|
|
CONTRIBUTED THOUGHTS
TOWARD THE WAR ON TERRORIST PROPAGANDA. Thru addendum 40 |
|
|
|
|
|
CONTENT SECTIONS: |
|
|
(1) DELETED |
|
|
(2) THE ILLOGIC OF
TERRORIST THINKING |
|
|
(3) U.S. POLICY
RECOMMENDATIONS |
|
|
(4) STREET OBSERVATIONS |
|
|
|
|
|
(2) THE ILLOGIC OF
TERRORIST THINKING addendum 40 |
|
|
|
|
THE LEFT: |
THE RIGHT: |
2.0000 |
"After 9/11, Bush
needed to assert American power, but should have adopted a posture of
consultation and cooperation.": |
Response: (1) Bush can't dance
indefinitely with nations unwilling to confront obvious evils in the world
due to their profiting from such reckless capitalism that deals with the
evils. (2) Can't do both. Bush did consult, but to cooperate to do little
about the evils that have attacked the US is not an option for a US President
sworn to protect his people. |
2.0001 |
"All
weapons are boomerangs": |
Response: Not if Saddam is
dead. |
2.0002 |
"America
is killing thousands of innocent people around the world every year and more
and more people want revenge. i think sep 11th was just the beginning.…" |
You get your information
from the Iraqi Mis-Information Ministry, Kim Jong Il, Castro, and every other
lying totalitarian brainwashing regime on earth, including ex-Soviet Party members. In Asia they called the US a
"bully" back in the 60's. Now, looking at the horrible state of
North Korea, it looks like the US wasn't "bully" enough to save the
North Koreans from that abomination of a political system, or the millions of
Chinese intellectuals and professionals murdered by Mao, or you ignorant
Russians from decades of living like zombie slaves under Stalin. |
2.0003 |
"As a priest for more
than 40 years, I have yet to encounter the God who counsels pre-emptive
slaughter in the name of peace.": |
Response: (1) Unfortunately
this statement has been misdirected at Bush rather than the Osama's, Muslim
Fundamentalists, Saddam's and Kim's of the world. (2) Further, the four examples of slaughter above still
do not give two cents for peace, but only for their own power, (3) the Priest
has not heard of Allah or Mohammad, it appears, (4) and why are peaceniks
afraid to direct their barbs at the real killers in the world, and instead
pick on the honorable guy doing the right thing? |
2.0004 |
"Boycott Bush's
Corporations to stop the war": |
Response: Crippling Bush is
not the answer. Bush would be in dereliction of his duty to protect airheads like
you if he did not pursue terrorists and the states that deal with them to the
ends of the earth, as he is doing. |
2.0005 |
"Bush alienated US
allies before the war.": |
Response: No, in fact he
brought out their true colors. |
2.0006 |
"Bush and cronies are
war-mongers": |
Response: No, they did not
war-monger before 9/11, and it doesn't take a genius to see what needs to be
done. It does however take a lot of courage, which Bush's spineless critics
lack. |
2.0007 |
"Bush does not think he
is doing God's work, he thinks he IS God.": |
Response: Clever, but
untrue. Is Bush just pandering to the Bible thumpers in the US? No, again. In
fact, Loony Liberals completely miss the point once again. Bush is bringing
up religion to challenge Osama's an Muslim Fundamentalist's self-proclaimed
monopoly on God's will, bringing up the point that God's Will works on both
sides of the fence. |
2.0008 |
"Bush
drunk with power" |
Response: Bush would be derelict
in his duty to protect American citizens if he was not pursuing terrorists,
their means, and their supporters to the ends of the earth. The only one
drunk with power is the one making the "drunk with power"
statement. |
2.0009 |
"Bush endangering the
survival of the planet": |
Response: Mere cowardly
conjecture. Counterpoint: Leaving
dictators in power is much worse. |
2.0010 |
"Bush has
support of world after 9/11, he has squandered it": |
Response: He has not
squandered what was not really there in the first place. The rest of the
world never had the nerve to stand up to the task of combating terrorist and
rogue states, and therefore lash back at the US when asked to help. |
2.0011 |
"Bush leader of
international gang of bastards" |
Criminals (who said this)
attack others in public by describing themselves. |
2.0012 |
"Bush
spending money on "what-ifs" when "is's" are killing
people in the world at this very moment": |
Response: It is his job to address
the what-if's when it concerns the lives of masses of American
civilians. Dealing with the
"is's" is being funded. |
2.0013 |
"Bush will cut social
programs to make war in Iraq": |
Response: Terrorist, using
Saddam's CMM (Civilian Mass Murder) agents and weapons, will target
population centers full of the very deadweights who live off of the social
programs and protest Bush's war on terror. |
2.0014 |
"Calling them 'death
squads' is a loaded description with legal implications.": |
Response: (1) We'll leave
that to Iraqi civilian justice after Saddam is gone. (2) Death Squads is only
an accurate description of their job function as ordained by Saddam. |
2.0015 |
"Civilian deaths
(accidentally caused by the US's war on Saddam) would cause hate in the
future.": |
Response: A cowardly
statement, considering that US hate is a matter of prejudice and has nothing
to do with civilian deaths, otherwise Saddam and the Baath Party the US is a
war with would be hated and not the US, considering the millions of Iraqis
the Baath Party has murdered. |
2.0016 |
"Death to
America": |
Response: Who are they
going to start with, Muslim Americans? |
2.0017 |
"Diplomacy
never got tried with Iraq": |
Response: only for 12 long
years. Also, the sanctions you condemned for killing 5000 children a day were
part of your very "diplomacy". |
2.0018 |
"False
reality where war=peace, invasion=democracy": |
Response: I see no
falseness about it in this situation. |
2.0019 |
"How long until you
occupy…" |
Occupy? As for occupy, it
would be less costly for the US if the UN contributed to the guidance of Iraq
away from a Saddam system of government to something more inducing to peace
and prosperity. France has shown interest
in a bellicose fashion in leading that coalition, if for honorable reasons,
good, if they go in as a colonial vulture, bad. |
2.0020 |
"I do not see Iraq
liberated. All I see is the murder of innocent men, women and
children.": |
Response: (1) By who?
People like this only see accidental casualties cause by the US as it frees
Iraq from it's cancer, while turning a blind eye to all the innocent men,
women, and children Bin Laden and Saddam are killing. Why? Blind prejudice
against the US. (2) I see Iraqis liberated. |
2.0021 |
"If AIDS
were pandemic in the White population, the reaction to AIDS would be much
different": |
Response: There isn't for a
good reason- White people are hard at work making the world a better place to
live in, rather than fooling around in flea-bitten beds with other
disreputable pleasure-seekers. |
2.0022 |
"If Saddam has
Civilian Mass Murder weapons, why weren't they used on 9/11? |
Response: (1) Because Osama
wanted something more dramatic. (2) It was Osama's poetic justice to attack
the World Trade Center and it's supporting apparatus on the day his crony was
being sentenced for the first World Trade Center terrorist bombing attempt.
(3) It was easier than smuggling in, hiding, and implementing Civilian Mass
Murder agents. |
2.0023 |
"If they don't find
any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Bush will lose face.": |
Response: Not with me. I
have enough insight in the matter to see that with one swing Bush has struck
blows against terrorism, tyranny, and anti-US prejudice throughout the world. |
2.0024 |
"Implication in some
of these emails that 'worried coalition families are somehow morally
superior' to worried Iraqi ones.": |
Response: (1) This person
misread them. It's "morally superior to Saddam's regime", (2)
Worried coalition families are not ruled by a murderous madman who openly
supports terrorist attacks against others. |
2.0025 |
"In it's campaign in
Iraq, the US is virtually alone.": |
Response: (1) I can foresee
this same despicable coward will trying to take credit for being behind the
US once the US is victorious and the benefits of that victory begin to bear
fruit in the world. (2) 45 nations support the US, and they aren't all
Micronesia's. |
2.0026 |
"In the history of
world British troops along with their allies probably killed more innocent
civilians then any other "regime". What about Hiroshima and
Vietnam, USA has forgotten history.": |
Response: What about the
Imperial Japanese in China, the Communist Chinese in China, the Communist
North Vietnamese in South Vietnam, Pol Pot's regime in Cambodia, not to
mention Stalin, Hitler, and the dozens of other mass-murdering dictator
regimes Britain and the US have fought in the past? To single out Hiroshima and
Vietnam against the US is to have an unbalance, unhealthy, if not to mention
twisted, view of history, with equally twisted nefarious motives behind such
twisted statements. |
2.0027 |
"In the past, Europe
could oppose the US, but that opposition was balanced by the Soviet threat of
Stalinist Communism": |
Response: Looks like Europe
has forgotten who it's friend is. |
2.0028 |
"In Vietnam, a
disproportionate amount of blacks were killed." |
Response: Only 11% of vets were
black, and sustained 12% of the casualties. In 1991 Gulf War, blacks 23% of
military, but only 11% of casualties, and only 10% in combat roles. |
2.0029 |
"Iraq does not pose a
threat to the US": |
Response: Read Saddam's
headlines "God's Punishment" in reference to 9/11, and it is not
hard to deduce the threat in today's present generation of Mad Muslims. |
2.0030 |
"Iraq more credible to
media in terms of civilian casualties." |
Response: I presume the
media believes the Iraq MisInformation Ministry when it stages bombings in
civilian areas? |
2.0031 |
"Iraq more credible to
media in terms of troop placement." |
Response: (1) I hope the US
military is not giving away it's troop placements to the mindless
media." (2) This statement was made before the Iraq MisInformation
Ministry revealed it’s true job (of making false statements in favor of
Saddam) by denying the US held Baghdad International Airport or had entered
Baghdad itself, when embedded reporters had filmed otherwise. |
2.0032 |
"Iraq success could
embolden Bush to go on to other wars.": |
Response: (1) Mere
conjecture. If Bush goes on to other wars, it will be out of his oath to
protect and serve as the President. (2) This reveals the Left’s intent on making
the Iraq campaign a failure. |
2.0033 |
"Iraq war is a big
business war, like US trade policy, is part of globalization where Third
World is exploited for labor. Look at the corruption of the stock market to
know who's controlling things": |
Response: This liberal
parasite has blinded himself to 9/11 and the madness of the Muslim world. If
this liberal is right, I would still take big business over Muslim madness. |
2.0034 |
"Iraq war
is not making Americans safer": |
Response: It will because
Bush is speaking the only language bullies like Osama and Saddam know. |
2.0035 |
"Iraq war
is not making Americans safer": |
Response: Yes it is. It is keeping Osama at bay and dealing
with an unstable and evil regime that has collected Civilian Mass Murder agents
and weapons, a regime that deals with unprincipled Militant Muslims and
barbaric savage terrorists. |
2.0036 |
"Iraq war off target,
totally forgot about Osama.": |
Response: No, every country
in the world is looking for Osama, including the US intelligence. |
2.0037 |
"Iraq will become
another Vietnam.": |
Response: (1) There is no
Jungle for the evil forces to hide in; (2) there is no Johnson/McNamara to
screw things up, (3) this is just enemy propaganda the Liberals have
swallowed to scare the US away from Saddam. |
2.0038 |
"Islam is
not a violent, hateful religion, so by creating an image that Muslims are all
bloodthirsty warriors of jihad will only create more hatred. Don't let the
few truly bloodthirsty fanatics of Islam ruin it for the many peaceful
Muslims.": |
Response: So you freely
admit Militant Muslim extremists are bloodthirsty. So what are you doing
about it, waiting for the US to confront them? This is exactly the reason Osama attacked the US in the first
place, to get their attention and have them topple every totalitarian regime
in the Middle East. |
2.0039 |
"It's our
world. We want peace. US, please stop": |
Response: What about
'Jihad, please stop', or 'Militant Muslims, please stop', or 'Terrorists,
please stop'. It is plain to see that
you're too afraid to confront them, because they are so mean, ignorant,
arrogant, and bloodthirsty, so you cowardly and despicably pick solely on the
nice guy on the block - the US. If
you want peace, you will address both sides, please. |
2.0040 |
"Kuwait is a US colony
for allowing the US military there.": |
Response: No, Kuwait is
grateful to the US, and hates Saddam. |
2.0041 |
"Live and Let
Live": |
Doesn't work when your
enemy wants you dead. |
2.0042 |
"Not a shred
of evidence Saddam was supporting terrorists": |
Response: How do you know
what he's been up to, his being a closed society? |
2.0043 |
"Painful armed
conflict is threatening humanity's hope in a better future.": |
Response: Tell that to the
recently freed Iraqi civilians who wanted no part of Saddam and the Baath
Party of terror and death. |
2.0044 |
"Painful armed
conflict is threatening humanity's hope in a better future.": |
Response: This statement is
completely out of touch with the minds of dictators. |
2.0045 |
"Saddam is a
leader.": |
Response: Saddam is not a
leader. Where is he leading Iraq? |
2.0046 |
"Saddam is
a US product": |
Response: No, Saddam is a
Cold War product, an only an idiot fails to see who was the good-guy and who
was the bad-guy in the Cold War. |
2.0047 |
"Shock and
Awe are oppressing the Iraqi people": |
Response: Pure liberal
hogwash. The Iraqis have been amply
told the purpose of this war, that they are not the targets or to be used as
targets, and actually go about their daily business waiting for Saddam and
his evil regime to fall. |
2.0048 |
"Spend
money on fighting AIDS instead": |
Response: Money is being
spent on AIDS, a self-inflicted disease caused by irresponsibility and
avarice. |
2.0049 |
"The Bush
Administration worries critics.": |
Response: The nature of
critics is not to help, but to sit back and criticize. If I had a choice
between Bush and critics, I'd take Bush. At least he has the capacity to do
something. |
2.0050 |
"The debate is not
about Saddam anymore, but about America and it's roll in the world.": |
Response: (1) A victory for
the Iraq MisInformation Ministry, and the reckless capitalist allies of the
US. (2) The child (anti-US elements) will always rebel when the mature parent
(the US) is protecting them from themselves. |
2.0051 |
"The economy is going
to hell and Bush wants to spend money on war": |
Response: The war is upon
you. The enemy's aim is civilian mass murder and economic disruption. There will be no economy with dead
civilians and said disruptions. |
2.0052 |
"The only rays of hope
I see are the growing anti-war protests here in the US and the fact that each
day brings us closer to the 2004 elections.": |
Response: In other words,
the only ray of hope this person sees is taking the pressure off of Osama and
leaving Saddam and his acknowledged evil regime sitting on top of the largest
oil reserves on earth, spending it's wealth in keeping themselves in
perpetual power through brutality, starvation, and murder of the Iraqi
population, and openly supporting terrorist acts against the US. |
2.0053 |
"The UN process could
have worked if Saddam realized the seriousness of Bush's intent.": |
Response: Negative. Saddam
was too entrenched in his totalitarian brutality and murder to pay much
attention to the outside world. |
2.0054 |
"The US is killing
children in Iraq.": |
Response: If you want to be
fair, you should side with the regime that has killed less women and
children, which is by far the US (score: Saddam and the Baath Party: 1.5
million deaths, US: 400). It is completely unfair to side with Saddam. It is
just plain blind prejudice. |
2.0055 |
"The US is wrong if it
thinks a successful war in Iraq will snap the world out of a deep resentment
of US foreign policy.": |
Response: Mere conjecture.
