Saturday, May 13, 2006

It's just the same

OK, so weapons of mass destruction and al-Qaida ties were just cover stories (they amounted to nothing) for the invasion of Iraq after 9/11. But the real reason for the invasion -- regime change -- was still worth it, we were told.



Just think, if Saddam Hussein and his sons were still in power, Iraq's infrastructure would be a mess. The utilities and oil fields would be antiquated and operating way below need or capacity. The future for Iraqis would be terribly uncertain. Thousands would be randomly targeted for torture and murder every year. No one could feel safe on the streets, day or night. Iraq's neighbors would be afraid of invasions from powerful military forces in Iraq. The whole region would be less stable than it was five years ago.

What's that? All these things are happening anyway, right now, while we're there running things?

Oh, sorry. Never mind.

Copied from a letter sent to the Herald tribune: Source Here.

yes.....

we make one civil protest.....

By Blogger Federico Perazzoni, at May 13, 2006 10:19 am  

i like this blog it one of the best iv'e seen

By Blogger Leisus, at May 13, 2006 2:45 pm  

Estimates vary but it’s fair to say that during Saddam Hussein’s reign (24 years) he was responsible for the deaths of at least 500,000 people. I did a little math and came up with a conservative estimate of 57 people murdered every day Saddam was in power. Just to be fair let’s allow for a liberal estimate on the liberal side and say that 40,000 Iraqi civilians have died due to US military intervention. The campaign has drawn on now for 1,000 days. Do a little math and find that averages about 40 people US intervention kills daily . Mathematics does not lie. US intervention saves at least 17 people every day. Poffrono

By Blogger Poffrono, at May 13, 2006 8:23 pm  

I think the only mess the US is concerned with is gas prices and how to get more oil to produce more gas.

By Blogger C, at May 13, 2006 10:31 pm  

Poffrono.

Thats the most wonderful and aburd logic I have heard in quite some time. I can only assume your being sarcastic ?

If you wish to take the 'liberal' estimate as to the number of deaths try 100,000 +

I am sure the Iraqi people are very grateful for your maths but we did not go there to replace a dictator with a civil war.

I suppose if your still convinced it was the right thing to do (or at least the right way to go about it) then you will keep the calculator out all night to find such logic.

Thanks for the laugh. Like I say I can only assume your being sarcastic.

I do hope so

By Blogger _H_, at May 13, 2006 10:49 pm  

what do they say about land wars in asia?

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 13, 2006 11:18 pm  

can i put you on my links

By Blogger Leisus, at May 14, 2006 9:54 am  

Sure Help yourself Dr

By Blogger _H_, at May 14, 2006 7:05 pm  

I bet it justs eats all you liberals up inside that this war is going so smoothly! We won the war and are bringing democracy to Iraq! Get over it!

By Blogger Carrie Oakey, at May 14, 2006 7:41 pm  

LOL Carrie . what exactly is your definition of 'smoothly' ? and for that matter 'democracy' ?

By Blogger _H_, at May 14, 2006 7:54 pm  

Dear Steven Colbert act stealer,

You are in violation of comments rules 1 and 6. One more time and I don't care if _H_ responds to you or not. I will axe you. Waste someone else's time.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 3:56 am  

And think, it all costs 250 million a day.

By Blogger R2K, at May 15, 2006 4:31 am  

I bet those 17 people are really happy.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 15, 2006 9:31 am  

Actually, "those 17 people" ignores the 160 per day that were choked off by U.S.-U.K. led sanctions.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 16, 2006 12:44 am  

Its about time someone brought up ....(censored)

What with the illegal wire tap probes going on in the states. One word seems to be failing to enter the debate. One word that makes all these current allegations seem like small fish by comparison. This word brings forth a concept straight from the land of George Orwell and 1984.

Any guess ?

Yes, we're talking about our old friend Echelon, as Kurt Nimmo usefully reminds us. A 1999 report by the European Parliament llaid bare the lineaments of the program, which has been carried out on a global basis since the end of World War II by the English-speaking powers of the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Decade after decade, every new communication technology has been gathered into the Echelon net. (The program, a closely guarded secret for decades, was confirmed by Australia's Defence Signals Directorate chief in 1999.)

"The stations collectively monitor millions of voice and data messages each day"

Read the full article here

There is, nor ever have been, nothing illegal about the US government eavesdropping. If you'd have done even a modicum of homework, you'd know that back in the days of Western Union, anything sent overseas, or to or from groups suspected of being involved with orgainzed crime. was copied and sent to the FBI.

Every country does this to some degree, and every US President since the age of wired communications on up, has employed methods to listen in on enemies. From your perspective, it would have been wrong to break German and Japanese codes during WWII, because,after all, most of it was being sent from the Allied nations.

Doesn't it even begin to dawn on you and yours, that the states has not been hit again because law enforcement is busily cracking down on these barbarians?

Guess not. Your blog is well done, and well written. Other viewpoints are always necessary, I just don't happen to agree with yours, but keep up the good work.

By Blogger Fits, at May 13, 2006 2:42 pm  

The difference between this president and the others is that he is spying on ANY citizen it deems to be a threat. Nobody is safe from a wire tap.

And, the States may not have been hit but England has, Spain has... England is a key ally in the war on terror and it too has cracked down on many of the barbarians, but it was still attacked.

By Blogger Toby, at May 13, 2006 6:44 pm  

Fits

Based on the facts available to date, the wiretap program appears to be clearly illegal.

1. Wiretaps by federal officials are generally prohibited, unless there is a particular legal basis such as a court order. The “exclusive basis” for wiretaps is either Title III for criminal investigations or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) for foreign intelligence investigations. It is a crime to conduct wiretaps unless there is a “statutory basis” for doing so.

2. The Administration has given two, and only two, reasons why it says the criminal law does not apply to the program.

3. The first is the Authorization of Use of Military Force (AUMF), passed on September 13, 2001. For multiple reasons, the AUMF does not provide a legal basis for the NSA wiretap program.

4. The second is that the President has inherent authority that does not derive from statutes. The President indeed has important inherent authority as leader of the Executive Branch and Commander-in-Chief, but the current Administration has taken that position to unprecedented lengths. We have a system of checks and balances. As the Supreme Court has made clear, the President’s power is at its “lowest ebb” when his actions directly contradict a lawful statute, as they do here.

5. In addition, as we learn more facts about the program, there may well be a clear case that government actions have violated the Fourth Amendment rules against unreasonable searches and seizures.

6. In short, it is a crime to conduct wiretaps in the United States, of U.S. citizens, unless there is a statutory basis for doing so. There was no statutory basis here.

seems like we did do our homework

Thanks for your polite dissent.

By Blogger _H_, at May 13, 2006 10:37 pm  

i am amazed people actually trust the government to spy on everyone.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 13, 2006 11:16 pm  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Blogger jonz, at May 14, 2006 11:11 am  

Jonz, FYI, I moderate here and don't like straw man attacks. Welcome to the void.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 14, 2006 3:32 pm  

Its a good job the void has so much space.... :-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 14, 2006 8:11 pm  

So what happens when he gets to zero ? (new Bush poll)

President Bush’s job-approval rating has fallen to its lowest mark of his presidency, according to a new Harris Interactive poll. Of 1,003 U.S. adults surveyed in a telephone poll, 29% think Mr. Bush is doing an “excellent or pretty good” job as president, down from 35% in April and significantly lower than 43% in January.





Roughly one-quarter of U.S. adults say “things in the country are going in the right direction,” while 69% say “things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track.” This trend has declined every month since January, when 33% said the nation was heading in the right direction. Iraq remains a key concern for the general public, as 28% of Americans said they consider Iraq to be one of the top two most important issues the government should address, up from 23% in April. The immigration debate also prompted 16% of Americans to consider it a top issue, down from 19% last month, but still sharply higher from 4% in March.

The Harris poll comes two days after a downbeat assessment of Bush in a New York Times/CBS News poll. The Times, in analyzing the results, said “Americans have a bleaker view of the country’s direction than at any time in more than two decades”

martial law.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 13, 2006 10:51 pm  

... hmmmmm ...
he's a religious man, is he not.
i seem to recall a story from sunday school about a man named saul ... changed his name to paul ...
then instead of killing all the people he could possibly kill, he started writing letters about how to love those people he used to kill ...
a possiblility.
i love your blog, by the way!
peace & harmony,
elaine
'freedom must be exercised to stay in shape!'

By Blogger business voodoo, at May 14, 2006 11:10 am  

On the other hand - sometimes those doing the right thing are critcized by the majority - let us remember the American Revolution. That too was an unpopular war - in England and in America.

By Blogger Annie, at May 14, 2006 1:41 pm  

LOL

sure Annie , creating a civil war in iraq is the 'right thing'

History will not be kind on Mr Bush

By Blogger _H_, at May 14, 2006 7:15 pm  

Just an off topic general FYI, Annie: your site should be parrhesia, not parresia. Furthermore, claiming parrhesia, does not necessarily mean you are therefore in a position to deliver parrhesia. See Michel Foucalt's Fearless Speech for more.

Finally, just because "sometimes those doing the right thing are critcized by the majority," that does not mean that if the majority criticises something it is therefore "the right thing." Look up non sequitur in the dictionary for more.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 4:08 am  

Norway announces 50 percent boost for UN Palestinian aid

OSLO, Norway - Norway on Friday announced a 50-percent hike in its funding for United Nations Palestinian relief efforts to help ease an economic crisis in the occupied territories after a Hamas-led government took office.






Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere announced the increase to 150 million kroner ($24.5 million) after a meeting with the head of the UN Relief and Works Agency, or UNRWA, Karen AbuZayd in Oslo.

Read more Here.

good human nature.

props to Norway.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 13, 2006 10:47 pm  

Friday, May 12, 2006

The Decider (animation)

Mark Fiore is back with another classic animation.

Watch it Here.

my dear H
i appreciate your work and efforts.
its people like you who keep me working on the international front on the cause of palestine.
in part : you helped to keep my iraqi friends strong enough to enhance their peace movement.
there i heard about the whole weblogg thing!
you wont imagine how much of a relief you put into my heart just by reading your kind words.
i will try to control my anger & i will continue my work.. its a personal promise to you..
salams..
S

By Blogger sam polet, at May 13, 2006 12:13 am  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 13, 2006 2:04 am  

Nice Blog! Keep it on!

Greetings from Italy

By Blogger Alexem82, at May 13, 2006 2:07 am  

Anonymous

When you learn to read and apply our Posting policy feel free to post again. Otherwise take your abusive hate speach elsewhere

By Blogger _H_, at May 13, 2006 2:09 am  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 13, 2006 2:13 am  

quite a number of assumptions there anonymous.

(1) I am not American and taking two seconds to look would have saved you the need for the patriotic crap which has no effect on me

(2) I feel no guilt just pride for what i have achieved but thanks for asking

(3) I have a right to do whats best for the people of the world and not some pseudo nationalistic rhetoric they you may or may not believe. freedom means having the freedom to love the flag or to burn it.

(4)I left college probably before you were born.

(5) I have been in Iraq during the conflict.

(6) maybe you should spend longer reading the web site before you jump to conclusions about the persona of the owner of this web site

Now my questions

(1) why do you assume abusive language makes your point more eloquent ?

(2) have you ever even left your country ?

(3) did you know that you can change the channel from fox news if you wish ?

(4) what is your favourite color ?

(5) what exactly do you think your trying to achieve ?

(6) And most important. why do you tell me your 'cool' with my posting policy when the rules clearly state that all posts should be on topic unless you are a regular and you have failed to apply that in your comment ?

oh and (7) Why would you bother to be Anonymous when you linked here from the site meter of your own web site.. ?

very strange

By Blogger _H_, at May 13, 2006 2:45 am  

I am the Decider... I want that T-Shirt.

We are all doing that at work now. I am the Decider.. no, I am Decider.

This animation is great. I really like Mark's style and method. The message is spot on.

-hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 13, 2006 9:34 pm  

Anon, your post was good enough for _H_ to get by, but not good enough for me. Sorry, my patience for your ilk ran out in 2003. Read the posting policy yet again.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 4:11 am  

Dear Mr President - Bush War Rap

Nice Blog :)

By Blogger Alison, at May 12, 2006 8:55 am  

damn good video. the images are sometimes pretty heart-breaking.

people are fed up with the warmongering.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 12, 2006 5:25 pm  

from the heart of palestine am speaking loud...
go ahead.. you are the hope of your country!!!

By Blogger sam polet, at May 12, 2006 5:53 pm  

Thank you for visiting sam , you are very welcome anytime

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 7:43 pm  

A few things are going on here in the good ole USA:

NSA secret database report triggers fierce debate in Washington
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-11-nsa-reax_x.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_call_database

FBI searches home of CIA's no. 3 executive
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-12-ciasearch_x.htm

Following a week of tough talk, a 250-member sheriff's posse charged with finding and arresting illegal immigrants made just one arrest in its inaugural desert search early Thursday morning.

link

Waste of money?

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 12, 2006 11:35 pm  

sounds more like a waste of brain matter to me hype.

shocking

Thanks for the links and for keeping us updated buddy

By Blogger _H_, at May 13, 2006 12:14 am  

Hate the politics all you want. Support our troops though. They don't want to be there any more than they have to.
http://ganocrie-navy.blogspot.com/

By Blogger Azazelo, at May 13, 2006 12:25 am  

I agree azazelo , The soldiers are not to be blamed for doing as they are asked. your right i do hate the politics and the leaders who brought this about. But I will never blame the soldiers. who are just trying to get home to their families in one piece.

By Blogger _H_, at May 13, 2006 12:36 am  

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Sir ! No Sir

If you ever wanted to end a war. You need to know this story.

Must watch flash animation Here.

salute je viens de tomber sur ton blog et je le trouve trés enrichissant merci a toi...

http://terravecchia.blogspot.com/
http://bastiadailyphoto.blogspot.com/

By Blogger Terra Vecchia, at May 11, 2006 11:58 pm  

Thank you Terra for your kind words. Your most welcome to visit anytime.


Merci de vos mots plaisants qui sont très aimables. si vous souhaitez annoncer toujours vos mots vous seriez si plaisant quant à traduisez vos commentaires en anglais avant indication de sorte que d'autres puissent lire quel souhait à dire. Si vous ne parlez pas les anglais emploient svp le bablefish au translat vos mots

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 12:41 am  

want to read some great stories? Then go to
http://www.freewebs.com/worksoffiction/

By Anonymous writer, at May 12, 2006 1:51 am  

Writer. try to leave something on topic. You have been here before and expressed some well thought out comments So I will leave this in place and I hope some people read your work.

But for reference if you wish people to link off to your stuff please leave a comment related to the thread as well.

good luck with your work

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 2:04 am  

good animation with a grave message.

this is serious folks. if you want this war, you better get over there and fight it.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 12, 2006 5:32 pm  

very impressive
hope all the americans will watch this before its too much of lose for them and for our iraqi people too.

By Blogger sam polet, at May 12, 2006 6:01 pm  

lets hope so sam.

and hype , yup a very grave message

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 7:44 pm  

Could the World survive another Bush

President George W. Bush said on Wednesday he thought his younger brother Jeb would make "a great president" but the two-term governor of Florida had given no hint about his intentions.



"I have no idea what he's going to do. I've asked him that question myself. I truly don't think he knows," Bush said in an interview with Florida reporters posted on the St. Petersburg Times Website.

The president said he had pushed his "independent minded" brother fairly hard about his plans after leaving the governor's office next January. He predicted Jeb could have a "very bright" political future.

"I would like to see Jeb run at some point in time, but I have no idea if that's his intention or not," Bush said. Asked if Jeb should run for president, Bush said, "I think Jeb would be a great president. But it's up to Jeb to make a decision to run."

Jeb Bush, 53, has said repeatedly over the past year that he will not run for president in 2008. He has not said anything recently to indicate a change in his thinking.

He can't be serious can he ? Please tell me this is just a nightmare. Just as planet Earth is starting to realise that the reign of George (the Decider) Bush is coming to an end they have to go and throw this in our face.....

Source Reuters via Raw Story

My God! One more Bush to president!!!We never run!!!!!!
http://somagui.zip.net

By Blogger Magui, at May 11, 2006 1:38 am  

I say vote libertarian !

Enough staus quo.

Gary

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 11, 2006 1:45 am  

Jeb wont run H, dont worry. He may run in 2012 if Dems win this next one, or in 2016 if Repubs win it again, but dont worry...

The Party knows that another Bush wouldn't be successful because of the name alone, so they wont support him.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at May 11, 2006 12:59 pm  

Jeb was the first pick by the PNAC. Jeb was already a Governor. Bush failed at his initial bid into politics. Thanks to Rove and the corporate money machine, Bush became the Governor of Texas. That is when he first became viable. Jeb was their first pick. Daddy must be proud. Especially since the CIA is almost completely destroyed.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 11, 2006 3:33 pm  

If I deleted anybody's real comment there I am sorry , stupid adverts for acne had to go....

If your comment was removed (and it was a real comment) please post again

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 5:00 pm  

I dont think the world is surviving the first Bush, a second and we would implode.

By Blogger Teresa, at May 11, 2006 6:00 pm  

Oh boulderdash! President Bush is the best president we've had since... Ronald Reagan!

By Blogger crusader88, at May 11, 2006 6:30 pm  

That is one scary thought.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 11, 2006 6:42 pm  

LOL very witty crusader

I remember Reagan , He was the one that said on the white house lawn when talking about the mujahideen "These are the moral equivalent of our founding fathers"

Of course he was talking about the very same groups that Bin Laden brought his troops to help. The very people that are now the terrorists we are there to fight. Reagan backed up his words with ship loads of stinger missiles to help the fight.

Oh how times change

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 6:43 pm  

Just another bold liar! Just what the country needs. Bush 3! Arggghhhh!

By Blogger thepoetryman, at May 11, 2006 7:27 pm  

B=Bullshit
U=Unashamed
S=Sinful
H=Humanbeing

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 11, 2006 7:43 pm  

Was with you as far as 'H' anonymous :>)

By Anonymous Dave (UK), at May 11, 2006 7:47 pm  

I'll move to Canada if this happens....

By Blogger H8TORADE, at May 11, 2006 8:51 pm  

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

By Blogger awsome person, at May 12, 2006 12:23 am  

The Shrubbery is good for America. By the time we get rid of our King George, everybody will be so fed up and so impoverished that we'll have 3 decades of populist democrats. Unions, environment, wages, peace, social programs and responsibility for one's actions will all be on the priority list again.

By Anonymous Nostradamnthem, at May 12, 2006 2:19 am  

Nos , Great to see you again :-) Hope all is well with your job. wise words as per usual , but i expect nothing less from you.

Take care

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 2:25 am  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Blogger jonz, at May 12, 2006 11:20 am  

That would be a hilarious outcome. I would be very pleased, if only to see the look on your faces / impending doom of your comments!

By Blogger jonz, at May 12, 2006 11:30 am  

jonz proves once again that liberals are the good ones and conservatives are the bad ones. the bad ones torture, lie, steal, cheat, murder... they are quite sick. go back to freeperville.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 12, 2006 5:02 pm  

LOL Hype

Jonz suffers from Right Wing neurosis. it's an illness he can't help it


:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 5:22 pm  

Israel threatens to wipe Iran off the map

Vice Premier of Israel Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."






Peres did not say who should act against Iran if it continues with its nuclear program, but implied military action should be led by the United States, pointing to the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Israeli officials have indicated that Israel would join any international operation against Iran.

Peres's vehement expressions came the same day that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote to US President George W. Bush proposing "new solutions" to their differences in the first letter from an Iranian leader to an American president in 27 years, Iranian government spokesman Gholam-Hossein Elham said Monday.

Source Jpost

There, now they have both supposedly said the same thing. Can we now cut out the word play and deal with the realities on the ground instead of the crap that comes out of peoples mouths ? ... Somehow I doubt it

shame on israel, in the name of God to threaten or wage war any longer, shame.

your blog is very powerful. thank you.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 11, 2006 2:16 am  

I don't see why thats a threat - its the truth, isn't it? That any country putting nukes in the air would have inbound missiles to the firing position, before their's hit their target?

If one guy sends a nuke, we'll all go up in smoke, everywhere, and thats all we all need to remember.

By Blogger Cheryl, at May 11, 2006 11:55 am  

mutual destruction doesn't exist anymore. missle defense shield?

we have changed the game and the old treaties are not valid anymore, thanks to BushCo.

this is very serious.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 11, 2006 2:52 pm  

cheryl the point is the words. That is all . thousands of blogs qoute every day that Iran said Israel could/should be wiped off the map and now Israel have said the same thing and less than 100 blogs seem to have noticed.

The point is one of hypocricy in what we in the west decide to put in our news programs. All nations should be judged by the same stick and they are not. That is my point .

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 4:22 pm  

Only difference is Israel will do it. Iran cannot. If Israel decides to crush Iran let us see the US then intervene to stop them! Highly unlikely. It's different when Iraq tries to crush Kuwait. Then our vested interests are at stake. Israel crushing Iran...fits our own agenda like a glove!

Like you said lets start talking as in the letter sent to George from Mahmoud that pressed for peace on every page.

By Blogger thepoetryman, at May 11, 2006 7:31 pm  

LOL. (I am really restraining from using ad-hominen attacks on _h_)

All nations should be judged by the same stick and they are not

Good lord. If only you practiced what you preached, you would be waxing lyrical about the human rights abuses that occur in the Islamic Republic of Iran, every single day.

