no prob dave p :D
LOL @ exploding cigar!!!
Printable View
no prob dave p :D
LOL @ exploding cigar!!!
genocide is by definintion:Quote:
Originally posted by david petley
I hope comments on genocide were just a really bad taste joke.
Whether you send them to the gas chambers or remove them with "surgical" military strikes (as is being discussed in the link provided in the opening post of this thread) it is still planned extermination.Quote:
The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group.
I stand by the comment.
Are we suggesting a widespread cull of all politicians ? Nice. I've often thought that anyone who actually wants to become a politician should automatically be disqualified from being one because they are probably a power hungry narcissist. The police should just drag random members of the public in off the streets and tell them that they are in charge from now on.
I'm going into London tomorrow - so I can have a pop at Blair.
Comrades, the revolution is only a chatroom posting away ...
LOL omg a lot of u people need to get up.. walk away from the PC and get a clue.. or start taking ur medication.. go back to web design.
what if, and only IF, we have proof that that politician is planning on whacking us. do we wait to get whacked then whack him. I'm not supporting assination, but if we have proof that saddam is cooking up a nasty suprise for us, won't whacking him be a little more economical than bombing iraq.....agian.Quote:
Originally posted by gerbick
I'm American.
I don't believe that we can go 'whack' a politician in a country that we don't seem to like.
so, evidently some think otherwise.
O.k. so now you may be saying... well where is the proof. If we make our information public, we lose that source of information(dead informants don't really work well). Not only that we may be using an "illegal" source of information. Congress passed a law a few years back making it illegal to gain information from people that commit certian crimes. Well you only get info about terrorists/enemies, from terrorists or enemies.
As far as apathy, its really a hard question, do we sit by while people are oppressed, I would say yes, unless we are enabeling the suppression. Which we do every time we deal with a non-representative government.
One last thing. It is not a conflict of interest to assinate a foreign leader during war. . . however are we at a state of war. when is the war over? what is the objective?
[Edited by TallGuyLittleCar on 06-17-2002 at 12:14 PM]
dude this is Coffee Lounge where people DO NOT have to think about web design... at least not seriously... so if u wanna do that u're welcome to go somewhere else :)Quote:
Originally posted by Hellsbellboy
LOL omg a lot of u people need to get up.. walk away from the PC and get a clue.. or start taking ur medication.. go back to web design.
An interesting point TallGuy, but I'm still not convinced about the ethics of it. Egypt for example, could send an agent to assasinate Ariel Sharon - and then say that they had evidence that he was planning on starting another war against them. If they said "well, we can't show you the proof, but honestly, we do have it" then that really wouldn't be on.
Similarly, on a local level, you can't shoot someone then tell the police that you think they were going to get you first - but you can't prove it.
The problem is that we have a proper system of law enforcement within countries, but there isn't a decent police force or judicial system that can punish actual countries when they break international law.
Having said that, millions of lives might have been saved if we'd have taken out Hitler in 1939. He was (kind of)democratically elected though, so he'd have had just as much right to assasinate Chamberlain or Roosevelt (was it?) and say that he was doing it in the name of peace.
I think it's fair to say that the US, and UK governments are much more interested in having friendly regimes abroad rather than promote democracy or human rights. The last thing they want is democratic elections in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia - the autocratic rulers there are quite US-friendly compared to the many Islamic fundamentalists in their populations.
Quote:
Originally posted by fancy a brew ??
Egypt for example, could send an agent to assasinate Ariel Sharon - and then say that they had evidence that he was planning on starting another war against them.
Isreal never started a war agianst egypt. but that is another topic.
Quote:
Similarly, on a local level, you can't shoot someone then tell the police that you think they were going to get you first - but you can't prove it.
But if i'm carrying over 5000 in cash the police can steal (confiscate) it becuase "obviously" i'm a drug dealer.
Quote:
there isn't a decent police force or judicial system that can punish actual countries when they break international law.
well there is the U.N. however it has become so corrupt its more a joke than anything else. And the only punish the weaker contries. The U.N. would never dream of punishing the U.S. the U.K. or China.
well I would say the radical Islamic fundamentalists are a propoerty of the autocratic rulers. "don't get pissed at me your super rich king while you live in poverty in the desert... its the western worlds fault"Quote:
The last thing they want is democratic elections in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia - the autocratic rulers there are quite US-friendly compared to the many Islamic fundamentalists in their populations.
also the autocratic rules of saudi arabia are Isreali friendly as well. They invest heavily in Isreal through remote channels. To their public they promote palestine.
In the end I still belive in representative government. if they elect a government that attacks the u.s. well we can declare war with a little better concious
My thoughts....
Killing saddam hussain isn't really a great idea lets face it. If he is killed then the conutry may split into rival factions (e.g. warlords) and then the US will just have to go back in and take them out aswell. :( better the devil you know than the devil you don't.
The US's foreign policy has almost always been verging on the ridiculous. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Colombia etc. etc. (But lets not forget WW2 though ;)) The fact that they can do anything they want without reprisal from the UN / NATO etc is a joke. Does anyone remember the league of nations? That failed because America didn't join and took on an islationistic policy. Thus trade embargos didn't work, sanctions were impossible etc By acting alone the US has removed the power from the UN and that is in it's self a worrying state of affairs. What is even more sickening is the way world leaders line up to kiss Bush's ass. Britain (where i live) had no reason to send troops to Afghanistan! none whatsoever! but our soldiers are still there! this whole thing makes me sick it really does!
Worrying this state of affairs is!
