| |
Main
Date: 29 Dec 2006 18:54:56
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Round about 10 tonight
|
Davey predicts Saddam's execution
--
http://costofwar.com/ - Merry Christmas
-
Way to go, Georgie!!
In Somalia, a reckless U.S. proxy war :
Undeterred by the horrors and setbacks in Iraq, Afghanistan and
Lebanon, the Bush administration has opened another battlefront in the
Muslim world. http://tinyurl.com/wr6jg
|
|
| |
Date: 04 Jan 2007 04:26:50
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
On Jan 4, 12:30 am, Howard Kveck <YOURhow...@h-SHOESbomb.com > wrote:
> In article <1167765659.781291.195...@h40g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Bill C" <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > Howard I want to make sure I get you the best info possible because
> > lots ofg what you have is factually inaccurate, even according to the
> > UN. Just for a bit here's some info on Shebaa Farms, which is the basis
> > for false claims that Israel didn't fully withdraw:
>
> >http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1991to_now_shaaba_farms.php Oh, I wasn't actually thinking of the Shaaba Farms situation. I've seen articles
> that indicate that the Israelis have regularly strolled across the border in other
> areas (particularly further south) to carry out operations against people they
> believe are threats or to intimidate the locals. As I mentioned, the Lebanese army
> has done little, if anything, to prevent this acivity.
>
> Thanks for the source.
>
> --
> tanx,
> Howard
>
> Never take a tenant with a monkey.
>
> remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
Sorry Howard
I'm just gonna toss up some links and extracts. Been miserable lately.
http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=51536&SelectRegion=Middle_East&SelectCountry=LEBANON
In Resolution 1655, adopted on 30 January, the Security Council
extended the mandate of UNIFIL by six months to 31 July 2006. The
peacekeeping mission was created in 1978 after the Israeli invasion of
southern Lebanon.
The Israelis finally withdrew in 2000.
UNIFIL's initial mandate was to confirm the Israeli withdrawal from
Lebanon, restore international peace and security and help the Lebanese
government reinstate effective authority in the area, which is yet to
be completed.
After the first withdrawal the Lebanese Government made NO effort at
all to control the area. The latest withdrawal was agreed to by Israel
on the UN fulfilling the mandate of the first one and demilitarising
the area, puttingt lots of troops on the ground quickly, stopping the
rearming and regrouping of hezbullah. This was why Israel insisted on a
much larger UN force and robust enforcement.
What did happen after the withdrawal and agreement by the UN was that
the UN changed everything they'd agreed to.
This is pretty much what Israel did agree to:
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=2495
This is what they got:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=110166
On Monday, Lebanese Defense Minister Elias Murr stated that his
nation's army would not disarm the Hizbullah, but that only the
Lebanese military and UNIFIL will carry arms south of the Litani River.
However, Murr said in a television interview, "The army is not going to
be deployed in southern Lebanon in order to disarm Hizbullah, something
that Israel was unable to do in its war." The army is to be deployed,
he said, "in order to protect the civilians and to maintain the
achievements of the resistance [the Hizbullah]."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,432019,00.html
Another important question is what to do about disarming Hezbollah, as
called for by a September 2004 UN resolution and by last week's
cease-fire resolution. The aim of the Lebanese and UN troop deployments
is to create a buffer zone on Israel's northern border free of
Hezbollah fighters. But so far, nobody seems terribly interested in
actually forcing the militants to hand over their weapons.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/11764/is_hezbollah_rearming.html
Is Hezbollah Rearming?
October 19, 2006
Prepared by: Lee Hudson Teslik
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1562890,00.html
Iran and Syria Helping Hizballah Rearm
As Lebanon's government tries to maintain its shaky grip on power,
sources tell TIME that Tehran and Damascus are shipping weapons to the
militant Shi'ite group
By ELAINE SHANNON/WASHINGTON AND TIM MCGIRK/BEIRUT
http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/site/c.glKWLeMTIsG/b.1313235/k.DAAD/January_2006BRLebanonIsrael_UNIFIL.htm
In May 2000, Israel proceeded with the complete withdrawal from South
Lebanon, in compliance with resolution 425 (1978). The SLA was
dismantled. The UN drew a border decation between Lebanon and
Israel, known as the Blue Line. In the aftermath, UNIFIL's mandate was
renewed in order to verify the Israeli withdrawal and help the Lebanese
forces to deploy into the area vacated by Israel. Because of violations
of the Blue Line by the IDF, the deployment of UNIFIL and of the
Lebanese forces in the south was halted. Hezbollah filled the vacuum,
conducting militant activities and providing social services for the
population. Today Hezbollah justifies its action against Israel based
on the Israeli occupation of the Sheb'a farms, a small piece of land
considered part of Syria by the UN but part of Lebanon by Hezbollah.
