au (210.50.171.107)
>
> Why do you post from IPRIMUS.NET in Australia?
Probably it is becasue his ISP has its corporate office in Australia,
and picked the domain name for him.
Gunner
(Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
Prove it.
Gunner
"The American political system is like a gigantic Mexican Christmas fiesta.
Each political party is a huge pinata -- a papier-mache donkey, for example.
The donkey is filled with full employment, low interest rates, affordable housing,
comprehensive medical benefits, a balanced budge and other goodies.
The American voter is blindfoled and given a stick. The voter then swings
the stick wildly in every direction, trying to hit a political candidate
on the head and knock some sense into the silly bastard." - P.J. O'Rourke, "Parliament of Whores"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duck Dog
wrote:
>On 25 Apr 2004 02:25:13 -0700, bhattachar...@hotmail.com
>(Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>
>>"฿ละลงง" <na_...@spam.net> wrote in message news:<108m85l...@corp.supernews.com>...
>>> "Alan Connor" <zzz...@xxx.yyy> wrote in message
>>> news:rrzic.10399$e4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>> > Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and kill
>>> > and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
>>>
>>> Just like the ragheads did when they entered our home country and killed
>>> 3,000 people. Yeah, we took offense, all right. And now the dune coons are
>>> paying for it.
>>
>>Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Abhijit
>
>Prove it.
You're the idiot making the moronic assertion, so YOU back it up,
gumdrop.
Gunner
Ive already made the case. You as yet have nothing to offer in
rebuttle.
Take your best shot.
฿ละลงง
news:me1o80h1vhlrtr13j...@4ax.com...
Pan-Islamists are forever pointing out that "Iraq" is nothing more than
lines drawn by a British cartographer nearly a century ago. Maybe a
loosely-defined geographical area called "Islamia" would be more accurate,
meaning that everything in the Middle East save for Israel would be
considered fair game.
฿ละลงง
> how funny, a gay "Islamabot". Here is a hint, I'm not Australia.
Your headers say otherwise:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 107.a.001.cba.iprimus.net.au (210.50.171.107)
Abhijit Bhattacharya
> On 25 Apr 2004 02:25:13 -0700, bhattachar...@hotmail.com
> (Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>
> >"฿ละลงง" <na_...@spam.net> wrote in message news:<108m85l...@corp.supernews.com>...
> >> "Alan Connor" <zzz...@xxx.yyy> wrote in message
> >> news:rrzic.10399$e4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >> > Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and kill
> >> > and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
> >>
> >> Just like the ragheads did when they entered our home country and killed
> >> 3,000 people. Yeah, we took offense, all right. And now the dune coons are
> >> paying for it.
> >
> >Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Abhijit
>
> Prove it.
>
> Gunner
>
I trust you will agree that it is impossible to prove that Iraq had
nothing to do with 9/11. On the other hand, it is possible to prove
that there was such a connection, but to date, no proof of one has
been provided. Since US intelligence agencies have been spectacularly
wrong about nearly everything regarding Iraq, mere assertions of a
link between Saddam's regime and the 9/11 terrorist attacks are
inadequate.
Regards,
Abhijit
Duck Dog
wrote:
>On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 18:39:47 GMT, Duck Dog <sp...@foo.org> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 18:27:36 GMT, Gunner <gun...@lightspeed.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 25 Apr 2004 02:25:13 -0700, bhattachar...@hotmail.com
>>>(Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>>>
>>>>"฿ละลงง" <na_...@spam.net> wrote in message news:<108m85l...@corp.supernews.com>...
>>>>> "Alan Connor" <zzz...@xxx.yyy> wrote in message
>>>>> news:rrzic.10399$e4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>>>> > Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and kill
>>>>> > and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just like the ragheads did when they entered our home country and killed
>>>>> 3,000 people. Yeah, we took offense, all right. And now the dune coons are
>>>>> paying for it.
>>>>
>>>>Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>>Abhijit
>>>
>>>Prove it.
>>
>>You're the idiot making the moronic assertion, so YOU back it up,
>>gumdrop.
>
>Ive already made the case.
No you haven't; you've just made a bunch of assertions.
>You as yet have nothing to offer in
>rebuttle.
Give me something to rebut, other than your stupidity.
>Take your best shot.
I don't need to. I'm dealing with you.
Gunner
(Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>I trust you will agree that it is impossible to prove that Iraq had
>nothing to do with 9/11.
No, I do not so agree.
Gunner
No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound
woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil?
Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence,
they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest
animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that,
and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work.
- L. Neil Smith
Matt
Funny, and the number of tourists coming to NZ from the middle east has
increased since the endorsement of New Zealand as a tourist destination by a
visting arab representative a few years ago, using your logic, something
should have already been blown up by now.
Matt
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 02:54:52 +1000, Matt <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>>Funny, and you call me an Aussie when I clearly am not one.
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> Really?
>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 107.a.001.cba.iprimus.net.au (210.50.171.107)
>
> Why do you post from IPRIMUS.NET in Australia?
Because I am a New Zealander in Australia. What are you, a moron?
