America's Disease is: Greed
know buddee
by Andrew Greeley
The most serious spiritual problem in the country today is reckless
and untrammeled greed. Greed caused the disgraceful corporate scandals
that fill our newspapers. Greed is responsible for crooked cops and
crooked politicians. Greed causes the constant efforts to destroy
unions that protect basic worker rights.
Greed has produced rash tax cuts that have given money to the rich and
in effect taken it away from the poor. Greed has led to the
immigration policy in which hundreds of poor men and women die every
year as they struggle across the desert for the jobs that el norte
promises them. Greed accounts for the efforts to take profitability
out of the pensions and health insurance of working men and women.
Greed is responsible for the fact that so many Americans have no
health insurance and the fact that the recent reform of Medicare was a
fraud. Greed causes newspapers to overestimate their circulation.
Greed is responsible for the obscene salaries of CEOs. In the '90s the
ratio of CEO compensation to average workers' compensation was 250 to
1, meaning that the boss earned on his first day of work during a year
as much as the worker did in a whole year. In European countries the
ratio is closer to 100 to 1. Recent estimates put the current ratio at
500 to 1 -- the boss makes as much before lunch as the worker does all
year. Greed is the cause of the high wages paid to the bosses even if
the company is failing.
Greed is responsible for the endless stress and ruthless competition
of the workplace and the strains and tensions of professional class
marriages. Greed (in this instance another name for relentless
ambition) explains much of the cheating on college campuses. Greed is
responsible for outsourcing, which is incapable of comprehending that
the employees who lose their jobs are also the consumers who sustain
the economy. Greed generates the reckless ventures that in part caused
the bubble of the late '90s. Greed causes expensive wars that shatter
the budget. Greed is the reason that only the wealthy are benefitting
so far from the economic upturn that is allegedly happening. Greed
drives loan sharks. Greed is responsible for the success of big box
stores that tax the poor with low wages to provide bargains for
affluent suburban shoppers. Greed is the reason poor white
Appalachians, poor African Americans and poor Native Americans must
fight the wars that the wealthy start. Jessica Lynch joined the Army
so she could go to college. Her Native American roommate, killed in
action, joined so, single mother that she was, she could support her
children. Greed is the reason why the country is being run by those
whom the president has described, however inelegantly, as the ''haves
and the have mores.''
No one said during the bizarre deification of President Reagan that he
taught us that greed is good and that we should feel good about our
greedy country. Greed is the reason that the country is being run by
the insurance, pharmaceutical, weapons and petroleum industries. Greed
causes worldwide sex slavery of women and children.
Greed drives the murders of the narcotics world. Greed is responsible
for the exploitations of teen sports stars by colleges and for the
mess in the pro sports world. It is also the cause of the use of
performance drugs by young athletes. Greed is responsible for the bad
advice lawyers gave the Church years ago to beat victims of sexual
abuse into the ground. It is behind the scam artists who steal from
the elderly.
Greed may have been a more serious problem for Americans, say, in the
era of the robber barons. But the Garys and the Morgans and the
Carnegies were a small bunch of men. Now their greed has seeped down
to a much larger segment of the population.
The Catholic Church speaks of four sins that cry to heaven for
vengeance. Two are cheating workers out of wages and exploiting widows
and children. Both happen every day in our greedy country.
Ambition is not evil within limits. The struggle for success is not
bad within limits. Hard work and fair rewards are good within limits.
It is not good to take from the poor and give to the rich, and that's
exactly what this country is doing today.
Don't let anyone tell you that lust is the most deadly of the deadly
sins.
===========
Published on Friday, August 20, 2004 by the Chicago Sun Times
and by CommonDreams:
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0820-09.htm
-------------
Good source for progressive news and views:
http://www.commondreams.org
-------------
"Man must change or die. There is no other course."
The World Teacher
http://www.share-international.org
Sovereign Sockpuppet©
news:52d3f97e.04083...@posting.google.com...
What is it with boilerplate diatribes? Can't anyone speak their own mind
any more? No, apparently all most folks can do is violate the DMCA by
stealing someone elses screeds.
Moron...
--
The AFA-B Sovereign Sockpuppet©
Government/Media Sponsored/Supported Disinformation/Mind Control Agent
Chief of Weather Control, Super Secret 34°, Order of the Illuminati
Presidential Puppeteer of the New World Order
Skepticult® ID: 581-00504-208
Sockmaster General
"I can't fight no one", Joseph "Foamy" Bartlo
<news:40C1EDA4...@enter.net>
"I was voted 'Kook of the year'", Raymond "Fathead" Karczewski
<news:40c76759...@news.west.earthlink.net>
"I goofed...", Ed "Dense as Rocks" Conrad
<news:cg7kf0ho8cs84vq8d...@4ax.com>
"Of Course I am a kook!", Pietro "Pedro" Sommavilla
<news:204c3b0a.04072...@posting.google.com>
"I have been drinking like this for 40 years", Stephen "Varnisher" Vanier
<news:7JWKc.99$u96....@news.uswest.net>
"Aluminum is a Masonic conspiracy", Alex "Br0omb0i" Kline
<news:fXPXc.5980$ZC7....@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>
* Disrupting the flow of information on the Internet since before Y2k0oK. *
Darkwing Duck (Infidel)
> by Andrew Greeley
>
>
Sooooo, your broke and you want everyone else to be.
---------------------------------------------------
The Duck
Denis Loubet
> by Andrew Greeley
>
>
> The most serious spiritual problem in the country today is reckless
> and untrammeled greed.
I distain the word spiritual, but I agree with the sentiment.
I'm out of work currently because of greed destroying the company.
--
Denis Loubet
dlo...@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
Godfrey
"untrammeled". My greed is, in fact, grieviously trammeled. In fact
I hardly have a gold-plated, jewel-encrusted pot to piss in. Hey, are
you gonna eat the rest of those fries?
Godfrey
On 31 Aug 2004 05:56:28 -0700, know_...@hotmail.com (know buddee)
wrote:
Myal
> America's Disease is Greed
> by Andrew Greeley
its actualy worse than greed , its dweebs !
dweebs who write their long bulldust diatribes and cross post them
allover usenet .
Gunner
wrote:
>
>"know buddee" <know_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:52d3f97e.04083...@posting.google.com...
>> America's Disease is Greed
>> by Andrew Greeley
>>
>>
>> The most serious spiritual problem in the country today is reckless
>> and untrammeled greed.
>
>I distain the word spiritual, but I agree with the sentiment.
>
>I'm out of work currently because of greed destroying the company.
You are out of work because of several reasons, most of which involve
laziness.
1. You were too lazy to keep an eye on the company
2. You wee too lazy to aquire other skills when you had the time and
money
3. You were too lazy to read history that few companies are forever.
4. You are too lazy to find another job, or to start your own company.
I could go on.
Gunner
"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann
Notroll2004
"Gunner" <gunner...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
news:j5caj01ekn0qdnqhe...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:09:09 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dlo...@io.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"know buddee" <know_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:52d3f97e.04083...@posting.google.com...
>>> America's Disease is Greed
>>> by Andrew Greeley
>>>
>>>
>>> The most serious spiritual problem in the country today is reckless
>>> and untrammeled greed.
>>
>>I distain the word spiritual, but I agree with the sentiment.
>>
>>I'm out of work currently because of greed destroying the company.
>
> You are out of work because of several reasons, most of which involve
> laziness.
>
> 1. You were too lazy to keep an eye on the company
> 2. You wee too lazy to aquire other skills when you had the time and
> money
> 3. You were too lazy to read history that few companies are forever.
> 4. You are too lazy to find another job, or to start your own company.
>
> I could go on.
>
> Gunner
>
America is not greedy. Some Americans (most of them Republicans) are.
sandman
it. If you're poor, it's because you deserve it. America the "meritocracy".
Such arguments themselves are born of both laziness and greed, for greed
itself is the greatest form of laziness.
"Gunner" <gunner...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
news:j5caj01ekn0qdnqhe...@4ax.com...
Denis Loubet
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"know buddee" <know_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:52d3f97e.04083...@posting.google.com...
> >> America's Disease is Greed
> >> by Andrew Greeley
> >>
> >>
> >> The most serious spiritual problem in the country today is reckless
> >> and untrammeled greed.
> >
> >I distain the word spiritual, but I agree with the sentiment.
> >
> >I'm out of work currently because of greed destroying the company.
>
> You are out of work because of several reasons, most of which involve
> laziness.
And you're a raging asshole for several reasons, most of which involve
abject stupidity.
> 1. You were too lazy to keep an eye on the company
On the contrary, I fatalistically watched it happen. There was nothing I
could do since I wasn't in charge.
> 2. You wee too lazy to aquire other skills when you had the time and
> money
It's only been two frickin' days, for Pete's sake, give me a chance. I don't
expect to have a problem finding a new company, as I spent my time garnering
a name in the computer game industry.
> 3. You were too lazy to read history that few companies are forever.
I work in the computer game industry, you retard, startups have a life
expectancy measured in picoseconds.
> 4. You are too lazy to find another job, or to start your own company.
I'm already starting another company, you presumptous twat.
> I could go on.
And continue to be just as clueless, I suppose.
That said, if your post was meant as irony, then I retract my abuse and hope
my breach of humor is not permanent.
Godfrey
I'm gonna have to chew on that one overnight...
Godfrey
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:53:34 -0500, "sandman" <m.sa...@cox.net>
wrote:
Cuan
<s.o.v.e....@s.o.c.k.p.u.p.p.e.t> wrote:
>"know buddee" <know_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:52d3f97e.04083...@posting.google.com...
>
>What is it with boilerplate diatribes? Can't anyone speak their own mind
>any more? No, apparently all most folks can do is violate the DMCA by
>stealing someone elses screeds.
>
>Moron...
Well, moron. When people speak their minds, they get asked to cite
"credible sources". I mean, really - you just can't win.
Gunner
Really? Then why are there more Democrat Senators that are
millionaires than Greedy Republicans?
Why do Democrat political contributions come in $500, 5000, 50,000
sizes, and Republican ones come in $5, 20, and $50 denominations and
far far more of them in sheer number than do Democrat ones?
perhaps its the Fat Cat, Limousine Liberals, such as the Trial Lawyers
that make the policy for the Dems, while its the little guys in the
Republican Party that give a shit?
Gunner
wrote:
>Ah, the great objectivist argument. If you're rich, it's because you deserve
>it. If you're poor, it's because you deserve it. America the "meritocracy".
>Such arguments themselves are born of both laziness and greed, for greed
>itself is the greatest form of laziness.
I see logic is not your strong suite. Please point out to me where
you got that bit of drivel out of my post?
The poster is whining about being out of work because of "greed",
where in fact she/he/it is out of work because of either stupidity or
lazyness, quite frankly. For if he/she/it were on the ball, he/she/it
would already have some sort of job by now. Even if it were flipping
burgers at Micky D's.
The only time Ive ever been out of work in the past 35 yrs, for more
than a couple days, was when I was injured. And Ive had jobs ranging
from fishing guide to cop, to lumberjack, to CNC tech.
Gunner
Gunner
wrote:
>
>"Gunner" <gunner...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>news:j5caj01ekn0qdnqhe...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:09:09 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dlo...@io.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"know buddee" <know_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:52d3f97e.04083...@posting.google.com...
>> >> America's Disease is Greed
>> >> by Andrew Greeley
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The most serious spiritual problem in the country today is reckless
>> >> and untrammeled greed.
>> >
>> >I distain the word spiritual, but I agree with the sentiment.
>> >
>> >I'm out of work currently because of greed destroying the company.
>>
>> You are out of work because of several reasons, most of which involve
>> laziness.
>
>And you're a raging asshole for several reasons, most of which involve
>abject stupidity.
Prove it.
>
>> 1. You were too lazy to keep an eye on the company
>
>On the contrary, I fatalistically watched it happen. There was nothing I
>could do since I wasn't in charge.