>From June 2000 to January 2001, the troop strength of UNIFIL was
increased in order to redeploy over the territory that Israel left. But
the Secretary-General noted at the end of 2000 that, out of the three
components of UNIFIL's mandate, one only remained: the restoration of
peace and security in the area, given recurrent incidents along the
Blue Line. Therefore, the strength of the force was reduced following
resolution 1337 (2001), and the mandate modified to one of monitoring.
Seems that every time the Israelis give up land, or try to make an
agreement they lose because a vast majority of the Palestinians and
Arabs have no intention of anything other than exterminating the State
of Israel, and the UN is obviously not going to enforce any agreements
other than hammer on the Israelis such as with the overflights of
Lebanon to monitor arms smuggling. Unifil was threatening to shoot down
Israeli jets, but still refuses in any way to confront Hizbullah.
The Gaza withdrawal and the phony "truce" have been a complete
disaster also. "Land for Peace" hasn't worked at all, and has actually
made the situation worse by rewarding the terrorists, validating the
tactics they've used to force Israel to cut it's own throat, and given
them a much better tactical position.
Bill C
|
| |
Date: 02 Jan 2007 11:20:59
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
On Jan 1, 12:54 am, Howard Kveck <YOURhow...@h-SHOESbomb.com > wrote:
> In article <1167537619.670006.190...@i12g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Bill C" <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 30, 10:10 pm, Howard Kveck <YOURhow...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote:
> > > In article <1167505045.637450.317...@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com>,
> > > I don't think anyone is really saying that Saddam should still
> > > be in charge or that he was an okay leader. He stunk to high heaven. On
> > > the other hand, when we went in there, things did not go like the people
> > > who wanted it said it would. It's seriously fucked up in Iraq right now.
> > > I think the real issue here is that everything to do with Saddam's trial
> > > and execution is about rank, crass politics here in the US. The fact that
> > > they really handed him over to the Iraqis right before the hanging says a
> > > lot. I think it would have been a different situation if we'd turned him
> > > over to the Hague for a trial. In the US, there would have been a mistrial
> > > called any number of times due to the number of people involved in the
> > > trial (judges, lawyers, etc.) who got whacked during the trial. When you
> > > look at it, there was never anything ressembling "fair" in the trial. Yes,
> > > there wasn't anything ressembling "fair" in how the people he was being
> > > tried for causing the death of were "tried" but that doesn't make it
> > > correct that *his* trial was fucked up, even if it's on a different order
> > > of magnitude.
>
> > > He got tried on the Dujail slaughter because, firstly, it was an easy
> > > "win" and, secondly, because they didn't really want to get into some of
> > > the other acts of barbarism he was involved in that happened while Sadam
> > > was the pal of the US government. See:
>
> > >http://www.vfpbuffalo.org/images/rumsad.jpg
>
> > > It's also amusing [1] to hear GWB talk about "rule of law" and "fair
> > > trial" regarding *this* when he still insists that, in time of war, *he*
> > > can decide who gets locked up and who gets a trial. A man who allows a
> > > place like Guantanamo to exist or the NSA to listen in to phone calls
> > > that FISA says they can't without a warrant.
>
> > > [1] Pronounced "sickening."
>
> > We agree mostly. I think the only point we don't agree on is turning
> > him over to the Hague. He'd play the media like a virtuoso for decades
> > before they even got around to actually trying him. Milosevic did a
> > pretty good job of it, and Hussein made him look like a complete hack,
> > and he was in comparison.
> > He'd be putting out a press release an hour to Al-Jazeera encouraging
> > jihad and laughing his ass off. With a little luck he'd cut an Idi Amin
> > deal and walk because he'd have huge popular support as the rightful
> > head of state who was "illegally deposed". Just because Bush's hated so
> > much. Well, that seems to be sort of what happened anyway, as he yelled about various
> things in court and the talk he gave right before his hanging. I'm well aware of how
> people have used Hague trials to spread messages to their supporters and detractors
> in the past. My thought on that is that the trial would have had something of an air
> of legitimacy that was completely lacking in the one he had. It was a show trial, no
> different than the ones the Soviets or Chinese have done. The judges all had some
> axe to grind with him.
>
> http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/12/30/saddam/
>
> > The last thing the US government wanted was him to be able to sing
> > publicly, outside their direct control, about all the shit the US put
> > him up to, and sponsored.
> > This is exactly the result they wanted, and can claim it was the
> > Iraqis who demanded jurisdiction. Plausible deniability and bury the
> > evidence. Absolutely. But to see the pictures of the hanging, it's hard to tell the
> difference between this and the ones put out by the insurgents when they murder
> someone: leather jackets and hoods, dancing around the corpse.
>
> > The point I was getting, from Davey especially, is that "Strong"
> > government that keeps "Good Order" no matter what they do to their own
> > people is the way to go. The world's heard that one way too many times,
> > from way too, many people, and a shitload of people who claim to value
> > human and civil rights are more than happy to look the other way when
> > they hear words they like despite the reality. I suppose that's what Crocket the Rocket was saying, but Bill O'Reillly's said it
> too. I guess I just dismissed it out of hand.
