P2P-Zone  

Go Back   P2P-Zone > Political Asylum
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Political Asylum Publicly Debate Politics, War, Media.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-03-04, 09:45 AM   #1
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Sleepy Pilger on the US and terrorism

Quote:
TONY JONES: Now to the issue which has divided the political left and the Iraq anti-war movement.

Now that the die has been cast, the regime deposed and the coalition forces are occupying the country, how should they regard those who are still attacking the occupiers and targeting anyone they consider to be assisting the United States?

The veteran journalist John Pilger has no doubts.

He claims that, what he calls "the resistance" is "incredibly important" and that the world now "depends" on it to win.

"I think," he says, "if the US military machine" and the Bush administration can suffer something like a defeat "in Iraq, they can be stopped."

By which he means stopped from invading other countries.

Mr Pilger is in Australia at the moment speaking regularly at political rallies and at screenings of his film Breaking the Silence.

I spoke to him earlier this evening.

TONY JONES: John Pilger, do you still maintain that the world depends on what you call "the Iraqi resistance" to inflict a military defeat on the coalition forces?

JOHN PILGER: Well, certainly, historically, we've always depended on resistances to get rid of occupiers, to get rid of invaders.

And what we have in Iraq now is I suppose the equivalent of a kind of Vichy Government being set up.

And a resistance is always atrocious, it's always bloody.

It always involves terrorism.

You can imagine if Australia was occupied by the Japanese during the Second World War the kind of resistance there would have been, and so on.

We've seen that all over the world.

Now, I think the situation in Iraq is so dire that unless the United States is defeated there that we're likely to see an attack on Iran, we're likely to see an attack on North Korea and all the way down the road it could be even an attack on China within a decade, so I think what happens in Iraq now is incredibly important.

TONY JONES: You mean defeated militarily?

JOHN PILGER: Yes.

TONY JONES: What does that mean in terms of the resistance, and who is the resistance?

Are we talking about the remnants of the Baathist regime, or are we talking around foreign mujahadeen? Are we talking about anyone that's prepared to pick up a gun or set off a bomb?

JOHN PILGER: Why do we have a different standard of looking at what a resistance is in Iraq as it is anywhere else?

TONY JONES: Well, what do you compare it to?

JOHN PILGER: There are 12 groups.

Only three of them - and we went through the nonsense that they were all Saddam remnants for a long time, now Saddam has been captured, the resistance has actually intensified.

There are 12 groups, they're all very different, there are groups within the Shia, but what they're all united about, quite clearly, is getting rid of a foreign invader and occupier from Iraq.

And as I say, historically, be it in Algeria or in Vietnam, or France during the Second World War, it is going to be atrocious and bloody.

Now, are they Baathist?

Well, there's a greet irony here because what the United States is doing now is retraining, or rather rehiring, 10,000 of Saddam Hussein's most vicious security people.

The CIA are training these people to actually put the finger on who the resistance are, so you have - what you have going on in Iraq now is a kind of re-Nazification, the same sort of thing that went on in Germany after the Second World War.

TONY JONES: On that score, let me ask you this - is it legitimate for the resistance then to target young Iraqi men queuing up to join the Iraqi police, which you describe as a sort of Gestapo?

JOHN PILGER: You know, all resistances have said if you're going to collaborate, then you are a target.

Well, of course, the killing of innocent people can't be condoned under any circumstances.

But in all resistances, it happens.

TONY JONES: It sounds, however, like you were saying these young men, about to join this Gestapo-like police force, are not innocent?

JOHN PILGER: Well, they're not...

It's nice that you call them 'these young men'.

They're among some of the most vicious creatures.

I mean, most of them will be led by people who the Americans would have slapped into Guantanamo Bay had they - if they didn't have another duty to perform for them.

The United States has singled out all of Saddam Hussein's top security and intelligence people.

He ran one of the most effective security, yes, Gestapo’s in the Middle East.

They've taken them and these people are now training 10,000, paid for by the CIA, to effectively do unto the Americans what they did under Saddam Hussein.

That's what they did in Vietnam...

