T.T Boy Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 http://www.cnn.com/interactive/world/0302/otsc.popup/gallery.rome.3.jpg'> roma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty_habiT Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 ttboy>>> get on AIM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ana Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 I'll add my 2 cents-If the US is going to war to disarm Iraq because they have weapons of mass destruction, aren't they risking Iraq setting off these weapons? Maybe bloodthirsty dictators, Hussein being hardly a role model for saints, think differently than I, but if you were being attacked, wouldn't you use all the weapons you could get your grubby little hands on? Personally I think Bush can look forward to many more terrorist attacks if he continues on this plan-having no guarantee that Saddam will not let loose his weapons of mass destruction before Bush gets to them and giving Al Quada and the like another example to say "hey look Americans killed your brother/father/sisters, etc, why don't you set off a bomb/dirty bomb/plane,etc... in the US and get revenge?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Dobbs Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Originally posted by chester FUCK BUSH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grittylifer Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 your mad fly sexy huh? Originally posted by ana I'll add my 2 cents-If the US is going to war to disarm Iraq because they have weapons of mass destruction, aren't they risking Iraq setting off these weapons? Maybe bloodthirsty dictators, Hussein being hardly a role model for saints, think differently than I, but if you were being attacked, wouldn't you use all the weapons you could get your grubby little hands on? Personally I think Bush can look forward to many more terrorist attacks if he continues on this plan-having no guarantee that Saddam will not let loose his weapons of mass destruction before Bush gets to them and giving Al Quada and the like another example to say "hey look Americans killed your brother/father/sisters, etc, why don't you set off a bomb/dirty bomb/plane,etc... in the US and get revenge?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ana Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 ummm well certainly mad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aichs47 Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Originally posted by Ronnie Dobbs da pussy fi dead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grittylifer Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 in what kinna way?... mad like bush is in the white house while dick is behind the scenes with colon? or mad like its a world gone mad? Originally posted by ana ummm well certainly mad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giving Tree Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak for me. MARTIN NIEMOELLER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BROWNer Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 there was a protest here, but i worked all day and couldn't make it, regrettably. i'm am fully down with the promotion of peace and anti-war demonstrations to stop the incredibly weak and disgusting daily PR spectacle by the white house. i am so sick of the tone, the insult to everyone's intelligence, the veiled disses to the members of the UN, the handy terror alerts that inevitably end up being false becuz some al qaeda suspect supposedly faked out the fbi, the utter fanaticism that they claim to be so morally superior to................... what are we coming up to now, 5 months straight of iraq white house spin every goddamn day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ana Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Originally posted by alder No offense to all the peaceful protestors but I think at a certain point if want someone to listen to you, you're gonna have to light something on fire. All the protest that I've been to in the US have been peaceful and some of them quite large but none of them had alot of press coverage and not that many people outside of those directly affected knew about them. I'm not for all out anarchy, but I'm not saying I couldn't use some new home furnishings and a nice jacket for those cold nights. Might I suggest you look at the ties between gov't, big business and big media? You might be shocked at how much CNN doesn't report. Check some alternative news sources if you want to see coverage of activist stuff. www.rabble.ca (more for Canucks) www.motherjones.com www.adbusters.org www.alternet.org the manchester guardian or the bbc are good reliable sources too though with much more of a European focus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ana Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Also about using violence to attract attention-Ghandi conducted a huge mass protest against British occupation of India using strictly peaceful methods. His methods were immensely successful. Granted different period, different sitch but violent methods generally blow up in your face in terms of pr. Media usually dismiss your message and concentrate on the number hurt or amount of property damaged if you use violence.Check Seattle, Quebec, Genoa protests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BROWNer Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 or go here