>
So you simply sat on the bench rowing, and fatalistically watched the
water come over the bow as the galley sank. So you were chained to
your bench. Correct?
>> 2. You wee too lazy to aquire other skills when you had the time and
>> money
>
>It's only been two frickin' days, for Pete's sake, give me a chance. I don't
>expect to have a problem finding a new company, as I spent my time garnering
>a name in the computer game industry.
If its only been two frickin days..why are you pissing and moaning?
>
>> 3. You were too lazy to read history that few companies are forever.
>
>I work in the computer game industry, you retard, startups have a life
>expectancy measured in picoseconds.
So your company going tits up was totally unexpected?
>
>> 4. You are too lazy to find another job, or to start your own company.
>
>I'm already starting another company, you presumptous twat.
Then you are not unemployed, you whining git.
>
>> I could go on.
>
>And continue to be just as clueless, I suppose.
And you will continue to whimper and whine.
>
>That said, if your post was meant as irony, then I retract my abuse and hope
>my breach of humor is not permanent.
If your post was not to garner sympathy and demonize business...Id be
damned surprised.
torch
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"know buddee" <know_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:52d3f97e.04083...@posting.google.com...
> >> America's Disease is Greed
> >> by Andrew Greeley
> >>
> >>
> >> The most serious spiritual problem in the country today is reckless
> >> and untrammeled greed.
> >
> >I distain the word spiritual, but I agree with the sentiment.
> >
> >I'm out of work currently because of greed destroying the company.
>
> You are out of work because of several reasons, most of which involve
> laziness.
>
> 1. You were too lazy to keep an eye on the company
> 2. You wee too lazy to aquire other skills when you had the time and
> money
> 3. You were too lazy to read history that few companies are forever.
> 4. You are too lazy to find another job, or to start your own company.
>
> I could go on.
>
> Gunner
>
planet that have to make do on a dollar a day do so because they are lazy.
So its all their fault - this makes me feel a lot better.
The CEO of my company gets paid around $35 million a year (despite the fact
that the companies value has dropped by 75% in the last 4 years) - thats
about $100,000 a day- he must feel like superman - he is 100,000 times less
lazy than the majority of human beings on the planet.
Gunner
Another emotional cripple with reading comprehension problems.
>The CEO of my company gets paid around $35 million a year (despite the fact
>that the companies value has dropped by 75% in the last 4 years) - thats
>about $100,000 a day- he must feel like superman - he is 100,000 times less
>lazy than the majority of human beings on the planet.
>
And the Stockholders who pay him, have what to say about his salary?
He only "earns" that money with the boards or stockholders approval.
I suggest you take it up with them. Tell them that if they paid
this guy less..their dividends would be bigger.
Now this has what to do with the OP not having a job?
m...@privacy.net
Is there some place one can lookup the salary of CEOs
of companies?
If yes... must these companies be public companies
only?
Denis Loubet
> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:19:22 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dlo...@io.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Gunner" <gunner...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
> >news:j5caj01ekn0qdnqhe...@4ax.com...
> >> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:09:09 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dlo...@io.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"know buddee" <know_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:52d3f97e.04083...@posting.google.com...
> >> >> America's Disease is Greed
> >> >> by Andrew Greeley
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> The most serious spiritual problem in the country today is reckless
> >> >> and untrammeled greed.
> >> >
> >> >I distain the word spiritual, but I agree with the sentiment.
> >> >
> >> >I'm out of work currently because of greed destroying the company.
> >>
> >> You are out of work because of several reasons, most of which involve
> >> laziness.
> >
> >And you're a raging asshole for several reasons, most of which involve
> >abject stupidity.
>
> Prove it.
Well, your first post made a bunch of wild and incorrect claims, but instead
of learning from your mistakes, you do it again with the second.
Even planaria learn from their mistakes, what's your excuse?
> >> 1. You were too lazy to keep an eye on the company
> >
> >On the contrary, I fatalistically watched it happen. There was nothing I
> >could do since I wasn't in charge.
> >
>
> So you simply sat on the bench rowing, and fatalistically watched the
> water come over the bow as the galley sank. So you were chained to
> your bench. Correct?
Correct. Maybe you have no pride in your work, but I and my design team had
confidence that our project would be a success. We fought to the bitter end
as incompetence and greed destroyed our work.
> >> 2. You wee too lazy to aquire other skills when you had the time and
> >> money
> >
> >It's only been two frickin' days, for Pete's sake, give me a chance. I
don't
> >expect to have a problem finding a new company, as I spent my time
garnering
> >a name in the computer game industry.
>
> If its only been two frickin days..why are you pissing and moaning?
Because something very cool was destroyed by incompetence and greed.
> >> 3. You were too lazy to read history that few companies are forever.
> >
> >I work in the computer game industry, you retard, startups have a life
> >expectancy measured in picoseconds.
>
> So your company going tits up was totally unexpected?
Did I say it was unexpected? No? Then what the fuck are you babbling about?
> >> 4. You are too lazy to find another job, or to start your own company.
> >
> >I'm already starting another company, you presumptous twat.
>
> Then you are not unemployed, you whining git.
What part of the word "starting" don't you understand? I am currently
unemployed.
> >> I could go on.
> >
> >And continue to be just as clueless, I suppose.
>
> And you will continue to whimper and whine.
I'd rather whine than be a clueless idiot like you.
> >That said, if your post was meant as irony, then I retract my abuse and
hope
> >my breach of humor is not permanent.
>
> If your post was not to garner sympathy and demonize business...Id be
> damned surprised.
Oh, sure it was to do that. Our company survived shit that would have killed
3 other companies, and finally succumbed when greed and incompetence was in
charge.
I'm not saying that we were perfect, but our little development house fought
an uphill battle against greed and incompetence from the business community
every step of the way.
Our problem was that we weren't sharks like they were.
Bob Brock
wrote:
Gee, I've never heard oil tycoons and Haliburtion referred to as "the
little guys" before.
ROTFLMAO....
Steven Douglas
There is a difference between opinions and facts. When someone states
"facts" without a source, that is the problem. When someone cuts and
pastes an opinion, then they get questioned why they can't write their
own opinion. Got it?
Charly the Bastard
> America's Disease is Greed
> by Andrew Greeley
>
snippage...
Ah, Weedhopper... you see the tree but you missed the forest. If the
battle was against flesh and bone, then would I say to my servant, "sell
your cloak and buy a sword". But the battle is against Powers and
Principalities, and against them no sword will suffice. The war for
hearts and minds is fought with words and ideas, they are the only sure
weapon against the Enemy.
Charly
William
> America's Disease is Greed
> by Andrew Greeley
>
>
> The most serious spiritual problem in the country today is reckless
> and untrammeled greed.
Yep. Al Sadr doesn't want to wait his turn. He must rocket ahead of
terminally ill leaders and grab it all while he's only 30 years old.
Greed is a terrible thing.
William
Ha! Some of the greediest are Dems.
Especially those that run LLC's and Non-Profits!!!
Notroll2004
"William" <billy...@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1e4e3692.04090...@posting.google.com...
True. But most of them are Repugs.
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
alt.fan.art-bell in message
<eorbj0lvmp31i3gqn...@4ax.com>:
Aside from the board of directors, it's no one's fucking business how
much a CEO gets paid, any more than it's his business how much *you*
get paid, unless you work for him.
--
V.G.
Change pobox dot alaska to gci.
"I wanted a car I could run down pedestrians with. But one with a comfy ride, like a sofa on wheels." - Father Haskell
"No doubt about it, 9-11 was orchestrated by Lockheed." - *lexa 'connects the dots' 4/27/04 (cg5t80pl73d7r1s81...@4ax.com)
"Nope, Lockheed provided the cover for 9-11 due to abuses of it's system. They're guilty as charged. But ultimately it was Bechtel who concocted the
9-11 events." Alexa connects some totally different dots. 8/6/04 (n3p8h0lvp0u3tj0j4...@4ax.com)
Sarcasm is my sword, Apathy is my shield.
Gunner
wrote:
I asked for you to prove it, not for your opinion, which on the grand
scale of things means dick.
>> >> 1. You were too lazy to keep an eye on the company
>> >
>> >On the contrary, I fatalistically watched it happen. There was nothing I
>> >could do since I wasn't in charge.
>> >
>>
>> So you simply sat on the bench rowing, and fatalistically watched the
>> water come over the bow as the galley sank. So you were chained to
>> your bench. Correct?
>
>Correct. Maybe you have no pride in your work, but I and my design team had
>confidence that our project would be a success. We fought to the bitter end
>as incompetence and greed destroyed our work.
So you were NOT chained to the bench and you decided to ride it out?
So much for your common sense. (though I admit to having done the same
thing..and having lost 19 yrs of profit sharing, pension etc...about
12 yrs ago.
>
>> >> 2. You wee too lazy to aquire other skills when you had the time and
>> >> money
>> >
>> >It's only been two frickin' days, for Pete's sake, give me a chance. I
>don't
>> >expect to have a problem finding a new company, as I spent my time
>garnering
>> >a name in the computer game industry.
>>
>> If its only been two frickin days..why are you pissing and moaning?
>
>Because something very cool was destroyed by incompetence and greed.
Then if you had a good lock on it, get your cohorts together and do it
yourselves.
>
>> >> 3. You were too lazy to read history that few companies are forever.
>> >
>> >I work in the computer game industry, you retard, startups have a life
>> >expectancy measured in picoseconds.
>>
>> So your company going tits up was totally unexpected?
>
>Did I say it was unexpected? No? Then what the fuck are you babbling about?
If it was not unexpected..then you should have had Plan B waiting in
the wings.
>
>> >> 4. You are too lazy to find another job, or to start your own company.
>> >
>> >I'm already starting another company, you presumptous twat.
>>
>> Then you are not unemployed, you whining git.
>
>What part of the word "starting" don't you understand? I am currently
>unemployed.
>
Not if you are starting. You just havent been paid yet. I should
mention that Im also self employed, and because a company I put my
blood sweat and tears into went south, because of the Clinton
Recession.
>> >> I could go on.
>> >
>> >And continue to be just as clueless, I suppose.
>>
>> And you will continue to whimper and whine.
>
>I'd rather whine than be a clueless idiot like you.
Chuckle..I have a job. One I started on my own. My very own company.
So who is the idiot?
>
>> >That said, if your post was meant as irony, then I retract my abuse and
>hope
>> >my breach of humor is not permanent.
>>
>> If your post was not to garner sympathy and demonize business...Id be
>> damned surprised.
>
>Oh, sure it was to do that. Our company survived shit that would have killed
>3 other companies, and finally succumbed when greed and incompetence was in
>charge.
>
Bummer. So lets hope you and your cohorts dont succum to the same
illness.
>I'm not saying that we were perfect, but our little development house fought
>an uphill battle against greed and incompetence from the business community
>every step of the way.
>
>Our problem was that we weren't sharks like they were.
Or you were working for the wrong people. There are lots of good
companies out there that dont gut and run.
dogna
>
> Greed is not only something that afflicts the U.S. it afflicts mankind as a
> whole and has been a problem for millenia, it's nothing new, no nation holds a
> moral high ground on it, no nation is free of it. It's just the nature of
> mankind.
What is described above is just the monied nature of monied
mankind[capitalists].
Capitalism is a geo-political culture of greed that loves money religiously.
Clearly, a problem is that few want to admit to the fact we are addicted
to and whores for the money that others create in order to control US...
I've heard said that when identifying problems that "its all about the money"...
In simpler terms then, money...has become our collective god.
We have become a monied cult living monied lies in denial.
Granted...a harsh Truth but a Truth nonetheless.
Any dime store shrink would agree. We are a nation in denial, defending
our actions with monied lies in denial.
In short, we are a culture of monied addicts, believing those that
control us with money by selling us on the benefits of the love of money
designed to control us.
In order to find a solution to a problem, what causes the problem should
be identified so that others may choose to make better choices aimed
towards solving the problem. Anything less is burying the problem under
a heap of absurd rationalizations, while ignoring the root problem for
all of
us, fear based greed defended by more denial.