TONY JONES: But are you saying that those men, outside police stations, looking to be recruited to get a job in a dire economic climate, are legitimate targets?

JOHN PILGER: No, I'm not saying they're legitimate targets but, to a resistance, they are legitimate targets, yes.

TONY JONES: But the resistance is a resistance you say we should be backing?

JOHN PILGER: JOHN PILGER: Ah, no, c'mon.

I'm not saying we should be backing.

I'm saying that we depend.

If the rest of us watching this, those who worry about what a rampant United States is going to do next - and we should all be worried about that. The evidence is there, it's all clear - if we're concerned about that, we ask ourselves, and millions of people all over the world have asked themselves - how can that be stopped?

Well, one place where it is going to be stopped, or at least entrapped, or something will deter it, is, unfortunately, and I repeat unfortunately, in Iraq, because although Americans will be killed, most of the people killed, as you rightly point out, are going to be Iraqis, and that happened in Algeria, it happened in Vietnam, especially in Vietnam.

It's happened all over the world when there has been a powerful invader, has come into the country.

It's not the invader that - well, the invader has suffered as the Americans clearly are - but it is the local people who will suffer.

TONY JONES: But you're saying, effectively, that the rest of the world now must depend upon a resistance which is prepared to send a truck bomb into the United Nations, which is prepared to bomb civilians who are celebrating on their holiest day in holy cities like Karbala, Shiites, which is prepared to condone, indeed to promote, the whole concept of a civil war in Iraq.

Why do you appear to be suggesting that that resistance is a good thing?

JOHN PILGER: But you missed out the source of all this violence.

In that litany, that's very interesting, you're quite right.

But the source of all this is the invasion, an unprovoked and illegal invasion, and a bloody invasion, by the US and Britain which has caused the deaths of, in the latest conservative estimate, is between 21,000 and 55,000, which causes the deaths every month of 1,000 children from cluster bombs, which is causing the most pervasive contamination from a variety of toxic weapons such as depleted uranium, which has destroyed people's lives.

That's the source, that is the main violence in Iraq.

Yes, there is that violence, but the violence that you describe is a reaction to that.

Haven't you got it round the wrong way?

TONY JONES: Well, you can put it that way and you're making your case but what I'm saying is how can anyone back a resistance which resorts to the killing of innocent people?

How can anyone suggest the world, in fact, depends on such a resistance which resorts to the killing of innocent people, as you say, mostly Iraqis?

JOHN PILGER: A lot of people depended on a resistance movement to get rid of invaders, virtually since the beginning of history.

When Caesar went up to Gaul, when finally they crossed the Rubicon - which the Americans have done in modern terms - there was a dependence on a resistance.

TONY JONES: There are other forms of resistance.

There is peaceful resistance, to start with.

Mahatma Ghandi did not resort to bombing?

JOHN PILGER: Tony, do tell me - how do you mount a peaceful resistance to an invading force, which Human Rights Watch this week described as out of control, as rapacious, which has bought a kind of murderous street fighting, which is - and I've just said - has killed, you know, in their ‘Shock and Awe’, they killed up to 55,000 people.

Robert Fisk, the independent correspondent, reckons that something like between 500 and 1,000 Iraqis are killed indirectly as a result of the American presence every week in that country.

Now, how do you say they should all sit down and say to the Americans: "You must go."

"It should be a peaceful resistance."

There are a lot of people actually opposing it peacefully and, if it was reported...

You know, I follow the reports of a number of human rights observers in Baghdad.

There's an enormous amount of peaceful resistance but on the other side of the resistance - and it's one resistance - there is also fire being fought with fire.

I don't think one has to approve that.

In fact, you can't approve, under any circumstances, in my opinion, the killing of innocent people.

But you have to understand why it happens.

In the same way that we have to understand why September 11 happened.

TONY JONES: Can you approve in that context the killing of American, British or Australian troops who are in the occupying forces?

JOHN PILGER: Well yes, they're legitimate targets.

They're illegally occupying a country.

And I would have thought from an Iraqi's point of view they are legitimate targets, they'd have to be, sure.

