American beheaded in Iraq...

[Deedlit]

[quote name='Falkon']Look at Japan for example. They have less murders per year than we do here in the US, and they MAKE all of the damn video games. [/quote]
[color=#009966]True, but they also have a very high rate of teenage suicides.[/color]

[quote name='the_fizz][font=Comic Sans MS][size=3][color=royalblue]I mean I know this stuff happens, but WHY do they have to show it over and over and over.[/color][/size'][/font][/quote]
[color=#009966]They're showing all of this to the public because it is the very nature of the media to reveal any and every scandal they can. Not only that, but it's election year. The democrats are trying to show everyone what has happened ever since Bush came in to office. It's only going to get worse.[/color]

[Adora]

[quote] the point of them killing the guy, was because he was american, and because they don't like how americans live. [/quote]
This, my dear poster, is a perfect example of what I described as "Cultural Ignorance" on the Western side of this invasion.

*sighs and shakes her head* So much to learn... Everyone, do yourselves a favour, go read [i]anything[/i] by Bernard Lewis. Please? For the sake of your brains.

[quote name='Boba Fett']First off, the complete lack of emotional response to such a barbaric act astounds me. A twenty-six year old man was slaughtered like a pig in front of the whole world, and his corpse dumped near a bridge. [/quote]
I haven't seen the video, so I can't comment. I've seen leading up to the moment, and I can't begin to imagine what's going through the mans head. That doesn't mean I should react like a 6 year old emotion-wise.

However, look at it from this perspective. You are thinking with the exact same mentality as the Palestinian boys who have seen 10 friends die by the time they are 10, and want their own revenge on their killers. And we label those people 'terrorists'.

[quote]We toppled their oppressive government,[/quote]
Oppressive for some, anyway. As I pointed out, I'd hate to be an Iraqi woman at present. If there was one thing Saddam was good for, it was keeping the religious fundamentalists under the gun.

[quote]have rebuilt ninety percent of their nation out of our own pocket,[/quote]
Honey, the gas pipelines, so belovedly protected when the country was first invaded, are barely pumping out a fraction of what the once did. A lot of the country is still without power, and the incompetence of the administrators to deal with a culture still heavily influenced by socialism is laughable.

[quote]are policing their nation free of charge[/quote]
It's not "policing" when it is the military. That is "Military Occupation". When a foreign police force is actually in the country (such as Australia's force in the Solomons) or it is a UN Police force, THEN it is policing.

[quote]and we're helping them set up a government.[/quote]
Filled to bursting with ex-members of the previous "government" and pathetic power politics (Chalabi barely scraped in. Female members have been terrorised and attacked. Nuff said).

[quote]They'll be crushed in time, and do not have the support of the people.[/quote]
The longer you stay there, the more support they will gather.

[quote]This isn't how war is fought. This is terrorism directed at innocent civilians. These men are disgracing themselves, their religion, and every moral standard every civilized society.[/QUOTE]
I still can't figure out whether you're talking about US soldiers or the other side of the battles here. Are US soldiers who shoot up people in cars trying to get back to their home disgracing Christianity? Watch your generalisations here...

[Boba Fett]

[quote name='Adora']However, look at it from this perspective. You are thinking with the exact same mentality as the Palestinian boys who have seen 10 friends die by the time they are 10, and want their own revenge on their killers. And we label those people 'terrorists'.[/quote]

[color=green]This situation is caused by Arafat and his terrorist pals, who've rejected any peace deals given to them. At one point, Israel was prepared to submit to all of the Palestinians demands and give them ninety-three percent of the land they demanded. When this deal was offered, the PLO refused to accept it.

These people somehow think that blowing up innocent Israeli civilians will solve their problems. I have very little sympathy for them, and I think they certainly meet the definition of terrorists.

[URL=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=terrorist]Terrorist - One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism.[/URL]

[URL=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=terrorism]Terrorism - 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.[/URL]

[/color]

[quote name='Adora']Oppressive for some, anyway. As I pointed out, I'd hate to be an Iraqi woman at present. If there was one thing Saddam was good for, it was keeping the religious fundamentalists under the gun.[/quote]

[color=green]I'd think that women are much better off in Iraq today, with regard to their rights and freedoms, than they were under Saddam. More women are now involved in government, commerce and other public roles than under Saddam.

I do agree with you about Saddam's success with religious fundamentalists. Sometimes it seems like the only way to control the Mullahs is through brute force.[/color]

[quote name='Adora']Honey, the gas pipelines, so belovedly protected when the country was first invaded, are barely pumping out a fraction of what the once did. A lot of the country is still without power, and the incompetence of the administrators to deal with a culture still heavily influenced by socialism is laughable.[/quote]

[color=green]I'm not sure about gas pipelines, but the oil pipelines in Iraq, after initially being reduced in output during and shortly after the war, are now pumping out more oil than under Saddam. Legally too, I might add.

It's true that power is a major issue over there, and should have been dealt with by now, but rebuilding a nation isn?t easy with terrorists sabotaging our efforts.
I'm sure that Bremer and his staff are doing their very best to deal with post-socialist Iraqi society. Perhaps you think you could do better?[/color]

[quote name='Adora']It's not "policing" when it is the military. That is "Military Occupation". When a foreign police force is actually in the country (such as Australia's force in the Solomons) or it is a UN Police force, THEN it is policing.[/quote]

[color=green] [URL=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=policing]Police - A body of persons making up such a department, trained in methods of law enforcement and crime prevention and detection and authorized to maintain the peace, safety, and order of the community. [/URL]

The Iraqi Police Force we trained, pay and support fits this definition. Since we support this organization monetarily and back it up militarily, I'd say we're policing their nation.[/color]

[quote name='Adora']Filled to bursting with ex-members of the previous "government" and pathetic power politics (Chalabi barely scraped in. Female members have been terrorised and attacked. Nuff said).[/quote]

[color=green]This group is merely writing a Constitution and "holding down the fort" until the UN and the US can set up a nationwide election.

How are attacks on these people by terrorists relevant?[/color]

[quote name='Adora']The longer you stay there, the more support they will gather.[/quote]

[color=green]If we overstay our welcome, this could happen.

I think that as long as there are terrorists in Iraq, we'll be welcome there as protectors of the Iraqi people.[/color]

[quote name='Adora']I still can't figure out whether you're talking about US soldiers or the other side of the battles here. Are US soldiers who shoot up people in cars trying to get back to their home disgracing Christianity? Watch your generalisations here...[/quote]

[color=green]Based on what I'd said earlier, I thought it'd be pretty obvious I was talking about terrorists. Sorry for the confusion.