We are a sick nation residing a twisted world, made that way by monied
design by lovers of money. The problem then is monied life[greed as
survival] is vested in creating problems for profit. Capitalism is the
love of money personified. The love of money is the root for all evil.
One way to finding a solution is to
examine the True costs of monied life[the problem] in order to solve for problem.
How do we do that?
Identify and admit that monied greed for power is a big problem-maker.
Assign no judgement.
Solve for problem.
Talk about solutions to monied problems by identifying a source of the problem.
Assign no judgement.
Solve for problem.
Change the monied collective-perspective by introducing free solutions
to monied problems.
In essence, sell freedom from the problems that love of money creates by
selling the benefits of freedom from the power of money.
I'll start...a problem is our collective'ist CULT-mentality is a
fraternal amway pyramid scheme hiding in plain sight, illegal by ITs own
laws, monied to its core being. One acquires money by loving money.
Clearly, we are a money-loving nation.
Given the above...why not talk about freedom FROM monied problems
instead of monied slavery TO monied problems? Granted, the issues that
will be raised may be profound. However, solving for problems should be
enjoyed, not dreaded. Its called growth.
Here are a number of sites that justify solving for problems by
disempowering money from different perspectives. Interesting stuff.
My idea. Flood the free market with free money for all. All will
prosper. All will grow.
Pro's/con's...?
abolishmoney.com
ubarter.com
reformation.org/moneychangers.html
reinventingmoney.com
dorewilliamson.com/plan.html
hope this helps
Cuan
wrote:
Oh yes. So, in other words, a semi-literate half-wit like Guernon,
who can barely construct an intelligible sentence, should rather write
his own essay instead of quoting someone who has the same views and a
much better command of English?
I see it so much clearer now, thanks.
Denis Loubet
I offered objective observations. You issued false claims in your first
post, which were pointed out to you, but instead of trying to improve the
accuracy of your claims, you simply issued more false claims. Thus we must
conclude that you apparently do not learn from your mistakes. Not learning
from one's mistakes is usually considered the prime indicator of stupidity.
> >> >> 1. You were too lazy to keep an eye on the company
> >> >
> >> >On the contrary, I fatalistically watched it happen. There was nothing
I
> >> >could do since I wasn't in charge.
> >> >
> >>
> >> So you simply sat on the bench rowing, and fatalistically watched the
> >> water come over the bow as the galley sank. So you were chained to
> >> your bench. Correct?
> >
> >Correct. Maybe you have no pride in your work, but I and my design team
had
> >confidence that our project would be a success. We fought to the bitter
end
> >as incompetence and greed destroyed our work.
>
> So you were NOT chained to the bench and you decided to ride it out?
> So much for your common sense. (though I admit to having done the same
> thing..and having lost 19 yrs of profit sharing, pension etc...about
> 12 yrs ago.
Ah, so now it's NOT lazyness, but rather your opinion of "common sense"?
I see...
> >> >> 2. You wee too lazy to aquire other skills when you had the time and
> >> >> money
> >> >
> >> >It's only been two frickin' days, for Pete's sake, give me a chance. I
> >don't
> >> >expect to have a problem finding a new company, as I spent my time
> >garnering
> >> >a name in the computer game industry.
> >>
> >> If its only been two frickin days..why are you pissing and moaning?
>
> >
> >Because something very cool was destroyed by incompetence and greed.
>
> Then if you had a good lock on it, get your cohorts together and do it
> yourselves.
That's what we're trying to do, but it's more difficult now because our
available funds are depleted.
So now are you agreeing that incompetence and greed destroyed my job, and
not lazyness?
> >> >> 3. You were too lazy to read history that few companies are forever.
> >> >
> >> >I work in the computer game industry, you retard, startups have a life
> >> >expectancy measured in picoseconds.
> >>
> >> So your company going tits up was totally unexpected?
> >
> >Did I say it was unexpected? No? Then what the fuck are you babbling
about?
>
> If it was not unexpected..then you should have had Plan B waiting in
> the wings.
So are we talking lazyness or a lack of foresight?
We went through Plan B, and Plan C AND Plan D to save the project. To no
avail.
> >> >> 4. You are too lazy to find another job, or to start your own
company.
> >> >
> >> >I'm already starting another company, you presumptous twat.
> >>
> >> Then you are not unemployed, you whining git.
> >
> >What part of the word "starting" don't you understand? I am currently
> >unemployed.
> >
>
> Not if you are starting. You just havent been paid yet.
There is no company yet.
> I should
> mention that Im also self employed, and because a company I put my
> blood sweat and tears into went south, because of the Clinton
> Recession.
You lazy bastard!
> >> >> I could go on.
> >> >
> >> >And continue to be just as clueless, I suppose.
> >>
> >> And you will continue to whimper and whine.
> >
> >I'd rather whine than be a clueless idiot like you.
>
> Chuckle..I have a job. One I started on my own. My very own company.
> So who is the idiot?
The person who keeps making wild and false claims. You.
> >> >That said, if your post was meant as irony, then I retract my abuse
and
> >hope
> >> >my breach of humor is not permanent.
> >>
> >> If your post was not to garner sympathy and demonize business...Id be
> >> damned surprised.
> >
> >Oh, sure it was to do that. Our company survived shit that would have
killed
> >3 other companies, and finally succumbed when greed and incompetence was
in
> >charge.
> >
> Bummer. So lets hope you and your cohorts dont succum to the same
> illness.
Thank you, we hope we do not.
> >I'm not saying that we were perfect, but our little development house
fought
> >an uphill battle against greed and incompetence from the business
community
> >every step of the way.
> >
> >Our problem was that we weren't sharks like they were.
>
> Or you were working for the wrong people. There are lots of good
> companies out there that dont gut and run.
So are you agreeing that there are greedy people out there destroying
companies and putting people out of work? What happened to the lazyness
angle?
Look, I hope your company succeeds, because what I've learned in my foray
into company ownership is that everyone is out to get you. They'll offer
investment, but will instead actively seek to destroy your company. If you
succeed, it will be rare and wonderful.
Good luck.
Gunner
wrote:
>>
>> I asked for you to prove it, not for your opinion, which on the grand
>> scale of things means dick.
>
>I offered objective observations.
You offered up biased opinions with little grasp of reality.
>You issued false claims in your first
>post, which were pointed out to you, but instead of trying to improve the
>accuracy of your claims, you simply issued more false claims.
Actually not.
> Thus we must
>conclude that you apparently do not learn from your mistakes. Not learning
>from one's mistakes is usually considered the prime indicator of stupidity.
As is offering up biased opinion as some sort of truth.
>
>> >> >> 1. You were too lazy to keep an eye on the company
>> >> >
>> >> >On the contrary, I fatalistically watched it happen. There was nothing
>I
>> >> >could do since I wasn't in charge.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> So you simply sat on the bench rowing, and fatalistically watched the
>> >> water come over the bow as the galley sank. So you were chained to
>> >> your bench. Correct?
>> >
>> >Correct. Maybe you have no pride in your work, but I and my design team
>had
>> >confidence that our project would be a success. We fought to the bitter
>end
>> >as incompetence and greed destroyed our work.
>>
>> So you were NOT chained to the bench and you decided to ride it out?
>> So much for your common sense. (though I admit to having done the same
>> thing..and having lost 19 yrs of profit sharing, pension etc...about
>> 12 yrs ago.
>
>Ah, so now it's NOT lazyness, but rather your opinion of "common sense"?
>
>I see...
I gave a number of sceanarios. Pick the one that fits.
>
>> >> >> 2. You wee too lazy to aquire other skills when you had the time and
>> >> >> money
>> >> >
>> >> >It's only been two frickin' days, for Pete's sake, give me a chance. I
>> >don't
>> >> >expect to have a problem finding a new company, as I spent my time
>> >garnering
>> >> >a name in the computer game industry.
>> >>
>> >> If its only been two frickin days..why are you pissing and moaning?
>>
>> >
>> >Because something very cool was destroyed by incompetence and greed.
>>
>> Then if you had a good lock on it, get your cohorts together and do it
>> yourselves.
>
>That's what we're trying to do, but it's more difficult now because our
>available funds are depleted.
Then get some of those greedy capitalist bastards to back you up. Just
make sure you have a couple really good attornies to make the
contracts iron clad.
>
>So now are you agreeing that incompetence and greed destroyed my job, and
>not lazyness?
evidently your reading comprehension sucks. No wonder you are out of
work. See below...posibility #3? There were a number of them. Find
one that fits.
>
>> >> >> 3. You were too lazy to read history that few companies are forever.
>> >> >
>> >> >I work in the computer game industry, you retard, startups have a life
>> >> >expectancy measured in picoseconds.
>> >>
>> >> So your company going tits up was totally unexpected?
>> >
>> >Did I say it was unexpected? No? Then what the fuck are you babbling
>about?
>>
>> If it was not unexpected..then you should have had Plan B waiting in
>> the wings.
>
>So are we talking lazyness or a lack of foresight?
See list. Pick those that fit.
>
>We went through Plan B, and Plan C AND Plan D to save the project. To no
>avail.
Bummer. Sometimes shit happens. Thats why they make parachutes.
>
>> >> >> 4. You are too lazy to find another job, or to start your own
>company.
>> >> >
>> >> >I'm already starting another company, you presumptous twat.
>> >>
>> >> Then you are not unemployed, you whining git.
>> >
>> >What part of the word "starting" don't you understand? I am currently
>> >unemployed.
>> >
>>
>> Not if you are starting. You just havent been paid yet.
>
>There is no company yet.
Yes, so? Its your job to build one.
>
>> I should
>> mention that Im also self employed, and because a company I put my
>> blood sweat and tears into went south, because of the Clinton
>> Recession.
>
>You lazy bastard!
How so? Im employed. You are pissing and moaning about not being so.
>
>> >> >> I could go on.
>> >> >
>> >> >And continue to be just as clueless, I suppose.
>> >>
>> >> And you will continue to whimper and whine.
>> >
>> >I'd rather whine than be a clueless idiot like you.
>>
>> Chuckle..I have a job. One I started on my own. My very own company.
>> So who is the idiot?
>
>The person who keeps making wild and false claims. You.
Im employed. You are not. Seems that I didnt make any excuses about
how I got RIFed, nor about starting my own company. Nor did I blame
greed and corporate fat cats on the fact.
>
>> >> >That said, if your post was meant as irony, then I retract my abuse
>and
>> >hope
>> >> >my breach of humor is not permanent.
>> >>
>> >> If your post was not to garner sympathy and demonize business...Id be
>> >> damned surprised.
>> >
>> >Oh, sure it was to do that. Our company survived shit that would have
>killed
>> >3 other companies, and finally succumbed when greed and incompetence was
>in
>> >charge.
>> >
>> Bummer. So lets hope you and your cohorts dont succum to the same
>> illness.
>
>Thank you, we hope we do not.
Good. Caution and watchfulness are seldom included in todays business
plans.
>
>> >I'm not saying that we were perfect, but our little development house
>fought
>> >an uphill battle against greed and incompetence from the business
>community
>> >every step of the way.
>> >
>> >Our problem was that we weren't sharks like they were.
>>
>> Or you were working for the wrong people. There are lots of good
>> companies out there that dont gut and run.
>
>So are you agreeing that there are greedy people out there destroying
>companies and putting people out of work? What happened to the lazyness
>angle?
I said YOU were lazy if you didnt have plan B etc etc at hand. Or
really stupid. Particularly so shortly after the DotCom implosion and
the recession we are just coming out of. In my industry..over 22,000
companies went tits up in the past 4 yrs.
>
>Look, I hope your company succeeds, because what I've learned in my foray
>into company ownership is that everyone is out to get you. They'll offer
>investment, but will instead actively seek to destroy your company. If you
>succeed, it will be rare and wonderful.