for something a little more stark: cnn steez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VAITOMANOCU Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 DRAFT THE BUSH TWINS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodice_ripper Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Originally posted by .:armr:. this is about opions eurotrash...not name calling... atta boy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HESHIANDET Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 5:45 am est phila. pa. usa, im wasted out of mind, bimb iraq. just to mke you dweebs sad. i hope millions of innocent people die. word to the gods an shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_Europe Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Signs at the NYC protest: EMPTY WARHEADS FOUND IN WASHINGTON LET'S BOMB TEXAS - THEY'VE GOT OIL TOO! SOMEWHERE IN TEXAS, A VILLAGE IS MISSING ITS IDIOT. THERE'S A DICK BEHIND THE BUSH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alleniverson Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 To Europe and the other anti-war people.. at what point do you feel war is necessary? do you feel we should be attacked first? if so, why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.:armr:. Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Originally posted by Europe Signs at the NYC protest: EMPTY WARHEADS FOUND IN WASHINGTON LET'S BOMB TEXAS - THEY'VE GOT OIL TOO! SOMEWHERE IN TEXAS, A VILLAGE IS MISSING ITS IDIOT. THERE'S A DICK BEHIND THE BUSH now those are provocative :D im pro war...a lil on the fence...but def leaning on the pro war side...and i know why people want war simply put fear of other humans and them losing power there i said it:D :D im just a lot more secure with dumb texans in power than some1 else...thats all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_Tesseract Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Originally posted by alleniverson To Europe and the other anti-war people.. at what point do you feel war is necessary? do you feel we should be attacked first? if so, why? [1] At the point were your 'secret' sources are shown to the UN and after inspection they prove to be reliable and true...if the US is so sure saddam has all those weapons and the inspectors still havent found them, why not let'em check the data??? I think its common sense that you cant convice the whole world just because you say so... [2] inspectors are satisfyied with the corporation from the iraqis right now, and they say the investigation is moving correct, if they werent willing to corporate, that would be a reason...anyway, war is the final move and i think we have a long way till that. As far as US being attacked, theres no way iraq, can threaten US soil with a military attack, you know that very well. The only attack you could take would be a terrorist attack...thats unpredictable, and it has nothing to do with who attacks first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_Tesseract Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Originally posted by alder No offense to all the peaceful protestors but I think at a certain point if want someone to listen to you, you're gonna have to light something on fire. All the protest that I've been to in the US have been peaceful and some of them quite large but none of them had alot of press coverage and not that many people outside of those directly affected knew about them. I'm not for all out anarchy, but I'm not saying I couldn't use some new home furnishings and a nice jacket for those cold nights. I totally disagree with that, heres what a small example of what happened here yesterday: http://tovima.dolnet.gr/B/D160203/1rea5b.jpg'> Breaking stuff is sure more fun, and you get to feel more active...but its a total illussion, the only thing you achieve is pass the wrong message, these protests were ANTI-WAR, and thats why they should remain peacefull, practise what you preach and keep your actions in context... As far as media coverage, my impression is that the whole world saw what happened yesterday, the message was sent clearly to the US, its up to you guys to think about it or not. alea jacta est. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Thoughts from a few others ... I e-mailed an ex-girlfriend to ask her what she thought about the impending war. This was her response: I am utterly against it. And if there was anything I could do to stop it, I would. I personally think that Bush is the AntiChrist who will lead us into the 3rd world war that will destroy life as we know it. Look in the Bible sometime. The signs are there. (I really dont know, but Mom made us watch Left Behind and some of the signs were in there.) Any time a president who was not even elected by the majority can start a war for oil and say it is to "stop evil", not a good idea. And what is with the religious bullshit about this being about an "evil axis?" What place does the word "evil" have in politics? Also, since my friends are in the armed forces, I think it is scary. Richie just got engaged, and sent to Kuwait in one week. If one of my friends is killed overseas, I will go crazy and personally bomb the White House. Plus Bush is dumb. And ugly. My current girlfriend had this to say after going to a mass that was mostly about the war: yesterday, mass was about the war too. the priest was saying how he was conflicted b/c he wants to have pride in america