There are already many countries who have not forgotten the US's role in
liberating them from evil totalitarian regimes. |
2.0056 |
"The US
must stop preemptive invasion policy and keep our sons out of harm's
way" |
Response: Best defense is
offense when pursuing an enemy that hits and runs. |
2.0057 |
"The US thinks the
Third World is not as human as Americans, because Americans gave money to the
World Trade Center attack Victims, but not to the African Embassy bombing
victims." |
Response: It seems more like
a case of a nation taking care of it's own. |
2.0058 |
"There is a lack of an
uprising in Basra.": |
Response: What do you
expect, the civilians fight the armed assassins with sticks and stones? |
2.0059 |
"This
seems to portray the mentality of pro-wars to the people across the globe,
you pro-war peep": |
and double further, my
pro-war peep parodying peep, you obviously know nothing about human
suffering. What are these anti-US history-revisionist professors teaching
kids these days? Drivel designed to impress one another, with no concern
about the damage it's doing to the few forces of good in this world, of which
the US is a leader. |
2.0060 |
"This
seems to portray the mentality of pro-wars to the people across the globe,
you pro-war peep": |
and further, my pro-war
peep parodying buffoon, you seem to be more concerned about the US image
abroad than doing a deed so blindingly right while protecting American
citizens in the process. Let me tell you about "images": Images are
"soft power". Soft power only works when your opponent wants to be
like you. I'm afraid, my egotistical peacenik, that Saddam and Osama and
their zombie Muslim minions do not want to be like you. |
2.0061 |
"To want to eradicate
Saddam's regime is respectable, but to destroy a whole nation in the process
is immensely immoral.": |
Response: How can anyone
with an ounce of brain-matter accuse the US, and not Saddam, of destroying
Iraq? |
2.0062 |
"US and Britain want
to control gulf oil.": |
Response: No, just get an
obvious evil off the top of it, and change who spends it's wealth from a
small, murderous, self-serving body to a body that pursues peace and
prosperity. |
2.0063 |
"US betrayed and
abandoned Kurds and Shiites after Gulf War.": |
Response: Myths. Bush called
for the Sunni Muslims to rise up against Saddam. The US then did all it could to protect Shiites and Kurds, in
the face of international opposition, by setting up no-fly zones in Iraq.
People who mindlessly spout out that the US abandoned anyone is to ignore the
forces aligned against the US at the time, and which there still remains many
remnants (consider France, Germany, Russia, and China, to name a few). It was
worse back then. The US could not get rid of Saddam. The free world was not
as strong back then. |
2.0064 |
"US demonizing
Iraqis.": |
Response: Saddam's regime
has demonized itself. The US doesn't have to do anything other than report
it. |
2.0065 |
"US Forefathers a
million times worse than Saddam. They used the same tactics. It's
hypocracy.": |
Response: More liberal
cracked logic. (1) US Forefathers used guerrilla warfare, but without human
shields or execution of families, or calls for suicide bombings. They were,
200 years ago, more civilized than Saddam is today. (2) Racist Liberals want
the US and all of it's history to be perfect before they confront today's
evils. (3) US Forefathers were fighting for the people against tyranny.
Saddam is fighting for tyranny against the people. |
2.0066 |
"US foreign debt $2
trillion, US living beyond it's means; the dollar has fallen 25% against the
Euro.": |
Response: Is this paranoid,
leftist economic views, or a true finger on a US problem? And who is more
inclined to self-indulgence and largesse beyond their means, liberals or
conservatives? The Liberals themselves, that's who. |
2.0067 |
"US gave
$40,000 to the Taliban, then turn around and oust them": |
Response: the money was for
humanitarian aid. The Taliban then
turned around and bit the hand that helped them by harboring
US-citizen-murdering Osama. |
2.0068 |
"US giving out
misinformation, like Saddam dead and his Generals defecting.": |
Response: Who said that was
misinformation? |
2.0069 |
"US has failed in Iraq
because it is calling in more troops.": |
Response: US has tested
Iraq to see how deep Saddam's evil goes. |
2.0070 |
"US is
evil" |
Response: US is leading the
world in making the world a better place for the human race, and in improving
the human race's behavior altogether, and improving the life of the common
man. The "US is evil"
statement comes from mis-information ministries in totalitarian states. |
2.0071 |
"US is racist. Just
look at the Tuskegee experiments in Alabama, the Smallpox and nuclear
experiments on American Indians…" |
Response: The present US
generation has made up for those acts by previous generations, who
incidentally lived in a universally prejudiced-filled world, 1000 times over.
The "racist" card blacks play is now no more than a con game by
liberal-created government dependent prejudiced parasites. |
2.0072 |
"US is the
most powerful nation on earth, unfortunately": |
Response: The
"Unfortunately" is a product of the anti-US drivel American
University ex-hippie conspiracy-crazed professors feed their student
population. Let the moron Salih live
under Kim Jong Il for a while. |
2.0073 |
"US is unconcerned
about world opinion." |
Response: This is an
unbalanced statement. Balance it with how much regard Saddam gives for world
opinion (when he is not in danger of being deposed by the US). |
2.0074 |
"US led sanctions that
prevented water treatment equipment from reaching Iraq, and Iraqi children
died." |
The alternative to
sanctions, which was the UN's idea, was removing Saddam from power, which the
UN opposed. |
2.0075 |
"US losing war." |
Response: Erroneous view of
the left as a result of the anti-Bush and pro-Saddam media blitz. |
2.0076 |
"US should not confront
evils as they perceive them in others.": |
Response: This is a good
example of the complete lack of perception on the part of liberals. What this
liberal is implying is that the evils of Saddam are just a matter of perception
and don't really exist. |
2.0077 |
"US sold
Saddam his bio and chemical weapons": |
Response: And 23 other
countries. Yet Saddam tells the UN he doesn't have any, and the peaceniks who
pointed out the US sold them to him believe him. |
2.0078 |
"US trying to take
over the world.": |
Response: No, US is merely
taking the lead in combating the problems the world faces, from terrorism to
AIDS to nuclear proliferation to evil regimes. |
2.0079 |
"US used A-bomb on
Hiroshima": |
Response: It was refugees
and dissidents from fascism, which would have crushed Islam, that convinced
the US to go on a crash program to develop the A-bomb in the first place. |
2.0080 |
"US war on
Iraq will harm Muslim/Christian relations": |
Response: Nothing can harm
Muslim/Christian relations more than what the Muslims are doing themselves to
Christians and non-Muslims alike. |
2.0081 |
"US will attack
Iraq": |
Response: Saddam is not
Iraq. He holds it hostage. |
2.0082 |
"Use the
money for the war instead on the poor in this country": |
Response: There is nothing
worse than internal parasites on a free democracy. |
2.0083 |
"Vietnam draft favored
Whites through college attendance.": |
Response: (1) If blacks had
a higher regard for academic smarts rather than street smarts they would have
been in college; (2) Most whites go deep into debt to get through college,
blacks are not willing to take that risk, and do not value academic education
enough to work so hard for it. |
2.0084 |
"Want
proof Saddam has WMD's": |
Response: Then peaceniks
turn around and say the US sold them to him. |
2.0085 |
"War in Iraq
unjust": |
Response: Just read
Saddam's headlines "God's Punishment" in reference to 9/11, and
there is ample justification, apart from Saddam's being able to contribute to
the mad Muslim jihad against the rest of the world. |
2.0086 |
"War on Iraq not
legitimate (according to the UN).": |
Response: UN did not
authorize force, not out of concern for the continuation of terrorism, or out
of concern for Iraqi civilians that do not take part in Saddam's regime, but
out of a twisted need to contain the US. |
2.0087 |
"War will split the
international community": |
Response: Mere conjecture.
The opposite may equally occur. |
2.0088 |
"We hope to succeed in
presenting the most accurate and objective picture," Maher Abdullah, a
reporter with al-Jazeera, said Sunday while reporting from Baghdad. |
Response: He's really
saying "Maybe if we say this the US won't bomb our facilities for
propagating known complete falsehoods against the US to gullible ignorant
Muslim masses in order to stir up a larger war (which, Al Jazeera
irresponsibly neglects to foresee, will result in more Muslim casualties). |
2.0089 |
"We must never be
allowed to divide world religions.": |
Response: This statement is
completely out of touch with Muslim desires. |
2.0090 |
"When the chosen
people grew too strong, the rightful cause became the wrong." |
Response: (Alluding to the
US becoming too strong with a rightful cause and the rest of the world
countering with false claims in order to oppose the US): It is the rest of
the world that has to wake up and benefit from this statement, so they don't
fine themselves countering that which is good in the world out of sheer
jealousy, envy, ignorance, selfishness, and hate. |
2.0091 |
"World uncomfortable
with the US going out and changing regimes whenever they want to": |
Response: This is a stupid and
inappropriately over-generalized statement completely ignoring all
right/wrong/moral aspects of the present situation. The only nations opposed to the US actions are nations that are
prejudiced against the US. |
2.0092 |
9/13/01: "Bush's
policy on national defense is wrong (Missile Defense System).": |
Response: This person did
not know about Kim Jong Il's nuclear plans like the US did, and it was before
Kim Jong Il's statement "The world does not need to exist if there is
not Kim Jong Il." |
2.0093 |
Abdul Bari Atwan:
"Having borne arms against the Russians in Afghanistan for 10 years, we
think our battle with the Americans will be easy by comparison." : |
This is the stuff that gets
liberal Americans peeing in their pants.
