Christopher Moore Home Page

The bulletin board is currently closed to new posts. Instead, why not check out Chris' Twitter and Facebook pages?


bbs.chrismoore.com Forum Index -> Blog Comments

Bin Laden Tape
Goto page 1, 2  Next
  Author    Thread This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics. This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
anti-social worker



Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Posts: 4
Bin Laden Tape  Reply with quote  

Hey all - I just looked at the CNN website, and it had quotes from Bin Laden's newest tape. He is saying that the safety of the United States does not depend on who we elect president, but how we handle our foreign policies. OK. . . .does this make me less of an American - We are being told to stop fucking around with Palestine and other Arab nations and that by doing this, we will not be attacked by these particular terrorists. Shouldn't we at least look at this option? Not if you ask our president or Kerry - both immediately responded by saying we will hunt down and kill Bin Laden and all other terrorists. Is it maybe, just maybe, the time to start questioning what a terrorist is? America has chosen allies and as a result created enemies - we do have blood on our hands in many places historically and currently. Do we expect that these enemies of ours will not see us as the terrorists? Before anyone gets too worked up about these comments, please be aware that I was as horrified as anyone by the September 11th slaughter of our friends, family, and countymen and women. I am not soft on the terrorists, I just want this shit to stop. I will not believe I am naive - we as a country make choices, and so far too many choices are based on greed rather than co-existence. I apologize if my comments strike anerve with anyone, however I do think this type of conversation is important. Please share your thoughts on this, keeping in mind that I am an enemy of no one. I am an American who thinks that America can do better than it has in its interactions across the globe.
_________________
"perhaps a lunatic was simply a minority of one"
- George Orell
1984

Post Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:15 pm   View user's profile Send private message
Ferrit Leggings



Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Posts: 2658
 Reply with quote  

If you leave me alone and then I will leave you alone, an interesting concept. It sounds good but does that mean Dick and Bush have to give back all the oil or is everything square from here on out? I don't mean to poke fun and I agree with you but it will never work. I mean the peace thing. Peace will never work when humans are involved. There is always some asshole out therethat will screw things up.

Ta
_________________
I feel the same way about disco as I do about herpes. -HST

Post Fri Oct 29, 2004 6:19 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Ferrit Leggings



Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Posts: 2658
 Reply with quote  

BTW:Look close, That picture is made with assholes.

Ta
_________________
I feel the same way about disco as I do about herpes. -HST

Post Fri Oct 29, 2004 6:21 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Jillybeans



Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 2247
Location: Cambridge, Massachusetts
 Reply with quote  

Ooooohhhhh!! That was a really cool website, Ferritt. I was particularly fond of the Bush Asshole Mosaic. But unfortunately, the assholes weren't big enough to really get his persona. No wait a minute. That would have to be Cheney's asshole wouldn't it?

Post Sat Oct 30, 2004 6:31 am   View user's profile Send private message
palmer



Joined: 30 Mar 2004
Posts: 1324
the bad guys  Reply with quote  

Let us remember that bin Laden is the bad guy.

And if you're going to get into a whole Jihad vs. McWorld thing, and thqat it's just different cultures sort of thing, remember that the Islamic world is a very oppressive place to be, especially for women, who are treated like chattels.

There was a story in the paper today. A bit trivial, but symptomatic, nonetheless. Iran has decreed that soccer players may not wear pony tails or sculpted beards -- too Western. Imagine, you're not even allowed to wear your own body hair as you please!

The Islamic world is, by and large, a pretty backward and brutal place. And I'll bet that's the real reason they hate us. It must drive bin Laden berserk that we allow our women to show a little leg.

Post Sat Oct 30, 2004 9:30 am   View user's profile Send private message
chris
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 3833
Location: People Republic of Northern California
Re: the bad guys  Reply with quote  

And let's not forget that George Bush is the bad guy. Yesterday the civilian casulties in Iraq were estimated as high as 100,000, mostly women and children. While that's probably not accurate, it goes without saying that W has killed a hell of a lot more innocent people than Osama Bin Ladin has. I'm not saying that Osama isn't a bad guy, but when it comes to the pure destruction of innocent human beings, George gets a way, way hotter circle in hell.