TONY JONES: So Australian troops you would regard in Iraq as legitimate targets?

JOHN PILGER: Excuse me but, really, that's an unbecoming question.

I've just said that any foreign occupier of a country, military occupier, be they Germans in France, Americans in Vietnam, the French in Algeria, wherever, the Americans in Latin America, I would have thought, from the point of view of the local people - and as I mentioned, be they Australians in Australia - if Australia had been invaded and occupied by the Japanese, then the occupying forces, from the point of view of the people of that country, are legitimate targets.

TONY JONES: The Shiites have so far refused to engage in this crusade against the United States, by and large.

They have huge militias who are armed and quite well trained whom they could turn against the Americans if they so wished.

They have not done so because they're looking for a peaceful solution.

They're looking still for a role in a new government in Iraq.

Why not back them, rather than the resistance which is killing their civilians?

JOHN PILGER: Well, my... you're interested into why I would back the Shia.

What the Shia are doing I think is far more interesting actually.

The Shia have long been a very patient group.

And you only have to look at Iran, under the shah of Iran, it took a long time during that whole period of oppression in Iran before it exploded in 1979 in a revolution.

And my understanding of what the Shia are doing in Iraq is something very similar, that they, yes, are building a militia army and they're doing it patiently and they're doing it in a very ordered way.

There is a certain commitment to a peaceful resistance among the Shia actually, and they're the majority in the country.

But when you have such daily provocation coming from the invader, coming from the Americans, who are the principal force in that country, when you have the kind of murderous presence, the use of well, just simply, the very fact of a military and violent occupation, when you have that provocation, day upon day, then the whole notion of a peaceful resistance, whether it will come from the Shia with their patience or from the Sunni or anywhere else, really goes out the window, I would have thought.

TONY JONES: Do you acknowledge that huge human rights abuses, not perhaps on the same scale as Pol Pot, but quite close to it, happened under Saddam Hussein's regime...

JOHN PILGER: Absolutely.

TONY JONES: ...that hundreds of thousands of mass graves have since been unearthed...

JOHN PILGER: Well, I can tell you when they...

TONY JONES: ...in the south of Iraq?

JOHN PILGER: I'm glad you've raised that.

TONY JONES: But just let me finish that question.

Can there not be a moral case made for deposing the dictator who was killing hundreds and thousands of his opponents?

JOHN PILGER: Absolutely.

By the Iraqi people.

And I believe had there not been 10 years of a medieval siege imposed on Iraq by the United States, effectively, with Britain, that has caused the death, according to two Assistant Secretary-Generals of the United Nations who were in charge of humanitarian aid up to 1 million people in Iraq - had there not been that extraordinary pressure, that actually strengthened the regime in Baghdad - then, almost certainly, there would have been the kind of uprising that happened in early 1991, and I think we might have had the parallel we might be drawing, would have been with Romania.

The Romanians got rid of their tyrant who was very similar to the tyrant of Saddam Hussein.

They did it by themselves.

Now, we stopped them.

When I say "we" I'm talking about the West.

TONY JONES: The United States in particular... there is a strong point to be made there, they were betrayed.

JOHN PILGER: In 1991, they stopped them.

And the other point you made about that Saddam Hussein is guilty of the most terrible human rights abuses, the great majority of the reign of terror of Saddam Hussein and the worst human rights abuses were committed by him when he was being supplied by us, when he was being supported by the United States with biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction in the 1980s.

It's rather important actually, because...

TONY JONES: We're nearly out of time, that's all.

Please continue.

JOHN PILGER: Saddam Hussein's strength - he drew his strength principally from Washington, also from London, and the hypocrisy talked about Saddam Hussein being the great tyrant that we have the moral right to overthrow I would have thought is now evident to most people.

TONY JONES: John Pilger, we will have to leave it there.
from lateline..
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-04, 11:33 AM   #2
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Pilger is a tool, applauding and encouraging the death of your own countrymen is just sad and another example of the anti-war losers disconnection with reality or common sense.
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-04, 12:27 PM   #3
Sinner
--------------------
 
Sinner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,379
Default


Pilger misses Saddam

Hear that Iraqis? Your future depends not on the coalition rebuilding your infrastructure, or the signing of your new constitution, but rather on psychos like Pilger, Wilkie and other peace-creeps lending their support to the people who are setting off car bombs in your streets.