He forgets who gave them the arms and training to fight the Soviets -
the Americans. |
2.0094 |
Afghan Extremist Schools: |
Afghan Children in
Extremists Schools: Do the Afghan children being taught "All non-Muslims
are their enemy, and "Osama bin Laden is good.": Are they taught
America is a country where Muslims go to be free, and a nation where all
religions in the world live side by side in peace? Are they taught that
people from all over the world and from many different religions worked in
the World Trade Center, including Muslims, and bin Laden praised the suicidal
murders who snuck into the United States, hijacked passenger jets, killed the
pilots, stabbed the attendants and passengers, then crashed the jets into the
World Trade Center, killing themselves and many people from all religions
from all over the world who were working peacefully in the World Trade
Center? Are they taught this is a crime praised by bin Laden? They need to be
taught facts and morals so they can stand on their own two feet in today's
world, and contribute something positive, rather than be taught to go
suicidally through it with a worthless, pathetic life. |
2.0095 |
Afghanistan and Ramadan: |
The US could stop the overt
military action (just the bombing), and use the time to get ahead in the
other behind-the-scenes aspects of the war on terrorism - resupplying,
maintenance, R&R, propaganda, intelligence gathering, planning,
government forming, and ally building. Bombing could be restricted to
reacting to the enemy's military actions - which include digging in,
resupplying, and maneuvering. |
2.0096 |
Al Douri on Iraqi Thought:
"Saddam hero for standing up to superpower so long.": |
Counter Insult: Yes,
Saddam's evil runs deep, as deep as evil runs in the rest of the Muslim
world. |
2.0097 |
Al Douri on Iraqi Thought:
"The US already took longer that the Israelis did in the '67 war, making
the US look bad.": |
Response: Not considered:
how long it would have taken Israel to depose Saddam. |
2.0098 |
Al Douri on Iraqi Thought:
"We can't get rid of Saddam, but once the US does it, it will be easy to
get rid of the US, because the US is easier to terrorize.": |
Response: I don't think any
Iraqi is thinking that, but I do think Al Douri is presenting a good example
of Muslim madness. |
2.0099 |
Al Jazeera News: |
"Innocent Afghans
being killed by US bombing, and the world remains silent." Al Jazeera
itself turns a blind eye and remains silent on the atrocities of the Taliban.
It views the world with one eye - anti-American. The bombing must be weighed
against the innocent people being killed by the enemies of America - the
Taliban. Al Jazeera does not do this, it is strictly anti-American. |
2.0100 |
Al Qaeda: |
"Muslims should not be
fighting Muslims." They try to hid the fact that there are good and bad
Muslims, and they are the bad. |
2.0101 |
Al-Jazeera: |
Alouni: Referring to
Northern Alliance in Kabul: "witnessed scenes that, I'm sorry, I
couldn't describe to anybody." How about the atrocities the Taliban
committed while they were in power, why has Alouni been so silent on that?
Because he is slanted toward the Taliban and is unreasonably anti-Western. |
2.0102 |
American Citizen: "Since
Americans and most whites do not care much for Asians…." and
"Americans secretly think whites are superior to all others…" and
"Americans only really, deep-down, care about their white families and
dynasties…" and "The religions of America are businesses derived
from industrial thinking.": |
Response to this juvenile
thinking: Certainly not the back-to-nature hippies in America. Certainly not
the Americans who give money, food, and medicine to every nation on earth,
even nations that hate Americans, which is a Christian thing to do. Certainly
not the scientists who have developed medicines that keep everyone in the
world free from disease, including nations that hate America. Certainly not
the Americans who have shared inventions with the world in order to free
people around the world from daily toils. The only prejudice I see in America
is from those who work hard for their freedom and strength against those who
do not. |
2.0103 |
American Citizen: "The
united states should also ask themselves why this happen in a highly secured
country like the US.": |
Response: "Highly
secured" is a common misconception by people from countries that do not
allow their citizens many freedoms at the pain of death. Why it happened is easy to see. This happened because the brainwashed
barbarians who did this used the freedoms in America that allow American
citizens to become strong and peaceful against Americans. |
2.0104 |
American: |
American: "It would be
U.S. geopolitical folly to simultaneously attack Afghanistan, Iraq,
Hezbollah, and other terrorist groups in other Muslim countries." This
could only have been spoken by a weak old American. |
2.0105 |
Amin, an Iraqi General:
said on Iraqi TV that Bush's speech was full of ``cheap lies with a political
purpose.'': |
The only
interest the General has is to score points with his dictator, and thereby
keep his head another day, fully knowing that his dictator himself is full of
cheap lies with political purpose. |
2.0106 |
Anti-American News Article:
"(The US unilaterally) Stop the fighting during Ramadan": |
If Ramadan had already been
here and the US had stopped the fighting, (1) the citizens of Kabul would not
be presently liberated, (2) the 8 relief workers may have been murdered or
killed already rather than rescued, (3) Radio Afghanistan would not be up and
running, (4) women would not have been hired at Radio Afghanistan, (5)
children in Kabul would not be flying kites, (6) men would still have their 5
year old beards, (7) the Taliban would still be terrorizing the citizens of
Kabul, (8) Tribes would not be revolting against the Taliban in the South,
(9) people in Kabul would not be literally dancing for joy in the streets.
The author's aim perhaps was to impress his imaginary (and eternally naive)
hippie friends. It is sad that people view the world with only one eye, and
an anti-American one at that. |
2.0107 |
Anti-American News Article:
"(The US unilaterally) Stop the fighting during Ramadan": |
If the Afghans wonder why
the Americans waited so long to liberate them if it was going to be so easy,
the answer is easy: Democrats and their one-eyed anti-American rhetoric that
does not weigh the suffering caused by the enemies of America on us and on their
own people. |
2.0108 |
Anti-American News Article:
"(The US unilaterally) Stop the fighting during Ramadan": "We
need more dialog and less fighting.": |
A one-eyed anti-American statement that should be addressed to the
terrorists who blow up civilian targets and proclaim they are going to
continue to do it until they are masters of the world. |
2.0109 |
Anti-American News Article:
"(The US unilaterally) stopping the bombing during Ramadan would show
the Muslim world we are not savages.": |
The Muslim world already knows that. The issue with the Muslim
world is America's decadence. |
2.0110 |
Anti-American News Article:
"The US (unilaterally) stopping the fighting during Ramadan would accomplish
more than continuing…": |
It would only cause Muslim extremists to conclude the US is
weak, and they would be emboldened once again. |
2.0111 |
Anti-American News Article:
"There are those pressing the US to respect the Islamic tradition of Ramadan."
: |
Does the author naively
think that if there were only 50 US soldiers exposing themselves to 50000
Taliban, that the Taliban would take a month off before slaughtering the 50
Americans? Unfortunately, all of mankind is not ready or capable of honoring
such a high ideal as Ramadan, least of all the terrorists and the Taliban
leadership. |
2.0112 |
Anti-American News Article:
"There is a pall over Ramadan as the US fights the war." : |
This anti-American-slanted
statement should read "As the US-led coalition, Terrorists, and the
Taliban fight the war." We all know the terrorists will continue to
fight their anti-American war through Ramadan. |
2.0113 |
Anti-US Dogma: "US is
a bully": |
Maybe. However it's Big
Bully picking on Little Bully so Little Bully can't pick on you. |
2.0114 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist "Although you feel somewhat reticent about taking advantage of
the modern American Wehrmacht…": |
Response: Totally bad
analogy, America and the Wehrmacht. I think the author could not find any
other use for his new-found word, and so misapplies it here. The Wehrmacht
represented murderous repressive Dictatorship. America represents individual
freedom, including oil moguls. |
2.0115 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist "Khalilzad has an unsavory past. during the Reagan years,
Khalilzad helped supply the anti-Soviet mujihadeen with weapons they're now
using to fight Americans. During the '90s he worked as Unocal's chief
consultant on its Afghan pipeline scheme.": |
Response: What's so
unsavory about these things, protecting the world from the Soviets and
working in the oil business? |
2.0116 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist "The Taliban government and their Al Qaeda "guests",
after all, both were at best bit players in the terror biz. If the U.S. had
really wanted to dispatch a significant number of jihad boys to meet the
black-eyed virgins, it would have bombed Pakistan. Instead, the State
Department inexplicably cozies up to this snake pit of anti-American
extremists (Pakistan), choosing a nation led by a dictator who seized power
in an illegal coup as our principal South Asian ally. Moreover, the American military strategy
in Afghanistan – dropping bombs without inserting a significant number of
ground troops – all but guaranteed that Osama would live to kill another
day. So the Third Afghan War
obviously isn't about fighting terrorism – leading cynics to conclude that it
must be about (yawwwwwwn!) oil.": |
Response: How cynics
mislead themselves into webs of illogical conclusions. |
2.0117 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "1.
During 1989-1990, the Kuwaiti monarchy was overproducing and driving down the
price of oil, a policy that cost Iraq $14 billion in lost revenue.": |
Response: We know now what Saddam
was spending his billions on, with his 27 odd palaces while Iraqi civilians
starved. |
2.0118 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "1.
General Norman Schwarzkopf was conducting sophisticated war games pitting
hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops against Iraqi armored divisions.": |
Response: Lucky for the
world he was. |
2.0119 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "1. King
Fahd also told King Hussein that there was no evidence of a hostile Iraqi
build-up on the Saudi border, and that despite American assertions, there was
no truth to reports that Iraq planned to invade Saudi Arabia.": |
Response: I guess good ole
King Fahd was wrong, wasn't he. Again, the author is saying these things
after Iraq's invasion of Saudi Arabia, because his intended audience is
unread and weak-minded. |
2.0120 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "1. The
Bush administration lied when it stated on August 8, 1990, that the purpose
of the U.S. troop deployment was "strictly defensive" and necessary
to protect Saudi Arabia from an imminent Iraqi invasion.": |
Response: Looks like Bush
was proved right when Saddam invaded Saudi Arabia during the 1991 Gulf War at
the Battle of Khafji. I don't know how the author expects any intelligent
person to swallow his vapid arguments, but then I believe the author is
playing to the populist airheads. |
2.0121 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "1. The
Saudis only bowed to U.S. demands that the Saudis "invite" U.S.
troops to defend them following a long meeting between the king and Secretary
of Defense Richard Cheney. The real substance of this discussion will
probably remain classified for many, many years.": |
Response: In retrospect we
can see this was spoken like a true conspiracy theorist to his airhead audience. |
2.0122 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "As many
as 50,000 to 100,000 Iraqi soldiers may have died after the Iraqi government
had fully capitulated to all U.S. and UN demands.": |
Response: Saddam never offered
any capitulations, this was the time of his infamous "Mother of all
Battles" statement. |
2.0123 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "Bush
also rejected Iraq's withdrawal offer of February 15, 1991, two days aver
U.S. planes incinerated hundreds of women and children sleeping in the
al-Arneriyah bomb shelter.": |
Response: Incinerated, the
author conveniently leaves out in order to make the US look bad, because
Saddam put them there, knowing full well it was a military installation by
day, and that it was a legitimate military target. |
2.0124 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "Heller
concludes that as of January 6, 1991, the Pentagon had not provided the press
or Congress with any proof at all for an early buildup of Iraqi troops in southern
Kuwait that would suggest an imminent invasion of Saudi Arabia. The usual
Pentagon evidence was little more than "trust me.": |
Response: In hindsight it's
lucky Congress trusted the Pentagon. |
2.0125 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "Information
that has come to light suggests that the United States interfered in and
aggravated the Iraq-Kuwait dispute, knew that an Iraqi military response
against Kuwait was likely, and then took advantage of the Iraqi move to carry
out a long-planned U.S. military intervention in the Middle East.": |
Response: OK, I'll give him
an ear…. Wait a minute, the author is singling out the US completely out
of context of the Cold War, which was
still raging. If fact, Iraq's military almost completely consisted of
hardware purchased from the evil Soviet Union. So, personally, even if this
was true, I can clearly see that the Soviet threat (and an evil one it was)
clearly outweighed any oil conspiracy theory for US actions in the Middle
East. |
2.0126 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "Iraq
neither attacked nor threatened the United States. We believe that this was a
war to re-divide and redistribute the fabulous markets and resources of the
Middle East, in other words this was an imperialist war. The Bush
administration, on behalf of the giant oil corporations and banks, sought to
strengthen its domination of this strategic region. It did this in league
with the former colonial powers of the region, namely Britain and France, and
in opposition to the Iraqi people's claim on their own land and especially
their natural resources.": |
Response: (1) Author forgot
the 1987 USS Stark incident during the Iraq/Iran conflict, in which Saddam
shot an Exocet missile at because the US would not sell him modern tanks, and
before Saddam's hand in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. (2) Redistribute the
oil, yes- from a paranoid murderous dictator to a democratic and free Iraq.