Yet you do not. You save ALL of your wrath for Israel and America. Which are both pluralist democracies, that LEGALLY enshrine EQUALITY for ALL.

Go figure.

By Blogger jonz, at May 12, 2006 11:11 am  

Wrong Jonz I save all my wrath for the return of balance , when did you last praise the millions of peace loving muslims on your web site ?

Israel is not a pluralist democracy. you tell me when Israel will have a non Jewish leader ? a muslim prime minister or even a catholic one ..tell me why the majority of Israelis wish to only have a country with Israelis in it. of course if anyone else behaved that way we would call them racists , but noooo we can't do that can we.

Jonz I have told you before that I view all states equally . I have told you before that this site shows the perspective that the thousands of sites do not show.

Yes it is selective for it is attempting to redress a balance . No web site from yours to the BBC and beyond is not selective in there choice of articles .

millions of sites attacked Iran for 'saying' Israel could be wiped off the map.

My tiny little corner of the world points out that Israel said it too and you have a problem with it ?

You obviously do not believe fairness for if such you would believe that both stories get equal airtime.

I am not anti Jewish , I would not even wish to enter that gutter with you . This is about balance to the other webs sites that ignore such stories .

I am sure you would be more at home with the little green fascists sorry footballs Jonz . You express no balance at all on your own site but attempt to slate me for mine

It is very boring to have to repeat comments to replies I have already made to you on other threads. Are you not able to evolve you debate ?

If your failing to take into account answers I have already given you then I can only assume you merely wish to disrupt the site.

Is that your purpose ?

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 3:44 pm  

Don't get me wrong. Although I disagree with your slant on just about everything, I appreciate that slant.

Ok so we're both biased in our ways? I focus on the Islamist threat, and you focus on the threat of the West (provoking an Islamist attack)?

By Blogger jonz, at May 12, 2006 4:32 pm  

Islamist threat? why aren't you in Iraq?

put up or shut up.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 12, 2006 5:05 pm  

i can see a conflict here!!!
what are those words !!! islamist threat!!!
please.. 1.4 billion people are totally weak and divided & you still think of islamist threar???
iran doesnt have any good relation with any islamic or arab country ..
afganistan was invaded
iraq is totally getting distroyed.. and you are talking about islamist threat?
they better defend thier countries .. no ?
wake up & smell some coffee my dear ...

By Blogger sam polet, at May 12, 2006 6:09 pm  

Try not to let such things upset you sam. millions of us are trying our best to help.

This site allows almost all views in the hope they we can convince them of such errors.

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 7:48 pm  

afganistan was invaded

Moonbat test: Was you against the war on the Taliban?

iraq is totally getting distroyed

No it's on the map last time I checked! It's very sad that the vacuum of power after Saddam turned into such despicable blood fest. But all this doomsaying, I really don't think it helps the Iraqis. Nor would it to "cut & run" with the troops.

1.4 billion people are totally weak and divided

I can only presume you are referring to Muslims. I don't think they would appreciate being all labelled as weak and divided.

There are plenty of Muslims that are progressive, liberal and reformist. They need our support more than ever, not to be mollycoddled as weak and divided.

By Blogger jonz, at May 13, 2006 11:22 pm  

The intellectual dishonesty of this blog's writers never ceases to amaze me. It's not unlike the way FOX News claims to be "fair and balanced" while being anything but ("we report, you decide")--comical, really. There's nothing inherently wrong with favoring Iran and defending it at every turn, and supporting its inherent right as a sovereign nation to get all caught up with the nuclear powers--but why not be straight about it? It really wouldn't be that hard, would it?

(There will now follow a lengthy response by _H_ dissecting what I just wrote while steadfastly refusing to come clean about obvious correctness of my main point.)

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 13, 2006 11:43 pm  

IQ test for Jonz :-)

Sam is a Palastinian so I think it is safe to assume she will not be pleased with any western attack on a Muslim country. I am sure Jonz that you would dislike any Muslim country to invade a western nation.

Sam has many friends in Iraq who give her first hand knowledge of the situation on the ground as where as you jonz live in the same country as me and have no idea what its like there apart from newspapers and TV. Try spending a month or two in Baghdad before you think you know better than those who live through this every day

Sam Is a Muslim who is both progressive and reformist though
the progress and reform they wish to make is not to become another England or another USA but to progress through their own choices and to have those choices respected by the west.

Maybe you should take a glance at the web sites of those that comment before judging Jonz. You are not a Muslim and you did not grow up with your country occupied by another nation.

I am pleased to read that you believe that Muslims need our support. You surprise me with your caring nature Jonz

:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 13, 2006 11:53 pm  

Anonymous

I never claimed to be 'fair and balanced' where as fox news does. That is the difference. so where is the dishonesty in our work ?

This site is merely a balance to the thousands who attack Iran every day. The truth simply lives somewhere in between. I do not claim that everything we write here is the truth. Just 'A' truth.

All web sites are biased and I would suggest to anyone to read this site and to read all the other points of view on other sites. Then decide for yourself based on all the evidence you see.

I have never hidden my view that Iran should be allowed to have it's own nuclear energy. I do not understand what you seem to think is hidden ?


PS

If you take the time to read my comments in this thread you will find I have already stated the response to your point before you decided to post

this site shows the perspective that the thousands of sites do not show.Yes it is selective for it is attempting to redress a balance . No web site from yours to the BBC and beyond is not selective in there choice of articles . millions of sites attacked Iran for 'saying' Israel could be wiped off the map. My tiny little corner of the world points out that Israel said it too

did you not notice ?

By Blogger _H_, at May 14, 2006 12:20 am  

Ok. Firstly let me state that I do have sympathy, and I do care for the Palestinian people.

to progress through their own choices and to have those choices respected by the west

What like voting in Hamas whose stated goal is to "push every last Jew in the sea"? I am to respect Islamo-fascism?

Sam is a Palastinian so I think it is safe to assume she will not be pleased with any western attack on a Muslim country

Why is it safe to assume? Saddam killed millions of Muslims?

She is a Palestinian, a good hearted one from the look of things.

Whatever she says it doesn't look to me like she prefers the Taliban and Saddams Baathist Regime to democracies.

And furthermore, she is culturally a Muslim maybe, however she is not a religious Muslim, thankfully.

By Blogger jonz, at May 14, 2006 11:01 am  

Hamas do not wish to push Israel into the sea. they just want the israelis out of their country who's borders are defined by the United Nations and Israel refuses to abide by.

Why make Hamas the bad guy ? they have had a cease fire for over a year and they only wish to enforce a UN mandate. surely our armies should be helping them :-)


Its not our place Jonz. If they want help then they would ask. Regime change is illigal under international law

There is no democracy in Iraq of Afghanistan. people have tribal loyalties and simply wait to be told how to vote by the local leaders.

as for "is culturally a Muslim maybe, however she is not a religious Muslim," I find that offensive. you need to stop comparing the muslim world to our western society. Religion is the corner stone of their societys Jonz . They are all religious and they are 99 % peaceful.

to much right wing news maybe ?

PS Jonz please dont call Hamas islamofascists that is just ignorance. They believe in democracy they have tolerance of other faiths. they Hate Al-Qaeda (in fact if Al-Qaeda went to Palastine they would find Hamas shooting at them. They are happy for the Jews to stay in their country. just under the rule of palastine.

They do not deny the rights of jews to exist. They simply want the Israeli occupation to leave their country and go back to where they should be (the UN defined borders). Hamas do not force any kind of strict muslim code on the people or anything like that.

Now Osama bin laden . A man whom has no authority to speak for muslims (he is not qualified to do so , as those that are in Tehran and mecca have clearly stated) you can call as such if you want. though even then its a bit lame. Osama has as much authrority to speak for muslims as I have to speak for the church of england and thats none...

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 1:44 pm  

_H_ - Hamas do not wish to push Israel into the sea.

_H_, have you ever read Hamas's OFFICIAL charter?

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it"

AND

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him..."

Now you are in a tough position _H_. Their official charter calls for the genocide of the Jews and you insist that critism of Hamas as islamofascist is "ignorant". Someone here is clearly ignorant, but I don't think it is Jonz.

By Blogger Jordan, at May 15, 2006 3:39 pm  

Jordan .

your a little out of date with your prejudice, but hey that doesn't surprise me.

Hamas did not get elected on its charter(from 1988 !).It was elected on it's manifesto(from2006) . You have to keep upto date you can't go round spouting out dated propoganda can you . Maybe your 'ignorance' stopped you from spotting the fact that Hamas dropped it's call for destruction of Israel from it's manifesto

In fact

According to Hamas choice for Palestinian Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh:

We do not have any feelings of animosity toward Jews. We do not wish to throw them into the sea. All we seek is to be given our land back, not to harm anybody.

and also

according to the chief of Hamas' political bureau, Khalid Meshaal:

Our message to the Israelis is this: We do not fight you because you belong to a certain faith or culture. Jews have lived in the Muslim world for 13 centuries in peace and harmony; they are in our religion "the people of the book" who have a covenant from God and his messenger, Muhammad (peace be upon him), to be respected and protected.Our conflict with you is not religious but political. We have no problem with Jews who have not attacked us — our problem is with those who came to our land, imposed themselves on us by force, destroyed our society and banished our people .

Please keep your ignorance to your own site and thanks for the link :-)

Hamas were elected on a mandate, The manifesto makes no mention of the destruction of the Jewish state and instead takes a more ambiguous position by saying that Hamas had decided to compete in the elections because it would contribute to "the establishment of an independent state whose capital is Jerusalem".

please keep up , you will make youself look ingorant :-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 5:29 pm  

_H_ - Hamas have yet to recognise the right of Israel to exist. Surely if they were going to renounce their claim to destroy Israel entirely (something they haven't actually done), they wouldn't have a problem recognising Israel?

And there's no democracy in Iraq? Try telling that to the people who risked their lives to go and vote. Something like 12 million of them voted in December 2005. Are you trying to tell me that all 12 million of them are unable to vote on their own, that they have to be told how to by tribal leaders? That sure is an enlightened view you have of the Iraqi people.

And word is that at least two groups claiming allegiance to Al Qaeda are already operating in Gaza.

By Blogger Jay.Mac, at May 15, 2006 5:32 pm  

LOL , Hamas is bound (as is Israel) to the 1967 UN mandate on the seperation of borders , Israel has yet to accept those borders and you complain about Hamas ?

They are both as bad as each other and defending a nation that is occupying another does not surpise me one bit . It fits with your poetic vision of Iraq As for Al-qaeda working in Gaza , thats the most absurd thing I have read in a while . reading the Mossad book of propaganda are you ?Do you have any Idea of the difference between freedom fighters and religious freaks who believe in a 14th century calphite ?guess not

Ooops you could be right !!!!. I have found your al-qaeda in Gaza . here you go

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 5:48 pm  

" if they were going to renounce their claim to destroy Israel entirely (something they haven't actually done)..."

Wrong, wrong and wrong.

You are on notice to back your claims or get deleted. Same for the rest of you. See the comment rules for this site.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 6:32 pm  

Jonz . deleted , read the replies first I am not going round in circles . Wikipedia is not a factual source try looking at the article you are quoting , it clearly says in BIG BOLD LETTERS

"The neutrality and factual accuracy of this article are disputed." and your stating it as fact , wrong...


Hamas has dropped its call for the destruction of Israel as stated by their prime minister . try again but read what I have said first. . Hamas has dropped its call for the destruction of Israel as stated by their prime minister . try again but read what I have said first.

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 6:40 pm  

Jonz, first thing we see at wikipedia is "The neutrality and factual accuracy of this article are disputed." Damn right. It is at odds with reports (actually in the link you provided) that have come out. Seems Hamas is not as committed to the missionit had back when the U.S. and Israel where promoting the group.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 6:41 pm  

LOL djeb , its was so clear in the article we both spotted it :-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 6:43 pm  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Blogger Jordan, at May 15, 2006 6:52 pm  

If you want to be snarky or add on smart-ass comments, I won't even have the chance to read your entire post before I hit that button...

It is great typing exercise for you, though...

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 6:55 pm  

You were, however, correct about us being correct.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 6:56 pm  

The official Hamas website on February 16. 2006 AFTER elected.

"We are a nation that drinks blood, and we know that there is no blood better than the blood of Jews. We will not leave you alone until we have quenched our thirst with your blood, and our children's thirst with your blood."

[AND]

"We will destroy you, blow you up, take revenge against you, [and] purify the land of you, pigs that have defiled our country."

By Blogger Jordan, at May 15, 2006 7:03 pm  

no source Jordan ?

will give you a a few mins to provide the source and to show the statement was made by someone senior to the prime minister of Palastine ? if not your comment will be deleted as per our comment rules ..


better get a move on , clocks ticking

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 7:08 pm  

Sure, here is the first source:

http://www.iris.org.il/blog/archives/1058-Hamas-Video-We-Will-Drink-the-Blood-of-the-Jews.html

Here is a second:

http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/001605.html

And just for fun, here is a funny spoof:

http://www.berryburger.com/funstuff_76.htm

By Blogger Jordan, at May 15, 2006 7:16 pm  

I don't understand, is the official Hamas website not official enough?

By Blogger Jordan, at May 15, 2006 7:18 pm  

LOL how strange , clicked on your link and went straight to the source (the Hamas web site)

it comes up

http://www.haaretz.com/error404.html

it does not exist .. your comment will stay a moment longer ... I asked for THE source , not some right wing web site ,you claimed it was on the Hamas web site

show me


clocks still ticking

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 7:19 pm  

Oh, and if you wish to see the video clip of these statements on the official Hamas site, here you go:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2006/02/hamas_we_drink_.html

"By the life of Allah, we will destroy you. We will blow you up. We will take our revenge on you. We will purify our land of you, pigs, who have defiled our land. By the life of Allah, we will take our vengeance. We are carrying out this operation as harsh revenge against the sons of monkeys and pigs."

By Blogger Jordan, at May 15, 2006 7:22 pm  

what source is that hahaha

404 Not Found
We're sorry, but the page you requested could not be found.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 15, 2006 7:23 pm  

you could be just wasting your keyboard here .

LAST TIME

you said it was on the Hamas web site , show me the words on the HAMAS WEB SITE AND who said them


ZZzz

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 7:24 pm  

I don't understand Arabic, but here is the video taken and translated directly FROM THE SOURCE!

http://www.pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_Hamas_suicide.asx

Satisfied?

By Blogger Jordan, at May 15, 2006 7:25 pm  

I get the same 404 from... Ha'aretz (which is not Hamas).

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 7:25 pm  

Please watch the video _H , Djeb

What do you have to say for yourselves, huh?

Another "translation error", no doubt.

By Blogger jonz, at May 15, 2006 7:26 pm  

You will have to forgive me if I require the clip to be translated from the official Hamas site. I don't speak Arabic.

This is getting ridiculous. The video is right there! Exactly how much evidence do you require?

By Blogger Jordan, at May 15, 2006 7:27 pm  

Nope , translated by whom ? from what context ?

as stated Ha'aretz is not the HAMAS web site , your telling me this is fact

so show me ... I do speak arabic Jorden so show me

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 7:28 pm  

I see the link to the Palestinian Watch Website (can't watch the vid from this computer). What I don't see is a statement that negates the position taken during the election campaigns (screaming guy playing up a crowd or no).

I can understand your distaste of Hamas, though. I don't like right-wingers either.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 7:31 pm  

What we have not yet spotted Djeb is any comment on the very article this thread is from , the deputy prime minister of Israel stating that Iran can also be wiped off the map .

The video is not any kind of official Hamas statement . The content does not exist on the Hamas web site . The statement is not in line with Hamas policy and I am still waiting to be shown any senior member of Hamas making such claims since the election . Or is some bloke with a camcorder all were going to get.

please remember I never stated hamas was a wonderful group I said do not call them Islamofascists . I too can respect a distaste for Hamas . I put the line at connecting them to Al-qaeda and extreme islam .. and I am still waiting

May 15, 2006 7:43 PM

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 7:44 pm  

I hear crickets. It got really quiet after you mentioned that you read Arabic...

I like crickets.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 7:48 pm  

Very peaceful. Did you hear that?

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 8:31 pm  

What's the point in posting here, when comments are deleted on a whim?

Well if you wanted to shutdown debate on the issue, looks like you have succeeded. Who wants to make the effort posting here if they are likely to get deleted?

By Blogger jonz, at May 15, 2006 8:40 pm  

Why don't you guys change the title of the blog to "Terrorism-Apologist"? Like any good apologists, you hide behind claims like "I never stated hamas was a wonderful group" or, generally, things along the lines of "we don't favor Iran, we're just trying to redress the balance." Hamas is a terrorist organization, thorugh and through. Do a google search for "Hamas claims responsibility" (with or without quotes) and see what comes up. Perhaps you will say we should disregard anything that happened before some recent date when Hamas may or may not have stopped publicly calling for the destruction of Israel. That would be a typical apologist rhetorical strategy. Iran is probably the largest sponsor of terror in the world today and you miss few opportunities to "balance the scales" in its favor.

This is what apologists do--let's just be honest. The Nazis had theirs, the Soviets had theirs and the Iranians have theirs, all eager to tell us how everyone misunderstands but hastening to add that they aren't defending the worst aspects of the regime (or, in this case, both the regime and the terror groups it underwrites). You seem happy with the role, so congratulations to you.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 15, 2006 8:49 pm  

47 comments Jonz and 3 deleted for breaking our posting rules , sheez were so harsh :-)

You have just read our posting policy . It is not hard to abide by . I can present you with evidence of me deleting extreme views of hatred of Israel In fact it was only a few days ago I last had to do so . we do not allow hate speach here and we expect people to provide credible sources and to show the curtesy of replying to questions qhen asked

That is our policy take it or leave it

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 8:49 pm  

Anonymous , the apoligists would be those that are willing to watch the US led war on Islam without saying a word . as you say , just like the nazis

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 8:50 pm  

It's not a war on Islam. Saddam Hussein certainly was a curious target for a war on Islam. Alliance with Saudi Arabia is an odd tactic in a war on Islam. Not wanting lunatics to even come close to having nuclear weapons is not opposition to Islam.

Are you really comparing the U.S. to Nazi Germany (in whose province you would be living if it were not for the U.S., btw). Please list the ways that the U.S. is like Nazi Germany. I, for one, would love to see what you think they are.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 15, 2006 9:03 pm  

willing to watch the US led war on Islam

Well they're not doing a very good job of it are they if that's what they're up to?

Do you believe that Islam is a religion of peace, _h_?

By Blogger jonz, at May 15, 2006 9:05 pm  

Anonymous learn some history , the British air force is the reason I am not speaking german . the US entered the war 2 years to late to help and my govenment is still paying back the 4 trillion dollar bill you gave us once you stopped appeasing and decided to join us .

Of course the US is not the same as Nazi Germany . you made an absurd comment so I gave you the same reply . Having worked with the UK military in iraq your assumptions are a little lame ...

Now as stated in our posting rules please stay on topic this is not an open forum , their are plenty of web sites that are , If you have comments on the statement made by the deputy prime minister of Israel that comply with our rules then go ahead.

Jonz

Yes basically I do believe Islam is a religion of peace , we could sit here all day quoting different parts of the Quran that disagree or agree with my statement (I have seen both)

Extremism exists in all forms of religion and extreme islam can be quite sickening

When my Friend was killed working as a security guard at the docklands by the IRA we did not attack all catholics .

Terrorism is sickening . Osama bin laden and his ilk have no authority to speak for Islam , horrors shuch as 9/11 were condemed straight away across the arab world (though right wingers refuse to see it)

Iran condemmed the attack on the US
Hamas condemmed the attack on the US

Read the opinion of our very own MI6 on Hamas , they do not connect them to Islamofascsism in anyway. and they work harder everyday to keep our country safe then anybody

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 9:17 pm  

What's the point in posting here, when comments are deleted on a whim?

Well if you wanted to shutdown debate on the issue, looks like you have succeeded. Who wants to make the effort posting here if they are likely to get deleted?


We have a posting policy that was debated over the course of several weeks then decided upon. I deleted one of yours (think it was yours) as it was a straw man attack + snarky comment. You know the one. You made it again on your own site.

you hide behind claims like "I never stated hamas was a wonderful group"

Scroll up. I made my distaste of them clear. Furthermore, read the archives. We post a lot of information on a lot of terrorism never with any support for terrorist activities. Granted, we are not total hypocrites, so we don't spend all our time pointing at official enemies saying, "Gosh, aren't they horrible and we so pristine."

You are corrert about there not being an official war on Islam. There are many great allies of the west that lead countries in the Islamic world. The war on Islam is one for public consumption only, not an official one. Look as you might, you won't see any government agencies of western nations declaring a war on Islam. You will see one existing, however. It comes in the form of attacks on mosques and Muslims (and people who aren't Muslims but are brown and therefore mistaken as Muslims), immigrations directives, intelligence directives and so on. Get some Muslim friends - particularly those from overseas - and ask them of their exeriences. If they are like my friends, they've probably ran into troubles before.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 9:40 pm  

_H_

Al Qaeda in Gaza- two groups so far that I've heard of.