EDIT---Andrew Wilkie said, "I want to back up the people who've spoken of the need to keep talking, to keep speaking out, to keep getting out on the streets, to really support the 20 March rally.

"The people of Iraq really do need us to do this for them because they just can't 'move on' from this."
__________________
The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend
Sinner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-04, 12:07 PM   #4
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

TONY JONES: Well, the US is not just labouring under a record trade deficit, there are warnings tonight that its budget deficit could precipitate a Latin American style financial crisis.

Influential economist Paul Krugman says the US will face a severe downturn before the end of the decade unless the $500 billion fiscal debt is rectified.

In his latest book, The Great Unravelling, the Princeton University economist is calling on President Bush to abandon his program of trillion dollar tax cuts, otherwise, he claims, there may not be enough funds to pay for the waves of baby boomers who will soon retire.

I spoke to Paul Krugman a short time ago.

TONY JONES: Paul Krugman, history proved your predictions right over the Asian financial crisis.

You're now warning essentially that the engine of the world economy, the United States itself, is heading for a South American style financial crisis.

What's the evidence for that?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN, PRINCETON ECONOMIST: Well, basically we have a world-class budget deficit not just as in absolute terms of course - it's the biggest budget deficit in the history of the world - but it's a budget deficit that as a share of GDP is right up there.

It's comparable to the worst we've ever seen in this country.

It's biggest than Argentina in 2001.

Which is not cyclical, there's only a little bit that's because the economy is depressed.

Mostly it's because, fundamentally, the Government isn't taking in enough money to pay for the programs and we have no strategy of dealing with it.

So, if you take a look, the only thing that sustains the US right now is the fact that people say, "Well America's a mature, advanced country and mature, advanced countries always, you know, get their financial house in order," but there's not a hint that that's on the political horizon, so I think we're looking for a collapse of confidence some time in the not-too-distant future.

TONY JONES: When you say the not-too-distant future, what does that mean?

We know there may be a crisis in paying, for example, in social security...

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: What I envision is that at some point, we have about 10 years now until the baby boomers hit the United States.

The US even more than other advanced countries has a welfare state that's primarily a welfare state for retirees.

We have the huge bulge in the population that starts to collect benefits and earn the next decade.

If there isn't a clear path towards fiscal sanity well before that, then I think the financial markets are going to say, "Well, gee, where is this going?"

I think, where in that 10 years the crunch comes, I don't know.

I think there's a real possibility that next year or one or two years from now, when they see that actually the same irresponsible tax cuts as the solution to everything continue, we might have a crisis that soon but more likely towards the end of the decade.

TONY JONES: Let me ask you this - just in the short-term, given today's policy settings and the ones that are going to prevail, we assume, through the election period, what's likely to happen to interest rates?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: Right now, long-term interest rates, short-term interest rates, I think, are going to stay where there are, which is not far above zero, right through the election and probably beyond because that's directly under the control of the Federal Reserve.

The economy is weak for the time being.

Job creation is essentially non-existent.

Long-term interest rates which should reflect all these things are actually quite low right now and it's an interesting thing when you try to talk to people in the bond market, why, you ask, doesn't the deficit worry you?

Don't you wonder that there's going to be a financing crunch?

And they say: "Well, we believe that next year Bush or whoever is in the White House is going to get responsible."

And you ask them: "What evidence do you have for that?"

And they say: "Well, I don't know but it's always happened before."

So right now again, the bond market is reflecting the credit built up in previous responsible governments.

TONY JONES: Actually the bond market's quite interesting because for the present moment there seems to be a huge influence on the US economy from the Asian central banks.

Is that risky?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: Well sure.

Although, I'm not sure that it's particularly riskier than a lot of other things. But yeah, we have this, I didn't say this, but we've got twin deficits.

We've got a huge budget deficit and an equally large current account deficit.

And if you ask, "How are we financing the current account deficit?", well that's a story.