(3) "In league with Britain and France": France's opposition to the
second gulf war shoots this theory down the toilet, just as Iraq's French
Mirages were blown out of the sky. (4) "Iraqi people's claim on their
own land and especially their natural resources": The author sounds like
a true lying Communist. If fact, the Iraqi people presently claim nothing
that Saddam does not want them to claim.
Saddam owns everything, and distributes the wealth through a network
of assassins. |
2.0127 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "It is thus
obvious that the U.S. government did not fight the war to secure Iraq's
eviction from Kuwait but rather proceeded with this unparalleled massacre for
other foreign policy objectives.": |
Response: I don't know what
bonehead would believe that the casualties inflicted in the Gulf War compares
in any way of the massacre the author's beloved Saddam inflicted during his
butcherus reign of terror, of which the author mentions nothing of, for
whatever twisted reasons. |
2.0128 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992:
"Satellite photographs taken by the Soviet Union on the precise day Bush
addressed Congress failed to show any evidence of Iraqi troops in Kuwait or
massing along the Kuwait-Saudi Arabian border.": |
Response: Again the
audacity of the author to say these things even after the events to the
contrary have already occurred. This is clearly a case of a conspiracy
theorist not wanting to give up his conspiracy theory even after events have
proven him wrong, such as the Iraqi army in Kuwait being destroyed while
100,000 other surrendered, and Saddam's thwarted invasion of Saudi Arabia
during the Battle of Khafji.. |
2.0129 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "That's
why it is important to get the facts. There is ample evidence that the U.S. was
eagerly planning to fight the war even before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on
August 2, 1990.": |
Response: This implies a US
conspiracy to get Saddam to attack Kuwait, then mass his forces on the Saudi
Border and then invade Saudi Arabia, rather than the simple militaristic
adventurism of a petty, meglo-maniacal, murderous dictator who no one has
seriously opposed, like a spoiled child. |
2.0130 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "The
"New World Order" is that the U.S. figures that if the Soviets are
willing to abandon Iraq and their other traditional allies in the Third World
then the U.S. and other western capitalist countries can return to their
former dominant position in various areas of the world.": |
Response: The author must
be aghast and crying in his vodka now after the world has recently learned
his beloved former Soviet Union is now engaging in the very reckless
arms-dealing capitalism (GPS Jammers and Night Vision Goggles to Saddam) that
the Soviets hypocritically berated the West for. |
2.0131 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "The
basic premise of U.S. policy has been to eliminate or severely weaken any
nationalist regime that challenges U.S. dominance and control over the
oil-rich region.": |
Response: Looks like Gulf
War 2 is proving the author wrong. |
2.0132 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "The
Bush administration has never presented any evidence whatsoever for its
charges that Iraq used poison gas on its own citizens.": |
Response: There is plenty of
evidence now since 1992. This is just the kind of thing foreign-influenced
anti-US liberals wish to hide. This theorist quotes from a "Liberation
and Marxism" publication, among other leftist media sources. I suppose
this theorist thinks Stalinist Russia was good, too. |
2.0133 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "The
goal of the U.S. war is to roll back the Arab revolution and all the other
revolutionary movements that have swept the region since World War II.": |
Response: As if the Arab
"revolutions" were good for the Muslim masses and not just a few
self-enriching, murdering dictators. |
2.0134 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "The New
World Order that Bush has in mind is, in fact, not so new. It is an attempt to
turn the clock back to the pre-World War II era of unchallenged colonial
domination and plunder of the land, labor, and resources of Africa, Asia,
Latin America, and the Middle East by a handful of industrialized capitalist
countries.": |
Response: Mistakenly thinks
that only large, industrialized nations are capitalists. |
2.0135 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "The
royal families of the oil-rich Arabian peninsula, who were put on their
thrones by the British empire and are kept there by the U.S. military and the
CIA, have loyally turned their kingdoms into cash cows for Wall Street banks
and corporations.": |
Response: The US would
prefer independent democracies that
are on a path of peace and prosperity. |
2.0136 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "The
U.S. and its imperialist allies have won a temporary victory in the Middle
East. But their policy of military domination to stop the natural progression
of history - for people to liberate themselves from the yoke of colonialism -
cannot succeed.": |
Response: (1) Should read
"help the people liberate themselves from the yoke of totalitarianism
will succeed in spite of oil-conspiracy theorists." (2) Every Kuwaiti is
born a millionaire. How does that fit in with the "poor and down-trodden"
view espoused by this theorist? (3) Saddam's rule in no way represents this
theorist's "poor and down-trodden" view. |
2.0137 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "The
U.S. ground war against Iraqi positions resulted in the greatest number of
casualties in the conflict. As many as 50,000 to 100,000 Iraqi soldiers may
have died after the Iraqi government had fully capitulated to all U.S. and UN
demands.": |
Response: Now the
conspiracy theorists want to rewrite history to suit their fantasies. I
remember Saddam defiant to the last, just as he is 12 years later. |
2.0138 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "While
the Pentagon was claiming as many as 250,000 Iraqi troops in Kuwait, it
refused to provide evidence that would contradict the Soviet satellite
photos.": |
Response: So now the oil
conspiracy theorist is putting his faith in a post-Stalinist Soviet satellite
photo. This oil-conspiracy theory is beginning to look like a weak-minded
attempt to fool the weak-minded with the aid of weak-minded, lying regimes. |
2.0139 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist, 1992: "With
its plans in tact, we must determine if it is possible that the U.S.
government actually sought a pretext for a military intervention in the
Middle East.": |
Response: I'll give you a
pretext now: the Osama's running around the world committing civilian mass
murder and Saddam publicly applauding it. |
2.0140 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: ""Bush's administration seems almost uniformly to dismiss
most of the civilities and practices that other nations would identify with a
common civilization. Civilized people operate by consensus . . . Diplomacy is
the common language.": |
Response: The world has
diplomacy with dictators, many times over, with the same sorry results. The
author is erroneously placing dictators on a civilized plain. |
2.0141 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: ""For example, they repeat accounts of al Qaeda members seeking
refuge in Iraq and of terrorist operatives meeting with Iraqi intelligence
officials, even though U.S. intelligence reports raise doubts about such
links.": |
Response: The war in Iraq has
cleared up this issue, with al Qaeda in Iraq and aligned closely with Saddam. |
2.0142 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: "Americans will not have heard much about PNAC because the
national media has chosen not to tell them about it.": |
Response: Because it came
and went according to human tiredness. |
2.0143 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: "And a front-page story in the Jan. 9 New York Times reveals
that "the United States is preparing a military presence in Central Asia
that could last for years," including a building permanent air base in
the Kyrgyz Republic, formerly part of the Soviet Union. (The Bushies say that
they just want to keep an eye on postwar Afghanistan, but few students of the
region buy the official story.": |
Response: The author is
again taking the stand that anything American is defacto bad. |
2.0144 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: "Any compromise of Washington's freedom to act is treated as a
hostile act.": |
Response: Should be "any
act by Washington is treated as a hostile act by it's enemies and
competitors." |
2.0145 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: "Did Bush exploit the Sept. 11 attacks to justify a Central
Asian oil grab? The answer seems clear. On Dec. 31, Bush appointed his
special envoy to Afghanistan: Zalmay Khalilzad. "This is a moment of
opportunity for Afghanistan.": |
Response: (1) Again, I
don't see anything wrong with helping Afghanistan generate some income. The
author seems to be saying anything that generates a profit is bad, especially
if it's the oil business. (2) I think Afghanistan has more to fear from our
"Unwilling Allies, France, Germany, Russia, and China, who are still not
above swooping down like vultures in a reckless, dangerous, irresponsible
form of Capitalism, as evidenced by their arms dealings with Saddam in the
past 12 years. |
2.0146 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: "Imagine how bad things would be if oil companies didn't rule
the world.": |
Response: What were the oil
companies doing when Clinton was in office, or does this refute the
conspiracy, and is not considered? |
2.0147 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: "Meanwhile, Bush has not yet produced credible evidence that
Iraq is the immediate and direct threat that his administration
claims…Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist: "To quash the International
Criminal Court (ICC), for example, the administration threatened in June to
withdraw all funds for UN peacekeeping. Global warming may be occurring, as
an administration report finally admitted in the spring, but the White House
nonetheless trashed the Kyoto Protocol that the international community spent
ten years negotiating. And it offered no alternative plan.": |
Response: Once again the
link that is staring them in the face the liberals cannot see - the misuse of
mass media by Saddam and it's insane effect on the Osama's in this world. |
2.0148 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: "On Iraqi weapons programs, administration officials draw the
most pessimistic conclusions from ambiguous sources," according to
Diamond.": |
Response: The author
ignores the fact that Saddam's civilian mass murder arsenal was obtained from
a not-so-ambiguous source - the US itself. So the US should know what Saddam
has not declared. |
2.0149 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: "There is an oil conspiracy behind the war in Iraq.": |
If you believe in an oil
conspiracy, you lost money this summer. -Jerry Bowyer. |
2.0150 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy
Theorist: "To quash the International Criminal Court (ICC), for example,
the administration threatened in June to withdraw all funds for UN
peacekeeping. Global warming may be occurring, as an administration report
finally admitted in the spring, but the White House nonetheless trashed the
Kyoto Protocol that the international community spent ten years negotiating.
And it offered no alternative plan.": |
Response: There they go,
back to the ICC and the Kyoto treaty. I should investigate them next, to see
why Bush was against them. |
2.0151 |
Anti-US Oil Conspiracy Theorist: "With the US
controlling Iraqi oil, the oil businesses will gain large profits.": |
Jerry Bowyer: With the
declining oil portfolio as evidence, the oil-conspiracy theory is false. If Iraq
were to undergo a regime change, its production of oil would likely increase
and this production would enter the flow of oil trade around the world. When
supply goes up, prices go down, which is bad for the oil companies. |
2.0152 |
Anti-US Protestor: "US
wants to dominate the world.": |
Response: Protecting your
civilian population by combating international terrorists and their
sympathizing states is not wanting to dominate the world. |
2.0153 |
Anti-US: "Press is
censored.": |
Response: That's a laugh,
with the Bush bashing party going on. |
2.0154 |
Anti-US: "the
humanitarian disaster in Iraq that the US created.": |
Response: Fails to tell us
how Iraq was a humanitarian disaster for the past 40 years under Saddam,
which was much worse, and intentional, and still ongoing, as opposed to the
US's unintentional hardships which it works hard to remedy as it fights
Saddam. This anti-US bitterness has seriously blinded this person's judgment. |
2.0155 |
Anti-US: "US military
experimented on soldiers with drugs, and soldiers could not refuse.": |
Response: I don't know what
happened in the past, but when I was in the military it was the healthiest
place around in regards to psychology and medicine. I saw no conspiracies
other than in the minds of the absurd. |
2.0156 |
Antiwar Activists "War
is not the answer": |
What are they
going to do, spank Saddam? They are posturing with an imagined strength they
do not possess. It is my theory that the weaker one is in relation to one's enemy,
the more ruthless one will be, and conversely, the stronger one is in
relation to one's enemy, the more merciful one will be. The activists are
assuming the US is so much stronger that their enemies that the US can afford
to be God-like in it's consideration and mercy, which is a current myth. |
2.0157 |
Anti-war Countries: |
Are merely afraid of the
uncertainties created by war, even if there will most likely be outcomes that
promote peace and prosperity. |
2.0158 |
Antiwar Liberal: "What
goes around, comes around." (referring to US military action against
Saddam): |
Response: Yes, liberation
goes around, thanks comes around. |
2.0159 |
Anti-War Mother: "Our
kids are dying fighting seasoned warriors. Bring them home.": |
Response: (1) I would
rather die fighting over there than die by Osama's hand here while hiding in
my mother's lap. Oh, by the way, I am more of a seasoned warrior than they
are. (2) This boo-hooing is a prime example of why women were banned from
politics throughout history- their tendency to bury their heads at the first
sign of trouble. |
2.0160 |
Antiwar News Article:
"A gauntlet of antiwar protestors carrying American flags": |
Terrorists, dictatorial
nations, and Muslims hate the American flag. Try and carry it over there, as
anyone is free to carry any flag over here. |
2.0161 |
Antiwar News Article:
"America is an Aggressive Imperial Power": |
Response: Does the US not
have an all volunteer armed force? Did they not leave Afghanistan after the
horrible situation there was taken care of? Are the enemies of the US and the
supporters of terrorism and rogue nations pursuing peace and prosperity, or
are they murderous repressive regimes, enemies of the free world, and whose
arms clients include international terrorist organizations? Are you saying
the US is not justified in it's actions? |
2.0162 |
Antiwar News Article:
"Attack Iraq doesn't seem natural (in the war on terrorism).": |
Response: Deposing Saddam will have to be done sooner
or later in the war on terrorism.