>
>Good luck.
>
And the same to you. May you live long and prosper.
Gunner,
Coyote Engineering
CNC machine tool service, design, sales and installation.
>
>--
>Denis Loubet
>dlo...@io.com
>http://www.io.com/~dloubet
"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
RH
<snip>
> Greed is a terrible thing.
Yes, it's a great pity that the US forces can't admit that they were
wrong, quit terrorising the Iraqis, lay down their weapons, try to
make amends for all the killing and damage done there, and go home.
Greed - for absolute world domination is what keeps them there. It is
the reason why the Bush regime won't admit that the invasion was based
on false pretenses, and is the reason why the American people are fed
a lethal dose of lies and distortions everyday.
The octapus like billionaires who control the news media simply can't
get enough money and power. War and oil are very profitable for them.
They think life is a game and that the smartest people are the ones
who amass the fattest stockpiles of money. They profit from their
weapons of mass deception (the news media) and all the other major
corporations too.
They have much in common with the morbidly obese people who are
sometimes headlined in the supermarket tabloids - so obese that
industrial cranes have to be used to get them out of their abodes.
Their days in power are numbered and soon they'll all have a great
fall, and all the kings horses and all the kings men, won't be able to
put them in power again.
We'll also see
-Politicians and gov'ts that serve the people - the common weal
-Poverty will be eradicated from the face of the earth
-Man's basic needs for food, shelter, healthcare and education will be
guaranteed rights of everyone.
-an end to war and the obsence preparations for it
RH
===========
----------
"He shall proclaim the norm, lovely in its beginning, lovely in its
middle, and lovely in the end thereof." Gautama Buddha - talking about
Maitreya
details:
http://www.share-international.org
----------
The global economy has become like a malignant cancer, advancing the
colonization of the planet's living spaces for the benefit of powerful
corporations and financial institutions. It has turned these once
useful institutions into instruments of a market tyranny that is
destroying livelihoods, displacing people, and feeding on life in an
insatiable quest for money. It forces us all to act in ways
destructive of ourselves, our families, our communities, and nature.
Human survival depends on a community-based, people-centered
alternative beyond the failed extremist ideologies of communism and
capitalism. This alternative is already being created through the
initiatives of millions of people around the world who are taking back
control of their lives and communities to create places where people
can live and grow in balance with the living earth.
Quoted is from: "When Corporations Rule the World" by David Korten, of
the People-Centered Development Forum
A Corporation "..can deduct from it's tax bill any fines it gets for
wrongdoing... [They] are the dominant institutions of our time,
exercising the
sort of power wielded by the church during the Middle Ages..." (Jim
Hightower, "Chomp", article in a past issue of the Utne Reader)
==========
"A world of glaring inequality is never going to be a fully safe
world. For millions of people, the threat of terrorism, or of weapons
of mass destruction, is remote compared to the daily threat of
poverty, hunger, unsafe water, environmental degradation and disease.
We have come to a decisive moment
in history." Kofi Annan
--------
"The developed nations of the world cannot remain secure islands of
prosperity in a seething sea of poverty. The storm is rising against
the privileged minority of the earth, from which there is no shelter
in isolation and armament. The storm will not abate until a just
distribution of the fruits of the earth enables men everywhere to live
in dignity and human decency."
Martin Luther King, Jr
-------
"Without sharing there can be no justice; without justice there can be
no peace; without peace there can be no future." The World Teacher
--------
"The cause of all sorrow and woes is desire -- desire for that which
is material. ... 'No man liveth unto himself", and no nation either,
and ...the goal of all human effort is loving understanding, prompted
by a love for the whole." The Tibetan
-----------------
Gunner
>billy...@juno.com (William) wrote:
><snip>
>> Greed is a terrible thing.
>
>Yes, it's a great pity that the US forces can't admit that they were
>wrong, quit terrorising the Iraqis, lay down their weapons, try to
>make amends for all the killing and damage done there, and go home.
>
Here we have a person who thinks rape camps, genocide, murder of
children, torture and execution acid baths and wood chipper, are all
commendable things.
A mindless drone, or an agent of some Islamic militant organization.
Possibly one similar or allied with the one that just butchered close
to 500 elementary school children and their parents.
I wonder if he/she/it is going to personally declare Fatwah on the US
and try butchering more little babies?
I hope so. Then we can hang he/she/it by the neck from a lamp post,
until dead and the meat has rotted off its bones and the ravens have
eaten its eyes.
Gunner
"She's (my daughter) already dating a sex offender.
Better that than a republican fundie neocon fascist."
FF, (alt.machines.cnc)
pyotr filipivich
<gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote back on Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:28:17 GMT in
misc.survivalism :
>On 4 Sep 2004 09:20:34 -0700, halco...@yahoo.com (RH) wrote:
>
>>billy...@juno.com (William) wrote:
>><snip>
>>> Greed is a terrible thing.
>>
>>Yes, it's a great pity that the US forces can't admit that they were
>>wrong, quit terrorising the Iraqis, lay down their weapons, try to
>>make amends for all the killing and damage done there, and go home.
>>
>
>Here we have a person who thinks rape camps, genocide, murder of
>children, torture and execution acid baths and wood chipper, are all
>commendable things.
Sounds like one of the vocal liberals, leftists and/ or Democrats, who
while personally opposed to such activities,are incapable of being
judgmental about any of the practices of other, third world, cultures.
Besides, as they accept as an unspeakable presupposition, Those People(tm)
really aren't capable of civilized behavior.
--
pyotr filipivich
"Do not argue with the forces of nature, for you are small,
insignificant, and biodegradable."
William
> billy...@juno.com (William) wrote:
> <snip>
> > Greed is a terrible thing.
>
> Yes, it's a great pity that the US forces can't admit that they were
> wrong, quit terrorising the Iraqis, lay down their weapons, try to
> make amends for all the killing and damage done there, and go home.
You must be RH negative.
US Forces are never wrong. They are merely instruments of National Policy.
You've got to go a little higher to assign blame.
Christopher A. Lee
The "I was only following orders" defence. It didn't work at
Nuremberg, where the precedent was set.
Jean Guernon
Strabo a écrit:
> In Re: America's Disease is: Greed on 13 Sep 2004 20:04:36
> -0700, by William, we read:
> Following orders is a poor excuse for personal failure.
>
>
No it isn't. A good example:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/09/13/falluja/index.html
J.
Jean Guernon
Christopher A. Lee a écrit:
This is not about crimes committed,. There are no crimes committed.
There is a betrayals by the weasels of a legitimate UN resolution. The
failure stems from that. The US could still overcome the failure with
less compromising with the assholes killers. Or with the assholes
weasels as well, BTW.
There is no appeasement that works there. Only kicking their ass.
I wish there was, but they (both) are the aggressors.
Not the US.
J.
Christopher A. Lee
<jgue...@globetrotter.net> wrote:
>
>
>Christopher A. Lee a écrit:
>
>> On 13 Sep 2004 20:04:36 -0700, billy...@juno.com (William) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>halco...@yahoo.com (RH) wrote in message news:<524db79f.0409...@posting.google.com>...
>>>
>>>>billy...@juno.com (William) wrote:
>>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>>Greed is a terrible thing.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, it's a great pity that the US forces can't admit that they were
>>>>wrong, quit terrorising the Iraqis, lay down their weapons, try to
>>>>make amends for all the killing and damage done there, and go home.
>>>
>>>You must be RH negative.
>>>
>>>US Forces are never wrong. They are merely instruments of National Policy.
>>>
>>>You've got to go a little higher to assign blame.
>>
>>
>> The "I was only following orders" defence. It didn't work at
>> Nuremberg, where the precedent was set.
>
>This is not about crimes committed,. There are no crimes committed.
Abu Ghraib? DU munitions? Bombing civilian infrastructure like water
treatment plants?
>There is a betrayals by the weasels of a legitimate UN resolution. The
>failure stems from that. The US could still overcome the failure with
>less compromising with the assholes killers. Or with the assholes
>weasels as well, BTW.
No. The US ignores or vetoes resolutions against its own actions. But
in any any case, there was no resolution allowing the US to use force
- they had conned the other security council members over that in GW1.
>There is no appeasement that works there. Only kicking their ass.
The voice of the binary thinking, internatruional bully.
Jean Guernon
Christopher A. Lee a écrit:
> On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 13:30:32 GMT, Jean Guernon
> <jgue...@globetrotter.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Christopher A. Lee a écrit:
>>
>>
>>>On 13 Sep 2004 20:04:36 -0700, billy...@juno.com (William) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>halco...@yahoo.com (RH) wrote in message news:<524db79f.0409...@posting.google.com>...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>billy...@juno.com (William) wrote:
>>>>><snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Greed is a terrible thing.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, it's a great pity that the US forces can't admit that they were
>>>>>wrong, quit terrorising the Iraqis, lay down their weapons, try to
>>>>>make amends for all the killing and damage done there, and go home.
>>>>
>>>>You must be RH negative.
>>>>
>>>>US Forces are never wrong. They are merely instruments of National Policy.
>>>>
>>>>You've got to go a little higher to assign blame.
>>>
>>>
>>>The "I was only following orders" defence. It didn't work at
>>>Nuremberg, where the precedent was set.
>>
>>This is not about crimes committed,. There are no crimes committed.
>
>
> Abu Ghraib?
Bah, rogue elements.
DU munitions?
Not a crime.
> Bombing civilian infrastructure like water
> treatment plants?
Bah, glitches in Gulf war one.
>
>
>>There is a betrayals by the weasels of a legitimate UN resolution. The
>>failure stems from that. The US could still overcome the failure with
>>less compromising with the assholes killers. Or with the assholes
>>weasels as well, BTW.
>
>
> No. The US ignores or vetoes resolutions against its own actions.
There is no veto resolution, only 1441.
> But
> in any any case, there was no resolution allowing the US to use force
> - they had conned the other security council members over that in GW1.
>
Yes, there was, 1441. And there is not a single doubt about it, as I
showed. The weasels who weaseled out conned the SC. They should be replaced.
>
>>There is no appeasement that works there. Only kicking their ass.
>
>
> The voice of the binary thinking, internatruional bully.
>
>
A new word? LOL
J.
Lawrence Seib
> Christopher A. Lee a écrit:
snipage
> > No. The US ignores or vetoes resolutions against its own actions.
>
> There is no veto resolution, only 1441.
>
> > But
> > in any any case, there was no resolution allowing the US to use force
> > - they had conned the other security council members over that in GW1.
> >
>
> Yes, there was, 1441. And there is not a single doubt about it, as I
> showed. The weasels who weaseled out conned the SC. They should be replaced.
From http://www.infoplease.com/spot/iraqtimeline2.html
Nov. 8, 2002
The UN Security Council unanimously approves resolution 1441
imposing tough new arms inspections on Iraq and precise,
unambiguous definitions of what constitutes a "material
breach" of the resolution. Should Iraq violate the resolution,
it faces "serious consequences," which the Security Council
would then determine.
Feb. 24, 2003
The U.S., Britain, and Spain submit a proposed resolution
to the UN Security Council that states that "Iraq has
failed to take the final opportunity afforded to it in
Resolution 1441," and that it is now time to authorize
use of military force against the country.
France, Germany, and Russia submit an informal counter-
resolution to the UN Security Council that states that
inspections should be intensified and extended to ensure
that there is "a real chance to the peaceful settlement
of this crisis," and that "the military option should
only be a last resort."
Feb. 24–March 14, 2003
The U.S. and Britain's intense lobbying efforts
among the other UN Security Council members yield
only four supporters (in addition to the U.S. and
Britain, Spain and Bulgaria); nine votes (and no
vetoes from the five permanent members) out of
fifteen are required for the resolution's passage.
The U.S. decides not to call for a vote on the
resolution.
So you see 1441 never did authorize the use of force
and neither did the U.N. Hans Blix was trying to prove
a negative, and was not allowed free access to Iraq
as he had hoped, thus claiming Iraq still did not
fully grasp the meaning of 1441. Since no wmd's
were ever found, it is apparent that the reason
Saddam did not cooperate is that he thought Hans Blix
was a spy.
