Posts by starScream

43

George Bush's excuse is good enough for me !

by searchfothetruth in

i am really excited by george bush's latest reason for bombing iraq: he's running out of patience.

for some time now i've been really pi##ed off with mr johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street.

well, him and mr patel, who runs the health food shop.they both give me queer looks, and i'm sure mr johnson is planning something nasty for me, but so far i haven't been able to discover what.. i've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden.

starScream

Not dangerous as Biological or Chemical weapons, do yourself a favor and lay of the the crack pipe.

Do yourself a favor and pull your head out of your rectum. Biological and chemical weapons kill on contact. Mere exposure to these substances is lethal very quickly. It is a fact, DU is not as dangerous as bio or chem weapons, not a crack induced hallucination. DU can be handled without harm. The decontaminations are also done for lead, another type of heavy metal ordinance. Are you saying we shouldn't use lead? Do you know what the half life of lead is? It is a lot longer than that of DU. Lead has been well documented to cause environmental and health problems. DU is new and therefore controversial. DU is a heavy metal. It is dangerous like other heavy metals such as lead. There is no evidence that is it as dangerous as mercury. Putting DU in the same category as bio and chem weapons downplays the danger of bio and chem weapons. Terrorists are not scowering the earth for DU, mercury or lead. They want bio, chem and nuke weapons.

20

What if the UN fell apart?

by undercover in

jw
friends

the wts has incessently preached about the wild beast being the un and how the anglo-saxon world power of america-great britain was the force behind it.

what if the un was to fold?

looking at world events this weekend, i wouldn't be surprised if it happened.

starScream

I'm not saying that we should do it, but what would the WTS say if the U.S. bombed the UN building. What could they say? They can't be in favor of war but they can't be in favor of the beast either.

43

George Bush's excuse is good enough for me !

by searchfothetruth in

i am really excited by george bush's latest reason for bombing iraq: he's running out of patience.

for some time now i've been really pi##ed off with mr johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street.

well, him and mr patel, who runs the health food shop.they both give me queer looks, and i'm sure mr johnson is planning something nasty for me, but so far i haven't been able to discover what.. i've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden.

starScream

Trauma_Hound,

You indicted Bush Sr in connection with DU as a Saddam type guy. I responded to that indictment. DU was approved by congress. The President does not dictate the use of conventional ordanance. That is the Job of military planners and classified by congress.

DU may very well be hazardous. We don't know for sure. DU is primarily used on Armored vehicles. DU is not as dangerous as Biological or Chemical weapons. It is not a weapon of mass destruction. Cutting and pasting a long list of articles about DU does not support your indictment of Bush Sr.

38

The U.S. already has the RIGHT to wage war on IRAQ

by starScream in

whether a u.s. lead invasion of iraq is necessary or not the united states has that right and here is why.

in 1990 the u.n. security council authorized the use of military force to expel the iraqi army from kuwait.

british and u.s. forces were the dominant contributors to the coalition.

starScream

Brigadoon,

The Army is not going to bomb Iraq. That is the Job of the Air Force and the Navy.

Don`t they have the military power to bomb and destroy the whole world - why don`t they do it ?

They have no reason to destroy the world, nor do they have the right. They have the reason and the right to take control of Iraq and destroy its illegal weapons. Iraq has stated that it will attack an invading force. Iraq is in violation of international law and the cease-fire agreement.

You are not being rational. You are being emotional.

They anyway are only scoundrels and cowards in the eyes of most americans: so come on, lets go!

That is false. Most Americans support the War. Check the gallup pole.

Isn`t it an act of MERCY that the US-army only bomb and destroy the Irak now.

The US has no intention of destroying Iraq. I don't know where you even got that. You are just making things up now.

Use your damned nuke bombs !

We wouldn't anyway, but it doesn't look like we would need to. The Iraqi army has started surrendering even before the War has started!!

43

George Bush's excuse is good enough for me !

by searchfothetruth in

i am really excited by george bush's latest reason for bombing iraq: he's running out of patience.

for some time now i've been really pi##ed off with mr johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street.

well, him and mr patel, who runs the health food shop.they both give me queer looks, and i'm sure mr johnson is planning something nasty for me, but so far i haven't been able to discover what.. i've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden.

starScream

Your analogies are incomplete and don't represent the current US/Iraq situation at all.