Bush is doing it perhaps sooner than most think "natural" or
obvious, hence the protests and misgivings.
It is unfortunate that, with the technology available today, we will
all be dead before it becomes "obvious". |
2.0163 |
Antiwar News Article:
"Honk for Peace": |
Muslim
fundamentalists hate car horns. |
2.0164 |
Antiwar News Article:
"I believe King’s principle of overcoming enemies with love is the only
solution to the problems facing us today, both at home and abroad.": |
Response: I don't think
you'll soften Saddam with love. First of all you're not his type. Second,
Saddam is holding on to power by committing crimes against humanity. |
2.0165 |
Antiwar News Article:
"If Bush had to send his children to war, he'd think twice about
it.": |
Response: Sure, and then
he'd do it anyway. All Americans should serve their country for a period of
time. |
2.0166 |
Antiwar News Article:
"Iraq is a Sovereign Nation": |
Response: It is not. It is
a nation held hostage. Put in in this perspective: You are developing a
one-sheet summary on each government in the world which explains how the
government works. In the US there are three branches of government than keep
each other in check. In parliamentary systems you have Prime Ministers and
Cabinets. Now you get to Iraq. Go ahead and do your summary, and then tell me
Iraq is a sovereign nation. |
2.0167 |
Antiwar News Article:
"Iraq is an elective campaign": |
Response: This statement
lacks the insight that all terrorist roads lead to Saddam, and lacks the
wisdom that if the US has the capability to depose Saddam, they should do it.
That it is a good deed is as plain as black and white. |
2.0168 |
Antiwar News Article:
"Iraq is not a threat.": |
How does anyone know Iraq
did not attack the US with anthrax already? Saddam's desire to possess
weapons of mass destruction, his already obtaining them, and his prior use of
them makes him a threat to all, including the blind. |
2.0169 |
Antiwar News Article:
"Only one congressman has a son in the military, so you can see their
mindset (hawks).": |
Response: It's this kind of
weenie talk that has emboldened the Saddam's and Osama's of the world, and
which has invited terrorists to US soil. They frequently gloat over Lebanon
and Somalia where the US turned tail and ran, not wanting to sustain any
casualties, being "civilized" and valuing human life over
principles. |
2.0170 |
Antiwar News Article:
"Russia during the cold war had many weapons of mass destruction. The US
did not declare war on them.": |
The world then
was a much more barbaric place- repressive dictatorial regimes were more
prevalent, and allies were less hesitant in screwing each other. In such a
world the US would truly been acting alone in the name of good. |
2.0171 |
Antiwar News Article:
"Soccer moms, religious leaders, longtime activists, senior citizens,
and professionals have recently taken to the oft-freezing streets to show
their support for a peaceful solution.": |
The enemies of the US who
these protestors want peace with do not operate on such lofty platitudes. In
Saddam's world soccer moms are evil, religious leaders are repressed,
activists never become "long-time" and their families killed and
tortured, senior citizens are ignored, and professionals are enslaved or
killed. What is keeping Saddam from exporting that rule here? The very
government that is protecting them from Saddam. The protestors are blind in
every direction except the direction of lofty platitudes. |
2.0172 |
Antiwar News Article:
"The US is a bully, it did not sign the Kyoto treaty on global warming,
did not support S. Korea's "Sunshine" policy toward N. Korea, did
not join the International Criminal Court, withdrew from the Antiballistic
Missile treaty, and has a preventive war doctrine.": |
Response: The US has it's
points on each of these issues, of which anti-US proponents have conveniently
forgotten, especially regarding N. Korea, who make it known that they were
going to pursue nukes long ago, and are now so eager for war. |
2.0173 |
Antiwar News Article:
"The US is becoming the next colonial power.": |
Response: How can the US do
that with a volunteer military that is only a fraction of what it could be? |
2.0174 |
Antiwar News Article:
"The US is bullying Iraq": |
Response: The US is
speaking in the only language a dictator understands. |
2.0175 |
Antiwar News Article:
"What are you going to do after Iraq, attack all other dictators and
countries with ties to terrorists?": |
That depends on what
happens after Saddam is deposed and his arsenal rounded up. If it is
perfectly clear that must be done, then it must be weighed. |
2.0176 |
Antiwar Protesting: |
Is snuffed out in the
Iraq's and North Korea's of the world. Why should the US listen to it? Peace
is not a unilateral phenomenon. |
2.0177 |
Antiwar Protestor Argument:
"Why pick on Iraq? Saddam doesn't have the ballistic missiles to reach
the U.S. with nukes, even if he had them.": |
He doesn't need them. He
can use Muslim Fundamentalists and Boeing planes. |
2.0178 |
Antiwar Protestor:
"Bush is a murderer." |
Response: (1) If he did
nothing, and terrorists murdered their next antiwar protestors in the US,
then he'd be a murderer. (2) OK, let's take your view, he is a murderer. Who
then, is the worse murderer, Bush or Saddam, and who's side is this person
on? |
2.0179 |
Antiwar Protestor:
"Peace Now." |
Response: When you enemy is
suicidally dealing out civilian death and destruction, attacking those who
are protecting you won't save you. |
2.0180 |
Antiwar Protestor:
"Think of the lives of innocent women and children.": |
Response: This war is far,
far better for the lives of Iraqi women and children than leaving the Baath
Party in power, a party that has killed an average of 43,000 Iraqi civilians,
including women and children, every year for the past 35 years. Why? To stay
in perpetual totalitarian power, keep the wealth, and let the population
starve. |
2.0181 |
Antiwar Protestors: |
Are hated because they are
untested in the face of the trials the rest of the world has to endure.
It is easy to predict that the protestors
ultimately would break down and act no less violently than others have in the
face of such trials. |
2.0182 |
Antiwar Protestors: |
Are hypocrites. They want
to bully the rest of the world peacefully. |
2.0183 |
Antiwar
Protestors: |
Are not anti-war, or they
would have been out on 9/12. It is merely a Democratic Party induced hysteria
aimed at a Republican Party White House. |
2.0184 |
Antiwar Protestors: |
Are posturing from a
position of strength which was won not by appeasing the Saddam's and Kim Jong
Il's of history, which was in fact won by the blood of their ancestors, who
are being remembered ungraciously by such protestors in that the wars that
they fought were wrong. |
2.0185 |
Antiwar Protestors: |
Think that opposing war in
Iraq will appease terrorists and dictators.
It will not because Muslim terrorists and dictators already have a
multitude of delusions logically-cracked mindsets that in their minds justify
exterminating the West and everyone in it, such as bombing Hiroshima and
killing civilians in Panama. |
2.0186 |
Antiwar Protestors: |
Treat Saddam as an
empirical issue, without any regard to good and evil. Bush cuts through this
bull. |
2.0187 |
Antiwar Protestors:
"Bush's imposing a Western-style government on others" |
Response: Degrading those
concepts shows they do not know anything about human suffering, such as the
horrible conditions in North Korea under classic communism, or under any
other classic communistic regime in the last century, under Asian, African,
and Middle East totalitarian regimes.
They are speaking out of complete ignorance of human suffering, as
taught at American University by revisionist anti-US professors. Only a complete moron would diminish
democracy as merely a "Western-style" government, especially after
the recent lessons of the 20th century, which revisionists are attempting to
rewrite to earn brownie points with fellow misguided intelligentsia. |
2.0188 |
Antiwar Protestors:
"It's too bad Bush doesn't show the same sorrow over the Iraqi's he's
going to bomb as he showed over the loss of the Shuttle crew.": |
Another one-way criticism.
What about the anti-war protestor's terrorist friends who show no sorrow in
exhorting mindless Muslims to kill themselves while committing mass murder of
civilian populations? |
2.0189 |
Antiwar Protestors:
"War in Iraq like the massacre of women and children by out of control
generals in the West": |
Response: The only movie
this person has seen is "Little Big Man", which was a bunch of
one-sided and out of context horsedung. |
2.0190 |
Antiwar: "Bush and
Blair delivering death and destruction, blood on their hands, and should be
held accountable": |
Where is the mention of
Muslim Militants from this one-sided coward who is too afraid to confront
Muslim Militants and instead picks on the nice guys? |
2.0191 |
Antiwar: "Bush and
Blair delivering death and destruction, blood on their hands, and should be
held accountable": |
With this logic you'd tell
your kid to not fight back when the bullies beat him up. |
2.0192 |
As the
realist theorist Kenneth Waltz argues, "North Korea, Iraq, Iran and
others know that the United States can be held at bay only by
deterrence.": |
Response: So Kenneth Waltz
and Scott Burchell approve of Kim Jong Il's pursuit of nuclear weapons, given
the hell North Koreans live in, and Kim's statement "The earth does not
need to exist if there is not Kim Jong Il." Now they are apologizing for
Kim Jong Il! It should be "Scott Burchell, lecturer in justification for
evil and basher of heroic US". Let his punishment be his being exposed
as an errant critic and a tool of evil regimes. |
2.0193 |
Baath Party "US has no
right to change regime": |
Response: The US has the
right to protect itself from the whims of a dictator who possesses CMM
(Civilian Mass Murder) agents and weapons who has had no one in his own
country to stop him from passing them out or using them. |
2.0194 |
Baath Party: |
Does not hesitate to push
civilians in front of bullets in order to stay in power and out of the hands
of civilian justice. |
2.0195 |
Baath Party: |
Modeled after Stalin and
Hitler, while those two were still in power. It is a present day evil
anachronism. |
2.0196 |
Baath Party: |
Only honorable thing left
for them to do is to regret what they have done and face Iraqi justice. |
2.0197 |
Baath Party: "Defend
Iraq, the dignity of it's people, and the destiny of the Muslim world.": |
Response: Poetic, but deceiving.
The Baath Party has raped Iraq, stole the dignity of it's people, and could
care less about the destiny of the Muslim world as evidenced by the
atrocities the Party has committed in it's perpetual quest for power. |
2.0198 |
Banned Omar Interview:
"America controls the governments of the Islamic countries.": |
The US does not control
Saddam, Kadafi, Iran, Syria, Jordan, Palestine, Malaysia, Indonesia, and
others. This is a good example of an secularly ignorant Mullah's self-serving
propaganda aimed at the ignorant street Muslim. |
2.0199 |
Banned Omar Interview:
"Not an issue of Osama, but of Islam's prestige and Afghanistan's
tradition.": |
He is dragging down both.