As for US soldiers shooting civilians, it's not a common occurrence and is assuredly accidental. Unlike terrorist IEDs that kill mostly innocent Iraqi bystanders.[/color]

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[quote=SPC Lincoln Crisler US Army]I don't know if soldiers would rape or kill if they
wanted to; we're the most powerful army on the planet,
and therefore we're always in the spotlight. That
kinda puts us in the position of having to be nice
because our actions are always up for inspection by
other nations and the taxpaying public.

I haven't talked to any guys who really really wanna
go kill and rape; hell I just want to trick them into
eating pork rinds and that's not really all that bad!

They teach us to be nice to POW's because if we're
nice, hopefully Americans won't lose their heads and
also because it makes the enemy more likely to
surrender if they know we're not going to throw them
to the lions. That's why we spend money on feeding
them and stuff; as much as I complain about it, I
understand why.[/quote]

[color=darkviolet]As you can tell that's from my husband about the whole military ordeal. It's the best I could do since he doesn't usually talk about it.

Yes there are some soldiers who probably want to go pillage and burn, but most of them are aware that their actions are being veiwed by everyone on this blue marble we call Earth. Just like the middle east a few bad apples ruin the thing for everyone else.

As for Boba's take on war tactics. The way these guys over there are playing is guerilla warfare. It's not like the good 'ol days when grampa would go through basic and learn how to fire at enemy soldiers who were playing the same game he was. This is more like Vietnam when they attatched mines to kids and then the kids threw themselves at the soldiers (my friend's father had that happen to a buddy of his) So Welcome to modern day warfare 21 century style.

Our soldiers and (I assume) the other coalition troops are taught the basics on how to handle POWs and some of the attacks depending on their job in this place. Hopefully they're also taught that if someone in your higher chain of command asks you to do something question him/her or go higher.

As for the lack of sympathy-I'm tired of this war and i want it to be over. When I lived in Ft. Hood the local news and the Post News would always say something about the KIAs and such every day and week. After the first few weeks the death kind of numbs you. Yes, this man was a civilian and an innocent by-stander, but what the hell was he doing in a war-zone in the first place if he was a civilian. Civilians have no place in war zones when they go voluntarily (I'm not talking about the Iraqi's because they were living in Iraq and had no say about what was going to happen in their neighborhood) So yes his death is tradgic, but if he hadn't gone over there it could have been avoided.

I'm sorry if any comments may have sounded cold hearted or just plain weird, but sometimes that's how it goes.[/color]

[Japan]

[QUOTE=ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet]
Our soldiers and (I assume) the other coalition troops are taught the basics on how to handle POWs and some of the attacks depending on their job in this place. Hopefully they're also taught that if someone in your higher chain of command asks you to do something question him/her or go higher. [/color][/QUOTE]


For a friend of mine, who is a soldier for Iraq, was put in a special type of training to make him...and others in his group to hate the Iraqi soldiers. You want to know what that was?!?!?!! I'll tell you. His commanding officers made him and the other guys watch that whole video of Nick Berg screaming in pain. Nick's head getting cut, and finally pulled away from his body. All from a dull knife!!

These guys are just 18 or 19 years old! After that video, my friend was not the same as he usually was. He was way different. He was crying at first, but his attitude turned cold....stone cold.

About this whole beheading thing...I am angry and sad. I want war no more. I want war to go away. This isn't fighting in a war. This is a massacre!

Though....I know that we can't pull out from Iraq now, no matter how much I want the war to disappear. If we pulled away from Iraq now, there would be a lot more bloodshed.

[Adora]

[quote name='Boba Fett']This situation is caused by Arafat and his terrorist pals, who've rejected any peace deals given to them.[/quote]
Y'know, it's always interesting the correlation between political moves that decrease the funding going out of Saudi Arabia to certain organisations, and the Palestinians certain bouts of desire to engage in "Peace Deals". Quite interesting indeed...

[quote]I'd think that women are much better off in Iraq today, with regard to their rights and freedoms, than they were under Saddam. More women are now involved in government, commerce and other public roles than under Saddam.[/quote]
Then maybe you should actually read the reports I posted, instead of just saying what you "think".

[quote]Sometimes it seems like the only way to control the Mullahs is through brute force.[/quote]
Or lining their pockets.

[quote]I'm not sure about gas pipelines, but the oil pipelines in Iraq, after initially being reduced in output during and shortly after the war, are now pumping out more oil than under Saddam. Legally too, I might add.[/quote]
Hardly. Do some research.

[quote]but rebuilding a nation isn?t easy with terrorists sabotaging our efforts.[/quote]
And incompetent, culturally ignorant ex-Economist administrators in charge.

[quote]I'm sure that Bremer and his staff are doing their very best to deal with post-socialist Iraqi society. Perhaps you think you could do better?[/quote]
Since I obviously know more about the damn culture they're dealing with than they do, I have no doubt about that.

[quote]The Iraqi Police Force we trained, pay and support fits this definition. Since we support this organization monetarily and back it up militarily, I'd say we're policing their nation.[/quote]
No they are trying to police their nation. You are simply paying for it. And I'd hardly call a few months being shown how to shoot a weapon properly actual training in policing.

[quote]This group is merely writing a Constitution and "holding down the fort" until the UN and the US can set up a nationwide election.[/quote]
If the UN dares to put its head into this mess again. And that will be long in coming.

[quote]How are attacks on these people by terrorists relevant?[/quote]
Maybe you should read Bush Snr's quote again.

[quote]If we overstay our welcome, this could happen.[/quote]
Oh, I think invading a country kind of did that already.

[quote]I think that as long as there are terrorists in Iraq, we'll be welcome there as protectors of the Iraqi people.[/quote]
There are terrorists in Iraq? Really? Where? I thought they were all poor little Diasporic Saudi's living in the West who flew planes into buildings, or did I miss the secret document where it said they finally found the Weapons of Mass Deception?

[quote]Based on what I'd said earlier, I thought it'd be pretty obvious I was talking about terrorists. Sorry for the confusion.[/quote]
I thought the sarcasm would have been obvious.

[quote]As for US soldiers shooting civilians, it's not a common occurrence and is assuredly accidental.[/quote]
If overworked troops high on IPU-only-knows-what freaked out because of the dogma they're being fed to keep them there makes it "accidental" by your books, fine. I say, get a damned real police force in there, and there will be less of these *ahem* "Accidents".

[quote]Unlike terrorist IEDs that kill mostly innocent Iraqi bystanders.[/QUOTE]
So? If you read what I said, they write them off as Apostates. It doesn't matter how many of their own they kill. But by keeping big fat targets hyped-up in the middle of said environment, you're certainly not "protecting" anyone.

[Guess?]

I think we deserved it. I'm not saying that the man deserved to die, but they were using him as an example. They want us out of their country and will continue to kill civilians until we're out. We invaded their country, took out the head honchos, and killed so many of its citizens. We did our job, so why the hell are we still there?!? We lose troops everyday because Bush is an idiot and doesn't seem to want an end to the war. He says he does but if he really did want the fighting to end, he would set up a government and leave.