You are going to kill your neighboors because you don't have patience? Who the F are you?

If the SWAT team has surrounded your neighboor's house because they are known to have illegal weapons that they knew they weren't supposed to have because they are convicted felons that is the right of the SWAT team. That is what it is there for. Once the SWAT team decideds that negotiations are going nowhere they can invade, at will, say their patience have run out. Laws are not passed to go unenforced.

43

George Bush's excuse is good enough for me !

by searchfothetruth in

i am really excited by george bush's latest reason for bombing iraq: he's running out of patience.

for some time now i've been really pi##ed off with mr johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street.

well, him and mr patel, who runs the health food shop.they both give me queer looks, and i'm sure mr johnson is planning something nasty for me, but so far i haven't been able to discover what.. i've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden.

starScream

Saddam Hussein is such a nice man. He is a real humanitarian. As an unquestioned dictator of an opressed peopel he does have quite a responsiblity though. He is under a lot of pressure to prevent a coup. So when he learns of his enemies he must deal with them.

He is so merciful that he disposes of them in a perfectly humane manor. Since he is under a lot of stress he needs to relax so sometimes he embelishes his desire to destroy his enemies by making a game out of it. I'm the enemy doesn't mind, he understands. So Saddam and his bodyguards tie up the mark by his hair and slowly lower him, slowly so he doesn't make a splash, into a vat of nitric acid. Saddam and his bodyguards find it rather amusing to they laugh and smoke cigars as the victim screams in hellish torment and humiliation. Finnally his smoking emaciated skeleton is lifted from the vat and put on display in one of his fine presidential palaces.

What a great guy. He even has a taste for the arts. I nominate him for humanitarian of the 21st century.

43

George Bush's excuse is good enough for me !

by searchfothetruth in

i am really excited by george bush's latest reason for bombing iraq: he's running out of patience.

for some time now i've been really pi##ed off with mr johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street.

well, him and mr patel, who runs the health food shop.they both give me queer looks, and i'm sure mr johnson is planning something nasty for me, but so far i haven't been able to discover what.. i've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden.

starScream

Trauma_Hound,

Depleted Uranium is a part of a conventional weapons arsenal. The US has been using it for decades. It is not a weapon of mass destruction. It is a precision armor piercing round. It was used primarily on Iraqi tanks that were designated by a UN security council resolution to destruction. Had it not been used the US would have suffered much heavier casualties and might not have been available to help Kuwait. The president does not authorize its use. It is approved by CONGRESS!!!!!! SENATE APPROPRIATIONS BILL!!!!!!

What you fail to comprehend is that if the war was not ended ASAP and Saddam fired Chemical or Bio weapons on Israel they would have gone nuclear on Iraq.

If you are saying George Bush Sr was a madman or a terrorist then give examples. Bosnia? topping ethnic genocide is terrorist? Somalia? Stopping criminal warlords from violently interferring with relief efforts? Iraq? Stopping thugs from annexing a soverign nation and raping and mudering that nations citizens?

43

George Bush's excuse is good enough for me !

by searchfothetruth in

i am really excited by george bush's latest reason for bombing iraq: he's running out of patience.

for some time now i've been really pi##ed off with mr johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street.

well, him and mr patel, who runs the health food shop.they both give me queer looks, and i'm sure mr johnson is planning something nasty for me, but so far i haven't been able to discover what.. i've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden.

starScream

SFT,

America is taking us into a new realm of international relations and it's scary to say the least.

WRONG. The action the US is taking is what the world should have done to PREVENT the Third Reich from marching all over Europe. Under the conditions of the treaty of Versailles the German military was forbidden to build or attain certain weapons. No one did anything stop it. If someone felt it was necessary to do so they would have been within their right under the conditions of the peace treaty.