Or does claiming that you are doing the will of God get you a get out of hell free card no matter how many kids you kill?

What is the difference between civilians who are killed because of the policies of a leader with whom they disagree and do not support, and civlians who are killed because of the policies of leader with whom they disagree and do not support?

http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=97712®ion=6

Post Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:59 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Ferrit Leggings



Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Posts: 2658
 Reply with quote  

When George Bush takes the final plunge, the dirt nap, the, well you get the point, when he kicks it I don’t think there is going to be a get out of hell card for him. If Dante is right I feel he will be right along side Judas with good old Satan nipping at him for eternity. There is no redemption from the atrocities that he has done. God’s name or not that should not make a difference. Stephen de Cloyes was a christian and look what he did. You know, the lovely Children’s Crusade. The french boy who wanted to take a walk with 20,000 of his best buddies. He may have had good intentions but that led to prostitution, death and slavery for his followers. Does his love of God exempt him from Hell?

Ta,
_________________
I feel the same way about disco as I do about herpes. -HST

Post Sat Oct 30, 2004 3:04 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Ferrit Leggings



Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Posts: 2658
 Reply with quote  

I do also want to say that I wish no ill upon George or anyone in office. I have the most respect for anyone that holds such a position. But I do expect higher when it comes to the job. I want the people who represent me to do a good, and I mean good in many ways, job. We should hold our president to a high standard but that is not what we got. Clinton got bashed all over the place and put on trial for a bj, George invades another country with no probably cause and what does he get?

Ta
_________________
I feel the same way about disco as I do about herpes. -HST

Post Sat Oct 30, 2004 3:41 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
palmer



Joined: 30 Mar 2004
Posts: 1324
who is the bad guy?  Reply with quote  

Okay, I don't know much about this -- I admit it, but here goes...

Saddam was a bad man, right? He financed suicide bombers in Israel, tortured and murdered his own people, and practiced genocide against the Kurds.

That said...

Quoting and commenting:

IRAQI DEATH TOLL SOARS_ OCTOBER 31 2004

World News Home

100 000 CIVILIAN CASUALTIES: IRAQ
29.10.2004. 15:28:46



Around 100 000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the US-led invasion of Iraq, a study by respected British medical weekly, The Lancet, estimated.

The findings revealed that half of the casualties were women and children killed predominantly in airstrikes.

The study was jointly conducted by Johns Hopkins University, Columbia University and University of Baghdad.

It is the first attempt to calculate the civilian casualties of the Iraqi war.

Commenting on the study, Australian Minister for Defence, Robert Hill, defended the conduct of Australian and American forces in Iraq.

Every effort has been taken to minimise casualties, he said.

A US Defence spokesperson threw doubt on the report claiming there is no accurate way to validate the estimates of civilian casualties.

The research relied on interviews from 988 Iraqi households in 33 randomly chosen neighbourhoods of Iraq.

- Weak link. How good is the information in a war zone. Who are they getting their information from? Unbiased sources? How do the results vary in pro and anti Saddam areas? Can we trust this sampling? I don't think so.

The report shows that violence is now the leading cause of death in Iraq.

Before the invasion, heart attacks, strokes and chronic illness were the most common cause of death.

The findings also show that infant morality has increased from 29 to 57 deaths per 1000 live births.

The report says this figure is consistent with war time patterns caused by difficulties getting to hospitals and people’s reluctance to leave the house.

That would be true in virtually any war zone, and can not logically be blamed on either side, can it?

The authors acknowledge the limited precision of the report.

- How limited?

The size of the sample and the sampling strategy “might not have captured the overall mortality experience in Iraq,” they said.

- In other words, the authors of the report are acknowleding that they might be just plain wrong.



