Dude, where is my country?

[Skaman]

I am deep into the book, and Moore has made some great correlations north Americans failed to overlook as they were purposefully hidden due to suspected public outcry. All his work, is well documented and factual. The interpreation of these facts is subjective and contraversal.


Interesting facts.


1. Captured taliban pamphlets and Jihad works suggets their holy warriors to abuse the Americans weak second amendment right. The right to bare arms. They suggest while within America to join gun clubs, and purposely train with automatic weapons. Americans will gladly assist you in Weapons knowledge. and Military weapons are widely available.


2.The Bin Laden family and saudi arabian goverment, both tightly knit with texan oil congromerates have billions invested within the USA. A removal of such backing would be economically horrible for the USA.

3. shortly prior to 911, 20 members of the immediate members of the Bin laden family were within the USA. Deep in economic meeting with American oil conglomerates.

4. in the days following 911, the Bin Laden family was allowed to leave the country via prvate jet although a no fly zone and all commerical aircraft were grounded. The bin ladens left unexpectedly, and no questioning of substantial nature was taken.

Suspicious that they would leave so soon, while the USA demanded who was responsible and sought the perpetrators.

Perhaps, the USA did not want to damage realtions with the Saudi goverment and make aqqusations, even though it was in the best interest of the American people.

5.Bin laden himself in a horrible medical condition could do little to command his "jihad forces" as he was immobile, in a cave in hiding on dialysis. This may suggest that binnie was easy to lable as the 911 perpetrator, and infact outside interets were also likely responsible. Possibly the immediate saudi goverment the USA would rather keep realtions up with>?


Some food for thought, check it out!

[mocking_loudly_died]

Michael Moore had an amusing TV show called the awful truth.

Though of late his overly extreme hatred towards the American right devalues any position he takes.

People do not like being preached too, thus the majority will always reject his point of view out of hand.

If you want to debate these issues, the best approach is to respect your audience.

Becoming embroiled in extreme political diatribes always makes you lose.

[Vance]

I'm sorry, but I can't beileve anything Moore says.....it's against my religion.

[Skaman]

I'm sorry, but I can't beileve anything Moore says.....it's against my religion.

quoted facts and documented citation, how can you argue with that? Just becuase its in HIS book?


dont be selective. The evidence is there, just becasue you dont like his interpretation, does not make it bs! Those 5 things I posted, are indeed documented reports.

[Vance]

He's been known, actually, he's been proven to twist things around alot to make them seem bad. He did it alot in his movie, who knows what he could of done in a book. Just saying.

[Skaman]

Thats arguable. Nontheless, check his sources, his facts and correlations are sound.

Lets not make this about Micheal Moore and his arguable validity, but about these 5 documented reports that I found quite interesting. How could something like this happen?

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Ok I've said this many times I'm not sure if you guys are reading it so I will put it in bold so its easier for you guys to see:


In every lie there is a grain of truth
I myself have watched the "Bowling for Columbine" movie. There was alot of stuff said about America, is any of it true? I cannot say because I wasnt there and dont have all the fact's. Just because some people dont like the author it doesnt mean the information he presents is any less accurate then anyone else...I'll say it one more time for the people less educated.
In every lie there is a grain of truth
Just my thoughts on the opinion.

[Skaman]

who said his new book is based on lies?

but ya, I tend to agree with that analysis.

[Vance]

In every lie there is a grain of truth
Exactly. Like I said, he's been known to spin the truth around into a lie. He bases his lies off of truths.

[Skaman]

In every lie there is a grain of truth
Exactly. Like I said, he's been known to spin the truth around into a lie. He bases his lies off of truths.

spin the truth into a lie. Not a lie, perhaps and exageration to some extent. However, when I read his book, and see these sources, one cannot brush the man with the same paint as before.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

"spin the truth into a lie. Not a lie, perhaps and exageration to some extent. However, when I read his book, and see these sources, one cannot brush the man with the same paint as before."

Exactly my point. I cant say if all the information he has put into his books/movies are true, but I bet some of it is, and some of it is not. Its up to the reader/viewer to decide.

[wholagun]

Some Americans at least the ones i talked too said that they know many ppl in the US who don't like Micheal Moore because he is not patriotic, and he crtisizes the US. Simply, they don't like him cause he's preaching bad things about America. Americans are one of the most patriotic ppl in the world, I can see how someone who doesn't share your view about the country can be unpopular. I can see this happening to any state that is painted badly by a fellow national.