Larry
Martyn R Jones
paranoia. Not a healthy mixture for sure. But, how can this disease be
addressed and fixed?
Michael Johnathan McDonald
> and neither did the U.N.
Are you slow or something?
>Hans Blix was trying to prove
> a negative, and was not allowed free access to Iraq
> as he had hoped, thus claiming Iraq still did not
> fully grasp the meaning of 1441.
When they talked about firing him the first time he changed his tune
quickly and said they started opening up everything to him. He was a
bullshitter opportunist from the get-go.
> Since no wmd's
> were ever found, it is apparent that the reason
> Saddam did not cooperate is that he thought Hans Blix
> was a spy.
Try to write that sentence in a graduate school. They will laugh you
out of there. It is incoherent and makes no common sense.
Comment:
Ever hear of the UN oil for food program? Some of the UN members were
in cohorts with France and Germany to never find WMDs in Iraq
regardless of resolutions - because they were getting RICH. Blix was
mighty pissed he lost his cushy job that he thought was actually going
to keep for life ;)
Who says the UN is looking out for the world's best intrests?
> Larry
How can you judge something that was wrong in the first place?
Gunner
Seib) wrote:
>So you see 1441 never did authorize the use of force
>and neither did the U.N. Hans Blix was trying to prove
>a negative, and was not allowed free access to Iraq
>as he had hoped, thus claiming Iraq still did not
>fully grasp the meaning of 1441. Since no wmd's
>were ever found, it is apparent that the reason
>Saddam did not cooperate is that he thought Hans Blix
>was a spy.
Which is all moot anyways as Sadman violated the terms of the Cease
Fire, repeatedly, for a bit over 12 yrs. So the war was simply turned
back on again.
Gunner
Jean Guernon
Lawrence Seib a écrit:
Bah, a biased way at looking at the timeline doesn't change the fact
that 1441 was the resolution authorizing force.
The resolution that the US was trying to pass was not one authorizing
force, it was one trying to make the authorization of force less
intrusive, i.e. the regime change in stead of regime annihilation 1441
called for.
J.
>
> Larry
Lawrence Seib
> On 14 Sep 2004 13:47:44 -0700, ls...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Lawrence
> Seib) wrote:
>
> >So you see 1441 never did authorize the use of force
> >and neither did the U.N. Hans Blix was trying to prove
> >a negative, and was not allowed free access to Iraq
> >as he had hoped, thus claiming Iraq still did not
> >fully grasp the meaning of 1441. Since no wmd's
> >were ever found, it is apparent that the reason
> >Saddam did not cooperate is that he thought Hans Blix
> >was a spy.
>
> Which is all moot anyways as Sadman violated the terms of the Cease
> Fire, repeatedly, for a bit over 12 yrs. So the war was simply turned
> back on again.
The objective if the first war was to get Iraq and
Saddam out of Kuwait, so there was no reason to
turn it on again, Saddam was still our of Kuwait
Lawrence Seib
A guttural sound is not much of an argument.
> The resolution that the US was trying to pass was not one authorizing
> force, it was one trying to make the authorization of force less
> intrusive, i.e. the regime change in stead of regime annihilation 1441
> called for.
Interesting theory, please provide some references.
Lawrence Seib
> ls...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Lawrence Seib) wrote in message news:<75ab6396.04091...@posting.google.com>...
> > Jean Guernon <jgue...@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<OcD1d.15063$KU5.9398@edtnps89>...
> >
> > So you see 1441 never did authorize the use of force
> > and neither did the U.N.
>
>
> Are you slow or something?
legitamite disscusions.
>
> > Hans Blix was trying to prove
> > a negative, and was not allowed free access to Iraq
> > as he had hoped, thus claiming Iraq still did not
> > fully grasp the meaning of 1441.
>
> When they talked about firing him the first time he changed his tune
> quickly and said they started opening up everything to him. He was a
> bullshitter opportunist from the get-go.
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Blix
Hans Blix (born June 28, 1928 in Uppsala in Sweden)
1978-1979 Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sweden.
1981-1997 Head of the International Atomic Energy Agency
2000-2003 Head of the United Nations Monitoring,
Verification and Inspection Commission
What evidence do you have that he is a bullshitter.
Larry
Jean Guernon
Lawrence Seib a écrit:
Well, no, it was to get Saddam out of power, the conditional ceasefire
gave him a chance and after 12 years of thumbing his nose at them 1441
gave him a last chance to comply or the operation would resume. Now,
there is a twist, there were special conditions if he was in appearance
of breaching the WMD parts of them, the inspectors were to determine if
there was a real breach. There was no other provision. If he breached
the non-WMD clauses in 687e, he had to face the serious consequences
within it, many times repeated as it is stated. He breached the 687e
nonetheless in 5 clauses besides all the WMD clauses. He also breached
the WMD clauses, and every single Blix report showed breach.
BTW, there wa no provision for further inspections in case of breach,
even if Blix said there could be still a way to resume them despite the
breaches.
The fact is that Saddam was in breach in virtually all the clauses, not
only one which was the maximum required for the serious consequences.
There was no question in the resolution that it required to go in there
and get him.
Now if the SC had agreed on another resolution instead of 1441, one that
ignored breaches or called for another resolution instead of
guaranteeing serious consequences, it would be something else. But hey
all backed this one. There was only provision for action.
Now the US tried to make the action less painful than what 6897e called
for, by changing the serious consequences which were the lifting of the
conditional cease-fire between Iraq and the allies of Kuwait (the
coalition) into a regime change which would have had the same result
overall, but France decided to veto it, And then went on to declare all
this was not legitimate. This is where France betrayed the US and the world.
That Kerry try to side with the weasels is incredibly ignorant, is a
betrayal of his own country, in times of war, and is based on nothing.
But France is responsible for much of the Arab media further lies that
ensued, France betrayed its alliance and should never be kissed up to.
Kerry instead castigate the allies of the US, those who stood behind the
legitimacy of the UN and its resolution. This is incredible. Unprecedented.
THose who pay for both these weasels spreading these lies abroad and at
home are the soldiers. Much worse than during the vietnam era when he
did the same because then he was a loser amongst losers, now he
represent half the country. Which is also quite an aberration.
Sorry if I digress a little, but barely. Anyway.
J.
Jean Guernon
Lawrence Seib a écrit:
http://www.michelnostradamus.org/Res1441.htm
First they decide that Iraq must comply with all of 687e:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its
obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991),
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Remember that 687e http://www.michelnostradamus.org/Res687e.htm is
a conditional ceasefire resolution between the allies of Kuwait (the
coalition) and Iraq (force wa authorized against Iraq in 678).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
in particular through Iraqis failure to cooperate with United Nations
inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under
paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);
2. Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by
this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament
obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly
decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing
to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by
resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: He has to abide by all of 687e... These two paragraph made it a
relevant resolution in 1, even if they say particularly point 8 to 13,
which are WMD. They don't say exclusively, they say "particularly",
because these have special conditions further on to create the new
UNSCOM. Now here it starts (after 3 years out) with the creation of UNMOVIC:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Decides that, in order to begin to comply with its disarmament
obligations, in addition to submitting the required biannual
declarations, the Government of Iraq shall provide to UNMOVIC, the IAEA,
and the Council, not later than 30 days from the date of this
resolution, a currently accurate, full, and complete declaration of all
aspects of its programmes to develop chemical, biological, and nuclear
weapons, ballistic missiles, and other delivery systems such as unmanned
aerial vehicles and dispersal systems designed for use on aircraft,
including any holdings and precise locations of such weapons,
components, subcomponents, stocks of agents, and related material and
equipment, the locations and work of its research, development and
production facilities, as well as all other chemical, biological, and
nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not
related to weapon production or material;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here it says that if he fails in any way to comply with UNMOVIC, it will
be reported by the inspectors to the UN:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations
submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any
time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this
resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's
obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in
accordance with paragraphs 11 and 12 below;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now here we have the conditions required for UNMOVIC to work properly:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Decides that Iraq shall provide UNMOVIC and the IAEA immediate,
unimpeded, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all,
including underground, areas, facilities, buildings, equipment, records,
and means of transport which they wish to inspect, as well as immediate,
unimpeded, unrestricted, and private access to all officials and other
persons whom UNMOVIC or the IAEA wish to interview in the mode or
location of UNMOVIC’s or the IAEA’s choice pursuant to any aspect of
their mandates; further decides that UNMOVIC and the IAEA may at their
discretion conduct interviews inside or outside of Iraq, may facilitate
the travel of those interviewed and family members outside of Iraq, and
that, at the sole discretion of UNMOVIC and the IAEA, such interviews
may occur without the presence of observers from the Iraqi Government;
and instructs UNMOVIC and requests the IAEA to resume inspections no
later than 45 days following adoption of this resolution and to update
the Council 60 days thereafter;
6. Endorses the 8 October 2002 letter from the Executive Chairman of
UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to General Al-Saadi of the
Government of Iraq, which is annexed hereto, and decides that the
contents of the letter shall be binding upon Iraq;
7. Decides further that, in view of the prolonged interruption by Iraq
of the presence of UNMOVIC and the IAEA and in order for them to
accomplish the tasks set forth in this resolution and all previous
relevant resolutions and notwithstanding prior understandings, the
Council hereby establishes the following revised or additional
authorities, which shall be binding upon Iraq, to facilitate their work
in Iraq:
– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall determine the composition of their
inspection teams and ensure that these teams are composed of the most
qualified and experienced experts available;
– All UNMOVIC and IAEA personnel shall enjoy the privileges and
immunities, corresponding to those of experts on mission, provided in
the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations and
the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the IAEA;
– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have unrestricted rights of entry into and
out of Iraq, the right to free, unrestricted, and immediate movement to
and from inspection sites, and the right to inspect any sites and
buildings, including immediate, unimpeded, unconditional, and
unrestricted access to Presidential Sites equal to that at other sites,
notwithstanding the provisions of resolution 1154 (1998) of 2 March 1998;
– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to be provided by Iraq the
names of all personnel currently and formerly associated with Iraq’s
chemical, biological, nuclear, and ballistic missile programmes and the
associated research, development, and production facilities;
– Security of UNMOVIC and IAEA facilities shall be ensured by sufficient
United Nations security guards;
– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to declare, for the purposes
of freezing a site to be inspected, exclusion zones, including
surrounding areas and transit corridors, in which Iraq will suspend
ground and aerial movement so that nothing is changed in or taken out of
a site being inspected;
– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the free and unrestricted use and
landing of fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, including manned and
unmanned reconnaissance vehicles;
– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right at their sole discretion
verifiably to remove, destroy, or render harmless all prohibited
weapons, subsystems, components, records, materials, and other related
items, and the right to impound or close any facilities or equipment for
the production thereof; and
– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to free import and use of
equipment or materials for inspections and to seize and export any
equipment, materials, or documents taken during inspections, without
search of UNMOVIC or IAEA personnel or official or personal baggage;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
And then the other obligation of Saddam:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Decides further that Iraq shall not take or threaten hostile acts
directed against any representative or personnel of the United Nations
or the IAEA or of any Member State taking action to uphold any Council
resolution;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I feel that there is another breach by Saddam in the following
resolution by the mere attack he made in the no-fly zone.
