A car or truck bomb blew up Iraqi market.

[pnjsurferpoet]

So another big lie from American haters is put to rest. The deaths came from foreigners who comprise the only people who practice human sacrifice.

[Clandestine]

What are you spouting on about now?

[Dear Wendy]

I think Iranians were sent for suicide actions in iraq. Haven't heard what pnj is referring to though.

[pnjsurferpoet]

I think Iranians were sent for suicide actions in iraq.

You're right. They sent in 5,000. They infiltrated a crowd in Northern Iraq and shot at Marines.

The Iranians want a Shi'ite government in Iraq. And, with the help of Russia, will be operating a nuclear power plant in June.

[Clandestine]

More power to them. It's about time they entered the modern world.

[Dear Wendy]

Originally posted by Clandestine
More power to them. It's about time they entered the modern world.

:eek:

[Clandestine]

Whats troubling you now jacq, why should Israel be the only nation in the ME to have nuclear energy unless its own motives are more insidious than you wish to believe they are?

[Dear Wendy]

Re-read what pnj wrote, and then read your own reply.
Though I think it suits you better arguing over how vile Israel is.

[Clandestine]

I read what he wrote and my response concerned his point that the Iranians would have a working nuclear power plant in about a year. Its about time they had some modern infrastructure to bring them forward into modernity.

[pnjsurferpoet]

I don't think some Europeans realize how much has changed with the decision of the US to go into Iraq...even if it had to go alone and the revelation of how far supposed allies will go to undermine US and UN efforts.

Radical Muslim clerics who promote human sacrifice will NEVER be allowed to have a plant that could create dirty bombs with its nuclear waste water. NEVER.

[Clandestine]

And perhaps you should wake up and realise that true friends and allies do not simply bow down and lick one's bootheels. Those amongst our leaders whom you seem to worship are leading America down a path from which we will one day emerge completely isolated politically if reason does not regain a foothold in the country.

Unless you want to grow up in a world of unmitigated war and violence, which it appears you are ignorantly wishing for.

[pnjsurferpoet]

true friends and allies

France crossed the line by being an obstructionist and really playa hating the US.

For the first time, many Americans don't trust what some in Europe have become. It goes beyond a difference of opinion. Some in Europe seem to always be scheming against America while smiling in our faces.

In the next few weeks and months. Americans will hear a stream of news about the deals made in Iraq between Old Europe and Russia and Saddam. I wonder if Europe will hear anything about them. I belive the revelations will change America's trust of its allies forever.

[Man Of Kent]

Originally posted by Clandestine
I read what he wrote and my response concerned his point that the Iranians would have a working nuclear power plant in about a year. Its about time they had some modern infrastructure to bring them forward into modernity.

I agree with you on that point and I think we need to support them in their attempts, rather than hold them back. If anything will further promote hatred of "the west" it is that.

But I think Jacq was referring to you glossing over the reason for the thread, and the 5,000 (alledgedly anyway) suicide bombers, just so that you could put forward your anti-Israel agenda.

Your subsequent reply to her just confirmed it.

[Clandestine]

ANti-Israel agenda? How utterly simplistic of you MoK. I am anti-Zionist, true, however I have no qualms about the existence of the State of Israel. I only take issue with the right wing agenda which it is being lead by.

Nevertheless, given that pnj was singularly unclear as to what the point of his rant was when I posted, I considered my response to his Iranian comment to be keeping with the obscure train of thought in this thread..

[Dear Wendy]

Originally posted by Clandestine
ANti-Israel agenda? How utterly simplistic of you MoK. I am anti-Zionist, true, however I have no qualms about the existence of the State of Israel. I only take issue with the right wing agenda which it is being lead by.

Am I the only one to see a major contradiction there? Oh well, what do I know? I am just another mindless teen with no significance or knowledge concerning anything :flirt:

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by pnjsurferpoet

Radical Muslim clerics who promote human sacrifice will NEVER be allowed to have a plant that could create dirty bombs with its nuclear waste water. NEVER. but radical rightwing christians who are willing to send their young people to far off places to be sacrificed can have anything they want.

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by Clandestine
And perhaps you should wake up and realise that true friends and allies do not simply bow down and lick one's bootheels. Those amongst our leaders whom you seem to worship are leading America down a path from which we will one day emerge completely isolated politically if reason does not regain a foothold in the country.