[Va_Dinger]

Beleive it or not, this is all true. Don't beleive me-look it up for yourself.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Good point wholagun. Many people have problems admitting to mistakes/errors made in the past, many people dont like the people that keep these mistakes/error's fresh in the peoples minds. The only way to avoid making the same mistakes/error's again is to learn from them then move on.

[Ratamacue]

Wholagun, that may be true for some people, but the reason most of the people I know don't like him is because he's very misleading and manipulative. There's a site somewhere, don't know what the address is, that shows all the false truths and misguidances in Bowling for Columbine.

[James]

Some Americans at least the ones i talked too said that they know many ppl in the US who don't like Micheal Moore because he is not patriotic, and he crtisizes the US. Simply, they don't like him cause he's preaching bad things about America. Americans are one of the most patriotic ppl in the world, I can see how someone who doesn't share your view about the country can be unpopular. I can see this happening to any state that is painted badly by a fellow national.

I don't have trouble with people criticizing the U.S. most of the time, though, as I've said in other discussions, I don't like it when all 280 million of us are painted with the same brush. As far as "Bowling for Columbine", well, it was at best, in my opinion, a rather extreme editorial, and not a documentary. As for this thread...


1. Captured taliban pamphlets and Jihad works suggets their holy warriors to abuse the Americans weak second amendment right. The right to bare arms. They suggest while within America to join gun clubs, and purposely train with automatic weapons. Americans will gladly assist you in Weapons knowledge. and Military weapons are widely available.


This is far more difficult than this paragraph might lead on to believe. Many gun clubs require U.S. citizenship. Many states don't allow ownership of automatic weapons, period. In many places, it is very difficult to legally aquire a firearm of any sort if one is not a citizen. (Aquiring one illegally is another story, but we needn't get into that ;) ). Last but not least... military weapons... that is a whole other can of worms. A Brown Bess musket is a military weapon. A Springfield M1861 Rifle is a military weapon. Definitions are important.

[Skaman]

I repeat, this is not about Moore and the Valdity of his arguments;rather than the facts he present which deserve some noteable attention and commentation.

[Skaman]

Some Americans at least the ones i talked too said that they know many ppl in the US who don't like Micheal Moore because he is not patriotic, and he crtisizes the US. Simply, they don't like him cause he's preaching bad things about America. Americans are one of the most patriotic ppl in the world, I can see how someone who doesn't share your view about the country can be unpopular. I can see this happening to any state that is painted badly by a fellow national.

I don't have trouble with people criticizing the U.S. most of the time, though, as I've said in other discussions, I don't like it when all 280 million of us are painted with the same brush. As far as "Bowling for Columbine", well, it was at best, in my opinion, a rather extreme editorial, and not a documentary. As for this thread...


1. Captured taliban pamphlets and Jihad works suggets their holy warriors to abuse the Americans weak second amendment right. The right to bare arms. They suggest while within America to join gun clubs, and purposely train with automatic weapons. Americans will gladly assist you in Weapons knowledge. and Military weapons are widely available.


This is far more difficult than this paragraph might lead on to believe. Many gun clubs require U.S. citizenship. Many states don't allow ownership of automatic weapons, period. In many places, it is very difficult to legally aquire a firearm of any sort if one is not a citizen. (Aquiring one illegally is another story, but we needn't get into that ;) ). Last but not least... military weapons... that is a whole other can of worms. A Brown Bess musket is a military weapon. A Springfield M1861 Rifle is a military weapon. Definitions are important.


Automatic and semi automatic rifles in particulair. I think something must be said when terrorist factions are using your own laws againt you to benefit their on goals and needs. What need is there to get illegal ak 47's into the nation in mass quantity for possible insurgence uprisings when they are already widely availbale both legally and illegaly.

[Vance]

But how do you know those facts aren't facts?

[Skaman]

But how do you know those facts aren't facts?

Check his sources. Time magazine openly stated saudi arabian officals flew out of the nation post 911 without routine interogation.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Good point Vance...We dont know, its up to the readers/viewers of his work to decide. Im sure if you searched some of the things he talked about and did alot of looking into it some would be true some would not be. I'll say it again, In every lie there is a grain of truth
You simply cant discount everything thats said as lie's, even in the most blatant (spelling?) of lies there is some parts of truth.

[ibstolidude]

Thats arguable. Nontheless, check his sources, his facts and correlations are sound.

Lets not make this about Micheal Moore and his arguable validity, but about these 5 documented reports that I found quite interesting. How could something like this happen?

