US troops kill Iraqi governer's 17 year old son
Major Debacle
jose
<Major_Debacle@the_Pentacostalgon.christianity> wrote:
> They kicked down a door, rushed in and shot him dead.
>
> http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSL20716114
Two less jihadists.
optix
wrote:
>
>Two less jihadists.
Won't make a dent in the scheme of things. We've got a whole bunch of
jihadists in Washington - led by jihadists in the White House.
--
Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices.
Voltaire
*us*
>On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:27:36 -0700 (PDT), jose <josef...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Two less jihadists.
>
>Won't make a dent in the scheme of things. We've got a whole bunch of
>jihadists in Washington - led by jihadists in the White House.
If we'd been 'less' Bush and Cheney, there would have been
no 9/11, the USA would be better off fiscally by trillions of
dollars, thousands of US military personnel would be alive
and well, and millions of Iraqis would be home safe.
optix
>
>If we'd been 'less' Bush and Cheney, there would have been
>no 9/11, the USA would be better off fiscally by trillions of
>dollars, thousands of US military personnel would be alive
>and well, and millions of Iraqis would be home safe.
It's definitely possible.
I can't help but wonder just how deep the CIA/NSA/other 3-letter
agencies are involved in the 9/11 event. It's completely clear that
9/11 was engineered by elements of the US government and at minimum
those elements are being protected by this administration.
Reality_CheckŠ
"optix" <op...@refractor.net> wrote in message
news:m3k784dor325vbrqi...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:39:02 -0400, * US * wrote:
>
>>
>>If we'd been 'less' Bush and Cheney, there would have been
>>no 9/11, the USA would be better off fiscally by trillions of
>>dollars, thousands of US military personnel would be alive
>>and well, and millions of Iraqis would be home safe.
>
>
>
> It's definitely possible.
>
> I can't help but wonder just how deep the CIA/NSA/other 3-letter
> agencies are involved in the 9/11 event. It's completely clear that
> 9/11 was engineered by elements of the US government and at minimum
> those elements are being protected by this administration.
You're a fucking idiot.
gravero...@yahoo.com
we'll send them to your house next, jose....... for your head.
gravero...@yahoo.com
Someone did bring up a good comment to me that brought me to some good
articles. Here is the character string search to use for google.
"silverstein" "demolition" "wtc" OR "world trade center" "building 7"
no doubt in my mind how the building came down. but, you surely would
want to check it out for yourselves, anyone interested, and pick links
you would be interested in
i think the most telling thing about the demolition of WTC building 7
is that it was done the same day the 2 planes were flown into WTC
buildings 1 and 2. if you watch much TV, and see those shows that
show demolitions, they indicate it is very intricate work and must be
planned over the period of weeks, if not months.
but, for some reason, WTC building 7 must have been a piece of cake
for demolition..... so easy to find a good demolition team for later
that day to bring it down, that they were able to plan within hours
how to bring it down without causing all other problems that a
demolition could,
http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/wtc7.html
Good site to read just above... all about WTC7 being "pulled"
*turning and walking away
"over shoulder"
"i have heard it say that WTC1 and WTC2 were pulled too..........
and that GWBush had heard earlier, even before 9/11 that it was soon
planes would be used to attack the buildings... and.... but there are
a lot of people who call me a 'conspiratist' and one of those 'anti-
government wackos'
gravero...@yahoo.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
gravero...@yahoo.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
quit looking in the mirror, reality check, and calling yourself such
things!
Charlie Wolf
"As they entered the target building, coalition forces encountered two
armed men. Perceiving hostile intent ... they shot and killed the men.
It was subsequently determined that the two ... were related to the
governor," the statement said.
Regards,
Major Debacle
They kicked down the door of a building and shot the occupants to death.
What gave them the right to kick down the door in the first place?
Don't you and I have the right to defend ourselves, our families and our
possessions using firearms against unlawful intruders?
Billzz
be young men with weapons. In fact I would be surprised if there were no
weapons.
Reminds me that if I kicked in the door of a house in the Mekong Delta I
would be faced with a young amn with either an AK-47 or Garand M-1 carbine,
depending upon which side he was on.
They basically screwed up. I did Article 32 investigations of friendly fire
incidents in Vietnam. This sounds like a courts-martial case. Either the
command or the soldiers are to blame. They got the wrong house.