A few years ago it was foreigners investing in the United States.

It was Daimler buying Chrysler, it was people investing in the strength of the US economy.

These days it's Asian central banks buying up US Government debt because they're trying to keep their currencies weak against the dollar and this can't go on forever.

TONY JONES: Your detractors - and there are quite a few of them on the Republican side of the equation - they're accusing you of scare mongering?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: The first thing to say is to look at what some of those same people were saying in the middle of the Clinton years when the deficit was substantially smaller as a proportion of GDP and they were carrying on about what a bad thing it was.

The other thing is the comparison.

The only time post war that the United States has had anything like these deficits is the middle Reagan years and that was with unemployment close to 10 per cent.

A lot of that was a cyclical thing which would go away when the economy recovered.

Also the baby boomers were 20 years younger than they are today.

If you look at the actual fiscal situation, it's much, much worse than it was even at its worst during the Reagan years. One way to say this is we have social security which is a retirement program which viewed on its own is running a surplus.

If you take that out of the budget then we're running at a deficit of more than 6 per cent of GDP and that is unprecedented.

TONY JONES: One of your fiercest critics, Donald Luskin, seems to fear you because of your very credibility and your plausibility.

As he puts it, you're the most "dangerous liberal commentator in the United States".

He says he once admired you but now he actually runs a website called the Krugman Truth Squad?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: Yeah.

Well, look this is good.

Something I used - let them hate as long as they fear.

I think the point is, let me quote Harry Truman: "I give them the truth and they think it's hell."

I don't think I've been saying anything that isn't quite straight forward.

It's just arithmetic but it's been stuff that a lot of, very few journalists have been willing or able to say.

TONY JONES: It's a bit more than arithmetic though, isn't it?

Would you agree with the proposition that you're slowly transforming yourself, in a way, from a pure economist into also something of a political activist?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: Well, yeah, I mean, it's not what I intended. But I came in writing as a journalist, writing occasional columns in the 90s, mostly about economical fears with a political tinge.

I came to the New York Times intending to do pretty much the same thing.

But then it became clear very early on that the President of the United States was irresponsible and dishonest on matters economic and it turned out that what I learned there was true of other kind of policies as well.

So, I was forced, if you like, just by the arithmetic of understanding how the budget works into a much broader critique of this really kind of scary thing that's happening to my country.

TONY JONES: Let's look a little bit at that broader critique that you outline in The Great Unravelling, your new book.

You claim that President Bush is part of the radical right and that America has become a revolutionary power.

How did you come to those conclusions?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: If you look at the policies and in a variety of areas, they're not within the range of normal partisan divides.

That is, Republicans always want lower taxes and Democrats a bigger state.

There are always disagreements about how strong environmental policies should be, but we're really way outside that now.

We're talking about repeated tax cuts in the face of enormous deficits and in the face of war.

Never done that before.

We're talking about a shift towards unilateralist foreign policy.

We've just gone to war without significant allies other than the UK to destroy weapons that didn't exist.

This is something that's kind of unique.

We're seeing a radical breakdown of the separation of church and state in a lot of policy issues.

This is something that's really outside normal politics and then if you just look at the political history, where do these people come from - you discover that there is a network of think tanks, organisations, funding sources, radical activists - which really, it's more than just an ordinary swing of the political pendulum.

If you like, the vast right-wing conspiracy isn't a theory, it's quite clearly visible to anyone who takes a little care to do his home work.

TONY JONES: One of those think tanks, of course, is the Heritage Foundation which was set up in a way to boost a series of ideological positions on the economy, on the social front and is now, you say, virtually running, to some degree, a lot of economic policy and one of the things they say, for example, is that social security and Medicare are violations of basic principals?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: That's right.

Heritage is central.

Heritage is in the middle of everything.

Almost every - if you like, the WAPs, the policy types such as they are, as opposed to the politicos - but the WAPs in this administration are almost all connected with Heritage or American Enterprise Institute but one or both of those.

And Heritage very clearly in its letters to fund raisers reminds them that our goal is to get rid of these programs, that we need to get rid of the legacy of the new deal on the great society and that means social security and Medicare.

