Discussion:
Arabs excused for abuses
(too old to reply)
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-25 02:46:06 UTC
Permalink
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they showed
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail, we can assume
that the left is OK with Arabs committing abuses. But not the US
To the left Arabs are sub Human and not required to hold the high moral
standards set for the US Australia and Britain. Infact the west is
responsible for any crimes committed by Arabs according to the left, as you
are responsible if your pet animal attacks someone, you are also responsible
if a Arab attacks someone, Arabs are not intelligent enough to take
responsibility for there own actions, this is a major point to the lefts
support for terrorism
Baldin Pramer
2004-10-25 03:02:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they showed
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail, we can assume
that the left is OK with Arabs committing abuses.
Really? Did you chat with the left today?
--
Sir Baldin Pramer, R.P.A.

"Tell the Queen I will call her back as soon as I have finished my tea."
Roedy Green
2004-10-25 04:32:23 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY. They are morally
obligated to fight you and repel the ILLEGAL invasion.

American had absolutely no business invading Iraq. If you Yanks get
your nose bloodied doing it, it is your own stupid fault. You damn
well deserved it.




Cheney masterminded 9/11.
~ Stanley Hilton lead attorney for the 9/11 victims, Bob Dole's advisor.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/bush911.html for details on Cheney's crime of the century.
Roedy Green
2004-10-25 04:37:39 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:32:23 GMT, Roedy Green
Post by Roedy Green
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY. They are morally
obligated to fight you and repel the ILLEGAL invasion.
American had absolutely no business invading Iraq. If you Yanks get
your nose bloodied doing it, it is your own stupid fault. You damn
well deserved it.
It was Bush who framed Iraq.

It was Bush who lied about the WMDs.

It was Bush who started the hostilities.

It was Bush who kills 10 to 1.

It is Bush who is killing kids.

It is Bush who set up torture camps and gay kink sexual humiliation
camps.

It is Bush who set up prisons for kids where they are sexually abused
and raped.


Bush's is the evil I can do something about. What the Iraqis are doing
to try to stop Bush from butchering kids might even be considered
virtue by some.

It would be counter-productive to condemn the Iraqis. It would make it
even harder for the Bushites to remove the beam from their eyes.



Cheney masterminded 9/11.
~ Stanley Hilton lead attorney for the 9/11 victims, Bob Dole's advisor.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/bush911.html for details on Cheney's crime of the century.
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-25 10:37:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:32:23 GMT, Roedy Green
Post by Roedy Green
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY. They are morally
obligated to fight you and repel the ILLEGAL invasion.
American had absolutely no business invading Iraq. If you Yanks get
your nose bloodied doing it, it is your own stupid fault. You damn
well deserved it.
It was Bush who framed Iraq.
Iraq were in breach of resolution 1441

End of story
Post by Roedy Green
It was Bush who lied about the WMDs.
It was Bush who started the hostilities.
It was Bush who kills 10 to 1.
It is Bush who is killing kids.
It is Bush who set up torture camps and gay kink sexual humiliation
camps.
It is Bush who set up prisons for kids where they are sexually abused
and raped.
Bush's is the evil I can do something about. What the Iraqis are doing
to try to stop Bush from butchering kids might even be considered
virtue by some.
It would be counter-productive to condemn the Iraqis. It would make it
even harder for the Bushites to remove the beam from their eyes.
Cheney masterminded 9/11.
~ Stanley Hilton lead attorney for the 9/11 victims, Bob Dole's advisor.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/bush911.html for details on Cheney's crime of the century.
catchmerevisited
2004-10-25 18:26:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:32:23 GMT, Roedy Green
Post by Roedy Green
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY. They are morally
obligated to fight you and repel the ILLEGAL invasion.
American had absolutely no business invading Iraq. If you Yanks get
your nose bloodied doing it, it is your own stupid fault. You damn
well deserved it.
It was Bush who framed Iraq.
Iraq were in breach of resolution 1441
End of story
so then you claim that the Bush Administration believed it had legal
authority to invade due to a UN Resolution?
To me, it sounds like it was up to the UN how they would enforce that
infraction- NOT the US!
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-26 00:13:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:32:23 GMT, Roedy Green
Post by Roedy Green
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY. They are morally
obligated to fight you and repel the ILLEGAL invasion.
American had absolutely no business invading Iraq. If you Yanks get
your nose bloodied doing it, it is your own stupid fault. You damn
well deserved it.
It was Bush who framed Iraq.
Iraq were in breach of resolution 1441
End of story
so then you claim that the Bush Administration believed it had legal
authority to invade due to a UN Resolution?
To me, it sounds like it was up to the UN how they would enforce that
infraction- NOT the US!
No the UN has no authority at all on the matter,

it is decided by the UNSC, they unanimously voted to give all member stats
the power to enforce the resolutions
catchmerevisited
2004-10-26 05:11:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:32:23 GMT, Roedy Green
Post by Roedy Green
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY. They are morally
obligated to fight you and repel the ILLEGAL invasion.
American had absolutely no business invading Iraq. If you Yanks get
your nose bloodied doing it, it is your own stupid fault. You damn
well deserved it.
It was Bush who framed Iraq.
Iraq were in breach of resolution 1441
End of story
so then you claim that the Bush Administration believed it had legal
authority to invade due to a UN Resolution?
To me, it sounds like it was up to the UN how they would enforce that
infraction- NOT the US!
No the UN has no authority at all on the matter,
it is decided by the UNSC, they unanimously voted to give all member stats
the power to enforce the resolutions
lol.
i like to here your answer on this:
what is the difference, between The United Nations,
and the United Nations Security Council?

the UN, is the head of all the various arms of the organization itself.
If the UN has no Authority, than neither does the UNSC!
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-28 13:18:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:32:23 GMT, Roedy Green
Post by Roedy Green
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY. They are morally
obligated to fight you and repel the ILLEGAL invasion.
American had absolutely no business invading Iraq. If you Yanks get
your nose bloodied doing it, it is your own stupid fault. You damn
well deserved it.
It was Bush who framed Iraq.
Iraq were in breach of resolution 1441
End of story
so then you claim that the Bush Administration believed it had legal
authority to invade due to a UN Resolution?
To me, it sounds like it was up to the UN how they would enforce that
infraction- NOT the US!
No the UN has no authority at all on the matter,
it is decided by the UNSC, they unanimously voted to give all member stats
the power to enforce the resolutions
lol.
what is the difference, between The United Nations,
and the United Nations Security Council?
the UN, is the head of all the various arms of the organization itself.
If the UN has no Authority, than neither does the UNSC!
So you say, but your betters in this world know better

The UNSC does not get its authority from the UN.

it gets it from its member nations, and those that support it.
Arcturus
2004-10-26 08:23:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
it is decided by the UNSC, they unanimously voted to give all member stats
the power to enforce the resolutions
*splutter*.. thats utter bullshit. Give me the date & time of this so
called vote? I would love to see the documentation giving the details as
well.

In respect to your earlier assertions that UN resolution 1441 gave the US
the authority to invade IRAQ. That is just plain bullshit as well.

When you read Resolution 1441, and I doubt that you have, it gives no
country authority to invade IRAQ. It would have required another resolution
voted in the UN security council to authorise that
action.

Can you can quote from 1441 where it authorises any country to invade
IRAQ?

The closest, is the warning of the consequences for failing to comply in
clause 13.

"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; "

That is not a authorisation for member states to enforce.

It would require another resolution which is usually the next step in the
process
of these matters to authorise military action by member states. An example
of how
it works, is where in resolution 678 (dealing with Iraq in its invasion of
Kuwait)
it states, it authorises member states to use whatever means possible to
restore
peace and security.