"Major Debacle" <Major_Debacle@the_Pentacostalagon.christianity> wrote in
message news:XJ5hk.15980$uE5....@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com...
optix
wrote:
>
>http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/wtc7.html
>
>Good site to read just above... all about WTC7 being "pulled"
>
Best site going:
optix
<Rea...@Check.it> wrote:
>
>You're a fucking idiot.
>
>
Your logical and rational argument is noted. Do you have any more of
your educated viewpoint you'd like to share?
:-)
Möbius Pretzel
> They kicked down a door, rushed in and shot him dead.
>
> http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSL20716114
.
Par for the course when it comes to US Oil Nazi apes.
Möbius Pretzel
> They kicked down a door, rushed in and shot him dead.
>
> http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSL20716114
.
jose
> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:27:36 -0700 (PDT), jose <josefsop...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Two less jihadists.
>
> Won't make a dent in the scheme of things. We've got a whole bunch of
> jihadists in Washington - led by jihadists in the White House.
>
> --
> Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices.
>
> Voltaire
You obviously have no clue what a jihadist is or what their
intentions are.
jose
> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:05:19 -0500, optix <op...@refractor.net> wrote:
> >>Two less jihadists.
>
> >Won't make a dent in the scheme of things. We've got a whole bunch of
> >jihadists in Washington - led by jihadists in the White House.
>
> If we'd been 'less' Bush and Cheney, there would have been
> no 9/11, the USA would be better off fiscally by trillions of
> dollars, thousands of US military personnel would be alive
> and well, and millions of Iraqis would be home safe.
More bullshit from the left.
Möbius Pretzel
> jose spooged:
>
> > Major Debacle
>
> > <Major_Debacle wrote:
> > > They kicked down a door, rushed in and shot him dead.
>
> > >http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSL20716114
>
> > Two less jihadists.
>
> we'll send them to your house next, jose....... for your head.
.
Tell 'em to bring back his ass to make sure because they won't be able
to tell the difference. :)
jose
So you believe Rosie O'Donnell the great forensic scientist.
Möbius Pretzel
<Major_Debacle@the_Pentacostalagon.christianity> wrote:
> Charlie Wolf wrote:
>
> They kicked down the door of a building and shot the occupants to death.
>
> What gave them the right to kick down the door in the first place?
>
> Don't you and I have the right to defend ourselves, our families and our
> possessions using firearms against unlawful intruders?
>
> > What part of this don't you understand???
>
> > "As they entered the target building, coalition forces encountered two
> > armed men. Perceiving hostile intent ... they shot and killed the men.
> > It was subsequently determined that the two ... were related to the
> > governor," the statement said.
And they didn't even have the WMDs.
jose
Any time.
jose
>
> - Show quoted text -
I do hope you stand armed if a SWAT team ever breaks
down your door.
jose
Bravo. A first class Islamic jihadist comment.
Major Debacle
And if I did nothing to bring down the SWAT team and did not know who
was breaking the door in?
What would you do if, in the middle of the night, you were wakened from
a deep sleep by the sound of someone kicking down your door?
Would you grab your gun or your ID?
Major Debacle
What if it turns out to be the local SWAT team dressed undercover as
jihadists?
Would you shoot first and ask questions later?
Reality_CheckŠ
> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:19:20 -0600, "Reality_CheckŠ"
> <Rea...@Check.it> wrote:
>
>>
>>You're a fucking idiot.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Your logical and rational argument is noted. Do you have any more of
> your educated viewpoint you'd like to share?
"Fuck Saddam, we're taking him out."
--President GW Bush
to three U.S. Senators in March 2002,
a full year before the Iraq invasion
"We found the weapons of mass destruction."
--President GW Bush,
in an interview with Polish television, May 29, 2003
"Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere!"
--President GW Bush,
joking about his administration's failure to find WMDs
in Iraq as he narrated a comic slideshow during the Radio
& TV Correspondents' Association dinner, March 25, 2004
"Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties."
--President GW Bush,
discussing the Iraq war with Christian broadcaster Pat
Robertson,
after Robertson told him he should prepare the American
people
for the reality of war casualties
"I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George, go and
fight
those terrorists in Afghanistan.' And I did, and then God would tell me,
'George
go and end the tyranny in Iraq,' and I did."
"Now again. I feel God's words coming to me: 'Go get the Palestinians their
state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle
East.'