and protect us against terrorism, but at the same time, we're going to be killing thousands of innocent people and who are we to just go and do this without international approval. the gospel was about being unclean and he was saying that we as a nation are unclean by going to war. then he said that it's scary that the president has gone this far in the movement to start a war when the american people arent even behind him. it's like bush doesnt care what america is saying, he's going to do what he wants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ArtvandaL Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Im glad I dont go to Church, fuck church Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HESHIANDET Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 uhhhh, i wasn't really serious about what i said last night. i was under the *ahem* influence. im not gonna discuss this anymore, you guys are all cool w/ me, we just don't see eye to eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grittylifer Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 i seen some slimeball republican on a debate show, the independant he was debating against referenced a mid 90's think tank memo from the republican conserivitives that basically outlined taking over iraq to disrupt opec and provide military supremecy for israel. this was years before the 9/11 attacks. which leads me to conclude that in my opinion the 9/11 attacks were allowed to happen in order to further the republican agenda of taking over iraq. iraq is one broke ass ho of a country. the only threat the could pose is to their neighbors, most of which are not to keen on a war. and again, if you look at whats behind al quida, its the israel palestine thing. solve that shit, and i bet money youll rid the world of the majority of islamic extremist terror. did anyone see the time photo essay of the chechyn rebels and the theatre in moscow? brutal shots of passed out women rebels -passed out from gas- that were shot and killed while they were passed out. the administration has ran our country into the dirt in the last two years. we have a fucked economy, less civil rights, a goverment that failed to protect its citizens when it had warnings of terrorist attacks, unsolved case of anthrax attacks, huge deficit, social programs are slashed while the rich are proposed to get huge tax cuts and state goverments are going broke. i dont give two fucks about iraq. george bush has done more harm to the country i live in than the terrorists could hope to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ArtvandaL Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Originally posted by ******** i seen some slimeball republican on a debate show, the independant he was debating against referenced a mid 90's think tank memo from the republican conserivitives that basically outlined taking over iraq to disrupt opec and provide military supremecy for israel. this was years before the 9/11 attacks. which leads me to conclude that in my opinion the 9/11 attacks were allowed to happen in order to further the republican agenda of taking over iraq. iraq is one broke ass ho of a country. the only threat the could pose is to their neighbors, most of which are not to keen on a war. and again, if you look at whats behind al quida, its the israel palestine thing. solve that shit, and i bet money youll rid the world of the majority of islamic extremist terror. did anyone see the time photo essay of the chechyn rebels and the theatre in moscow? brutal shots of passed out women rebels -passed out from gas- that were shot and killed while they were passed out. the administration has ran our country into the dirt in the last two years. we have a fucked economy, less civil rights, a goverment that failed to protect its citizens when it had warnings of terrorist attacks, unsolved case of anthrax attacks, huge deficit, social programs are slashed while the rich are proposed to get huge tax cuts and state goverments are going broke. i dont give two fucks about iraq. george bush has done more harm the country i live in than the terrorists could hope to. plus we havent seen osamas head yet!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boxcarwilly Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 infoshop.org helps with a good amount of unbiased straight news, and always anarchist comments on the juicy stuff. i personally wont get involved in a diatribe against war as a last resort, tho war is a necessary evil due to greed consumption etc on both sides i dont think blowing the hell out of another country should be used as a threat and/or a consequence. everyone knows my opinions to be extremely anti-US, and have defended myself on numerous occasions... yet just a little hint at who to believe: "Major duct tape manufacturers came out this week to the tune of: DUCT TAPE IS gaspermeable and wont do a damn thing against biowar/infectwar you are better using clear packing tape which happens to be impermeable to gas and air yet not very temperature resistant" Thanks senor ashcroft because millions of gunjumping americans would have died just like the Jews who took showers to be clean... hmmm more parallels to Nazi America 2003. rant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grittylifer Posted February 16, 2003 Share Posted February 16, 2003 Osama Rallies Muslims, Condemns Hussein By William Rivers Pitt, TruthOut.com February 12, 2003 