SOURCE: World News

STORY ARCHIVE






- Body of Japanese hostage reportedly found
- Frail Arafat in Paris hospital
- 100 000 civilian casualties: Iraq
- Iraq explosives fate still unclear
- Arafat leaves for Paris hospital









- Video threats ’will not influence Australia’
- Bin Laden ’will not divide society’


- Russia’s parliament reinforces central control
- EU leaders sign new constitution


- Somali border dispute leaves over 15 dead
- Tunisian president re-elected


- Ceremony hails new Cambodian king
- Thai leader announces probe into deaths


- Schwarzenegger considers presidency
- Bin Laden video threatens attacks







SBS New Media developed in association with

SBS Home | Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy
© 2003 Special Broadcasting Service
This website includes copyright material from third parties including APTN, Reuters, BBC, AAP and others. All rights in this material is reserved
Countries have been divided into regions within this site for
reporting purposes only

Post Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:00 pm   View user's profile Send private message
Ferrit Leggings



Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Posts: 2658
 Reply with quote  

Palmer,

I hate to be the one to tell you this but here it goes...

None of your numbers matter because we should not have been there in the first place. Oh, and Saddam tortured and murdered his own people when we were trying to woo a pipe line out of him.

Ta,

From Tom Pain....
_____________________________________________________________________
Rumsfeld's Old Flame

Jim Vallette is the research director for the Sustainable Energy and Economy Network, a project of the Institute for Policy Studies. He is the author, with Steve Kretzmann and Daphne Wysham, of the report "Crude Vision: How Oil Interests Obscured US Government Focus on Chemical Weapons Use by Saddam Hussein."

Everyone's heard of Vice President Dick Cheney's ties to Halliburton, a company standing on the brink of a bonanza as the government doles out post-war reconstruction dollars. But not enough has been revealed about Bechtel, a reported finalist for the first round of contracts, and its connections to another of the war's architects: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. It's a sordid little tale, and one that calls into question the depth of Rumsfeld's virtuous claims about his intentions to liberate the Iraqis.

Bechtel has long been intertwined with Republican foreign policymakers, globally and in Iraq. It turns out that many of today's war hawks spent a couple years in the 1980s trying to get Saddam to sign an oil pipeline contract. Even though Saddam was gassing Iranians at the same time, people like Donald Rumsfeld had some quality face-time with the "evil dictator" pitching a plan that would benefit, beyond all other interests, Bechtel -- and, potentially, Hussein.

Rumsfeld flew to Baghdad, twice, as Reagan's special envoy. According to newly-available documents, a lot of his business was nothing more than advancing Bechtel's business. Following a script crafted by then-Secretary of State George Shultz -- who went directly from the CEO seat at Bechtel into the Reagan team -- he pitched the idea of building an oil pipeline from Iraq to Jordan in December 1983.

Saddam told Rumsfeld it sounded like a fine plan, but he was worried about the possibility of Israeli attack. Rumsfeld wrote back to Shultz, "I said I could understand that there would need to be some sort of arrangements that would give those involved confidence that it would not be easily vulnerable. (This may be an issue to raise with Israel at the appropriate time.)"

For the next two years, Reagan administration officials, Bechtel, and pipeline promoters expended a lot of energy trying to placate Saddam's concerns, even while publicly the U.S. government "condemned" the use of chemical weapons in the Iran-Iraq War. Behind the scenes, State Department officials forged ahead. Rumsfeld's second meeting in Baghdad, again to press the pipeline scheme, occurred the same day that a United Nations team confirmed that Saddam gassed Iranian troops.

The revolving door between the Reagan administration, Bechtel and other pipeline agents produced a whirlwind of shady dealings. An agent promised Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres a secret sluiceway of pipeline profits into the Israeli Labor Party. Pipeline promoters and Reagan officials pondered other magic formulas -- like committing, beyond congressional view, existing Defense and foreign aid as collateral in case Israel did attack the pipeline. All to placate Saddam's concerns.

But it was all for naught. Two years after Rumsfeld broached the plan with Saddam, the dictator finally rejected Bechtel's proposal. He found better pipeline deals involving Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and thought the U.S. company doubled the actual construction cost.

