• This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:

    1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.

    2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.

    3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.

    Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.

    Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.

    Thank you!

"Postponing an attack to Iraq would be more dangerous than attacking now"

hristostoichkov

Reserve Team
Danm, here we go again. Another war is coming, innocents will die again and once again I´m sure that nothing will change as always.
Won´t this people ever realize that war is good for nothing?
Everytime i read something like this I start to remember the wars we had so far since I was born and the goods that they brought. I can´t remember nothing good that came from those wars.:(
 

Paul

Fan Favourite
I think its better than sitting down twiddling our thumbs and letting Saddam get away with it.

War always has casualties, the innocent and the not so innocent. Thats just life.
 

hristostoichkov

Reserve Team
I agree that Saddan can´t get away. This b*stard is a menace to mankind but I just don´t think that is fair to kill people that have nothing to do with that.

I´ve never been to Iraq but I know that not everyone there support this mf so they´re innocent and it´s unfair to kill them.

I know that is life but it would much better if we could change somethings.;) :)
 
um ok heres a thought

can someone explain to me get away with what???????? what would he get away with if we dont attack him at this very second?Did everyone forget about his tv interview where he invited congress to discuss with him about entering and searching and also when he said just in the past two weeks that he would aloww inspectors?
 

Paul

Fan Favourite
Re: um ok heres a thought

Originally posted by ahmedkkk
can someone explain to me get away with what???????? what would he get away with if we dont attack him at this very second?Did everyone forget about his tv interview where he invited congress to discuss with him about entering and searching and also when he said just in the past two weeks that he would aloww inspectors?

yeah he did say that, but they get screwed around by Saddam and they never get to do they're job properly. And its not the world's biggest secret that he's still producing weapons of mass destruction . . .
 

hristostoichkov

Reserve Team
Re: um ok heres a thought

Originally posted by ahmedkkk
can someone explain to me get away with what???????? what would he get away with if we dont attack him at this very second?Did everyone forget about his tv interview where he invited congress to discuss with him about entering and searching and also when he said just in the past two weeks that he would aloww inspectors?


Do you actually believe in Saddam´s words?:rolleyes:
 
,

i dont know i think it would have been to take him up on his offer thn when he srews them to blow his *** to a cave in afganistan
 

zul-aid

Starting XI
The only reason they wan Saddam and why they are still in Afganistan is becuz of Oil and if ya say thats bull**** then look at Fox News they said and i quote "the real benefits of the war on terrior is oil' they said that on Sept 14th people were only been pulled out of the rubble by then.

you people who are totally against him expand your reading
www.michaelmoore.com
this man sums it up
Bush stole an election he doesnt have the right of the people
Bush works for an oil company
Bush Snr works for Bin Ladins Oil company
Cheney also works for a company under investigation, also they all have a conflict of interest in there business dealings
Majority of the employees are either former or current employees of Enron and World com...
Saddam may be a prick but they (USA) dont give a **** they want there (Irans) Oil back that Bush Snr couldnt get sorry guys but if u ever read Animal Farm your all Sheep baa baa baa
 

Paul

Fan Favourite
Originally posted by zul-aid
The only reason they wan Saddam and why they are still in Afganistan is becuz of Oil and if ya say thats bull**** then look at Fox News they said and i quote "the real benefits of the war on terrior is oil' they said that on Sept 14th people were only been pulled out of the rubble by then.

you people who are totally against him expand your reading
www.michaelmoore.com
this man sums it up
Bush stole an election he doesnt have the right of the people
Bush works for an oil company
Bush Snr works for Bin Ladins Oil company
Cheney also works for a company under investigation, also they all have a conflict of interest in there business dealings
Majority of the employees are either former or current employees of Enron and World com...
Saddam may be a prick but they (USA) dont give a **** they want there (Irans) Oil back that Bush Snr couldnt get sorry guys but if u ever read Animal Farm your all Sheep baa baa baa

I'll never beleive Saddam Hussain for as long as i live.

