GWEEDO

Joined

• started 13 topics
• posted 226 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by GWEEDO

• 
  38

  Need help locating WT destroying U.S.Buildings

  by Tallyman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i am in need of references to watchtower publications that contain images.

  of united states government buildings, especially the white house-.

  depicted as being violently destroyed by the watchtower society.. i have much of the wt literature pre-1992, and a bit of the post-1992 stuff,.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Tally, i swear thats the UN building getting it in that pic
• 
  1

  It aint Osama. Its the evil WT cult at work -PROOF

  by GWEEDO in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ok... who has the money?.

  well, the wt does.

  its been bleeding its members dry for years!.

  1. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Ok..

  Who has the money?

  Well, the WT does. Its been bleeding its members dry for years!

  Who has the will?

  Again the WT does. We all know how much they hate the world and this 'evil Satanic system'.

  But...Who has the training?

  Again, the the WT does. Just go to the official WT site and then go to 'current topics'. See the rather quaint title: 'Making air travel safer'. Click there and the true deviousness of the evil WT cult is revealed.

  [url] http://www.watchtower.org/library/g/2000/9/22a/article_01.htm[/url]

  They have been caught out big time here. Apparently this article appeared in Awake sept22 2000. So we can safely say they have been planning this thing for years... those sick MF'ers. Scroll down the page and notice the picture of NY with the WTC in focus. Obviously the dub in the simulator is about to go through a dry run. Scroll down even further and notice the glee with which the dub plows into a control tower.

  "As I now try to "land" the "Boeing 747" at "Charles de Gaulle Airport" under the watchful eye of my copilot Terry I expect to hear the sweet chirp of tires touching down on the tarmac. Alas, a bad maneuver freezes the screen of the simulator! I just crashed a "big iron" into the air traffic control tower!"

  Bad Maneuver huh! Someone get the feds!
• 
  16

  and now a minutes silence for the people of Iraq

  by GWEEDO in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  you know, as much as i was horrified and felt sick to the gut by the wtc disaster (i must have watched that plane crash into the wtc about fifty times).

  there are other things going on in the world that largely go unreported by comparison but constitute just as much suffering(if not more) as the wtc disaster.. one of the questions i've asked myself is why is the u.s. so hated by certain arab groups.

  maybe this article from off the 'noam chomsky archive'[url] http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/index.cfm[/url] will go a little way to answering that:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  You know, all i'm really saying is that the U.S. has enemies for reasons. It's not as simple as George W.Bush has put it: that the U.S. was attacked because it is a lover of freedom. The issues run deeper and become quite complex.
  To figure out why the US is so hated by some is a question that should be approached not flippantly, but very seriously and honestly.
  Its all very well to talk revenge....and i admitt it's unreasonable to expect the US not to do so in some way. But what I'm worried about now is the possiblity of escalation. Attacking someone could well give further justification to these pscho terrorists out there to committ further atrocities. I can't see things ending well at the moment...and I don't like where things might be heading. I hope there are a few people high up on both sides that real cool heads. Sadly, there are some people around who seem to react to these situations as if it's just a game and we can drop bombs like we are playing Duke Nukem. The world don't need anymore Armchair commando's.
• 
  16

  and now a minutes silence for the people of Iraq

  by GWEEDO in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  you know, as much as i was horrified and felt sick to the gut by the wtc disaster (i must have watched that plane crash into the wtc about fifty times).

  there are other things going on in the world that largely go unreported by comparison but constitute just as much suffering(if not more) as the wtc disaster.. one of the questions i've asked myself is why is the u.s. so hated by certain arab groups.

  maybe this article from off the 'noam chomsky archive'[url] http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/index.cfm[/url] will go a little way to answering that:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Jelly,

  [1] Why is America responsible for feeding Iraq's children?

  The issue is whether THE U.S. imposed sanctions are a good or bad thing. Thats U.S. Sanctions. I say they are a bad thing. Not worth the price paid.

  2) my answer to 2 is that you didn't read the first article. I've never said Hussein was a good guy. I merely believe that the US is in a position to do something...and has a responsibility to do so, since they are the ones imposing the sanctions.

  3)What are you saying???? that lifting sanctions wouldn't alleviate suffering of the Iraqi people, so we may as well keep them?....I can't fathom your reasoning here!. If you are saying that Saddam wouldn't give a shit about his own people after sanctions are lifted just remember that life before the Gulf war was so much better. One of the reasons Saddam was so popular was because he provided his people with a relatively good standard of living i.e. They actually had morphine in hospitals and went to the doctor instead of buying medical text books from markets so as to do their own 'do it yourself' ops. Of course he never gave a shite about the Kurds...though nor did the US, who was a backer of Saddam when he was committing atrocities. Kurds BTW suffer as a result of sanctions too...right now, and lifting sanctions would help them too BTW. Yes, believe it or not.