Gunner
wrote:
>>
>> Australia and New Zealand enjoy an isolation of sorts due to their
>> geographic position on the globe. But that won't last forever, as you
>> will soon find out.
>>
>> Coming soon to a country near you: Islamic Terrorism.
>
>Funny, and the number of tourists coming to NZ from the middle east has
>increased since the endorsement of New Zealand as a tourist destination by a
>visting arab representative a few years ago, using your logic, something
>should have already been blown up by now.
>
>Matt
How many did NZ lose in Bali?
Matty
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 14:37:40 +1000, Matt <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>
>>>Australia and New Zealand enjoy an isolation of sorts due to their
>>>geographic position on the globe. But that won't last forever, as you
>>>will soon find out.
>>>
>>>Coming soon to a country near you: Islamic Terrorism.
>>
>>Funny, and the number of tourists coming to NZ from the middle east has
>>increased since the endorsement of New Zealand as a tourist destination by a
>>visting arab representative a few years ago, using your logic, something
>>should have already been blown up by now.
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> How many did NZ lose in Bali?
Not too many, but then again, we don't run around like headless chickens when
people are killed.
Gunner
wrote:
>>>Funny, and the number of tourists coming to NZ from the middle east has
>>>increased since the endorsement of New Zealand as a tourist destination by a
>>>visting arab representative a few years ago, using your logic, something
>>>should have already been blown up by now.
>>>
Seems like you refuted your own statement (below)
>>>Matt
>>
>>
>> How many did NZ lose in Bali?
>
>Not too many, but then again, we don't run around like headless chickens when
>people are killed
how about the ones who had their heads blown off?
Btw..are you related to Neville Chamberlain by any chance?
Matty
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:47:11 +1000, Matty <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>
>>>>Funny, and the number of tourists coming to NZ from the middle east has
>>>>increased since the endorsement of New Zealand as a tourist destination by a
>>>>visting arab representative a few years ago, using your logic, something
>>>>should have already been blown up by now.
>>>>
>
>
> Seems like you refuted your own statement (below)
>
>>>>Matt
>>>
>>>
>>>How many did NZ lose in Bali?
>>
>>Not too many, but then again, we don't run around like headless chickens when
>>people are killed
>
>
> how about the ones who had their heads blown off?
>
> Btw..are you related to Neville Chamberlain by any chance?
No, and even if I were, would it make a difference. You seem to be like most
Americans, hot headed and unable to calm down and rationally think about the
situation.
Abhijit Bhattacharya
> On 25 Apr 2004 15:26:36 -0700, bhattachar...@hotmail.com
> (Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>
> >I trust you will agree that it is impossible to prove that Iraq had
> >nothing to do with 9/11.
>
> No, I do not so agree.
>
> Gunner
If you do not accept that it is impossible to prove a negative then
there is no point in discussing this any further with you.
Regards,
Abhijit
Jeffrey Schwartz
>
>
> Our good President GW Bush oughta learn a thing or
> two from our late great Presidents Harry S. Truman
> & John F. Kennedy. We need to stop phucking around
> with these quasi-islamic murderers and send em all
> to Hades where they belong.
Truman? the guy who got us into Korea?
Kennedy? Taking care of business? Like at Bay of Pigs? or the way he
handled Viet Nam?
If you use those as a standard of comparison, W's doing a decent job
:)
฿ละลงง
> Funny, and the number of tourists coming to NZ from the middle east has
> increased since the endorsement of New Zealand as a tourist destination by
> a visting arab representative a few years ago, using your logic, something
> should have already been blown up by now.
Give it time. One day you'll roll the dice and it'll come up snake-eyes.
April 22, 2004
Australian Police Charge Terror Suspect
SYDNEY, Australia (AP) - Authorities on Thursday charged a Pakistan-born
architect with recruiting terrorists and plotting to blow up an Australian
target.
Faheem Khalid Lodhi was the second Pakistan-born Australian to be accused of
assisting an Australian terror cell. Authorities believe the cell has links
to international terror networks like al-Qaida.
Police say both Lodhi and the other suspect - Izhar ul-Haque - have ties to
a French terror suspect arrested in Australia in October and later deported
to France.
That suspect, Willie Virgile Brigitte, remains in French custody.
Australian media reported in November that Brigitte was suspected of
plotting an attack on the Lucas Heights nuclear power plant on the outskirts
of Sydney.
Australian Attorney General Philip Ruddock said more arrests may follow.
"This is a matter in which we continue to investigate and so there may yet
be more," he told reporters. "The (Lodhi) charges do arise from the
investigation of Brigitte. They relate to preparing, in various ways, for a
terrorist act."
Lodhi and ul-Haque are the first two suspects charged under the tough
anti-terrorism laws passed in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks
in the United States.
Lodhi, a 34-year architect who is an Australian citizen, was arrested at his
suburban Sydney home Thursday after a six-month investigation by Australia's
spy agency, the ASIO, federal police said.
Hours later, he was charged in Sydney's Central Local Court with preparing a
terrorist act and recruiting for a terrorist organization in Sydney and
Pakistan between April 2001 and March 2003. If convicted, he could face life
in jail.