Unless you want to grow up in a world of unmitigated war and violence, which it appears you are ignorantly wishing for.

Especially when those friends and allies are making lots and lots of money in violation of UN resolutions by doing business with Iraq.

Not to mention the UN making 500 million dollars a year to manage the oil for food program, a program that will now disappear along with the sanctions.

For all you like to discuss the motivations of the United States, Clandestine, what about the motivations of the United Nations, Russians, French, Germans, and Syrians?

[Man Of Kent]

Originally posted by Greenhat
For all you like to discuss the motivations of the United States, Clandestine, what about the motivations of the United Nations, Russians, French, Germans, and Syrians?

We went down that route a few weeks ago Greenie.

Apparently duplicity isn't a problem so long as you agree with the anti-war agenda.

BTW Good to see you back, unscathed.

[Clandestine]

Yes we did go down that route a while back and however much youd like to say that simply conducting business with a sovereign state is duplicitous, it isnt. No more so than our own (US) under the table cheap oil purchases from Iraq rubber stamped by Cheney.

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Chin112102/chin112102.html


excerpt:

Under Dick Cheney, Halliburton (via its subsidiaries Dresser-Rand and Ingersoll-Dresser Pump) has helped rebuild Iraq's oil infrastructure, and reportedly earned an additional $1 billion by illegally exporting oil through black-market channels

What is illegitimate is invading a country with the express purpose of overthrowing an uncooperative government where Washington decides its in our own geo-political and corporate interests to do so just because we can. All the while selling the warmongering to a gullible and worldly-ignorant public under a rolling littany of ever changing pretexts which were systematically debunked, and which are even now proving to to have been substanceless.

What i find amusing is the constant buck passing practiced by the right wing warmongers who are willfully blind to our own roster of hypocrisy whilst being ever so ready to pontificate of the wrongs of other governments as if that somehow excuses our own duplicity. Fact is, Washington doesnt spend billions in the hopes of seeing happy Iraqi faces. This war was fought so that a new puppet regime could be insinuated into the ME to give us a base for economic, geo-political and strategic military control.

The backlash of 9/11 resulted itself in part from that very national and political culture of refusing to face up to the ills our own foreign policy behaviour have exacerbated if not given rise to in the first place. Such is the myopia of empire obviously.

[Man Of Kent]

Originally posted by Clandestine
Yes we did go down that route a while back and however much youd like to say that simply conducting business with a sovereign state is duplicitous, it isnt.

Indeed it isn't. The duplicity comes when you then claim to be acting in peace when you oppose the overthrowing of said Govt, becuase you know that your contracts will be under threat and your illegal activities will come to light. When you claim to be acting in the interests of the citizens of said country, even though your actions ensure that they are kept oppressed and that they don't get the food which they are supposed to under the UN "Oil for Fodd" programme. It is when those contracts are illegal under international laws, breaking UN sanctions and you then accuse another nation of acting illegally.

If it was a "simple case of business", Clandestine, no-one would say a word.

What is illegitimate is invading a country with the express purpose of overthrowing an uncooperative government where Washington decides its in our own geo-political and corporate interests to do so just because we can. All the while selling the warmongering to a gullible and worldly-ignorant public under a rolling littany of ever changing pretexts which were systematically debunked, and which are even now proving to to have been substanceless.

Is it illegitimate to tell your public that you are invading for one reason, when in fact you are doing it for another reason?

There's me thinking that was just immoral. I didn't know there was a lasw against it...

What i find amusing is the constant buck passing practiced by the right wing warmongers who are willfully blind to our own roster of hypocrisy whilst being ever so ready to pontificate of the wrongs of other governments as if that somehow excuses our own duplicity.

What I find amusing is that you point out the duplicity of the USA but remain blind to the hypocrisy of those you support. Or at least you attempt to divert attention from it by trying to spin the discussion towards the USA.

Fact is, Washington doesnt spend billions in the hopes of seeing happy Iraqi faces. This war was fought so that a new puppet regime could be insinuated into the ME to give us a base for economic, geo-political and strategic military control.

Fact is that France, Russia etc didn't want a war because they didn't want people to find out about the illegal activities - not because they wanted to save Iraq but becuase they wanted to save face.