  If you want an opposing opinion and a better break down go to the aforementioned site, look under 'fact sheets' and then look for '11 myths on sanctions'. Dont care to, then good for you. Think putting up a link is cowardly...too bad. Do you think i give a shit about winning debates and arguments with you....cause i dont!

  I'll go back to smoking crack now!!!
• 
  16

  and now a minutes silence for the people of Iraq

  by GWEEDO in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  you know, as much as i was horrified and felt sick to the gut by the wtc disaster (i must have watched that plane crash into the wtc about fifty times).

  there are other things going on in the world that largely go unreported by comparison but constitute just as much suffering(if not more) as the wtc disaster.. one of the questions i've asked myself is why is the u.s. so hated by certain arab groups.

  maybe this article from off the 'noam chomsky archive'[url] http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/index.cfm[/url] will go a little way to answering that:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  So sanctions are a good thing...Oh, sorry for my errant thinking.

  I'll just crawl back into my little hole here:

  http://leb.net/IAC/

  And smoke some more crack ....Claudia! cheers!
• 
  16

  and now a minutes silence for the people of Iraq

  by GWEEDO in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  you know, as much as i was horrified and felt sick to the gut by the wtc disaster (i must have watched that plane crash into the wtc about fifty times).

  there are other things going on in the world that largely go unreported by comparison but constitute just as much suffering(if not more) as the wtc disaster.. one of the questions i've asked myself is why is the u.s. so hated by certain arab groups.

  maybe this article from off the 'noam chomsky archive'[url] http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/index.cfm[/url] will go a little way to answering that:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  bboy

  Bullshit!

  Inspectors were there for some time you know. People still died then.

  How the hell are the iraqi people supposed to rise up against Hussein when they cant even feed themselves?

  Its easy to pass the buck aint it. Its all Saddams fault of course...meanwhile how many die?
• 
  10

  Appeal for CALM

  by Amazing in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when the tragic events took place tuesday, i did not post right away, as i feared my own anger and hurt would lead to careless comments on my part.

  but, once i started the nato post, that all changed, and in retrospect, i regret speaking as soon as i did.

  i think i said too many hurtful things out of anger, and may have fueled the flames, even if my comments technically did not call for hurting innocent people.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  I'm all burnt out too. Watching CNN; watching the plane hurl into the WTC over and over and over. It has left me numb. I never really felt anger...pure rage, i just felt sick.

  Your a smart guy Amazing. Your a thinker and a person who seems willing to 'look in the mirror' and stare down his own faults. If more people did that, this world would be so much better.
• 

  Aint no easy battle. Aint no easy choices

  by GWEEDO in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ripped off stratfor.com.

  2000 gmt, 010914. summary.

  united states, the u.s. government is trying to decide .

• 

  GWEEDO

  Ripped off stratfor.com

  No Easy Battle
  2000 GMT, 010914

  Summary

  In the wake of this week's terrorist attacks in the
  United States, the U.S. government is trying to decide
  how it can defeat its new style of enemy. The key to
  victory is finding the enemy's center of gravity, or
  what enables it to operate, and destroying it. But what
  has worked for the U.S. military in the past may not be
  enough this time around.

  Analysis

  The foundation of any successful military operation is
  defining and attacking the enemy's center of gravity:
  the capacity that enables it to operate. A war effort
  that does not successfully define the enemy's center of
  gravity, or lacks the ability to decisively incapacitate
  it, is doomed to failure.

  The center of gravity can be relatively easy to define,
  as was the Iraqi command and control system, or
  relatively difficult to define, as was Vietnam's
  discovery of America's unwillingness to indefinitely
  absorb casualties. In either case, identifying the
  adversary's center of gravity is the key to victory.

  In the wake of this week's terrorist attacks in the
  United States, this question is now being discussed in
  the highest reaches of the American government. The
  issue, from a military standpoint, is not one of moral
  responsibility or legal culpability. Rather, it is what
  will be required to render the enemy incapable of
  functioning as an effective force. Put differently, what
  is the most efficient means of destroying the enemy's
  will to resist?

  This is an extraordinarily difficult process in this
  case because it is not clear who the enemy is. Two
  schools of thought are emerging though.

  One argues that the attackers are essentially agents of
  some foreign government that enables them to operate.
  Therefore, by either defeating or dissuading this
  government from continuing to support the attackers,
  they will be rendered ineffective and the threat will
  end.

  Such a scenario is extremely attractive for the United
  States. Posing the conflict as one between nation-states
  plays to American strength in waging conventional war. A
  nation-state can be negotiated with, bombed or invaded.
  If a nation-state is identified as the attackers' center
  of gravity, then it can by some level of exertion be
  destroyed. There is now an inherent interest within the
  U.S. government to define the center of gravity as Iraq
  or Afghanistan or both. The United States knows how to
  wage such wars.