678 Example:
"2. Authorizes Member States co-operating with the Government of Kuwait,
unless Iraq on or before 15 January 1991 fully implements, as set forth in
paragraph 1 above, the foregoing resolutions, to use all necessary means to
uphold and implement resolution 660 (1990) and all subsequent relevant
resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area;"

This authorisation is missing from 1441.

Resolution 660 is like 1441, where it calls on IRAQ to comply(leave Kuwait)
and warns of serious consequesences if non-compliance. But it was Resolution
678 that authorises member states to take whatever means (i.e. military
action) to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

The difference in The Iraqi invasion by the US was that they had no UN
resolution authorising member states to take unilateral or even multilateral
action. So in effect, the nations that participated in the "Coalition of
the willing"
broke international law.

Brian Keenan
Dean Turner
2004-10-27 04:15:45 UTC
Permalink
If the U.S used U.N resolutions to justify invading Iraq, then when are
going to invade Israel? That country has also ignored U.N resolutions!
Post by Arcturus
The difference in The Iraqi invasion by the US was that they had no UN
resolution authorising member states to take unilateral or even multilateral
action. So in effect, the nations that participated in the "Coalition of
the willing"
broke international law.
Brian Keenan
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-28 13:14:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dean Turner
If the U.S used U.N resolutions to justify invading Iraq, then when are
going to invade Israel? That country has also ignored U.N resolutions!
Crap

Israel has chapter 6 resolutions against it,
they are non binding.

Chapter 7 resolution are binding and are voted on.
Post by Dean Turner
Post by Arcturus
The difference in The Iraqi invasion by the US was that they had no UN
resolution authorising member states to take unilateral or even
multilateral
Post by Arcturus
action. So in effect, the nations that participated in the "Coalition
of
Post by Arcturus
the willing"
broke international law.
Brian Keenan
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-28 13:13:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arcturus
Post by Mosley Jones III
it is decided by the UNSC, they unanimously voted to give all member stats
the power to enforce the resolutions
*splutter*.. thats utter bullshit. Give me the date & time of this so
called vote? I would love to see the documentation giving the details as
well.
In respect to your earlier assertions that UN resolution 1441 gave the US
the authority to invade IRAQ. That is just plain bullshit as well.
When you read Resolution 1441, and I doubt that you have, it gives no
country authority to invade IRAQ. It would have required another resolution
voted in the UN security council to authorise that
action.
No it does not

Evidece please
Post by Arcturus
Can you can quote from 1441 where it authorises any country to invade
IRAQ?
The closest, is the warning of the consequences for failing to comply in
clause 13.
"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; "
That is not a authorisation for member states to enforce.
It would require another resolution which is usually the next step in the
process
of these matters to authorise military action by member states. An example
of how
it works, is where in resolution 678 (dealing with Iraq in its invasion of
Kuwait)
it states, it authorises member states to use whatever means possible to
restore
peace and security.
"2. Authorizes Member States co-operating with the Government of Kuwait,
unless Iraq on or before 15 January 1991 fully implements, as set forth in
paragraph 1 above, the foregoing resolutions, to use all necessary means to
uphold and implement resolution 660 (1990) and all subsequent relevant
resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area;"
This authorisation is missing from 1441.
Resolution 660 is like 1441, where it calls on IRAQ to comply(leave Kuwait)
and warns of serious consequesences if non-compliance. But it was Resolution
678 that authorises member states to take whatever means (i.e. military
action) to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait.
The difference in The Iraqi invasion by the US was that they had no UN
resolution authorising member states to take unilateral or even multilateral
action. So in effect, the nations that participated in the "Coalition of
the willing"
broke international law.
Brian Keenan
Dana
2004-10-25 05:21:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed Iraqi's.
When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends are really
doing.
Diabolik
2004-10-25 06:05:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed Iraqi's.
Yeah, they killed the wrong people;)
Post by Dana
When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends are really
doing.
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-25 10:38:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dana
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of
49
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed
Iraqi's.
Yeah, they killed the wrong people;)
Who are the right peop to kill and why,

(facts only please)
Post by Dana
Post by Dana
When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends are really
doing.
Diabolik
2004-10-25 11:33:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by Dana
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of
49
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed
Iraqi's.
Yeah, they killed the wrong people;)
Who are the right peop to kill and why,
People like you who can't spell?
Bullock
2004-11-25 18:19:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Diabolik
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by Dana
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the
killing
Post by Diabolik
of
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by Dana
49
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed
Iraqi's.
Yeah, they killed the wrong people;)
Who are the right peop to kill and why,
People like you who can't spell?
Yet again emerges the true face of the left; wishing death upon all those
with other viewpoints.
HawkCW4
2004-10-25 17:47:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Diabolik
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by Dana
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing
of
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by Dana
49
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed
Iraqi's.
Yeah, they killed the wrong people;)
Who are the right peop to kill and why,
People like you who can't spell?
This has to be a Liberal, only a hate mongering Liberal would consider
killing for inability to spell. How did that sound? I only hope it
sounds as bad as what this guy said.

Ed
USA Ret
catchmerevisited
2004-10-25 09:22:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed Iraqi's.
When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends are really
doing.
a single US bomb levelled an entire Iraqi children's hospital.
you tell me.
Harry Snape
2004-10-25 10:25:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed Iraqi's.
When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends are really
doing.
a single US bomb levelled an entire Iraqi children's hospital.
you tell me.
I only found 2 sources for this story, one was pravda, the other a peace
activist website. Both were during the early war phase and the
information came from the eminently reliable Iraqi Information Ministry.
The Pravda version claims zero casualties. Apparently the unconfirmed
destruction of a building without any human casualties is the same as
shooting bound up people in the back of the head.

US Bombs Children's Hospital in Baghdad

One of Baghdad's main children's hospitals was destroyed last night
during a bombing raid on suburbs of the Iraqi capital. Fortunately,
there were no casualties, as half an hour before the raid all the
patients were evacuated to a bomb shelter.

The Iraqi authorities said that the attack on the children's hospital
was an international crime for which Britain and the US would 'be held
responsible before an international tribunal.'
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-25 10:39:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed Iraqi's.
When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends are really
doing.
a single US bomb levelled an entire Iraqi children's hospital.
you tell me.
What on purpose?

I calling you a liar
Dana
2004-10-25 10:55:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed Iraqi's.
When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends are really
doing.
a single US bomb levelled an entire Iraqi children's hospital.
you tell me.
Liar
HawkCW4
2004-10-25 17:35:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed Iraqi's.
When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends are really
doing.
a single US bomb levelled an entire Iraqi children's hospital.
you tell me.
Seems to me that you just hate war. You just hate that people die in
war. You hate that innocents die in wars. Well good on you. So if you
hate war so much, why are you not out there making sure that war is no
longer nessessary?

Someone tore down a couple of our buildings, they were full of
innocents. Do you honestly think we would ever let that go unpunished,
and steps taken to make sure, as much as possible, that it doesn't
happen here again? Do you happen to recall WWII? How many folks died
that day in Dec, which caused the US to go to war? How many died on 9/11?

Ed
USA Ret
fritz
2004-10-25 23:45:25 UTC
Permalink
HawkCW4 wrote ...

| Seems to me that you just hate war. You just hate that people die in
| war. You hate that innocents die in wars. Well good on you. So if you
| hate war so much, why are you not out there making sure that war is no
| longer nessessary?
|
| Someone tore down a couple of our buildings, they were full of
| innocents. Do you honestly think we would ever let that go unpunished,
| and steps taken to make sure, as much as possible, that it doesn't
| happen here again? Do you happen to recall WWII? How many folks died
| that day in Dec, which caused the US to go to war? How many died on 9/11?