And by God, I'm gonna do it."
-- George W. Bush, June 2003
"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our
number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
~ George aWol Bush . 2001-Sept
"I don't know where he (bin Laden) is. I have no idea and I really don't
care.
It's not that important. It's not our priority."
~ George aWol Bush 2002-March
"Gosh, I just don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden.
It's kind of one of those ex-a-gger-a-tions."
~ George aWol Bush 2004 presidential debate
Reality_CheckŠ
"jose" <josef...@yahoo.com> wrote .
> On Jul 20, 4:05 pm, optix <op...@refractor.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:27:36 -0700 (PDT), jose <josefsop...@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
> >>Two less jihadists.
>>
>> Won't make a dent in the scheme of things. We've got a whole bunch of
>> jihadists in Washington - led by jihadists in the White House.
>>
>
> intentions are.
"I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George, go and
Reality_CheckŠ
"Major Debacle" <Major_Debacle@the_Pentacostalagon.christianity> wrote in
What if it turns out to be the local Jihadists dressed as SWAT team members?
Would you hesitate just long enough to die ?
Reality_CheckŠ
"Billzz" <billzz...@starband.net> wrote in message
news:7db1a$48850de8$9440b19b$24...@STARBAND.NET...
> Especially since it was the local governor's house. Of course there
> would be young men with weapons. In fact I would be surprised if there
> were no weapons.
>
> Reminds me that if I kicked in the door of a house in the Mekong Delta I
> would be faced with a young amn with either an AK-47 or Garand M-1
> carbine, depending upon which side he was on.
>
> They basically screwed up. I did Article 32 investigations of friendly
> fire incidents in Vietnam. This sounds like a courts-martial case.
> Either the command or the soldiers are to blame. They got the wrong house.
"I poured four clips into the dinks...the mothers kept hugging their
children...we kept
on firing..." - Paul Meadlo, U$ Army, commenting on US War crimes in Vietnam
Reality_CheckŠ
"jose" <josef...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:282b5b93-a259-4b25...@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>
> I do hope you stand armed if a SWAT team ever breaks
> down your door.
Make sure you're on point ...
Reality_CheckŠ
"Major Debacle" <Major_Debacle@the_Pentacostalagon.christianity> wrote in
Ismael Mena, 45, was shot to death by masked SWAT officers who broke down
his door in the middle of the night. The officers, who had obtained the
warrant based on a tip from an informant who claimed there were drug dealers
in the house, later said they shot Mena after he pointed a gun at them and
fired. No drugs or evidence of drug dealing were found in Mena's house, and
an autopsy revealed no drugs in his body.
"If the government officials who authorized the warrant had followed the
law, Ismael Mena would be alive today," said Mark Silverstein, the ACLU's
legal director in Colorado. "No-knock warrants should be the rare exception
and not the rule," he added.
Craig Silverman, a Denver trial lawyer and a former prosecutor summed up the
absurdity of no-knock warrants by asking, "Why do you have police officers
risking their lives and putting other people's lives at risk for a crime
that routinely results in no incarceration in Denver?"
Silverstein said that while any request to search a home must be evaluated
with care, judges should be especially wary of requests for no-knock
warrants. "No-knock warrants pose a danger to the lives of police officers
as well as innocent civilians. Many Colorado residents legally own firearms,
and Colorado's controversial 'Make My Day' law increases the risk to police.
If police do not successfully communicate their identity in the split-second
hen they kick down the door, they are likely to encounter gunfire from
citizens who believe they are justifiably defending their homes from lawless
intruders."
In 1997, the Supreme Court unanimously held that a warrant to search for
drugs does not automatically justify a no-knock entry. "The Supreme Court
requires facts that are based on the specific case and the specific home to
be searched," said Silverstein. "Police cannot rely on the easy
generalization that a drug case means that the suspects inevitably will
start shooting or attempt to destroy evidence. The warrant in this case,
however, was based on the precise stereotype that the Supreme Court
unanimously rejected in 1997.
Reality_CheckŠ
Starkiller
Along a similar line. Her we recently had a team of 6 home invaders
that were finally caught after a high speed police chase. They are
thought to be responsible for numerous home invasions in all areas of
town.
Their method of operation was to kick in the door of the unsuspecting
home owners while yelling "FBI, SEARCH WARRANT".