You are constantly talking out your:
http://centralpets.com/critter_images/mammals/goats/GOT_0005072_20030205230036.jpg GOATAS$$



I am deep into the book, and Moore has made some great correlations north Americans failed to overlook as they were purposefully hidden due to suspected public outcry. All his work, is well documented and factual. The interpreation of these facts is subjective and contraversal.


Interesting facts.


1. Captured taliban pamphlets and Jihad works suggets their holy warriors to abuse the Americans weak second amendment right. The right to bare arms. They suggest while within America to join gun clubs, and purposely train with automatic weapons. Americans will gladly assist you in Weapons knowledge. and Military weapons are widely available.


2.The Bin Laden family and saudi arabian goverment, both tightly knit with texan oil congromerates have billions invested within the USA. A removal of such backing would be economically horrible for the USA.
- Please offer the proof. As a student/practicioner of international finance, investments and development, I am intrigued to see these "backings that would be economically horrible for the USA." - unless of course you are refering to "Arbusto Energy (later merged w/Spectrum)"? You know the one that Bin Laden family was one of 50 investors...the thing went belly up in 84. Perhaps the fact that the Bin Laden family is head of one of the largest construction companies in the world (much less the middle east) and that they are one of the largest land owners could be a reason they have some involvement in the middle east oil ventures.....just a crazy guess....


3. shortly prior to 911, 20 members of the immediate members of the Bin laden family were within the USA. Deep in economic meeting with American oil conglomerates.surprise...family members of the binladen family remain in the US...oddly enough so do Tim Mcveigh's (they must have been in on it!!! they are in the same family !!!) Several live here you jackass!!

4. in the days following 911, the Bin Laden family was allowed to leave the country via private jet although a no fly zone and all commerical aircraft were grounded. The bin ladens left unexpectedly, and no questioning of substantial nature was taken. all commercial air was closed for the days following 911????...also you included private air???but I would check my timeframes... I suggest a double check of the facts and timelines regarding the FAA suspension of commercial flights and the locations of "no fly zones". I also suggest you ask how Mr Moore obtained the flight plan of the Bin Laden family....or perhaps it just sounds better to spill the horse**** I that I read from his book. I mean if they left after 911 in a plane it must have been during the flight suspension!! and over a no-fly zone!!!..what a dolt!.. the Bin Laden family (several of them remain) leaving was even reported in main stream media...leaving out of fear or reprisals that were unwarranted.

Suspicious that they would leave so soon, while the USA demanded who was responsible and sought the perpetrators.
Perhaps the fact that the family publically denounced Osama and his actions as a terrorist for years prior to 911, coupled with the fact that the family is not a suspected terrorist could have plated a minor role...just maybe...considering that several arab-looking Americans were accousted by an ignorant minority following the 911 attacks, perhaps in an unprecedented act of prudence the US government avoided further public humilitation by granting this wish in an attempt to avoid embarassement...or perhaps they granted this movement as an opportunity to begin a dialogue with those responsible....perhaps this was not an unplanned movement? perhaps [b] Neither you nor Mr Moore have a wild hair up the a$$ clue.

Perhaps, the USA did not want to damage realtions with the Saudi goverment and make aqqusations, even though it was in the best interest of the American people.

5.Bin laden himself in a horrible medical condition could do little to command his "jihad forces" as he was immobile, in a cave in hiding on dialysis. This may suggest that binnie was easy to lable as the 911 perpetrator, and infact outside interets were also likely responsible. Possibly the immediate saudi goverment the USA would rather keep realtions up with>?
show me the evidence that would support that he
a: "could do little to command his Jihad Forces"
b: "as he was immobile"
be sure to veiw the several released videos of him since that time frame in which he is walking un aided... also do a little research to understand the limitations that renal disease does and does not affect....you may wish to check out thuraya and Iriduim websites.


Some food for thought, check it out!

THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE....
TOO BAD THE LIES ARE IN YOUR HEAD.

beware of the smoking man!
http://x-files.host.sk/csm.jpg

simply stating that something is a fact...does not make it so.
Mr Moore's book constantly says according to documents...yet were are these documents?

[Skaman]

Get the book, check his sources, read them for yourself. Thats all I can suggest. I do not have a comprehnsive listing of all of his sources at my disposal, thus do not ask me. If you question his validity, read his book, analyze the soucres and create your own opinion.

Have a nice day ;)

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

ibstolidude did u even read the last post's??? I doubt it. Go read threw them and repost.