The resolution is binding, there is no way he can weasel out of breaches:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Requests the Secretary-General immediately to notify Iraq of this
resolution, which is binding on Iraq; demands that Iraq confirm within
seven days of that notification its intention to comply fully with this
resolution; and demands further that Iraq cooperate immediately,
unconditionally, and actively with UNMOVIC and the IAEA;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request the world cooperation in debunking saddam:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Requests all Member States to give full support to UNMOVIC and the
IAEA in the discharge of their mandates, including by providing any
information related to prohibited programmes or other aspects of their
mandates, including on Iraqi attempts since 1998 to acquire prohibited
items, and by recommending sites to be inspected, persons to be
interviewed, conditions of such interviews, and data to be collected,
the results of which shall be reported to the Council by UNMOVIC and the
IAEA;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNMOVIC has to report failures to comply, which, again, Blix did in
every single report:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General
of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by
Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to
comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations
regarding inspections under this resolution;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now here they were supposed to convene upon reception of reports of non
compliance by UN inspectors for breach concerning clause 4 and 11 (WMD):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in
accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the
situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant
Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the reports were of non-compliance, yet they didn't.
True, on March 7th, 2003, as the resolution was goinmg to go into efect,
the weasels tried to make anothe resolution givin more time for Saddam
to comply, but that would have been making the UN irrelevant, You can't
go on making last chance resolution after 12 years odf last chance
resolutions. So anyway, this resolution failed.
Now here we have the key word:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned
Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued
violations of its obligations;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which included all of 687e, as exposed above. All the further
resolutions before 1441 were all based on 687e, which is a conditional
cessation of the use of force to remove Saddam. This is the serious
consequences he was repeatedly warned about, and this does not include
Desert Fox, it is more serious than that despite what putin later
infered, but at least he said something, the other weasels in teh SC
never aqpologized. They should all go from there, they are not worthy of
the position. Anyway.
And reamins the typical usual way Resolutions say that the case is not
closed:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment:
The only exception was if he had only had the appearance of quibbling
over his WMD program, when the UN inspectors would submit the report if
he seriously abided by it in every other endeavors. And the fact is that
Saddam breached also the rest of resolution 687e, the part that didn't
require the expertise of the inspectors, limited to the WMD section.
The non-WMD parts of 687e was to be fully implemented, after 1441,
without any inspectors second guessing. He couldn't breach these parts
and hope for someone to say he hadn't. But the fact is that Blix has
demonstrated in every single report, that he had he had breached the
resolution in relation with WMD.
But the fact that 1. he continued to harass Kuwait threatening it in
many instance that it was a province and woul be annexed, 2. continued
to refuse to give them back their National archives, 3. refused to give
them back their POWs (or their bodies - he had kileld them all but they
didn't know), and 4. that he paid for homicide bombers, all that were
each breaches of one distinct conditons layed out in 687e
http://www.michelnostradamus.org/Res687e.htm
There is 5 a condition of 1441 as I oultlibne above, about shooting at
coalition planes... and all of teh WMD related clauses...
Remember... 13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has
repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a
result of its continued violations of its obligations;
I hope this is detailled enough for you.
J.
Jean Guernon
Lawrence Seib a écrit:
The fact that even though all his reports were specifying that Saddam
was in breach of the WMD part of his obligations,
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2002/iraq/blix.notes/page7.html
(not to mention all the other breaches Saddam made that were not for the
inspectors to decide), despite the fact that the UN had concluded that
much, had recognized that, and was scrambling to try to have another
resolution passed (other than 1441) so as to give another last chance to
Saddam, another three months despite the unquestionable breach,
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/07/sprj.irq.main/index.html
which resolution didn't pass of course (if it had passed BTW would have
shattered the UN credibility to smithereens about pseudo last chance
resolutions after having had 12 years of breach), After that he comes
back and say there is no legitimacy? This pretense is total bullshit.
The only resolution that could pass and have the UN keep its integrity
would have been one that would have made the serious consequences of the
regime annihilation into regime change. And we know that France promised
veto on that one. So the only one left was the integral implementation
of 1441. YET, despite the betrayal of France, the US did offer anyway
that choice to Saddam which he didn't take. The crime is that France and
other member of the council went on to pretend to the countless millions
of brainless losers who believed them, that the intervention was illegal
to avoid spending or losing their backshish from illegal dwellings, when
they knew it was legitimate, and thus the Arab media picked on that and
predictably sided with the weasels, but to escalate the attacks on the
legitimacy, being backed by these liars. Anyway, I digress, but to add
that Blix is also in that conspiracy that cost countless lives in the
US-coalition and in the Iraqis civilians.
These are not allies, weasels should be dumped from the SC and from
NATO, at least if they don't publicly apologize. Russia has made almost
that much, but the other weasels who are allied should be dumped. To
kiss the ass of weasels and brand the allies sold out puppets like Kerry
do is also a betrayal of the most sacred solidarity in America and the
world. Sorry, i digress again, but this gets me, even if the domestic
one is even more repulsive, Blix is party only to the non domestic part
of this.
You see what I mean, why the outrage?
J.
Gunner
Seib) wrote:
>Gunner <gunner...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message news:<m7sfk0d5bdt4a3iig...@4ax.com>...
>> On 14 Sep 2004 13:47:44 -0700, ls...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Lawrence
>> Seib) wrote:
>>
>> >So you see 1441 never did authorize the use of force
>> >and neither did the U.N. Hans Blix was trying to prove
>> >a negative, and was not allowed free access to Iraq
>> >as he had hoped, thus claiming Iraq still did not
>> >fully grasp the meaning of 1441. Since no wmd's
>> >were ever found, it is apparent that the reason
>> >Saddam did not cooperate is that he thought Hans Blix
>> >was a spy.
>>
>> Which is all moot anyways as Sadman violated the terms of the Cease
>> Fire, repeatedly, for a bit over 12 yrs. So the war was simply turned
>> back on again.
>
>The objective if the first war was to get Iraq and
>Saddam out of Kuwait, so there was no reason to
>turn it on again, Saddam was still our of Kuwait
But Saddam was still shooting at Americans, still violating his terms
of cease fire. Google up the terms sometime. You may learn something.
William
Then you need to name the crime. As long as an order is not illegal,
the combattant must obey.
You need to learn a thing or two about followership before you do the
blowhard thing about leadership.
Christopher A. Lee
Again, not according to Nuremberg. Those convicted there had not
commited any crime according to the existing laws.
What the Nazi leadership did was evil, beyong humanity, but it was not
explicitly illegal.
>You need to learn a thing or two about followership before you do the
>blowhard thing about leadership.
The only blathering is yours. Do you honestly imagine that "only
following orders" should let the perpetrators of Abu Ghraib off the
hook?
Jean Guernon
Christopher A. Lee a écrit:
> On 15 Sep 2004 20:07:50 -0700, billy...@juno.com (William) wrote:
>
>
>>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote in message news:<t0ldk05ii6s54g1uv...@4ax.com>...
>>
>>>On 13 Sep 2004 20:04:36 -0700, billy...@juno.com (William) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>halco...@yahoo.com (RH) wrote in message news:<524db79f.0409...@posting.google.com>...
>>>>
>>>>>billy...@juno.com (William) wrote:
>>>>><snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Greed is a terrible thing.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, it's a great pity that the US forces can't admit that they were
>>>>>wrong, quit terrorising the Iraqis, lay down their weapons, try to
>>>>>make amends for all the killing and damage done there, and go home.
>>>>
>>>>You must be RH negative.
>>>>
>>>>US Forces are never wrong. They are merely instruments of National Policy.
>>>>
>>>>You've got to go a little higher to assign blame.
>>>
>>>The "I was only following orders" defence. It didn't work at
>>>Nuremberg, where the precedent was set.
>>
>>Then you need to name the crime. As long as an order is not illegal,
>>the combattant must obey.
>
>
> Again, not according to Nuremberg. Those convicted there had not
> commited any crime according to the existing laws.
>
> What the Nazi leadership did was evil, beyong humanity, but it was not
> explicitly illegal.
>
Yes they had. Crimes against humanity. They were found guilty.
>
>>You need to learn a thing or two about followership before you do the
>>blowhard thing about leadership.
>
>
> The only blathering is yours. Do you honestly imagine that "only
> following orders" should let the perpetrators of Abu Ghraib off the
> hook?
Well the geneva convention was still a moral issue that they had to
uphold as he tried to explain a dumbass like you, but it would certainly
lessen their crimes, if a superior officer was to blame, which is of
course not the case.
J.
Lawrence Seib
> Lawrence Seib a écrit:
>
> > Jean Guernon <jgue...@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<phW1d.31440$XP3.18940@edtnps84>...
> >
SNIPAGE
> >>force, it was one trying to make the authorization of force less
> >>intrusive, i.e. the regime change in stead of regime annihilation 1441
> >>called for.
> >
> > Interesting theory, please provide some references.
Thank you for the detailed analysis Jean. It is not
clear whether or not you wrote all the comments or
not because your links bypass michelnostradamus,
and go directly to the U.N. documents. The U.N.
documents reference many other documents and
thus you must include them all to fully understand
1441. Please allow me to attempt to cut to the chase.
> http://www.michelnostradamus.org/Res1441.htm
> http://www.michelnostradamus.org/Res687e.htm
Note, I have put Jean's two links here so that
I can snip rather irrelevant material.
snipage
> 12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in
> accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the
> situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant
> Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All the reports were of non-compliance, yet they didn't.
> True, on March 7th, 2003, as the resolution was goinmg to go into efect,
> the weasels tried to make another resolution givin more time for Saddam
> to comply, but that would have been making the UN irrelevant, You can't
> go on making last chance resolution after 12 years odf last chance
> resolutions. So anyway, this resolution failed.
Refering to the U.N. as weasels shows the obvious bias the commentator
has toward the U.N. He/she states that you cannot give last chances for
12 years, but I say that 10,000 innocent Iraqi civilian lives
are worth waiting for, not to mention the 1,000 American lives(ops,
I mentioned it).
> Now here we have the key word:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned
> Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued
> violations of its obligations;
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Which included all of 687e, as exposed above. All the further
> resolutions before 1441 were all based on 687e, which is a conditional
> cessation of the use of force to remove Saddam. This is the serious
> consequences he was repeatedly warned about, and this does not include
> Desert Fox, it is more serious than that despite what putin later
> infered, but at least he said something, the other weasels in teh SC
> never aqpologized. They should all go from there, they are not worthy of
> the position. Anyway.
I find it curious that 1441 did not actual simply spell out,
military force as the consequence.
>
> And reamins the typical usual way Resolutions say that the case is not
> closed:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Jean, I do not see how this constitutes a less
intrusive reaction than before. The basic story is that the
terms of 687e are still in effect and thus a violation
might result in an end to the cease fire. 1441 also
goes on to say that the case is not closed. Violations
of 4 and 11 also require consideration before the U.N.
Since the UN never did vote to renew the war against Iraq,
1441 never authorized the war.
Larry
Jean Guernon
Well they are taken from the UN site. And they mainly refer to the FULL
implementation of 687e, with some restrictions about the WMD clauses.
>
>>http://www.michelnostradamus.org/Res1441.htm
>>http://www.michelnostradamus.org/Res687e.htm
>
>
> Note, I have put Jean's two links here so that
> I can snip rather irrelevant material.
>
> snipage
>
>
>>12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in
>>accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the
>>situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant
>>Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>All the reports were of non-compliance, yet they didn't.
>>True, on March 7th, 2003, as the resolution was going to go into efect,
>>the weasels tried to make another resolution givin more time for Saddam
>>to comply, but that would have been making the UN irrelevant, You can't
>>go on making last chance resolution after 12 years odf last chance
>>resolutions. So anyway, this resolution failed.
>
>
> Refering to the U.N. as weasels shows the obvious bias the commentator
> has toward the U.N. He/she states that you cannot give last chances for
> 12 years, but I say that 10,000 innocent Iraqi civilian lives
> are worth waiting for, not to mention the 1,000 American lives(ops,
> I mentioned it).
>
Nah,. I don't, refer at the UN as weasels, the real UN at the security
council are not weasels, they are the US and UK. I refer to weasels who
don't respect their signatures in the UN, by order of weaseling
importance the weasels are France, Syria, China and Russia, but Russia
tried to at least make amend, the others still are WEASELS.
But no, the UN is not, BECAUSE OF THE NON WEASELS UNIQUELY.
