Id cards

That's true. The only way it could help is that having all the info in one place would make it easier to track someone, because you don't have to coordinate so many different agencies (DMV, Social Security, etc). But thats about it. All the terrorists were here legally, right? So having proper identification wasn't even a problem.

So yeah, I see an alterior motive. Consolidating power over the people for their own gain. The easier they can track us, the better. This has a pretty good chance of getting pretty ugly, Nazi Germany ugly.

 

You don't thats the whole point..

 

What is it like spitting on so many dead people graves..?.

 

I always forgot to call those terrorists 'freedom fighters'...and saddam was not a lying murdering son of a bitch.. Your thoughts i think run through the minds of the zealots who find in right to kill people because it suits them.

 

I don't find it right to kill ANYBODY, that is a reason why I'm opposed to this, and all, wars. How does my stating the fact that these cards will do nothing to stop terrorist make me a supporter of terrorism? You're just as bad as a good percentage of America: "You either support us fully or you're a terrorist." That makes me fucking sick.

Yes, saddam was a lying, murderous sack of shit. So are dictators of various countries around the world, but the media never brings up that fact, does it? If we're fighting to free this particular country from a tyrant, why aren't we freeing the numerous other countries in the same position?

 

How do you know these measures will not solve anything ?. I apologise if i was a little harsh.. It is just all these things people keep saying about Mr Bush and his goverment and my goverment that come from the anti war point of view, make ME sick. Why take the worst possible negative stance to make out it is about all the rasons terrorists use (to blow themselves, troops and the iraqi people up). I can understand how they would prefer to maintain that the coalition are imperialist murdering heathens or whatever, to justify there actions.. I find it difficult to understand how people in both our countries do the same.. Even though it serves no purpose..sorry thats not true.. it does, it perputuates a myth that this war is all about oil and Mr bushs oil investments..like some kind of crap bond film or something. I think i should apologise for loading all that on you.. but heck at least i hope it was a little better than .

I don't think with all the minutia of investigations that even now people still continue to say a portion of the truth maybe..but vastly biased points that always fail to take into consideration independant investigations.

I don't know about your country , but they do over here. Plus you can easily find out what ever you like. Why sit through vannila flavoured news when you can get the information readily. I understand that people buy into what they see on TV and Fox seems to get a lot of crap ..not having watched that channel i can't comment ..but judging by the website i can't see the issue you have (going by the sig') I have always wanted to know what was so despotic about a organisation that shows the simpsons ?.

We do and we are.. sometimes goverments do try and give peace a chance rather than wading in with there bombs and ther guns.. i would have thought you would have proffered that ?. i would imagine trying to give aid and diplomacy is better than a 'war'.. saddam sadly failed to do the right thing...and had no intentions of doing so. There i think will come a point when other dictators run out of bargaining chips..and 'we' will 'invade' then people will say it is illegal what your doing..why are so many people being killed etc etc etc .. sometimes i think goverments can never win.

oh and just because i have the image in my sig' does not mean i think the sun shines out of there arse or anything..its just a image thats all..

 

"I don't know about your country , but they do over here. Plus you can easily find out what ever you like. Why sit through vannila flavoured news when you can get the information readily."
I'm in America. All news is vanilla-flavored here.

" I have always wanted to know what was so despotic about a organisation that shows the simpsons ?."
Showing the simpsons has nothing to do with anything. My beef is with the fox news organization specifically. Their news is so republican-tainted it's sickening. Do you realize that Bill O'Reilly got in trouble for phone sex with a minor? He settled the whole thing out of court, and FOX has swept the occurence under the carpet, as though it never happened. O'reilly still has his show. FOX news also uses cheap, subtle psycological tricks to sway your opinion. Ever notice how the FOX news reporters and hosts, and any republicans on the show, always have nice, colorful, spiffy backgrounds? Yet democrats consistantly get faded, monotonous backgrounds with visible creases in them. And, I'll be damned, even a certain very republican teacher at my school has acknowleged that FOX news is a joke. FOX news is the worst form of that vanilla-flavored news you spoke of, thats why so many people despise the bullshit network.