[ibstolidude]

I have.

I have also listened to him speak and seen several of his works...

Although the points he often makes are valid..inparticular to those regarding corporate American..his sources are rarely "backed up" with anything but his own words, opinions and analysis

My little cousins/nephews can offer the same...they also carry more weight because they don't pass it off as fact/the truth.

[James]

Automatic and semi automatic rifles in particulair. I think something must be said when terrorist factions are using your own laws againt you to benefit their on goals and needs. What need is there to get illegal ak 47's into the nation in mass quantity for possible insurgence uprisings when they are already widely availbale both legally and illegaly.

Here is an example:
http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Remington%207400.JPG



As stated earlier, automatic rifles are almost impossible to own in the United States - this has been the case since 1934. The example above is a semiautomatic rifle, arguably more deadly than any small arm currently used by the U.S. Military.

Sorry, I am about to go off on a rant.

Definitions are important.

[Skaman]

I have.

I have also listened to him speak and seen several of his works...

Although the points he often makes are valid..inparticular to those regarding corporate American..his sources are rarely "backed up" with anything but his own words, opinions and analysis


I disagree, and I believe for the THIRD TIME, get the book, CHECK the sources!

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Guys dont turn this into ducimus19 bash fest..lets keep it on topic this discussion is rather interesting.

[James]

Worry not, for never will I bash him. If he starts to get uppity, I will kill him with kindness. ;)

[usa320]

I read the first line of this thread and ive already developed a great feeling on it.

Michael moore is gay.

Bowling for clumbine is gay.

Ducimus19 is gay.

:cantbeli:

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

wow usa320 your ignorance amaze's me. Nobody care's about your comments about ducimus19, get a life. Talk about thread hi-jack...
If you dont like the thread then dont post here because it only goes to show what lack of chromosomes you do have

[Ratamacue]

It is impossible to "lack chomosomes." All human beings have 46 chomosomes per cell, and if you don't, then you're not a human and probably wouldn't be able to post here.

[kinghk]

wow usa320 your ignorance amaze's me. Nobody care's about your comments about ducimus19, get a life. Talk about thread hi-jack...
If you dont like the thread then dont post here because it only goes to show what lack of chromosomes you do have

Actually, you are retarded if you have to many.

[kinghk]

I read the first line of this thread and ive already developed a great feeling on it.

Michael moore is gay.

Bowling for clumbine is gay.

Ducimus19 is gay.



Nice arguments.

[Beowulf]

I have.

I have also listened to him speak and seen several of his works...

Although the points he often makes are valid..inparticular to those regarding corporate American..his sources are rarely "backed up" with anything but his own words, opinions and analysis


I disagree, and I believe for the THIRD TIME, get the book, CHECK the sources!

You have the book, do you not? Does Moore list his sources in the book? If so please provide them. If not then why not?

Also, someone cannot simply call something a fact and then defy all challengers to "check the sources" in order to form a cogent opinion of said "facts". If you present a series of "facts" you must provide the sources for so called facts.

The proper way to make a point is not to posit something and then say "prove me wrong" but rather to present a thorough presentation of facts, sources, and then your interpretation of those facts.

It's your opinion/thesis the burden of proof is on you.
-b

[Beowulf]

also: Moore smokes pole....

[kinghk]

Here is an example:
http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Remington%207400.JPG

As stated earlier, automatic rifles are almost impossible to own in the United States - this has been the case since 1934. The example above is a semiautomatic rifle, arguably more deadly than any small arm currently used by the U.S. Military.

Sorry, I am about to go off on a rant.


Guns don't kill people, people kill people. If this weapon is more deadly than any other gun, it has a serious malfunction.[/b]

[Beowulf]

"guns don't kill people....dangerous minorities do." -The Family Guy (National Gun Association propaganda video)

[Shake n Bake]

**** Moore and his bull****..


Here's some good reading....

The Pussification Of The Western Male (http://www.kimdutoit.com/dr/essays/essays.php?id=P2327)

[Jack Mehoff]

f*** Moore and his bull****..


Here's some good reading....

The Pussification Of The Western Male (http://www.kimdutoit.com/dr/essays/essays.php?id=P2327)

I like the title

[Andyman]

Wholagun, that may be true for some people, but the reason most of the people I know don't like him is because he's very misleading and manipulative. There's a site somewhere, don't know what the address is, that shows all the false truths and misguidances in Bowling for Columbine.