They were only caught after one of the occupants of the last house
called 911 from their bedroom while the thugs were robbing their
parents.
The point is, yeah that could happen.
Hesitate and die if their really bad guys
Shoot and spend the rest of your life in jail or get shot yourself and
die if it's a real cop.
Hell of a choice yes?
'A government big enough to give you everything you want, is
big enough to take away everything you have.'
"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."
*us*
>Someone did bring up a good comment to me that brought me to some good
>articles. Here is the character string search to use for google.
>
>"silverstein" "demolition" "wtc" OR "world trade center" "building 7"
>
>no doubt in my mind how the building came down. but, you surely would
>want to check it out for yourselves, anyone interested, and pick links
>you would be interested in
>
>i think the most telling thing about the demolition of WTC building 7
>is that it was done the same day the 2 planes were flown into WTC
>buildings 1 and 2. if you watch much TV, and see those shows that
>show demolitions, they indicate it is very intricate work and must be
>planned over the period of weeks, if not months.
>
>but, for some reason, WTC building 7 must have been a piece of cake
>for demolition..... so easy to find a good demolition team for later
>that day to bring it down, that they were able to plan within hours
>how to bring it down without causing all other problems that a
>demolition could,
>
>http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/wtc7.html
>
>Good site to read just above... all about WTC7 being "pulled"
>
>*turning and walking away
>"over shoulder"
>
>"i have heard it say that WTC1 and WTC2 were pulled too..........
>and that GWBush had heard earlier, even before 9/11 that it was soon
>planes would be used to attack the buildings... and.... but there are
>a lot of people who call me a 'conspiratist' and one of those 'anti-
>government wackos'
It doesn't take as much time to set up demolitions
when you don't need to protect people or other
structures in the area, either.
*us*
>What part of this don't you understand???
The Iraqis never posed a threat to you.
>...As they entered the target building ...
There was no valid reason to 'target' the building.
*us*
>On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:39:02 -0400, * US * wrote:
>>If we'd been 'less' Bush and Cheney, there would have been
>>no 9/11, the USA would be better off fiscally by trillions of
>>dollars, thousands of US military personnel would be alive
>>and well, and millions of Iraqis would be home safe.
>
>It's definitely possible.
>
>I can't help but wonder just how deep the CIA/NSA/other 3-letter
>agencies are involved in the 9/11 event. It's completely clear that
>9/11 was engineered by elements of the US government and at minimum
>those elements are being protected by this administration.
Indeed. It was Poppy the Wimp's CIA that came up
with "Operation Northwoods", the plan to kill some
Americans and blame it on someone else ...
*us*
>... idiot.
You even believe Bush when he claims God speaks through him, don't you.
*us*
>So you believe ...
He's dealing in facts.
You're the one who believes that God speaks through George W. Bush.
*us*
>More bullshit from the left.
Unlike you, I'm right.
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:05:19 -0500, optix <op...@refractor.net> wrote:
*us*
>... obviously have no clue ...
Your fascist masters count on it to keep you subservient.
Major Debacle
Exactly!
If someone busts down your door in the middle of the night, shoot 'em!
Charlie Wolf
>On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:11:56 -0500, Charlie Wolf <charli...@noemail.com> wrote:
>
>>What part of this don't you understand???
>
>The Iraqis never posed a threat to you.
>
>>...As they entered the target building ...
>
>There was no valid reason to 'target' the building.
And you know this from a news report?
Regards,
*us*
>And you know this ...
It's quite obvious that you can't back up your claim, bushfilth traitor.
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:11:56 -0500, Charlie Wolf <charli...@noemail.com> wrote:
>What part of this don't you understand???
The Iraqis never posed a threat to you.
>...As they entered the target building ...
There was no valid reason to 'target' the building.
You have nothing.
Reality_CheckŠ
"Charlie Wolf" <charli...@noemail.com> wrote in message
news:fm5f84lgh0m04sfkv...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:58:20 -0400, * US * wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:11:56 -0500, Charlie Wolf
>><charli...@noemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>What part of this don't you understand???
>>
>>The Iraqis never posed a threat to you.
>>
>>>...As they entered the target building ...
>>
>>There was no valid reason to 'target' the building.
>
> And you know this from a news report?
And you know otherwise from cowering 5000 miles away from the fighting?
*us*
There was no valid reason to invade Iraq.