>
>>Now here we have the key word:
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned
>>Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued
>>violations of its obligations;
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Which included all of 687e, as exposed above. All the further
>>resolutions before 1441 were all based on 687e, which is a conditional
>>cessation of the use of force to remove Saddam. This is the serious
>>consequences he was repeatedly warned about, and this does not include
>>Desert Fox, it is more serious than that despite what putin later
>>infered, but at least he said something, the other weasels in teh SC
>>never aqpologized. They should all go from there, they are not worthy of
>>the position. Anyway.
>
>
> I find it curious that 1441 did not actual simply spell out,
> military force as the consequence.
>
It didn't need to, it said that he had been repeatedly told about the
serious consequences (something Kofi carefully avoided to mention in his
lame comment). The UN had authorized force, and stopped it only
conditionally. And it can't be merely desert fox like operations, since
these serious consequences were not implemented, just threatened to be
over and over again.
>>And reamins the typical usual way Resolutions say that the case is not
>>closed:
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Well Jean, I do not see how this constitutes a less
> intrusive reaction than before. The basic story is that the
> terms of 687e are still in effect and thus a violation
> might result in an end to the cease fire. 1441 also
> goes on to say that the case is not closed. Violations
> of 4 and 11 also require consideration before the U.N.
> Since the UN never did vote to renew the war against Iraq,
> 1441 never authorized the war.
>
> Larry
No, 1441 gives a last chance to comply with 687e. The case is not closed
only because of this last chance, after Saddam had breached it in every
way, it was closed.
And it was the case.
http://www.michelnostradamus.org/Kofi.wmv
Don't know why Kofi weaseled out at the eve of a US election.
J.
Cuan
Seib) wrote:
I agree 100% with your observation. However, talking to Jean is like
talking to a rock. It's still going to be a rock no matter how
carefully you explain something to it.
Jean Guernon
J.
Cuan a écrit:
Cuan
<jgue...@globetrotter.net> wrote:
>Only because you ONLY keep talking and NEVER listen Cuan.
You're not really worth listening to, Jean.
Warble606
> and untrammeled greed.
Such as the greed of religious organizations for power over everything,
including citizens, government, business, pornographers etc?
Furthermore, look at any country, and you will find unbridled greed;
it's just that in the USA it's the main ethic.
Consider the greed of palestinians for land that their ancestors greedily
grabbed up when the jews were expelled, or when the Arab imperialists
swarmed in ...
Consider the greed of Russians, French, etc who would rather that
Sudan's poor blacks be slaughtered than lose the chance at cheap oil
from Sudan's Arab-run government. Not that Bush cares about them either...
Michael Johnathan McDonald
> abook...@yahoo.com (Michael Johnathan McDonald) wrote in message news:<dd3256f0.04091...@posting.google.com>...
> > ls...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Lawrence Seib) wrote in message news:<75ab6396.04091...@posting.google.com>...
> > > Jean Guernon <jgue...@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<OcD1d.15063$KU5.9398@edtnps89>...
> > >
> > > So you see 1441 never did authorize the use of force
> > > and neither did the U.N.
> >
> >
> > Are you slow or something?
> sophomoric insults have no place in
> legitamite disscusions.
> >
> > > Hans Blix was trying to prove
> > > a negative, and was not allowed free access to Iraq
> > > as he had hoped, thus claiming Iraq still did not
> > > fully grasp the meaning of 1441.
> >
> > When they talked about firing him the first time he changed his tune
> > quickly and said they started opening up everything to him. He was a
> > bullshitter opportunist from the get-go.
>
> From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Blix
>
> Hans Blix (born June 28, 1928 in Uppsala in Sweden)
>
> 1978-1979 Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sweden.
Didn't stop any nuclear proliferation from all countries that have
been documented spreading them during this period, did he? So
according to my bullshit theory of him " He must have took bribe money
and shut his filthy mouth" ...Because it is too evident that nuclear
proliferation from duel-use tech was spreading like a wild fire when
he was the head. Kind of sad that we have people like him on earth,
don't ya think?
> 2000-2003 Head of the United Nations Monitoring,
> Verification and Inspection Commission
Ahhh the 'UN Oil for Food scam ' and not a peep by him. He is guilty
of crimes against humanity. Nice going you ousted him as a criminal.
;) Feel better?
>
> What evidence do you have that he is a bullshitter.
If you also read the above reply to you - you saw my evidence –
obviously you cannot read especially saying 'sophomoric insults' to
me when I was at least pointing out the fact that you do not keep up
with the times. ;)
By the way, *Titles* don't mean shit to me. That is what America is
all about - 'no titles.' I'm even mad that Hollywood calls people
*stars* if they get an ounce of fame. That is not American – that is
why 90% of hollyweirds ( Just a guesstement) are lefties and not
traditional Americans. The point is Hans *Blithering* Blix has titles,
but he didn't do his job ;)
>
> Larry
Lawrence Seib
Bush did not stop the 9-11 terrorists did he,
So according to my bullshit theory of him
"He must have took bribe money and shut his
filthy mouth" because he trying to make pipeline
deals with The Taliban right after he was elected.
Kind of sad that we have people like him on earth,
don't ya think? Documentation? I provided just as
much as you did above.
>
> > 2000-2003 Head of the United Nations Monitoring,
> > Verification and Inspection Commission
>
> Ahhh the 'UN Oil for Food scam ' and not a peep by him. He is guilty
> of crimes against humanity. Nice going you ousted him as a criminal.
> ;) Feel better?
The food for oil program was headed by Mr. Benon Sevan,
not Hans Blix. The United Nations Monitoring
Verification and Inspection Commission was created to
try and keep tabs on Saddam after he expelled the
weapons inspectors.
> >
> > What evidence do you have that he is a bullshitter.
>
> If you also read the above reply to you - you saw my evidence ?
> obviously you cannot read especially saying 'sophomoric insults' to
> me when I was at least pointing out the fact that you do not keep up
> with the times. ;)
Michael, you replied *after* I asked for evidence,
I cannot read your reply before you wrote it. Also
you supplied no evidence only unsupported allegations,
most of which were miss directed.
> By the way, *Titles* don't mean shit to me. That is what America is
> all about - 'no titles.' I'm even mad that Hollywood calls people
> *stars* if they get an ounce of fame. That is not American ? that is
> why 90% of hollyweirds ( Just a guesstement) are lefties and not
> traditional Americans. The point is Hans *Blithering* Blix has
> titles, but he didn't do his job ;)
No comment.
Larry
Jean Guernon
Lawrence Seib a écrit:
This is total bullshit of course, debunked to the bone for 3 years.
Your obsession with Bush which makes you wallow in lies and deception
only show your total anti-American perversity.
>>>2000-2003 Head of the United Nations Monitoring,
>>> Verification and Inspection Commission
>>
>>Ahhh the 'UN Oil for Food scam ' and not a peep by him. He is guilty
>>of crimes against humanity. Nice going you ousted him as a criminal.
>>;) Feel better?
>
>
> The food for oil program was headed by Mr. Benon Sevan,
> not Hans Blix. The United Nations Monitoring
> Verification and Inspection Commission was created to
> try and keep tabs on Saddam after he expelled the
> weapons inspectors.
>
And it was crooked because i was in the hands of the French, as we now know.
>>>What evidence do you have that he is a bullshitter.
>>
>>If you also read the above reply to you - you saw my evidence ?
>>obviously you cannot read especially saying 'sophomoric insults' to
>>me when I was at least pointing out the fact that you do not keep up
>>with the times. ;)
>
>
> Michael, you replied *after* I asked for evidence,
> I cannot read your reply before you wrote it. Also
> you supplied no evidence only unsupported allegations,
> most of which were miss directed.
>
Bullshit.
J.
Michael Johnathan McDonald
Bush was a president - not the Security Head you freakin retard - big
difference. He does not spend day-after-day observing foreign
movements as a security head would as Hans 'the pathetic retard' Blix!
;)
> because he trying to make pipeline
> deals with The Taliban right after he was elected.
> Kind of sad that we have people like him on earth,
> don't ya think?
"Pipeline?" - not according to the people who use gas in western
countries, retard! What do you want them to do ride bicycles? The left
won't let the gov. drill in America like it was prior to '50s.
> Documentation? I provided just as
> much as you did above.
Nope. Actually you failed to make a viable comparison, but I think we
can say that is your normal MO!
The '90s were wroth with nuclear proliferation technology. I see no
Blithering blix docs back up that he fought this ;)
Here is (some) evidence: p 1-7
http://prophet.michaelreport.com/nostradamus/1999/beasts/dearfriend/index.htm
also:
court and FIOA docs.
http://prophet.michaelreport.com/nostradamus/index.html
Lawrence Seib
For your information sir, name calling is best left on the
play ground. As for Hans Blix, it appears that
Paul Wolfowitz was not sure of his abilities either,
so he had the CIA investigate his inspections of
Iraq. According to the Walter Pincus and Colum Lynch
of the Washington Post, the CIA's report was that
Blix had conducted inspections of Iraq's declared
nuclear power plants "fully within the parameters he
could operate" as chief of the Vienna-based agency
between 1981 and 1997
> > because he trying to make pipeline
> > deals with The Taliban right after he was elected.
> > Kind of sad that we have people like him on earth,
> > don't ya think?
>
> "Pipeline?" - not according to the people who use gas in western
> countries, retard! What do you want them to do ride bicycles? The left
> won't let the gov. drill in America like it was prior to '50s.
>
> > Documentation? I provided just as
> > much as you did above.
>
> Nope. Actually you failed to make a viable comparison, but I think we
> can say that is your normal MO!
> The '90s were wroth with nuclear proliferation technology. I see no
> Blithering blix docs back up that he fought this ;)
>
>
> Here is (some) evidence: p 1-7
>
> http://prophet.michaelreport.com/nostradamus/1999/beasts/dearfriend/index.htm
>
> also:
> court and FIOA docs.
> http://prophet.michaelreport.com/nostradamus/index.html
These are links to some kind of Nostradamus fan club,
which you appear to have written, I hope you do not
seriously consider them to be valid references.
Larry
Lawrence Seib
Yes, it is no truer than Michael attack on Hans Blix. I
simply wanted to mock his post.
> Your obsession with Bush which makes you wallow in lies and deception
> only show your total anti-American perversity.
On the contrary, I am against Bush because I love the United
States of America, and I do not want to see him bankrupt
this nation on an ill conceived war that can only make us
more vulnerable to terrorists.
> >>>2000-2003 Head of the United Nations Monitoring,
> >>> Verification and Inspection Commission
> >>
> >>Ahhh the 'UN Oil for Food scam ' and not a peep by him. He is guilty
> >>of crimes against humanity. Nice going you ousted him as a criminal.
> >>;) Feel better?
> >
> >
> > The food for oil program was headed by Mr. Benon Sevan,
> > not Hans Blix. The United Nations Monitoring
> > Verification and Inspection Commission was created to
> > try and keep tabs on Saddam after he expelled the
> > weapons inspectors.
> >
>
> And it was crooked because i was in the hands of the French, as we now know.
It appears that there was a lot of corruption in the oil for
food program, and if the allegations are substantiated
I hope that Mr. Sevan is held accountable. That being said
the U.N. does claim that the program helped increase the
amount of food for the poor in Iraq.
> >>>What evidence do you have that he is a bullshitter.
> >>
> >>If you also read the above reply to you - you saw my evidence ?
> >>obviously you cannot read especially saying 'sophomoric insults' to
> >>me when I was at least pointing out the fact that you do not keep up
> >>with the times. ;)
> >
> >
> > Michael, you replied *after* I asked for evidence,
> > I cannot read your reply before you wrote it. Also
> > you supplied no evidence only unsupported allegations,
> > most of which were miss directed.
> >
>
> Bullshit.
Look at the carrots, Jean, four before my question,
three before he said I should have read his reply.