Like what? saying Columbine didn't get shot by two of it's own students. Michael Moore is simply a bearer of hard unpolished truth. Of course he's gonna be hated by many people. Look at what was done to Jesus by the same people he was helping. Whether you believe he performed those miracles or not he still helped the people and showed them a better way to live but as soon as he told those doing wrong what they were doing wrong people started screaming death and they succeeded. Hatred towards Michael Moore ironically is mainly found in America.

[Nawlins]

f*** Moore and his bull****..


Here's some good reading....

The Pussification Of The Western Male

I like the article. I read the whole thing.


I refuse to waste my money on Moore's book, because in my opinion he is full of horse****. By the way, I think someone was looking for this web site: Moorelies.com (http://www.moorelies.com).

(I can't f-ing believe you just compared him to Jesus...)

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Andyman your so right. The truth hurts I guess. :lol:

[Skaman]

Look, do these occurances in the post 911 period not phase the lot of you at all? would you rather not comment, and instead draw argument away from the topic to a bash moore thread? Additionaly, I cannot post all of Moores evidence as I do not have a comprehensive listing of Time magazines, New Yorkers, Wall Street Journals, Washington Posts etc.

It seems people would rather curb his work as outlandish. "your worst critic is yourself" Who better than to comment on the USA than an author, director, and civillian of the USA such as Moore himself.

It seems people would rather ignore Moores claim, and label him as a non patriot. How ironic it is that you would rather live blind in one eye, and deaf in one ear. Challange the pre conceptions you have, and take a look at his book. No one says you have to buy it, go down to the local libary and check it out.

-Ducimus

[Trigger]

The bull**** that Moore is selling as the truth does hurt...
It hurts the ignorant polesmokers like douchelips19 who buy it hook, line and sinker and then try to pawn it off on us as if we would somehow embrace it.
puh-leeeeze. :roll:

You started the thread about Moore's book you fool! We are on topic when we bash him and it. You wanted response you got it. Don't bitch if it isn't what you want to hear. You're always welcome to leave if you get uncomfortable or if your needs aren't being met. There's the door. Don't let it hit ya where the good lord split ya!

[Nawlins]

Additionaly, I cannot post all of Moores evidence as I do not have a comprehensive listing of Time magazines, New Yorkers, Wall Street Journals, Washington Posts etc.


Actually all you have to do is post the applicable portions of his bibliography, then we can check the sources out ourselves. It's pretty easy, which makes me wonder why you continue to refuse to do so.

[Jack Mehoff]

Did Michael Mooron said something about the KKK originated from the IRA?

[Nawlins]

Did Michael Mooron said something about the KKK originated from the IRA?


I think you're talking about when he suggested that the NRA originated from the KKK.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
Ok thats great it bash's Micheal Moore alot but it still doesnt discredit alot of the film.
For example
1953: Us overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran, US installs a dictator by the name of Shah.
1954: Us overthows a democratically elected President Arbenz of Guatemala, after this 200,000 civilians were killed.
1963: Us supports the assassination of then the South Vietnamese President Diem
1973: On September 11th Us helps stage a coup in Chile. The then president Salvador Allende that was democratically elected by Chilean's was assassinated. Then Augusto Pinochet is then installed as there Dictator, 5000 Chileans were systematically murdered.
1977: Us backs the rulers of El Salvador, 4 nuns (that happened to be american) and 70,000 Salvadorans were killed.
In the 1980's Us helps train Osama bin Laden and other terrorists to help kill Soviets, 3 Billion dollars were given to them by the CIA.
1981: Us trains and funds the "contras" which later kill 30,000 Nicaraguans die.
1982: Us gives an unknown amount of WMD and gives billions in aid to Saddam Hussein to fight the Iranians with, 1983: White house gives Iran weapons to kill the Iraqi's...amazing what can change over a year eh?
1989: Manuel Noriega (CIA agent and also the President of Panama) wasnt following Washingtons orders, 3,000 Panamanian Civilian casualties.
1990: Iraq using the weapons the Us gave them invades Kuwait, this starts the "Gulf War 1". Bush Senior reinstates a dictator to Kuwait (cause dictators apparently are the way to go)U.N. even has estimates that around 500,000 Iraqi childern die between the sanctions and bombings. (from 91-present day)
1998: Us bombs a labeled "weapons factory" in Sudan. In actuallity it was a aspirin factory.

Prove that wrong I could bring out a calculator and do the math myself on the amount dead but I'll leave it to the rest of you to add up.