Palestinian Jundallah
http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/006869.php
Al Quds Islamic Army
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/article_1162497.php/Al-Qaeda_distributes_first_communique_in_Gaza

These aren't the same group you linked to (dating from 2002 btw)

As I said in my original comment, Hamas have not renounced their intention to destroy Israel- all they have done is to drop that explicit call from their election manifesto. That declaration still exists in the group's charter- and no one from Hamas has said that they no longer hold that position. An omission is not the same as the group changing their position.

The PA's interior minister has reiterated Hamas' refusal to recognise the right of Israel to exist-

"Addressing supporters in Khan Yunis, he reiterated his Hamas's refusal to recognize Israel's right to exist. "We can't accept the existence of the criminals, executioners and murderers on our blessed lands," he said. "We won't change our position.""

And they also said this-

"Hassan al-Safi, a senior Hamas official in the Gaza Strip, warned that the international sanctions would lead to a "third intifada." He added: "This time it will be a regional intifada which will change the balance of power in the region.""
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961290193&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

From Reuters-
Palestinian militant group Hamas urged supporters around the world on Wednesday to send it arms, fighters and money to back its fight against arch-foe Israel. "We ask all the people in surrounding Arab countries, the Muslim world and everyone who wants to support us to send weapons, money and men," Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal said in a speech at a pro-Palestinian event in Qatar.

"You should not shy away from of this. This is resistance, not terrorism," said Meshaal whose group -- sworn to the destruction of Israel -- leads the Palestinian government.
http://today.reuters.com/News/CrisesArticle.aspx?storyId=L10731417

And from Bloomberg news-
" When Seelye presses on the sorest subject -- recognizing Israel's right to exist -- teeth bare. She asks Mahmoud Zahar, a founder of Hamas and foreign minister of the new government, if the group will change its charter and recognize Israel.

``Why?'' he responds. ``To satisfy you?'' "
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000088&sid=aM.qTe2CgFHk&refer=culture

And finally, Bill Clinton's former special advisor on ARab-Israeli affairs is still under the impression that Hamas is committed to Israel's destruction-
"Hamas, which heads the Palestinian Authority, is sworn to Israel's destruction, its charter replete with anti-Semitism, its outlook tethered to the use of violence."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/14/AR2006051400807.html

Hamas may have run on a manifesto- but they are still bound to their founding charter. If you can provide me with ecidence that Hamas has in any way said that it will even recognise Israel or that it has altered its stance on not destroyng it, please do provide it.

By Blogger Jay.Mac, at May 15, 2006 10:10 pm  

ZZZzz

I repeat the very same quote as before

According to Hamas choice for Palestinian Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh:

We do not have any feelings of animosity toward Jews. We do not wish to throw them into the sea. All we seek is to be given our land back, not to harm anybody.

and also

according to the chief of Hamas' political bureau, Khalid Meshaal:

Our message to the Israelis is this: We do not fight you because you belong to a certain faith or culture. Jews have lived in the Muslim world for 13 centuries in peace and harmony; they are in our religion "the people of the book" who have a covenant from God and his messenger, Muhammad (peace be upon him), to be respected and protected.Our conflict with you is not religious but political. We have no problem with Jews who have not attacked us — our problem is with those who came to our land, imposed themselves on us by force, destroyed our society and banished our people .


Israel is mentioned in the second quote DIRECTLY . strange Hamas would never utter the word before ...


Now my question .

why do you not condemn Israel for refusing to abide by International law and retreating to the boundaries as defined by the United Nations ?

Why do you not condemn Israel for building Nuclear weapons and refusing to sign the NPT ?

why do you not condemn Israel for attacks that kill Palestinian children ?

why do you not condem Israel for destroying homes and lives and building a wall on land the entire world has stated is not theirs ?

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 10:21 pm  

I guess Peres should have just noted that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones and left it at that. It's the same type of comment as the one he did make. Notably, both comments only make sense after someone else has been intemperate. The point is just to give a somewhat ominous reminder that two can play at whatever game was threatened by the first party, in this case, Iran and its terrorist allies.

I have a very hard time taking you seriously, _H_, when you write things like this: "the British air force is the reason I am not speaking german. the US entered the war 2 years to late to help." I'm sure very few of your compatriots share your views. Obviously, without the U.S. there would have been no D-Day, no second front, no thousand-plane raids to destroy German industrial capacity, etc. And without U.S. assistance in its darkest hour, Britain's troubles would have been exponentially greater. The Battle of Britain only mattered in a hindsight premised on U.S. engagement. Without U.S. assistance, Britain could simply have been throttled and starved to death at Germany's leisure. Eventually there would have been no fuel for those planes. Even if you deny all that, you might do well to wonder if you would be speaking Russian now without U.S. inolvement in the European theater. In my opinion, your reflexive dislike of the United States--evidenced this time by by those curious views about WWII--is a huge Achilles' heel of this site and most of your commentary.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 15, 2006 10:29 pm  

You can not assume all that anonymous , History is concrete and the events have happened , the greatest military minds (German , UK and American)have war gamed operation sealine ( the invasion of the UK) and all have agreed that the Germans would have failed in such an attempt.

your wonderful post prophecy's have no base for an argument.

we paid for the fuel supplied and until then end of 2007 we are still paying for it. do you really believe the US would have supplied that fuel without the 4 trillion dollar bill ?

if so why didn't they ?

I have no hatred of the United states I do however have a hatred of current US foreign policy.

this debate is becoming absurd , the post is about a statement made by the Israeli deputy prime minister and is days old , nobody is reading it apart from those that are reading Jonz post on his own site.

This is not a forum to attack my entire persona , you can use Jonz own site to do that.

I have already stated that all web sites are biased and that applies here as much as the places you frequent.

If you do not like my site then do not read it. If you wish to attack my view of the world then create a web site and feel free to attack away.

If you wish to comment on the article then feel free (as long as you stick to our posting policy)

I feel that all those that came here to reply to a comment made to Jonz have had their say. anybody can post a comment on a blog that brings the like minded folk in to defend it , with respect Jonz it seems cowardly.

If you jonz or jordan or jay mac wish to reply to any specific points made to them then your welcome .

If you (anonymous) wish to reply then please give yourself a name to identify yourself (I don't care if its real just that the comment is coming from the same person.)

to all others if you wish to post here then keep it on the topic of the post or waste your time and your keyboard just to be deleted.

H

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 10:54 pm  

I think it is worth repeating what you said at the very beginning before the comments even started:

"There, now they have both supposedly said the same thing. Can we now cut out the word play and deal with the realities on the ground instead of the crap that comes out of peoples mouths ? ... Somehow I doubt it"


You were right to doubt it.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 15, 2006 11:08 pm  

The point is really that without U.S. assistance the Germans would have been able to do with Britain pretty much as they liked--starve it, invade it, ignore it, etc. While I strongly question your $4 trillion figure, it's interesting to wonder why the U.S. shouldn't have expected to be repaid for resources it provided. That's the usual way things work. Your views about the usefulness of the U.S. to Britain in WWII are extraordinary. Frankly, I think anyone with such views probably would have a lot of bizarre views about the current world situation . . . and lo and behold. But it's true, this is a tangent with very little direct bearing on what Peres said. As for staying on that topic, _H_, you chose to ignore my last topical comment about Peres' remark as an anonymous poster, which was:

"I guess Peres should have just noted that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones and left it at that. It's the same type of comment as the one he did make. Notably, both comments only make sense after someone else has been intemperate. The point is just to give a somewhat ominous reminder that two can play at whatever game was threatened by the first party, in this case, Iran and its terrorist allies."

I think my comment is a pretty good refutation of the notion that "they have both supposedly said the same thing." It is ludicrous in such a situation to willfully ignore who made the initial threat and who merely reminded that person that he might be standing on thin ice. It's not "the same thing" at all.

By Anonymous Charming Visitor, at May 16, 2006 12:03 am  

Uhhhh, so now Peres did say what he said but it doesn't couunt, so he didn't say it? That's special.

By Blogger DJEB, at May 16, 2006 12:39 am  

_H_

I came into this argument through an outside link... and I am alittle confused by some of the things you say.

1. "Hamas do not force any kind of strict muslim code on the people or anything like that."

are you saying Hamas are democratic millitants? and they would not like to see an Islamic state?

2. "They are happy for the Jews to stay in their country. just under the rule of palastine."

Palasatine doesn't want an Islamic state either then?
That would be good for the jews living there since in an Islamic state non muslims are concidered unworthy of equal rights, dignity or respect. and I got that information straight from an Islamic forum.

But the topic of this post was Iran and Israel, I dont feel this was a threat either, it was a reply. And even if you say hamas had retracted its plans wipe the jews from the map - Iran ( who are public hamas supporters) have not.
I also would like you to read this....

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49807

seems Iran also backs the Taliban
(who do support Al-qaeda)

and we havent even brought pakistan into the picture yet.....
not looking to pretty.

By Blogger Tu s. Tin, at May 16, 2006 12:52 am  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Blogger unaha-closp, at May 16, 2006 12:58 am  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Blogger Jay.Mac, at May 16, 2006 1:04 am  

Was there some dispute about whether Peres said it?

djeb, if you are walking along the street, minding your own business, and I come up and tell you that I'd like nothing more than to reach into your chest, pull out your heart and feed it to you (just for the sake of crafting a dramatic analogy, mind you), and you respond that I should remember that I can also have my heart pulled out and fed to me, have we really said the same thing?

First, it surely matters that I made the first threat. You were just minding your own business. (If you want to argue that Israel wasn't minding its own business, then that's your politics coming through).

Second, you (and Peres) actually didn't say the same thing. One could take the implication that you (or Israel) would be the one delivering the fatal blow, but the statement is not specific. A condemned man may say "judge not lest ye be judged" without meaning that he is the one who will do the judging.

So tell us again how these two leaders "said the same thing."

On a tangential note, if you two gave the U.S. as much benefit of the doubt that you give to Hamas (and again, I invite anyone to do that google search for "hamas claims responsibility"), you wouldn't be arguing that this is a war against Islam, or a war for oil or whatever--because, after all, the U.S. has said that it is not.

By Anonymous Charming Visitor, at May 16, 2006 1:17 am  

Charming visitor lovely name :-)

On the war either check the archives or email me , I have debated that many times and Most of the Brits that I know do take offence at the very notion that we were saved by anyone !

The phrase "Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few. " is one I think you will accept was in direct reference to the the the British Air force , not the American loan ...

Of course (sick of repeating myself) the world is very grateful for the US when it finally joined but nobody can doubt the US government tried to appease and was dealing with the Germans too. (why do I need to write this two days running , I made the same point on the article regarding the full letter sent to bush . And again about a week before that one ...

People lost family members during the war both here and in the US and I am sure we are both sorry for their losses. My reply is not one of ingratitude simply one of balance . I do not feel that the UK would have lost the war without US financial loans .... but we will never know . that does not mean I am not graceful but it sure as hell does mean that nobody is going to use that lame excuse in an argument about Israel . it has no bearing on this debate .

Now I have two choices , delete the message for being off topic ( I have not defined any of you as a regular) or respond with equal sarcasm and move on .. I picked B and you followed on , If I had picked A then the smarmy claims of censorship would have come instead , i picked the better option

It is also ludicrous my dear charming visitor to attempt to finding meaning in either statement by Iran or Israel I hope you have read the FULL Translation from the irnain presidents remarks . lets not take them out of context , read the whole speach then of course your charming self is most welome to return

You see , so much more curtesy when you use a name :-)

I stated so many times before to people whom have judged without reading the archives. My opinions on the war , my respect from US involvement, my dismay at the delay of such involvement and the pride in the RAF who convinced the Germans that such an attack on the UK was pointless . all these points I have made over and over again .

If you want to understand my opinions more than read the archives , with respect this site get a few people a week who consistently make the very same point and fail to take a more detailed look at our opinions across the web site . I do not have time to repeat the same line every day or even every thread

I accept that a site such as this can invoke passionate responses (both for and against) but the Subject matter of the post is what your requested to reply on (I note in this case you did) Not the writers of the blog whom you do not know and can only assume as to what motivates me to post what I do. You may well now have learnt that I was in Iraq , you may well have learnt that I also spent time in palestine , you may well of learnt that counter terrorism is my field of expertise and that I am trained to mediate the huge gulf between eastern and western thinking.

You may not like it but the British , the US and even the Insurgents talk to each other all the time . Israel and ha mas are talking as we speak (and have been for weeks) because communication is the ONLY way to peace . Like I say I am sure you do not approve , but that is the way the worlds governments work so you better get used to it , rhetoric to the public and cups of tea in private , welcome to the real world

Now if you enter a conversation with someone in Ha mas or Israel with the opening gambit of making a demand of them , then you will be thrown out the office in seconds . all I see from dissenters here is anger , anger at the Muslims , well I am sorry , that anger will only bring more pain

sure the Muslims have to listen to us , but heck , we have to listen to them too and whilst us mere fools sit here and argue about who said what , the Israelis and Ha mas are sitting down in real (if not declared) talks to try and achieve peace .

That is a personal debate that I am more than willing to have with anyone who emails me. We have a policy for a reason and that is define a sorting system for what are sensible comments and what are not , that is our right on our own web site .

We must have order and now I have linked you to your IP you have made a few comments of a similar nature over the last few days .

If you wish to debate with 'me' then email 'me' if you wish to comment on an article then comment on the web site.

This thread about the Israeli statement has been taken from Hamas to al-qaeda to islamofascism , to hatred of america , to the sense (or not) in my mind and now of into world war 2 ....

Again that is not the purpose of this web site and looking back through most of these comments should have been deleted , Jonz is big enough and strong enough to defend himself , If I placed any of these comments on sites such as ICH for example you would find aprox 60 to 80 replies in a matter of minuites.

Jonz himself states I do appreciate you blog, even though I disagree with your slant on almost every issue. There are suprisingly few blogs like yours so I am little surprised that he dropped his standards to play such a game as this.

I might well in the future put up the occasional (open thread) and let everyone loose but when you are dealing with issues that bring such emotion (from US citizens killed due to 9/11 to the famillies of those slaughtered by the US in falluja ) it of course brings anger (from both sides) and I am delighted to bring many from the arab world who read this blog and read the dissent and the support of their and our actions , dialogue is the way forward but only dialoge with those whoms minds are open to the possibility that everything they believe is not by definition correct

If your so concerned about my method then email me , I dont bite but refrain from disrupting posts about your opinion of little old me ..


Tu s tin

But the topic of this post was Iran and Israel

exactly and that is where it will remain , thankyou for your comments , so it has been removed , I will not respond to them but read back you will find the same points already made and responded too in this thread , we have already played the you quote I quote game and I have already stated that no new posters can enter this debate unless it is clearly on topic , yours is not as you state yourself , Hang around if I post on hamas feel free to pop in and leave a comment

Unuha

same thing , sorry , nothing new in your comment , we have been their and this thread is simply for the debate on the article above , feel free to leave a comment as stated

if you read the comments you would have saved yourself time by either (a) leaving something on topic or (b) leaving your many friends here whom I have said I will continue to discuss with , but it seems you did not

Jaymac you asked me some questions and i showed curtesy and replied , I asked you some questions and you have choosen to ingnore them , feel free to come back and answer the questions asked of you before you ask any more of me .

Is it to much to ask you to show the curtest of replying to the questions asked of you by the site moderator ?

deleted , if you wish answer the questions try again but this is not a bombard H hour , you want a two way conversation then respond in kind

oh my , looks lik 'charming visitor; is the only one to survive that little rant , he must be charming after all :-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 16, 2006 1:22 am  

PS tu s in , Your comment was respectful so I have left it in place due to this being your first comment here , I am more than willing to discuss the Hamas issue on a future thread with that subject , this one does not.
or contact me directly via email .

This is not a personal slate on you but sadly your timing on a post that is days old (and nobody but you guys are reading) is very boring

The topic is Israels deputy prime minister and if you wish to comment on that feel free

By Blogger _H_, at May 16, 2006 1:30 am  

Hamas are worthy of criticism, because it will take a lot of killing to make Palestine from river to sea happen. You might not like to take notice, but Israel is nuclear armed and is very strong. To fufill its aim Hamas will need to defeat Israel, this will most likely require a nuclear war and the deaths of tens or hundreds of millions of innocent people.

It is my opinion that any inhumanities committed by Israel in Palestine are of minor concern compared to the conflict that will be required to defeat Israel. Hamas should be destroyed because they have goals that are threatening to the entire world. For the same reason Iran should be dissuaded from having a nuclear program. The injustices suffered by the Palestinians/Muslims/Arabs are trivial compared to what will be required to wipe Israel off the map/make palestine from river to sea.

realism uber alles

By Blogger unaha-closp, at May 16, 2006 1:45 am  

yea sure Unha

Hamas should be destoyed (hate speach , posting policy , yawn yawn) , Hamas going to destroy the very people they wish to save, yea of course they are .. thats just hate speacj unuha

NOTE

this post is NOT about Hamas . I keep trying to remind you all to read the post . If your comment is one of Israel or Iran then go ahead , Hamas has absoulutely no bearing to this post apart from one person (jonz) who has every right to defend my comment to him . the rest of you either post on topic (that is NOT hamas or icecream or sweets or world war 2 , or Islamofasicm or any of the other weird lines we have gone down)

READ THE POST

I really do not wish to ,for it has been ammusing to read but I will close this thread down if people keep taking the post off topic and continue to NOT answer direct questions asked of them by the site moderators

your choice

By Blogger _H_, at May 16, 2006 2:03 am  

Ok - Israel deserves and gets more respect because it is better armed, more capable and a richer state than Iran.

Iran is condemmed for even thinking it has a right to nuclear power because it has a stated ambition to wipe Israel off the map. It contributes assistance to proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas who likewise wish to see the removal of Israel. Rule A1 - don't prod sleeping bears with sticks and don't let any idiot standing near you do it. Nuclear war bad, so please keep the Iranians away from pointy sticks.

On the otherhand Israel making such a statement is not a concern, because it is not a threat and not an intention to make nuclear war happen. This is obviously self evident because Iran is not a charring radioactive wasteland right now, when right now there is nothing stopping Israel from killing everybody in Iran. All Israel is making is a warning, it is not stating a desire. We would be well served to respect this warning.

Plus Israel is armed with nukes, so we cannot do anything other than talk nicely to it. Talk nicely ok.

By Blogger unaha-closp, at May 16, 2006 2:47 am  

We shall see Unuha , I think you will find that Israel or the US will directly attack Iran (again starting an illigal war) but Iran will make no strike against Israel for they have no such weapons and the IAEA (remember those guys that were correct on Iraq when we were all talking out of our backsides) have made no such claim that they are trying to make any such weapon at all .

Israel is a threat it defies international law and refuses to sign the NPT , and they currently have a country under occupation as defined by international law

my solution , increase the inspections of Iran and make Israel sign the NPT and give up its weapons ..

then both Iran and Israel can scream at each other till they are blue in the face . but to attack the country that is signed up to the NPT and ignore the one who already has 200 warheads and is not signed up is the ultimate hypocracy

at least your getting back on topic

By Blogger _H_, at May 16, 2006 2:55 am  

people , I am going to bed so I am not here to respond to a bombardment of one sided comments .

Comment moderation has been enabled whilst I sleep to prevent any abuse of this web site (i am sure some of you would do no such thing)

any comments sent (on topic) or in direct reply from the people who I have mentioned above will be allowed through tomorrow but this site will not be left apon to abuse . especially from those who are not arguing on the post but merely on a comment specifically for one person

I could be equally childish and post some of these comments here on the many web sites I frequent but I am big enough and old enough to defend my own words on my own web site.

sleep well , thank you for the debate and anything sensible will be processed tomorrow and allowed through based not on whether I agree or not but simply on its relivence to the post or a reply directly from a person whom I have adressed directly above

"There, now they have both supposedly said the same thing. Can we now cut out the word play and deal with the realities on the ground instead of the crap that comes out of peoples mouths ? ... Somehow I doubt it"

your correct Djeb , I was very correct to doubt it

H

By Blogger _H_, at May 16, 2006 3:24 am  

ultimate hypocracy / ultimate practicality

tom-mah-to / tom-may-to

Those 200 nukes change the game.

An attack now will be good because it will prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. You say they don't have them, I agree, best time to attack for Israel and friends - targeted attack now rather than a nuclear apocalypse later.

Israel will not hold back if prodded with a nuclear stick later. APOCALYPSE would be wholly bad. Only solution is to swallow any pride and go with the practical/hypocritical condemnation of Iran. We won't feel good about it in the morning, but at least we'll have a morning.

Or you could go with condemning Israel, only thats never actually worked - because they know they are invulnerable (those 200+ nukes again).

Better to be practical than fried.

By Blogger unaha-closp, at May 16, 2006 4:02 am  

Thats more like it Unaha.

Your true colours (colors) are showing through now.

You know as well as I do that Iran would never attack israel for the lives of palastinians would befurther destroyed in any fall out and Iran would gain no support in the middle east for such genocide.

As for your wish for genocide of the people of Iran that clearly is sickening and I will leave you to your wishes for nothing I can tell you will convince you of the error of such thoughts.

Nobody in this world apart from Israel and the US are disccusing any attack on Iran , your view is one of extremism , no different to those you wish to condem.

The United nations in all its wonder will never authorise force on Iran unless their is real and viable IAEA evidence that they are building a bomb (there is not)

The UK , Europe , China , Asia , India and even the african states have all concluded that such a barbaric act has no place at the table , even the majority of americans (in a recent survey posted here) do not wish for such sickness

Your views to me are one of guarded designs on genocide and such a post would normally be removed from this site but I gave you the option to reply so Your message will stay purely due to respected by statement to you.