Larry
Gunner
Seib) wrote:
>
>On the contrary, I am against Bush because I love the United
>States of America, and I do not want to see him bankrupt
>this nation on an ill conceived war that can only make us
>more vulnerable to terrorists.
More vulnerable than we were on 9/11?
Lesseehere...hummm that was what...3 yrs ago? When was the last
Militant Terrorist attack on the US again....hummmmlesseehere...3 yrs
ago?
Get real. At least Im biased and for a reason. You are blindly
biased.
Gunner
<no...@f.yourdamned.bis> wrote:
>X-No-Archive: YES
>"Gunner" <gunner...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>news:4fe7l0l3nd1v1oi3p...@4ax.com...
>> On 23 Sep 2004 21:18:18 -0700, ls...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Lawrence
>> Seib) wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >On the contrary, I am against Bush because I love the United
>> >States of America, and I do not want to see him bankrupt
>> >this nation on an ill conceived war that can only make us
>> >more vulnerable to terrorists.
>>
>> More vulnerable than we were on 9/11?
>>
>> Lesseehere...hummm that was what...3 yrs ago? When was the last
>> Militant Terrorist attack on the US again....hummmmlesseehere...3 yrs
>> ago?
>>
>> Get real. At least Im biased and for a reason. You are blindly
>> biased.
>
>
>And you are BOTH a couple of fucking idiots.
Your opinion is noted, examined with bio-hazard gear, and bagged for
incineration with the other puss filled hazardous materials.
>
>Just trying to be helpful.
Your input was given the treatment it deserves.
Gunner
<no...@f.yourdamned.bis> wrote:
>X-No-Archive: YES
>"Gunner" <gunner...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>news:5ug7l0l30m7rho4mc...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 06:43:31 GMT, "Chadwick StoneŠ"
>> <no...@f.yourdamned.bis> wrote:
>>
>> >X-No-Archive: YES
>> >"Gunner" <gunner...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>> >news:4fe7l0l3nd1v1oi3p...@4ax.com...
>> >> On 23 Sep 2004 21:18:18 -0700, ls...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Lawrence
>> >> Seib) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >On the contrary, I am against Bush because I love the United
>> >> >States of America, and I do not want to see him bankrupt
>> >> >this nation on an ill conceived war that can only make us
>> >> >more vulnerable to terrorists.
>> >>
>> >> More vulnerable than we were on 9/11?
>> >>
>> >> Lesseehere...hummm that was what...3 yrs ago? When was the last
>> >> Militant Terrorist attack on the US again....hummmmlesseehere...3 yrs
>> >> ago?
>> >>
>> >> Get real. At least Im biased and for a reason. You are blindly
>> >> biased.
>> >
>> >
>> >And you are BOTH a couple of fucking idiots.
>>
>> Your opinion is noted, examined with bio-hazard gear, and bagged for
>> incineration with the other puss filled hazardous materials.
>
>Heh... idiots like you and that other chowderhead already have a monopoly on
>puss filled materials as well as obtuse pointlessness. I was simply pissing
>into the mix to make things interesting, cupcake. You should be grateful
>for the break in banality.
Those of your ilk really need to find a new script though. What you
assume is some relief from banality has been done several thousand
times before. Shrug..kids like you think you invent the wheel every
day.
Do try harder and see if you can scape up even a modicum of
originality.
>
>> >Just trying to be helpful.
>>
>> Your input was given the treatment it deserves.
>
>See how helpful I am :)
Like a sucking chest wound.
Gunner Asch
Jean Guernon
Lawrence Seib a écrit:
Ha so you admit you lied.
As for Blix, every report he provided showed Saddam in breach, and what
he had to say about it matters little, the object was to find him in
breach or not, but this is a moot point since Saddam breached the
resolution in many other clauses that are not related to WMD and thus
not subject to UNMOVIC scrutiny. He was in irreparable breach and this
was recognized by Anan. http://www.michelnostradamus.org/Kofi.wmv then.
Now he is a turn coat at the eve of the US and other countries
elections. It is quite a puzzle except when we see that he put a <n
anti-semite as the representative of the UN in Iraq, and didn't take him
out of there after he made his statement about Iraq being run by Jews...
Which shows how much the UN is crazy now. But I digress.
>
>>Your obsession with Bush which makes you wallow in lies and deception
>>only show your total anti-American perversity.
>
>
> On the contrary, I am against Bush because I love the United
> States of America, and I do not want to see him bankrupt
> this nation on an ill conceived war that can only make us
> more vulnerable to terrorists.
Well, Bush had a reverse of fortune because of the betrayal of France,
mainly, that made many other country stuck with their commitment to
implement the resolution the US was proposing, regime change instead of
what the resolution called for. This was not something you expect from
allies, so it threw off the planning and is the main reason all the
Arabs media are worsening the situation by keeping up the incitement,
and if Kerry goes kiss their ass after, America will have lost its dignity.
That Kerry insults the only Real allies of the US is worst than him
insulting the prime minister of Iraq, but not much more. I mean I could
go on, the fact is that aa commander in chief has to deal with the
course that is taken, he went to the US senate and house and ask
permission to go to war because Saddam had breached the UN resolution.
So anyway, this was supposed to be understood, at least by Americans.
>
>
>>>>>2000-2003 Head of the United Nations Monitoring,
>>>>> Verification and Inspection Commission
>>>>
>>>>Ahhh the 'UN Oil for Food scam ' and not a peep by him. He is guilty
>>>>of crimes against humanity. Nice going you ousted him as a criminal.
>>>>;) Feel better?
>>>
>>>
>>>The food for oil program was headed by Mr. Benon Sevan,
>>>not Hans Blix. The United Nations Monitoring
>>>Verification and Inspection Commission was created to
>>>try and keep tabs on Saddam after he expelled the
>>>weapons inspectors.
>>>
>>
>>And it was crooked because i was in the hands of the French, as we now know.
>
>
> It appears that there was a lot of corruption in the oil for
> food program, and if the allegations are substantiated
> I hope that Mr. Sevan is held accountable.
I agree.
> That being said
> the U.N. does claim that the program helped increase the
> amount of food for the poor in Iraq.
>
Well, I would think that if they used their head they wouldn't steal it
all indeed. It would look pretty suspicious! LOL
>
>>>>>What evidence do you have that he is a bullshitter.
>>>>
>>>>If you also read the above reply to you - you saw my evidence ?
>>>>obviously you cannot read especially saying 'sophomoric insults' to
>>>>me when I was at least pointing out the fact that you do not keep up
>>>>with the times. ;)
>>>
>>>
>>>Michael, you replied *after* I asked for evidence,
>>>I cannot read your reply before you wrote it. Also
>>>you supplied no evidence only unsupported allegations,
>>>most of which were miss directed.
>>>
>>
>>Bullshit.
>
>
> Look at the carrots, Jean, four before my question,
> three before he said I should have read his reply.
>
Well, I was replying to the conspiracy lunacy about Afghanistan not
trying to intervene in your personal divergence of view.
It is my experience that this kind of total bullshit is posted by those
who will do anything to justify, or in support of, Islamic terrorism.
Many loony keep posting this kind of total bunk here and even again, a
poster (Barbara Rossa) today posted the same shit debunked over and
over. So yesterday, it assumed you were one of these loonies.
Just don'T post lies if you don't want to have them addressed. Try to
deal with "unsupported allegations" with facts. It is very confusing
otherwise if you adopt the liars' modus operandi here.
But I'm sorry I don't know about your brawl, so I cannot say who I think
is right.
J.
> Larry
Cuan
wrote:
>On 23 Sep 2004 21:18:18 -0700, ls...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Lawrence
>Seib) wrote:
>
>>
>>On the contrary, I am against Bush because I love the United
>>States of America, and I do not want to see him bankrupt
>>this nation on an ill conceived war that can only make us
>>more vulnerable to terrorists.
>
>More vulnerable than we were on 9/11?
>
>Lesseehere...hummm that was what...3 yrs ago? When was the last
>Militant Terrorist attack on the US again....hummmmlesseehere...3 yrs
>ago?
>
>Get real. At least Im biased and for a reason. You are blindly
>biased.
Others could argue the same about you.
Larry Tozer
Act now to participate in our ultimate business venture. You will be
provided with a website which will generate a constant cash flow
deposited to you PayPal account. We do all the job. Risk free. $5250
is Guaranteed with no efforts!<br>
Learn about our generous program, register, collect $5250 CASH!<br>
Visit DollarRandomizer.com for more information.<br>
<a href="http://www.dollarrandomizer.com/?larryt">http://www.DollarRandomizer.com/?larryt</a>
Gunner
And as has been so often demonstrated, they would again be proven
wrong.
Gunner
"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosphy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke
Michael Johnathan McDonald
> abook...@yahoo.com (Michael Johnathan McDonald) wrote in message news:<dd3256f0.04092...@posting.google.com>...
> > > Bush did not stop the 9-11 terrorists did he,
> > > So according to my bullshit theory of him
> > > "He must have took bribe money and shut his
> > > filthy mouth"
> >
> > Bush was a president - not the Security Head you freakin retard - big
> > difference. He does not spend day-after-day observing foreign
> > movements as a security head would as Hans 'the pathetic retard' Blix!
> > ;)
>
> For your information sir, name calling is best left on the
> play ground. As for Hans Blix, it appears that
> Paul Wolfowitz was not sure of his abilities either,
> so he had the CIA investigate his inspections of
> Iraq. According to the Walter Pincus and Colum Lynch
> of the Washington Post, the CIA's report was that
> Blix had conducted inspections of Iraq's declared
> nuclear power plants "fully within the parameters he
> could operate" as chief of the Vienna-based agency
> between 1981 and 1997
It is best that you do not skirt the issue without bringing another
point up. We need to have conclusion to your point that it was Bush's
job to oversee the daily movements of foreign govs. (Bush causing
9/11) - As the job of the president and not the CIA (Or intelligence
community). This way we do not get into circular arguments.
The only reason I brought out a name is because this should not be a
four-year-older reasoning in logic. It is obvious that Hans Blix's job
was global security - so he should have known about 9/11 - while you
say it was Bush's job to be president and global security head at the
same time which caused me to think that you are a retard. I do not
mean to call you that, but you need to be more forthwrite in your
conclusions and reasonings or I have no other choice.
I am no a conspiracy theorist fan...The last conspiracy theory that
was huge in history for over a 1500 years was that the earth was flat
– even after Pythagoras told his disciples the ways you can debunk
that argument and Socrates agreeing with that – the Earth was also
known and scientifically proven by many others in history to be round
- well over a thousand years ago – that is why I do not like
conspiracy theories.
No Bush did no know about 9/11, in as much as Bill Clinton did not
know. IF you want to make the argument opposite than we can cite The
New York Times, or my website of prior knowledge of 9/11 being
communicated to Bill Clinton. In fact the plan was laid on his desk,
in the White House office exactly two years before the day. – not a
conspiracy theory – just facts. Bill Clinton told the AP news org.
that he didn't believe the report. That is fair enough. I believe it
would be hard for anyone to believe that airplanes were going to be
used as missiles. Right?
However, this brings us back to the start of the point - that if
Clinton had some little knowledge than Hanz ‘Blithering' Blix (being
who he is) should have had much, much, much, more, don't ya think?
So WHERE WAS HE ( BLIX)? HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SCREAMING FROM THE
ROOFTOPS ;)
PS: please follow the point and do not bring up another. ;)
Dan
"Cuan" <a...@nymous.co.za> wrote in message
news:e4bal051urapiqpj7...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 06:10:16 GMT, Gunner <gunner...@lightspeed.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On 23 Sep 2004 21:18:18 -0700, ls...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Lawrence
> >Seib) wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>On the contrary, I am against Bush because I love the United
> >>States of America, and I do not want to see him bankrupt
> >>this nation on an ill conceived war that can only make us
> >>more vulnerable to terrorists.
> >
> >More vulnerable than we were on 9/11?
Yes.
Next time, they will not even try to be restrained...
Dan