--------------> edit
The KKK was formed the same year the NRA was formed.

[Skaman]

Additionaly, I cannot post all of Moores evidence as I do not have a comprehensive listing of Time magazines, New Yorkers, Wall Street Journals, Washington Posts etc.


Actually all you have to do is post the applicable portions of his bibliography, then we can check the sources out ourselves. It's pretty easy, which makes me wonder why you continue to refuse to do so.



Trigger, your ignorace speaks endless numbers,

Nawlins, here are some sources and articles for you to review so you can verify these statements.




Mike Allen, "For Bush, a Slippery situation" The Washington Post, June 23, 2000

Thomas Petzinger, "Family ties:How oil firm linked the Son of a Bush with Bahrain Drilling Project, The Wall Street Journal, Decmeber 6th, 1991

Johnathon Beaty, "A Mysterious Mover of Money and Planes" Time Magazine, October 28th, 1991

Susan Sevareid, "Attacks hurt Bin Laden Conglomerate,"Associated Press" October 8, 2001

"Outcast who Brought Shame on Family" London Times, September 15th 2001

Jane Mayer, "The House of Bin Laden, A familys and a nations divided loyalities" the New Yorker, November 12th, 2001

Ken Eichenwald, "Bin Laden Family liquidates Holdings with Carle Group", The New York Times, October 21, 2001

Robert Baer, "sleeping with the devil" crown, 2003

Tim Shorrock, "crony capitalim goes global" The Nation, April 1, 2002

Department of Energy, Energy information adminstration "Table 4-10: United States-Oil imports, 1991-2002


These are a few of the 97 used in the first chapter.

[Skaman]

Did Michael Mooron said something about the KKK originated from the IRA?


The ira.....no, the NRA yes.

The IRA is based out of Northern Ireland.

[Andyman]

Thank you Bastardchild. I assume all logical beings who once so gloriously supported the US and believed it could perform no wrong, will now all sit back mouths agape and pay respect to silence. You said it all dude you said it all.

Oh and another thing. My uncle lives in Nanaimo B.C but Im not gonna ask you if you know him cause that would be kinda retarded. He's a crazy ski bum with a wife and a kid but i dont get to see him much since we live thousands of kilometres away.

[Skaman]

1953: US overthrows prime minister Mossadeq of Iran, US then installs Shah as dictator.

1954-US overthrows democratically elected President of Guatemela, 200,000 civillians are consecutively killed.

1963-1975 America backs assisination of South Vietnimese President Diem.To prevent spread of Communism through a domino effect, they invade North Vietnam and 4 million people in South East Asia die. Communism remained.

1973-US stages coup in Chile, democratically elected President Salvator Allende is assassinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet is installed.
5,000 Chilienas are inturn murdered

1977-US backs military rulers of El Salvador, selling them American made weapons. 70,000 Salvadorans are killed, many by US sold weapons.

1980's-US trains osama bin laden in ways to kill soviets during Afghanistan occupation. CIA provides him wth 3 billion US

1981-US trains and funds "contras", 30,000 Nicirauguans die

1982-US provides billions in foreign aid to Sadam to sponsor his war againt Iran. Weapons are inturn used on his own people.

1987-Disatisfied with Sadams actions, US sells Iran Weapons to be used againt Iraq military.

1989-Noriega, a CIA agent begins serving as president of Panama. USA discourages this. USA eventully steps in to remove him, resulting in 3,000 Panamanian deaths.

1990-Iraq invades kuwait using billions provided by USA 8 years prior.

1991-USA steps in defeating Sadam, fearing Iraq is a chllange to their Saudi oil reserves. Kuwait is used as a "blank check". Kuwait inturn becomes an American puppet with a hardly functioning democracy.

1992-US puts embargoes against Haitian goverement. Currency is inflated, jobs are lost, food runs out. USA steps in to restore order. USA polices for a few months, then leaves before a formal infrastructure is established. Problems return to Haiti.

1993-US leads operation "restore hope" in Somalia in an attempt to overthrow the warlords, restoring peace and ending famine. A US mission goes astray, and results in the entire US military evacuation, crumbling the UN mission. Somalia returns to chaos.

1998-Sudan-USA bombs supposed weapons factory, which apparently was making Aspirin.

1991-current- Bombs are dropped on Iraq continually, and sanctions are places on Iraqi goverment. 500,000 die from bombing and sanctions

2000-USA gives taliban ruled goverment in Afghanistan $245 million in goverment aid.