Thats the only reason we should be there. If we remove a form of crap government, we have to set up a new one thats better. I thought we already set up a government and that means we should be out. I'm starting to belive this war was started so Bush could feel importent. We should pull out and level the whole country with bombs.

[Falkon]

[QUOTE=Guess?]I think we deserved it. I'm not saying that the man deserved to die, but they were using him as an example. They want us out of their country and will continue to kill civilians until we're out. We invaded their country, took out the head honchos, and killed so many of its citizens. We did our job, so why the hell are we still there?!? We lose troops everyday because Bush is an idiot and doesn't seem to want an end to the war. He says he does but if he really did want the fighting to end, he would set up a government and leave.

Thats the only reason we should be there. If we remove a form of crap government, we have to set up a new one thats better. I thought we already set up a government and that means we should be out. I'm starting to belive this war was started so Bush could feel importent. We should pull out and level the whole country with bombs.[/QUOTE]

exactly. I agree with every part of that - the last sentence. Bush wants to be the big "heeero". He wants to think he is making a f-ing difference in the world, which, as we all can see he is...but its about as effective as trying to combat heartburn with battery acid.
oh right so uh i guess saddam just, what, made the "weapons of mass destruction" dissapear? Bush lies and looks for excuses o attack other people that he doesnt like. Like most Americans i am sure he is prejudiced against muslims and people of that nature.

What the whole world needs to do is deal with its' own conflicts inside its' own borders. America, for example, needs to get more people off the street and into homes they can appreciate. America is so filled with hate and remorse that we cant spare hardly any money to the starving people on the street. If Bush wants to help us then why doesnt he provide all the jobs he has promised? or education for the unfortunate? or food for the hungry?

Bush must not run this country again.

[Monkey_Orange]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][QUOTE=Falkon]What the whole world needs to do is deal with its' own conflicts inside its' own borders.
[/QUOTE]

Be careful what you say. It's not so simple to just say 'Okay, I'm done playing here so now I'm gonna take all my troops and go home.' Yes, it's HORRIBLE that Bush invaded those countries in the Middle East for whatever the reasons.

BUT, these are countries we're talking about AND millions of lives. You CANNOT go into Afghanistan and Iraq, ******* them up, and just leave like that! It's irresponsible.

For those of us who are US [or Western] born, we are SO used to the confortable life we live right now. We take for granted all the things we have around us. If something bothers us, our ears go deaf and we turn a 'blind eye.' Otherwise we whine and complian about how this country sucks. We should be more grateful for living in this country. And if us Westerners shake our head at that, than it just shows us how much we don't understand what it's like on the outside--the poverty, the suffering. Seriously, you don't know until you live it, or know others who live it.

So all I'm trying to say is that this is a problem the US started, and therefore they MUST finish it. They are the ones who did this, so they can't just cop out and leave. It's ********** irresponsible. Two wrongs do NOT make a right. And don't just say that it's not your business 'cause you don't live there. Ignorance & cowardice seriously irks me! Finish what you started, take responsibility, be compassionate, and be humble for what you have.

[QUOTE]America, for example, needs to get more people off the street and into homes they can appreciate. America is so filled with hate and remorse that we cant spare hardly any money to the starving people on the street. If Bush wants to help us then why doesnt he provide all the jobs he has promised? or education for the unfortunate? or food for the hungry?[/QUOTE]

Simple. He's a Republican. As a Republican, their motto is to limit Government Spending. Well guess what? If you limit government spending, then there will be NO welfare for starving people, NO funding for training for those who are unemployed, NO unemployment, NO additional fund for public school education, NO funding for medicaid/medicare...and the list goes on.

What the heck do you expect? In order to get services, you gotta spend. And how does the spending work? TAXES!!! I hate it when poeple are like "Oh, we want all these services for the people of our country, and ourselves. BUT we don't want to pay taxes. Let's vote for Bush. He will cut our taxes." WRONG. Benifits do not rain from the sky. If you cut taxes, you cut those benifits...And once again, the people of America complains. Oh Pleeeease. You get who you voted for, darnit. Next time do MORE research and ask yourself whether or not Government Spending is as 'bad' and 'dirty' as most Americans think it is. Again, ignorance.

[QUOTE]Bush must not run this country again [/QUOTE]

Therefore, to everyone: If you are 18 and over, then get off you ********** lazy a** and go VOTE!!! I missed out on the 2000 election because I was like "Whatever. I trust this country to make the right decisions." WRONG. And yes, I regret it. Be grateful that you have the right to vote [unlike many other countries]. I can't stand it anymore and I will definitely be filling out my ballot forms this November!

So yes, APATHY is not a desirable trait to possess at this time. Again, you get what you voted for. AND you can't always have both ways! I swear, we Americans spoiled, ungrateful, and ignorant little brats!

I love living in the US . Life is easy and there are so many opportunities to do great things. If your life sucks, at least in the US you can DO something about it--unless you're one of those lazy/spoiled people I mentioned before who just sits on his/her lazy a** and does nothing but complain.

The US is a land of options ^^ And there are good people too! I will acknowledge those people and NOT dismiss the entire American popluation. But still, as much as I love the US [and respect it], the vast majority of Americans are still: arrogant, lazy, ingorant, and ungrateful. AND in DENIAL about their very own lives!!!

So be humble for what you have, and understanding for what you don't. The world outside the US is messed up in some way, shape, or form. It's tough to realize that seriously, as we continue to live inside our safety bubble known as the "USA". Safe? Is it really? The only plague in our society, is us--the people.

Therefore, we should strive to be better than that *^^* Only then will we be truly content with our lives. [/COLOR]

[Falkon]

good points :P
but i just happened across this...take a look:

[QUOTE]Statyk
Member
*
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In a state of mind
Posts: 80




------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's something I just read on another message board.





Sources for all my facts can be found at the bottom, they are labeled according to subject.

That having been said...

Many of you might remember that I started a thread on the day the video was released noting how "convenient" it was that the tape had come out, just as the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal was in full swing. Not only did this take the abuse scandal off of headlines, but it swayed public opinion back against "those ******* Iraqis".

Evidence

1) Most people replied by asserting that the execution occured as retribution to the abuse photos that had surfaced, but you have to ask yourself - do these terrorists, who are clearly capable of brainwashing people to the point where they are willing to kill and be killed for their beliefs, really have no concept of political tact? Here they are, the whole world screaming at the US for hypocrisy and injustice over these pictures, and they perform and publish this execution right in the heat of the scandal. In other words, these masters of brainwashing and spin and deception release a video of a despicable act just as the US, their sworn enemy, is being globally grilled. Does this make sense to you?