In 1990 The US attained a UN security council resolution to kick Iraq out of Kuwait. We were so mercifull to the evil Iraqi aggressors that we agreed to stop killing them, although it was our right to do so, if they met certain requirments of disarmament and also allowed us to peacefully enforce NO-FLY zones in Iraq. The Iraqis have failed to meet the requrirements of the CEASE-FIRE agreement. A cease-fire agreement does not put an end to a conflict. It is a temporary document that only lasts as long as the parties involved honor it. The US has honored it. The Iraqis have not.

Just the first time the Iraqis fired on Coalition planes enforcing the no-fly zone was, under law, enough reason to wipe out the Iraqi armed forces completely and utterly. We abstained. The Iraqis have spent 11 years refusing to cooperate with the weapons agreement. We have exausted diplomatic efforts. We are not obligated to be diplomatic. We have a cease fire agreement and multiple UN resolutions. It is time to show other renegade nations that their agreements must be honored if the rest of us are to be expected to honor them.

F France, calling us arrogant? F Germany, calling us miltaristic? F Russia, calling us what? wreckless, extortionists, totalitarians. Those are the USSR and IRAQ. The US has been diplomatic even though they have had the right to take military action the whole entire time.

38

The U.S. already has the RIGHT to wage war on IRAQ

by starScream in

whether a u.s. lead invasion of iraq is necessary or not the united states has that right and here is why.

in 1990 the u.n. security council authorized the use of military force to expel the iraqi army from kuwait.

british and u.s. forces were the dominant contributors to the coalition.

starScream

Whether a U.S. lead invasion of Iraq is necessary or not the United States has that right and here is why.

In 1990 the U.N. security council authorized the use of military force to expel the Iraqi army from Kuwait. British and U.S. forces were the dominant contributors to the coalition.

General Powell was the Chairman of the Joint cheifs at that time. Even though the Iraqi army had not been totally obliterated at that time Powell was concerned how we might look in the aftermath. He felt that we might look evil in some way because it was TOO EASY to kill the Iraqi army. They were entirely unable to defend themselves from us.

So as an act of MERCY we offered the Iraqis a CEASE FIRE AGREEMENT. That is not a peace treaty. It means we will stop blowing you out of the sand IF you do certain things. We held up our end of the deal. We were authorized by the agreement to enforce a NO FLY zone. But the Iraqis have continued to SHOOT at us since 1992. They were obligated to destroy and document all their weapons of mass destruction. We have proven that Saddam Hussein has done all he can to avoid this part of the agreement.

The war that was fought in 1991 did not end in 1991. We (US) put the war ON HOLD. The Iraqi government has defied the agreement that put it on hold for over 10 years. The United States has done all it is obligated to fulfill the cease fire agreement. Under International law the US has the right to march its forces in peacfully and disarm Iraq. The Iraqi dictator has stated that he will fight off the invaders until the last drop of Iraqi blood has been shed. The United States has in its war doctrine that opposition is bombed first and then attacked from the ground.

So yes, the US will bomb Iraq and it is within its rights to do so.

Personally I don't think that it is that necessary, but if you don't act then you send the wrong message to other renegade countries.

34

Elder came...grasped at straws...and left. UPDATE!

by searchfothetruth in

well i had a very interesting conversation on friday night.

sorry to be so long letting you know what happened.. only one elder turned up and i was wrong in my original thought that my mum had given him my report, it seems he was coming to ask me to study, therefore he was totally unprepared for what was about to happen to him.

but, i have to say, that he was the most honest elder i have spoke to and i'm sure you will be surprised by some of the things he said.. he started off wanting to know what made me stop going to the meetings and i related to him my experiences of a certain body of elders that had, to say the least, made me realise that they thought that they were a law unto themselves (including stealing, lying and generally being un-christian).

starScream

SFT,

I left in 1995 and I was wondering if they had changed the 1914 generation thing by the memorial that year. I'm starting to remember that they made a refference to it at the memorial but it sounded wrong. I'm having troubke remembering but if you know it would help.

BTW, I heard that due to errors in the Christian calendar going back over the last 2000 years Christ was actually born in 4 BC according to our calendar instead of AD 1. I'm still not sure what year that puts us in if you correct it. I think this becomes AD 2006 or 2007.