  The second school of thought argues that the entity we
  are facing is instead an amorphous, shifting collection
  of small groups, controlled in a dynamic and
  unpredictable manner and deliberately without a clear
  geographical locus. The components of the organization
  can be in Afghanistan or Boston, in Beirut or Paris. Its
  fundamental character is that it moves with near
  invisibility around the globe, forming ad hoc groups
  with exquisite patience and care for strikes against its
  enemies.

  This is a group, therefore, that has been deliberately
  constructed not to provide its enemies with a center of
  gravity. Its diffusion is designed to make it difficult
  to kill with any certainty. The founders of this group
  studied the history of underground movements and
  determined that their greatest weakness is what was
  thought to be their strength: tight control from the
  center.

  That central control, the key to the Leninist model,
  provided decisive guidance but presented enemies with a
  focal point that, if smashed, rendered the organization
  helpless. This model of underground movement accepts
  inefficiency -- there are long pauses between actions --
  in return for both security, as penetration is
  difficult, and survivability, as it does not provide its
  enemies with a definable point against which to strike.

  This model is much less attractive to American military
  planners because it does not play to American
  capabilities. It is impervious to the type of warfare
  the United States prefers, which is what one might call
  wholesale warfare. It instead demands a retail sort of
  warfare, in which the fighting level comprises very
  small unit operations, the geographic scale is
  potentially global and the time frame is extensive and
  indeterminate. It is a conflict that does lend itself to
  intelligence technology, but it ultimately turns on
  patience, subtlety and secrecy, none of which are
  America's strong suits.

  It is therefore completely understandable that the
  United States is trying to redefine the conflict in
  terms of nation-states, and there is also substantial
  precedent for it as well. The precursor terrorist
  movements of the 1970s and 1980s were far from self-
  contained entities. All received support in various ways
  from Soviet and Eastern European intelligence services,
  as well as from North Korea, Libya, Syria and others.
  From training to false passports, they were highly
  dependent on nation-states for their operation.

  It is therefore reasonable to assume the case is the
  same with these new attackers. It would follow that if
  their source of operational support were destroyed, they
  would cease to function. A bombing campaign or invasion
  would then solve the problem. The issue is to determine
  which country is supplying the support and act.

  There is no doubt the entity that attacked the United
  States got support from state intelligence services.
  Some of that support might well have been officially
  sanctioned while some might have been provided by a
  political faction or sympathetic individuals. But
  although for the attackers state support is necessary
  and desirable, it is not clear that destroying involved
  states would disable the perpetrators.

  One of the principles of the attackers appears to be
  redundancy, not in the sense of backup systems, but in
  the sense that each group contains all support systems.
  In the same sense, it appears possible that they have
  constructed relationships in such a way that although
  they depend on state backing, they are not dependent on
  the support of any particular state.

  An interesting development arising in the aftermath is
  the multitude of states accused of providing support to
  the attackers: Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan,
  Algeria and Syria, among others, have all been
  suggested. All of them could have been involved in some
  way or another, with the result being dozens of nations
  providing intentional or unintentional support. The
  attackers even appear to have drawn support from the
  United States itself, as some of the suspected hijackers
  reportedly received flight training from U.S. schools.

  The attackers have organized themselves to be parasitic.
  They are able to attach themselves to virtually any
  country that has a large enough Arab or Islamic
  community for them to disappear into or at least go
  unnoticed within. Drawing on funds acquired from one or
  many sources, they are able to extract resources
  wherever they are and continue operating.

  If such is the case, then even if Iraq or Afghanistan
  gave assistance, they are still not necessarily the
  attackers' center of gravity. Destroying the government
  or military might of these countries may be morally just
  or even required, but it will not render the enemy
  incapable of continuing operations against the United
  States.

  It is therefore not clear that a conventional war with
  countries that deliberately aided the culprits will
  achieve military victory. The ability of the attackers
  to draw sustenance from a wide array of willing and
  unwilling hosts may render them impervious to the defeat
  of a supporting country.

  The military must systematically attack an organization
  that tries very hard not to have a systematic structure
  that can be attacked. In order for this war to succeed,
  the key capability will not be primarily military force
  but highly refined, real-time intelligence about the
  behavior of a small number of individuals. But as the
  events of the last few days have shown, this is not a
  strength of the American intelligence community.