While this signaled the end of U.S.-Iraqi oil diplomacy, the Reagan and first Bush administrations settled into a constructive engagement routine with Saddam. Bechtel signed contracts with Saddam in 1988, after "Chemical Ali" gassed thousands of Kurds, to build a huge dual-use chemical plant on the outskirts of Baghdad. Saddam named Bechtel as one of the corporate suppliers of technology for chemical weapons in its U.N. declaration last year. Construction stopped only after Saddam's troops invaded Kuwait, and his police held Bechtel employees in confinement. The last Bechtel employee left Iraq in December 1990.

U.S.-Iraqi relations -- business and political -- have never been the same. Rumsfeld and other officials have seethed as they've watched lucrative oil contracts signed between Baghdad and corporations from France, Russia and China. And to cover their own jealousy, they've decried those who would make a deal with a man possessing weapons of mass destruction.

The lesson to be drawn from Bechtel, the Aqaba pipeline and the present conflict is that an "evil dictator" is a friend of the United States when he is ready to do business, and a mortal enemy when he is not. Sadly, it is our sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, who must pay the price when a deal goes bad

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_________________
I feel the same way about disco as I do about herpes. -HST

Post Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:45 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
chris
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 3833
Location: People Republic of Northern California
 Reply with quote  

Palmer, you missed my point. I said the report probably wasn't accurate. I'm only saying this, and it's important that you get it: Bin Ladin killed 3000+ innocent people. He is a bad man. George Bush killed, how many, say the figure is off by 75%, then 25,000 people. Still that's eight times more than Bin Ladin. George Bush is a bad man.

We would not have attacked Iraq if not for George Bush. He is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians. Women and children. He ordered their deaths, the same way that Bin Ladin ordered the deaths of the people in the Pentagon and World Trade Center. Collateral damage is still damage. They knew they would kill thousands of civilians. You can't drop a 5000 lb. bomb in a residential neighborhood and not kill kids.

The point, and it's vitally important that you understand this, is that these deaths were totally at the descretion of George Bush. We did not have to go to Iraq. The rational for war was simply not true.


There were no weapons, and he knew there were no weapons. Wolfowitz wanted to blame 911 on Saddam because he thought that Iraq was an easy war. (He said so, I"m not making this up.) In February of 2001, Colin Powell spoke to the United Nations, saying that the sanctions had worked, Saddam was in his hole, there were no weapons of mass destruction. (I can link you to the video of the speech, but trust me, it's there.) We went to war because George Bush wanted to go to war. Tens of thousands of civilians have died because George Bush ordered it. He is an evil motherfucker.

Was Saddam a bad guy? Of course he was a bad guy. Did he kill his own people. Yep. But we didn't. See the difference there?

When we kill the innocent people, we are the bad guys. When we kill the innocent people, even for all the right reasons, it becomes really easy to talk the Muslim kid down the street into making us his number one enemy, to dedicating his life to killing our innocent people. His cause is holy, because we killed innocent Muslims. It doesn't matter that we were really fucking careful with our 5000 lb bombs. It doesn't matter that we really, really kind of sort of though that maybe there might be bad weapons in Iraq. All that matters is that Americans killed tens of thousands of civilians, and with that, we went to the top of the hit list.

And who's fault is that?

I'm sorry this post is so redundant, but people seem to be missing the point. So one more time, the number doesn't matter, the reason doesn't matter, the result and the person responsible matters.

Post Sun Oct 31, 2004 2:47 am   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dave



Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 451
Location: MA, USA
 Reply with quote  

chris wrote:
George Bush is a bad man.

Absolutely.

chris wrote:
[Bush] ordered their deaths, the same way that Bin Ladin ordered the deaths of the people in the Pentagon and World Trade Center.

Gotta disagree with that one.

Bush invaded Iraq because he could - every other "reason" given, IMO, was just an excuse.
osama bin fucktard wrote:
The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies--civilians and military--is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it...