TONY JONES: Now here's another quote from your book: "A revolutionary power does not accept the legitimacy of the state."

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: There's a very hardline view.

There was actually a kind of revealing moment recently - Bush gave an interview, was more or less dragooned into an interview on Meet The Press and the interviewer said: "Well, what if you lose the election?"

And he said: "I'm not going to lose the election."

And the interviewer said: "But what if you do lose?"

He said: "I'm not going lose the election."

The possibility that they just would not regard it as a legitimate thing if someone else were to take power.

Quite a few people as part of the Republican movement have said that God chose Bush to be President.

I don't know whether they would accept the idea that mere mortal men should choose for him not to be President for another four years.

TONY JONES: You also link the personal fortunes of George Bush and Dick Cheney to what you called the epidemic of corporate malfeasance.

Are you suggesting that, in a way, their business ethics somehow leaked out into the rest of the corporate world or that they're just representative of it?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: Oh no, they're representative of it.

Let's be clear.

Most of the explosion of corporate malfeasance really took place during the 90s.

It took place with Clinton in the White House, which is not to say that he caused it.

In fact, you could say a lot of it happened despite some mild efforts on the part of Clinton to stop it.

But the point is that you ask when Bush says, "I want to reform corporations," is he credible?

Well, you have to look back and say, "Gee his own personal fortune arose, in large part, through deals that look an awful like Enron."

TONY JONES: Nor do you spare Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Fed Reserve.

I always thought under the Clinton years or during the Clinton years he was the steady hand on the tiller.

You seem to refer to him these days as a partisan hack?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: Well, here's a special case.

I mean, the governor of the central bank has a terribly important job, enormous responsibility and power.

He's not an elected official.

This is an agreement that we've all reached - that this is a good thing to do because monetary policy is too easily politicised.

Best to have it in a technocrat.

In his role as a technocrat Greenspan has done a good job, not as stellar a job as his admirers will tell you but he's done a very good job.

There's an obligation that goes with this which is to stand above and outside the political fray.

Greenspan did that during the 90s.

But no sooner was Bush in office than Greenspan threw his weight behind tax cuts.

He actually went to Congress and argued that we need tax cuts because otherwise we're going to run excessively large budget surpluses and pay down our debt too quickly.

Which he shouldn't have done in the first place.

This was violating the role.

Then, of course, when it turned out to be completely wrong.

Instead we've plunged from surpluses into huge deficits, he has now said, "Well, I don't think we should rescind the tax cut, instead we need to talk about cutting social security benefits."

That's injecting himself into politics in a very partisan fashion.

TONY JONES: You essentially claiming the Fed is no longer independent?

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: Well Mr Greenspan is acting as a partisan figure.

He is acting as somebody who is doing whatever he can to support the agenda of this right-wing movement that is now running a large part of the Government.

I think that the star at the Fed is as good as ever.

My belief is that if you were to promote one of the other governors to chairman of the Fed we would be back to business as we've had it before.

I don't think everybody has been corrupted but I do think that Mr Greenspan has gone very far - basically has abused in his position, in a way, that's no longer recoverable.

TONY JONES: We will have to leave it there.

Paul Krugman, we thank you very much for taking the time to come and join us tonight.

PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN: Well, thank you.

another good interview this week..
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-04, 06:18 PM   #5
scooobiedooobie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 381
Default

wow multi...pilger and krugman in the same thread. what a treat! who's next..chomsky? molly ivins?

geez..why don't you just post the bush-haters handbook?
__________________
Proud member of the Republican Attack Squad!
scooobiedooobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-04, 12:54 AM   #6
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

fuck off..
there are millions that hate bush for what he has turned the modern world into...

dont whine on about terrorisim u retards..its the US and british and the israelis that have provoked it from the onset..

the islamic terrorist is supplied and trained and inspired by the west...and you expect everyone just to take on board the blind judgement that the west and democracy is the victim

its a mind fuck
thats is just bullshit and MOST people
can see right through it..