[Clandestine]

Obviously you didnt read the article i linked above or youd see that US companies were also taking every advantage of the black market with the rubber stamp of Cheney himself. The only difference between the European interests and the US then is that the EU countries in question sought to strangel Saddam by other means than outright invasion and unilateral dictate of how Iraq will be run, by whom, and whom will benefit.

I truly am surprised that you can so warmly accept the hegemony that the US wants and is demonstrably performing whilst claiming to be opposed to Bush and his doctrine.

It is just this sort of "sweep it under the carpet and cheer for the outward appearances" attitude that prompts me to continue pointing out the much more insidious agendas being pursued by Washington. Especially since the media chooses to whitewash it to the public as well.

As the old saying goes, a prophet is not without honour save but in his own country... How true that is in the current atmosphere of unquestioning acquiescence to the militant posture of Bush and his cronies.

If Washington werent leading the charge, I wouldnt be critiquing them as vociferously as I am. Fact is they are the principal protagonists therefore I am well within my civic rights and duties to raise my voice against it and expose it for what it truly is.

[Aladdin]

Sorry to go back to the original topic at this stage, but would pnj care to back up this claim of a car bomb with some links? But not from the NY Post please.

I see that from the "I've seen the light and don't want this war anymore" change of mind you announced a while ago you've gone back to the "Bloody America-hating lying leftists!" position. Different pnj, perhaps?

[Clandestine]

Didnt take long upon returning to note that U-turn did it Al? ;)

[Greenhat]

Clandestine,

Maybe you should reread your own article. "Reportedly" is a media buzzword for "someone told us, but we have no idea if the source is valid, so we want to avoid getting sued". Or haven't you learned that?

Btw,

I'll assume that PnJ is talking about the market explosion in Baghdad that the Iraqis claimed was a cruise missile missing its target.

The blast damage, etc. don't match up with any aerial delivered munitions. Nor does it seem likely that it was a car bomb. No crater. What was most likely based on the damage shown and the pattern of the blast, damage to the roofing, etc. was an SA2 or SA6 returning to Earth after being fired unguided.

Ground to air missiles have very small explosive charges, and that matches very well with the damage at the site. If it was a car bomb, it was a fairly small one... and that still fails to explain the hole in the market's roofing (although that might have already existed).

You can watch the footage shown on the BBC and see all of this.

[Clandestine]

"Reported" is also a journalistic device employed equally by the Washington spin artists whose half truths you seem ready to believe and defend without any question, Greeny. Hardly surprising since its fairly common practice for the Pentagon, the Military and the MIC to be economical with the truth at the best of times and in many cases completely duplicitous.

Wouldnt serve the elitest interests and the massively pumped budgets to let the public know what our government is really up to around the globe.

Deny that Cheney and his corporate cohorts were party to the same backroom dealings of which you so easily lambast the French, Germans, Syrians, Jordanians, Russians, (et al) all you like, it does not change the fact that it went on. Similarly your long running denials of controlling Iraq's oil production being a leading determinant in the push of the hawks to take the military route are progressively appearing to have been either willful ignorance or deliberate falsehood.

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by Clandestine
"Reported" is also a journalistic device employed equally by the Washington spin artists whose half truths you seem ready to believe and defend without any question, Greeny. Hardly surprising since its fairly common practice for the Pentagon, the Military and the MIC to be economical with the truth at the best of times and in many cases completely duplicitous.

Wouldnt serve the elitest interests and the massively pumped budgets to let the public know what our government is really up to around the globe.

Deny that Cheney and his corporate cohorts were party to the same backroom dealings of which you so easily lambast the French, Germans, Syrians, Jordanians, Russians, (et al) all you like, it does not change the fact that it went on. Similarly your long running denials of controlling Iraq's oil production being a leading determinant in the push of the hawks to take the military route are progressively appearing to have been either willful ignorance or deliberate falsehood.

Let me guess, Clandestine. As the Americans rolled towards Baghdad, you believed the carpings of the Iraqi Information Minister, didn't you?

Still don't get it, do you? And you never will. Too busy believing your conspiracy theories.