He is a dictator for christ sake, doesnt that tell u anything?
 

zul-aid

Starting XI
just read his recent message and while your at it read "Stupid White Men" a book by him a number one best seller thats sums up hey there is only on axis of evil (even the chancellor of germany said this recently) and thats America

(why would america allow lighters ((remember the shoe bomber trying to light his feet on fire)) on international flights becuz BIC a financial backer of bush said it would damage sails so now they allow them on planes sorry that stupid and they dont care about u

Also one question still remains to this day why did Bush earlier hold a meeting with the Taliban about puting in an oil pipeline in Afghanistan

Also why did they donate billions of dollars to a country they knew where do hanus and barbarian acts against each other (becuz of drugs get real your not that dumb are u?)

Also why is one son of a huge American oil company fighting (where is Osama now next to Wally probably) the son of another
guys get real American is not all peaches and sunshine they are all like everything else big business
 

zul-aid

Starting XI
you only believe in what u want to believe
and you think bush isnt when he didnt win an election he pratically stole it who did the count - Jeb Bush his brother and the judge guess what his cousin

stupid white men and cnn are my references
 

zul-aid

Starting XI
What about Conan O'Brien and Jay Leno they called Bush stupid thief be4 September 11 then now its Osama (USAma if you watch fox news) then three months back to normal who do they make fun of now???
 

zul-aid

Starting XI
"The Sad and Sordid Whereabouts of bin Cheney and bin Bush"
A Free Online Chapter addition to "Stupid White Men"
by Michael Moore

Part One: "What Does a 99-cent Bic Lighter Tell Us About the Bush War on Terrorism?"

On September 22, 2001, just 11 days after the terrorist attacks in New York and Arlington, I had to fly. I had actually wanted to fly on September 11, and in fact had a ticket on the 3:00pm American Airlines flight from LAX to JFK. As we all know, that flight never made it off the ground as hours earlier four California-bound flights, two on American and two on United, were hijacked as part of a coordinated suicide mission to attack the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon outside Washington, DC.

Stranded in Los Angeles, my wife and I (out there for the annual Prime Time Emmy Awards for our series, "The Awful Truth"), were awakened that morning by my wife's mother, calling us from Flint at 6:15 a.m., L.A. time. I answered the phone and heard her say that "New York was under attack, New York is at war." I remember thinking, "So what's new," but she suggested we immediately turn on the TV. I fumbled for the remote and switched on the hotel room TV. And there it was. The twin towers on fire, black smoke billowing upward.

"OK," I thought, "a really bad fire." But then they ran the replay from 15 minutes earlier, of the second plane hitting the south tower. This wasn't an accident. We tried to call our daughter in New York. The phone lines weren't allowing any calls. We tried calling our friend, Joanne Doroshow, who works a few blocks from the towers. Again, the lines were jammed.

A horrible panic started settling inside me. Finally, I reached Joanne's office. A woman answered, frantic. I asked if Joanne was there. "NO!" she shouted. "She's not here! We have to go! Ohmygod!" She dropped the phone and I heard a loud roar, like a train. My wife said, "Look at the TV." I did, and I saw from L.A. what I was listening to over the phone: the collapse of the south tower.

It would be another four hours before we were able to reach our daughter, and seven hours before Joanne calls us, safe inside her apartment (she had ducked into a building just in time as the cloud of debris rained its way down the street).

That night, as we watched the images repeated on the TV, a ticker began running the names of some of the dead who had been on the planes. Along the bottom of the screen came the name, "William Weems." A friend of ours the next morning confirmed that this was, in fact, the same Bill Weems, a line producer from Boston with whom we had recently filmed a batch of humorous TV spots targeting the tobacco companies. Bill was on the Boston-to-L.A. plane. He died as the jet, traveling at 586 miles per hour, slammed into the south tower. He left behind a wife and 7-year old daughter. It was all so unbelievably horrific.