WHO tore down your buildings ?
A bunch of Saudi Arabians.
Who did you attack ?
Afghanistan and Iraq.
Why ?
BECAUSE BUSH IS IN BED WITH THE SAUDIS !



|
| Ed
| USA Ret
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-26 00:17:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by fritz
HawkCW4 wrote ...
| Seems to me that you just hate war. You just hate that people die in
| war. You hate that innocents die in wars. Well good on you. So if you
| hate war so much, why are you not out there making sure that war is no
| longer nessessary?
|
| Someone tore down a couple of our buildings, they were full of
| innocents. Do you honestly think we would ever let that go unpunished,
| and steps taken to make sure, as much as possible, that it doesn't
| happen here again? Do you happen to recall WWII? How many folks died
| that day in Dec, which caused the US to go to war? How many died on 9/11?
WHO tore down your buildings ?
Al-Quada
Post by fritz
A bunch of Saudi Arabians.
Al-Quada
Post by fritz
Who did you attack ?
Al-Quada
Post by fritz
Afghanistan and Iraq.
Where Al-Quada live, and saddam who was in a position to arm Al-Quada, and
had outstanding UNSC resolution against him
Post by fritz
Why ?
BECAUSE BUSH IS IN BED WITH THE SAUDIS !
Becauewe they are bad people.

Why would you not want to defend them?
Post by fritz
|
| Ed
| USA Ret
fritz
2004-10-26 23:44:39 UTC
Permalink
Mosley Jones III wrote u...
|
| "fritz" <***@address.com> wrote in message
| news:clk3f5$dfd$02$***@news.t-online.com...
| > Who did you attack ?
|
| Al-Quada
|
| > Afghanistan and Iraq.
|
| Where Al-Quada live, and saddam who was in a position to arm Al-Quada, and
| had outstanding UNSC resolution against him

Whoops !
Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, IDIOT !
Anyway THERE WERE NO WMD in Iraq when it was attacked !
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-28 13:30:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by fritz
Mosley Jones III wrote u...
|
| > Who did you attack ?
|
| Al-Quada
|
| > Afghanistan and Iraq.
|
| Where Al-Quada live, and saddam who was in a position to arm Al-Quada, and
| had outstanding UNSC resolution against him
Whoops !
Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, IDIOT !
did i say they did?
Post by fritz
Anyway THERE WERE NO WMD in Iraq when it was attacked !
So you say.

but the Weapons inspectors say there were
"Some of those warheads were old, but it could not be ruled out some could
still be used," he added.

Charles Duelfer, the chief US weapons inspector in Iraq, has said that some
old sarin and mustard rounds have been discovered in scattered places but
said he could not say whether military-capable stockpiles remained
concealed.

http://mosley.arach.net.au/pub/news/chemical_weapons.htm
HawkCW4
2004-10-26 02:07:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by fritz
HawkCW4 wrote ...
| Seems to me that you just hate war. You just hate that people die in
| war. You hate that innocents die in wars. Well good on you. So if you
| hate war so much, why are you not out there making sure that war is no
| longer nessessary?
|
| Someone tore down a couple of our buildings, they were full of
| innocents. Do you honestly think we would ever let that go unpunished,
| and steps taken to make sure, as much as possible, that it doesn't
| happen here again? Do you happen to recall WWII? How many folks died
| that day in Dec, which caused the US to go to war? How many died on 9/11?
WHO tore down your buildings ?
A bunch of Saudi Arabians.
Who did you attack ?
Afghanistan and Iraq.
Why ?
BECAUSE BUSH IS IN BED WITH THE SAUDIS !
Sure Fritz, and he also sleeps with the Bin Ladens. Everyone knows
that, right? You ever hear of the Ohio Jones, or the Tennessee Smiths?
Would it surprize you to learn that in both cases, there were some
really bad Jones and really bad Smiths. In both cases, there were
family members who were, and still are, pillars of the communities they
live in. Your feeble attempts to make claims that Bush is a part of the
terrorist attacks is rather stupid, but does make a case for your
partys desperation in this election. If you need examples closer to
home, take a look at a President Carter who had a brother. Take another
look at a first Lady, Clinton, who had a brother. Do you actually think
that in either case, the President at that time should have taken some
blame for the actions of either? Get real and put the damn handbook
down, it is worthless to you.

Ed
USA Ret
Post by fritz
|
| Ed
| USA Ret
sunnie
2004-10-26 08:16:24 UTC
Permalink
Ed
Post by fritz
| USA Ret
Does RET stand for retard
sunnie
Post by fritz
Post by fritz
HawkCW4 wrote ...
| Seems to me that you just hate war. You just hate that people die in
| war. You hate that innocents die in wars. Well good on you. So if you
| hate war so much, why are you not out there making sure that war is no
| longer nessessary?
|
| Someone tore down a couple of our buildings, they were full of
| innocents. Do you honestly think we would ever let that go unpunished,
| and steps taken to make sure, as much as possible, that it doesn't
| happen here again? Do you happen to recall WWII? How many folks died
| that day in Dec, which caused the US to go to war? How many died on 9/11?
WHO tore down your buildings ?
A bunch of Saudi Arabians.
Who did you attack ?
Afghanistan and Iraq.
Why ?
BECAUSE BUSH IS IN BED WITH THE SAUDIS !
Sure Fritz, and he also sleeps with the Bin Ladens. Everyone knows that,
right? You ever hear of the Ohio Jones, or the Tennessee Smiths? Would it
surprize you to learn that in both cases, there were some really bad Jones
and really bad Smiths. In both cases, there were family members who were,
and still are, pillars of the communities they live in. Your feeble
attempts to make claims that Bush is a part of the terrorist attacks is
rather stupid, but does make a case for your partys desperation in this
election. If you need examples closer to home, take a look at a President
Carter who had a brother. Take another look at a first Lady, Clinton, who
had a brother. Do you actually think that in either case, the President
at that time should have taken some blame for the actions of either? Get
real and put the damn handbook down, it is worthless to you.
Ed
USA Ret
Post by fritz
|
| Ed
| USA Ret
Bullock
2004-11-25 18:17:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed Iraqi's.
When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends are really
doing.
Red Roedy will never be able to face reality. He thinks that it's OK to have
sex with 14 year olds, and he continues to adamantly defend that sick
position.
catchmerevisited
2004-10-25 19:07:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dana
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of
49
Post by Dana
Post by Roedy Green
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed
Iraqi's.
Post by Dana
When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends are really
doing.
Red Roedy will never be able to face reality. He thinks that it's OK to have
sex with 14 year olds, and he continues to adamantly defend that sick
position.
i can't say i condone the behaviour, but in the criminal code, 14 IS
considered legal age of consent (as to the charge of buggery, however....)
i WISH people looked up these things before making such an assertion.
Gregory Shearman
2004-10-26 05:04:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dana
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed
Iraqi's. When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends
are really doing.
You misuse the english language. An attack on military soldiers is NOT a
terrorist attack.