2) Second, I wonder what the standard issue chair is at Abu Ghraib prison?




*cough*

3) Is it not interesting that the wall colour at Abu Ghraib prison is identical to that of the video?

4) Is it not also interesting that Berg is wearing the same orange jumpsuit worn by prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison? Sure, you say, perhaps he was kidnapped directly from the prison (as stupid as this sounds, anyway) - but then can you please explain (7)?

5) Is it also not interesting that the timecodes in the video jump back and forth?

6) Is it also not interesting that Berg did not exhibit any of the convulsions that typically accompany decapitation? [url]http://www.ahsc.arizona.edu/uac/iacuc/rodents/avma.htm[/url] I am suggesting here that Berg was already dead when the decapitation occured (which accounts for 5). Before you go calling me crazy, please review the evidence; why did he not exhibit the convulsions that go hand in hand with decapitation (especially such an extended one)?

7) Is it not curious that the US denies contact with Berg, and yet his friends and family insist that he told them he was being held by the US? Huh? Why?

8) Another tape oddity - the men SPEAK RUSSIAN for several seconds. Not only that, but they speak Arabic with Russian accents. That's right, in the final seconds of the tape, one of the men speaks in Russian. Those here who understand russian (and have the stomach to view that final seconds of the video) can verify this. Those who speak Arabic will be able to verify that these men speak Arabic in Russian accents.

9) Finally (the physical evidence that will convince you in case you already aren't)...
You will notice, in watching the video, that 6 times, a gold ring flashes on the hand of the executioner. What is the problem? Islam completely and utterly forbids men to wear gold rings. This fanatical muslim, willing to kill in a gutwrenching manner, and be killed for his beliefs, is violating one of the clear prohibitions of his religion? Really? DOES THIS MAKE SENSE TO YOU?

edit:
Two more points:

10) Nick Berg understands Arabic, but sits calmy while statement is read, waiting to be killed. Hmm?

11) One of the executioners is wearing Air Jordans. WHAT?

edit 2:

12) The "terrorists" signed the video, yet they wear hoods and masks. Why?

13) The "terrorists" have lily white hands.

14) The video time is in US Military English. What the hell?

Conclusion
As many has suspected, but have not had the time to build a solid case for, the execution of Nick Berg was performed by coalition interests (most likely independent Russian mercenaries) in order to dwarf the abuse pictures and sway public opinion back against the Iraqis and in support of the war by taking advantage of the emotional reaction we all experience when hearing of such an despicable act. The poor production quality (all the "curiosities" I have pointed out) of this video can be attributed to the haste in which it was made after the order was given to distract the public from the abuse scandal, and is in line with my conclusion.

Again, before you attack my conclusion, attack my evidence. No matter how crazy you think this sounds, examine the evidence objectively and please try to deny a single thing I have said. If you cannot deny my evidence, you logically cannot deny my conclusion. Make your replies free of subjective opinions and ad hominem attacks or I will not reply to them.


Sources:

Chair, wall, timecode, and :
[url]http://www.libertyforum.org/showfla...=-1#Post1469025[/url]
[url]http://www.news24houston.com/conten...D=28906&SecID=2[/url]

Berg was in US custody:
[url]http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast...ends/index.html[/url]
(you'll have to copy & paste this one since genmay blocks cnn links as you know)

Gold rings forbidden by Islam:
[url]http://www.khilafah.com/home/catego...ID=9529&TagID=2[/url]
[url]http://www.google.com/search?q=gold...=utf-8&oe=utf-8[/url]
[/QUOTE]

[Boba Fett]

[b]Research[/b]:

[quote]December 13, 2003 -- The activist group Human Rights Watch has claimed that "hundreds of civilian deaths" in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq "could have been prevented" if only America hadn't used cluster munitions or tried to "decapitate" the Iraqi leadership using intercepts of satellite phone calls. This could be true. After all, war is an inherently messy thing - a kingdom of difficult, often deadly choices.
But keep these facts in mind: Overall civilian casualties during the war were amazingly low. (Even Kenneth Roth, director of Human Rights Watch concedes - grudgingly - that "Coalition forces generally tried to avoid killing Iraqis who weren't taking part in combat.") Physical destruction in Baghdad and other Iraqi cities was extremely limited.

So fair-minded folk should assess this claim skeptically.

Especially given the group's obvious - and sometimes grotesque - anti-American bias in the context of Iraq.

After all, before the war HRW predicted a massive "humanitarian disaster" if America tried to topple Saddam Hussein, though it claimed to take no position on the imminent invasion.

And during the war it could barely rouse itself to condemn the Iraqi forces' practice of wearing civilian clothes - an open-and-shut, abundantly documented, large-scale violation of one of the core laws of war that put civilians at grave risk.

Instead, HRW issued press release after press release condemning or carping at Coalition forces - often based on nothing more than supposition.

For instance, in an April 16 press release HRW Director Roth wrote of the U.S. Army "indiscriminately batter[ing] civilian neighborhoods with cluster munitions," even though he had no evidence whatsoever of any kind of "indiscriminate" behavior (his only evidence was a newspaper photograph of a single bomblet in a Baghdad building). Indeed, HRW's researchers didn't even arrive in Iraq until April 29.

Nor does it encourage faith in Human Rights Watch's supposed objectivity that one of its key sources for an October report on post-war civilian deaths in Baghdad caused by U.S. forces was Nermin al Mufti, a longtime Ba'athist activist and propagandist for the Saddam regime.

Human Rights Watch (or at least its predecessor organizations like Helsinki Watch and Africa Watch) was once a responsible group that tried to be objective despite the left-wing views of its staff and did some good work in dark places that knew little liberty.

Now its claims simply can't be trusted.[/quote]

[color=green]The "Human Rights Watch" site that you got your "facts" about Iraqi women being afraid to walk the streets is severely biased. I wouldn?t trust a word they say.