"We do and we are.. sometimes goverments do try and give peace a chance rather than wading in with there bombs and ther guns.. "

We jumped right into Iraq with plenty of explosions and bullets. But we're "trying to give peace a chance" in every other oppressed nation? More specifically, we brought our bombs and guns to a country that we thought posed a small threat because we believed it possessed "Weapons of mass destruction", a term used to gather support through fear. That's Bush's main method of gaining support. These "weapons of mass destruction" were conventional bombs, mustard gas, and similar weapons. yeah, they're dangerous, but they're not weapons of MASS destruction. We we're making plans to invade Iraq based on our belief that it possessed these weapons (which, it turns out, it didn't). Meanwhile, Korea had restarted it's nuclear development program - a program aimed at developing true weapons of mass destruction. We ignored that. . I guess to "give peace a chance"?

 

So both sides made up there minds based ob 'vanilla news' .. i assume ?. well your both are going to be a bit wrong then.

" I have always wanted to know what was so despotic about a organisation that shows the simpsons ?."

I was being a bit sarcastic sorry

Bill o reily and his crimes has nothing to do with the news editorial .. The BBC employs known cocaine takers, so ?... The BBC still get airbrushed into peoples minds asl 'good' and 'unbiased' etc even though they were also taken to court |and prety much lost ( 'The Hutton Enquirey' ) They still say that they represent ALL the general public even if that means failing to ask or answer questions that the 'apathetic' audience should be asking. They just stay prety much as clueless as they say we all are...even though clearly they are not. Do you think i have been watching live feeds of fox news to come to the conclusions on this situation ?.. Like i said i have not watched fox news.. you can call them for there reporting if you want but i think America has a varied enough news outlet for people to have a broader perspective (how ever 'vanilla flavoured' it might be). I watched our suposed better news outlets and gained information from a multitude of diffrent sources and once upon a time even favoured your point of view. check out 'how things change'...

I accept diffrent nations highlghted diffrent parts of resolutions 1441 ..does not realy mean in its entirity it was not fully explained why action was taken.

We did not realy just 'jump in', countless years before the first iraq war and ten years before the second were spent trying to reson with the man and his regime.
I don't wish to be patronising but did you read http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1293412&postcount=12 it realy is a diffrent situation in North korea.. I would be intrested to know were you get your 'news' from.. If all the news is 'vanilla' surely it is unlikely any better news is going to be available from the other perspective.. It just seems like your self rationalising a point of view based on the simple (honourable) point that you don't like war (your not alone imho).

I am going to come across as a bit of a what was it 'wankbait' but i am just intrested from a anti war perspective how you interprete news...

 

I don't take any news sources as truth. As I said, they're all bullshit.

"So both sides made up there minds based ob 'vanilla news' .. i assume ?. well your both are going to be a bit wrong then."
You make the assumption that I subscribe to the US's the two party system, that because i disagree with what you say, I'm on the opposing side, and therefore, a democrat. In this two party system both parties put eachother down and criticize eachother to no end, when in fact they are both nearly identical. It's a manifestation of the close-mindedness so commonplace in america, and not uncommon elsewhere.

All news networks are transforming into just another form of entertainment. They choose what to show the public based on two factors.
1. What will the consumer find most titalating? What will get the biggest response out of our viewers?
2. Will the government/big corporations/majority opinion approve of this?

This is true in America more than anywhere else. I found a story on the BBC website that showed that one of the purported suicide hijackers in the november 11 attacks was alive and well.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm

American news won't touch that with a 10 foot pole.

 

Check on page two of this thread. Someone said that right now you can opt out.

 

That FOX news article had nothing to do with the fact that some of those accused of the hijacking are alive. And while fox news say that "unidentified law officials" gave them Sheri's name. . .

http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/092701hjpic.htm

They do list his name differently, with an added "al" - Waleed M. Alshehri. There you have it, the fbi itself claiming that a living man is guilty of suicide terrorism. If you think the added "al" somehow proves it is a different person or something, click the link that this official fbi website gives to a list of pictures. He's there, listed without the added "al" on his name.