to label people bush haters and terrorist supporters is just weak rhetoric...without very much substance
or thought..
the right are so up them selves they just think everyone is stupid..and will fall for their broken record style of slandering others...
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-04, 01:03 AM   #7
scooobiedooobie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 381
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by multi
to label people bush haters and terrorist supporters is just weak rhetoric...without very much substance
or thought..
Quote:
Originally posted by multi
fuck off..
there are millions that hate bush for what he has turned the modern world into...
__________________
Proud member of the Republican Attack Squad!
scooobiedooobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-04, 01:28 AM   #8
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
GrinNo lame..

and that waste of a post proves what?
(ok hates a prety strong emotion..i guess i mean disapprove)

people should be proud disapprove of him and his tactics..ffs he has done the main damage not the terrorists..
but you the media and the other brainwashed...all cry foul at this idea..
its all about programming and desensitizing..
some like to buy it hook line and sinker..


this war on terrorisim only causes more terrorisim?
ofcourse it does..its exactly what its designed to do...

(oh look theres another car with islamic paraphenalia found near the seen of more carnage..)
anyway thats another story..
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-04, 02:23 AM   #9
floydian slip
===\/------/\===
 
floydian slip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,704
Default Re: lame..

Quote:
Originally posted by multi

(oh look theres another car with islamic paraphenalia found near the seen of more carnage..)


Spain blame

But Spanish Interior Minister Angel Acebes said authorities were investigating a van found in the town of Alcala de Henares, outside Madrid, with at least seven detonators and an Arabic tape with Koranic teachings.



Quote:
Originally posted by multi

thats is just bullshit and MOST people
can see right through it..
in america most do not
thats the problem


America spells competition, join us in our blind ambition
Get yourself a brand new motor car
Someday soon we'll stop to ponder what on Earth's this spell we're under
We made the grade and still we wonder who the hell we are...
floydian slip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-04, 05:41 AM   #10
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by multi


its a mind fuck
thats is just bullshit and MOST people
can see right through it..

lol, you and your buddies from Moveon and the DemocraticUnderground.com aren't exactly "most people"

i said it before and i'll say it again, the extreme left is all in a uproar because they realize America is more like Bush than it is like them. you dolts are a minority, you just live in an echo chamber that makes you think you're not (see Howard Dean's "certain nomination" for more proof).
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-04, 10:42 AM   #11
scooobiedooobie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 381
Default Re: lame..

Quote:
Originally posted by multi
and that waste of a post proves what?
thought it was kinda obvious..but i'll try to explain it to you.

in one sentence you say "to label people bush haters and terrorist supporters is just weak rhetoric...without very much substance or thought."

in another sentence you say "fuck off..
there are millions that hate bush for what he has turned the modern world into"

by that, you just labled "millions" of people as bush-haters. so how can you see labeling people bush-haters as "weak rhetoric, without very much substance or thought" when that's exactly what you're doing?

Quote:
people should be proud disapprove of him and his tactics..ffs he has done the main damage not the terrorists..
weak rhetoric, without any substance or thought.
__________________
Proud member of the Republican Attack Squad!
scooobiedooobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-04, 02:06 PM   #12
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

lol..
um ..but you started the bush haters stuff

i was just responding your comment so you might understand..in the terms that you were using..

obviously went too far over your head...

span you might be thinking we are minority...but everyday comments coming from people like you in the right help serve to push people just that little more to the left..

you really dont think people are smart enough to see terrorisim as the resistance efforts of the 3rd world...and that have been pushed by the west for over 150 years into this position ..

this is a resistance that will carry on for generations...and all this war on terror bullshit will only help to etch it into the hearts and minds of those groups that are the most oppressed..its a war that both sides know can never be won..
and thats why its becoming an important tool for the propagandists in the the west that only represent the rich and the corporations..and the stock exchange..ect

terrorisim will go to new levels with probably dirty bombs and bioweapons..
and then you will say ..good thing bush started that war on terrorisim when he did..because he stopped this from happening earlier..

but hopefully most will see by that time he had started similar type of situation to vietnam..unable backout and unable to be driven out.. but this time all of the western world would be the battlefield
driven by some flimsy idea that its ok.. they are somehow reaping revenge for 911..or some sort of backward logic to that effect...(because anyone can see its not designed to actually STOP terrorisim)
israel and the US(britan australia ..et al) are rich high-tech countries ..taking the moral high ground to have their way with the poor( they never attack the wealthy) islamics in the 3rd world...where they have bred and nurtured the politcal climate in the area for the last 50 years to serve their agenda of occupation ..


its not just a handful of people that see this..many saw it all quite clearly and objected to the way bush was BULLSHITTING everyone so he could create this mess that is currently iraq..
i wont even mention afganistan..