However, I did find out that I was wrong about Iraqi oil production. Iraq was producing around 3 million barrels of oil a day under Saddam and now is producing between 1.3 and 1.5 million barrels a day, due to sabotage.[/color]

[quote name='Adora']And incompetent, culturally ignorant ex-Economist administrators in charge.[/quote]

[color=green]Bremer had made, and continues to make, great strides each day in improving the situation in Iraq. If you think he's doing such a poor job, who'd you replace him with?[/color]

[quote name='Adora']If overworked troops high on IPU-only-knows-what freaked out because of the dogma they're being fed to keep them there makes it "accidental" by your books, fine. I say, get a damned real police force in there, and there will be less of these *ahem* "Accidents".[/quote]

[color=green]You seriously think US Forces shoot innocent civilians? You getting this from Human Rights Watch too, or straight from Al Franken?[/color]

[quote name='Adora']So? If you read what I said, they write them off as Apostates. It doesn't matter how many of their own they kill. But by keeping big fat targets hyped-up in the middle of said environment, you're certainly not "protecting" anyone.[/quote]

[color=green]So it'd be better for these people if we just left them to the terrorists?[/color]

[quote name='Guess?']We did our job, so why the hell are we still there?!? We lose troops everyday because Bush is an idiot and doesn't seem to want an end to the war. He says he does but if he really did want the fighting to end, he would set up a government and leave.[/quote]

[color=green]You seriously think the government we've set up so far is capable of surviving on its own, after being in existence for barely a year?
Our forces will be needed in that region for a very, very long time. Far longer than any politician would like. Nevertheless, we've got to stick around until Iraq is more than capable of running itself.[/color]

[quote name='Guess?']I'm starting to belive this war was started so Bush could feel importent. We should pull out and level the whole country with bombs.[/quote]
[color=green]The President of the United States doesn?t declare war just so he can feel important. That's absurd.[/color]

[quote name='Falkon']If Bush wants to help us then why doesnt he provide all the jobs he has promised? or education for the unfortunate? or food for the hungry?[/quote]

[color=green]Over half a million jobs have been created in the last two months in America, and our economy is right back where it was in the 1990s.

Bush's [u]No Child Left Behind Act[/u] is making sure that all children receive quality educations from their public schools, and allowing parents to opt out of poorly performing schools.

If you'd like your taxes raised another ten or twenty percent, we can become a socialist nation that punishes the hard-working citizens of our nation by taxing them to death and supports the slackers who don?t want to work. We already have hundreds of charities, thousands of soup kitchens, a plethora of handout organizations and legislation that allows these people to help themselves.


As for the "evidence" presented in that last quoted post?
It's a silly, untrue, conspiracy theory. If there was any truth to it, it'd be a major news story.

I hope nobody here is stupid enough to believe that the US would execute one of it's own citizens for propaganda purposes?[/color]

[Transtic Nerve]

[quote name='Boba Fett][color=green']The "Human Rights Watch" site that you got your "facts" about Iraqi women being afraid to walk the streets is severely biased. I wouldn?t trust a word they say.[/quote][/color]
How is that any different from the bias you obviously have for "Republicans." Judging by your "logic," I should not believe a word you say. You cannot discredit information because a group has a political bias, if that was the case, everything on "FOX NEWS" is not true and everything "you" say is just plain silly.

[quote name='Boba Fett][color=green']and our economy is right back where it was in the 1990s.[/quote][/color]
Yet strangely enough I still don't have near as much money in my money market as I did in the late 1990s.

[quote=Boba Fett][color=green]As for the "evidence" presented in that last quoted post?
It's a silly, untrue, conspiracy theory. If there was any truth to it, it'd be a major news story.

I hope nobody here is stupid enough to believe that the US would execute one of it's own citizens for propaganda purposes?[/color][/QUOTE]

Actually, the post said that it was Russian mercenaries with coalition ideas in mind who did it, not the US. How much of that did you actually read? Regardless, I'm not saying i believe anything, but if you were a news broadcasting corporation, would you broadcast a conspiracy to the death of Nick Berg during a time like this? Yeah right, you'd risk losing everything you ever had. No news corporation is going to report on a conspiracy to this degree. Not now at least. You may hear it several years from now.

[Boba Fett]

[quote name='Transtic Nerve']How is that any different from the bias you obviously have for "Republicans." Judging by your "logic," I should not believe a word you say. You cannot discredit information because a group has a political bias, if that was the case, everything on "FOX NEWS" is not true and everything "you" say is just plain silly.[/quote]

[color=green]Yes, I am biased. I tend to think right of center. We're all biased, some more than others. You're biased left of center Transtic Nerve, but you already knew that.

As long as we present facts to support our arguments, I don?t see anything wrong with us sharing our opinions.

I'd like to point out that almost every organization out there has political interests of some kind. That's why you ignore their analysis and go straight to the facts, and watch many different news sources. Compile the facts, and formulate your own opinion.

However, if an organization publishes fallacies supporting one side or the other, it deserves to be ignored. This HRW group has done that, so I suggest they be ignored.[/color]

[quote name='Transtic Nerve'] Actually, the post said that it was Russian mercenaries with coalition ideas in mind who did it, not the US. How much of that did you actually read? Regardless, I'm not saying i believe anything, but if you were a news broadcasting corporation, would you broadcast a conspiracy to the death of Nick Berg during a time like this? Yeah right, you'd risk losing everything you ever had. No news corporation is going to report on a conspiracy to this degree. Not now at least. You may hear it several years from now.[/quote]

[color=green]The way I interpreted it, the author meant that Nick Berg was executed by Russian mercenaries operating under coalition instruction.

As for news organizations not feeling free to broadcast whatever they wish, how do you explain "Radio Free America"? Or Hollywood awards shows where multiple actors criticize the Bush administration? Or the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal?

All of these things are put out there, and nothing restricts the freedom of the press. If a newspaper can print allegations that US soldiers raped Iraqi women (complete with pictures from a porn site), then this can certainly be printed, if it's true.

The fact is, it isn?t credible. No reputable news agency will publish it for that reason, not because they're afraid of some government crackdown on their expression of free speech.[/color]

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE=Boba Fett][color=green]Yes, I am biased. I tend to think right of center. We're all biased, some more than others. You're biased left of center Transtic Nerve, but you already knew that.

As long as we present facts to support our arguments, I don?t see anything wrong with us sharing our opinions.

I'd like to point out that almost every organization out there has political interests of some kind. That's why you ignore their analysis and go straight to the facts, and watch many different news sources. Compile the facts, and formulate your own opinion.

However, if an organization publishes fallacies supporting one side or the other, it deserves to be ignored. This HRW group has done that, so I suggest they be ignored.[/color][/quote]

Well yeah, but the point I was making was based on the way you said it. You implied, at least by the way it was written, that you thought everything with a strong bias should therefor be ignored because it is false. Now that you've cleared that up, I ask what proof you have that whatever this HRW group said was not true. I didn't read it, perhaps I should, but I was interested in why you wrote that they should be discredited because they were biased in your first post and now you claim they have "published fallacies"... which are, at least in my view, two different claims against the group. Why not just post they "published fallacies" in your first post.


[color=green][quote]The way I interpreted it, the author meant that Nick Berg was executed by Russian mercenaries operating under coalition instruction.[/quote][/color]
I thought it was clearly stated that these acts were done by russian mercenaries with coalition interest in mind. [i]"...coalition interests (most likely independent Russian mercenaries)"[/i] Mercenaries tend to do things on their own with their own interests in mind. Like states, they were russian mercenaries with coalition inerests in mind. Doesn't nessisarily mean they were hired by the US, Britain, Spain, whoeverr was in the Coalition, just means they did it with the interests in the coalition in mind.