As much as I dislike Bush and the way the US administration has handled things in Iraq, I don't think we deliberately target civilians. If we did do things the same way OBL did, we wouldn't still be hearing about places like Falluja.

Post Sun Oct 31, 2004 7:59 am   View user's profile Send private message
palmer



Joined: 30 Mar 2004
Posts: 1324
 Reply with quote  

chris wrote:
Palmer, you missed my point. I said the report probably wasn't accurate. I'm only saying this, and it's important that you get it: Bin Ladin killed 3000+ innocent people. He is a bad man. George Bush killed, how many, say the figure is off by 75%, then 25,000 people. Still that's eight times more than Bin Ladin. George Bush is a bad man."


Okay, point conceded, and I wish I knew a lot more about this because you and a few other people around here are doing rings around me, and I am getting closer and closer to saying, "Duh, guess I don't know what I'm talking about."

Let me retreat to acknowledging points and asking honest questions...

Quote:
We would not have attacked Iraq if not for George Bush. He is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians. Women and children. He ordered their deaths, the same way that Bin Ladin ordered the deaths of the people in the Pentagon and World Trade Center. Collateral damage is still damage. They knew they would kill thousands of civilians. You can't drop a 5000 lb. bomb in a residential neighborhood and not kill kids.


When he attacked Iraq, did should he have been reasonably expected to know how much collateral damage there would eventually be, or did things take on a life of their own? Just asking...

Quote:
The point, and it's vitally important that you understand this, is that these deaths were totally at the descretion of George Bush. We did not have to go to Iraq.


Same question...

Quote:
The rational for war was simply not true.


I think that virtually everyone agrees on that now. Although Saddam did support terrorism, just not in concert with al Qaida -- true?

Quote:
Was Saddam a bad guy? Of course he was a bad guy. Did he kill his own people. Yep. But we didn't. See the difference there?


Sorry, but I don't. And banging my head on the floor for ten minutes didn't help either... ("Stoopid, stoopid, stoopid...") -- It's rhetorical or something, right?

(Permission given in advance for you to begin your reply with, "Palmer, you are one dumb motherfucker..."

Quote:
I'm sorry this post is so redundant, but people seem to be missing the point. So one more time, the number doesn't matter, the reason doesn't matter, the result and the person responsible matters.


A dead person is a dead person is a dead person...right?

Gotcha.

Post Sun Oct 31, 2004 8:17 am   View user's profile Send private message
Ferrit Leggings



Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Posts: 2658
 Reply with quote  

Here's a bit of news for you
Quote:
Oct. 13 - The new report by chief U.S. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer contains evidence that Saddam Hussein allegedly used the United Nations-managed Oil-for-Food program to provide millions of dollars in subsidies to a group the U.S. State Department has branded a foreign terrorist organization.

advertisement

But so far, the Bush administration has made little of Duelfer’s surprise discovery which, on its face, would seem to strengthen White House claims that Saddam’s regime had longstanding ties to terrorism.

In fact, U.S. officials concede, the Duelfer finding does little to advance the administration’s case and could even be politically awkward. The State Department designated terrorist group in question, is the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK)—an Iranian opposition group that was long backed by Saddam’s regime as a counterweight to the Tehran government. Not only does the MEK have no connection either to September 11 or Al Qaeda, in the past, it has had strong support from members of Congress—including leading Republicans in both chambers and a current Bush cabinet member, Attorney General John Ashcroft.


and if you want the whole pie and not just a slice...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6242223/site/newsweek

Ta,
_________________
I feel the same way about disco as I do about herpes. -HST

Post Sun Oct 31, 2004 8:47 am   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Ferrit Leggings



Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Posts: 2658
Masters of War  Reply with quote  

http://homepage.mac.com/duffyb/nobush/iMovieTheater259.html
_________________
I feel the same way about disco as I do about herpes. -HST

Post Sun Oct 31, 2004 7:18 pm   View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
  Display posts from previous:      
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics. This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

Jump to:  
Goto page 1, 2  Next

Last Thread | Next Thread  >

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 
Templates created by Vereor and Ken