(it was a ratings grabber when it started ..but its gone a little stale..)

world has lost sadam and the taliban..?did i hear you say?

yes and force is the only way to rid the the world of these people that we were all lead to believe to be the worst in the world..but why not fix some place in africa too ? plenty of real bad shit going down there for the last 30 years..(most of it also fueled by the west)
because these 2 were yet another fuckup created by the US that had got out of hand..enough repeditive media over and over about it and never mention the part about how they were only in power because of the US..

after the cold war there was a tendancy to favor the dismantling of the various western armies...much to the horror of the political right..at that time there was this actor stooge and his vice-prez to craftily help along the flegling terrorist groups of the time..anyway
the oppurtunity for that to ever even look like happening again is forever gone with the events post 2001..

thats if there really ever was 2 paths to go down..
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-04, 08:24 PM   #13
Drakonix
Just Draggin' Along
 
Drakonix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 1,210
Default

Quote:
dont whine on about terrorisim u retards..its the US and british and the israelis that have provoked it from the onset..
I guess that's supposed to mean that we shouldn't care that thousands of innocent government employees, civilians, firemen, police officers and rescue workers were killed by terrorist acts on 09/11/2001 - because supposedly "we started it".

I guess that means if any fanatic (religious or otherwise) wants anything, all they have to do is threaten to blow up something and we should give them what they want. Don't count on that ever happening.

I guess we did start it. We (the United States) formed a government based on liberty and freedom. A lot of blood was spilled in that process. Blood continues to be the price for maintaining those ideals.

Terrorists will NEVER win.

Iraqi resistance defeating the coalition military is about as likely as finding a gnat fart in a level 5 tornado.
__________________
Copyright means the copy of the CD/DVD burned with no errors.

I will never spend a another dime on content that I can’t use the way I please. If I can’t copy it to my hard drive and play it using the devices I want, when and where I want, I won’t be buying it. Period. They can all take their DRM, broadcast flags, rootkits, and Compact Discs that aren’t really compact discs and shove them up their bottom-lines.
Drakonix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-03-04, 03:11 AM   #14
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

i dont believe that terrorisim can be ignored...

i also think that many the centuries of violent solutions for just about anything in the middle east and in the west...is really whats to blame for it..

looking at it that way only makes me think its a war between the modern culture of violence V's the ancient culture of violence
except the modern one has all these powerful shiny toys to use against the other..

in the same fucked up way that medicine only deals with the condition caused by the dis-ease...(with the help of more fine programming by the media)
this coalition seems to think that the surgical strikes and the occupation of their anti-biotic foot soldiers will get rid of terrorisim..
(like with antibiotics..this is creating a super-strain of the disease)

its like when p2p gets attacked it only serves to strengthen it and drive it further underground...the current approach to terrorisim will do the same..

do i have a better one..?

no

the spanish tragedy is a shocking waste of life..my condolences go to all the spanish people of the world..and especialy to the people that have lost love ones..

please dont get me wrong here but as i have said before.

i am all for preventing terrorisim..i would even almost advocate death penalty for people caught trying it..(its this martyr thing that bothers me..)..but throwing more money at keeping the public safe in large western cities and other potential targets and less money at the military overseas wich i can only see will help to create a stronger more advanced form of terrorisim for our future generations to deal with...is not much to offer but its about all i can come up with at the moment..
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump






All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© www.p2p-zone.com - Napsterites - 2000 - 2024 (Contact grm1@iinet.net.au for all admin enquiries)