>
> > The left is happy to support Castro, Chavez, Mugabe was a hero to them
> > etc...The right supported Somosa, The "Doc"s, Hussein, and is still
> > happily playing footsie with the Saudis, etc.... Mugabe has long been ditched by anyone on the left worth a hill of beans.
> Everyone knows he's a piece of shit.
>
> > I know you have little to no sympathy for tyrants of any stripe,
> > unfortunately lots of others do though and the UN protects a lot of
> > them.
> > There would've been no war, or very little, in Lebanon if UNIFIL had
> > actually done it's job which was supposed to be making that area of
> > southern Lebanon demilitarised after the Israeli withdrawal. Instead
> > they watched Hezbellah bring in 10s of thousands of missiles, dig
> > bunkers, tunnels, and prepare to be able to provoke/attack Israel. If
> > they hadn't felt so strong, and protected by Unifil they would've been
> > more cautious. That's kind of an oversimplification, I think. The Israelis never fully withdrew
> and the Lebanese army never began to defend Lebanon, especially the south. Plus the
> Israelis have many Lebanese prisoners and most are kept in a situation similar to
> the guys at Guantanamo - no trials or charges. Here's a very good article on the
> Lebanon situation:
>
> http://www.truthdig.com/report/print/200601003_hiz_ballah_party_of_god/
>
> > Same for Hussein. He expected the UN, Russians, and
> > French in particular to protect him so he played games with the UN. It
> > was a bad bluff, but the UN's complete lack of credibility did nothing
> > to help put the brakes on the Neocons. The inspections did seem to be going very well, and they said that they weren't
> getting much resistance to them. But the neocons didn't care because it was full
> steam ahead no matter what.
>
> Oh, and here's a good article on Hamas and Israel:
>
> http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2951
>
> --
> tanx,
> Howard
>
> Never take a tenant with a monkey.
>
> remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -
Howard I want to make sure I get you the best info possible because
lots ofg what you have is factually inaccurate, even according to the
UN. Just for a bit here's some info on Shebaa Farms, which is the basis
for false claims that Israel didn't fully withdraw:
http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1991to_now_shaaba_farms.php
Quoted:
When Israeli forces invaded southern Lebanon in 1978, the UN Security
Council passed Resolution 425, which called upon Israel to "withdraw
forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory" and established the
UN Interim Force in Lebanon [UNIFIL] "for the purpose of confirming the
withdrawal of Israeli forces." The official position of the UN has
always been that Resolution 425 required Israeli forces to withdraw to
the pre-1978 line of separation, that is, to the 1949 ADL.
Until 1999, Lebanon endorsed this position; the 1949 ADL was considered
the border and Resolution 425 meant withdrawal across that line.
Lebanese tenant-farmers were allowed to cross the border to work the
fields south of it, considered to be in Israel. But in late 1999,
Lebanon, under pressure from Syria, began to make territorial claims to
villages in the Shaaba Frams area, south of the 1949 ADL.
When UN surveyors ked the Blue Line between Lebanon and Israel in
the summer of 2000 after Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon, they
determined that the Shaaba Farms villages were on the Israeli side,
that is, on land that will be the subject of peace negotiations between
Israel and Syria at some time in the future.
Lots more to say on all of it later when I have time to put it
together. Getting to what are actually facts in this mess is really
difficult because of the propaganda being peddled as fact from both
sides. I've got a ton of time invested in the history of this so I feel
I have a pretty good handle on it. I just want to make sure that I
point you and everyone else to solid, reliable, reputable, documents
and sources.
Thanks for the good talk
Bill C
|
| | |
Date: 03 Jan 2007 21:30:01
From: Howard Kveck
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
In article <1167765659.781291.195580@h40g2000cwb.googlegroups.com >,
"Bill C" <tritonrider@verizon.net > wrote:
> Howard I want to make sure I get you the best info possible because
> lots ofg what you have is factually inaccurate, even according to the
> UN. Just for a bit here's some info on Shebaa Farms, which is the basis
> for false claims that Israel didn't fully withdraw:
>
> http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1991to_now_shaaba_farms.php
Oh, I wasn't actually thinking of the Shaaba Farms situation. I've seen articles
that indicate that the Israelis have regularly strolled across the border in other
areas (particularly further south) to carry out operations against people they
believe are threats or to intimidate the locals. As I mentioned, the Lebanese army
has done little, if anything, to prevent this acivity.
Thanks for the source.
--
tanx,
Howard
Never take a tenant with a monkey.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
|
| |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 20:00:19
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
On Dec 30, 10:10 pm, Howard Kveck <YOURhow...@h-SHOESbomb.com > wrote:
> In article <1167505045.637450.317...@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com>,
> "Bill C" <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 30, 11:08 am, Kyle Legate <lega...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Just to inject a little perspective: while a lot of people died under
> > > Saddam's watch, a lot more people died since he has been removed. As
> > > cruel as he might have been, he kept sectarian violence in check.