Please feel free to use your own sites to practice such speach. You have had your reply , your reply will stay and any further talk of the wish to murder Iranians (it seems on the assumption that you view them as lesser people than israelis) will not be welcome

Thank you for you comment

By Blogger _H_, at May 16, 2006 2:10 pm  

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

1,091 killed in Baghdad during just one month

At least 1,091 people were killed in Baghdad alone last month in ongoing sectarian violence, President Jalal Talabani said in a statement.

"We received a report from the morgue about the deaths in Baghdad that 1,091 people were killed between April 1 and 30," Mr Talabani was quoted as saying in a statement issued by his office.




He said "we are shocked and angry at the daily reports of unidentified bodies being discovered and of people killed on the basis of their identity".

Iraq has been engulfed in a tit-for-tat sectarian violence since the bombing of a revered Shiite shrine in the northern town of Samarra on February 22. Thousands of bodies have been discovered across Iraq, mostly of Sunni Arabs, killed in Shiite reprisals after the Samarra bombing.

The President's statement came as gunmen killed 12 people on Wednesday across Iraq, including 11 in an ambush near the restive city of Baquba amid a crucial parliamentary session expected to reveal a new cabinet.

At least 11 people were killed as gunmen ambushed a minibus travelling near Baquba, just north of Baghdad, a local police officer said. He said the gunmen ambushed the bus carrying employees of the local electricity company 10 kilometres north of Baquba and "sprayed it with bullets, killing 11 people wounding four others".

"After the attack the police came to investigate, and at that time the bus exploded, wounding a policeman." The attack came shortly after Tuesday night's deadly suicide truck bombing in the northern town of Tal Afar which left 24 people dead.

The US military said 134 others were wounded in the attack when the bomber exploded a truck carrying flour in the marketplace in Tal Afar, a town hailed by the Bush administration a few months as an example of successful attempts to pacify the restive north.

But we still don't call this a civil war ?

it is a civil war in my book.. we were talking about this last year. the civil war wasn't hot yet but it was an undeclared civil war. the Guerrilla War has undeniably turned into a real civil war.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 11, 2006 2:49 pm  

Yup , to call what's happening in Iraq anything other than a civil war (or a low level civil war if someone wants to be picky) would be foolish

We broke it . we caused it , as I know you would agree hype

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 4:49 pm  

And I blame George Bush for the situation and all the deaths.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 11, 2006 6:44 pm  

Oh no. 1,091 is just shy of the "declare you're in a state of civil war" type reaction! 200 more and then we're talking.... How preposterously sad!

By Blogger thepoetryman, at May 11, 2006 7:34 pm  

B=Butcher
U=Uncivilzed
S=Sinful
H=Hound dog

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 11, 2006 8:20 pm  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Blogger jonz, at May 12, 2006 11:16 am  

Why do you want to call this a civil war? Will that make you feel better?

Surely it should be up to the Iraqis?

By Blogger jonz, at May 12, 2006 4:29 pm  

why don't you go ask them jonz?

go find out.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 12, 2006 5:09 pm  

the iraqis already say it is a civil war Jonz. seems you missed that one Here

As hype says maybe you should ask them rather than thinking for them ?

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 5:25 pm  

Maybe you should ask them, was it right to remove Saddam?

74% of Iraqis agree according to the BBC
77% agree according to another suvery out recently.

By Blogger jonz, at May 14, 2006 2:33 am  

Nice twist Jonz , all Shia would agree about removing Saddam for he was a Sunni. Now considering the Shia hated Saddam you would think if you asked them the real question

Do you aprove of the coalition of non Muslim nations invading your country to remove Saddam was a correct. then somewhere near 80% say no.

Guess what. they hate us being their as much as they hated Saddam. In fact they hate the British being there so much that 90% of the time they refuse to even talk to us or work with us.

And that is the british. they hate the US being there even more.

We are not liberators Jonz

By Blogger _H_, at May 14, 2006 2:40 am  

Alarmed by Raids, Neighbors Stand Guard in Iraq

As evidence mounts that Shiite police commandos are carrying out secret killings, Sunni Arab neighborhoods across Baghdad have begun forming citizen groups to keep the paramilitary forces out of their areas entirely.



In large swaths of western Baghdad, and in at least six majority Sunni areas in its center, young men take turns standing in streets after the 11 p.m. curfew, to send out signals by flashlights and cellphones if strangers approach.

Read the full article Here.

the horror of war was well known to BushCo. they knew exactly what was going to happen. maybe the kool-aid drinkers didn't know, but the ones serving the kool-aid certainly knew.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 11, 2006 2:46 pm  

Its about time the world started noticing the Shia death squads. there are some sick sick crimes taking place in that country and its time for some REAL peace keepers to step in , of course they should be made up from the Muslim Nations or we will be back where we started.

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 4:51 pm  

Britain's top lawyer demands closure of Guantanamo Bay

The Attorney-General this evening launched Britain's most outspoken attack yet of the US detention centre at Guantanamo Bay, demanding the closure of what he described as an international symbol of injustice.




At a keynote speech in Whitehall, London, Lord Goldsmith QC said that the US policy of detaining terrorism suspects without trial at the prison camp in Cuba was 'unacceptable'.

"It is time, in my view, that is should close. Not only would it, in my personal opinion, be right to close Guantanamo as a matter of principle, I believe it would also help to remove what has become a symbol to many - right or wrong - of injustice," he said.

"The historic tradition of the United States as a beacon of freedom, liberty and of justice deserves the removal of this symbol," he told a terrorism conference organised by the Royal United Services Institute.

The camp, which opened in January 2002 to hold prisoners taken in the US invasion of Afghanistan, has been branded "the gulag of our times" by Amnesty International. Many of the 490 men held at the facility have been there for three years without trial.

Lord Goldsmith, who is responsible for advising the Government on the law, has previously voiced concerns over whether the indefinite detention of so-called enemy combatants is legal or fair. He is now the most senior Government minister to publicly call for its closure.

Source

more attacks are coming. we have multiple investigations into abuses.

the investigations are bringing down Bush people and soon all of their policies.

Bush is a lame duck. He lost his support.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 11, 2006 2:45 pm  

The damage is done now. Nobody can claim to defend freedom and democracy by creating such places..

Even when it goes it will be decades before the US starts to regain any of the credibility it once had

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 11:17 pm  

You've all noticed the new spin on Gitmo, right? "We want to close it, and we want to get these guys into a court, but nobody's told us yet which kind of court to take them to...." What a load of bullshit.

1, They have no status under law, per Bush and Gonzo-les, so there is no way for anybody to make that decision.
2, The Bushies have been avoiding that for years now, and will continue to do so until Gitmo is a Democrat President's problem. THEN they will scream that it's time to let those guys go home.
3, it's just another change of lie from the Bush administration, because the old lie wasn't working very well any more.

By Anonymous Nostradamnthem, at May 12, 2006 2:26 am  

Why the obssesion with a these terrorists human rights? Bizzare.

At least you're not as bad as Khan head of Amnesty International that compared Gulag (millions executed) with Gunatanmo (none executed).

By Blogger jonz, at May 12, 2006 11:13 am  

Because we are the good guys Jonz. why are you assumuing they are terrorists , 91 % of them were handed over by bountry hunters who were simply paid to hand people in.


tell you what , you tell us what crimes they have commited , for they have not been put in a court.

Sounds to me like if your willing to allow places like this to exist then you probably would have allowed hitler and gas chambers too ,


ZZzz

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 2:26 pm  

Because we are the good guys Jonz. why are you assumuing they are terrorists , 91 % of them were handed over by bountry hunters who were simply paid to hand people in.


tell you what , you tell us what crimes they have commited , for they have not been put in a court. your simply an appeaser Jonz , just this time the country your appeasing is the US. chamberlain ring any bells . it should do your a brit

Sounds to me like if your willing to allow places like this to exist then you probably would have allowed hitler and gas chambers too ,


ZZzz

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 2:28 pm  

LOL.

Yes thats right. Not Gulag, but it's equivalent to the Gas chambers!!
(6 million dead)

I am not happy about Guantanamo but the amount of coverage it gets from the left wing press is completely and utterly out of proportion, as I'm sure, on some level at least, you are aware of.

And what is the truth?

Cuba? It was great, say boys freed from US prison camp

I heard they even played inmates Britney Spears. The horror!

By Blogger jonz, at May 12, 2006 4:23 pm  

why are you assumuing they are terrorists

Because it is incredibly expensive to keep the holed-up in Cuba.

Some are no doubt innocent. But what are you saying exactly? That most are actually innocent goat-farmers?

By Blogger jonz, at May 12, 2006 4:25 pm  

Personally, correct me if I'm wrong, they have detained people who they believe are aiding and abetting Al-Qaeda, Bin Laden and Jihad against the West. They want intelligence on Bin Laden. Bit of a waste on detaining the innocoent, no?

By Blogger jonz, at May 12, 2006 4:28 pm  

jonz is cluessless. the us and uk are both guilty of genocide. that is part of being an empire. Diego Garcia is just one example.

if jonz is sooo gung ho about getting the terrorists then why isn't he over there?

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 12, 2006 5:13 pm  

the guardian jonz !!! glad to see your reading a decent newspaper :-) try asking Amnesty how many are guilty of any crimes. Torture doesnt work (only on tv) and the geneva convention applies to all human beings. even US Judge Judge Sterling Johnson Jr. declared the camp unconstitutional and if they are treated so fine then why not let the UN visit to confirm.

Please tell me how someone bounty hunted in afghanistan 4 years ago is going to tell you anything about bin laden... thats silly

funny the british guys released have turned out to be real nice people who have since made efforts to save the lives of christians in iraq . how evil eh ... its no wonder the UK government have allowed them to sue the americans for at least ten million a piece..

very typical though Jonz , its not your family (some inmates were as young as 12 and some were in their 70s , real dangerous eh) so you dont care about them.

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 5:44 pm  

the us and uk are both guilty of genocide

Moonbat alert!

Yes, I'm sure it's terrible in Gitmo. Funny though, the inmates have put on 11 pounds of weight on average because they are receiving 3 square meals a day. Must be some sort of starvation technique eh?

Oh and nobody has died there. But yes bring on the analogies! Gas chambers! Gulag!

You do realise that some people in Gitmo won't hesitate to saw your head off in the name of Islam?

Hype I'd stay off the halucinogenics if I were you. There's too much fear & loathing in your words.

By Blogger jonz, at May 14, 2006 11:22 am  

Jonz why have you connected gitmo and genocide , hype didn't he clearly used Diego Garcia as an example . feel free to attack what people said but attacking what is not there is a little foolish. people can read what Hype said.


You have no idea what the people in gitmo would do to anyone. your just guessing, you don't know them and you like to believe what your told.

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 12:37 pm  

US gives early birthday present to Zarqawi

SOME 200,000 guns the US sent to Iraqi security forces may have been smuggled to terrorists, it was feared yesterday. The 99-tonne cache of AK47s was to have been secretly flown out from a US base in Bosnia. But the four planeloads of arms have vanished.



ÚOrders for the deal to go ahead were given by the US Department of Defense. But the work was contracted out via a complex web of private arms traders. And the Moldovan airline used to transport the shipment was blasted by the UN in 2003 for smuggling arms to Liberia, human rights group Amnesty has discovered.

It follows a separate probe claiming that thousands of guns meant for Iraq's police and army instead went to al-Qaeda

Amnesty chief spokesman Mike Blakemore said: "It's unbelievable that no one can account for 200,000 assault rifles. If these weapons have gone missing it's a terrifying prospect." American defence chiefs hired a US firm to take the guns, from the 90s Bosnian war, to Iraq.

But air traffic controllers in Baghdad have no record of the flights, which supposedly took off between July 2004 and July 2005. A coalition forces spokesman confirmed they had not received "any weapons from Bosnia" and added they were "not aware of any purchases for Iraq from Bosnia". Nato and US officials have already voiced fears that Bosnian arms - sold by US, British and Swiss firms - are being passed to insurgents.

A Nato spokesman said: "There's no tracking mechanism to ensure they don't fall into the wrong hands. There are concerns that some may have been siphoned off." This year a newspaper claimed two UK firms were involved in a deal in which thousands of guns for Iraqi forces were re-routed to al-Qaeda.

One arms broker's lawyer is said to have admitted that nearly all of a shipment of 1,500 AK-47s went missing. And a US official said £270million of equipment could not be traced.

Meanwhile, Aerocom, the Moldovan air firm at the centre of the 200,000 missing AK47s, was stripped of its licence by its national authorities a day before the first shipment.

Two other companies in the complicated sale claim to have papers proving the guns were delivered in Iraq but refuse to show them.

Source : Here

Well what's this about, Zarqawi shows he can't shoot a gun so the US send him a few (thousand) to help him practice. Why are they using private contract firms to deliver weapons to a war zone in the first place ?

According to my government he can't use the weapons anyway. They tried to make him look like an idiot by showing the rest of one of the tapes he sent out.

So if this guy can't even shoot a gun properly, why hasn't he been caught or killed?

Propaganda aside, we all should know that the people representing the conflict are not always the ones fighting on the ground.

Bush doesn't get his hands dirty probably anymore than Zarqawi. And that is why it is hard to catch him.

Same goes for Bin Laden, if he is still alive.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 10, 2006 8:17 pm  

Of course . Zarqawi is merely a symbol , and I have my doubts as to whether that is really him anyway ..They will never catch bin laden and zarqawi , well not at least until they have another demon in his place to save us all from..I studied the Afghan tribal regions many years ago and nobody seems to remember the fact that Zarqawi hated Al-qaeda , he set up his own camps separate from bin laden and classified bin laden as a false prophet.

Now I wonder what changed that ....

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 9:15 pm  

Attempts to destabilise put progress in peril

File this one under "no shit." From IPS via Common Dreams:
...Washington has allocated 75 million dollars to inspire "regime change".

The money is to be spent on empowering civil society, providing supplemental requests, broadcasting into Iran, promoting democracy, offering scholarships and fellowships, and enhancing communication.

But Iranian civil society activists who asked to remain unidentified told IPS they believe this policy will just intensify the Islamic republic's repressive approach toward non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and will be used as an excuse to crack down on their activities.

Just last week, agents from Iran's intelligence agency arrested Ramin Jahanbegloo, a prominent scholar, at Tehran's airport. "He had relations with foreigners," said Intelligence Minister Moseni Ejeyee.

Fars news agency, which is closely connected to the country's security forces, asserted later that Jahanbegloo was recruited by the U.S. government in 2001, while he was a researcher for the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Under the new U.S. State Department funding, the NED would be in charge of working with Iranian NGOs. Jahanbegloo's arrest serves as a worrisome harbinger of a new wave of intimidation against Iranian civil society, professionals, and intellectuals who simply have connections outside Iran.

Iran's new government perceives civil society groups as a tool for Washington to bring about a non-violent "colour revolution", similar to those which occurred in Georgia in 2003 and Ukraine in 2004. Consequently, the government has used many different strategies to control NGOs, by increasing the risks of accepting any foreign funding, and inspiring fear among civil society activists to derail any serious changes inside the country.

...

Given the conservatives' paranoia about a Western cultural invasion, Washington's statement of support for NGOs and civil society activities has made it very hard for local NGOs to maintain their relationships with foreign entities. Some of them have canceled their projects in order to avoid being negatively affected by officials' conspiracy-oriented mindset.

It is not entirely without reason that the "conspiracy-oriented mindset" is there.

It certainly isn't entirely without reason. And when these NGO's get found out I have no doubt Washington will spin it into a story about the suppression of democracy. Of course failing to mention their role in the destabilization of the country and that 'democracy' was the last thing on their minds...

Thanks for that Djeb. Wasn't expecting you to have time to post. A pleasant surprise :-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 3:57 pm  

This is a good time to bring up the Iranian hostage crisis, Iranian Islamist revolution and how the CIA was used to start regime change in the 70's.

If you have time, please read these documents: http://www.thememoryhole.org/espionage_den/

Take note of the names.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 10, 2006 8:21 pm  

US backs down and accepts UN decision to provide aid to the Palestinians

+The Quartet of Middle East peace brokers has agreed on a way to channel aid to the Palestinians for a trial period to ease a financial squeeze on the new government following the election of Hamas.




The group of international mediators - the United Nations, the United States, Russia and the European Union, reached the agreement at the UN headquarters on Tuesday.

"The Quartet expressed its willingness to endorse a temporary international mechanism that is limited in scope and duration, operates with full transparency and accountability," it said.

The United States, which initially opposed a European proposal to channel aid to the Palestinians via an international mechanism such as the World Bank, said any such move would have to be limited in scope and mechanism so aid would not reach the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority.

Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, told a news conference at the United Nations that "the thrust of the statement is that the international community is still trying to respond to the needs of the Palestinian people".

"It is to provide assistance to the Palestinian people so they do not suffer deprivation," she said.

Kofi Annan, the UN secretary-general, said the international mechanism to be used should begin as soon as possible and be reviewed after three months.

But the agreement seemed to underscore a concern that months of withholding aid from the Palestinians, part of an effort to press the new Hamas-led government towards a more accommodating stance with Israel, was harming the Palestinian people.

The European Union will take the lead in working out the details but has suggested in the past that the World Bank could be a suitable vehicle for getting aid to the Palestinians.

I can only assume John Bolton had a migraine and didn't turn up for the meeting. Whatever the reason, what matters most is that common sense 'appears' to have shone through. All we can do is wait and see.

Where was this sanity when children were dying in Iraq from sanctions!? Fucking hypocrits!

By Blogger thepoetryman, at May 10, 2006 6:08 am  

this shit world needs a lot of fresh people like you to make it living worthy!!!!

By Blogger toxic_i, at May 10, 2006 10:11 am  

This is a very stupid move.

By Blogger Christopher Trottier, at May 10, 2006 10:50 am  

Interesting post! Waiting won't get them anywhere...

By Blogger Will Powers, at May 10, 2006 12:33 pm  

like they really care about the palestian children or the iraqi children. republicans don't care about anybody but themselves. they are anti-liberal. it is the liberals who actually care about other people not like ourselves. remember new orleans. liberals got out there and did something. Bush flew over it in a plane. republicans and their supporters were yelling shoot the looters. and they dare pretend to care about the law when immigration is brought up. shooting the looters is not legal. shooting somebody for stealing food from a closed down store in a time of emergency is now lawful. it is only lawful if they have a gun and pointed it at you.

i remember the propaganda from Gulf War I. remember Saddam was taking babies off life support and all that. Which was proven to be propaganda put out by the Kuwaiti royal family.

and Saddam never had any intentions of going into Saudia Arabia but that is exactly how Cheney and Rummy sold congress on war with Iraq the first time.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 10, 2006 8:29 pm  

I rememeber the babys being pulled from life support machines crap too..

blasted all over fox news and the rest of them . Turns out the ONLY witness was the daughter of one of the Kuwaiti royal family .. the asked the doctors in the hospitals after the war if it was true and they just laughed at the very idea .. to start with Kuwait didnt actually have that many life support machines in the first place ..

still as my mother always told me , A lie can work its way around the world before the truth has put its boots on

:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 8:37 pm  

Hamas to subjects: Let them eat virgins! Palastine needs a civil war. Proping up Hamas just prolongs the inevitable.

Hype, do you foam at the mouth? Surely your are not allowed to vote are you?

If so, maybe we should bring back the literacy test.

By Blogger The Plumber, at May 11, 2006 7:48 am  

Ahh yes! Palastinian youth. They blow up so fast.

By Blogger The Plumber, at May 11, 2006 7:49 am  

the plumber should get back to his day job.. politics is not his subject. does the plumber understand democratic elections?

have you taken your meds today?

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 11, 2006 2:41 pm  

Plumber , your pushing the limits of the post rules of this site . do NOT attack the readers and do NOT express your subtle hate speach here . There are hundreds of blogs that will be more than willing to help express your desire for the deaths of palastinans I am sure your comments will be welcome there..

Your comment has only remained due to the fact that Hype decided to reply and the fact that I know he is not going to be affected even slightly by such pathetic attacks..

do it again and you enter the void

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 4:58 pm  

hate speech? palestinian youth what???

any idea about israeli youth ???

2 kind of youth in this area:
Israeli soldiers who carry the occupation (military service is obligetary one for every isreali turn 18 years old)
and Palestinian youth who live under occupation

i dont say attacks on israeli civilians is right but i cant see you talking about palestinian civilians have been killed every day..
the plan is bigger than anyone... and i have to admit.. israel is winning once more.. thanks to people like you are!

hey plumber.. get yourself to visit palestine & hope you will understand what you are talking about..
look at the wall.. look at the daily life of what we live down there in palestine
as a palestinian i can tell you: get some respect!!!
i cant say much cause people like you are bring me so down...

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 12, 2006 6:18 pm  

anonymous (sam)

we have many ignorant people come here. Please try not to let them get you angry for that is what they want you to be.

Stay at peace in your heart and such people will never hurt you.

The people who speak ill of palastinian children are not worthy of your time or your mind.

Peace

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 7:59 pm  

Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Iran's letter to President Bush (full transcript here)

(Note: This letter is very long, but well worth the read if you have time. I have decided to show the letter in its entirety for those who wish to read the actual words of the letter sent to George W Bush without the usual selective editing of our western media).