It is only an issue of the Taliban's atrocities being exposed, and the
embarrassment it will cause to Islam and the Afghan tradition. |
2.0200 |
Banned Omar Interview::
"America is very strong… but it could not be strong enough to defeat
us.": |
Spoken like a true
barbarian, using words like "strength". That is the only language
he understands. |
2.0201 |
Banned Omar Interview::
"If you (I) start a journey on God's path, you can reside anywhere on
earth and be protected.": |
So who says he is on God's
path? Not anyone with no stake in the matter. |
2.0202 |
Banned Omar Interview::
"If you look at Islamic countries, the people are in despair.": |
Contradicts 2.0100. And
yes, because of corrupt totalitarian oppressive Islamic regimes, and not
because of any Western nation. The US has been overly tolerant of recent
Islamic antics and rhetoric. |
2.0203 |
BBC Headline:
"Baghdad's anger: Residents' rage after a shopping area was apparently
hit by coalition bombs.": |
Should Read: "Iraq
(Mis-)Information Ministry stages false public rage by threatening civilians
if they do not, and makes false claim that coalition bomb hits shopping
area." |
2.0204 |
Ben & Jerry's Ben Cone,
a few days before 9/11: |
"We don't need a large
military (implying everybody loves Americans)." |
2.0205 |
bin Laden: |
Attacks a nation (in the
name of Islam) that has been more welcome to Muslim immigration more than any
other country in the world. A nation that has fought for beleaguered Muslims
four times in four different places in the past decade alone (Afghanistan against
Soviets, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia against a militaristically adventurous
neighboring Dictator, Bosnia against Christians, Somalia against anarchy. ) |
2.0206 |
bin Laden: |
Erroneously equates strong
with bad, and weak with good, in international relations, but hypocritically
is strong himself with respect to Muslim peasants. |
2.0207 |
bin Laden: |
His plan would not have
worked if he did not misuse the very freedoms that he, in his twisted mind,
is at war with. He used American freedoms to sneak into the U.S., freely take
specialized trainings with no governmental investigations, sneak aboard the
planes, hijack them, and suicidally fly them into civilian buildings. |
2.0208 |
bin Laden: |
Says the U.S. is
"heavy handed" in one statement and "weak" in the next. A
contradiction. |
2.0209 |
bin Laden: |
The non-Muslim world must
avoid talking the language of Islam - that of deceit, threat, and force.
However, that is why bin Laden thinks the West is weak, because they don't
talk his language (that of deceit, threat, and force). |
2.0210 |
bin Laden: "...if
avenging the killing of our people is terrorism, let history be a witness
that we are terrorists.": |
Here he is avenging the
killing of his people by killing more of his people (Muslims who worked in
the World Trade Center). Simply illogical. |
2.0211 |
bin Laden: "Children
are dying in Iraq and nobody says anything.": |
He is not fighting for
Iraq, Iraq was going to take over Saudi Arabia. Children in Iraq are not
dying, anyway. The main cause of death in Iraq is obesity. |
2.0212 |
bin Laden: "Iraq
invaded Kuwait to liberate Palestine.": |
How much more illogical can
he get? |
2.0213 |
bin Laden: "Punish
U.S. for all the pain it has caused the world": |
Suppose it is even partly
true, what about all the good the U.S. has done in the world throughout the
20th century by present and past American generation, such a preventing a
Nazi Middle East. That can't be unconsidered. Yet the terrorist mind
selectively blocks out any facts that interfere with the activities that give
them so much pleasure - that of death and destruction. It's their video game,
and they're in an intoxicating fantasy world. It gives their miserable
existence some meaning and companionship, however macabre. |
2.0214 |
bin Laden: "The
American soldier is weak as evidenced in Beirut and Somalia": |
Bin Laden mistakes the
weakness as being the soldier instead of the leadership. He forgets that
American leadership is up for election every 2-4 years. |
2.0215 |
bin Laden: "The
Americans must pay for the pain and suffering they've caused.": |
The pain and suffering in
the Middle East is caused by their own leadership's decadence and corruption
which has left the general population in ignorance and isolation. |
2.0216 |
bin Laden: "The U.S.
has caused suffering in Iraq.": |
The Iraqi people and the
Muslim world have caused suffering in Iraq, not the West or the U.N. They
have, against President Bush Sr.'s advice, allowed Saddam to continue ruling
in his insane maniacal ways, and violate U.N. mandates. Muslim extremists
wish to shift the blame away from Saddam and the Muslim world where it
belongs, and over to the West, where it does not belong. Like children, they
are not accepting their responsibilities in the matter. |
2.0217 |
bin Laden: "Use of
atom bomb in WWII was terrorism": |
WWII was all out war between
a free nation and deadly, fanatical, merciless, aggressive reigns in Japan
and Germany. He refuses to admit there would be no Muslim world today if the
Axis Leaders had the bomb. |
2.0218 |
bin Laden: "We have
lost loved ones unjustly, or are being treated with unjust prejudice": |
They are relying on the civility of their targets, who then
won’t retaliate in kind. If they don’t care if more of their loved ones are
killed in return then they are contradicting their initial purpose "for
Allah and country". |
2.0219 |
Blacks "were the only
victims of Slavery in the US, and should side with the enemies of the US,
such as evil dictators and terrorist organizations": |
Slavery was the culture up
to the 1800's in many countries and still exists today in many
countries. In 1834 a white man
convicted of vagrancy was sold to a black man for a nickel in Chicago. Let
the blacks argue that one. |
2.0220 |
Bush whining about the
Geneva Convention, what a joke! What about starting a war against the rules
of the UN charter? What about the Kyoto treaty? What about the international
court? What about import taxes of up to 30% on foreign steel? Bush doesn't
care at all about international law and regulations. He uses them when they
suit him, ignores them when they stand in his way. |
Response: Another 'Peace
Now, See No Evil' person. Bush has perfectly good reasons for his actions. He
cannot let world prejudice against the US determine his actions. |
2.0221 |
Chinese Citizen-Slave (or
gov. propaganda): "America has never apologized for Vietnam, which was
millions of times worse than the terrorist attacks in USA.": |
Response: America was
trying to stop the spread of the communist evil like Joseph Stalin and Mao
Tse Tung represented, but the world was too childish to understand. The US
did not start that war. The communists attacked the non-communists. The US
swore to protect the non-communists from the horrors of communism, and they
failed. The only apology the US
should make about Vietnam is for letting the communists take over. |
2.0222 |
Chinese Citizen-Slave (or
gov. propaganda): "Ever since Bush came to power, USA has committed many
atrocity outside USA, causing huge loss of human life.": |
Response: Can the US
government shed some light on this? How come I as an American citizen do not
know about these things? Let me check the Internet…….. |
2.0223 |
Chinese Citizen-Slave (or
gov. propaganda): "I think America needs to realize that not everyone in
this world appreciate its way of life. In pursuing freedom, it cannot
exercise its superpower at other country's expense, making war in other
country's territory and threatening other nation's sovereign.": |
Response: (1) Not everyone
in world appreciate US way of life - like Kim Jong Il, Castro, Idi Amin,
Saddam, Osama bin Laden, Hitler, Stalin, Genghis Khan, Ivan the Terrible, Ho
Chi Min, Mao, Charles Manson, and Al Capone. (2) In Iraq, all email and all
phone calls are censored. That doesn't sound like a sovereign nation. It
sounds like dictator and subjects. |
2.0224 |
Chinese Citizen-Slave (or
gov. propaganda): "In pursuing freedom, the US cannot exercise its
superpower at other country's expense.": |
Response: Other country's
expense like those run by un-elected, brutal, perpetual, anti-American
lie-spreading dictators, such as communist countries. |
2.0225 |
Chinese Citizen-Slave (or
gov. propaganda): "This should set people thinking about what USA has
done to incur such a strong retaliation.": |
Response: False
anti-American propaganda and brainwashing by evil, non-democratic
governments. |
2.0226 |
Chinese
Citizen-Slave (or gov. propaganda): "US making war in other country's
territory and threatening other nation's sovereign.": |
Response: (1) The US does
not go around chanting "Death to China" or "Death to the
Middle East". (2) The US is a
peacemaker, and will defend itself from the many non-democratic madnesses in
the world. (3) 62 year old Iraqi: "We (Iraq) have had so many wars I'm
used to it." I don't hear any Americans saying that, while America's
enemies, including Iraq, falsely tell the world the US is a warmonger. |
2.0227 |
Christopher Dickey:
"If the US stays in Iraq for 15 to 20 years, it will find itself at war
with the rest of the world.": |
Response: Mere cowardly
conjecture. Fact is the rest of the world will counterbalance the US anyway
if the US does not build alliances and coalitions. |
2.0228 |
Christopher Dickey:
"Iraq will not stay together after Saddam is gone, too many
tribes.": |
Response: (1) Wait until
the oil wealth is distributed. (2) Iraq does not have a choice, since they
could not get rid of Saddam by themselves, and since terrorists roam free. It
would in any case be to the US's advantage to have a splintered Iraq, then
actions against terrorist-supporting states would be easier, but the US has
higher principles than that. |
2.0229 |
Christopher Dickey:
"Saudi Arabia a wholly-owned subsidiary of the US.": |
Response: A cynical and
inaccurate view. The Saudi Regime is the only present alternative to the
Muslim Madness fomenting in the ranks of the barbaric. |
2.0230 |
Christopher Dickey:
"War will not make the world a safer place.": |
Response: It will as long
as there are Saddam's to deal with. |
2.0231 |
Debate with Saddam: |
How can you debate a
knee-jerk denier and a pathological liar, and with one of his doubles? |
2.0232 |
Democrats and the Media: |
Believed Saddam when he
said he has complied, and has no CMM's (Civilian Mass-Murder) agents and
weapons. Then the inspectors found
missiles, and Saddam is destroying them. So who is playing the Democrats and
the Media for fools? Saddam is. |
2.0233 |
Democrats: "This has
been a long war.": |
Response: This was said 14
days into the war. |
2.0234 |
Dictator Quote: |
Hitler: "Democracy is
Weak.." |
2.0235 |
Dictator Quote: |
Kim Jong Il: "The
world does not need to exist if there is no Kim Jong Il." |
2.0236 |
Dictator Quote: |
Saddam: "I was elected
unanimously." |
2.0237 |
Dictator Quote: |
Stalin: "We are all
happy here." |
2.0238 |
Fareed Zakaria:
"America has an arrogance of power.": |
Response: Sick viewpoint.
If you want to see arrogance of power, visit any anti-US country. |
2.0239 |
Father John Dear: “Fifty years from now, the next generation
will ask, ‘What were you doing when the children of Iraq were dying?”: |
Response: That actually
goes against you, and how you want to prolong Saddam's murderous rule and his
dealings with international mass murderer organizations that are renegades of
all countries and all Gods. |
2.0240 |
Father John Dear: Conclusion: |
Final Response: The Father
may think it is his duty to mindlessly oppose war, even when it means the
continued humiliation and suffering of millions. He is doing a good job of that. But let me remind him that his country, which is in the right,
is not at war against Saddam, who is in the wrong, but is using the threat of
war very effectively, and in a most civilized manner, in spite of dealing
with such a brutal self-serving barbaric military-adventurer of a madman. He
is opposing good and wishes to perpetuate bad, out of cowardice, unreasoning
principle, and self-aggrandizement, unless he is a fabrication of Saddam,
which is reasonable to conclude given the illogic, inaccuracies, and
misdirecting shown in his statements. |
2.0241 |
Father John Dear: "A
war aimed at “regime change” is unjust, unwise, and incompatible with any
criteria for establishing long lasting peace.": |
Response: If an Iraqi heard
you say that he'd pewk. You care nothing for their suffering, you care only
for your own self-aggrandizement in the loony-liberal community where it is
the current fashion to bash America.