Osama bin Laden rose from the dead yet again on Tuesday to prophesy doom and death for America. This is nothing new; he has been clawing his way out of various burial holes for seventeen months now, and always manages to strike fear into the American heart by way of the American media and the Bush administration at exactly the moment when incredibly important shifts in history are in the offing. At this moment, George W. Bush stands almost completely alone in his desire to make pre-emptive war on the nation of Iraq. Several key NATO allies – France, Germany and Belgium among them – have thrown sand into the gears of battle by refusing to prepare Turkey for an immediate war they do not support nor deem necessary. As this incredible state of affairs unfolded, Americans found their ears ringing with orange-hued warnings of imminent death. Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge went so far as to tell people to load up on plastic sheeting and duct tape so as to bar their windows from chemical attack, but the administration he calls home made sure to tell people to live their lives normally and continue shopping. And so it goes. This is fairly standard stuff within the American echo chamber. Let there be one important piece of legislation, or one highly embarrassing turn of events for the administration, and the word goes forth that the sky is falling. We have been dealing with this politically manufactured low-grade hysteria for many months now. Most Americans have reached a suspended state of disbelief about it all, and won't be taking these warnings seriously unless they see Osama bin Laden on their doorstep in a black cassock with scythe in hand. Bush and Ashcroft will soon run out of colors on the warning chart if this keeps up; the shade after red likely exists somewhere in the fourth dimension, visible only to ultraconservative war-hawks and media talking heads. When the voice of Osama comes out of the television, however, things suddenly become much more serious. The Bush administration may have forgotten him entirely, but every single American still sleeps with visions of burning towers and plummeting bodies projected on the backs of their eyelids. Peter Bergen, noted terrorism expert, stated on CNN that such messages from bin Laden usually herald new attacks. If the Orange Alert was dubious on Monday, it was given new importance on Tuesday. Secretary of State Colin Powell set the stage for this new bin Laden statement early on Tuesday, much to the surprise of CIA Director George Tenet. Powell, during testimony at a Senate Budget Committee meeting, let it drop that the Middle East news network Al Jazeera had in hand a tape of Osama bin Laden. Tenet, seated with the Intelligence Committee, had not heard of this tape. One is left wondering at Powell's sources, especially after the story unfolded. Powell used the existence of this tape, and the words he claimed bin Laden had said on it, to further tie Saddam Hussein to international terrorism. He claimed bin Laden was clearly establishing a connection between himself and Hussein on the tape, beyond all question. "This nexus between terrorists and states that are developing weapons of mass destruction," said Powell, "can no longer be looked away from and ignored." The actual tape, played and translated live on every major cable news channel, told a very different story. Osama bin Laden swore vengeance against America if Iraq was attacked, and demanded that the Muslim world stand in solidarity with the Muslim people of Iraq. In very clear words, Osama bin Laden told the people of Iraq to rise up against both American aggression and against "socialist" Saddam Hussein. If the translations that were provided were reliable, there is no ambiguity in bin Laden's words on the matter. So much, it seems, for Powell's case that Hussein and bin Laden are working together. And this is where it gets interesting. An MSNBC.com report on the bin Laden tape carried the following sentence: "At the same time, the message also called on Iraqis to rise up and oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, who is a secular leader." This clearly confirms the clarity of mind Osama bin Laden displayed in regard to Saddam Hussein, and conforms to the recorded message heard by millions and millions of people around the world. Less than twenty minutes after this report appeared on MSNBC, that sentence was deleted from the report. A few intrepid Internet news junkies, including myself, preserved what is called a 'screen-grab' of the original article before it was scrubbed. The version of the article currently in existence has replaced the text above with this far more benign text: "The taped statement reflected Saddam, a secular leader, but made it clear that Saddam was not the immediate target." A similar story line, bereft of the portions describing bin Laden's wish that Hussein be killed, has appeared in virtually every mainstream news media report on the matter. The manner in which this story unfolded brings forth a number of serious questions. First of all, questions must be asked regarding Colin Powell's motives in this. The recording heard by the world diverged significantly from the spin Powell put on it before the Budget Committee. Osama bin Laden did not state an alliance with Saddam Hussein, but with the Muslim civilians in Iraq who will bear the bloody brunt of any American attack. In fact, bin Laden told the Iraqi people