The airports were closed and all planes were now grounded. I found a Hertz dealer who would rent me a mini-van for $1,700 -- and 43 hours later we pulled out of our hotel on the Pacific Ocean and began our 2,990-mile journey home to our apartment in New York City.

Somewhere around Oklahoma City, the airports were all open again, but my wife did not want to ditch the mini-van and get on a plane. So we continued on home for the next few days, the first ever trip each of us had made driving coast to coast. It was, as it turned out, well worth it, as it gave us a chance to gauge the reaction of average citizens, especially as we passed through Bush and Ashcroft country (The internet letters I wrote – and read – from the road can be found on my website).

By September 22, I had no choice but to get back on a plane. I had been scheduled to give a talk in San Antonio, and so off I went on an American flight out of Newark. At the airport there was a newly, hastily put-together list of all the items that I could NOT bring aboard the plane. The list was long and bizarre. The list of banned items included:

No guns. (Obviously)
No knives. (Ditto)
No boxcutters. (Certainly now justified)
No toenail clippers. (What?)
No knitting needles. (Huh?)
No crotchet hooks. (Now, wait a minute!)
No leaf blowers. (OK, now it's personal)
No corkscrews.
No letter openers.
No dry ice.
The list went on and on. A lot of the items made good sense. I wasn't quite sure if terrorists also made quilts in their spare time, and I guess I must have missed the terrorist incident where some poor bastards smuggled dry ice aboard a plane (were they trying to keep their Popsicles cold until they ate them and then used the sticks for their attack?).

Frankly, I was a little freaked-out about flying so soon after 9-11 and I guess there was just no way I was going to fly without a weapon for my protection. So I took the New York Yankees-signed baseball that Mayor Giuliani had given me on "TV Nation," put it in a sock, and – presto! Whip that baby upside somebody's head, and they're going to take a little nap. Note to budding terror****ers: If you try something on a flight I'm on, I'll Clemmons ya. That, or the smell from my ratty sock, is going to do you in.

Though I now felt "safe" with my makeshift weapon, as I continued to fly through the fall and winter, I did NOT feel safe being greeted at airport security by weekend warriors from the National Guard holding empty M-16s and looking like they shop in the same "special needs" department at K-Mart which I visit from time to time.

More importantly, though, I kept noticing something strange. The guy in front of me, while emptying his pockets into the little plastic tray to run through the x-ray machine, would take out his butane lighter or matchbook, toss them into the tray, then pick them up on the other side -- in full view of security. At first I thought this was a mistake until I looked at the list of banned items again -- and saw that butane lighters and matchbooks were NOT on the forbidden list.

Then came December 22, 2001. Richard Reid, on an American Airlines flight from Paris to Miami, attempted to light his shoes on fire, using matches. His shoes, the police said, contained a plastic explosive and, had some passengers and flight attendants not taken quick action to restrain him, he would have been able to blow the entire plane out of the sky. But his lighter would not light the shoes fast enough, and everyone survived.

I was sure after this freakish incident that the lighters and matches would surely be banned. But, as my book tour began in February, there they were, the passengers with their Bic lighters and their books of matches. I asked one security person after another why these people were allowed to bring devices which could start a fire on board the plane, especially after the Reid incident. No one, not a single person in authority or holding an unloaded automatic weapon, could or would give me answer.

My simple question was this: If all smoking is prohibited on all flights, then why does ANYONE need their lighters and matches at 30,000 feet -- while I am up there with them?!

And why is the one device that has been used to try and blow up a plane since 9-11 NOT on the banned list? No one has used toenail clippers to kill anyone on Jet Blue, and no one has been blowing away the leaves in the aisle of the Delta Connection flight to Tupelo.

BUT SOME FRUITCAKE DID USE A BUTANE LIGHTER TO TRY AND KILL 200 PEOPLE ON AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT #63. And this did nothing to force the Bush Administration to do something about it.