2001-Osama bin laden uses CIA training and mass amount of American "aid" to plan and carry out the 911 tragedies. 3,000 people are killed

2003-Bush adminisration invades Iraq under false pre-tenses. Thousands of Iraqi's die in struggle. 400 American soldiers are killed.


A more comprehensive list.

[Nawlins]

1953: US overthrows prime minister Mossadeq of Iran, US then installs Shah as dictator.

1954-US overthrows democratically elected President of Guatemela, 200,000 civillians are consecutively killed.

1963-1975 America backs assisination of South Vietnimese President Diem.To prevent spread of Communism through a domino effect, they invade North Vietnam and 4 million people in South East Asia die. Communism remained.

1973-US stages coup in Chile, democratically elected President Salvator Allende is assassinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet is installed.
5,000 Chilienas are inturn murdered

1977-US backs military rulers of El Salvador, selling them American made weapons. 70,000 Salvadorans are killed, many by US sold weapons.

1980's-US trains osama bin laden in ways to kill soviets during Afghanistan occupation. CIA provides him wth 3 billion US

1981-US trains and funds "contras", 30,000 Nicirauguans die

1982-US provides billions in foreign aid to Sadam to sponsor his war againt Iran. Weapons are inturn used on his own people.

1987-Disatisfied with Sadams actions, US sells Iran Weapons to be used againt Iraq military.

1989-Noriega, a CIA agent begins serving as president of Panama. USA discourages this. USA eventully steps in to remove him, resulting in 3,000 Panamanian deaths.

1990-Iraq invades kuwait using billions provided by USA 8 years prior.

1991-USA steps in defeating Sadam, fearing Iraq is a chllange to their Saudi oil reserves. Kuwait is used as a "blank check". Kuwait inturn becomes an American puppet with a hardly functioning democracy.

1992-US puts embargoes against Haitian goverement. Currency is inflated, jobs are lost, food runs out. USA steps in to restore order. USA polices for a few months, then leaves before a formal infrastructure is established. Problems return to Haiti.

1993-US leads operation "restore hope" in Somalia in an attempt to overthrow the warlords, restoring peace and ending famine. A US mission goes astray, and results in the entire US military evacuation, crumbling the UN mission. Somalia returns to chaos.

1998-Sudan-USA bombs supposed weapons factory, which apparently was making Aspirin.

1991-current- Bombs are dropped on Iraq continually, and sanctions are places on Iraqi goverment. 500,000 die from bombing and sanctions

2000-USA gives taliban ruled goverment in Afghanistan $245 million in goverment aid.

2001-Osama bin laden uses CIA training and mass amount of American "aid" to plan and carry out the 911 tragedies. 3,000 people are killed

2003-Bush adminisration invades Iraq under false pre-tenses. Thousands of Iraqi's die in struggle. 400 American soldiers are killed.


A more comprehensive list.


How about footnotes here, with real documents (not op/ed pieces) as sources?

[Skaman]

Nawlins, I just provided you with some sources for the original post. Analyze and validate your little heart out. Im not going to go through the painstakigng process again. Go check the ones I just posted and quit whining you triffling whelp.

[Nawlins]

Nawlins, I just provided you with some sources for the original post. Analyze and validate your little heart out. Im not going to go through the painstakigng process again. Go check the ones I just posted and quit whining you triffling whelp.

I didn't resort to namecalling, I don't think you ought to do so either. And you provided me with a list of media articles, not historical documents. But I will check them out, thanks.

[Skaman]

No prob Nawlins.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

I certainly dont have the time to go threw and find every source, I've seen these verified on other sites before. By the way I did a lil calculator work, 40808001 have died from mistakes made in the past by American leaders...I stopped personally short because the number was much higher then I was expecting..
40808001 dead people is enough facts on its own.

[Skaman]

I certainly dont have the time to go threw and find every source, I've seen these verified on other sites before. By the way I did a lil calculator work, 40808001 have died from mistakes made in the past by American leaders...I stopped personally short because the number was much higher then I was expecting..
40808001 dead people is enough facts on its own.


But hey, its in the name of freedom and American interest ;)


I think an apolgy is owed....

[Skaman]

And the critics all shut up. Music to my ears. :lol:

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Oh ya also another footnote..Dont forget the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

--------->edit
also forgot "agent organe" use'd during the vietnam war to kill plants thus the jungles becomming not so green. There is still effects and birth defects and even nastier stuff still happening to the people who inhabit the region today.