>
> > Yep and Stalin saved those poor eastern Europeans from their historical
> > political instability. You and Davey seem to agree that "Good Order" is
> > the key. Personally I'd rather fight and die than live under those who
> > built their countries and empires on Good Order.
> > Bill C I don't think anyone is really saying that Saddam should still be in charge or
> that he was an okay leader. He stunk to high heaven. On the other hand, when we went
> in there, things did not go like the people who wanted it said it would. It's
> seriously fucked up in Iraq right now. I think the real issue here is that
> everything to do with Saddam's trial and execution is about rank, crass politics
> here in the US. The fact that they really handed him over to the Iraqis right before
> the hanging says a lot. I think it would have been a different situation if we'd
> turned him over to the Hague for a trial. In the US, there would have been a
> mistrial called any number of times due to the number of people involved in the
> trial (judges, lawyers, etc.) who got whacked during the trial. When you look at it,
> there was never anything ressembling "fair" in the trial. Yes, there wasn't anything
> ressembling "fair" in how the people he was being tried for causing the death of
> were "tried" but that doesn't make it correct that *his* trial was fucked up, even
> if it's on a different order of magnitude.
>
> He got tried on the Dujail slaughter because, firstly, it was an easy "win" and,
> secondly, because they didn't really want to get into some of the other acts of
> barbarism he was involved in that happened while Sadam was the pal of the US
> government. See:
>
> http://www.vfpbuffalo.org/images/rumsad.jpg
>
> It's also amusing [1] to hear GWB talk about "rule of law" and "fair trial"
> regarding *this* when he still insists that, in time of war, *he* can decide who
> gets locked up and who gets a trial. A man who allows a place like Guantanamo to
> exist or the NSA to listen in to phone calls that FISA says they can't without a
> warrant.
>
> [1] Pronounced "sickening."
>
> --
> tanx,
> Howard
>
> Never take a tenant with a monkey.
>
> remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
We agree mostly. I think the only point we don't agree on is turning
him over to the Hague. He'd play the media like a virtuoso for decades
before they even got around to actually trying him. Milosevic did a
pretty good job of it, and Hussein made him look like a complete hack,
and he was in comparison.
He'd be putting out a press release an hour to Al-Jazeera encouraging
jihad and laughing his ass off. With a little luck he'd cut an Idi Amin
deal and walk because he'd have huge popular support as the rightful
head of state who was "illegally deposed". Just because Bush's hated so
much.
The last thing the US government wanted was him to be able to sing
publicly, outside their direct control, about all the shit the US put
him up to, and sponsored.
This is exactly the result they wanted, and can claim it was the
Iraqis who demanded jurisdiction. Plausible deniability and bury the
evidence.
Bill C
The point I was getting, from Davey especially, is that "Strong"
government that keeps "Good Order" no matter what they do to their own
people is the way to go. The world's heard that one way too many times,
from way too, many people, and a shitload of people who claim to value
human and civil rights are more than happy to look the other way when
they hear words they like despite the reality.
The left is happy to support Castro, Chavez, Mugabe was a hero to them
etc...The right supported Somosa, The "Doc"s, Hussein, and is still
happily playing footsie with the Saudis, etc....
I know you have little to no sympathy for tyrants of any stripe,
unfortunately lots of others do though and the UN protects a lot of
them.
There would've been no war, or very little, in Lebanon if UNIFIL had
actually done it's job which was supposed to be making that area of
southern Lebanon demilitarised after the Israeli withdrawal. Instead
they watched Hezbellah bring in 10s of thousands of missiles, dig
bunkers, tunnels, and prepare to be able to provoke/attack Israel. If
they hadn't felt so strong, and protected by Unifil they would've been
more cautious. Same for Hussein. He expected the UN, Russians, and
French in particular to protect him so he played games with the UN. It
was a bad bluff, but the UN's complete lack of credibility did nothing
to help put the brakes on the Neocons.
Now the UN is allowing Hezbollah to rearm and dig in again from
everything I've seen. Sudan is a disaster and no one is being tried in
absentia. Why not, if the ICC worked? Where's the UN outrage that over
60 rockets were fired into Israel during the "truce" they keep
hammering on Israel to stick by? I hadn't heard or seen shit until the
other day except in AFP and Haaretz stuff. Not a peep from the BBC,
Guardian, etc...No comdemantion from Loiuse Arbor on the Palestinian
extremists purposely firing rockets at Israeli civilian areas despite
the truce.
The system is totally FUBAR and so is most of humanity. It's all about
power, money, influence, and self righteousness not people or we, and
the UN would actually be doing something about some of the brutal and
repressive countries around the world.
Happy freaking New Year, Right?
I think the constant pain is making me a little cranky ;-)
Bill C
|
| | |
Date: 31 Dec 2006 21:54:07
From: Howard Kveck
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
In article <1167537619.670006.190230@i12g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >,
"Bill C" <tritonrider@verizon.net > wrote:
> On Dec 30, 10:10 pm, Howard Kveck <YOURhow...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote:
> > In article <1167505045.637450.317...@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com>,
> > I don't think anyone is really saying that Saddam should still
> > be in charge or that he was an okay leader. He stunk to high heaven. On
> > the other hand, when we went in there, things did not go like the people
> > who wanted it said it would. It's seriously fucked up in Iraq right now.