A charge sheet presented to the court said Lodhi was preparing for an attack
on a "major infrastructure facility," but it did not specify the target.
The Australian newspaper reported Thursday that Lodhi was planning to attack
the national electricity grid with a bomb made from ammonium nitrate
fertilizer - a component of many terror attacks, including the October 2002
explosions that killed 202 people on the Indonesian island of Bali.
Lodhi also allegedly used a fake name to order maps of the grid from the
Electricity Suppliers Association, the newspaper said. The charge sheet said
he dumped maps of military installations in a garbage bin behind near his
house.
But Lodhi's lawyer, Stephen Hopper, said his client had "reasonable
explanations," for all the charges against him. "And those explanations have
been provided to the authorities," he said, without elaborating.
Hopper told the court that Lodhi was "a very mild-mannered man" who "loves
Australia; he came to Australia to make a better life for himself."
Ul-Haque, the other suspect, was arrested last week and charged with
training with a Kashmir-based terror group, Lashkar-e-Tayyaba.
Prosecutors say ul-Haque, a 21-year-old medical student, had conversations
with Lodhi and Brigitte, the French suspect.
Brigitte, 35, reportedly helped the Australian cell plan attacks. Since his
arrest last year, Australian and French intelligence officials have been
working to try and break up the cell.
Gunner
wrote:
>>>
>>>Not too many, but then again, we don't run around like headless chickens when
>>>people are killed
>>
>>
>> how about the ones who had their heads blown off?
>>
>> Btw..are you related to Neville Chamberlain by any chance?
>
>No, and even if I were, would it make a difference. You seem to be like most
>Americans, hot headed and unable to calm down and rationally think about the
>situation.
>
>Matt
Matty old boy...Ive been to war on several occasions. I have spent
much of my adult life as a survivalist, making plans and preperations
to avoid the consequences of war, death, destruction, fire,flood,
famine, earthquake, out of control governments and bandits (insert
disaster of your choice).
Ive spent an inordinate time thinking about the situation. 30+ yrs
worth. Im also a student of not only military history, but
geopolitical history.....
Some times Matty old beanie...the only thing to do is raise the black
flag, sharpen the knife and commence to cutting throats. Other times,
run, hide, negotiate etc. This is one of those times to draw the
knife.....
Assuredly you know who Neville "Peace in Our Times" Chamberlain was,
correct? And of course you do know the result of his desperate
plunging of his head in the sand, are you not? 45 million dead, plus
or minus a few million here and there. His denial was similar to that
which you labor under. Shrug.
We are in a cusp event in history. WW1 & 2 were fought on the battle
field. WW3 was fought via the Cold War, on smaller battle fields. WW4
begain in ernest on 9/11. Its a war between diametriclly opposed
cultures, the antagonist no different in its desire to spread by
force, its dogmatic religious and cultural beliefs across the entire
planet. No different than that of the USSR and its satellites to
spread Marxism. We (the free world) vanquished the communists, now
its our turn to defeat the Islamic geopolitical body that is
attempting the same thing.
Do some thinking yourself lad. Sitting on your bum with a beer in your
hand in drunken apathy is not thinking, Matty..try some skull sweat
without the beer old boy. Turn off your version of MTV, and read a
few history books. At this point..its obvious you are a classic
example of "those that ignore history, are doomed to repeat it"
Gunner
(Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>Gunner <gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message news:<ou1p80pk7rn4pvh3p...@4ax.com>...
>> On 25 Apr 2004 15:26:36 -0700, bhattachar...@hotmail.com
>> (Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>>
>> >I trust you will agree that it is impossible to prove that Iraq had
>> >nothing to do with 9/11.
>>
>> No, I do not so agree.
>>
>> Gunner
>
>If you do not accept that it is impossible to prove a negative then
>there is no point in discussing this any further with you.
>
>Regards,
>
>Abhijit
Lets look at it another way old boy...prove to me that Saddam & Co.
are innocent of funding and backing terrorism. That can be proven, if
you are correct. Think of it as a criminal trial.
default
> Lets look at it another way old boy...prove to me that Saddam & Co.
> are innocent of funding and backing terrorism. That can be proven, if
> you are correct. Think of it as a criminal trial.
Er.... There's a reason why the American legal system has
the verdicts "Guilty" and "Not Guilty", and no verdict "Innocent"...
--Goedjn
Gunner
Ayup.
SkullyWV
"Matty" <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:c6ilr1$c8k4c$2...@ID-220941.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Gunner wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 14:37:40 +1000, Matt <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>Australia and New Zealand enjoy an isolation of sorts due to their
> >
> >
> > How many did NZ lose in Bali?
>
> Not too many, but then again, we don't run around like headless chickens
when
> people are killed.
>
> Matt
> --
They are a bunch of morons, BIG TIME.
Facts are very hard to find in the media and in political circles, you must
listen for a long time to find actualities. Sometimes you have to wait until
events are over and semi-forgotten to actually see what the real story
was/is.