They were a legitimate target, as they are collaborating with the illegal
invaders of Iraq.
--
Regards,
Gregory.
"Ding-a-Ding Dang, My Dang-a-Long Ling Long."
XpatriotgamesX
2004-10-27 04:36:09 UTC
Permalink
Subject: Re: Arabs excused for abuses
Date: 10/25/2004 10:04 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Post by Dana
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed
Iraqi's. When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends
are really doing.
You misuse the english language. An attack on military soldiers is NOT a
terrorist attack.
They were a legitimate target, as they are collaborating with the illegal
invaders of Iraq.
They were in fact part of the legitimate government of Iraq. If military, they
were entitled to POW status and treatment according to the GC. Shooting unarmed
persons in the back of the head while face down in the dirt is a despicable act
of terrorism carried out by cowards.
Brash
2004-10-27 10:02:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregory Shearman
Post by Dana
Hey our aids infected idiot. An outside terrorist killed 50 unarmed
Iraqi's. When will you face reality and see what your terrorist friends
are really doing.
You misuse the english language. An attack on military soldiers is NOT a
terrorist attack.
It is when they aren't armed, Dickhead.

By your own admission you're a supporter of war criminals.
Post by Gregory Shearman
They were a legitimate target,
Wrong, as usual Dickhead.
--
"The code of the warrior has room for fallibility but there is no room
for a lack of integrity."
JMD
2004-10-27 12:34:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregory Shearman
You misuse the english language. An attack on military soldiers is NOT a
terrorist attack.
They were a legitimate target, as they are collaborating with the illegal
invaders of Iraq.
====================
Technically you are right in your language but these recruits were unarmed
and were not resisting. They were lined up and killed execution style. So
instead of calling these perpetrators "terrorists", how about murderers?

John Dowell
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-25 10:36:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roedy Green
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:06 +0800, "Mosley Jones III"
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day
It has still has not sunk it. The Iraqis are the GOOD GUYS in this
fight because you Americans invaded them ILLEGALLY.
Absolute crap

Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all

necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2
August

1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to
restore

international peace and security in the area,

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;


http://mosley.arach.net.au/pub/docs/united%20nations%20res%201441.htm




They are morally
Post by Roedy Green
obligated to fight you and repel the ILLEGAL invasion.
American had absolutely no business invading Iraq. If you Yanks get
your nose bloodied doing it, it is your own stupid fault. You damn
well deserved it.
Cheney masterminded 9/11.
~ Stanley Hilton lead attorney for the 9/11 victims, Bob Dole's advisor.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/bush911.html for details on Cheney's crime of the century.
Sigfried
2004-10-25 05:11:02 UTC
Permalink
Why the Left Loves Osama (and Saddam) New York Post March 19, 2003

Has anyone noticed an indifference in the precincts of the far Left to the
fatalities of 9/11

and the horrors of Saddam Hussein?

Right after the 9/11 attack, German composer Karlheinz Stockhausen called it
"the greatest

work of art for the whole cosmos." Eric Foner, an ornament of Columbia
University's Marxist

firmament, trivialized it by announcing himself unsure "which is more
frightening: the horror

that engulfed New York City or the apocalyptic rhetoric emanating daily from
the White House."

Norman Mailer called the suicide hijackers "brilliant."

More recently, it appears that none of the millions of anti-war
demonstrators have a bad word

to say about Saddam Hussein nor an iota of sympathy for those oppressed,
tortured and murdered

by his regime. Instead, they vent fury against the American president and
British prime

minister.

Why is the Left nonchalant about the outrages committed by al Qaeda and
Baghdad?

Lee Harris, an Atlanta writer, offers an explanation in a recent issue of
the Hoover

Institution's journal, Policy Review. He does so by stepping way back and
recalling Karl

Marx's central thesis about the demise of capitalism resulting from an
inevitable sequence of

events:

* Business profits decline in the industrial countries

* Bosses squeeze their workers

* Workers become impoverished

* Workers rebel against their bosses, and

* Workers establish a socialist order

Everything here hangs on workers growing poorer over time - which, of
course, did not happen.

In fact, Western workers became richer (and increasingly un-revolutionary).
By the roaring

1950s, most of the Left realized that Marx got it wrong.

But rather than give up on cherished expectations of socialist revolution,
Harris notes,

Marxists tweaked their theory. Abandoning the workers of advanced industrial
countries, they

looked instead to the entire populations of poor countries to carry out the
revolution. Class

analysis went out the window, replaced by geography.

This new approach, known as "dependencia theory," holds that the First World
(and the United

States above all) profits by forcefully exploiting the Third Word. The Left
theorizes that the

United States oppresses poor countries; thus Noam Chomsky's formulation that
America is a

"leading terrorist state."

For vindication of this claim, Marxists impatiently await the Third World's
rising up against

the West. Sadly for them, the only true revolution since the 1950s was
Iran's in 1978-79. It

ended with militant Islam in power and the Left in hiding.

Then came 9/11, which Marxists interpreted as the Third World (finally!)
striking back at its

American oppressor. In the Left's imagination, Harris explains, this attack
was nothing less

than "world-historical in its significance: the dawn of a new revolutionary
era."

Only a pedant would point out that the suicide hijackers hardly represented
the wretched of

the earth; and that their objectives had nothing at all to do with socialism
and everything to

do with - no, not again! - militant Islam.

So desperate is the Left for some sign of true socialism, it overlooks such
pesky details.

Instead, it warily admires al Qaeda, the Taliban and militant Islam in
general for doing

battle with the United States. The Left tries to overlook militant Islam's
slightly un-

socialist practices - such as its imposing religious law, excluding women
from the workplace,

banning the payment of interest, encouraging private property and
persecuting atheists.

This admiring spirit explains the Left's nonchalant response to 9/11. Sure,
it rued the loss

of life, but not too much. Dario Fo, the Italian Marxist who won the 1997
Nobel Prize for

literature, explains: "The great [Wall Street] speculators wallow in an
economy that every

year kills tens of millions of people with poverty, so what is 20,000 dead
in New York?"

The same goes for Saddam Hussein, whose gruesome qualities matter less to
the Left than the

fact of his confronting and defying the United States. In its view, anyone
who does that can't

be too bad - never mind that he brutalizes his subjects and invades his
neighbors. The Left

takes to the streets to assure his survival, indifferent both to the fate of
Iraqis and even

to their own safety, clutching instead at the hope that this monster will
somehow bring

socialism closer.

In sum: 9/11 and the prospect of war against Saddam Hussein have exposed the
Left's political

self-delusion, intellectual bankruptcy and moral turpitude

Left Strategies for Revolution

To the best of our knowledge, these strategies were first printed in the
Bartlesville, Oklahoma, Examiner-Enterprise in 1919. It was reprinted again
in 1946 in The New World News, after the Florida attorney general secured it
from a known member of the communist party, who acknowledged that it was
then still apart of the communist program. In May 1919, at Dusseldorf,
Germany, the Allied Forces obtained a copy of the "Communist Rules for
Revolution." Nearly 83 years later, they have nearly succeeded in every
area.

A. Corrupt the young; get them away from religion. Get them interested in
sex. Make them superficial, destroy their ruggedness.

B Get control of all means of publicity, thereby:

1. Get peoples mind off of government by focusing their attention on
athletics, sexy books, plays and other trivialities.

2. Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on
controversial matters of "No Importance".

3. Destroy the people's faith in their natural leaders by holding them up to
contempt, ridicule and disgrace.

4. Always preach true democracy, but seize power as fast and as ruthlessly
as possible.

5. By encouraging government extravagance, destroy its credit; produce fear
of inflation with rising prices and general discontent.

6. Incite unnecessary strikes in vital industries, encourage civil disorders
and foster a lenient and soft attitude on the part of government toward such
disorders.

7. By specious argument, cause the breakdown of the old moral virtues:
honesty, sobriety, self-restraint, faith in the pledged word, ruggedness.

C. Cause the registration of ALL firearms on some pretext with a view to
confiscate them and leave the population helpless.

Every one of these rules are nearly complete in the USA and Australia today.
Col. Edward Mandell House called for a meeting with European counterparts to
form the Institute of International Affairs. This was on May 30. In 1921 the
United States branch was incorporated under the name Council on Foreign
Relations.