[quote][color=green]As for news organizations not feeling free to broadcast whatever they wish, how do you explain "Radio Free America"? Or Hollywood awards shows where multiple actors criticize the Bush administration? Or the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal?

All of these things are put out there, and nothing restricts the freedom of the press. If a newspaper can print allegations that US soldiers raped Iraqi women (complete with pictures from a porn site), then this can certainly be printed, if it's true.

The fact is, it isn?t credible. No reputable news agency will publish it for that reason, not because they're afraid of some government crackdown on their expression of free speech.[/color][/QUOTE]
I'll agree with that, to a point. There is freedom of press, the point I was making was that anyone in such press wouldn't publish it because it is very political and scandalous. Alot of people working for the press won't do certain things because it might affect their reputation either politically or economically.... whatever. While they also might not publish it because of the fact, you're right, it doesn't have alot of credibility. It's just a conclusion, as I'm sure many were made, about the murder. It's an interesting one at that. I'm not saying I agree, but its certainly worth the read.

[Adora]

[quote name='Boba Fett']Research:The "Human Rights Watch" site that you got your "facts" about Iraqi women being afraid to walk the streets is severely biased. I wouldn?t trust a word they say.[/quote]
Really? That's funny. Because your government was using reports from HRW and the Red Cross to validate this invasion when they couldn't find the Weapons of Mass Destruction and instead started using the excuse that they were invading the country for humanitarian reasons.

Maybe you missed these facts:

"Humanitarian disaster":

Well, lets start with the links I posted. Did you actually read them or just look for a link to disprove HRW? Iraqi females now terrified to go outside their homes. Civillians being shot for no reason other than there is a military where there should be a police. The ransacked museums and hospitals. Hell, the hospitals that still have regular power blackouts. The UN pulling out.

Sounds like a disaster to me.

Now, if you would kindly post the URL of where you got your "HRW Disproving News Report", we can get on with the discussion (ALWAYS link your sources).

[quote]However, I did find out that I was wrong about Iraqi oil production. Iraq was producing around 3 million barrels of oil a day under Saddam and now is producing between 1.3 and 1.5 million barrels a day, due to sabotage.[/quote]
Prove it's due to sabotage.

[quote]Bremer had made, and continues to make, great strides each day in improving the situation in Iraq. If you think he's doing such a poor job, who'd you replace him with?[/quote]
Chalabi.

[quote]You seriously think US Forces shoot innocent civilians? You getting this from Human Rights Watch too, or straight from Al Franken?[/quote]
No, just the regular newscast at night. All the channels, newspapers (well, except for the Sunday/Courier, because it's a tabloid) and look, oh, The Age [url=http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/03/28/1080331001795.html?from=storyrhs] right here[/url]. Maybe you should stop watching CNN. It rots your brain like chocolates rot teeth.

And it's not limited to Iraqi citizens either. [url=http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/8/19/14111/3435]Reuters[/url] [url=http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=8&id=269852]reporters[/url] seem to be targets of "not-so-friendly-fire" as well. Poor bastards. His name was Mazen Dana, for all those sick of hearing the name "Nick Berg".

[quote]So it'd be better for these people if we just left them to the terrorists?[/quote]
You opened the country up to the Fundamentalist Terrorists, you deal with the problems.

[quote]You seriously think the government we've set up so far is capable of surviving on its own, after being in existence for barely a year?[/quote]
Of course not, because they are mostly the same criminals and corrupt administrators that ruled under Saddam.

[quote]Our forces will be needed in that region for a very, very long time.[/quote]
No, A force is needed there for a very long time. This force should not be a foreign occupation. It should be a neutral police force.

[quote]Far longer than any politician would like. Nevertheless, we've got to stick around until Iraq is more than capable of running itself.[/quote]
You mean like you stuck with Afghanistan? *snort*

[quote]The President of the United States doesn?t declare war just so he can feel important. That's absurd.[/quote]
...
I find it absurd you even refer to the Thief as the 'President'.

[quote]If you'd like your taxes raised another ten or twenty percent, we can become a socialist nation that punishes the hard-working citizens of our nation by taxing them to death and supports the slackers who don?t want to work. [/quote]
And here we have the myth that "Most of your taxes go to welfare". Ever noticed that those countries with high taxes have some of the greatest doctors and surgeons, engineers and scientists. Ever noticed they also have extremely cheap/free Tertiary education? Guess it must be all that money going into welfare, eh?

[Boba Fett]

[quote name='Adora']Well, lets start with the links I posted. Did you actually read them or just look for a link to disprove HRW? Iraqi females now terrified to go outside their homes. Civillians being shot for no reason other than there is a military where there should be a police. The ransacked museums and hospitals. Hell, the hospitals that still have regular power blackouts. The UN pulling out.[/quote]

[color=green]I read both stories on the Human Rights Watch that you posted links to, as well as several others on their site. Their bias wasn?t hard to detect, in fact I couldn?t find a single statement of praise for coalition forces on the website. Surely we've done something right over there?

I then searched with Yahoo for anything that could verify my suspicions about HRW's leftist agenda. I was able to find a post on another, conservative, forum that exposed several problems with HRW's coverage of the war in Iraq.

[URL=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1039619/posts]Here's the site[/URL][/color]

[color=green]As for the regrettable shootings of journalists covering the action in Iraq, it's something that happens in war. If there are people in the area who aren?t enemy combatants, they may get hurt. There's not much we can do to avoid incidents like this, although the military does its best.

However, if you seriously think that US forces would intentionally shoot at innocent bystanders/journalists?

I'm not even going to argue the point with you. If you feel that way... I don?t know what to tell you.

By the way, that goes for the group of Iraqis that appear to have run a roadblock in Tirkrit as well and were attacked by US forces.


I've read your responses to my last post, and I'm shaking my head in amazement. You're arguments, while well conceived and pleasantly concise, go from extreme to downright amazingly absurd. I still can't imagine anyone could actually believe that the US military would intentionally harm civilians.

Its obvious this isn?t going anywhere and that you'll attempt to shoot down whatever I say with statements reminiscent of Michael Moore (Specifically the President --> Thief business). Utterly pointless?

Good Show.[/color]

[Adora]

[quote name='Boba Fett']Their bias wasn?t hard to detect, in fact I couldn?t find a single statement of praise for coalition forces on the website. Surely we've done something right over there?[/quote]
I dunno. Have they? HRW exists to give voice to the voiceless who's deaths and victimisation would otherwise go unheard of in the world media. As I mentioned, HRW has been used by the US Administration in press conferences when they changed their tune to 'Humanitarian Reasons'. So are you saying that using that as an excuse is also a bad move by your administration?