You also seem to group people together without first investigating their
true nature, not boldly but via implication. That is not wise, by doing so
you run the risk on befriending a sadistic idiot or making an enemy of a
truly decent person. The NG I'm posting from is misc.survivalism, from a
survival standpoint it is dangerous to assume too much. In fact it is better
sometimes to refrain from action than to assume.
Skully
WbGV
SkullyWV
--snip--
> No, and even if I were, would it make a difference. You seem to be like
most
> Americans, hot headed and unable to calm down and rationally think about
the
> situation.
There is no way that you know most Americans, neither do I.
You are probably talking about "most Americans" that you have seen on
television, heard on radio, etc...
There I am assuming right after typing the evils of assuming in another post
just a second ago, but it is probably a safe assumption.
Evil perceived is evil indeed.
Perception is the root of all evil.
Question; why is this thread cross-posted to so many NGs?
> Matt
Matty
And to lash out in revenge is also dangerous. What was the first thing GWB
said about the terrorists? "they attack us because they hate our freedom",
sorry, that isn't the reason. Unless GWB has been AWOL from following the
news, the US has made its fair share of enemies, some have legitimate
grevinces, others don't.
To simply come out of the "wood works" and make a broad state along the lines
of "they're jealous" is nothing short of ignorance at best.
SkullyWV
You have made an issue out of a very simple mistake; some assumed that you
were an "Aussie".
I cannot tell where someone is from by their typing, I also erred and
assumed that the ".au" meant that you were Australian, just as you, in
recent posts, assumed that other posters here are American.
I am curious, how was anyone supposed to know that you are from New Zealand?
Skully
WbGV
"Matt" <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:c6i3nv$brpum$2...@ID-220941.news.uni-berlin.de...
SkullyWV
"Matty" <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:c6k5qh$d8cqe$1...@ID-220941.news.uni-berlin.de...
> SkullyWV wrote:
---snipped for brevity---
> >>--
> >
> > Sounds like you, like many around the world, listen to the American
Media.
> > They are a bunch of morons, BIG TIME.
> > Facts are very hard to find in the media and in political circles, you
must
> > listen for a long time to find actualities. Sometimes you have to wait
until
> > events are over and semi-forgotten to actually see what the real story
> > was/is.
> >
> > You also seem to group people together without first investigating their
> > true nature, not boldly but via implication. That is not wise, by doing
so
> > you run the risk on befriending a sadistic idiot or making an enemy of a
> > truly decent person. The NG I'm posting from is misc.survivalism, from a
> > survival standpoint it is dangerous to assume too much. In fact it is
better
> > sometimes to refrain from action than to assume.
>
> And to lash out in revenge is also dangerous. What was the first thing GWB
> said about the terrorists? "they attack us because they hate our freedom",
> sorry, that isn't the reason. Unless GWB has been AWOL from following the
> news, the US has made its fair share of enemies, some have legitimate
> grevinces, others don't.
That is the impression one gets from listening to political speech and the
news.
Name a country that has a legitimate grevince and what it is.
NOTE:I am not saying that you are incorrect, I am just promoting the
discussion.
>
> To simply come out of the "wood works" and make a broad state along the
lines
> of "they're jealous" is nothing short of ignorance at best.
There again you have to realize the difference between stated facts and
political speech, they have nearly nothing in common.
Skully
WbGV
>
> Matt
Light Templar
> On 26 Apr 2004 06:46:28 -0700, bhattachar...@hotmail.com
> (Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>
>> Gunner <gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>> news:<ou1p80pk7rn4pvh3p...@4ax.com>...
>>> On 25 Apr 2004 15:26:36 -0700, bhattachar...@hotmail.com
>>> (Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>>>
>>>> I trust you will agree that it is impossible to prove that Iraq had
>>>> nothing to do with 9/11.
>>>
>>> No, I do not so agree.
>>>
>>> Gunner
>>
>> If you do not accept that it is impossible to prove a negative then
>> there is no point in discussing this any further with you.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Abhijit
>
> Lets look at it another way old boy...prove to me that Saddam & Co.
> are innocent of funding and backing terrorism. That can be proven, if
> you are correct. Think of it as a criminal trial.
>
> Gunner
>
As in most of the rest of the western world, one is innocent until proven
guilty, therefore the burden of proof is on you.
> No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a
> 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is
> that evil?
> Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing
> violence, they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the
> biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically
> "right". Guns end that, and social democracy is a hollow farce
> without an armed populace to make it work.
> - L. Neil Smith
--
I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Steven Wright
Gunner
<I...@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
>Gunner wrote:
>> On 26 Apr 2004 06:46:28 -0700, bhattachar...@hotmail.com
>> (Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>>
>>> Gunner <gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>>> news:<ou1p80pk7rn4pvh3p...@4ax.com>...
>>>> On 25 Apr 2004 15:26:36 -0700, bhattachar...@hotmail.com
>>>> (Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I trust you will agree that it is impossible to prove that Iraq had
>>>>> nothing to do with 9/11.
>>>>
>>>> No, I do not so agree.
>>>>
>>>> Gunner
>>>
>>> If you do not accept that it is impossible to prove a negative then
>>> there is no point in discussing this any further with you.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Abhijit
>>
>> Lets look at it another way old boy...prove to me that Saddam & Co.