Furthermore:

In the political field he refuses the state the means for its
self-preservation, destroys the foundations of all national self-maintenance
and defense, destroys faith in the leadership, scoffs at its history and
past, and drags everything that is truly great into the gutter.

Culturally he contaminates art, literature, the theater, makes a mockery of
natural feeling, overthrows all concepts of beauty and sublimity, of the
noble and the good, and instead drags men down into the sphere of his own
base nature.

Religion is ridiculed, ethics and morality represented as outmoded, until
the last props of a nation in its struggle for existence in this world have
fallen.

What is left is a culture of utilitarian-swinism (the tendency to become
swine). Nobody values anything or anyone, and of course, alcohol,
anti-depressants and drugs are the only consolation left.
catchmerevisited
2004-10-25 09:21:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sigfried
Why the Left Loves Osama (and Saddam) New York Post March 19, 2003
for a newspaper, i expected something focused more on....hard facts, rather
than supposition, juxtaposition, and labelling.
An article like that is much more suited to a newsgroup posting in reply to
an indisputable fact, "well yeah? you're mom's a treeHUGGER!!!"

here's a truncated antithesis of what i gleaned from your heavily partisaned
prose:

is YOUR mom wearing army boots, and goose-stepping with the red, white and
blue over her shoulders?
Can she sing "Hail to the Chief!" in German (Heil ze Fuhrer!)?
David Deilley
2004-10-25 06:46:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they showed
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail,
You seem a little confused. The American government is accountable to
the American people. The Australian government is accountable to the
Australian people. The terrorists are not.
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-25 10:43:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they showed
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail,
You seem a little confused.
you seem a little confused.

Human life should be just as important no mater the race of the dead, or the
killers




did you condemn the abuses in Abu Grave?

did you condemn the abuses committed by the terrorists the other day when
they killed 49 in cold blood?


The American government is accountable to
Post by David Deilley
the American people. The Australian government is accountable to the
Australian people. The terrorists are not.
Diabolik
2004-10-25 12:58:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
showed
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail,
You seem a little confused.
you seem a little confused.
Human life should be just as important no mater the race of the dead, or the
killers
The US has killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians so far.

That is "collateral damage", right?
Dana
2004-10-25 13:45:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Diabolik
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing
of
Post by Diabolik
49
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
showed
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail,
You seem a little confused.
you seem a little confused.
Human life should be just as important no mater the race of the dead, or
the
Post by Mosley Jones III
killers
The US has killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians so far.
LIAR
Bullock
2004-11-25 18:43:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Diabolik
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing
of
Post by Diabolik
49
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
showed
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail,
You seem a little confused.
you seem a little confused.
Human life should be just as important no mater the race of the dead, or
the
Post by Mosley Jones III
killers
The US has killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians so far.
That is "collateral damage", right?
First of all 10,000 is bullshit and Saddam killed over a million. Where was
your compassionate ass then?
HawkCW4
2004-10-25 17:51:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Diabolik
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of
49
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
showed
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail,
You seem a little confused.
you seem a little confused.
Human life should be just as important no mater the race of the dead, or
the
Post by Mosley Jones III
killers
The US has killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians so far.
And when do you intend to complain about the thousands of civilians who
were killed 9/11? You get no respect for your cause by being two faced.

Ed
USA Ret
Post by Diabolik
That is "collateral damage", right?
st
2004-10-25 23:15:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by HawkCW4
Post by Diabolik
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of
49
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
showed
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail,
You seem a little confused.
you seem a little confused.
Human life should be just as important no mater the race of the dead, or
the
Post by Mosley Jones III
killers
The US has killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians so far.
And when do you intend to complain about the thousands of civilians who
were killed 9/11? You get no respect for your cause by being two faced.
What does Iraq have to do with September 11? Are you one of those
idiots fooled with this Saddam-Al Qaeda smokescreen?


--
"It's too late
to be late again
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-26 00:20:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by st
Post by HawkCW4
Post by Diabolik
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of
49
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
showed
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail,
You seem a little confused.
you seem a little confused.
Human life should be just as important no mater the race of the dead, or
the
Post by Mosley Jones III
killers
The US has killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians so far.
And when do you intend to complain about the thousands of civilians who
were killed 9/11? You get no respect for your cause by being two faced.
What does Iraq have to do with September 11? Are you one of those
idiots fooled with this Saddam-Al Qaeda smokescreen?
smokescreen????????????


While I Agree with the left, we don't know what Al-Quada and Saddam spoke
about, but I Think it is pretty obvious.

The fact that they were meeting together is enough, we don't need evidence
that they planned anything
Post by st
--
"It's too late
to be late again
HawkCW4
2004-10-26 01:56:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by st
Post by HawkCW4
Post by Diabolik
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of
49
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
showed
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail,
You seem a little confused.
you seem a little confused.
Human life should be just as important no mater the race of the dead, or
the
Post by Mosley Jones III
killers
The US has killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians so far.
And when do you intend to complain about the thousands of civilians who
were killed 9/11? You get no respect for your cause by being two faced.
What does Iraq have to do with September 11? Are you one of those
idiots fooled with this Saddam-Al Qaeda smokescreen?
And how did I know you/someone would scream ' no Iraq '? You are
entitled to think as you like, I will do likewise. Saddam was our
biggest problem at the time, Iraq remains unsettled and we don;t leave
til it is. In the mean time, you must think we are finished looking and
capturing the bad guys, where ever they are. So far we are keeping
their damn heads down enough they have to do the damage on their turf.
That is exactly what I think the USA keeps a military for. Now that we
know what sort of idiot I am, what kind of idiot are you?

Ed
USA Ret
Post by st
--
"It's too late
to be late again
sunnie
2004-10-26 08:21:09 UTC
Permalink
A bigger one than you for reading your crap
sunnie
Go away ya stupid yank
Post by st
Post by HawkCW4
Post by Diabolik
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of
49
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
showed
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail,
You seem a little confused.
you seem a little confused.
Human life should be just as important no mater the race of the dead, or
the
Post by Mosley Jones III
killers
The US has killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians so far.
And when do you intend to complain about the thousands of civilians who
were killed 9/11? You get no respect for your cause by being two faced.
What does Iraq have to do with September 11? Are you one of those
idiots fooled with this Saddam-Al Qaeda smokescreen?
And how did I know you/someone would scream ' no Iraq '? You are entitled
to think as you like, I will do likewise. Saddam was our biggest problem
at the time, Iraq remains unsettled and we don;t leave til it is. In the
mean time, you must think we are finished looking and capturing the bad
guys, where ever they are. So far we are keeping their damn heads down
enough they have to do the damage on their turf. That is exactly what I
think the USA keeps a military for. Now that we know what sort of idiot I
am, what kind of idiot are you?
Ed
USA Ret
Post by st
--
"It's too late
to be late again
Dean Turner
2004-10-27 04:15:44 UTC
Permalink
Saddam was "your" biggest problem, huh? How many did the Oklahoma bomber
kill? How many did the Washington sniper kill? Typical redneck military
jerk, gung-ho and stupid. The problem with the U.S is that it is a country
with a obsessive need to have guns and violence entrenched in their culture,
then whinge when they export the cancerous culture and world communities
tell them to rack off!! The U.S will have more 9/11's if the silly Americans
don't realise that they can be annihilated by the rest of the world if they
are not careful. Look after your own backyard, you jail more people than any
other country, shit healthcare, (Cuba is better than U.S in terms of
health!), massive Drug and AIDS problems that you export around the world,
SICK SOCIETY INDEED!!.........
Post by HawkCW4
And how did I know you/someone would scream ' no Iraq '? You are
entitled to think as you like, I will do likewise. Saddam was our
biggest problem at the time, Iraq remains unsettled and we don;t leave
til it is. In the mean time, you must think we are finished looking and
capturing the bad guys, where ever they are. So far we are keeping
their damn heads down enough they have to do the damage on their turf.
That is exactly what I think the USA keeps a military for. Now that we
know what sort of idiot I am, what kind of idiot are you?
Ed
USA Ret
HawkCW4
2004-10-27 23:52:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dean Turner
Saddam was "your" biggest problem, huh?
Contrary to the popular Liberal thinking today, and the populare
thinking a couple of years ago by your esteemed leader, Kerry, Yes,
Saddam was this countrys biggest problem it world security. Those
things that cause countrys to maintain a military.