  And that is the ultimate dilemma for policymakers. If
  the kind of war we can wage well won't do the job, and
  we lack the confidence in our expertise to wage the kind
  of war we need to conduct, then what is to be done? The
  easy answer -- to fight the battle we fight best -- may not be the right answer, or it may be only part of the
  solution.
• 
  16

  and now a minutes silence for the people of Iraq

  by GWEEDO in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  you know, as much as i was horrified and felt sick to the gut by the wtc disaster (i must have watched that plane crash into the wtc about fifty times).

  there are other things going on in the world that largely go unreported by comparison but constitute just as much suffering(if not more) as the wtc disaster.. one of the questions i've asked myself is why is the u.s. so hated by certain arab groups.

  maybe this article from off the 'noam chomsky archive'[url] http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/index.cfm[/url] will go a little way to answering that:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  You know, as much as i was horrified and felt sick to the gut by the WTC disaster (i must have watched that plane crash into the WTC about fifty times). There are other things going on in the world that largely go unreported by comparison but constitute just as much suffering(if not more) as the WTC disaster.
  One of the questions i've asked myself is why is the U.S. so hated by certain Arab groups. Maybe this article from off the 'Noam Chomsky Archive'[url] http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/index.cfm[/url] will go a little way to answering that:

  A Call to Action on Sanctions and the U.S. War Against the People of Iraq

  Endorsed by Noam Chomsky, Edward Herman, Edward Said, and Howard Zinn, and many, many others.

  January 8, 1999

  At the end of 1998, the United States once again rained bombs on the people of Iraq. But even when the bombs stop falling, the U.S. war against the people of Iraq continues through the harsh economic sanctions. This is a call to action to end all the war.

  This month U.S. policy will kill 4,500 children under the age of 5 in Iraq, according to UN studies, just as it did last month and the month before that, all the way back to 1991. Since the end of the Gulf War, at least hundreds of thousands -- maybe more than 1 million -- Iraqis have died as a direct result of the UN sanctions on Iraq, which are a direct result of U.S. policy.

  This is not foreign policy -- it is sanctioned mass-murder that is nearing holocaust proportions. If we remain silent, we are condoning a genocide that is being perpetrated in the name of peace in the Middle East, a mass slaughter that is being perpetrated in our name.

  The time has come for a call to action to people of conscience. We are past the point where silence is passive consent -- when a crime reaches these proportions, silence is complicity. There are several tasks ahead of us.

  First, we must organize and make this issue a priority, just as Americans organized to stop the war in Vietnam, and to protest U.S. policies in Central America and South Africa. We need a national campaign to lift the sanctions.

  This kind of work has already begun, and those efforts need our help. For the past several years, individuals and groups have been delivering medicine and other supplies to Iraq in defiance of the U.S. blockade. Now, members of one of those groups, Voices in the Wilderness in Chicago, have been threatened with massive fines by the federal government for "exportation of donated goods, including medical supplies and toys, to Iraq absent specific prior authorization." Our government is harassing a peace group that takes medicine and toys to dying children; we owe these courageous activists oursupport.

  Such a campaign is not equivalent to support for the regime of Saddam Hussein. To oppose the sanctions is to support the Iraqi people. The people are suffering because of the actions of both the Iraqi and U.S. governments, but our moral responsibility lies here in the United States, to counter the hypocrisy and inhumanity of our leaders.

  Also, there has been a virtual embargo on news of the effects of the sanctions in the mainstream media. For the most part, the American people do not know what evil is being carried out in our name. We must continue to apply pressure on journalists at all levels -- from our local papers to the network news -- to cover this tragedy. We should overwhelm the major press with letters to the editor and put pressure on journalists to cover the story.

  And we must realize this could be a long struggle. Preparations should begin for all the possible strategies, including civil disobedience once a sufficient number of people are committed. Direct action that forces a moral accounting likely is going to be necessary.

  Whatever else we are doing, we should treat this as an emergency and put it at the top of our agenda. Existing groups can work on the issue, new groups may need to be formed, and national networks need to be built. A good central source of information exists on the web at http://leb.net/IAC/.

  Without action by us, the horrors will go on, the children will continue to die. We must appeal to the natural sympathies of the American people, who will respond if they know what is happening. We must therefore bring this issue, in every way we can, to national attention. The only way to avoid complicity in this crime is to do everything we can, and much more than we have been doing, to end the sanctions on Iraq. This issue must be discussed in every household and every public forum across the country.
• 
  15

  WT Kult "Exultation" at Destruction

  by Tallyman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  schick watchtower kult bastards!

  sick fanatic islamiks!.

  look here comes some diaper-headed fanatics (diapers full of doo-doo, so shitheads!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GWEEDO

  Government buildings blowing up!

  Check out pg52 of Revelation book. Top left

  Looks like the white house getting it!?

  Jehovah is so much more effective than terrorists, who couldn't even hit the target.

  pg127
  pg285

  Do you think the WT artist sits outside and sketchs the NY skyline for some of these pics?