>> are innocent of funding and backing terrorism. That can be proven, if
>> you are correct. Think of it as a criminal trial.
>>
>> Gunner
>>
>
>As in most of the rest of the western world, one is innocent until proven
>guilty, therefore the burden of proof is on you.
>
You (not surprisingly) left out one of the basic tenets of self
defense. "Reasonable cause to believe"
We had more than reasonable cause. Deal with it.
Gunner
Abhijit Bhattacharya
>
>
> Lets look at it another way old boy...prove to me that Saddam & Co.
> are innocent of funding and backing terrorism. That can be proven, if
> you are correct. Think of it as a criminal trial.
>
> Gunner
It is ironic you bring up a criminal trial because the onus rests on
the prosecution to prove that the defendant is guilty. The reason is
that it is impossible to prove a negative (i.e. prove one's
innocence).
Regards,
Abhijit
Light Templar
Bullshit.. Deal with it.
>
> No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a
> 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is
> that evil?
> Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing
> violence, they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the
> biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically
> "right". Guns end that, and social democracy is a hollow farce
> without an armed populace to make it work.
> - L. Neil Smith
--
Gunner
<I...@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
Your opinion is noted, examined like a maggot on bad meat, and
discarded in the terlet.
(insert sound of flush)
Gunner
Gunner
(Abhijit Bhattacharya) wrote:
Of course. Since the various UN Resolutions were ignored, which are to
be considered "laws", the terms of Iraqs surrender (probation) after
DS1, were repeatedly broken, Saddam and his country were returned to
custody. Very simple. It is noted that he and his gang continue to
resist arrest, but the end will come. The Rangers always get their
man(men).
dd
--
"There's an old saying, that victory has a hundred fathers and
defeat is an orphan ... I am the responsible officer of the
government and that is quite obvious."
- John F. Kennedy
"I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the
midst of this press conference with all the pressure of
trying to come up with an answer, but it hadn't [sic] yet,
I just haven't - you just put me under the spot here and
maybe I'm not quick - as quick on my feet as I should
be in coming up with one."
- George Bush
"Abhijit Bhattacharya" <bhattachar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9996210f.04042...@posting.google.com...
> "฿ละลงง" <na_...@spam.net> wrote in message
news:<108m85l...@corp.supernews.com>...
> > "Alan Connor" <zzz...@xxx.yyy> wrote in message
> > news:rrzic.10399$e4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and
kill
> > > and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
> >
> > Just like the ragheads did when they entered our home country and killed
> > 3,000 people. Yeah, we took offense, all right. And now the dune coons
are
> > paying for it.
>
> Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
Shhhh. These are AMERICANS. Gun. They don't need no gun.
They don't need no stinking smoking gun. They are following a
New Englander to Armageddon! It's great fun, killing innocent
women and children just for the hell of it. They cheered at the
sight of bloody children in Oklahoma City. They dream daily about
shooting people. The people in this group are definitely not civilized.
They hate the Constitution. They hate Europe. They hate Asia.
They hate Africa. They hate brown skin, black skin, yellow skin,
red skin (except when delicately placed around the neck). Hate is
all they know, and killing is all they know how to do to deal with
that hate.
Some of them are some of the stupidest people you will ever
encounter. But they have access to computers and they have no
shame is showing their stupidity to the world. They revel in it!
Not all people in the U. S. are like that. Not even most. These
people are just obnoxious, loud drunks with toys they don't
understand. Like our current administration, hoping they can
bluff through another day and not be sent to jail.
Dnadan
Sue
>"Abhijit Bhattacharya" <bhattachar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:9996210f.04042...@posting.google.com...
>> "฿ละลงง" <na_...@spam.net> wrote in message
>news:<108m85l...@corp.supernews.com>...
>> > "Alan Connor" <zzz...@xxx.yyy> wrote in message
>> > news:rrzic.10399$e4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> > > Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and
>kill
>> > > and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
>> >
>> > Just like the ragheads did when they entered our home country and killed
>> > 3,000 people. Yeah, we took offense, all right. And now the dune coons
>are
>> > paying for it.
>>
>> Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
>
>Shhhh. These are AMERICANS. Gun. They don't need no gun.
>They don't need no stinking smoking gun. They are following a
>New Englander to Armageddon! It's great fun, killing innocent
>women and children just for the hell of it. They cheered at the
>sight of bloody children in Oklahoma City.
Now there's an interesting piece of BS. Sure would like to see you
quote someone from MS who said any such thing.
> They dream daily about
>shooting people. The people in this group are definitely not civilized.
This is crossposted to several groups. Which is "this" group? I can
only speak about the people on misc.survivalism and can tell you that
you paint with an extremely wide brush. I post here (ms) and I've
never dreamt of shooting anyone (I don't own a gun) and believe that
I'm reasonably civilized.
>
>They hate the Constitution. They hate Europe. They hate Asia.
>They hate Africa. They hate brown skin, black skin, yellow skin,
>red skin (except when delicately placed around the neck). Hate is
>all they know, and killing is all they know how to do to deal with
>that hate.