How many did the Oklahoma bomber
Post by Dean Turner
kill?
And what has that to do with the Iraq question?

How many did the Washington sniper kill?

And what has that to do with the Iraq question?

Typical redneck military
Post by Dean Turner
jerk, gung-ho and stupid.
I suppose I will just have to assume you to be another desperate Liberal
looser today. I am not redneck, and I have a certificate from the
redneck checker that says so, I am military and would seem to be a jerk
to only those totally out of step with the problem at hand and or
reality. Take your pick. I am in fact gung-ho over most of what I do
or believe in. That friend is what will separate me from the likes of
you. I have always maintained that I was just a dumb country boy, but
buddy, I am not and never have been stupid. The fact that you think so
only confirms to me that I have the right position on this topic.

The problem with the U.S is that it is a country
Post by Dean Turner
with a obsessive need to have guns and violence entrenched in their culture,
then whinge when they export the cancerous culture and world communities
tell them to rack off!!
Oh I get it now, just another gun-grabber. Just another looser that
didn't get all the handouts he wanted from this country. Just another
looser that runs around with the limp wrist saying 'please don't do
that' and expect a Saddam to cower down and run for cover. Get real buddy.

The U.S will have more 9/11's if the silly Americans
Post by Dean Turner
don't realise that they can be annihilated by the rest of the world if they
are not careful.
EVERY country faces that reality. So what? The Silly French and the
Silly Germans, and the silly N. Koreans, and the silly__________fill it
in friend, we are all in the same boat. Maybe you would like to just
get off. Go ahead.

Look after your own backyard, you jail more people than any
Post by Dean Turner
other country, shit healthcare, (Cuba is better than U.S in terms of
health!), massive Drug and AIDS problems that you export around the world,
SICK SOCIETY INDEED!!.........
Ah so we have not an American but some damn out of country fool coming
here to whine about how bad we in America have it. None of your damn
business friend. WHere ever you come from, take care of your own
problems, we will do fine, as we have shown the world the past 200+ years.

Ed
USA Ret
Post by Dean Turner
Post by HawkCW4
And how did I know you/someone would scream ' no Iraq '? You are
entitled to think as you like, I will do likewise. Saddam was our
biggest problem at the time, Iraq remains unsettled and we don;t leave
til it is. In the mean time, you must think we are finished looking and
capturing the bad guys, where ever they are. So far we are keeping
their damn heads down enough they have to do the damage on their turf.
That is exactly what I think the USA keeps a military for. Now that we
know what sort of idiot I am, what kind of idiot are you?
Ed
USA Ret
Brash
2004-10-26 11:32:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Diabolik
The US has killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians so far.
Deliberately? (I predict you'll say "yes").
Post by Diabolik
That is "collateral damage", right?
It's a tragedy. Bit it's not like deliberately sawing a man's head off.
--
"The code of the warrior has room for fallibility but there is no room
for a lack of integrity."
catchmerevisited
2004-10-25 18:33:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Human life should be just as important no mater the race of the dead, or the
killers
i agree.
David Deilley
2004-10-26 05:23:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
did you condemn the abuses in Abu Grave?
Of course.
Post by Mosley Jones III
did you condemn the abuses committed by the terrorists the other day when
they killed 49 in cold blood?
Of course.
sunnie
2004-10-26 08:22:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Deilley
Post by Mosley Jones III
did you condemn the abuses in Abu Grave?
Of course.
Post by Mosley Jones III
did you condemn the abuses committed by the terrorists the other day when
they killed 49 in cold blood?
Mai Li
Gee lets not bring up that fuckup you got into called
VIETNAM
Wake up fool
Sunnie
Post by David Deilley
Of course.
catchmerevisited
2004-10-25 09:08:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they showed
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail, we can assume
that the left is OK with Arabs committing abuses. But not the US
To the left Arabs are sub Human and not required to hold the high moral
standards set for the US Australia and Britain. Infact the west is
responsible for any crimes committed by Arabs according to the left, as you
are responsible if your pet animal attacks someone, you are also responsible
if a Arab attacks someone, Arabs are not intelligent enough to take
responsibility for there own actions, this is a major point to the lefts
support for terrorism
there appears to be a blackout on such atrocities in the US Media- i only
found out about ONE recent killing of an Iraqi, from a video I downloaded
off a p2p network.
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-25 10:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they showed
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail, we can assume
that the left is OK with Arabs committing abuses. But not the US
To the left Arabs are sub Human and not required to hold the high moral
standards set for the US Australia and Britain. Infact the west is
responsible for any crimes committed by Arabs according to the left, as you
are responsible if your pet animal attacks someone, you are also responsible
if a Arab attacks someone, Arabs are not intelligent enough to take
responsibility for there own actions, this is a major point to the lefts
support for terrorism
there appears to be a blackout on such atrocities in the US Media-
just present the evidence you saw,

I mean you have seen evidence haven't you?

your not just believing the story because it fits your prejudges are you?



i only
Post by catchmerevisited
found out about ONE recent killing of an Iraqi, from a video I downloaded
off a p2p network.
catchmerevisited
2004-10-25 18:32:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
showed
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail, we can
assume
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
that the left is OK with Arabs committing abuses. But not the US
To the left Arabs are sub Human and not required to hold the high moral
standards set for the US Australia and Britain. Infact the west is
responsible for any crimes committed by Arabs according to the left, as
you
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
are responsible if your pet animal attacks someone, you are also
responsible
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
if a Arab attacks someone, Arabs are not intelligent enough to take
responsibility for there own actions, this is a major point to the lefts
support for terrorism
there appears to be a blackout on such atrocities in the US Media-
just present the evidence you saw,
I mean you have seen evidence haven't you?
your not just believing the story because it fits your prejudges are you?
lol.
the p2p network i use, has an id block, preventing me to know the id of the
user who supplied the .wmv file to the internet for d/l.
As for me, i viewed the file, was abhorred by it, and dumped it promptly-
else you could have given me YOUR IP address and I'd have ftp'ed it to you.
My suggestion? get yourself a p2p client and search for Iraq videos.
Lots of soldiers posing in front of their 'trophies'.

WinMX, WinAmp, Kazaa, Shareaza work well on Windows
LimeWire works good on all platforms (mac o/s, o/s X, windows, Linux)
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-26 00:22:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
showed
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail, we can
assume
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
that the left is OK with Arabs committing abuses. But not the US
To the left Arabs are sub Human and not required to hold the high moral
standards set for the US Australia and Britain. Infact the west is
responsible for any crimes committed by Arabs according to the left, as
you
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
are responsible if your pet animal attacks someone, you are also
responsible
Post by catchmerevisited
Post by Mosley Jones III
if a Arab attacks someone, Arabs are not intelligent enough to take
responsibility for there own actions, this is a major point to the lefts
support for terrorism
there appears to be a blackout on such atrocities in the US Media-
just present the evidence you saw,
I mean you have seen evidence haven't you?
your not just believing the story because it fits your prejudges are you?
lol.
the p2p network i use, has an id block, preventing me to know the id of the
user who supplied the .wmv file to the internet for d/l.
You don't have any evidence do you?