 

thats fucking ridiculous

 

So what is your suggestion on finding out if Iraq did or didn't have these weapons? Bush already tried peacefull solutions by asking for permission to do searches and was denied. Why deny a search if you aren't hiding anything. Like most Americans, did you already forget about all these other attempts to avoid war?

 

Permission to search was NOT denied - if it was war would have erupted right then. We were in the country and conducting searches. Iraq was supposedly doing things like driving convoys of trucks out of sites just before we searched them. This may or not be true, but if it is, I think it's a case of Iraq figuratively spitting on America rather than actually hiding anything. And if there were weapons to hide, where are they? We've been in the country quite a long time, plenty to search the sites we've been claiming were for developing weapons of mass destruction. Did they jump into an interdimensional portal? Did saddam throw them all in a giant cauldron of lava just before we invaded, as though it would have mattered to him that we found his weapons after his government had been toppled and he had lost everything?

You are in denial, you can't accept that the war was not conducted for the altruistic reasons that the Bush administration would love you to believe.

Even you have to acknowlege that the oil supply has to run out someday. But before it runs out, it will slowly become scarce and more expensive. This would ruin the United States' oil-based economy.

The motives are there, clear as day.

"Like most Americans, did you already forget about all these other attempts to avoid war?"

Those were not attempts to avoid war, they were excuses to initiate it.

The weapons aren't there, plain and simple. Either they grew legs and walked away, or your government tricked you.

 

I wonder if you apply this logic as critically to the repeated refusals of the Bush admin to allow full transparent public investigation into ALL the aspects of 911 and the activities of the admin before, during and after the events of the day?

This denial of cooperation lasted for upwards of two years before the the carefully crafted and heavily circumscribed Congressional 911 commission was finally begrudgingly conceded to by this admin. Even then, if you bother recalling, they demanded closed door interviews with no possibility for retention of transcripts of those interviews (and of course Bush and Cheney had to be interviewed together).

Nothing glaringly suspect in all that in your mind, I suppose?

As to Saddam and the inspections, there was never any request, it was outright imperative from Washington, channelled through the UN SC for typical multilateral "justification" and classic ready made scapegoating at any point when Washington didn't get its absolute way in the matter.

At all times the hypocritical claims were that 1. compliance was mandatory for removal of sanctions, but that 2. the regime was to be overthrown at all costs. The intent of the Bush admin was always invasion; the UN stopgap was merely a political charade used (as it has been oft times before by Washington) to lend the thinnest of multilateral facades to a wholly unilateralist doctrine subscribed to by this administration of Straussian liars and powermongers.

 

You, as many, make the mistake of judging people in history by today's standards. That is erroneous and fatally flawed. Franklin was hardly a religious fanatic. And simply because he was a man of religious conviction has little bearing on the truth of his statement I originally quoted. That statement did not come from the bible, nor was it inspired by it. By your logic then, the thoughts of any person of any religious faith is irrelevant. So in other words, we are only to listen to atheists. What an open mind you have!So I guess you also ARE willing to trade liberty for temporary security, that's really what you're saying. If you are, then you deserve whatever you get. I for one, am not.

 

Is it spitting on them to remind ourselves of what happened so we can prevent it? Or would they rather we be politically correct and keep quiet...just like the German people did?

At any rate, I wan't even referring to the Holocaust, I was just talking about the dictatorial state and the loss of rights and privacy.

 

Tell that to the guys in Guantanamo Bay. Tell that to the US Citizens who've been hassled by the Feds because they were believed to have associated with muslim terrorists, or visited the wrong internet site, or called the wrong person, or met the wrong person. Tell that to muslim immigrants who have been imprisoned for months or years in this country, without charges, only to be released because THEY WERE NOT A THREAT. Do you really work for the CIA or something, or are you just such a brainwashed sheep you believe whatever crap the government feeds you?

 

I think nazi germany is the best, most recognizable example of how an entire country of people can be duped into supporting the most terrible things. I know some of you find it extremely hard to believe that this government in which you've put so much trust would lie to you, but they're human, and as such, extremely corruptable by power. Hitler burned the Reichstag(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire) to the ground and blamed it on communist Jews. The Bush administration knocked down the twin towers and blamed it on arabs.