More BS and wide brush. There are perhaps two people on MS who fit
that profile and many of the other posters call them on the carpet for
it.
>
>Some of them are some of the stupidest people you will ever
>encounter. But they have access to computers and they have no
>shame is showing their stupidity to the world. They revel in it!
Piffle.
>
>Not all people in the U. S. are like that. Not even most. These
>people are just obnoxious, loud drunks with toys they don't
>understand. Like our current administration, hoping they can
>bluff through another day and not be sent to jail.
More BS and wide brush. I doubt many of them drink and to what toys
would you be referring? What laws are they breaking? C'mon. You
claim to know them so well so you must know what laws they're
breaking.
>
>Dnadan
I can understand why you put "nad" in your nom de computer. It's
probably the only one you have - literally or figuratively.
Sue
>
Matty
> I wonder...
> You have made an issue out of a very simple mistake; some assumed that you
> were an "Aussie".
> I cannot tell where someone is from by their typing, I also erred and
> assumed that the ".au" meant that you were Australian, just as you, in
> recent posts, assumed that other posters here are American.
>
> I am curious, how was anyone supposed to know that you are from New Zealand?
Previous posts are a bit of a give away.
Crazy Tribes Man
right off they're ass
Wyatt Earp <frontie...@dodge.city.kansas> wrote in message news:<84F5V9R538100.8493402778@Gilgamesh-Frog.org>...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> The big problem is that America & her loyal allies
> are going much too far out of our way to spare the
> lives and homes of innocent bystanders. I remember
> a time not too long ago when everyone thought that
> WWIII would be fought with heavy nuclear and biolo-
> gical weapons--not with pansy-assed "pea-shooters"
> like they're using so far. I'd say 5000-lb.+ bombs
> ought to be the very SMALLEST thing we're throwing
> at these barbaric scumbags. No need to hurt 'em or
> torture 'em. Put them quickly out of their misery,
> and let's be done with it already. Nuke Damascus &
> Tehran. Neutron bombs are "humanitarian" enough to
> get the job done. Like they say, "on the plains of
> hesitation bleach the bones of countless billions".
>
> Our good President GW Bush oughta learn a thing or
> two from our late great Presidents Harry S. Truman
> & John F. Kennedy. We need to stop phucking around
> with these quasi-islamic murderers and send em all
> to Hades where they belong. Then we'll go in & mop
> up after the dust clears. America's *very* good at
> mopping up. Please drop the BIG ONE, Mr. President.
> Then watch and see how fast these Islamic infidels
> scramble to round-up their Anti-American militants
> and execute every last one of them faster than you
> can say Hiroshima & Nagasaki baby! Push the button.
> ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^
> Very Truly Yours,
> Daniel Joseph Min
>
>
> "The true art of diplomacy is to prolong
> every crisis."--author unknown
>
>
> On 23 Apr 2004, tony...@aol.com (TonyZ2001) wrote:
> >GEOSTRATEGY-DIRECT INTELLIGENCE BRIEF
> >U.S. faces threat of nationwide Shiite uprising
> >Underestimated extent to which Saddam kept Iraq together by force
> >April 23, 2004
> >Moqtada al-Sadr represents a formidable problem for the military in Iraq, the
> >U.S. intelligence community has acknowledged, according to Geostrategy-Direct,
> >the global intelligence news service.
> >
> >Al-Sadr might be the bane among Shiite clerics. But over the last year he has
> >managed to completely intimidate even the most prominent of clerics, such as
> >Ayatollah Ali Sistani.
> >Al-Sadr has also managed to win supporters and cooperation within the Sunni
> >community. His poster has been pasted in mosques even in hardcore Fallujah.
> >U.S. intelligence analysts said al-Sadr has managed to inspire just about
> >everybody who opposes the U.S. in Iraq.
> >More importantly, al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army have exploited a new class of
> >disenfranchised Shiites who are unemployed and have nothing to lose. He has won
> >thousands of Shiites - and in some cases Sunnis - with tens of millions of
> >dollars of Iranian money.
> >The intelligence analysts say the U.S. military underestimated several factors:
> >1. The extent to which Saddam Hussein kept Iraq together by pure intimidation.
> >2. The absence of a community infrastructure in Iraq.
> >3. The vulnerability of a socially- and politically-decimated Iraq to
> >neighboring Iran.
> >Al-Sadr brings the United States to a crossroad. Over the next few weeks, the
> >U.S. will either push hard or bring Sunni and Shiite insurgents to the wall and
> >reign by fear until an authoritarian Iraq can rule itself.
> >Or, the Iraqi Governing Council and the security forces will disintegrate, with
> >soldiers and police doing little more than showing up to work and collecting
> >salaries - but failing to impose order.
> >The analysts warn that the United States cannot rely on either the Sunni or
> >Shiite clergy. Indeed, they have never been in a position of influence on a
> >national level.
> >In many towns and cities, Shiite clerics took over municipal services but were
> >quickly confronted by rivals who stressed their opposition to the United
> >States.
> >Their analysts' assessment: a Shiite insurgency could go nationwide over the
> >next few months.