> > I think the real issue here is that everything to do with Saddam's trial
> > and execution is about rank, crass politics here in the US. The fact that
> > they really handed him over to the Iraqis right before the hanging says a
> > lot. I think it would have been a different situation if we'd turned him
> > over to the Hague for a trial. In the US, there would have been a mistrial
> > called any number of times due to the number of people involved in the
> > trial (judges, lawyers, etc.) who got whacked during the trial. When you
> > look at it, there was never anything ressembling "fair" in the trial. Yes,
> > there wasn't anything ressembling "fair" in how the people he was being
> > tried for causing the death of were "tried" but that doesn't make it
> > correct that *his* trial was fucked up, even if it's on a different order
> > of magnitude.
> >
> > He got tried on the Dujail slaughter because, firstly, it was an easy
> > "win" and, secondly, because they didn't really want to get into some of
> > the other acts of barbarism he was involved in that happened while Sadam
> > was the pal of the US government. See:
> >
> > http://www.vfpbuffalo.org/images/rumsad.jpg
> >
> > It's also amusing [1] to hear GWB talk about "rule of law" and "fair
> > trial" regarding *this* when he still insists that, in time of war, *he*
> > can decide who gets locked up and who gets a trial. A man who allows a
> > place like Guantanamo to exist or the NSA to listen in to phone calls
> > that FISA says they can't without a warrant.
> >
> > [1] Pronounced "sickening."
>
> We agree mostly. I think the only point we don't agree on is turning
> him over to the Hague. He'd play the media like a virtuoso for decades
> before they even got around to actually trying him. Milosevic did a
> pretty good job of it, and Hussein made him look like a complete hack,
> and he was in comparison.
> He'd be putting out a press release an hour to Al-Jazeera encouraging
> jihad and laughing his ass off. With a little luck he'd cut an Idi Amin
> deal and walk because he'd have huge popular support as the rightful
> head of state who was "illegally deposed". Just because Bush's hated so
> much.
Well, that seems to be sort of what happened anyway, as he yelled about various
things in court and the talk he gave right before his hanging. I'm well aware of how
people have used Hague trials to spread messages to their supporters and detractors
in the past. My thought on that is that the trial would have had something of an air
of legitimacy that was completely lacking in the one he had. It was a show trial, no
different than the ones the Soviets or Chinese have done. The judges all had some
axe to grind with him.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/12/30/saddam/
> The last thing the US government wanted was him to be able to sing
> publicly, outside their direct control, about all the shit the US put
> him up to, and sponsored.
> This is exactly the result they wanted, and can claim it was the
> Iraqis who demanded jurisdiction. Plausible deniability and bury the
> evidence.
Absolutely. But to see the pictures of the hanging, it's hard to tell the
difference between this and the ones put out by the insurgents when they murder
someone: leather jackets and hoods, dancing around the corpse.
> The point I was getting, from Davey especially, is that "Strong"
> government that keeps "Good Order" no matter what they do to their own
> people is the way to go. The world's heard that one way too many times,
> from way too, many people, and a shitload of people who claim to value
> human and civil rights are more than happy to look the other way when
> they hear words they like despite the reality.
I suppose that's what Crocket the Rocket was saying, but Bill O'Reillly's said it
too. I guess I just dismissed it out of hand.
> The left is happy to support Castro, Chavez, Mugabe was a hero to them
> etc...The right supported Somosa, The "Doc"s, Hussein, and is still
> happily playing footsie with the Saudis, etc....
Mugabe has long been ditched by anyone on the left worth a hill of beans.
Everyone knows he's a piece of shit.
> I know you have little to no sympathy for tyrants of any stripe,
> unfortunately lots of others do though and the UN protects a lot of
> them.
> There would've been no war, or very little, in Lebanon if UNIFIL had
> actually done it's job which was supposed to be making that area of
> southern Lebanon demilitarised after the Israeli withdrawal. Instead
> they watched Hezbellah bring in 10s of thousands of missiles, dig
> bunkers, tunnels, and prepare to be able to provoke/attack Israel. If
> they hadn't felt so strong, and protected by Unifil they would've been
> more cautious.
That's kind of an oversimplification, I think. The Israelis never fully withdrew
and the Lebanese army never began to defend Lebanon, especially the south. Plus the
Israelis have many Lebanese prisoners and most are kept in a situation similar to
the guys at Guantanamo - no trials or charges. Here's a very good article on the
Lebanon situation:
http://www.truthdig.com/report/print/200601003_hiz_ballah_party_of_god/
> Same for Hussein. He expected the UN, Russians, and
> French in particular to protect him so he played games with the UN. It
> was a bad bluff, but the UN's complete lack of credibility did nothing
> to help put the brakes on the Neocons.