Read it for yourself Here.

Wow. Thanks for the article.

I like your blog.

By Blogger JoJo, at May 09, 2006 9:32 pm  

Hehe they didnt post the next page: the LOVE NOTE!

: )

I dont know what I am talking about.

By Blogger R2K, at May 09, 2006 9:53 pm  

Bush probably shit on himeself when he read that....sat there with that stupid look on his face just like he did on 9/11.....

By Blogger H8TORADE, at May 09, 2006 10:24 pm  

As inciteful as the letter is, it's really sad that the same message hasn't been coming more from the American people and the media. We shouldn't need a foreign leader to point this out.

By Blogger Chicadi, at May 09, 2006 10:36 pm  

He also questions the right of Israel to exist. Which is nice.

_H_ , if you had to choose between living in Tehran, or Washington D.C., what whould you choose, and why?

By Blogger jonz, at May 10, 2006 12:00 am  

He questions the process which took place to create the nation of Israel Jonz ..

He also talks about hatred of terrorism , Disgust at the horrors of 9/11 , the hope that all the worlds faiths can sit in prayer for peace together, His Hatred of Nuclear weapons , His desires for human rights , his willingness to talk , the acceptance of the deaths of 6 millions Jews .The principle of democracy to allow Jews , christians and Muslims to determine their own fate , poverty in Africa , the suffering of the American people and the hand of friendship . The importance of international law and the offer of peace , Even the suffering of Jewish families during world war 2....

and most important for your dear self , The danger of lies

Nice try Jonz but people can read for themselves .....

As for your questions ... you answer none and ask many ... when you have answered all the questions asked of you on previous threads I will be pleased to oblige...

Islamophobia and xenophobia are not healthy my friend and your hatred of muslims seems to blur your view of reality.

At least your still polite so I thank you for that

:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 12:26 am  

Good lord at least attempt to be balanced. Do you have a reliable link I can read which is unlikely to be edited?

By Blogger jonz, at May 10, 2006 12:43 am  

Jonz

Give it a rest please.What next 'Did you see the part where the evil Iranian suggested the Jews,Christains and Muslims have a referedum on the future of the region. How sick wanting people to be allowed to vote'.

Seriously.The desire for all faiths to sit together in prayer for peace says alot.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 10, 2006 12:53 am  

LOL , it is an exact copy Jonz but if you doubt me Here is the original in pdf format (so it can't be changed) .

That is the very same document that every article and news show is quoting from...

Still you will only see what you want to see anyway.

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 12:59 am  

Well it's a very articulate piece of Taqiyah, straight out of Robert Fisk's mouth.

Whilst I would love to believe the emotionally soothing words of the Iranian president, it does incontrovertibly appear that such statements are contradicted in the native tongue.

It's quite weird, Bin Laden now speaks the language of the left, and the Iranian President has cottoned on.

"Useful idiots" spring to mind.

By Blogger jonz, at May 10, 2006 1:07 am  

I reserve the right to be utterly cynical of anyone as religious as the Iranian president.

One who takes the words of a religious nutter at face value has no intellectual capability of reasoned analysis. I do not doubt he is intelligent, perhaps would score higher on IQ tests than Bush. However intelligence does not equate to sincerity and goodness of heart, unfortunately.

By Blogger jonz, at May 10, 2006 1:11 am  

I think he is crazy. Why would he write an 8 page letter to Bush?

Bush doesn't even read the Newspapers. He couldn't concentrate long enough to read all that.

Jonz. You still don't get me at all do you :-) I am not claiming that this is the gospel. I don't believe every word is some kind of special truth. This is simply what he said and that is all.

I don't believe every word that comes out of the white house and I don't believe every word that comes out of Iran either. Propaganda comes from both sides in equal amounts. Try finding the claim that the Iranian president wants to push Iran into the sea and you will find thousands of such links. Try finding an accurate translation and you see that the context has been warped by our press and governments.

This is balance. It is balance against what you see and read every day and that's why you don't like it.

Nowhere do I claim to support Iran or love Saddam etc (as you have claimed before) but you just have to believe that I do for you can not accept a world that goes against what you have already decided.

I reserve the right to be utterly cynical of anyone as religious as the Iranian president.

Great . thats your right . I assume that also applies to American Presidents who believes that god has told him to solve the middle east crisis




I reserve the right to be utterly cynical of anyone as religious as the Iranian president.

Great . thats your right . I assume that also applies to American Presidents who believes that god has told him to solve the middle east crisis

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 1:24 am  

At least if the man can adopt the language of the West, he is engaging in the political process.

I know in my heart that the Shia nutters want the infidels in smithereens, but one cannot continue forever in a facade of pretences.

...

Well I'm glad your not an robot for the reactionary left, at least.

By Blogger jonz, at May 10, 2006 1:25 am  

I suppose thats as close as I will get to a compliment from you.

your correct one cannot live forever in a facade of pretences, but you seem to think that only applies to muslims and not equally to us here in the west.

Ps thats a rhetorical question , please dont answer or you will be here all night :-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 1:34 am  

correction

Push 'Iran into the sea' should be 'push Israel into the sea'. am getting tired

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 1:44 am  

That is a very Intelligent letter.Certainly food for thought.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 10, 2006 2:09 am  

WOW ! Thats a hell of letter. I Think The US will look foolish if they do respond and foolish if they dont.

How can they answer that lot

By Anonymous Dave (UK), at May 10, 2006 5:00 am  

Can the 'Decider' decypher the big words. or will someone draw him pictures of what it said.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 10, 2006 5:07 am  

You can bet Dubya's eye's will never see that letter.

It's amazing, he sounds nothing like the media portrays him, hmmmmm.......

Either way he makes some excellent points.

nice find H,
happy new year!

By Anonymous Somethingsphisy, at May 10, 2006 5:23 am  

Phishy !!! Great to see you again

Your wisdom and insight have been sorely missed , I hope all is well bud.

:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 5:52 am  

Just finished reading the entire letter... What an incredible thing of peace! Unfortunately Bush wouldn't understand one iota of his words. How sad that such a dumbass recieves such an offering.

By Blogger thepoetryman, at May 10, 2006 6:34 am  

"I could not correlate the abduction of a person, and him or her being kept in secret prisons, with the provisions of any judicial system."

This is a direct quote from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter.
I would urge you to check out Amnesty International's, (hardly an American mouthpiece), 2005 report on Iran here:

http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/irn-summary-eng

and then honestly rethink your assessment of the letter.

Don't get me wrong - this letter is a good thing; it's the first time the two governments have directly communicated since the Iranian Revolution in 1979. However, I honestly see nothing in this letter, in light of Ahmadinejad's, shall we say, past indiscretions, which indicates anything more than damage control on the Iranian government's part. Thanks for your time; come check out my spot sometime and keep up the good work.

By Blogger Invisibull, at May 10, 2006 7:56 am  

Invisbull

Amesty ! Thats a bit shallow considering the Amnesty report on the USA. Of course they have human rights issues,nobody denies that,least of all the Iranians. Sadly the USA has ceased to be an example to the world.

The considering the 'drop a nuke on tehran' talk come out of many quarters in the USA,this letter is almost pure by comparison. Dont believe the hype, the war machine is in full flow in the USA and no amount of reality is going to stop that. I am Ashamed that wisdom is being brought to our leader from Iran. ashamed but not in denial for they certainly have a point.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 10, 2006 9:10 am  

My point was to simply point out that the letter is more than likely a ploy designed to embarrass the U.S., and take pressure off of Iran in their nuclear development negotiations. I am not interested in getting into a morality olympics tournament; I'm just trying to put this letter into its proper context. It seems a bit insane to suddenly declare Ahmadinejad, who has denied the holocaust and called for the destruction of Israel numerous times, a voice of reason. Will he next be nominated for the nobel peace prize on the strength of a carefully crafted letter? A little sidenote of interest. I happen to have a friend living in Isfahan, Iran - I meet this friend online occasionally and she has very tactfully asked me not to mention anything political about Iran during our chats. Take from that what you will.

By Blogger Invisibull, at May 10, 2006 9:44 am  

Sorry I wasnt having a go at you Invisibull my point is that he is the voice of reason compared to George Bush but that in itself is no compliment. On your point that he Denied the The Holocaust I can only assume that either (a) you dont speak farsi or (b) your Iranian friend is one of the many that did not vote for him. He said no such thing as every Iranian knows. Like you I have no desire to debate. I just found your amnesty remark funny. Please take no offence

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 10, 2006 10:21 am  

Invisibull

just a side note that I am sure you aware of. People are free to discuss politics in Iran.

I follow a huge number of Iranian blogs that are very political, some very critical of the government. They are not harrased any more than we are.

Its probably that your friend is a litttle sensitive or that I miss read your comment.I am quite sure your aware of the freedom of expression aloud inside Iran.

A few such iranians read this blog.

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 10:33 am  

PS some links to some quaility Iranian blogs can be found here for those that are interested.

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 10:39 am  

Hi again -

I'd like to quickly point out that the comments i made about my friend living in Iran were soley representative of what she told me. I do not pretend to have any deep understanding of what goes on inside Iran; I can only go by what she's told me. Anonymous, thanks for that link, I'm always happy to have new sources to help me understand the various issues. However,it may be true that Ahmadinejad doesn't explicitly call for the destruction of Israel, he does, i think most would agree, come pretty close to it. Here's a quote from your link:

"We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime [Israel] has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world."

Let's face it - he's advocating the destruction of Israel there, even if he isn't coming right out and saying it.

H - thanks for a running a civil site and thanks also for the links to Iranian run sites - i intend to check them out.

By Blogger Invisibull, at May 10, 2006 10:55 am  

Your wekcome Invisibull its much better now I have the posting rules :-)

I suppose it all depends on how you read the quote above. I see no threat to destroy Israel just a desire to find justice for the palastinians.

We must always remember that the foolish talk of Iran attacking Israel would directly harm the very people they are angry for. the Palastinians)

Nukes are not selective. Thousands of Arabs would die (assuming he had such weapons and used them) He would be the most unpopular man in the middle east if he did something so stupid.

It seems to me his anger is not at the jewish people but at the occupied land . the 'occupying regime' he talks of is about the land such as the west bank. not the whole of israel. This point becomes even more clear if you quote the whole paragraph.

I can see how you can read it as a threat to Israel but in context I think our western press has played on key sentences and put them out of context. In the letter he wishes to pray with Jews for a world of peace...

I am not saying he is some lovely kind man by any shot. Just applying some balance which is the simple function of this site

Anyway back to sleep ....

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 11:12 am  

PS (still awake)

On the note of language. Remember that this was an internal speach designed for his own people...

We can all fall into the trap of sounding like a maniac to the rest of the world without meaning it

The Operation to free Afganistan was originally called 'Operation infinite justice' as it sounded good to American people.

The shock and disgust of the arab world forced the US to change the name for in their eyes only god can issue 'infinie justice'

we often here politicians saying that we must defeat the oppostion , that the reps/dems are a stain on our country etc ..

what is not mentioned is any desire by the Iranian president to achieve anything by military force.In the context of this letter he is asking for a referedum in the area. Thats a long long long way short of the concept of wanting to start a war and it is dificult to be scared of a man who 'claims' he wants to change the world through democracy and talking..

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 11:26 am  

i really need to sleep but i have just one more thing to say.

"Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world."

He's referring, through the Imam, to a regime, not a piece of territory - I am all for balance too H, I don't think you've seen me praise GW a single time in my 500 or so words (whew). Im merely addressing this so-called letter of peace and trying to express my exceptional skepticism as to its sincerity - off to sleep, more later

By Blogger Invisibull, at May 10, 2006 11:38 am  

'He's referring, through the Imam, to a regime,'


yes the regime in the occupied land. again not the destruction of Israel but there removal from the Palastinian land ( I assume the land borders agreed by binding UN agreement made in 1967 )

Still Like i say it depends how you read it and it wasn't for the wests consumption anyway...

Either way Iran does not have any history of starting wars, when they have had the chance to join other arab states in attacking Israel they have never sent their military to fight..

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 11:57 am  

As for its sincerity. well only the man himself knows....

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 12:00 pm  

H, I think he sent the letter, NOT to Bush, but to America. He knew the letter would be read around the world.

He is a teacher and I don't think he is crazy. However, I am not in a position to know for sure. I will give him the benefit of the doubt since my government doesn't like him. Why? Because my government lies to me everyday and is more corrupt than anything I have ever seen in person. The issue about Israel is always going to make Iran look bad but you have to admit they have a point.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 10, 2006 7:54 pm  

Oh I agree hype ( you know me by now) , saying he was crazy was just a joke in reference to Bush never reading anything more than a comic

I think it is an excellent letter that makes some very shrewd points 'most' of which i would agree with....

were playing on the same team with this one Hype . and sad though it is I have more faith in the Iranian President than I do in Bush , I wish I didnt but I do .

Thats no compliment to Iran but its a very scary thought for america

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 8:06 pm  

After reading most of the entire blog this one evening, I've finally decided to enter a comment.

I have a hard time believing that this is the letter sent from the Ahmadinajad to Bush. It may be the one that was released, but the facts don't add up.

First of all, why does the date at the top of the site say June 25, 2005?

Secondly, such newsagencies as CBS, the AP, and the BBC, the letter is between 17 and 18 pages in length. The one you have provided is only 8 pages.

And, what type of source is http://medias.lemonde.fr/mmpub/edt/doc/20060509/769629_lettre.pdf?

I found the exact same letter on usatoday's website. They also claim the letter to be 18 pages long, but only 8 pages are too be found. Something doesn't seem right about the letter...

By Blogger Toby, at May 11, 2006 6:52 am  

oh, and what is with all the "...s"

By Blogger Toby, at May 11, 2006 6:55 am  

Does anyone note the similarity between this miniacle anti-semite's comments about American and the Democrat talking points?

You'd think that major political parties would at least look to see what leading world nut-jobs are saying before they run around in the media and spout their talking points.

Btw, the same tactic that you lefties are suggesting we take with Iran is what was used with North Korea... and look how well that one turned out..

Best of intentions and worst of results is still a bad senario... it just makes you feel better when you go to sleep.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at May 11, 2006 1:05 pm  

awwww, G is comparing the leader of Iran to liberals... how flattering.

better than being compared with killer Bush. Thanks for the compliment.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 11, 2006 2:38 pm  

LOL Toby

The reason for the date at the top of the page is simply to put the letter at the start of my blog. the only way to prevent a post appearing on the first page is to change the date and I am sure you understand that placing the letter on the first page would mean I had no room to post anything else.

Just a side note that this blog had not even began on the date you state . It started on the day of the London Bombings.

I respect your choice to believe what you want to believe but in my view your analysis is not very scientific. have you considered that the pages you have seen elsewhere are smaller maybe ?

The letter was released by the Iranian Government to the United Nations for the publics consumption and the source you quote me from above was directly in response to a question about seeing a copy that could not be changed and as you know PDF files can not be changed. It was not my source for the letter it was simply my reply to a question .

Of course if your wild assumption is correct then instead of counting the number of pages you will easily be able to show me (from your many sources) the Huge volume of content you state is missing . but for some bizare reason you have failed to note a single word that has changed or been removed !

AS for all the '...' thats simply means 'and so on' or etc.

Thankyou for your conspiracy it was amusing to read and I hope your research continues towards actually finding a difference in the letters you claim to have read . If you find such a letter please inform us as I would gladly print it.

BTW

You say you have read most of my entire site . Please forgive me if I doubt that, certainly you didn't do so on any single computer for the IP log shows no such event . Anyway it appears you did not even read the sites you 'claim' to quote from

Here is the Letter as printed by the BBC . funny its exactly the same word for word as mine .... and guess what , 8 pages long just like mine , how ironic

I don't normally bother to reply to those who create bizarre conspiracies without bothering to check their facts first. But sadly someone reading your comment may have unwittingly believed that you had actually read the sites you quote from rather than just making things up as you go along .


Very creative though I must say

Btw , ........... :-)

And G

this seems to be the new tactic of the right. trying to connect the thinking of Iran/terrorists/bin laden etc with the left .. very funny stuff. as Hype says .... thank you :-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 6:30 pm  

PS Toby of course the US Government could also easily proove such a stange claim as yours false or true by releasing their copy of the letter. You and I both know that if there was the slightest chance of making Iran look foolish they would have done so.

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 8:07 pm  

Doesn't anyone think that this letter was made public (if it is actually legitimate), to help "resolve" this diplomatic problem. Please, the Iranian rhetoric in the passed few days is all the same. Iran hopes we (the US) will strike first and is doing everything they can to provoke us. Further, half of the letter could have been written by Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy or any number of so called enlightened liberals. At its face value, it is just another hit and run attack. On a strategic level, it is designed to made Bush look unreasonable and the Iranian's willing resolve this peacefully through talk ... and talk and talk while they refine U-235 and build bombs. Let the memory of Neville Chamberlain live on, are we doomed to repeat history?

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 11, 2006 8:11 pm  

LOL Anonymous. The US is the only country off invading other lands and starting wars

the appeasers would be those that refuse to stand up to the bullying of the United States just as they refused to Stand up to Hitler

that would make you part of the chamberlain crowd . maybe you are doomed to repeat that history for it seems you have not learnt the lesson of those that start illegal wars against sovereign nations

PS . another one makes the left/terrorist link. Hilarious stuff, what next , you going to link michael Moore to Alq-aeda , is that the latest instructions from republican head office ?

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 8:17 pm  

PPS anonymous

Before you make any more speaches from the land of the John Bolton fan club, Care to show us the actual IAEA report that shows Iran is building a bomb ?

You won't find one for the IAEA have NEVER made any such claim.

I doubt you have spent thousands of hours on the ground in Iran inspecting the sites (correct me if I am wrong) so could you either

(a)show me the IAEA report (in full) that makes any such absurd claim ?

or (b)

Inform me of what makes you more qualified than the IAEA to make such a (un)qualified guess as to the nature of Iran's Nuclear program ?

or (c)

admit that you have no Idea what the facts are and that we should continue to allow the IAEA experts to do the job without all this propaganda from the US government

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 8:27 pm  

I Think he/she will pick (d) Which is to never reply or (e)to reply without answering a single one of your questions.Maybe they will pick(f) which is to use the F word and become abusive.We shall see H.

By Anonymous Dave(UK), at May 11, 2006 9:01 pm  

I have never seen anything but the 8 page document.

What I don't understand is why BBC announces that Iran wrote an 18 page letter here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4752831.stm
but all that is printed on BBC's website (through your link) is only 8 pages. The same can be said for both CNN and CBS.

I know what "...s" mean, but what did they replace. There were three sets of them on the first page. They could have replaced single words or entire pages. I don't know, and you don't know.

By Blogger Toby, at May 11, 2006 9:09 pm  

Toby

It was first picked up on the AP newswire. My guess is that they all copied the same typo

as for '....' I now 'think' that your talking about the ones in the letter not my constant habit of placing .... in my comments

I dont know but I seriously doubt it implies anything missing. My guess is that its just part of the original

thanks for replying

By Blogger _H_, at May 11, 2006 9:24 pm  

Hey folks, believe what you want until you have deluded yourself into trouble. The US does not behead people; you have more rights and opportunity in this country than almost anyplace else; our press is COMPLETELY free of government interference (unlike the UK and Canada), any one can run for office (unlike Iran) any one can stand across from a funeral of a fallen soldier and heckle their family, you can protest (unlike in China were 5,000+ people were burned in Tenenmin Square); and it seems anyone can come and stay here and partake in our wonderful services; and best of all you folk can leave at any time (unlike the eastern block). The list goes on, but I am sure you libs don't care. You all hate Bush more than you love liberty, freedom or democracy. Clinton bombs and invades a sovereign nation, I guess that was ok (BTW without the consent of the UN or congress). Sadam kills over 1 MILLION people between Iran, Kuwait and his own country… but I guess I am out of touch...

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 11, 2006 11:48 pm  

You were right Dave , he/she decided on (e)

Any advice on the lottery numbers ?

:-)

Anonymous. You have the freedom not to read the web sites you comment on too. I am not American my co author is NOT American and your little rant is most amusing. The rhetoric is wonderful but alas your factual knowledge seems to be zero.

Try answering the questions asked of you before you use my web site to spout out republican propaganda.

I asked you a simple question: to provide evidence on your previous comment and as stated clearly in the Posting policy of this site we reserve the right to ask you to provide such evidence of your so claimed facts. We also request you keep your comments on topic which you have failed to do.

If you choose to oblige then I would be delighted to work through your latest batch of non sequiturs one by one and debate the fallacy of your arguments.

I will leave this message here for 24 hours to enable you to comply with this very basic request.If you choose not to reply your message will end up in the void.

Is it to much to ask you to apply courtesy and converse with those who have tried to converse with you ? or do you not have the confidence in your ability to test the accuracy of your own statements.

This is not a political platform for your neurosis. Your welcome to comment as long as you stick to the rules like everyone else on this site.

H

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 12:12 am  

First I am sorry I kicked sand in your public sand box, but you did make it a public forum. As to the point-counter-point:

For H, the coalition that liberated Iraq (wait, I meant invaded and occupied), was made up of dozens of nations including nearly 60 that participated in one form or another, under UN 1441, with two resolutions from the US congress. If you’re against the preemptive action, that’s fine, I respect that. On the other hand, it is also clear that for the major dissenters for the proposed “force resolution” as asked for by Blair, it has become very clear that there were corrupt influences at very high levels at the UN, France, Russia and to a lesser extent in the UK and Germany. Oil for food anyone?