You are left with what? your word???

hayhahahahahah
Post by catchmerevisited
As for me, i viewed the file, was abhorred by it, and dumped it promptly-
else you could have given me YOUR IP address and I'd have ftp'ed it to you.
My suggestion? get yourself a p2p client and search for Iraq videos.
Lots of soldiers posing in front of their 'trophies'.
WinMX, WinAmp, Kazaa, Shareaza work well on Windows
LimeWire works good on all platforms (mac o/s, o/s X, windows, Linux)
fritz
2004-10-25 23:25:34 UTC
Permalink
Mosley Jones III wrote ...
| Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
| Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they showed
| at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail, we can assume
| that the left is OK with Arabs committing abuses. But not the US

I condemn all killing, but the US has killed far more Iraqis than the 'Arabs'.
Sure, the 'execution-style' killing of the 49 Iraqi soldiers was shocking, but
the US has killed thousands of Iraqis. It doesn't make any difference if you
get blown apart by a US bomb or shot in the head. You are just as dead.

When a country invades another and overthrows its security forces, it
is the responsibility of the invading country to maintain security.
The US has failed abysmally to plan for the post-invasion conditions.
The 49 Iraqis killed died because the US has and is failing the Iraqi people.

| To the left Arabs are sub Human and not required to hold the high moral
| standards set for the US Australia and Britain. Infact the west is
| responsible for any crimes committed by Arabs according to the left, as you
| are responsible if your pet animal attacks someone, you are also responsible
| if a Arab attacks someone, Arabs are not intelligent enough to take
| responsibility for there own actions, this is a major point to the lefts
| support for terrorism

The insurgency was predictable AND predicted. The US failed to make
adequate plans for it, they went to war without an exit strategy.
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-26 00:26:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by fritz
Mosley Jones III wrote ...
| Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
| Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they showed
| at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail, we can assume
| that the left is OK with Arabs committing abuses. But not the US
I condemn all killing, but the US has killed far more Iraqis than the 'Arabs'.
Evidence please
Post by fritz
Sure, the 'execution-style' killing of the 49 Iraqi soldiers was shocking,
Sure ........ But........ I never asked for excuses

You just cant bring yourself to condemn it can you?


but
Post by fritz
the US has killed thousands of Iraqis.
How many?



It doesn't make any difference if you
Post by fritz
get blown apart by a US bomb or shot in the head. You are just as dead.
or die of old age?? you are just as dead.


In the real word to murder is not the same as to die in your sleep, or by
accident, or unintentionally?

do you understand the difference of running over a child by accident, and
murdering that child?

I think you do, but you pretend not to, so you don't have to face the facts
Post by fritz
When a country invades another and overthrows its security forces, it
is the responsibility of the invading country to maintain security.
The US has failed abysmally to plan for the post-invasion conditions.
The 49 Iraqis killed died because the US has and is failing the Iraqi people.
| To the left Arabs are sub Human and not required to hold the high moral
| standards set for the US Australia and Britain. Infact the west is
| responsible for any crimes committed by Arabs according to the left, as you
| are responsible if your pet animal attacks someone, you are also responsible
| if a Arab attacks someone, Arabs are not intelligent enough to take
| responsibility for there own actions, this is a major point to the lefts
| support for terrorism
The insurgency was predictable AND predicted. The US failed to make
adequate plans for it, they went to war without an exit strategy.
fritz
2004-10-26 23:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Mosley Jones III wrote ...
|
| "fritz" <***@address.com> wrote in message
| news:clk2b7$21t$03$***@news.t-online.com...
| >
| > Mosley Jones III wrote ...
| > | Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
| > | Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
| showed
| > | at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail, we can
| assume
| > | that the left is OK with Arabs committing abuses. But not the US
| >
| > I condemn all killing, but the US has killed far more Iraqis than the
| 'Arabs'.
|
| Evidence please
|
|
|
| > Sure, the 'execution-style' killing of the 49 Iraqi soldiers was shocking,
|
|
| Sure ........ But........ I never asked for excuses
|
| You just cant bring yourself to condemn it can you?

Of course I condemn it, why don't you condemn the killing of
innocent Iraqi civilians by the US now ?


| but
| > the US has killed thousands of Iraqis.
|
|
| How many?

Over 10,000 is the usual figure quoted. Up to 15,000 by some.
Of course the US invaders don't keep a body count of Iraqis,
only their own troops, because they have to fly the bodies home.

|
| It doesn't make any difference if you
| > get blown apart by a US bomb or shot in the head. You are just as dead.
| >
|
| or die of old age?? you are just as dead.
|
|
| In the real word to murder is not the same as to die in your sleep, or by
| accident, or unintentionally?
|
| do you understand the difference of running over a child by accident, and
| murdering that child?

There is nothing accidental about dropping bombs on residential areas.
This is a bullshit excuse 'oh we were targeting a house where our reliable
intelligence said insurgents were hiding, we didn't know about the
women and kids, not our fault blah blah blah....'


| I think you do, but you pretend not to, so you don't have to face the facts
|

I think you are living in Disneyland.
The dead kids are shown being dragged out of the rubble after US
airstrikes.


|
|
|
|
| > When a country invades another and overthrows its security forces, it
| > is the responsibility of the invading country to maintain security.
| > The US has failed abysmally to plan for the post-invasion conditions.
| > The 49 Iraqis killed died because the US has and is failing the Iraqi
| people.
| >
| > | To the left Arabs are sub Human and not required to hold the high moral
| > | standards set for the US Australia and Britain. Infact the west is
| > | responsible for any crimes committed by Arabs according to the left, as
| you
| > | are responsible if your pet animal attacks someone, you are also
| responsible
| > | if a Arab attacks someone, Arabs are not intelligent enough to take
| > | responsibility for there own actions, this is a major point to the lefts
| > | support for terrorism
| >
| > The insurgency was predictable AND predicted. The US failed to make
| > adequate plans for it, they went to war without an exit strategy.
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-30 00:08:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by fritz
Mosley Jones III wrote ...
|
| >
| > Mosley Jones III wrote ...
| > | Judging by the lack of condemnation from the left over the killing of 49
| > | Iraqi prisoners the other day, and the and the complete horror they
| showed
| > | at the Americans punching a few prisoners in Abu Grave jail, we can
| assume
| > | that the left is OK with Arabs committing abuses. But not the US
| >
| > I condemn all killing, but the US has killed far more Iraqis than the
| 'Arabs'.
|
| Evidence please
|
|
|
| > Sure, the 'execution-style' killing of the 49 Iraqi soldiers was shocking,
|
|
| Sure ........ But........ I never asked for excuses
|
| You just cant bring yourself to condemn it can you?
Of course I condemn it, why don't you condemn the killing of
innocent Iraqi civilians by the US now ?
| but
| > the US has killed thousands of Iraqis.
|
|
| How many?
Over 10,000 is the usual figure quoted. Up to 15,000 by some.
Of course the US invaders don't keep a body count of Iraqis,
only their own troops, because they have to fly the bodies home.
Evidence please
Post by fritz
|
| It doesn't make any difference if you
| > get blown apart by a US bomb or shot in the head. You are just as dead.
| >
|
| or die of old age?? you are just as dead.
|
|
| In the real word to murder is not the same as to die in your sleep, or by
| accident, or unintentionally?
|
| do you understand the difference of running over a child by accident, and
| murdering that child?
There is nothing accidental about dropping bombs on residential areas.
This is a bullshit excuse 'oh we were targeting a house where our reliable
intelligence said insurgents were hiding, we didn't know about the
women and kids, not our fault blah blah blah....'
| I think you do, but you pretend not to, so you don't have to face the facts
|
I think you are living in Disneyland.
The dead kids are shown being dragged out of the rubble after US
airstrikes.
|
|
|
|
| > When a country invades another and overthrows its security forces, it
| > is the responsibility of the invading country to maintain security.
| > The US has failed abysmally to plan for the post-invasion conditions.
| > The 49 Iraqis killed died because the US has and is failing the Iraqi
| people.
| >
| > | To the left Arabs are sub Human and not required to hold the high moral
| > | standards set for the US Australia and Britain. Infact the west is
| > | responsible for any crimes committed by Arabs according to the left, as
| you
| > | are responsible if your pet animal attacks someone, you are also
| responsible
| > | if a Arab attacks someone, Arabs are not intelligent enough to take
| > | responsibility for there own actions, this is a major point to the lefts
| > | support for terrorism
| >
| > The insurgency was predictable AND predicted. The US failed to make
| > adequate plans for it, they went to war without an exit strategy.
fritz
2004-10-30 01:38:53 UTC
Permalink
Mosley Jones III wrote ..
|
| "fritz" wrote
.....
| > Of course I condemn it, why don't you condemn the killing of
| > innocent Iraqi civilians by the US now ?
| >
| >
| > | but
| > | > the US has killed thousands of Iraqis.
| > |
| > |
| > | How many?
| >
| > Over 10,000 is the usual figure quoted. Up to 15,000 by some.
| > Of course the US invaders don't keep a body count of Iraqis,
| > only their own troops, because they have to fly the bodies home.
|
| Evidence please