The inspections did seem to be going very well, and they said that they weren't
getting much resistance to them. But the neocons didn't care because it was full
steam ahead no matter what.
Oh, and here's a good article on Hamas and Israel:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2951
--
tanx,
Howard
Never take a tenant with a monkey.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Jan 2007 09:29:48
From: Howard Kveck
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
In article <YOURhoward-380A3D.21540731122006@comcast.dca.giganews.com >,
Howard Kveck <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com > wrote:
> Absolutely. But to see the pictures of the hanging, it's hard to tell the
> difference between this and the ones put out by the insurgents when they
> murder someone: leather jackets and hoods, dancing around the corpse.
From Glenn Greenwald:
------------------------
And the most revealing, and most disturbing, detail is that Saddam's executioners
-- in between playground insults spat at a tied-up Saddam -- chanted their
religious-like allegiance to Moktada Al Sadr, the Shiite militia leader whom we are
told is the Great Enemy of the U.S., the One We Now Must Kill. This noble and just
event for which we are responsible was carried out by a brutal, murderous, lawless
militia. Freedom is on the ch.
------------------------
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2007/01/iraqis-learn-art-of-legal-workarounds.html
--
tanx,
Howard
Never take a tenant with a monkey.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
|
| |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 16:45:15
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
On Dec 30, 6:25 pm, "Bill C" <tritonri...@verizon.net > wrote:
> On Dec 30, 3:29 pm, Fred Fredburger
> How are the never ending talks going in stopping the Sudanese
> Genocide? How'd it go in Somalia when rather than fight the French
> observed the genocide rather carefully? How about Nato in Kosovo where
> they had neither the ability or will to stop the genocide so they
> watched?
> All good things I suppose. The American Friends Service Committee
> still says it was wrong to fight WW2 and that if we'd asked nicely
> enough there would've been no war.
> Not my kind of people or thinking.
> Some more rational thoughts:
>
> "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the
> blood of patriots and tyrants."
> The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain
> occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive."
> "I have no fear that the result of our experiment will be that men
> may be trusted to govern themselves without a master."
> All from Thomas Jefferson
> Bill C
Here're some thoughts from one of those war-mongering imperialist
Canadians:
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-71-1290-7532/conflict_war/blue_berets/
In 1993, Lt.-Gen. Romeo Dallaire and his Blue Berets landed in Rwanda
to guard the peace between the battling Hutus and Tutsis. The country
was in ruins, threatened by the chaos of civil war. Suspecting a plot
of genocide, Dallaire planned pre-emptive action. But the United
Nations curbed Dallaire's plans. Machete-wielding forces moved
systematically through the country, slaughtering innocents. A year
later, Dallaire and the peacekeepers left Rwanda. In 100 days, close to
800,000 Rwandans were brutally murdered by their fellow countrymen.
An honorable man who's haunted for life because he wasn't allowed to
fight.
The beat goes on in Sudan. Same policy. Same result.
Nothing's ever worth fighting for, right?
Bill C
|
| |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 15:25:54
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
On Dec 30, 3:29 pm, Fred Fredburger
<FredFredbur...@WhereAreTheNachos.huh > wrote:
> Bill C wrote:
>
> > On Dec 30, 11:08 am, Kyle Legate <lega...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Just to inject a little perspective: while a lot of people died under
> >> Saddam's watch, a lot more people died since he has been removed. As
> >> cruel as he might have been, he kept sectarian violence in check.
>
> > Yep and Stalin saved those poor eastern Europeans from their historical
> > political instability. You and Davey seem to agree that "Good Order" is
> > the key. Personally I'd rather fight and die than live under those who
> > built their countries and empires on Good Order.
Not meaning to be a stass or anything, but shouldn't you already be
> dead then? Or was that just rhetorical flourish?
Why would I be dead? The Soviet Tanks never came through Fulda or
across the Czech border at us, though my intorduction to the area was
Welcome to ---, in the event of war you have 9 minutes to live." as we
were a priy communications/ intelligence target.
The US, and Europe are free because people did show up and eventually
take a stand for freedom. I'm not willing to go backwards. My friends
and family members are still showing up in Iraq and Afghanistan, hoping
to make a difference, even though GWB has fucked it up totally from the
beginning.
How are the never ending talks going in stopping the Sudanese
Genocide? How'd it go in Somalia when rather than fight the French
observed the genocide rather carefully? How about Nato in Kosovo where
they had neither the ability or will to stop the genocide so they
watched?
All good things I suppose. The American Friends Service Committee
still says it was wrong to fight WW2 and that if we'd asked nicely
enough there would've been no war.
Not my kind of people or thinking.
Some more rational thoughts:
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the
blood of patriots and tyrants."
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain
occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive."
"I have no fear that the result of our experiment will be that men
may be trusted to govern themselves without a master."
All from Thomas Jefferson
Bill C
|
| | |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 22:59:15
From: Bob Schwartz
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
Bill C wrote:
> "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the
> blood of patriots and tyrants."