Let me quote a few Iraqis: "They (referring to the antiwar
protestors) have good intentions but are completely naïve. In Iraq, with
Saddam in power, the absence of war is not peace." Saddam will continue
to spill Iraqi blood to stay in power. |
2.0242 |
Father John Dear:
"Anyone who claims to be a Christian and supports the bombing of the
children of Iraq has renounced their faith.": |
Response: Oh, now you are
the Pope giving edicts. Your delusions are complete. |
2.0243 |
Father John Dear:
"Anyone who claims to be a Christian and supports the bombing of the
children of Iraq… they are practicing the ultimate form of child
abuse.": |
Response: I don't think
you, as a Catholic Priest, can use that analogy to your benefit. |
2.0244 |
Father John Dear:
"Bombing Iraq will only make matters worse; it may lead even to the use
of nuclear weapons, and set a horrible global precedent, that it is okay to
bomb preemptively.": |
Response: Mere conjecture
about making matters worse, and completely irresponsible using the phrase
"bombing Iraq" when it is Saddam who is going to be bombed, if
bombs are the answer. |
2.0245 |
Father John Dear:
"Bombing the children of Iraq will not solve our problems or grant us
security or bring us peace or save us from terrorist attacks or help the
world.": |
Response: More mere
conjecture. Your statements are
beginning to sound like those of an Iraqi official planting this drivel, who
will say anything Saddam tells him to say. |
2.0246 |
Father John Dear:
"Father John Dear: "An attack on Iraq will further alienate U.S.
allies and dramatically increase anti-American sentiment throughout the
world.": |
Response: Mere conjecture.
I am of the opinion that when the terrorist cowards and their benefactors
witness the dismantling of one of the most powerful regimes in the Muslim
world, they will crumble like a house of cards. Your statement is not only
fearful but cowardly. It is just such weak statements that gave rise and
boldness to the Osama's of the world. |
2.0247 |
Father John Dear:
"Father John Dear: "From a Christian perspective, war is never
blessed by God. . It is never the will of God.": |
Response: That may work on
a personal level, but when dictatorial power is at stake, and crimes have
been committed in keeping it, as in Saddam's case, then your love approach is
not only inappropriate but dangerous. |
2.0248 |
Father John Dear:
"From a Christian perspective, war is never blessed by God. . It is
never the will of God.": |
Response: Now you are
completely off your rocker. I am assuming you are referring to the Christian
God and the Christian Bible, in which the words "God will smite
them" occur more than once in the Jew's "holy" battles against
the Philistines, the poor victims of Jericho, and countless others who stood
in the way of the Jews obtaining their promised land and were duly
slaughtered, down to the last goat. |
2.0249 |
Father John Dear:
"Heading to war with Iraq is a grave mistake. It can only lead to
catastrophic consequences for the suffering people of Iraq, other suffering
people around the world and ourselves.": |
Response: Mere conjecture.
On the contrary, most Iraqi's in exile, safe from Saddam's retributions,
speak out for the US removing Saddam. |
2.0250 |
Father John Dear: "I
worked in New York city as a Red Cross coordinator of chaplains at the Family
Assistance Center, and counseled thousands of grieving relatives and
exhausted rescue workers. I have seen up close the grief that comes from
massive violence.": |
Response: After seeing the
wreckage of the World Trade Center, I told myself I wouldn't wish this on any
nation. Unfortunately your terrorist and dictator friends do not have such
compassionate notions. Your message
here against massive violence is being misdirected. It is not the US you
should be attacking here, but your mad mass-destruction Mullah and terrorist
friends whom you have so far completely failed to reproach as you single out
the US, who is opposing them. |
2.0251 |
Father John Dear: "In
fact, it will inflame millions more people around the world against us, and
guarantee further terrorist attacks against us.": |
Response: The only thing
that will inflame the rest of the world against "us" is a weak
showing in Iraq, which you wholeheartedly endorse. Remember how angry the
Afghan rebels were when the US was only dropping a bomb here and there on the
Taliban and their terrorist benefactors, and how they cheered when the B52's
came in? Your error in logic is that you think the absence of war is the
absence of suffering, when in fact in this case it will only prolong it, and
I an quoting Iraqis, who in your uninformed goodwill would actually have them
suffer more. |
2.0252 |
Father John Dear: "In
March 1999, I led a delegation of Nobel peace prize winners to Baghdad. We
met with religious leaders, United Nations and non-governmental organization
officials, and even government representatives, but most importantly, we saw
with our own eyes the reality of the suffering these sanctions have caused.
We saw hundreds of children dying of relievable diseases, because we have
systematically destroyed Iraq’s infrastructure.": |
Response: Your lack of
knowledge of current events is alarming. First sanctions on food and medical
supplies were lifted by your countrymen, if indeed you are an American, which
you do not sound like. So any suffering from relievable diseases are solely
the cause of Saddam. If Iraq's infrastructure has been totally destroyed, how
come Saddam is still in power? It sounds like you were shown what Saddam
wanted you to see, believe what Saddam has told you, and have been brainwashed
by their religious leaders, who's brethren call for the extermination of
everything non-Muslim, starting with your countrymen. You are either a
trend-following loony liberal or a traitor or a Saddam propagandist. In any
event your statements are ridiculous and anti-American, and you have not the
benefit of history and how Stalin manipulated visitors and the media. In
other words, your statements are ignorant. |
2.0253 |
Father John Dear: "In
the end, we should not go to war because it risks the lives of thousands of
U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians, beginning with
the already suffering, innocent children.": |
Response: (1) There you go
with the children again, whom you care nothing for in your argument to keep
Saddam in power. (2) Not taking Saddam out risks the lives of millions of
Americans. Saddam has the smallpox virus. There are no vaccines for all. It
has been guaranteed by experts that 1/3 of the exposed population of an
attacked country will die. You are blind to that? (3) You care nothing for
the Iraqi civilians if you want to keep Saddam in power. What kind of people
do you think they will grow up to be, knowing that the US has the power to
alleviate them from Saddam but didn't, because of twisted arguments like
yours? |
2.0254 |
Father John Dear:
"Instead of funding jobs, healthcare, schools, low-income housing,
environmental clean-up…": |
Response: Now I know you're
a liberal, who thinks the government can solve all of society's woes, when in
fact such unmanaged government social spending only creates sloth and
dependency. |
2.0255 |
Father John Dear:
"Instead of trying to overthrow any government, we should root out the
causes of terrorism, starting with global poverty, widespread starvation, and
weapons sales.": |
Response: Don't you realize that it is evil
totalitarian governments that are the root cause of your terrorism, global
poverty, and weapons sales? You illogic is complete. |
2.0256 |
Father John Dear:
"Making peace throughout the world is much harder than war, and requires
long-term vision.": |
Response: Now what are you
saying, that the US can be friends with Saddam? Are you crazy, or just plain
illogical? |
2.0257 |
Father John Dear:
"Most critically, preemptive war is illegal under international
law.": |
Response: You show a
complete lack of common sense. No one will argue that it would be a good deed
in getting rid of Saddam. But when it comes to doing it, the cowardly put
abstraction ahead of reality. |
2.0258 |
Father John Dear: "No
one supports tyranny in Iraq or anywhere, but bombing these suffering people
will not bring democracy": |
Response: Again you are
delusional, your country is not bombing the suffering people of Iraq, nor is
it the intention of your country to make them suffer in the process of
freeing them from Saddam's evil stranglehold. |
2.0259 |
Father John Dear:
"Once one country takes preemptive action, other countries will follow
suit. If the U.S. bombs Iraq, and calls it self-defense, we can be assured
that similar wars will break out else.": |
Response: The cowardly
begin to generalize and do not face the facts in the situation presented to
them. In this case there is not "one country", there is the US and
all that it stands for. There is not "other countries", there is
Saddam and all that he stands for. Cowards ignore all that things stand for
and beg generalizations when things get tough, rather than act on a case by
case basis, as your much wiser leaders are doing. |
2.0260 |
Father John Dear:
"Since 1990, our sanctions on Iraq have killed over one million Iraqis,
over half of them children under five, according to UNICEF, the World Health
Organization, the Vatican and the United Nations.": |
Response: I hate to argue
with a Father, but you are being a typical ill-aimed sheltered American. Iraqis are applauding Bush right now, and
see nothing for themselves in the plans of the French, Germans, and Russians
except more Saddam. Blame sheltered
liberals like yourself for sanctions instead of removing Saddam by force, and
for any suffering sanctions have given Saddam an excuse to cause. Blame
Saddam, too, which you are glaringly failing to do. It was perceived then by the liberals in power that sanctions
were the politically correct and civilized thing to do. You as a liberal are
now admitting to that failure. Also
you fail to mention the Iraqi's own leader's role in the suffering of Iraqis,
beginning with his military adventurism. You fail to mention any wrong doing
by Saddam. You also fail to mention Iraq's #1 health problem currently:
obesity. So where is their starving, if not caused by their own leader of the
past several decades? |
2.0261 |
Father John Dear: "The
best way to security and peace in the region continues to be through the
United Nations, the UN-administered process of weapons inspections, and a
strategy of regional disarmament (as called for in UN Security Council
Resolution 687, article 14)": |
Response: (1) Your are a
hypocrite. Now you want to "bully" them into disarming
"peacefully". You can't have it both ways. (2) You do not understand the mind of a
mad dictator. The only reason inspectors are back in Iraq is because of the
military threat Bush has imposed on Saddam. You are prolonging the pain of
Iraqis. (3) You address regional disarmament, but completely miss the point
as to why Bush is bravely putting his foot down with Saddam - the point is
not regional disarmament, but the availability of modern mass-destruction
technology to the Osama's of the world. In Saddam's closed society, no one
knows what he's up to, and one must go by his track record and statements, of
which there is ample cause for Bush's heroic actions, which you so completely
fail to appreciate for your own petty reasons. |
2.0262 |
Father John Dear: "The
Bush administration has offered no evidence of any links between Saddam
Hussein and the terrorist attacks of 9/11. There is no evidence that Iraq
currently has useable weapons of mass destruction.: |
Response: You do not have
any proof Saddam is not dealing with terrorist organizations on a daily
basis. His is a closed society, so proof is not possible. In such a case the
worst case scenario must be assumed, and the appropriate responses carried
out. It sounds like you just want to keep Saddam in power. |
2.0263 |
Father John Dear:
"There are many alternatives to war, they just require patience and hard
work.": |
Response: You completely
fail to realized that your leaders are doing just that, they are presently
exercising an alternative to war: that of the threat of war. They are using
the threat of war to good effect. Is that effect enough? I don't think so.
That would entail trusting a brute like Saddam, and frankly I think he is
daily dealing with terrorist organizations and has every intention of giving
them the weapons they want to mount a suicidal offensive against the free
world, which has sheltered ingrates like yourself from the Saddam's and Kim
Jong Il's of the world. |
2.0264 |
Father John Dear:
"These dying Iraqi children were born long after the 1991 Gulf war, have
suffered under Saddam, but die because of our sanctions and bombs.": |
Response: What children are
dying by the bombs of the US? This is Saddam lying to us. This is no priest.
(1) The sanctions were the ideas of liberals like this phony priest, and the
extremely few bombs being dropped on Iraq by the US are dropped on your
antiaircraft batteries that fire upon American planes, which you are so eager
to shoot down. You have no reservations about using civilians as shields.
Your arguments lack merit and your attitude, if you were an American, would
be a disgrace to those countrymen who protect you from Saddam, who you in New
Mexico think you are so safe from, and can afford to exude such high
platitudes, which in any case are deplorable in their ill-aim. |
2.0265 |
Father John Dear: "War
with Iraq is not only illegal and immoral, it’s just downright impractical.
It’s not justified or noble, just stupid and lethal.": |
Response: (1) Impractical?
No military expert would even call it a war, it would be a one-way
steamrolling over Iraq. Iraq has absolutely nothing to stop the
"Anglo-American armada" as so disrespectfully put by a loony
liberal. (2) It is justified a thousand times over (3) It is noble a thousand
times over (4) As compared to higher reason, I agree, war is stupid (ask any
woman) (5) War is lethal, sure, but so is the absence of this war, especially
in regard to the Iraqi children who will grow up under the thumb of an evil
dictator who will sacrifice them to keep himself in power. |
2.0266 |
Father John Dear: "War
with Iraq will hurt our already failing economy.": |
Response: Again, mere
conjecture. You cannot predict the future anymore than I can. |
2.0267 |
Father John Dear: "We
should lift all economic sanctions on Iraq and impose strict military
sanctions not only on Iraq, but throughout the Mid-East.": |
Response: You are so stupid
I don't know why I am wasting my time with you. Oh yes, now I know. Because
the government does not waste it's time with you, and allows your drivel to
go unchallenged, thereby making you believe yourself. It's the 60's all over
again, when the government did not have the wit to respond to
stoned-out-of-their-minds kids, who in any other epoch would have been
immediately enslaved by a conqueror. |
2.0268 |
Father John Dear: "we will
be paying billions more to kill Iraqi children.": |
Response: You are making
false statements in order to be dramatic.