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> iQA/AwUBQIquw5ljD7YrHM/nEQJCywCguyd4VIO5k/Gt64bGmBpnM8k1/5oAn3Ju
> nUvSOlLtk11gwyFN2IIMvn2g
> =zPJr
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
def...@uri.edu
> defense. "Reasonable cause to believe"
>
> We had more than reasonable cause. Deal with it.
Actually, all I know is that Bush CLAIMED we had reasonable
cause. The evidence made public certainly didn't meet my
standards for the kind of evidence needed to launch a war.
I just took it on faith that he had other evidence that he wasn't,
for whatever reason, willing or able to show us. In the absence
of any corroboration after the fact, that faith is history,
and he's not getting my vote until I see convincing evidence
that either he was right, or that I would have made the same
mistake, given the available evidence.
When you pick up a gun, you're responsible for what you
shoot with it. "I thought it was a deer" doesn't cut it in my
book. Same principle at work here. The President can
invade any country for any reason that Congress will let him,
but he doesn't get to be wrong.
Of course the fact that the democratic party threw
away the opportunity to put up for presidence someone who's
not a vacuous communist hatemonger means they're not
getting my vote, either.
--Goedjn
ArKLyte_
>Actually, all I know is that Bush CLAIMED we had reasonable
>cause.
Apparently, what you 'know' is extremely limited:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/rossmackenzie/printrm20031230.shtml
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.
We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great
deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use
nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the
greatest security threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the
U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if
appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond
effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of
mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle,
John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and
he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In
addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless
using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range
missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, December 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to
deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam
is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years... We also should remember we have
always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
This he has refused to do"
- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show
that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological
weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program.
He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including
al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam
Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and
chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime... He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to
miscalculation... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass
destruction... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass
destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
--
( W W P D ) - What Would Patton Do?
Gunner
>Actually, all I know is that Bush CLAIMED we had reasonable
>cause. The evidence made public certainly didn't meet my
>standards for the kind of evidence needed to launch a war.
>I just took it on faith that he had other evidence that he wasn't,
>for whatever reason, willing or able to show us. In the absence
>of any corroboration after the fact, that faith is history,
>and he's not getting my vote until I see convincing evidence
>that either he was right, or that I would have made the same
>mistake, given the available evidence.
Heads up..this is not a Bush issue. The ENTIRE World Wide Intel
community from every nation on the planet thought there was reasonable
belief. The Clinton Administration thought so, the British, the
French, the Germans, the Russians etc etc. Need the cites? They have
only been posted a million plus times on the net.
Bush acted on the same intel that everyone else in the intel community
far and wide had access to, and they all believed there was WMD.
And its my personal belief that there were indeed WMD, and they are
now sitting in Syria. Shrug. Only the future will show who is right.
You have two choices with some subsets.
1. Vote for Bush,
2. Not vote for Bush
2a. Not vote at all
2b. vote for Kerry, who is a total fuck up and wind sock
2c. vote for Nader (enough said)
2d. vote for any of the other total losers
Its no hair off my ass which way you vote. Its my firm belief that we
are involved in WW4 (WW3 being the Cold War) and is a cusp event in
history, where the future of civilization on this planet is being
decided. Bush gets my vote. Again.
ArKLyte_
>Its no hair off my ass which way you vote. Its my firm belief that we
>are involved in WW4 (WW3 being the Cold War) and is a cusp event in
>history, where the future of civilization on this planet is being
>decided.
YUP.
def...@uri.edu
> community from every nation on the planet thought there was reasonable
> belief. The Clinton Administration thought so, the British, the
> French, the Germans, the Russians etc etc. Need the cites? They have
> only been posted a million plus times on the net.
>
> Bush acted on the same intel that everyone else in the intel community
> far and wide had access to, and they all believed there was WMD.
Fair enough.. But it was Bush who decided that the evidence available
to him was sufficient to justify starting a war on the basis of it.
I don't know what evidence was/is available to him.
I only know what evidence he decided to share with the public.
And that evidence wouldn't be enough, by itself, to convince ME
to start a war. So now there's an election coming up, and if Bush
wants my vote, then he needs to come up with a better explanation
than we've gotten so far, or better evidence. And it seems to
me that if he's willing to pay a few thousand lives on the off-chance
that he's right, it's fair to expect him to pay with his job.
>And its my personal belief that there were indeed WMD, and they are
>now sitting in Syria. Shrug. Only the future will show who is right.
I hope you're right.. But I doubt it.
> You have two choices with some subsets.
>
> 1. Vote for Bush,
> 2. Not vote for Bush
> 2a. Not vote at all
> 2b. vote for Kerry, who is a total fuck up and wind sock
> 2c. vote for Nader (enough said)
> 2d. vote for any of the other total losers
I expect I'll be voting for some third party candidate, as the
clearest way I know of to say "none of the above".
Since RI is pathalogically democrat, there's not much
chance of it mattering anyway.
> Its no hair off my ass which way you vote. Its my firm belief that we
> are involved in WW4 (WW3 being the Cold War) and is a cusp event in
> history, where the future of civilization on this planet is being
> decided. Bush gets my vote. Again.