> The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain
> occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive."
> "I have no fear that the result of our experiment will be that men
> may be trusted to govern themselves without a master."
> All from Thomas Jefferson
> Bill C
Not Benjamin Franklin?
Bob Schwartz
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Dec 2006 10:45:11
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
Bill C wrote:
>> All from Thomas Jefferson
Bob Schwartz wrote:
> Not Benjamin Franklin?
Probably drunk on the job again.
|
| |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 11:03:00
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
On Dec 30, 1:57 pm, "Bill C" <tritonri...@verizon.net > wrote:
> On Dec 30, 11:08 am, Kyle Legate <lega...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just to inject a little perspective: while a lot of people died under
>
> > Saddam's watch, a lot more people died since he has been removed. As
> > cruel as he might have been, he kept sectarian violence in check.Yep and Stalin saved those poor eastern Europeans from their historical
> political instability. You and Davey seem to agree that "Good Order" is
> the key. Personally I'd rather fight and die than live under those who
> built their countries and empires on Good Order.
> Bill C
Can't find it right now, but I think it was Stalin who said:
"I will have peace! It may be the peace of a graveyard, but I will
have peace in my land!" or something very similar.
Bill C
|
| |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 10:57:25
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
On Dec 30, 11:08 am, Kyle Legate <lega...@hotmail.com > wrote:
Just to inject a little perspective: while a lot of people died under
> Saddam's watch, a lot more people died since he has been removed. As
> cruel as he might have been, he kept sectarian violence in check.
Yep and Stalin saved those poor eastern Europeans from their historical
political instability. You and Davey seem to agree that "Good Order" is
the key. Personally I'd rather fight and die than live under those who
built their countries and empires on Good Order.
Bill C
|
| | |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 19:10:38
From: Howard Kveck
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
In article <1167505045.637450.317800@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com >,
"Bill C" <tritonrider@verizon.net > wrote:
> On Dec 30, 11:08 am, Kyle Legate <lega...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just to inject a little perspective: while a lot of people died under
> > Saddam's watch, a lot more people died since he has been removed. As
> > cruel as he might have been, he kept sectarian violence in check.
>
> Yep and Stalin saved those poor eastern Europeans from their historical
> political instability. You and Davey seem to agree that "Good Order" is
> the key. Personally I'd rather fight and die than live under those who
> built their countries and empires on Good Order.
> Bill C
I don't think anyone is really saying that Saddam should still be in charge or
that he was an okay leader. He stunk to high heaven. On the other hand, when we went
in there, things did not go like the people who wanted it said it would. It's
seriously fucked up in Iraq right now. I think the real issue here is that
everything to do with Saddam's trial and execution is about rank, crass politics
here in the US. The fact that they really handed him over to the Iraqis right before
the hanging says a lot. I think it would have been a different situation if we'd
turned him over to the Hague for a trial. In the US, there would have been a
mistrial called any number of times due to the number of people involved in the
trial (judges, lawyers, etc.) who got whacked during the trial. When you look at it,
there was never anything ressembling "fair" in the trial. Yes, there wasn't anything
ressembling "fair" in how the people he was being tried for causing the death of
were "tried" but that doesn't make it correct that *his* trial was fucked up, even
if it's on a different order of magnitude.
He got tried on the Dujail slaughter because, firstly, it was an easy "win" and,
secondly, because they didn't really want to get into some of the other acts of
barbarism he was involved in that happened while Sadam was the pal of the US
government. See:
http://www.vfpbuffalo.org/images/rumsad.jpg
It's also amusing [1] to hear GWB talk about "rule of law" and "fair trial"
regarding *this* when he still insists that, in time of war, *he* can decide who
gets locked up and who gets a trial. A man who allows a place like Guantanamo to
exist or the NSA to listen in to phone calls that FISA says they can't without a
warrant.
[1] Pronounced "sickening."
--
tanx,
Howard
Never take a tenant with a monkey.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
|
| | |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 12:29:20
From: Fred Fredburger
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
Bill C wrote:
>
> On Dec 30, 11:08 am, Kyle Legate <lega...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just to inject a little perspective: while a lot of people died under
>> Saddam's watch, a lot more people died since he has been removed. As
>> cruel as he might have been, he kept sectarian violence in check.
>
> Yep and Stalin saved those poor eastern Europeans from their historical
> political instability. You and Davey seem to agree that "Good Order" is
> the key. Personally I'd rather fight and die than live under those who
> built their countries and empires on Good Order.
Not meaning to be a stass or anything, but shouldn't you already be
dead then? Or was that just rhetorical flourish?
|
| |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 12:36:51
From: MagillaGorilla
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
Davey Crockett wrote:
> Davey predicts Saddam's execution
>
Dude,
You need to calm down with these political posts that have nothing
whatsoever to do with cycling. And stop referring to yourself in the
third person like some kind of drunken Pantani.
If you have nothing interesting to say in the sport of cycling, then
don't post.