[quote]I then searched with Yahoo for anything that could verify my suspicions about HRW's leftist agenda.[/quote]
There's so many things wrong with this I don't know where to start.

How about I just put it this way.

If you're now going to claim that somehow that disproves the HRW reports, or that it means that you are now somehow objectively looking at the situation, all I can compare you to is a YEC.

[quote]I was able to find a post on another, conservative, forum that exposed several problems with HRW's coverage of the war in Iraq.[/quote]
Which I read. And I don't even have to go searching google or yahoo for the bias on [i]that[/i] site to make me scoff. They have " FreeRepublic.com "A Conservative News Forum" Posted at the top of their pages. So a Rightist agenda is better than a Leftist one now?

[quote]As for the regrettable shootings of journalists covering the action in Iraq, it's something that happens in war. [/quote]
If you'd kindly notice, the "war" was announced over a few months ago.

[quote]However, if you seriously think that US forces would intentionally shoot at innocent bystanders/journalists?[/quote]
Well, I didn't think the US forces had dumbarse cannon-fodder running their gaols. But I was proven wrong there, and look what happened.

Never underestimate the stupidity of the human race.

[quote]I still can't imagine anyone could actually believe that the US military would intentionally harm civilians.[/quote]
I'd hate to point it out to you, but prisoners, no matter where the gaol, are still citizens of a country.

[quote]Its obvious this isn?t going anywhere and that you'll attempt to shoot down whatever I say with statements reminiscent of Michael Moore (Specifically the President --> Thief business). Utterly pointless?[/quote]
Actually, I was referring to the Radiohead reference with the Thief issue. Maybe you need to widen your pop-culture references, as well as your source references.

[James]

[QUOTE=Adora]Chalabi.


[/QUOTE]
[color=#707875]You'd want Chalabi instead of Bremmer? Chalabi is possibly one of the most untrustworthy people in the entire Governing Council, I'd say. If you are anti-war at all, it would be hard to support him; he was one of the major driving forces behind the war itself. I also get the impression that he's quite interested in the Presidency of Iraq.

In any case, I do want to remind everyone to maintain a civil tone in this forum. Most of you have been doing a relatively good job in that department, but I do want to reinforce the idea that OtakuBoards encourages mutual respect. If you're going to engage in debate, please focus your attention on the issues, rather than throwing around personal comments. Some of you are combining personal jabs with legitimate arguments in your posts and it's not something that I want to see here.

So, I just want to remind everyone about that. People who decide to get involved in personal attacks will be banned immediately and without question.[/color]

[DBZgirl88]

[COLOR="#004a6f"]In my opinion, nothing, absolutely NOTHING can justify the way Nick Berg was slaughtered. When I first heard the news I thought he was an american soldier, but even still I was totally against it. When I learned that he was a civilian, It made me even more angry. My brother managed to download the video off Kazaa and I gathered up my courage to watch it. I really wanted to know how it happened. Now I wish I didn't.

It was horrific. Even before wathing it, my heart was beating really hard and fast. Watching the video, I could tell that Berg didn't even know it was coming. At first he was sitting on the floor, hands and feet tied up, with all the men standing behind him. He seemed pretty calm. One of the men was reading a speech off a paper in his hand. Every once in while he would pause after a statement and the others would say "Allahu Akbar" (God is Great). When he was finished, he handed the sheet to a man beside him and pulled a long knife out of his robe. Two men charged at Berg; on grabbed him by the hair and pushed his head to the ground and another held his feet down. The Beheading began. The literally sawed his head off. Very slowly. They didn't even start at the throat! They could have just slit the throat an let him die from that and then finish decapitating him, but no, the started on the side and let him [I]feel[/I] his head being decapitated. He screamed in agony, and the screaming went on for more than 30 seconds. The whole time, all the men kept repeating "Allahu Akbar!", "Allahu Akbar!". Eventually the screaming stopped, either because Berg was dead or he was unable to anymore. And the spend around another minute sawing at the neck and twisting it to get the head free (shudder). Berg's face looked so terrifying now. Finally, his killer held up his decapitated head. I let out a cry and ran out of the room. I am traumatized for life. Every time I even think of the video my heart starts pounding like crazy.[QUOTE=Boba Fett][color=green]First off, the complete lack of emotional response to such a barbaric act astounds me. [i]A twenty-six year old man was slaughtered like a pig in front of the whole world, and his corpse dumped near a bridge.[/i]

This isn't how war is fought. This is terrorism directed at innocent civilians. These men are disgracing themselves, their religion, and every moral standard every civilized society.[/color][/QUOTE]I could not believe that anyone can be so cruel and ruthless as this. It made me so angry because Berg was just a civilian. What was his crime? In their eyes, he was American, and that gives them every right to execute him. Even if he was an American soldier, it would still just too cruel. What made even more angry was the men saying "Allahu Akbar!" over and over again. That is NOT how Muslims behave! They're disgracing Islam and generating more hatred towards muslims and arabs. It's totally disgusting and barbaric. Sure, beheading is the way execution is carried out in our religion, but not like this. First of all, he was innocent; beheading is only done to murderers, and secondly, Allah asks that if a criminal is to be beheaded , that it be done with one quick swipe of a sharp sword. Even animals are treated better during slaughter than the way Nick Berg was.[/COLOR]

[Guest Spike88]

[QUOTE=Transtic Nerve]

I see what your point is and I repsect it. The reason I said that this country doesn't support me is because they don't on many issues, but they do on others. I could go to Canada or England and say what i want and probably wouldn't be shot or arrested. Depending on exactly what i was saying, but the same goes for America as well. Anyway, I understand your view.[/QUOTE]

Well at least we can see eye to eye on somethings anyways and I respect your views too. You could get away with a few more things in Canada and England that's true but there is no doubt that we live in the most free country in the world anyways at least we respect each others views well it's been a nice caht anyways

[Adora]

[quote]What made even more angry was the men saying "Allahu Akbar!" over and over again. That is NOT how Muslims behave! They're disgracing Islam and generating more hatred towards muslims and arabs.[/quote]
Wahhabism. Wahhabism. Wahhabism. Wahhabism. Wahhabism. And as much as Saladin is a standout example, Uthman did a pretty good job of wiping out his own "Muslim" brothers when he was in power, and he [i]wrote[/i] the Qu'ran. Just as native Americans occasionally had their own bouts of warring, or Rwandans turned on their neighbours when given the chance by propaganda broadcast over the radio, blaming them for the economic problems the country was having.

You're right. That's not how Muslims behave. That's how humans behave. It really doesn't take much to make regular people do very bad things to each other, as studies have shown. In fact, the worse individual from an Australian one I saw was a female nun. It has nothing to do with your religion, race, gender or age. Although they have found some correlation with education (better the education, less likely to go farther, on average). All it takes for murder like that, for torture like the gaol-photos, is a quick dehumanisation process and you have yourself a sadist.