War sucks. It should not be engaged in lightly. Only history will tell whether the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were liberations or just a continuation of over 3000 years of war and violence in the region.

So far as building a bomb, I have not read the IAEA report and don’t really care to. If you have link, I will look at the relevant portions. The IAEA referred the matter to the UN Security Council and it is not because they are happy with Iran and think they should get a little something extra in their dog bowl. Finally, I have not spent thousands of hours pouring through Iran and inspecting their sites. So what. I have looked at the satellite pictures, listened to Iranian government officials, including those that have admitted that they have successfully stalled the Europeans, gone through a number of Iranian dissident websites. Iranian government reps play cat and mouse, admitting they "have the right" to build a nuke and then retracting the statement or saying the opposite a few days later. It keeps every one confused. The Russians offered to enrich Uranium for Iran to the require 235 level for commercial reactors, the Iranians declined. The subterfuge and obfuscation goes on.

Listen to the leader of Iran. If you are not concerned, you should be. Ahmadi-Najad is frothing up Muslim support from Syria to Borneo, much the irritation of many Muslim leaders. Iran has supported and continues to support terrorist. He has been using religion and nationalism to its limits. Just read that letter, how many times is Christ mentioned? Further, we have one UN member (Iran) publicly advocating the destruction of another UN member (Israel).

No one thought that Pakistan had the bomb, at least not admitting it publicly, until they tested one. On one knew AQ Khan ran a secret network disseminating nuclear information and potentially materials, until he got caught. Oh, did the IAEA report on Pakistan?

Yes, the Iraqi nuke program was basically a mess, but the Libyan program was much farther advanced than previously believed. Yes, Iraq had and used WMD. Did he have anything in March 2003, doesn't appear so. He player a bad hand of poker and everyone lost.

Hate Bush, I don’t really care. It’s a convenient way to avoid the real problems and have serious debate. At least for another 30 months. But I am sure there will be some one else to hate then.

So far as items (a) through (e), they are all the usually “don’t question us, your not qualified” tactic. Go ahead, take my posts down. Show your real colours. I know I will sleep better tonight knowing you and your friends are seeking a solution to these heady problems. This is probably wasted time anyway.

PS: If it makes you feel better, the “f” word is fallacy. Pol Pot killed 2-3 million Cambodians, Hitler killed 6 million Jews and another 4 million undesirables. Stalin killed 20 million Russians. Moa killed 25-30 million Chinese through starvation and the Cultural Revolution. Those numbers don’t include combatants or those caught in the cross fire. Of course, this is all a fallacy. Ahmadi-Najad wants to wipe Israel off the map, that’s only 6,276,883 people. Chump change.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 12, 2006 5:03 am  

its April 28 report, the International Atomic Energy Agency mentioned the UNSC mandate to Iran of last February:

' • re-establish full and sustained suspension of all enrichment related and reprocessing activities,
including research and development, to be verified by the Agency;

• reconsider the construction of a research reactor moderated by heavy water;

• ratify promptly and implement in full the Additional Protocol;

• pending ratification, continue to act in accordance with the provisions of the Additional
Protocol which Iran signed on 18 December 2003;

• implement transparency measures, as requested by the Director General, including in GOV/2005/67, which extend beyond the formal requirements of the Safeguards Agreement and Additional Protocol, and include such access to individuals, documentation relating to procurement, dual use equipment, certain military-owned workshops and research and development as the Agency may request in support of its ongoing investigations.

Despite not being fully in compliance with these demands, Iran maintains that it is in fact fulfilling its obligations under the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty.

The IAEA found no smoking gun.

Here is its conclusion, which others will not quote for you at such length:

' 33. All the nuclear material declared by Iran to the Agency is accounted for. Apart from the small quantities previously reported to the Board, the Agency has found no other undeclared nuclear material in Iran. However, gaps remain in the Agency’s knowledge with respect to the scope and content of Iran’s centrifuge programme. Because of this, and other gaps in the Agency’s knowledge, including the role of the military in Iran’s nuclear programme, the Agency is unable to make progress in its efforts to provide assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran.

34. After more than three years of Agency efforts to seek clarity about all aspects of Iran’s nuclear programme, the existing gaps in knowledge continue to be a matter of concern. '

This ambiguity is being twisted by the Bush administration to make it seem as though Iran has done something illegal. The report can be read to say that there is no evidence that Iran is doing anything illegal.

In fact, under the NPT, countries do have the right to do the sort of experiments Iran is doing. Most of the complaints are not about substance but about something else

It is the IAEA that is responsible for reporting to the UN security council of violations , There have been no such violations . The IAEA web site can be found Here where ALL the reports can be found . The IAEA had no intention of referring Iran to the UNSC it was the extreme pressure from the US government that forced them to do so

UN resolution 1441 did not in any way authorise the use of force Here it clearly states that their will be further action if Iraq does not comply . as stated by Kofi Anan it was up to the Security council (not the US) to decide what action should be taken. in the words of the UN head himself , 'the war was illegal' and hence it was a war crime .(video of him saying so on request)

your believe in the hype of the western media has made you repeat the claim that Iran intends to use a nuclear weapon against Israel but you seem to fail to note that Palestinians would also be killed in such an attack. You really think Iran will kill the very people they wish to save ? ridiculous concept.

Nobody thought Israel had a bomb either and Israel has not signed up to the NPT at all whilst Iran has complied with the NPT to the letter.

Israel said on Monday that they too wipe Iran off the map I off the map so assume your disgust is equal with them and you are popping off as we speak to advice the US government to attack Israel ? no ? Israel has over 200 war heads , Iran has none , Israel is not a member of the NPT , Iran is . maybe you have picked the wrong horse my friend , for I can assure you that Iran will not attack Israel , but Israel may well attack Iran

Your post can stay for you have admitted that you have absolutely know Idea what the status is of Iran's lawful attempts to gain nuclear power.

BTW it is very difficult to be scared of a man whom wants to sit down with Jews in a monolithic prayer for world peace ...

The rest of your post seems to have no relevance to the subject at hand so forgive me if i do not bother to reply such irrelevance

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 5:36 am  

btw as stated this a public forum for those who apply the posting policy of the site. It is not a free for all. and I am especially dubious of those that come spouting wisdom behind the veil of anonymous.

Those that wish to hide behind such things are always the appeasers. those that desire to provoke the next step in the Neocon manifesto so please forgive me if my tone is direct. but I do not take kindly to appeasers for I am old enough to remember what can happen when people do.

and finally on your oil for food bit. Again I dont normally bother to reply to such fallicies but I will ...

The largest oil consignment smuggled out of Iraq took place with US approval just weeks before the April 2003 invasion, according to a United Nations report.

The Independent Inquiry Committee has spent the past year examining the now defunct UN oil-for-food program. The report blamed UN officials and the Security Council but it also faulted the United States and other Security Council members for ignoring violations of UN sanctions.

While US Navy ships were patrolling the Gulf in February 2003, making a show of boarding and searching leaky dhows and small ships, they turned a blind eye to tankers carrying $54 million of Iraqi oil under the scheme on Jordan's behalf, the report said.

A total of 7.7 million barrels of oil was smuggled through the Khor al-Amaya oil terminal in at least seven shipments in February and March 2003, it said.

The sales were arranged by a businessman in Jordan named "Mr Shaheen" who told an Iraqi official he had "the Pentagon in one pocket and the CIA in the other." The oil was bought at a heavily discounted price of around $7 a barrel, the report said. If it had been sold at fair market value within the oil-for-food program, it could have earned $200 million to buy humanitarian goods. "

The illegal sales of oil from Khor al-Amaya came at a staggering cost to the program in terms of potential revenue foregone," the report said.

The 1,000-page report showed shipping records from a tanker included instructions for the ship's captain saying the US Navy was "already aware about your passage and itinerary."
The investigation said the smuggling in early 2003 was "the single largest episode of oil smuggling" under the oil-for-food program and occurred with the approval of the United States government."

"The governments of Jordan and the United States have declined the Committee's requests for interviews and information concerning the smuggling of oil from Khor al-Amaya," the report said.

Earlier this year the chief of staff for the US mission to the United Nations admitted Iraqi oil sales with Turkey and Jordan at the time violated UN sanctions.

Yet more examples of US double standards , they make huge waves at the UN staff who 'abused' the oil for food program , when it is themselves that have commited the greatest crime

I hope your mad at the US for cashing in more than anyone else on oil for food. Its a shame anyway as the US has already taken every cent of the oil for food money and spent it NOT building schools in Iraq... funny , It wa Iraqs money and the Us has spent every cent ...

any chance of a reciept ?

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 6:16 am  

Didn't anonymous miss the 2 million killed in vietnam by the US or does that not fit his hypothesis. Not forgetting the 100,00 plus killed in Iraq for a war they statrted. My Lai oops sorry I mean my my is (f) for forgetful maybe ?

H go with

21 15 43 11 06 27 (bonus ball 5)

By Anonymous Dave(UK), at May 12, 2006 7:13 am  

Thanks Dave , sure fire winning numbers I am sure..


maybye anonymous with his own special reseach and looking at the satellite pictures should contact the IAEA right away to inform them of his finds. Then he can be told exactly the same as Hans Blix told the americans when they handed him intelligence on Iraq , that the information is " 100 % wrong "

It makes me laugh when people think their knowledge is up and equal with the experts. If you rang the IAEA and said , guess what I have been looking at a sat photo and I think i see .... can you Imagine . they would be laughing for weeks

as for his listining to Iranian officials . well he should be able to translate what I am saying here


فاشيست

جمهورى خواه, جمهورى, گروهى, اجتماعى

If he can not then its safe to assume he means that he has been watching TV and listining to the highly edited versions of western translations , hardly the same thing

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 7:53 am  

_H_ and Dave,

Everyone can choose to pickup up the facts you like and ignore those you don’t. You can weight each to your personal tastes, fears and vested interest. You can paint a picture in your mind that suites your motivation. And of course, as you did again, you can call others names and belittle them to make your argument. “I bow to your superior intellect”.

I don’t like Israeli policy and have long thought that their treatment of the Palestinians has been horrible. On the other hand, as one who has watched politics and events for the past three decades, as well as studied history and traveled extensively, it is clear that many Palestinians do not have a long term goal to live in peace with Israel.

The US can be both saint and monster. Just as the UK is and has been. I have wasted an hour in this debate if you don’t view Iran as a threat to peace in the region, then that is a shame. We can spent days doing tit for tat on oil for food, who killed who. Picking this section out of this report or that report. So please tell me your practical solutions to these problems.

And finally, I have not logged on because I did not feel it was worth the time to be on one more server with one more ID and one more password. I am not “anonymous” because I am trying to “hide”, it was just easier than plowing through another registration. If you haven’t guessed, I am obviously and evil American cowboy with relatives who died on foreign soil to protect the very country in which you live. As “anonymous” I see the best I can do is see that you are from the UK. So what. And finally finally, you did not answer my question, who are you going to hate in thirty months when Bush leaves office?

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 12, 2006 2:48 pm  

Well you were a little late to save my arse anonymous. the battle of Britain was in 1940 you guys were a couple of years late for that ! selective history maybe ?


"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few" ... I think you will find it was the British air force that kept Hitler out of my country whilst you guys were still appeasing

whilst you are remembering saving us you may not be aware that your wonderful help came with a 4 trillion dollar bill which we are still to this day paying your country back. bet you didn't know what a huge profit you made out of saving my arse.

Your comment is offensive to the many Brits still alive that fought to save our country , you did jack shit regardless of how many times we asked you , and when you finally came , you sent us a bill

give me a break and show some respect to those who spent 3 more years than you fighting the Nazis ALONE to save your arse too ..

sheez , is that what they teach you in America !!!

sad

As for whom I am going to hate , well nobody I hope , I judge by actions and behaviour not by political party , do you ?

BTW you do not need to register , you merely need to click 'other' and give yourself a name ...

On the more sensible points of your comment. You may be closer to understanding what we do here.

yes Palestinians also commit horrible crimes , yes Iran is far from perfect , this site merely attempts to put the balance back that is all

do a google search and see how many sites attack Iran for saying Israel could be wiped off the map. but try doing the same now that Israel has said it and you wont find much.

This site is biased (all sites are biased) but the 'other side' have an army of millions of web sites armed and ready to attack Arabs as simply terrorists and Israel as simply correct. this site is not designed to be the complete picture , it is simply designed to be a small counter weight to the masses

I do not think Americans are evil so I am sorry if you assume that's the case .My dear wife grew up in the US and had her schooling their , lovely people who I visit often

As for insults , it was you he came here spouting anti leftist propaganda , what do you expect ?

Finally if you wish to continue to have a one on one debate with me your most welcome , my email is at the side and this thread is purely about the letter from Iran . I can not argue the entire range or American/world policy in a thread about a letter. surely you respect that.

simply put I should have deleted your comment for failing to remain on topic but I showed you the respect to come back and redress what was said. you did so and so hopefully we can leave this thread for those whom wish to talk about the letter.

respect

PS, please do not read my first comment wrong. The US did wonders to help the fight against the Nazis and the world is very grateful for the sacrifice made.

I was simply offended by the weird notion that you saved my country , we did that perfectly well on our on without your help.

One of the proudest moments in our history is the fact that we stood alone against the Nazis and we were there doing so whilst the rest of the world did nothing.

I wish no offence and only respect to your family that came to fight Hitler , you just stepped on nerve for us Brits.

btw when did I claim to have a 'superior intellect'

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 5:17 pm  

damn fine words H. i think i learned something as well.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 12, 2006 6:16 pm  

anonymous said: "our [American] press is COMPLETELY free of government interference (unlike the UK and Canada)"

It is so sad, then, to not see it use its freedom to the fullest extent.

In defence of the British press, while there actually are legal ways of censoring it (the D-notices, the fierce defamation and libel laws etc.), the British press is like a bulldog on a long long leash, ready to savage any public figure who gives reason for it.

In comparison, the American press, though it has the greatest legal / constitutional guarantees of freedom in the world (though I don't know how those have been affected by the Patriot Acts), often seems like a meek, timid and unquestioning lapdog in comparison.

I generalise, of course; there are some great reporters in America doing a great job of "afflicting the comfortable and comforting the afflicted". Unfortunately, I would guess only a minority of the population reads or is aware of them; for the rest, tar-brushing them as "liberals" instantly invalidates their research and reportage.

Fascinating document, at any rate. I wonder whether Ahmadinejad really penned it himself in English? Can you imagine Mr Bush mastering even his own language to such a degree?

By Blogger I.:.S.:., at May 13, 2006 1:49 pm  

Just to add a side note to the previous well written comment. It seems it will come as a bit of a shock to anonymous that the US is ranked 44th in the The annual worldwide press freedom index. with some very interesting countries that have appeared above them on the list

The following list is in order of the 43 countries in the world that have a press that are more free and more open than the United states

Denmark
Finland
Iceland
Ireland
Netherlands
Norway
Switzerland
Slovakia
Czech Republic
Slovenia
Estonia
Hungary
New Zealand
Sweden
Trinidad and Tobago
Austria
Latvia
Belgium
Germany
Greece
Canada
Lithuania
Portugal
United Kingdom
Benin
Cyprus
Namibia
El Salvador
Cape Verde
France
Australia
South Africa
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Jamaica
Mauritius
South Korea
Japan
Mali
Hong-Kong
Spain
Costa Rica
Italy
Macedonia

Then we get to the United states...

Information source here

Previous Terrorism News Article here

By Blogger _H_, at May 15, 2006 1:15 am  

Punishing prospects : A humanitarian catastrophe

International law bans collective punishment - a tenet the representatives of the Middle East peace "quartet" should bear in mind when they meet in New York today to consider the grave situation in the Palestinian territories.


The US and the EU suspended their direct funding of the Palestinian Authority when the government of the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, entered office last month.

Their purpose was to pressure Hamas to formally recognise Israel, abandon violence, and accept agreements concluded between Israel and the PA when it was being run by Yasser Arafat and his successor, Mahmoud Abbas. The boycott has not achieved these goals. By not paying the salaries of 165,000 public employees it has aggravated the rapidly deteriorating economic crisis in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. It may thus achieve an undeclared and highly risky aim: the collapse of the Hamas government.

The quartet - Russia and the UN form the other half - are to discuss creating a special international "mechanism" to bypass Hamas and funnel aid through the World Bank, the IMF or the UN. Optimists hope Israel might agree to use this channel to resume its suspended tax transfers to the PA. It is unclear whether the US will back this. If it does not, the Europeans should for once be prepared to go it alone in resuming aid to the Palestinians, as Russia has done.

That means cash will flow again to health and education, helping alleviate the misery and despair being reflected in new fighting between Hamas and Fatah gunmen. That in turn risks pushing Gaza, already a byword for deprivation and violence, over the edge of the abyss. The normally cautious World Bank is now warning of a "humanitarian catastrophe".

It does not take a genius to work out how to avoid this. Overall, greater imagination and flexibility is needed to handle Hamas. Having carried out 60 suicide bombings against Israeli targets, mostly civilians, it has maintained a ceasefire for 16 months. That is more important than the totemic issue of recognising Israel. Palestinians voted for it because they had despaired of progress towards a just peace under the discredited old PA regime, not because they had converted en masse to jihad.

Hamas won the sort of democratic election which the US claims to be encouraging. James Wolfensohn resigned recently as the quartet's envoy because he thought the aid cutoff was plain wrong. Jimmy Carter, the former US president, has put it well:"Depriving the people of Palestine of their basic human rights just to punish their elected leaders is not a path to peace."

Article Source Here

Whadda mess

By Blogger 357martini, at May 09, 2006 3:28 am  

Maybe before you start feeling so sorry for those murderous bastards you ought to check out what they are doing with the money they do have!
http://debka.com/headline.php?hid=2404

By Blogger sarge, at May 09, 2006 7:56 am  

You know, it's funny, I just wrote a post on the Israeli peace process not long ago. You can check it out under "The Zion Street Allegory: How Not To Resolve a Property Dispute." I think it does a pretty good job of fairly portraying both sides. The peace process is a complex issue, and no side is completely free of blame. Cheers.

By Blogger Spc. Freeman, at May 09, 2006 10:01 am  

yeah ... democratically elect a government ... but if we don't like them, we won't deal with them ... we'll shut them out ... we won't honor them ... we won't respect them ................ darn, i just wish the rest of the world had done that when mr. bush stole the elections here.

UH ... KNOCK, KNOCK ... HELLO, UN ... you can sanction us for our bad behavior too! we know we should be in trouble too!

peace & harmony,
elaine
'freedom must be exercised to stay in shape!'

By Blogger business voodoo, at May 09, 2006 10:44 am  

world peace

By Blogger NYC TAXI SHOTS, at May 09, 2006 10:55 am  

Sarge

Please read the posting Policy before leaving comments on this site.

Calling an entire nation of people 'Murderous bastards' says more about you then it does about them

I am disgusted by American foreign policy and how the US government spends its money creating death and destruction across the globe. That does NOT make the american people 'Murderous Bastards'

Hamas has maintained a ceasefire for 16 months something to be noted when everyone simply wishes to make them sound like mini Bin Ladens

Children are starving simply because the Palastinians made a democratic choice and the US simply did not like the choice they made .. and you call them 'murderous bastards'

Please read and apply our posting policy as everyone else has done here..

By Blogger _H_, at May 09, 2006 5:04 pm  

H, you made some pretty bold assertions that I think are just plain wrong. First, Jimmy Carter is arguably the United State's biggest failure as President. He had the best of intentions with the least and worst of results. Quoting him only falls back to the same argument that liberals commonly have: "What we were trying to do was..."

Second thing, at what point did American and the EU take on sole responsibility to "By not paying the salaries of 165,000 public employees" in a nation/territory where they neither hold authority or legal rights? The US and EU do not tax nor control this area, but are expected to pay the salaries of their public employees... reguardless of the political climate and/or activities of their actual "leaders"?

Lastly, you stated: "Overall, greater imagination and flexibility is needed to handle Hamas. Having carried out 60 suicide bombings against Israeli targets, mostly civilians, it has maintained a ceasefire for 16 months. That is more important than the totemic issue of recognising Israel."

You are wrong. The reason they have carte blanche authority and acceptance from most of the Arab world (and Iran) to conduct the attacks they've so graciously stopped for the last 16 months is because no one in the Arab world recoginizes Israel's right to exist. If the Arab world, starting with Palestine accepts Israel as a legitimate state, then they have to stop open attacks on the populace as it is an official act of war as recognized by ALL nations. This is precisly why the more liberal world powers do not fight for exactly that status of recognition, because it would cause them start ACTING on the violence coming from the Arabs towards the Jews instead of just Talking about it. (See: A Recipe for In-Action)

By Blogger G_in_AL, at May 09, 2006 5:08 pm  

G

the US and EU are bound by international contracts to make those payments. Its not a moral choice its simply a crime not to pay them. It is assured as long as the palestine authority adhere to these terms Here under These United Nation instructions . In fact as a fully signed up member of the united nations your are legally required to ensure that international humanitarian law [particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention] and international human rights law are fully implemented, as outlined in the World Court Opinion of July 9th 2004
which you are currently failing to do...