I began asking this question in front of audiences on my book tour. And it was on a dark and rainy night in Arlington, Virginia, at the Ollsson's Bookstore a couple miles from the Pentagon that I got my answer. After asking my Bic lighter question in my talk to the audience, I sat down to sign the books for the people in line. A young man walks up to the table, introduces himself, and lowering his voice so no one can hear, tells me the following:

"I work on the Hill. The butane lighters were on the original list prepared by the FAA and sent to the White House for approval. The tobacco industry lobbied the Bush administration to have the lighters and matches removed from the banned list. Their customers (addicts) naturally are desperate to light up as soon as they land, and why should they be punished just so the skies can be safe?

The lighters and matches were removed from the forbidden list.

I was stunned. I knew there had to be some strange reason why this most obvious of items had not been banned. Could the Bush mob be so blatant in their contempt for the public's safety? How could they do this, and at the same time, issue weekly warnings about the "next terrorist threat"? Would they really put Big Tobacco's demands ahead of people's lives?

Yes, of course, the answer has always been YES but not now, not in a time of national crisis, not NOW, so soon after the worst domestic mass murder in U.S. history!

Unless there was no real threat at all.

The hard and difficult questions must be asked: Is the "War on Terrorism" a ruse, a concoction to divert the citizens' attention?

Accept, if you will for just a moment, that as truly despicable as George W. Bush is, he would not be so evil as to help out his buddies in tobacco land that that would be worth suffering through another 9-11. Once you give the man that – and for once I am asking you to do just that – once you admit that not even he would allow the murder of hundreds or thousands more just so Marlboro addicts can light up outside the terminal, then a whole other door opens – and that door, my friends, leads to the Pandora's Box of 9-11, a rotten can of worms that many in the media are afraid to open for fear of where it might lead, of just how deep the stench goes.

What if there is no "terrorist threat?" What if Bush and Co. need, desperately need, that "terrorist threat" more than anything in order to conduct the systematic destruction they have launched against the U.S. constitution and the good people of this country who believe in the freedoms and liberties it guarantees?

Do you want to go there?

I do. I have filed a Freedom of Information Act demand to the FAA, asking that they give to me all documents pertaining to the decisions that were made to allow deadly butane lighters and books of matches on board passenger planes. I am not optimistic about what the results of this will be.

And let's face it – it's just one small piece of the puzzle. It is, after all, just a 99-cent Bic lighter. But, friends, I have to tell you, over the years I have found that it is PRECISELY the "little stories" and the "minor details" that contain within them the LARGER truths. Perhaps my quest to find out why the freedom to be able to start a fire on board a plane-full of citizens is more important than yours or my life will be in vain. Or maybe, just maybe, it will be the beginning of the end of this corrupt, banal administration of con artists who shamelessly use the dead of that day in September as the cover to get away with anything.

I think it's time we all stood up and started asking some questions of these individuals. The bottom line: Anyone who would brazenly steal an election and insert themselves into OUR White House with zero mandate from The People is, frankly – sadly – capable of anything...
 

hermolt

Starting XI
Don't get me started on Bush..good god I hate that motherf*cker. And the US have been killing Iraqi people for 10 years now..economic snactions are crippling Iraq and led by the US.
 

Can't stop the rush...

Hip Hop is Dead
zul-aid, We appreciate your comments but please dont be posting one then posting another 2 minuntes later then another when you can fit it into one post.

Thank you.:)
 

zul-aid

Starting XI
sorry i know but the big one i couldnt and i remember some other stuff after i posted the second one im sorry
 

Bogdan10

Reserve Team
Zul-aid you are the man for posting what you did...not alot of ppl accept that America is rotten! I couldn't have said it better!
 

INFESTA

Official
Right, here's my take on the issue. I already told it to Ice, so don't bother going through this again, Yash. :)

First, I strongly believe that the decision to bomb Iraq is already taken. We'll have to wait until next December/January to see some action, simply because that's when the weather is more favourable for an attack.
Now I'll try to explain why I have this belief and why Europe won't join the war.