:)
Alan
you know?! hence i can barely wander around my neighborhood because they (the police) think i am out looking for drugs... i'm like duh, i live here ... they wander through with floodlights and such... it gets real old real quick.Quote:
Originally posted by TallGuyLittleCar
But if i'm carrying over 5000 in cash the police can steal (confiscate) it becuase "obviously" i'm a drug dealer.
plus with all this "extended authority" given to law enforcement these days... it doesn't sit well.
the police can impound your car at the drop of a hat now basically. plenty of time to plant evidence should they feel the need. after all, that was one of the major tenets of cointelpro which ashcroft apparantly finds dear enough to try and revive, that mofo.
this administration is busily tearing down all kinds of things that keep people safe from our own government... who does indeed have a history of terrorism itself...
the more people here are distracted (wars with iraq etc) from that fact the easier it's going to become for the administration too keep pulling the rug of rights from under our own feet.
sadly, not that too many people are complaining over here.
[sarcasm]oh, our civil liberties and freedoms are only in jeopardy as long as that evil saddam hussein guy is around[/sarcasm] whatever. i'm more worried about the guys pulling the strings here in the states most of the time.
Quote:
Originally posted by tonytryout
Sorry man -- it was cyk. With reference to the jewish worker not turning up for work -- I did not write the report myself. All I said was that there was an unconfirmed report and denied by Bush admin.Quote:
Originally posted by swampy
wasn't my link.
The conspiracy theory about the jewish workers not turning up for work is ludicrous.
Saying that, I am keeping an open mind -- it is now difficult to know which is truth and which is lies. When was the last time you heard a politician telling a truth? remember Clinton lied under oath
At the end of the day, there would not be so much trouble if Bush admin had not supported Isreal so strongly and have the decency to admit wrong doings. And stop being so aggorant towards other countries for example I remember a summit meeting a couple of months ago to talk about pollution and globalisation, all countries agreed to cut down on pollution production. USA did not bother to turn up and in the nicest way possible said "**** off" to the other countries. That is one of the many reasons why there are a lot of resentments. [/B]
That was NOT the story I was pointing to- there were many many Jewish people killed in the 9/11 attacks- to suggest this was planned by our own government--well I'm not even going to suggest something so absurd-
-tonytryout I don't want to be associated with that type of idiocy (I have my very own)-can you please re-check the article if neccassary(its the Paula Zahn interview) and edit your post accordingly . Meaning do not refernce me as posting a link to the story you describe- I want nothing to do with that mentality.
[Edited by cyk on 06-17-2002 at 01:47 PM]
sniff, sniff, whats that I smell? Smells sort of like Iran-Contra part two.
--------------------------------------------------------
But the whole truth is much uglier. We have documented in detail how the Iran-contra drug-running and gun-running operations run out of Bush's own office played their role in increasing the heroin, crack, cocain, and marijuana brought into this country. We have reviewed Bush's relations with his close supporters in the Wall Street LBO gang, much of whose liquidity is derived from narcotics payments which the banking system is eager to recycle and launder. We recall Bush's 1990 meeting with Syrian President Hafez Assad, who is personally one of the most prolific drug pushers on the planet, and whom Bush embraced as an ally during the Gulf crisis.
--------------------------------------------------------
1) the secret arming of the Khomeini regime in Iran by the U.S. government, during an official U.S.-decreed arms embargo against Iran, while the U.S. publicly denounced the recipients of its secret deliveries as terrorists and kidnappers--a policy initiated under the Jimmy Carter presidency and accelerated by the Reagan-Bush administration;
2) the Reagan-Bush administration's secret arming of its `` Contras '' for war against the Sandinista regime in Nicaragua, while such aid was explicitly prohibited under U.S. law;
3) the use of communist and terrorist enemies--often armed directly by the Anglo-Americans--to justify a police state and covert, oligarchical rule at home;
4) paying for and protecting the gun-running projects with drug- smuggling, embezzlement, theft by diversion from authorized U.S. programs, and the `` silencing '' of both opponents and knowledgeable participants in the schemes; and
5) the continual, routine perjury and deception of the public by government officials pretending to have no knowledge of these activities; and the routine acquiescence in that deception by Congressmen too frightened to oppose it.
-----------------------------------------------------------
You guys think maybe Bush Jr might be involved in something similar with what has been going on in the middle east lately? Possabilities are very high, and money and power to control this type of operation are there. Something to maybe think about.
well diggity doc, wouldn't put it past bush jr at all.
after all, we all know the war on drugs is a load of bull*$%&
oh and welcome to FK, nice handle ya got there :p
Thank you, diggity doc is my real name, I think, yeah.
Bush Sr was a crack dealer, and now his son is a brainwashed crack-abuser. His dad molded him to perfection.
for a new member that was a damn good first post :)
Not necessarily. There is an extremely large percentage of the Cuban population who blame Castro for their economic woes. Thats why thousands upon thousands have fled to the US and set up base in Miami. These people HATE Castro with all their heart...and they all vote vote for the Republican's who are more hard line with the Castro regime.Quote:
Originally posted by david petley
maybe, though the same tactics have not worked against Cuba. The people there don't blame their leader for keeping them poor, they blame the US for keeping them poor.
dp
Right-wingers can always count on the vote from the Cuban Americans.
What can I say, I am deeply deeply deeply involved in the political field, deep like the mines of Minolta.
i take it you're not partial to the Bush administration? :DQuote:
Originally posted by Diggity Doc
Thank you, diggity doc is my real name, I think, yeah.
Bush Sr was a crack dealer, and now his son is a brainwashed crack-abuser. His dad molded him to perfection.
u must feel very strongly about this issue if u made it your 1st post hehehe...
then you can prove item numbers 3-5 of your post. If you care to that is.Quote:
Originally posted by Diggity Doc
What can I say, I am deeply deeply deeply involved in the political field, deep like the mines of Minolta.
lol something amusing i just found:
http://www.assesofevil.com
:p