So many people twist the meanings of words G , Hatred is one such word..

I hate rap music
I hate fascists
I hate many many things

I dont think for example that fascists have a right to exist ...

That does not mean that i can not co-exist in peace on a planet that contains fascists. Recognising(or not) someones right to exist is just word play G , that does not mean they can't live side by side in peace ..

Even if the Arab world said what you wanted them to hear , it wouldn't change your view one bit would it ?There is a huge difference between words and actions. what matters most is that they have stopped killing (unlike the Israelis)

The way to peace and security in the Middle east is to keep your word and honour your agreements.Hamas is NOT currently at war with Israel and they can choose not to recognise them if they so wish .

Should the children of Palestine be starved to death not because they are being evil or killing Israelis , but because they choose not to recognise them ..

You guys always manage to make the mere freedom to use words sound like acts of terrorism whilst actually dropping bombs onto peoples houses by the US or Israel is defending freedom and democracy .

There is no such thing as thought crime G , this is NOT 1984 , they can think and say what they hell they like . Judge them by what they do , as others judge you by what you do ...

btw on your act of war bit ...

LOL no its not , the UN charter clearly states that you can only use force against another country in an act of clear self defence. you can not attack a country simply because they say bad things about you, thats absurd

Its exactly the same as National laws G , In what democracy can I 'say' something nasty about your wife or kids and you have the 'legal' right to use physical violence against me ...

Of course the US doesn't bother with international law any more so as the leader of the free world , is it any wonder that others will follow suite

By Blogger _H_, at May 09, 2006 7:13 pm  

G, I see that you still haven't read the only study looking at every modern incidence of suicide terrorism. Don't you think that terrorism is an important enough topic that the definitive piece on it should be read?

By Blogger DJEB, at May 09, 2006 7:25 pm  

Jimmy Carter

*created a national energy policy and the consolidation of governmental agencies (bush has screwed the energy policy and broadened the gov't agencies)

*enacted strong environmental legislation; deregulated the trucking, airline, rail, finance, communications, and oil industries..(as we know, all these industries have molded back together, except for trucking. bush wouldn't have it any other way)

*In 2002, Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize for his "efforts to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development." (Bush will never win a nobel peace prize).

*This man helped (successfully) complete the Camp David Accords, the first ever signed document between Israel and an Arab State for Peace. (Bush would rather just invade Arab States and claim us as liberators, not occupiers)

Bush will never will a nobel peace prize. ever.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 10, 2006 8:58 pm  

Known Truths , Closed Minds

My meeting with Rumsfeld : By Ray McGovern

A graphic reminder for those wishing to spread some truth around that we have our work cut out for us. We have to find imaginative ways to use truth as a lever to pry open closed minds.


Read the article Here.

well, a closed mouth is a first step!
peace & harmony,
elaine
'freedom must be exercised to stay in shape!'

By Blogger business voodoo, at May 09, 2006 10:42 am  

There are known knowns and there are known unknowns. We also know that there are known to be known unknown knowns as well as unknown known unknown knowns. These are not to be confused with the unknown known unknown unknowns. You know?

By Blogger DJEB, at May 09, 2006 7:28 pm  

Hehehe

Djeb . You grabbed the very thought in my head when I wrote the title.

Elaine

Very true and thanks for taking the time to visit

Peace

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 4:39 am  

Paradise Now (video)

This is a powerful film that has become controversial because it forces you look at things you might not want to think about. Hany Abu-Assad's gripping and insightful drama about two Palestinian terrorists preparing for a suicide mission may be shocking but it certainly opens a window into the culture and life of the people in Palestine.




Western thinking may never enable us to understand why someone would decide to become a human bomb. Watching this film will not change your opinion. Such things I believe depend on the culture and society that you belong to. However it is impossible not to recognise the anger, humiliation and shame that drives people to such extreme desperation.

I do not think that there is anything in this film that would come as any surprise to the average Israeli, merely that they would disagree with its conclusions. You may disagree too but in my opinion, such films are all the more important to watch if you feel your are able to judge the conclusion without watching the film.

_H_

Watch the film Here (windows media player required)

Source : Again the excellent ICH

(Note: Please watch this film at the source if you are able. It is presented here for convenience but it is not held on this server and I am sure the bandwidth owner would prefer you to watch the film directly)

i haven't had a chance to see it yet. i think suicide missions are very old. people today are just not used to it. the tactic works.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 09, 2006 2:31 pm  

The tactic has been since the creation of explosives . This is a VERY powefull film Hype. certainly a must see film when you can find the time . The video quality on this one is excellent

Certainly my choice of the week. If someone can only see one video on this site then this is the one ....

By Blogger _H_, at May 09, 2006 5:10 pm  

I prefer Flight 93

By Blogger jonz, at May 10, 2006 12:01 am  

Amazing , Its not even out yet in the UK , have you watched an Illegal pirate copy or are you just guessing ..

You were here less then 2 mins Jonz. Its stunning how you can pre judge a film you have not seen .... twice

:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 12:31 am  

"illegal pirate copy" you sound like some hard-right tory boy

Yes I fucking downloaded Flight 93 before it was premiered in America.

Flight 93 is a factual account, no matter how intellecutally depraved you are, watching this film you must surely see the folly of religious fanatacism?

I'll be frank, instead of jonz, I have no desire to see Paradise Now. I'm not sure why. Maybe because I have no sympathy with suicide bombers, and I don't want to have any.

By Blogger jonz, at May 10, 2006 12:48 am  

'hard-right tory boy' what you mean with a bag on my head and a sausage up my arse :-)

The film is not about sympathy Jonz.

When someone is murdered the Police try to find out exactly how,why and what happened. that does not make them sympathetic to the murderer.

To understand is not to justify

now please refrain from arguing with me on my own site. You have made your view clear as your entitled to do. If you want to argue with me then send me an email. This forum is for anyone whom wants to comment (including you) It is not for a game of tit for tat with you

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 1:05 am  

BTW

For anyone not British the opening sentence of my last comment refers to a right wing British MP who was found dead a few years ago in such an unusual position

:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 1:57 am  

that is pretty gross H but probably not as bad as what my country did to the iraqis in Abu Graib.

I will post again after watching the movie.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 10, 2006 8:06 pm  

Hehehe , sorry , was a moment of madness , I didnt even mention that he had an orange in his mouth and had tied himself up in bondage .. the worst thing is nobody else was involved , he did it to himself ...


Hey thats far right wing politicians for you

:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 8:09 pm  

Monday, May 08, 2006

Manufacturing Consent (video)

'Required Viewing for every citizen in the Free World'.

Judge for yourself Here (windows media player required: 2 hours 47 minutes)

Source : The excellent ICH




(Note: Please watch this film at the source if you are able. It is presented here for convenience but it is not held on this server and I am sure the bandwidth owner would prefer you to watch the film directly)

i only watched the first 30 minutes last night. so far it is pretty good. this should be required viewing.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 09, 2006 2:27 pm  

Yup. there are some clasic films up lately. I am still working through them myself..

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 4:37 am  

Ahmadinejad writes to George in shrewd move towards peace

Iran's president threw a deft trump card into his standoff with the West on Monday when he dispatched a letter to President Bush proposing "new solutions" to the crisis _ a diplomatic overture that vastly complicates U.S. hopes for U.N. Security Council sanctions to punish the Islamic regime.





While Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not disclose what he wrote to the American leader, the letter's very existence appeared to offer Russia and China handy additional justification to block the U.S. sanctions drive while diplomatic channels remained open. Both countries hold Security Council vetos and already were hotly opposed to sanctions.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton dismissed the letter as an attempt to break international pressure.

"It doesn't surprise me that it comes on a day like today in a week when they expect a vote on a resolution. The Iranians are always interested in talking right before somebody puts the squeeze on them," he said. "Then once the squeeze lets up a little bit ... back they go to the pursuit of nuclear weapons."

Mark Fitzpatrick, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, called Ahmadinejad's move "an astute negotiating ploy."

"It's harder for the Americans to get 15 votes (a unanimous result) in the Security Council if they are seen as not willing to talk to the Iranians," the former State Department official said.

Source Here. (via AP)

I see John Bolton is up to his usual tricks, blaming the Iranians when it has always been the US that has refused to have direct talks with Iran. A chance of peace ? Well unlikely unless someone is willing to teach George how to read.

John Bolton is BushCo's attack dog.

Diplomacy isn't in his vocabulary.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 9:09 pm  

I would love to find out what was in that letter.

Speaking of letters, ever wonder what happened with all those Anthrax letters sent to congress? I do.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 9:15 pm  

I suppose they performed their function Hype (to help scare everyone into compliance) and so they are no longer required.

Wasn't it confirmed as US produced anthrax ? (if my memory serves me well)

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 9:30 pm  

that is what i read. after they found that out they didn't care about it that much.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 9:34 pm  

'I suppose they performed their function Hype (to help scare everyone into compliance) and so they are no longer required.'

so back to John Bolton and the UN.


hehe, i couldn't resist that one.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 9:35 pm  

hehehe

very smooth return to the topic

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 10:31 pm  

Ahmadinejad's move was not "an astute negotiating ploy," it was a pedantic, immature and just plain stupid approach to a country that saw through it so fast it only took minutes to respond in public. This jerk off is trying to go toe to toe with Condy Rice, perhaps the most brilliant mind Washington has seen in decades. Dont worry everyone, Bush sees right through this ploy, and is as focused as ever. Bush's laser beam is on Ahmadinejad's pointed little head, and there it will remain until it is redirected toward the nuclear facilities. Ahmadinejad's days are numbered, make no mistake.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 12, 2006 4:04 am  

Yet more Wisdom and non sequiturs Anonymous ?


The US has not even replied to the letter so of course it took minutes to respond for it seems the administration are too cowardly to reply ..

Condi Rice and Brilliant mind are clearly an oxymoron and your patriotic nature though admirable is clouding your view of reality.

Again the words 'Bush' and 'Don't worry' tickled me , why would we not worry about such a Terrorist he is a greater threat to the human race than Al-Qaeda and has ended the lives of more women and children than Al-qaeda could even hope for.

Get rid of Bush then we can get on with the job of Al-qaeda , but no progress can be made with such a maniac in power

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 4:48 am  

Sunday, May 07, 2006

Fill 'er Up

The latest Mark Fiore animation is now available.

Watch it here.

Once again I had to come back. I love the blog. thank you very much. Feel free to visit. We have a new article you will find interesting. www.juddandjasonspeakout.com
Your blog is powerful, stay consistent. Peace.

By Anonymous Jason, at May 08, 2006 4:41 am  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 08, 2006 6:19 am  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 08, 2006 6:20 am  

Why are all these a$$hole$ leaving advertising messages??? i think they missed the McPoint... Texas Oil thief of Baghdad... Asbestos Acne bollocks...

By Blogger Yossarian, at May 08, 2006 9:22 am  

Sad isn't it. they travel from site to site never reading anything just putting in adverts for acne cream...

I always laugh at the 'great blog' messages when their IP adress shows they have only spent 15 seconds on the site.

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 2:00 pm  

Another great anime from Mark. Fill'er Up!

H did you ever get a chance to see Colbert at the White House Correspondent dinner?

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 5:21 pm  

Yea I finally did catch it on crooks and liars bud , Fantastic stuff , Its a shame I didnt spot it earlier as I would have put up a link but we dont get comedy central over here ( we get some of the programes like the daily show etc) so I ended up missing the boat on that one.

btw Hype have you ever thought about posting yourself ? Your three steps ahead of most on spotting the latest stories. Your welcome to post your finds here if you have any space in your busy schedule..

If not then no worries it's just a thought.....

BTW I love mark's work , very talented guy.

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 6:07 pm  

I wish I had enough time. Right now we are in a slow period before summer starts. I visit a long list of blogs and news sites to get my daily dose of reality. This one being one of the better non-political blogs.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 7:32 pm  

Thanks for the compliment Hype and no worries . If you ever find you have spare time then the offer will still be here

Btw looking at the links on your own site it must take you hours to get through them :o)

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 8:46 pm  

Actually, I use a combination of RSS reader and firefox to get my daily dose in record time.

I just started using Sidebar. It has newsreader functionality builtin. However, it is not very robust.

I noticed you don't have a RSS link for your blog. I recommend Feedburner

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 9:07 pm  

I use an RSS reader for my sources (like you I have thousands, in fact I end up with too many to read) but not for the blog (long story)

you can get an atom feed for terrorism news Here

but I never got round to putting it in :-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 9:12 pm  

Thanks. I will add you to my reader.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 9:36 pm  

_H_, you really do a bang-up job on the site. The volume of news you go through is stunning AND you have a working memory. You regularly link back to what has been posted in the past. No small feat by any means.

And Hype, you are basically a contributor. You've added a tremendous amount to the site.

I'm so out of it that I can't even keep up with reading this site, let alone others. Too much work... Speaking of which, I literally have some seeds to sow right now...

By Blogger DJEB, at May 08, 2006 10:32 pm  

Thanks Djeb your too kind .

btw 'monotone' <--- what was I thinking :-)

Keep up the fantastic work. far more productive than this little adventure. It sure seems like hard work for you, but I have no doubt your enjoying yourself.

Take care and we will see you as often or as rarely as you can manage.

By Blogger _H_, at May 09, 2006 2:28 am  

eh Hype , A job offer from me and a compliment from Djeb ... we are either coming up in the world , or you are on the sliperly slope down

:-)

Just kidding bud

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 4:36 am  

Iran: will only sell oil in Euros

In July Iran will ditch the dollar in favour of the euro as the currency in which it will accept payments for its oil and natural gas exports.




Iranian president Mahmoud Iran's Oil Ministry took the next step toward establishing an oil trading market denominated in euros, rather than the US dollar, by granting a license for the bourse, Iranian state-run television reported.

Just who would trade on the market wasn't immediately apparent. Iranian television did not mention traders or governments willing to market or purchase products on the exchange, nor did it say when it would open for business, the Associated Press (AP) reported.

"Iran has registered an oil bourse on the Persian Gulf island of Kish in which oil would be sold in euros," the broadcast said. Kish, located off the coast of southern Iran, houses the offices of some 100 Iranian and foreign oil companies.

Oil trading is currently only conducted in dollars on markets in New York and London.

According to AP, Iranian legislators earlier this year urged the government to set up the market to reduce the United States' influence over the Islamic republic's economy. They also criticized Oil Minister Sayed Kazem Vaziri Hamaneh, saying he had delayed setting up the bourse.

If the market succeeds, observers say euro-denominated oil sales could eventually convince central bankers to convert some US dollar reserves into euros, possibly causing a decline in the dollar's value.

First floated in 2004 when reformist president Mohammad Khatami was in power, the idea of a euros-traded oil bourse gained new life after the stridently nationalist Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president last summer, AP pointed out.

As the fourth-largest oil producing country in the world, the second in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting countries and controlling about 5 percent of the global oil supply, Iran has a measure of influence over international oil markets. Tehran also partially controls the Persian Gulf's Strait of Hormuz through which much of the world's oil supply must pass, AP added.

Iran has sought to wield its oil resources as a bargaining tool in Tehran's ongoing standoff with the West over its nuclear program.

Iran's deputy oil minister, M.H. Nejad Hosseinian, said Thursday he doubted the UN Security Council would impose sanctions on Iran's oil sector because such a move would drive oil prices higher, AP stated.

Council members are considering imposing sanctions on Iran for defying their request to halt all uranium enrichment-related activities by late last month

Source Here.

Have you seen the dollar lately? The recession is just around the corner. Everything needs to be re-evaulated. That is what happens when you have a fed controlled by neo-cons. They just keep printing money. Keep an eye on World Bank.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 5:16 pm  

I agree hype , the quicker they print the faster this new recession will come. It will be even worse when Iran refuses to accept dollars for its oil...

scary times

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 6:09 pm  

there is a lot of rhetoric coming from both sides but the writing is on the wall. anybody with their eyes open should be able to see how this is going to play out. We are 6 months away from mid-term elections. I expect the rhetoric to get worse. However, it seems to me the neo-cons have lost the public support they needed to pull this crap.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 7:39 pm  

6 months from the election sounds like 5 months from the start of the next war..

Watching the death of the Neocons is like watching one of those old cowboy movies when you can see the guy has been shot but he will still take the next three months to roll over and die ..

We have the same problem here . 50 MPs from blairs own party have signed a letter that says 'for god sake go' but he takes no notice and just looks more and more stupid every day.

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 9:00 pm  

I really think they lost the public support they needed to be able to go to war and keep their jobs during an election year.

Iran, Immigration, Gay marriage/adoption and abortion were going to be their ticket to controlling our government.

That all changed when they tried to sell our ports. That is when I noticed the regular Texan on the street taking the time to read about what his party was doing. Here in Texas the port deal was big. The other issues won't help them as much as the port issue hurt them. In summary I expect the Republicans to get less votes across the board. Their base is going to vote for the other guy or stay home. After the mid-term elections BushCo will not be able to rely on their rubberstamp congress. At least one of the houses will be ours and we will investigate more and quite possibly impeach the President.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 9:45 pm  

Lets hope your feel for what's happening on the ground is correct Hype.

Lives are being lost everyday. If its the port issue that does it then thats fine by me just as long as we get them out

Millions around the world obviously can not vote in US elections but will rejoice in the fact that sanity is returning to the U.S.A

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 10:35 pm  

Has anyone else noticed that the quickest, and easiest way to join the "axis of evil" is to price your commodities in Euros instead of dollars. I never could understand why Cuba and Venezuela were considered so dangerous by some of the Bushistas until someone pointed out that both countries prefer -- or say they would switch -- to payments in Euros.

By Anonymous "Mexile", at May 09, 2006 4:32 am  

"Has anyone else noticed that the quickest, and easiest way to join the "axis of evil"


It has crossed our minds yes. I have even spotted a few of the right wing sites making this connection aswell ..

Thank you for taking the time to comment
mexille

By Blogger _H_, at May 10, 2006 4:32 am  

Part of me died when I saw this cruel killing

By HALA JABER





EVEN by the stupefying standards of Iraq’s unspeakable violence, the murder of Atwar Bahjat, one of the country’s top television journalists, was an act of exceptional cruelty.

Nobody but her killers knew just how much she had suffered until a film showing her death on February 22 at the hands of two musclebound men in military uniforms emerged last week. Her family’s worst fears of what might have happened have been far exceeded by the reality.

Bahjat was abducted after making three live broadcasts from the edge of her native city of Samarra on the day its golden-domed Shi’ite mosque was blown up, allegedly by Sunni terrorists.

Roadblocks prevented her from entering the city and her anxiety was obvious to everyone who saw her final report. Night was falling and tensions were high.

Two men drove up in a pick-up truck, asking for her. She appealed to a small crowd that had gathered around her crew but nobody was willing to help her. It was reported at the time that she had been shot dead with her cameraman and sound man.

We now know that it was not that swift for Bahjat. First she was stripped to the waist, a humiliation for any woman but particularly so for a pious Muslim who concealed her hair, arms and legs from men other than her father and brother.

Then her arms were bound behind her back. A golden locket in the shape of Iraq that became her glittering trademark in front of the television cameras must have been removed at some point — it is nowhere to be seen in the grainy film, which was made by someone who pointed a mobile phone at her as she lay on a patch of earth in mortal terror.

Article continues Here.

Is this your attempt to be balanced I wonder?

And you have made absolutley no comment on the article. What are your thoughts on the matter?

Is this more evidence that George Bush is a terrorist of the highest oder, perhaps?

Or that Islamism can be evil within itself, without the pretext of infidel oppression?

By Blogger jonz, at May 08, 2006 12:30 am  

It seems you have not read the full article Jonz , its from the London Times .. do you aprove, it seems that you do for you have posted the article yourself.

Maybe you didnt notice that The author (a muslim) notes the break down in law and order that led to the tragedy that she witnessed.

What do you think could create the colapse of society in Iraq , sacking the entire police force and army maybe ?

Of course you on your site blame the Muslims. have you forgot the words of colin powell ' you break it , you own it '

we broke it , now you want to blame them for the consequences.

take away law and order from the streets of london (or new orleans ) and see how long it takes before the shit hits the fan...

Of course in your mind we are just innocent liberators I am sure

:-)

Again you only bring assumption to the debate. I can not answer a constant flow of non sequiturs , try basing your opinions on what you see not what you assume must be true.

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 1:50 am  

'we broke it , now you want to blame them for the consequences.'

Blame the victim is very popular with the neo-cons.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 5:14 pm  

very true Hype its always someone else thats responsible

Iran
Insurgents
Al-qaeda
The UN
cindy sheehan
The press
The left
Muslims
Michael Moore
the French
The IAEA
The Russians
President Chavez

Infact they can blame anyone (north south east and west of themselves) but never do they stand up and say , yup we fucked up its our own fault...

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 6:15 pm  

you forgot #1....


Bill Clinton

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 7:40 pm  

:-) of course sorry , there is always bill to blame

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 9:01 pm  

i just blame craig. he sits next to me and i tell him it is his fault because he is the closest to me.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 9:47 pm  

for me It's the wife :-)

Well to be honest she blames me for everything but still , it keeps her busy :-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 9:55 pm  

Has this world gone fucking absolutely mad or what? My countries right wing government party to the West's terrorism of Iraq. I hope John Howard Prime Minister of Australia will one day face war crimes charges in the ICC.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 14, 2006 2:41 pm  

Most Americans oppose military action against Iran

Many adults in the United States have a clear idea of how their government should approach the situation regarding Iran’s nuclear program, according to a poll by Opinion Research Corporation released by CNN. 63 per cent of respondents think the U.S. should resort to economic and diplomatic efforts, but not take military action.