[DBZgirl88]

[COLOR="#004a6f"]My family and I were discussing the video over the dinner table, and my brother began questioning the authenticity of the tape. My mother had read some articles pointing out all the little mistakes in the tape that made it fake. She told me that Nick Berg was probably already dead before his head was cut off. In the video, he was sitting unusually still with barely the slightest movement.

Furthermore, she pointed out that his killers were probably not even Iraqi. She told me that the way they were standing was not an "Iraqi" way of standing, especially for militants. Their legs were a little too spread out and they kept shifting from one foot to the other. She said they were probably actaully Americans. Although they had their faces covered and you can't really tell who they are, their hands were pretty pale. Iraqis have dark skin.

The man who was reading the speech kept turning his pages over and over again, all during one sentence. It's like he's not even reading off the pages! My mom said they probably have someone hidden somewhere whom they forced to read the speech, or they were playing a recording or something.

I also heard screaming before they even charged at him. At first, I thought that maybe there was an error in the video file, but now I'm not so sure. I never really saw his face while he was screaming. I couldn't see his mouth moving either.

The last mistake I saw was that not alot of blood came out when the head came off. The cut this severe should bring blood to gush out like crazy. This also helps to confirm that Berg was already dead before he was beheaded.

Therefore, this might have been done by American soldiers who are just trying to destroy the Iraqi image to make people overlook the horrible and disgusting things they did with the Iraqi prisoners.

*Edit: I forgot to mention that I did watch the video again to see these mistakes for myself.[/COLOR]

[Falkon]

ok i have some somwhat long quotes to post. please read them, as they actually mean something. dont dismiss them because they are long.
Thanx
[quote]
klavier
Posted: May 15 2004, 12:53 AM
I am a nub!!
Posts: 46
Group: Members
Member No.: 56
Joined: 4-December 03

Holy **** is this guy listening to me? Im saying terrorists cant justifiy their actions!!!


I hinted at americans desserved to be attacked? Seriously, can you ******* read? I said some of your gov. leaders NEED TO BE PUNISHED. NOT ATTACKED, PUNISHED YOU DIM WITTED ****.


What am i arguing? Im arguing that you are stupid. You dont know the first thing about this islam religion, and have no ******* clue about the history of your own country. Why dont you research some stuff like this:
US shooting down Iranian passenger plane
US supporting and helping saddam hussein build weapons
US helping Iraq in their fight war against Iran (which ****** over both countries)
US putting supporting a government in iran (and other places) and after they are no longer happy with him, they fund rebellious factions and turn the country upside down, resulting in decades of poor economical and political growth.
US putting trade sanctions on countries because they didnt like them
US selling illegal arms to countries so they can wipe out their freedom fighters (not terrorists)
US killing and removing families from their homes so they can make room for another country.
US training Osama bin laden.


Dont get me wrong, after all of that, i still dont think a single american civilian should suffer. And hell, the US isnt the ONLY country with a bad record. Russia, china, they have them too.


Me? Brainwashed. Tell me, by who? I dont listen to my parents, and anytime they try to get me to become a muslim i tell them were to stick it. I dont really belong to any sort of body that would force an oppinion on me. The only education about religion i got in Iran was how to say some basic prayers and speak in arabic. Hardly brainwashing.


You are out of your league. You dont know what you're talking about.
And for the record, I didnt feel like typing 40 years of history because you have just proven, you are too dumb to get it.

If you are so smart and well informed, go and find them yourself. They arent hard to find.

[/quote]

[Falkon]

aaannnd another....
[quote]
SoF-KonIT

Posted: May 15 2004, 01:13 AM
I live here
Posts: 409
Group: SoF Member
Member No.: 53
Joined: 4-December 03

super, i'm sorry to say it, but really, you sound like the stereotypical american moron. yes, the us deserved what it got. throughout history, just about every action has a cause. do you really think that the iraqi (or whatever nation you choose) terrorist groups were just sitting around one day saying, "gee, that america is so great and fair to everyone, let's hijack their planes and crash them into towers, killing not only hundreds of innocent americans but also ourselves." i mean, really...who would kill themselves over nothing? i think even terrorists have a bit more intelligence than a lemming.

anyhow, the moral of this thread is :

every action has a reaction.

see you in class next week :)
[/quote]

[Falkon]

'Nother one, sry bout that triple posting i guess....

[quote]
SoF-KonIT
Posted: May 15 2004, 09:39 PM
I live here
Posts: 409
Group: SoF Member
Member No.: 53
Joined: 4-December 03

[quote] (SoF-HideIT @ May 15 2004, 01:59 PM)

No k0n, the US didnt deserve to get one of its innocent civilians killed. And no k0n terriorist dont have any intelligence at all. I personally think its sick of you to give them any credit, think of all the people that lost their lives.

My conclusion: k0n is anti America and wishes he was not American.[/quote]

Klavier you have some good points, some that no one can argue with. Every country does have a bad history. And I think many of you (k0n) need to remember that and stop bashing the US. Afterall most of you (k0n) do live in it, therefore you should have some sort of respect towards it. I dont know maybe its just me.

did i not say that i was greatful for the liberties i have been granted as an american? look, i'm fine with living in america, but as an american i DO HAVE THE RIGHT to speak my mind, and IF THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE GOVERNMENT I WILL ******* SAY SO. please do NOT lay blanket accusations upon me.

i do not like the capitalist dominated society.
i do not like our THROW AWAY SOCIETY.
i do not like the fact that i make a living based on the LAZINESS OF OTHER PEOPLE.

now, america has great potential. but what pride should i have in a country that has lied to me my entire life? what pride should i have in a country who's actions are hippocritical of what they say? WHY SHOULD I BELIEVE IN A PRESIDENT WHO CAN'T THINK HIS WAY OUT OF A BOX?

it is out of respect for the country that i point out it's fallacies. i will NOT sit by and let MORONS rule the world.

"terrorist dont have any intelligence" <- anyone else see the humor here. look, just because i am born here (i didn't chose to be born here) doesn't mean i should accept the ******** spoon fed to me by PATRIOTISTS. which brings me to this...what's the difference between patriotism and ethnocentrism?

there are no rules to war. he knew there was a war going on in iraq. he chose to be there. now, it is my understanding that he was there to help out the iraqi people...nevertheless, THIS IS WAR. or, at least america prefers to call it war. i am thinking of all the people that lost their lives. how many hundreds of american soldiers have died? can you tell me how it is helping us to send hundreds of thousands of troops over to a desert wasteland to get killed by car bombs?

My conclusion: you are blindly patriotic.
[/quote]