Re: Brainwashed?
Unless this is an accidentally sloppy formulation I would say that
you seem brainwashed. You talk about people standing up for
"what is right" not for "what they believe is right". There is
quite a big difference there. Anybody is and should be allowed
to have their own opinion, but you are elevating your opinion
to be an undisputable truth, not accepting other people to have
a differing opinion. Sadly, this seems to be quite a common
phenomenon amongst americans, not being able to, or not
bothering to, distinguish between their beliefs and the objective
truth. (Now, don't overinterpret me here, I do not say this
applies to all americans or that it does not apply also to many
non-americans).
Neutron Bob said:
Unless this is an accidentally sloppy formulation I would say that
you seem brainwashed. You talk about people standing up for
"what is right" not for "what they believe is right". There is
quite a big difference there. Anybody is and should be allowed
to have their own opinion, but you are elevating your opinion
to be an undisputable truth, not accepting other people to have
a differing opinion. Sadly, this seems to be quite a common
phenomenon amongst americans, not being able to, or not
bothering to, distinguish between their beliefs and the objective
truth. (Now, don't overinterpret me here, I do not say this
applies to all americans or that it does not apply also to many
non-americans).
How many funerals did you go to after 9/11?
I personally went to 11 funerals after September 11th. I sang at 2 of them.
Iraq is carrying on a proxy war against the U.S. --
and for our European allies -- perhaps we should remove the corpses from Normandy, the Ardenne or Ypres.
I personally went to 11 funerals after September 11th. I sang at 2 of them.
Iraq is carrying on a proxy war against the U.S. --
and for our European allies -- perhaps we should remove the corpses from Normandy, the Ardenne or Ypres.
I think this is getting better every day.
Also informed-ation is reaching out like crazy, with major help from the internet, which I think is a blessing. The next step is now to get all informed. Information to the people, and power to the people.
Yes, a large portion of the to-be-informed-with part.
BEATING THE BUSH
Hi,
The only thing I know for certain in this case is that neither Bush nor Houssein are any good at keeping peace.
When talking to the Arab community in my country you won't encounter too many supporters in favour of a war against Iraq let alone a good word for the Americans.
Don't get me wrong here most of them don't think of Houssein as an hero either but anti-americanism is definitely " en vogue".
History has taught us nothing,or so it seems.
Cheers,🙄
Hi,
The only thing I know for certain in this case is that neither Bush nor Houssein are any good at keeping peace.
When talking to the Arab community in my country you won't encounter too many supporters in favour of a war against Iraq let alone a good word for the Americans.
Don't get me wrong here most of them don't think of Houssein as an hero either but anti-americanism is definitely " en vogue".
History has taught us nothing,or so it seems.
Cheers,🙄
Re: How many funerals did you go to after 9/11?
I thought we were discussing Irag in this thread. As far as I know
there has still not been any proof presented that Iraq was
involved in the horrible events of Sep. 11, or that they are
involved with al Queda. In a sense it would be surprising they
would have anything to do with one another, since they are
religiously quite far apart, but they may have certain common
goals on their agendas, so it may still be that they do cooperate.
However, the world is still asking for proof, while Bush is only
providing rhetorics. Saddam has a proven track record of very
bad behavious in the past, but the question is if there is any
reason to strike now. The way of handling this affair by Bush
and his associates is still puzzling me. Philo seems to have
some first-hand knowledge that may constitute such proofs,
but why must we hear it from him, and not from official sources
who should have all the reason in the world to present that
proof in order to justify an attack on Iraq?
BTW, although US forces were very important for the outcome
of WWII, don't forget there are less noble sides to the coin.
For instance, it seems that IBM equipment was essential for
the administration required by the germans to carry out the
holocaust, and that Thomas Watson and his nearest
associates were not only fully aware of the use of the equipment
and making a lot of money out of it, but even helped the germans
by suggesting more efficient methods to use it. When the US
were finally at war with germany, IBM still made money through
supplying punch cards throught their german branch company.
At the same time they also happily supplied punched cards to
the allied side.
Edit: I should, perhaps, add that although I am very much
against war and don't like militaries very much, events in the
past 10+ years have made me realize that the world is not
such a safe place as I thought, and that many humans seem
to have a view I hardly thought possible, except for certain
mentally ill people. The Gulf war was the first such event. I
did support that for the simple reason that one country, Kuweit,
was attacked by another country, Iraq, and asked for help to
defend themselves. It is hard to be against defensive war or
against forces who are invited to help with the defense. Other
chocking events were Bosnia and Kosovo, not the least since
they took place so close to us in western Europe. It was quite
hard to believe such things could happen within Europe. Then
we have the recent problem with al Queda and terrorism, which
is very scaring and horrible, but also much more complex and
difficult, since we are not dealing with a nation here, but a
network of fanatics.
jackinnj said:
I thought we were discussing Irag in this thread. As far as I know
there has still not been any proof presented that Iraq was
involved in the horrible events of Sep. 11, or that they are
involved with al Queda. In a sense it would be surprising they
would have anything to do with one another, since they are
religiously quite far apart, but they may have certain common
goals on their agendas, so it may still be that they do cooperate.