Oh, by the way, one bit of information you may have missed. An Iraqi scientist has admitted that Iraq was responsible for the Anthrax attacks post 9/11. But then again, you and company insisted there were no links between Iraq and terrorists. I guess Abu Abbas was just getting a tan there in Iraq. :rolleyes:

[Clandestine]

Greeny you truly will believe anything so long as it washes any culpability from the Bush admins hands wont you? :rolleyes:

Given the many reports coming from this admin that have so far turned up false or sheer fabrication only you with your military conditioning to serve without question would believe such reports without substantial verification. Fact is the Anthrax used in those attacks was not long after the investigation began confirmed to be from US labs. And why would the target have been Daschle and other liberal congressmen if it was Iraqi inspired eh? Not long ago you and your hawkish ilk were decrying such men as enablers of Saddam.

Best you go back and check your consistency. Its as lame as it ever was.

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by Clandestine

Given the many reports coming from this admin that have so far turned up false or sheer fabrication only you with your military conditioning to serve without question would believe such reports without substantial verification. Fact is the Anthrax used in those attacks was not long after the investigation began confirmed to be from US labs. And why would the target have been Daschle and other liberal congressmen if it was Iraqi inspired eh? Not long ago you and your hawkish ilk were decrying such men as enablers of Saddam.

Aren't you the one that was pointing out that the US Government provided Anthrax cultures to Iraq?

Btw, this isn't a claim of the Administration. It's a claim of a single scientist, made to non-US Intelligence sources. Eventually, you'll get the word...

[Clandestine]

Yes I did point out that fact Greeny. Two companies that I know of specifically in this regard which were cited for having infiringed the prohibitions against trading in WMDs and their precursors were The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry in N.C. and The American Type Culture Collection which itself made at least 70 shipments of bacillus anthracis.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52241-2002Dec29?language=printer

Your denials are humurous but hardly surprising given the penchant of the military to try to cover up anything that might demonstrate the embarrassing hypocrisy of our own MIC proliferations to questionable agents or governments around the world.

[Greenhat]

What's more humorous is the spin you will continue to put on events.

Didn't you claim that there were no links between Iraq and terrorism?

[Clandestine]

The CIA actually confirmed that fact Greeny. Guess you really are either so programmed to believe what Rumsfeld wants to be the truth (without any credible evidence to date) or else you are simply the product of a Pentagon which has a roster of lies and coverups spanning generations.

The spin is entirely you own.

[Greenhat]

Abu Abbas, Clandestine.

[Clandestine]

Yes, certainly a welcome capture from the point of view of the Italian government who would like to get their hands on the guy. Neverthless no more an indisputible link for Bush and co than Ansar Al Islam has proven to be.

Face it greeny, try as they might they can't make any direct connection between the regime and the odd terrorist or two who might have hidden out or passed through Baghdad. Keep trying though, it provides endless amusement for the international community.

[Greenhat]

Clandestine,

They could find Bin Laden there and you wouldn't admit to a link to terrorism, any more than you will admit that Yassar Arafat is a terrorist, a murderer and a thug.

Were you making money from some of the deals going on with Iraq?

[Clandestine]

By that token I suppose any and all terrorists residing in the US including those that committed 9/11 must be tied to Washington? Thats where your presumptuous reasoning leads so why the refusal to admit the need for a proper and thorough investigation into what Bush and co really knew and when they knew it?

As for Bin Laden, the only reason that Saddam became the urgent target of the moment is precisely because Bush and co havent found Bin Laden and were in desperate need of another diversion to keep the public from asking too many questions.

Have i profited? No sorry, I don't consider any country of the Middle East a safe investment.

[Greenhat]

You keep pretending, Clandestine.

Any idea what Abu Abbas was up to over the last few years? Ask the Israelis. It wasn't like he was sitting on his ass.

And there is a slight difference between hiding in a regime like Iraq was and hiding in a western democracy. Especially a regime that modelled its security forces after the Stasi.

[Clandestine]

Especially a regime that modelled its security forces after the Stasi

An apt critique of Bush's authoritarian control aparatus, the DHD.

As for pretending, there is no pretense on my end, that is the accomplished role of the Pentagon who's doctine of lies you practice with a flourish.

Just goes to show how far the Right wing coup has dominated the minds of its footsoldiers and its sheeple, that public scrutiny should be deemed no more than pretense or more disturbing, "treason".

And you claim to be safeguarding the liberty and justice upon which our nation was founded. What a supreme joke!

[Greenhat]

You don't know anything about the Stasi, do you?