After being branded as part of an "axis of evil" by U.S. president George W. Bush in January 2002, Iran has contended that its nuclear program aims to produce energy, not weapons. Support for military action against Iran stands at 13 per cent.

Polling Data

What do you think the United States should do to get Iran to shut down its nuclear program?

Take military action against Iran now
13%

Use economic and diplomatic efforts,
but not take military action right now
63%

Take no action against Iran at this time
21%

No opinion
3%


Source Here.

Isn't it amazing that the tiny minority of trigger happy warmongers continue to create the amount of noise that they do ...

It seems to me that the fact that we have a war going on is the reason you have the right to plug your opinions on the internet.

By Blogger Porcupinetaxi, at May 07, 2006 3:47 am  

It seems to me that the fact that we have a war going on is the reason you have the right to plug your opinions on the internet.


What kind of weird psuedo logic is that ?

By Blogger _H_, at May 07, 2006 3:58 am  

The problem facing the United States, over the Iran crisis, is to difuse the situation regarding Iran’s nuclear capibilities while maintaining Washington’s opposition to the regime in Tehran. The best way to do his is, not thorugh negotiation or apeasement using the United Nations as a mediator, but through using the threat of sanctions and force to harm Iran itself. America’s goal is not simply to halt the accused pursuit of nuclear weapons, but to halt Iran’s nuclear program altogehter. Not only would this deny the regime an opportunity of technological greatness and national pride, but halting the rogram would also prevent Iran from gaining any such nculear capabilities in the future.

The long term goal of the United States is regime change, not though war, but through democratisation and reform. If military action takes place against Iran, it is doubtful that this would entail regime change. Through the NPT, the United States and Iran can negotiate a deal. Yet this would allow Iran nuclear capibilities for civilian use – something that is unnaccpetable to the Americans. A possible Uranium enrichment deal between Iran and the Russian federation has not been signed.

But, confrontation with Iran also gives the neoconservative movement another possibility. Through confrontation, the United Nation’s role as a mediator will be lost. Confrontation (especially if the Security council fails to reach an aggreement) will undoubtably lead to an accelerated pursuit by Iran to gain nuclear tehnology and would also probably lead to greater militarisation, in anitcipation of an American attack. Without UN support, the United States will go alone. Although the consequences of a US strike may have counter-productive results in Iran, the anti-institutional neo-conservative movement will claim a victory in anti-prolifation enforcement, and will claim the United Nations to be a faulty institution.

The nuclear issue is a real isse, and not necessarily an excuse for waging war. The US and Iran have a history of friction, stemming from the Iranian revolution and the American embassy crisis. Iran needs to be confronted, but thorugh the UN and the terms of the NPT. Iran has a responsibility to ensure the international community that it does not have plans that contravene the NPT, thus threatening ‘international peace and security.’ If it fulfills its responsibilities, it has a right under the terms of the NPT to persue nuclear technology, and the United States and Europe have no right to interfere.

If war is to take place without UN approval, it may forfiet the NPT and accelerate an international drive for great defensive measures, including nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction. Concern about the threat of non-state nuclear equiped actors is only speculative and extremely minor in comparison to the current issue. Infact, conflict could increase the prospects of the latter.




I would advise people to go to the Oxford Research Group webpage and look at 'Iran: Consequences of a War' by Paul Rogers. Sobering to say the least.

By Anonymous Jon Nugent, at May 07, 2006 4:37 am  

I think the source of the noise may well be the tiny minority who control the government.

By Blogger Mr Angry, at May 07, 2006 8:20 am  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Blogger sid, at May 07, 2006 12:48 pm  

"It seems to me that the fact that we have a war going on is the reason you have the right to plug your opinions on the internet"

that is the dumbest logic i've ever heard

By Blogger sid, at May 07, 2006 12:51 pm  

Sorry sid you first comment is simply hate speach and has been removed. Please read our Posting policy before leaving comments

To selectively remove people like Luis Posada Carriles and Timothy McVeigh , groups like the IRA and ETA and not forgetting the worlds best financed terrorist group (the CIA)to make it seem as though Islam alone represents terrorism
is far to similiar to that kind of hatred of jews put forward by the Nazis to justify their treament of the Jewish race

Constructive critism is more than welcome Feel free to question the motives of certain groups or 'extreme' factions of the Islamic faith if you so wish but do not judge a billion people of a different faith to you in such a sweeping fashion . It is called Islamophobia and I am sure you can find plenty of blogs that will be willing to put forward views similar to yours.

By Blogger _H_, at May 07, 2006 3:03 pm  

You know,

It's a lot easier to say "let's do things the peaceful way" if you aren't in Mr. Bushs' situation.

You might not know all the facts and you might not feel the pressure Mr. Bush has.

It is true that he has made some messy decisions, and some good ones, but I think it's easy to make him a scapegoat for the world's problems, when in reality, each and every one of us rich, or even middle-class people is contributing to the suffering of someone else in the world.

It's wisest to step in someone's shoes and view as many sides of the issue as possible before you comment.

By Anonymous MechWarrior4Christ, at May 07, 2006 3:44 pm  

Well, it makes you wonder how these kind of people were able to get power in the first place, doesn't it?

About 90% of Spanish population was against sending troups to Iraq ( as tiny help as it was) , yet PP government still decided to support US & UK. As a result we had a terrorist attack & PP were kicked out of Moncloa.

Interesting blog, I'll keep an eye on it !

By Blogger Georgina, at May 07, 2006 4:02 pm  

Isn't it amazing that the tiny minority of trigger happy warmongers continue to create the amount of noise that they do ....

I completely agree. It's amazing how the ruling elite in Iran can cause so many problems for the Iranian people.

By Blogger jonz, at May 07, 2006 7:09 pm  

Support for military action against Iran stands at 13 per cent.

Not very good with facts are you?

Literally a few lines down it says

Take military action against Iran now
13%

Use economic and diplomatic efforts,
but not take military action right now
63%


I wonder what the statistics would be if one asked the question

Do you think that at some point it maybe necessary to take some military action against Iranian nuclear facilities?

Pretty different, I would imagine.

By Blogger jonz, at May 07, 2006 7:13 pm  

Yup its strange how you call them the ruling elite and not the elected government.

Democracy is great as long as they vote how you wish them too it seems.

Any problems with Hamas ?

I agree the iranian people have many problems including the desire to takes the next step in democratic reforms , poor air quality and many many others.

But complying with the IAEA and acting fully within their rights under the NPT is not one of them.

Why not concern yourselves with those countries that break international laws rather than those that comply with them.

You never know , you might live in one :-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 07, 2006 7:17 pm  

LOL jonz , I wonder what the answer would be if the question was who is the greater threat to world peace and security

In 2003

87 % thought that it was the US

and less than 10 % thought it was Iran

I doubt those numbers have changed much

we can all change the question to suite our political alignment ....

was that a straw man fallacy or non sequiter you choose..

By Blogger _H_, at May 07, 2006 7:22 pm  

Good lord you lefties can't help but lie and distort the truth can you?

Where the fuck did you get this "survey"?

By Blogger jonz, at May 07, 2006 7:27 pm  

Democracy is great as long as they vote how you wish them too it seems.

Indeed the fundamental problem with democracy is the notion that people are inherently good and truthful.

The fascists were democratically elected by German people, as were Hamas in the Palestinian terroritories.

I take it you, being a mindless lefty, was a against the war to remove Saddam, even though 74% of Iraqis think the decision to remove Saddam was correct.

By Blogger jonz, at May 07, 2006 7:31 pm  

Exact deatils

Time Magizine polled Europeans of which 706,842 people responded

The exact question

What country poses the greatest danger to world peace in 2003

Results

North korea 6.7 %
Iran 6.3 %
United states 86.9 %

Original source

TimeEurope.com and broadcast on the ITV news channel in the UK (late 2003)


-----

Indeed the fundamental problem with democracy is the notion that people are inherently good and truthful.The fascists were democratically elected by German people, as were Hamas in the Palestinian terroritories.

Indeed as the fine american people elected George W bush whom is considered by many on the planet as the worlds greatest terrorist


Jonz , I will warn you once . feel free to critise the posts but do not make childish personal insults we have a Posting Policy if you wish to comment here you are welcome but abide by the comment rules of the site or you comments will be deleted

By Blogger _H_, at May 07, 2006 7:45 pm  

Sorry, I do get worked up. I will try not to swear on your site etc.

fine american people elected George W bush whom is considered by many on the planet as the worlds greatest terrorist

I think you'll find these "many" are nearly all Socialists and Islamists. Which are you?

By Blogger jonz, at May 07, 2006 7:47 pm  

That wasn't meant as a childish insult by the way. I'm talking factually.

By Blogger jonz, at May 07, 2006 7:51 pm  

They are simply non Americans in the main have you not seen the hatred expressed on all 5 continents , from south America to australia , from Africa to eastern Europe. GWB is seen as a very dangerous man , far more dangerous than Osama or Zarqawi

I am neither a socialist or an islamist ( I have no religion ) I have spent time in Iraq and palestine (during the recent conflicts)

You must try to remember (assuming that your an American) that almost every democratic government in the world is to the left of the US so from that perspective everyone probably would come across as 'socialist'

for example France has a centre right wing government which is often mistaken for being left wing by the American public( bloggers)

If you must put me in a box then I would say I am centre left , no more socialist than you are fascist.

PS feel free to swear as much as you want. it is merely the personal attacks that we do not allow

PPS I see you work in the UK are you a fellow brit ?

By Blogger _H_, at May 07, 2006 8:20 pm  

Yes I am a fellow Brit. How do you feel about London turning blue? The conservatives now have control of 14 councils, labour 4, lib dems 3.

Well to be honest mate, the only people that go round saying that Bush is the world's number one terorist are those nutjobs from the Socialist Workers Party, and George Galloways lot.

He's not really a terrorist. You can see that can't you? He may be dumb, but he is not an evil man. How could someone evil keep going on about liberty and democracy?

I think your type of thinking as a sort of inverted morality. Your a bit like me I guess, you get angry at the world, and the way things are. It's just you have latched on to America and neo-cons as your enemy. Which I find utterly bizzare.

There's a lot of evil around in the world. And you won't find much in the country of America. Ignorance yes, but wilful evil, no, very little.

By Blogger jonz, at May 07, 2006 8:33 pm  

Sorry not inverted morality, thats the wrong phrase. Inverted rage at evil?!

By Blogger jonz, at May 07, 2006 8:38 pm  

. How do you feel about London turning blue?

I am not surprised , I would be what you would call a natural labour voter but I couldn't bring myself to vote for them but I still cant bring myself to like Cameron the chameleon . the increase in BNP support is worrying but again to be expected in the current climate


He's not really a terrorist. You can see that can't you? (bush)

Depends on your definition , if you use the pseudo right wing definition of terrorism that can not even be agreed upon by the united nations then I agree , however if you us the dictionary definition then there is no doubt that he is a terrorist of the highest order .

Lets take the American dictionary (Websters) it defines a terrorist as The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

So even the threat to remove saddam from Iraq was an act of terrorism (it was illegal under international law) If you start to look at the slaughter of innocents at fallujah or the use of depleted Uranium , the propping of of regimes like Uzbekistan , shock and awe , The disregard of the Geneva convention , gitmo , abu graab the military financing of Israel , the entire work of the CIA ..... etc etc then you could only possibly deny that he is a terrorist by denying the true meaning of the word.....

The United Nations can not agree on a definition for terrorism is for that very reason , the true definition of terrorism would clearly include the united states , as they say one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter

french resistance during world war two ? ( terrorists or freedom fighters)
American war of independence from Britain ( terrorists or freedom fighters )

it all depends on which side of the fence you sit , I am quite sure the Nazis would have called the french resistance 'terrorists' and I am equally sure that many Iraqis view the Insurgents as freedom fighters...

I have written on this at length in the past so please forgive me if my answer is incomplete but having wrote entire articles on this site about this very subject I really don't want keep repeating old subjects.

I agree that he probably is not intentionally evil but such extreme nationalism as held by the Neo conservatives is dangerous ....

I certainly agree that Americans are not evil in fact I spend much time there and my dear wife was educated in the US, wonderful people , I do not judge a culture by its government.

And my opinion on the wrongs of American foriegn policy do not in any way reduce the evils of terorists like Al-qaeda ...

inverted evil .. well no .. double sided evil if you will

By Blogger _H_, at May 07, 2006 9:10 pm  

Oh btw on your point of George always going on about freedom and democracy .. see how you do yourself .. check out This

its never wise to take a leaders words at face value

:o)

By Blogger _H_, at May 07, 2006 9:42 pm  

You're infuriating. The Iraq war was not illegal. It's utter tosh. You will find however that Saddam defied 4 UN resolutions. But let's not facts get in the way of a good old anti-american rant.

Calling George Bush a terrorist of the highest order is utter, lunacy. I see you are silent on Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and all his rheotoric.

Well at least you've got your eye on the ball, you're watching the real enemies. The Americans!

Tell me, where do you get these notions from I wonder? Do you read The Independent by any chance?

Your favourite authors are Jonathan Pilger, Robert Fisk, and to an extent Noam Chomsky, right?

By Blogger jonz, at May 08, 2006 12:23 am  

Personally I think it's criminal that people like you supported Saddam's Baathist regime, who brutually oppressed his people. And completely, morally, and intellecutally bankrupt, in my opinion.

By Blogger jonz, at May 08, 2006 12:26 am  

LOL . the war was illegal for it did not have UN security council authority , doubt me ? then watch the words come straight from the horses mouth Here (real player required) or if you don't have real player then try Here

still believe that the Iranian president wants Israel wiped off the map ?? That he denied the Holocaust ?? I am sure you do


do you speak Farsi ? I doubt you do so try reading the full translation of what the Iranian president said , Somehow I doubt you have come across the full translation it may surprise you
Here

You seem to dishing out plenty of rhetoric but very little fact , You questioned my sources earlier and I provided , you question my definition of terrorism so I show you that mine matches the dictionary , now you question the Illegal invasion of Iraq and I show you the opinion of the head of the United Nations in regard to the violations you quote above...

plenty of rhetoric , any evidence to bring to the debate , or are we dealing with a debate between opinion and fact ?

Btw I never said I supported the sick regime of Saddam , thats desperate , you cant attack what I say so you assume what I think

Keep following the war pimps my friend , they will lead you to the promise land I am sure

:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 12:44 am  

That's right! Al-Jazeera is lying! He never denied the holocaust or said Israel should be wiped off the map! It's all neo-con conspiracy! Amd the Jews did 9/11!

You're an embarassment to logic.

By Blogger jonz, at May 08, 2006 7:22 am  

Well it seems you have nothing but rheotric to provide. You have failed to answer a single question so again you attack what you assume not what I say..


oh well

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 1:23 pm  

Porcupinetaxi said: "It seems to me that the fact that we have a war going on is the reason you have the right to plug your opinions on the internet."

_H_ said: "What kind of weird psuedo logic is that ?"


I say, _H_, have you literally lost your mind? Do you not remember that Britain had been living under the iron fist of dictatorial rule by Afghanistan and Iraq for the past 7815 years before this war of liberation [or something like that]?

Jon Nugent, as was accurately pointed out in 2002, the best chance for democratic change in Iran was crushed by bellicose U.S. rhetoric. This is simply a matter of public record. Furthermore, the goal in Iran is not to bring good government (not everone in the world chooses to ignore the fact that the U.S. actively worked at removing good government there) but containment of China. I am, of course, referring to the quest for "the greatest material prize in history."

MechWarrior4Christ, thank you. That was truly funny.

As for the rest, yawn. I'm not made of time. I have seed trays to plant...

By Blogger DJEB, at May 08, 2006 3:06 pm  

it looks like jonz just about blew a gasket.

does jonz know about PNAC and has he/she been watching the news at all the past year? out of touch maybe? the chickenhawks don't have anything left to stand on. he needs to get with the new year. 2006 is the year liberals take the neo-cons to the dump where they belong.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 5:11 pm  

7815 years !! .... showing your age Djeb :-) hope the seeds are settling in nicely


Hype .. I doubt Jonz has ever heard of the PNAC all the more amazing considering that he is a Brit and we dont get daily fiction from fox news etc over here

evidence that the propaganda machine reaches far and wide it seems

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 6:47 pm  

have you read about the religious right? i did some research and found out that the reason the world is moving to right (left for those on the other side) is because of the push from the religious folk. i read and forgive me for not providing a link, the religious right in America has funded the effort to do the same thing in Europe. We have a push back here in America from the liberal Christians. It seems the religious right crafted a plan to take over the majority of America's churches and are exporting that same method to Europe. That is very dangerous.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 7:45 pm  

Yea I have been reading up on the effect of them over here . real scary . religion and politics should never mix . If there are any lessons to learn from Bush thats got to be high on the list

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 9:25 pm  

you would think people would learn from history. well if history was actually taught correctly in school, then maybe the average American might know more than the Disney version of history.

nope. we are doomed to repeat it. that is why i say the nazi comparisons are valid. if we cannot make the comparison until we have another nazi on our hands then we are not doing ourselves or the memory of the people any justice.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 9:49 pm  

Orwell really would be turning in his grave...

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 9:57 pm  

Once again George W. Bush wants to send our soldiers into harms way. This man doesn't care about the American people. We have already had two wars lead by this man, and we don't need, nor can we afford another war. It is obviously in our best interest to implement various economic sanctions against Iran to force them to comply with our demands. Read my blog at www.GTCHRONICLES.blogspot.com

By Blogger rfdraper3, at May 10, 2006 8:54 am  

You obviously have not learned the lessons of history, and those who fail to learn, repeat the mistakes of the past. The world is not a good, glorious place filled with lovely muslims and christians, it has much evil, and evil always wins against good natured, well-meaning people who are willing to "let live" and do nothing. Learn history, pay attention to your studies, and stop criticizing stuff you obviously failed to learn.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 12, 2006 3:57 am  

This is the lesson anonymous , the appeasers allowed Hitler to continue his reign of terror across the globe. We will not stand idle whilst the Neocons do the same thing..

Communication is a two way street my friend , there is much you can learn from us. Those that are willing to teach without listening do not really have much wisdom worthy of sustained analysis

Your patronizing tone based on your perception of my persona which your failing directly to assess is amusing but please do not assume you have the intelligence or the capacity to perceive the level of understanding or wisdom within my mind or that of my readers based on a 30 second look at a web site for such naivety would only make you look foolish, which ironically is exactly what you have just done

Why would you assume that your in any position to pass your wisdom on to me ? you simply sound like another appeaser, I can find hundreds of such people in the United States , they come here often

:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 12, 2006 4:26 am  

Sudan to Accept U.N. Peacekeepers (at last)

Sudan's government said Saturday that its peace accord with Darfur's main insurgent group allows it to welcome U.N. peacekeepers to the troubled region, as mediators worked to persuade the rest of the fractured rebel movement to join the process.





The peace agreement, reached Friday in Abuja with one branch of the Sudan Liberation Army after two years of sporadic negotiations, aims to end ethnic bloodshed that has killed at least 180,000 people in three years and left some 2 million displaced.

The suggestion that it could pave the way for a deployment of U.N. peacekeepers overturns previous rejections by Khartoum, which so far has allowed only African Union peacekeepers on the ground.

The underfunded African forces have largely been ineffective in stopping atrocities and re-establishing security, leaving tens of thousands of refugees in camps with little food or water.

Decades of low-level tribal clashes over land and water in Darfur, a vast region about the size of France, erupted into large-scale violence in early 2003 with rebels demanding regional autonomy. The government is accused of responding by unleashing Janjaweed militias upon civilians, a charge Sudan denies.

The peace deal calls for a cease-fire, disarmament of goverment-linked militias, the integration of thousands of rebel fighters into Sudan's armed forces and a protection force for civilians in the immediate aftermath of the war.

Article source (and continues) Here.

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 07, 2006 8:12 pm  

Ooops Anonymous thats ended up in the void . Feel free to comment again aslong as you comply with our Posting policy

:-)

By Blogger _H_, at May 07, 2006 8:18 pm  

Hooray for the void!

What's the score now? Something like wankers 0, void 120?

By Blogger DJEB, at May 08, 2006 3:08 pm  

Better late than never. It is pretty sad a celebrity can do more for a war torn region than say a President.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 4:59 pm  

LOL Djeb , there is no doubt the void is winning, the wankers just cant seem to stay on the field ....

Hype , Yes finally things are starting to move ... if only Sudan had a quarter of the worlds oil under the soil eh ......

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 6:18 pm  

'if only Sudan had a quarter of the worlds oil under the soil'

the sudanese would probably suffer the same fate if they did. how sad.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 7:48 pm  

Thats true , wasn't thinking ... No Oil means your at least safe from the 'shock and awe' tactics of the Whitehouse.

Was assuming Dafur would have been noticed quicker but at least these way they have been noticed for the right reasons , just way way way too late

By Blogger _H_, at May 08, 2006 9:28 pm  

America has always been slow to respond.

and slow to learn from past mistakes.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at May 08, 2006 10:08 pm