Bush will always say that they want to bomb Iraq because he fears that Saddam is a continous threat to the world peace. Of course the Iraq's president is a nasty dictator ("nasty" and "dictator" are a pleonasm), dragging his people into poverty with his ruthless totalitarian regime. However, I can't stop asking myself these questions:

- Why didn't Mr. Bush Sr. got rid of Saddam in the first place, back in 91?

- Why is Iraq a threat now? Wasn't it 5 years ago? Why attack them at this present time?
Funny, because when the US had their UN officials (who were supposed to check if Iraq was producing chemical weapons) spying on them, as it was proved by the UN itself, there was no reasons for alarm, but now they are a part of the "axis of evil".

Unfortunately, we live in a world of cynical leaders, driven by obscure intentions.
As we all know, the world and the US in particular are immersed in one of the most severe economical crisis ever. I don't want to bring the whole of the facts about this crisis (which I can and will if I'm asked), but lets just say that they are more or less cyclical, but this one seems to be taking longer than usual.
In fact, all the usual "devices" to spice up the economy have been already used with little effect. It's the 11th September, it's the Enron scandal, a non-stop string of events that allow the stock exchange markets to reach new lows every week. Poor U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman, Alan Greenspan, doesn't know what to do next. Don't fear, Alan, your president does!

History shows us that there's no bigger economy booster than a good old war. Lets take a look at recent events. Where's Japan now and where was it before the WW2? And what can we say about Germany? Does anyone have any doubt about who the leading European country is, both politically and economically?
I think that a war is exactly what the US needs, and probably the only thing they have left.
The political environment for such an action is very favourable. After Sep. 11th, who will argue against them taking "measures to protect their country from terrorist actions"?

This time around, they won't have the support of many countries from that region, that backed them up back in 91. Does that matter? Not really, since the US has something that Europe don't have: a huge oil stock! That's why Europe can't afford entering the war. How would we deal with an oil boycott? Especially during such difficult times for our economy.

There are a couple things I wanted to add, but I'm having this convo on MSN with a friend's (female) cousin. Love comes first, whether it's on a personal or a global scale.;)
 

monkee

Senior Squad
I've always thought that the Bush Administration was using Sept 11th for political gain. It was obvious that they want oil from the region and it was the perfect excuse (nice one Bin Laden, maybe you work for the US govt?).

That Michael Moore article was ace. I liked watching the stuff that guy produces it's always really well-thought out and compelling. I think I'll have to get that book. (anyone remember the other one that someone mentioned - think it was Joe - about US war crimes?.. was it rogue state?)

It is plainly obvious that Bush is about listening to big business rather than the will of the people who (did not) elect him to office.

It begs the question why is Bush so worked up over one dictator that lives in an oil rich area, when another who is commiting blatent human rights violations (mugabe, zimbabwe) get to do whatever he wants in his agricultural country. Maybe all you need to do to get the US bullies involved is to find oil.

Money is the root of all evil, so maybe the 'Axis of evil' should include another country that justifies things like producing 25% of the worlds pollution by citing that they also produce 25% of the worlds wealth.

I think Britian can stop this. But Blair's not brave enough. I think Britain needs to become more a part of Europe and less the 51st State.
 

zul-aid

Starting XI
yeah well if Britian is the 51st state then Australia is the 52nd Britian sometimes refuse America, Australia never has! ever since we adopted America as our 'new mothercountry' as stated in high school text books we have been apart of wars that should never had existed and globalisation (theres that word again the one that sends a chill down everyones spine including Michael Moore).

If anyone has Kazaa or MSN i have 2 speechs he gave to the American pubic which i may or may not post here there fairly lengthy on is a Ralph Nader rally in NYC and another is Stupid White Men book signing..............so if ya want them tell me

I know of another book Downsize this! havent read this yet but i have to get it imported from another country

I have like Moore for a good couple of years; since Roger and Me, Canadan Bacon, TV Nation, the Awful truth, if you have never experienced Michael Moore go to his website and read the letters he wrote from Sept 11 til Sept 18 they are the best piece of journalism you will ever read

zul-aid
 


Top