Thanks for telling us about Sadddam's execution though. It's only been
rumored to be imminent by every media outlet non-stop for the past 48
hours. Do you think you've scooped a story on your own?
Thanks,
Magilla
|
| |
Date: 29 Dec 2006 19:42:35
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
On Dec 29, 2:44 pm, Davey Crockett <daveycrocket...@azurservers.com >
wrote:
> Dan Gregory <dangreg...@brakes.palaver.freeserve.co.uk> writes:
> > Davey Crockett wrote:
> >> Davey predicts Saddam's execution
>
> > Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been handed over to the Iraqi
> > authorities ahead of his execution, his lawyers say they have been
> > told.
>
> > "The American side has notified us that they have handed over the
> > president to the Iraqi authorities," lawyer Khalil al-Dulaimi said,
> > quoted by Reuters.
>
> > The prison breakout is scheduled for 9.45 leading Sunni sources have
> > added...Whilst there's life there's Hope
Nope, in this case "where there's death there's hope". One more dead
genocidal scumbag gone. The world is a little bit better for it
tonight.
Unfortunately there's never been a shortage of people happy to step
into the job though.
Bill C
|
| | |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 17:08:59
From: Kyle Legate
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
Bill C wrote:
>
> On Dec 29, 2:44 pm, Davey Crockett <daveycrocket...@azurservers.com>
> wrote:
>> Dan Gregory <dangreg...@brakes.palaver.freeserve.co.uk> writes:
>>> Davey Crockett wrote:
>>>> Davey predicts Saddam's execution
>>> Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been handed over to the Iraqi
>>> authorities ahead of his execution, his lawyers say they have been
>>> told.
>>> "The American side has notified us that they have handed over the
>>> president to the Iraqi authorities," lawyer Khalil al-Dulaimi said,
>>> quoted by Reuters.
>>> The prison breakout is scheduled for 9.45 leading Sunni sources have
>>> added...Whilst there's life there's Hope
>
> Nope, in this case "where there's death there's hope". One more dead
> genocidal scumbag gone. The world is a little bit better for it
> tonight.
>
Just to inject a little perspective: while a lot of people died under
Saddam's watch, a lot more people died since he has been removed. As
cruel as he might have been, he kept sectarian violence in check.
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 12:39:02
From: MagillaGorilla
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
Kyle Legate wrote:
> Bill C wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 29, 2:44 pm, Davey Crockett <daveycrocket...@azurservers.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dan Gregory <dangreg...@brakes.palaver.freeserve.co.uk> writes:
>>>
>>>> Davey Crockett wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Davey predicts Saddam's execution
>>>>
>>>> Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been handed over to the Iraqi
>>>> authorities ahead of his execution, his lawyers say they have been
>>>> told.
>>>> "The American side has notified us that they have handed over the
>>>> president to the Iraqi authorities," lawyer Khalil al-Dulaimi said,
>>>> quoted by Reuters.
>>>> The prison breakout is scheduled for 9.45 leading Sunni sources have
>>>> added...Whilst there's life there's Hope
>>
>>
>> Nope, in this case "where there's death there's hope". One more dead
>> genocidal scumbag gone. The world is a little bit better for it
>> tonight.
>>
>
> Just to inject a little perspective: while a lot of people died under
> Saddam's watch, a lot more people died since he has been removed. As
> cruel as he might have been, he kept sectarian violence in check.
You can thank President Bush for many of those innocent deaths too. But
since he goes bike riding with Lance, I guess that makes it all okay.
Superficially yours on behalf of most dumbass Americans,
Magilla
|
| |
Date: 29 Dec 2006 18:47:28
From: Dan Gregory
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
Davey Crockett wrote:
> Davey predicts Saddam's execution
>
Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been handed over to the Iraqi
authorities ahead of his execution, his lawyers say they have been told.
"The American side has notified us that they have handed over the
president to the Iraqi authorities," lawyer Khalil al-Dulaimi said,
quoted by Reuters.
The prison breakout is scheduled for 9.45 leading Sunni sources have
added...
|
| | |
Date: 29 Dec 2006 20:44:06
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: Round about 10 tonight
|
Dan Gregory <dangregory@brakes.palaver.freeserve.co.uk > writes:
> Davey Crockett wrote:
>> Davey predicts Saddam's execution
>>
>
> Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been handed over to the Iraqi
> authorities ahead of his execution, his lawyers say they have been
> told.
>
> "The American side has notified us that they have handed over the
> president to the Iraqi authorities," lawyer Khalil al-Dulaimi said,
> quoted by Reuters.
>
> The prison breakout is scheduled for 9.45 leading Sunni sources have
> added...
Whilst there's life there's Hope
--
http://costofwar.com/ - Merry Christmas
-
U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins' revelation Maher Arar is
still considered a threat to his nation and is barred from entering it
should be seen in the context of the Bush administration's rap sheet
on abduction, torture, rendition, false imprisonment and kangaroo
justice.
|
|