However, the world is still asking for proof, while Bush is only
providing rhetorics. Saddam has a proven track record of very
bad behavious in the past, but the question is if there is any
reason to strike now. The way of handling this affair by Bush
and his associates is still puzzling me. Philo seems to have
some first-hand knowledge that may constitute such proofs,
but why must we hear it from him, and not from official sources
who should have all the reason in the world to present that
proof in order to justify an attack on Iraq?
BTW, although US forces were very important for the outcome
of WWII, don't forget there are less noble sides to the coin.
For instance, it seems that IBM equipment was essential for
the administration required by the germans to carry out the
holocaust, and that Thomas Watson and his nearest
associates were not only fully aware of the use of the equipment
and making a lot of money out of it, but even helped the germans
by suggesting more efficient methods to use it. When the US
were finally at war with germany, IBM still made money through
supplying punch cards throught their german branch company.
At the same time they also happily supplied punched cards to
the allied side.
Edit: I should, perhaps, add that although I am very much
against war and don't like militaries very much, events in the
past 10+ years have made me realize that the world is not
such a safe place as I thought, and that many humans seem
to have a view I hardly thought possible, except for certain
mentally ill people. The Gulf war was the first such event. I
did support that for the simple reason that one country, Kuweit,
was attacked by another country, Iraq, and asked for help to
defend themselves. It is hard to be against defensive war or
against forces who are invited to help with the defense. Other
chocking events were Bosnia and Kosovo, not the least since
they took place so close to us in western Europe. It was quite
hard to believe such things could happen within Europe. Then
we have the recent problem with al Queda and terrorism, which
is very scaring and horrible, but also much more complex and
difficult, since we are not dealing with a nation here, but a
network of fanatics.
IBM is a company and not the United States Government. A big difference. Nowadays, such corporate behavior (making money from the opposing country) would be considered corporate traitorship and is dealt with severly.
CAPITALISM.
Hi,
Does anyone remember the Bull scandal some years back?
Same,same but different.😡
Cheers,😉
Hi,
Does anyone remember the Bull scandal some years back?
Same,same but different.😡
Cheers,😉
In case if you do not know yet:
Frodo has failed... and the Dark Lord has got hold of his ring again
Frodo has failed... and the Dark Lord has got hold of his ring again
Philo said:
I quite agree, and hopefully the US government had no
knowledge of this. On the other hand, I have often heard
americans complaining angrily about swedish companys
selling iron ore and ball bearings to Germany during the war,
and we were not even at war with Germany. This was done
to prevent Sweden from being dragged into the war, although
there was undeniably a profit involved. IBMs behaviour was
purely for profit and much more ruthless. My point was only
to show that the US were not only the angels freeing Europe
that some americans are very persistent to point out. And while
we're at it, I seriously doubt Hitler would ever had had a chance to win the elections in Germany if their economy had not been
totally devastated as a consequence of the Wall Street crash,
so maybe one might say that the US was partially responsible
for the war. (I'll probably be hit by an atom bomb for saying this,
but it is something worth to think about).
No no..
Someone is trying to make you believe he is wearing that ring. But if you think for yourself for a second, then you can see a completely different glare on the ring:
Someone is trying to make you believe he is wearing that ring. But if you think for yourself for a second, then you can see a completely different glare on the ring:
Nielsio said:
Yes, of course it is faked. Not even a Kodachrome 25 film would
allow for such a sharp and perfect enlargement, and digital
cameras wouldn't even come near it.
WWII.
Hi,
Well said Christer.
And shall we discuss the Marshal plan too?
There's a lot of hypocrisy out there and as far as I can see we're still in an economic recession because of "Desert Storm"...
Someone has to pick up the tab,right?
Nah,...let the UN handle this one for as long as possible I'd say.
Cheers,😉
Hi,
Well said Christer.
And shall we discuss the Marshal plan too?
There's a lot of hypocrisy out there and as far as I can see we're still in an economic recession because of "Desert Storm"...
Someone has to pick up the tab,right?
Nah,...let the UN handle this one for as long as possible I'd say.
Cheers,😉
Nielsio said:
Yes, you are right, that is probably not an appropriate word
to use. I apologize for that. It is late and I'm tired, so I'm
not quite sure what word would be appropriate, but I think
you get what I mean. I do not mean any kind of deliberate
responsibility, but just that events in the US were probably
one of several factors leading to the outbreak of WWII. The
reasons for the outbreak of wars are always much more complex
than the simplified versions we are told in history books.
Christer said:
But my 8x10 would! But that's not why it's fake. We all know he wears his Skull and Bones ring on that finger.
Nednai said:
Oh yes, I was thinking of medium and large format film too, but
that is hardly ever used for this type of photos nowadays.
Christer said:
I know it is of course faked, and I know everyone else knows it, and I thought everyone also knew that I already knew that and wouldn't think I was being serious.
Get it?
I'm not quite sure how to put this in words...
I have been to Poland and visited the death camps.... I have stood in the war graves in the Somme and Normandy and Washington DC... When it comes to war there are no winners, we all lose, even the victorious lose their humanity.Is Saddam evil? Yes. Is he connected to 9/11, no.
We go to war, we all loose..
I have been to Poland and visited the death camps.... I have stood in the war graves in the Somme and Normandy and Washington DC... When it comes to war there are no winners, we all lose, even the victorious lose their humanity.Is Saddam evil? Yes. Is he connected to 9/11, no.
We go to war, we all loose..
- Status
- Not open for further replies.