Dear oh dear.
Take a look at this site, Moesly
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
Up to 16,000 dead.

Whoops, looks like I underestimated the real body count of Iraqis.
The latest study indicates the true figure is 100,000 possibly more.
See the Lancet.
http://www.thelancet.com/journal/vol364/iss9445/early_online_publication
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-30 02:47:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by fritz
Mosley Jones III wrote ..
|
.....
| > Of course I condemn it, why don't you condemn the killing of
| > innocent Iraqi civilians by the US now ?
| >
| >
| > | but
| > | > the US has killed thousands of Iraqis.
| > |
| > |
| > | How many?
| >
| > Over 10,000 is the usual figure quoted. Up to 15,000 by some.
| > Of course the US invaders don't keep a body count of Iraqis,
| > only their own troops, because they have to fly the bodies home.
|
| Evidence please
Dear oh dear.
Take a look at this site, Moesly
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
Up to 16,000 dead.
dickhead

Casualty figures are derived solely from a comprehensive survey of online
media reports.
This includes civilian deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order,
and deaths due to inadequate health care or sanitation.
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/database/
Post by fritz
Whoops, looks like I underestimated the real body count of Iraqis.
The latest study indicates the true figure is 100,000 possibly more.
See the Lancet.
http://www.thelancet.com/journal/vol364/iss9445/early_online_publication
Dickhead is it 16,000 or 100,000

"It means that the authors are 95 percent confident that the war-caused
deaths totaled some number between 8,000 and 194,000."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2108887/
http://www.techcentralstation.com/102904J.html
fritz
2004-10-31 00:29:52 UTC
Permalink
Mosley Jones III <***@cia.gov.mars> wrote in message news:***@funnel.arach.net.au...
|
| "fritz" <***@address.com> wrote in message
| news:clurkb$q8$03$***@news.t-online.com...
| >
| > Mosley Jones III wrote ..
| > |
| > | "fritz" wrote
| > .....
| > | > Of course I condemn it, why don't you condemn the killing of
| > | > innocent Iraqi civilians by the US now ?
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > | but
| > | > | > the US has killed thousands of Iraqis.
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | > | How many?
| > | >
| > | > Over 10,000 is the usual figure quoted. Up to 15,000 by some.
| > | > Of course the US invaders don't keep a body count of Iraqis,
| > | > only their own troops, because they have to fly the bodies home.
| > |
| > | Evidence please
| >
| > Dear oh dear.
| > Take a look at this site, Moesly
| > http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
| > Up to 16,000 dead.
|
|
| dickhead

FUCKWIT !

| Casualty figures are derived solely from a comprehensive survey of online
| media reports.
| This includes civilian deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order,
| and deaths due to inadequate health care or sanitation.
| http://www.iraqbodycount.net/database/

Fuckwit, you left off the important bit....
"In the current occupation phase the database includes all deaths which
the Occupying Authority has a binding responsibility to prevent under
the Geneva Conventions and Hague Regulations. This includes civilian
deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order, and deaths due
to inadequate health care or sanitation."

IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OCCUPYING POWER TO
PREVENT THESE DEATHS:

| >
| > Whoops, looks like I underestimated the real body count of Iraqis.
| > The latest study indicates the true figure is 100,000 possibly more.
| > See the Lancet.
| > http://www.thelancet.com/journal/vol364/iss9445/early_online_publication
| >
|
| Dickhead is it 16,000 or 100,000

Probably over 100,000 fuckwit.



|
| "It means that the authors are 95 percent confident that the war-caused
| deaths totaled some number between 8,000 and 194,000."
| http://slate.msn.com/id/2108887/
| http://www.techcentralstation.com/102904J.html
|
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
|
|
Mosley Jones III
2004-10-31 01:42:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by fritz
|
| >
| > Mosley Jones III wrote ..
| > |
| > .....
| > | > Of course I condemn it, why don't you condemn the killing of
| > | > innocent Iraqi civilians by the US now ?
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > | but
| > | > | > the US has killed thousands of Iraqis.
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | > | How many?
| > | >
| > | > Over 10,000 is the usual figure quoted. Up to 15,000 by some.
| > | > Of course the US invaders don't keep a body count of Iraqis,
| > | > only their own troops, because they have to fly the bodies home.
| > |
| > | Evidence please
| >
| > Dear oh dear.
| > Take a look at this site, Moesly
| > http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
| > Up to 16,000 dead.
|
|
| dickhead
FUCKWIT !
| Casualty figures are derived solely from a comprehensive survey of online
| media reports.
| This includes civilian deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order,
| and deaths due to inadequate health care or sanitation.
| http://www.iraqbodycount.net/database/
Fuckwit, you left off the important bit....
"In the current occupation phase the database includes all deaths which
the Occupying Authority has a binding responsibility to prevent under
the Geneva Conventions and Hague Regulations. This includes civilian
deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order, and deaths due
to inadequate health care or sanitation."
formulated from media reports, and including the deaths cause by terrorists
Post by fritz
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OCCUPYING POWER TO
what deaths, the report was formulated from reading the internet
Post by fritz
| >
| > Whoops, looks like I underestimated the real body count of Iraqis.
| > The latest study indicates the true figure is 100,000 possibly more.
| > See the Lancet.
| >
http://www.thelancet.com/journal/vol364/iss9445/early_online_publication
Post by fritz
| >
|
| Dickhead is it 16,000 or 100,000
Probably over 100,000 fuckwit.
thats not what the report said

it said maybe somewhere between 8,000 and 194,000. A meaningless figure
http://slate.msn.com/id/2108887/
http://www.techcentralstation.com/102904J.html
Post by fritz
|
| "It means that the authors are 95 percent confident that the war-caused
| deaths totaled some number between 8,000 and 194,000."
| http://slate.msn.com/id/2108887/
| http://www.techcentralstation.com/102904J.html
|
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
|
|
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...