You are obvious in the former and a complete failure in the latter.
You also care nothing for the children Saddam has killed with chemical
weapons and power maintaining. What is your agenda? Personal fame? It sure
isn't concern over human suffering. |
2.0269 |
Fearniks "War on Iraq
will divert attention away from the war on terrorism": |
Response: War on Saddam a
part of the war on terrorism. |
2.0270 |
France "Cannot accept
ultimatum for war in face of progress on inspectors": |
Response: Does anyone
really think inspections will complete the job of ridding Saddam of CMM
agents and weapons after 12 years of trying? |
2.0271 |
France "War is always
a result of a failure of the intellect": |
Response: Unfortunately, no
one possesses the intellect to depose an entrenched dictator who defies the
UN and endeavors to hang on to his arsenal of CMM agents and weapons that he
agreed to destroy 12 long years ago in exchange for his being allowed to
continue to brutalize, murder, and rape his country. |
2.0272 |
France: "US war on
Iraq wrong morally, politically, and strategically, and will have a bad
result internationally." |
Response:(1) The same thing
could have been said about the Nazis. (2) Mere cowardly conjecture. Look at
the Baath Party. They care nothing for outside opinion as they commit their
war crimes, kill civilians, and spew out transparent false propaganda, and
yet they enjoy broad support from their fellow Muslims, albeit out of blind
loyalty, while the US, tiptoeing on eggshells to do the civilized thing, has
the entire international community against them, harboring an anti-US
prejudice that turns a blind eye on good and evil. |
2.0273 |
Hamas: |
Complain when they get
blown up, but cheer when Jews get blown up.
At least the Jews express public regret for the loss in innocent life. |
2.0274 |
Hard Question Askers: On war with Iraq: "The Soviets had such
weapons, why didn't the US attack them?": |
Response: The Soviets, as
bad as they were, were more civilized than the free world's current
enemies. The Soviets did not go about
the free world suicidally murdering masses of unarmed civilians who were guilty
of nothing more than pursuing peace and prosperity. |
2.0275 |
Hard Question Askers: On war with Iraq: "Where does it all
end?": |
Response: That entirely
depends on the intelligence gathered and the analysis made. |
2.0276 |
Homefront: |
From 99.5 AM Radio
Station in NYC: In America Muslims have good jobs, get a good education, sent
their money to their poor extended family back in the old country, practice
their religion fee from political oppression. |
2.0277 |
Homefront: |
Contrary, the criminal
justice system's approach to allowing evidence and higher reasoning is
ludicrous. Take the case of illegally obtained evidence. What des the
criminal justice system do, accept the evidence and punish the obtainers? NO!
They throw out the evidence and do not punish the illegal obtainers!
Completely backwards! Take the case of employing higher reasoning - the
criminal justice system does not employ it. They remain mindlessly bound by the books. |
2.0278 |
Homefront: |
Do the people at 99.5FM in NYC
still think the US is trying to bomb Islam out of existence, and that the US
is bombing the poor? |
2.0279 |
Homefront: |
From 99.5 AM Radio Station in NYC: "America is
trying to bomb Islam out of existence." From Muslim Surrendering Taliban
Militiaman: "We agree with what the Americans are doing - going after
International Terrorists even if it means going through regimes that protect
them." |
2.0280 |
Homefront: |
From 99.5 AM Radio Station in NYC: (The US should)
"Stop bombing the poor." Not only is this statement inaccurate -
the only US bombs hitting the poor are strays and the ones the Taliban has
put the poor under - but it is one-eyed in it's anti-American stance. The
person who said this has not weighed America's actions against the evils the
Taliban has been perpetrating against the poor over the last several years,
and shows how some people, even Americans, will go to any length, even
slander, to discredit the US. |
2.0281 |
Homefront: |
From 99.5 AM Radio Station in NYC: (The US should)
"Stop bombing the poor." The US is not bombing the poor, it is
bombing the wicked - the Taliban regime and the International Terrorist
Organizations it protects. |
2.0282 |
Homefront: |
From 99.5 AM Radio Station
in NYC: (The US should) "Stop bombing the poor." The person turns a
blind eye to the liberation US bombing has brought to the Afghan poor, as
depicted through the media. The person is stuck in an Anti-American mentality
fashion show devoid of all higher reasoning. |
2.0283 |
Homefront: |
Michael Kramer: "Islam
fanatics gave their lives to advance their distorted views of Islam, only a
response in kind will deter them in the future." So who is Michael going
to use for fodder? In fact, not throwing lives away over pride and taunts
puts the US a cut above the Taliban, and the effects have rippled throughout
the world. We no longer hear of protests in Malaysia and Indonesia, Pakistan
and Palestine, Iran and Europe. Only cheap people with cheap personal agendas
are protesting. |
2.0284 |
Homefront: |
Michael Kramer:
"Sleeper agents lurking among us indicate that the war will go on long
after Afghanistan is liberated." On the contrary. Afghanistan being so
obviously liberated from Muslim Fanaticism will take some if not all of the
air out of the terrorist's balloon. |
2.0285 |
Homefront: |
Michael Kramer: "We
(Americans) need to prove we're not afraid to die. Winning the war in
Afghanistan with bribes and proxy forces will only embolden those convinced
that we lack the will to fight our own battles even when we're attacked at
home." This is pure bullshit. The US under Bush doesn't have to make any
amends for the US under Clinton. The US military is an arm of it's leaders,
strong or weak. It has had both recently. It has always been the land of the
free and the home of the brave, in spite of the temporary leaderships that
have come and gone. |
2.0286 |
Homefront: |
Michael Kramer: "We
(Americans) need to prove we're not afraid to die." I'm sure he refers
to sacrificing somebody other than himself. He also is not familiar with
General Patton's Maxim: "You win wars by making the other poor dumb
bastard die for his country." |
2.0287 |
Homefront: |
Michael Kramer: His
"Prove" statement he said was echoed in "talk shows and on the
Web". If it was (and I doubt it) then it only demonstrates the ignorance
rampant in the US due to a lack of a military draft, where entire populations
are completely ignorant of military insights and have been brainwashed by
liberal anti-military, anti-American media since the Vietnam war. |
2.0288 |
Home-front: |
American Apologists say
"Look at what the US does to women (as compared to the Taliban). We need
to look at ourselves." As if equal opportunity isn't enough. Nothing in
America can compare with the scale of oppressive Medieval treatment of women
in Afghanistan. As for children, nothing in America can compare with the
insanity being taught to orphan children in Pakistan. Self-criticism is
healthy to a point, but it will not save you from the insanity of today's
Muslim fundamentalists. |
2.0289 |
Homefront: |
If the US gives Israel
preferential treatment, it is by choice. Israel has the more democratic,
industrious, and civilized culture, more akin to American values. This choice
does not make the US evil. |
2.0290 |
Homefront: "Military
Tribunal's rules of evidence more lax.": |
"Stop the Bombing."
Consider who the target is, those who target and bomb US civilians. It is the
government's duty to bomb them. The Muslims have declared war on the US and
have proclaimed that Allah has directed them to destroy the US. The US is
being very restrictive in their response, targeting only the most criminally
insane in the Muslim world. |
2.0291 |
Human Shields (flying to
Iraq from Western nations to shield Iraqi civilians from US bombs): |
Response: The only Iraqis
they will shield are Saddam and his band of killers. Saddam even kicked some
of them out for arguing where they will be shielding, military or civilian
areas. Saddam wants them to shield military targets, thinking "Who cares
about Iraqi civilians? You shield me and my band of killers!" |
2.0292 |
Indian Peace Demonstrators: |
Don't look so peaceful
breaking windows and making effigies to mutilate. It is hypocritical. |
2.0293 |
Inspections: |
Are a circle of folly that
the US administration cannot stand by and pay for when it is American civilian
populations that are being attacked and plotted against, with Saddam's CMM
toys in mind. |
2.0294 |
Inspectors "Progress
is being made in ballistic, biological, chemical, and nuclear domains": |
Response: only ballistic, because
Saddam knows it is not needed with the tool of insane Muslim terrorists at
his disposal. |
2.0295 |
Inspectors "We should
keep pursuing fruitful, albeit difficult, inspections": |
Response: He conveniently
left out "expensive", since his continued futile inspections are
made possible by and at the expense of the US forces poised to depose Saddam
and take care of the problem themselves.
Hans Blix only wants to stay in the spotlight for his own personal
aggrandizement. |
2.0296 |
Inspectors: |
Even if they find and
destroy CMM (Civilian Mass Murder) agents and weapons, with Saddam still in
power and longing for them, he will obtain and produce them again, and thumb
his nose up at the UN, much as Kim Jong Il is doing now. |
2.0297 |
Inspectors: "Military
presence lends support to the inspection process": |
Response: Not "lends
support", but "makes wholly possible, yet still not
effective". Who is going to pay for the military presence, the US alone?
Not fair. |
2.0298 |
Inspectors: "Why
attack Iraq and attack the inspection process now?": |
Response: It is expensive
and perilous for the US to just sit there and let the inspectors and Saddam
play hide-and-seek for another 12 years while terrorists organizations plot
and carry out plans of civilian mass-murder with Saddam's CMM arsenal. |
2.0299 |
International War Crimes
Commission: |
A joke created by totalitarian regimes that are a
joke. A kooky liberal mentioned these
"war crimes" that were brought against Bush Sr. over the Gulf War, and
that the US military experimented on it's soldiers with experimental drugs
without their consent, among other things. The liberal, obviously anti-US and
anti-Bush, called herself "intelligent" and "well read".
Well, I have excerpts from her source, a paper from the self-proclaimed
"International War Crimes Commission", and you won't believe the
amount of fabrication that went into this document, as will be demonstrated
by my responses to them below. It
will be shown that our self-proclaimed "intelligent" and "well
read" lady has displayed a complete lack of judgment, or simply will
unethically grind her axe. |
2.0300 |
International War Crimes
Commission: " United States war crimes breaking the Four Geneva
Conventions of 1949 and their two Additional Protocols of 1977; and the
international crimes of Genocide against the People of Iraq as defined by the
International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crimes of
Genocide of 1948 as well as by the United States' own Genocide Convention Implementation
Act of 1987, 18 <U.S.C>. 1901.
Finally, and most heinously of all, these Defendants actually
perpetrated a Nuremberg Crime against their own troops when they forced them
to take experimental biological weapons vaccines without their informed consent
in gross violation of the Nuremberg Code on Medical Experimentation that has
been fully subscribed to by the United States government.": |
Response: (1) International
Commission of Inquiry into United States war crimes at the Martin Luther, Jr.
Auditorium (smells of racism already) , (2) the Nuremberg Crime Against Peace
(sorry, Saddam waged war first, so there was no peace), (3) No mention of Saddam breaking every
rule in the book in war, and every rule in the book in peace (4) most points
presented in this paper are complete fabrications that actual events have
already proven wrong. |
2.0301 |
International War Crimes
Commission: ""Superbombs" were dropped on hardened shelters
with the intention of assassinating Iraqi President Saddam Hussein - a war
crime in its own right.": |
Response: A national leader
is a legitimate target in wartime, especially one who carries a sidearm and
conducts his own executions with his children present to 'toughen them up'. |
2.0302 |
International War Crimes Commission:
"After the Rebellion Failed, the U.S. Invaded and Occupied Parts of Iraq
Without Lawful Authority in Order to Increase Division and Hostilities Within
Iraq": |
Response: The lack of
punctuation indicates this drivel is emanating from the Iraq MisInformation
Ministry. Iraq was occupied in accordance with UN mandates to protect
civilians from Saddam's continuing indiscriminately slaughter. |
2.0303 |
International War Crimes
Commission: "Aircraft and helicopters dropped napalm and fuel-air explosives
on oil wells throughout Iraq and many, if not most, of the oil well fires in
Iraq and Kuwait.": |
Response: Nice try at
distorting the truth again. The fact is the best way to stop Saddam's oil
well fires was to bomb them. |