I don't see any real gain if the only way to defeat the religious
totalitarians
is to elect the more-or-less secular ones.
Billyblastoff
Well said, Gunner.
dd
--
"There's an old saying, that victory has a hundred fathers and
defeat is an orphan ... I am the responsible officer of the
government and that is quite obvious."
- John F. Kennedy
"I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the
midst of this press conference with all the pressure of
trying to come up with an answer, but it hadn't [sic] yet,
I just haven't - you just put me under the spot here and
maybe I'm not quick - as quick on my feet as I should
be in coming up with one."
- George Bush
"Matt" <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:c6gjco$btnr8$2...@ID-220941.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Abhijit Bhattacharya wrote:
>
> > "฿ละลงง" <na_...@spam.net> wrote in message
news:<108m85l...@corp.supernews.com>...
> >
> >>"Alan Connor" <zzz...@xxx.yyy> wrote in message
> >>news:rrzic.10399$e4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >>
> >>>Yes. When you do nasty things like invade a people's home country and
kill
> >>>and destroy, they are liable to take offense.
> >>
> >>Just like the ragheads did when they entered our home country and killed
> >>3,000 people. Yeah, we took offense, all right. And now the dune coons
are
> >>paying for it.
> >
> >
> > Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Abhijit
>
> Hey now, don't get all logical with these Americans, they need to believe
like
> good little sheep that their government is never wrong.
The sheep believe that REPUBLICANS are never wrong, in or out
of government.
Dnadan
dd
--
"There's an old saying, that victory has a hundred fathers and
defeat is an orphan ... I am the responsible officer of the
government and that is quite obvious."
- John F. Kennedy
"I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the
midst of this press conference with all the pressure of
trying to come up with an answer, but it hadn't [sic] yet,
I just haven't - you just put me under the spot here and
maybe I'm not quick - as quick on my feet as I should
be in coming up with one."
- George Bush
"Gunner" <gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote
> Matty old boy...Ive been to war on several occasions. I have spent
> much of my adult life as a survivalist, making plans and preperations
> to avoid the consequences of war, death, destruction, fire,flood,
> famine, earthquake, out of control governments and bandits (insert
> disaster of your choice).
>
> Ive spent an inordinate time thinking about the situation. 30+ yrs
> worth. Im also a student of not only military history, but
> geopolitical history.....
Wow! All that, and you have failed entirely to learn one single thing...
Talk about excelling at futility.
> Some times Matty old beanie...the only thing to do is raise the black
> flag, sharpen the knife and commence to cutting throats. Other times,
> run, hide, negotiate etc. This is one of those times to draw the
> knife.....
Yes, Runner, please do. As stupid as you are, you'll certainly get
caught, and we will all be a little safer for it.
Conversely, you could just cut your own throat and save us the trouble...
> Assuredly you know who Neville "Peace in Our Times" Chamberlain was,
> correct? And of course you do know the result of his desperate
> plunging of his head in the sand, are you not? 45 million dead, plus
> or minus a few million here and there. His denial was similar to that
> which you labor under. Shrug.
I thought you said you studied history, and military history, to boot.
None of it ever sticks with you.
Are you related to Bush?
> We are in a cusp event in history. WW1 & 2 were fought on the battle
> field. WW3 was fought via the Cold War, on smaller battle fields. WW4
> begain in ernest on 9/11. Its a war between diametriclly opposed
> cultures, the antagonist no different in its desire to spread by
> force, its dogmatic religious and cultural beliefs across the entire
> planet.
My father fought on the other side, the side of right, in WWII.
Too bad you wish to take us down the wrong road this time. I sure
hope the good guys don't get impatient and use nukes.
> No different than that of the USSR and its satellites to
> spread Marxism. We (the free world)
Runner, you are so much a slave, you cannot even imagine
being free. Every time it is offered to you, you get scared (responsibility
is a big, scary thing, isn't it Runner) and run back to your masters.
> vanquished the communists, now
> its our turn to defeat the Islamic geopolitical body that is
> attempting the same thing.
As I said, totally ignorant of history...
> Do some thinking yourself lad. Sitting on your bum with a beer in your
> hand in drunken apathy is not thinking, Matty..
Then why is it yoru favorite pattime? Never mind, it was a rhetorical
question (look it up).
> try some skull sweat without the beer old boy.
Runner telling someone else to think is like a 3 year old boy talking to
his mommy about childbirth and pain...
> Turn off your version of MTV, and read a few history books.
Remarkably sage advice. You should take it!
> At this point..its obvious you are a classic
> example of "those that ignore history, are doomed to repeat it"
Projection by Runner!
Dnadan
Matty
> The sheep believe that REPUBLICANS are never wrong, in or out
> of government.
>
> Dnadan
Agreed. When the Republicans are in opposition, they claim that the democrats
are wasting money and being fiscally irresponsible, and yet, when they go in,
they start borrowing so much money that they end up making Elton Johns credit
card look like a modest bill.
SkullyWV
Skully
"Matty" <kaiw...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:c6lio2$defof$1...@ID-220941.news.uni-berlin.de...