to rise up against Hussein. This is not the way allies deal with each other. Why would Powell go to such lengths to stretch the glaringly obvious truth in this matter? He is already suffering from a deficit of credibility in the aftermath of the plagiarism scandal that is currently rocking Tony Blair's administration. Powell stood before the UN last week and praised a British intelligence dossier that contained cut-and-pasted pages and pages of an essay, with all spelling and grammatical errors intact, written by a postgraduate student from California. The data was years out of date, flat-out contradictory in several key areas, used without the student's awareness, and yet was offered as an up-to-the-minute assessment of Iraqi weapons capabilities. This, in combination with Powell's obviously skewed interpretation of Tuesday's bin Laden recording, forces us to call into question every single word he and the Bush administration have said on the matter. The question of whether Saddam Hussein has ties to al Qaeda terrorism and Osama bin Laden can be put to bed now, it seems, alongside the tatters and shreds of honor and dignity formerly enjoyed by the Secretary of State. More ominously, why would a news network like MSNBC so obviously haul water for the failed allegations of the Bush administration? Events happen in seconds on the internet, but merely scrubbing uncomfortable sentences from articles cannot stop the tens of thousands of readers who are wise enough now to save the evidence before it evaporates in a cloud of silicon. These deletions display a manifest breach of faith on behalf of MSNBC, and call to mind issues surrounding the conflict of interest that are inherent in the ownership of this network. MSNBC, along with NBC and CNBC, are owned by the corporate giant General Electric. GE is one of the largest defense contractors on the face of the earth, and will, bluntly, be paid a king's ransom in the event of a war. Following this line of questioning leads to some dark corners, indeed. How often is the data being manipulated by the corporate-owned media? Are we to rely solely on the nimble fingers of keyboarded citizens to get to the heart of the matter? A report appearing later on Tuesday on MSNBC.com served to refute the claims of collusion between bin Laden and Hussein. "Although Powell sought to characterize the tape as a concrete link between al-Qaida and the Iraqi government," the MSNBC.com report read, "White House officials acknowledged later to NBC News that it did not. Powell did not know it had not been broadcast when he spoke to the committee and was 'a little on the front of his skis,' a government source said." These lines were buried deep within the report. By Wednesday morning, this text had been completely removed from the article. Virtually the entire global community stands against us today on the subject of this war, with nations willing and able to destroy NATO before allowing it to take place. The Bush administration has cut billions of dollars from street-level homeland defenders like police forces and fire houses, yet has the eagle screaming for a war that will be fought simultaneously in downtown Baghdad and in your utterly undefended neighborhood. They have the gall, simultaneously, to speak of trillion dollar tax cuts for rich people that will further debilitate our budgetary ability to defend ourselves. Links between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein have proven to be not only false, but laughable. The credibility of the Bush administration has been destroyed. And yet we go, with the news media whistling 'Onward Christian Soldiers' all the while. The Bush administration is ecstatic, believing they can spin bin Laden's statement of support for Iraqi civilians into a connection between the terrorist and Hussein. You are being lied to, clumsily. Pass it on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.:armr:. Posted February 17, 2003 Share Posted February 17, 2003 it may be possible for there to be some sort of link (bin laden...hussien). i mean they all have a common enemy. US. :). stupid isreal if they werent so pushy but they do have a right to be there...not to be as awful as they have been...i mean...we all know theyre just a pit stop for america...and now they think their some sort of country...cmon now oh and just wondering...if any1 knows americas other aillies in the middle east and where we get oil from if you could post it that would be grand :) and do you guys pro and anti war sides think they have a right to be there? is it their fault theyve been shitted on by all those people? just a thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.:armr:. Posted February 17, 2003 Share Posted February 17, 2003 oh one more thing...about george bush being a piece of shit yadda yadda...hes just a talking head...you really think he knows what hes doing i know if i grew up son of president super rich oil tycoon...id be dumb too he just does what hes told...who tells him...who knows...ashcroft...hes new friend ridge...whoever else is on his cabinet...chances are...there is some hidden agenda but i can say im scared :( maybe the war will bring more terror...maybe not i personally feel since america hasnt done shit to get bin laden...all those other people think they can just do what ever...but if we show some balls...who knows...im rambling once again...sowwie :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.