[Skaman]

Oh ya also another footnote..Dont forget the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Civillians.....the worst and most unecessary casulity of war. :(

[Seiyuuki]

I am deep into the book, and Moore has made some great correlations north Americans failed to overlook as they were purposefully hidden due to suspected public outcry. All his work, is well documented and factual. The interpreation of these facts is subjective and contraversal.


Interesting facts.


1. Captured taliban pamphlets and Jihad works suggets their holy warriors to abuse the Americans weak second amendment right. The right to bare arms. They suggest while within America to join gun clubs, and purposely train with automatic weapons. Americans will gladly assist you in Weapons knowledge. and Military weapons are widely available.


2.The Bin Laden family and saudi arabian goverment, both tightly knit with texan oil congromerates have billions invested within the USA. A removal of such backing would be economically horrible for the USA.

3. shortly prior to 911, 20 members of the immediate members of the Bin laden family were within the USA. Deep in economic meeting with American oil conglomerates.

4. in the days following 911, the Bin Laden family was allowed to leave the country via prvate jet although a no fly zone and all commerical aircraft were grounded. The bin ladens left unexpectedly, and no questioning of substantial nature was taken.

Suspicious that they would leave so soon, while the USA demanded who was responsible and sought the perpetrators.

Perhaps, the USA did not want to damage realtions with the Saudi goverment and make aqqusations, even though it was in the best interest of the American people.

5.Bin laden himself in a horrible medical condition could do little to command his "jihad forces" as he was immobile, in a cave in hiding on dialysis. This may suggest that binnie was easy to lable as the 911 perpetrator, and infact outside interets were also likely responsible. Possibly the immediate saudi goverment the USA would rather keep realtions up with>?


Some food for thought, check it out!

...and don't forget, I'm Santa Claus.

[SOG]

please, this is way to easy.

bastard child was right on about spinning lies from truth.

there can be a fact, or a simple statement but it can be read in many different ways and lights.

why do pastors read the same thing in the bible and preach three different views of it?



1. Captured taliban pamphlets and Jihad works suggets their holy warriors to abuse the Americans weak second amendment right. The right to bare arms. They suggest while within America to join gun clubs, and purposely train with automatic weapons. Americans will gladly assist you in Weapons knowledge. and Military weapons are widely available.

woopteedoo. beats a airplane flying into a building. hey, they can get a car, stuff it full of fertilizer, blow a building like mcvey, or run a car along a crowded street walk. i mean cmon, if were thinking of ways of killing people, guns are very limited compared to the big boys expplosive toys you could make in ANY country with little effort. wow, a american will assist you in weapons knowledge, this is how you load/aim/clean your gun, should we take all guns away because some paranoid pussy thinks a bad guy is going to exploit our freedoms?

2.The Bin Laden family and saudi arabian goverment, both tightly knit with texan oil congromerates have billions invested within the USA. A removal of such backing would be economically horrible for the USA.

that is correct. we would never remove them, why would we? they are not criminals.

3. shortly prior to 911, 20 members of the immediate members of the Bin laden family were within the USA. Deep in economic meeting with American oil conglomerates.

not deep in meeting! youll see where im going in a sec.

4. in the days following 911, the Bin Laden family was allowed to leave the country via prvate jet although a no fly zone and all commerical aircraft were grounded. The bin ladens left unexpectedly, and no questioning of substantial nature was taken.

Suspicious that they would leave so soon, while the USA demanded who was responsible and sought the perpetrators.

Perhaps, the USA did not want to damage realtions with the Saudi goverment and make aqqusations, even though it was in the best interest of the American people.

this is why michael moor is a gay wad. does anyone know that the binladen family had disowned bin laden himself way before this ever happened? anyone? did anyone know that bin laden has had stressed relations with his family for quite some time even though a few in his family have been sympathetic to him? the bin laden family has had nothing to do with osama for years, they thought he was a dangerous ranting radical and they disowned him. does michael moore tell anyone any of this? i mean cmon, it was on a 1 hour profile show of osama's life on the history channel, does michael moor constantly not present factual evidence to support his own theories within a accute little bubble? id let the bin laden family leave to, as some dum ignorant hick who doesnt understand the difference between oasama and his family might have tried something stupid.

5.Bin laden himself in a horrible medical condition could do little to command his "jihad forces" as he was immobile, in a cave in hiding on dialysis. This may suggest that binnie was easy to lable as the 911 perpetrator, and infact outside interets were also likely responsible. Possibly the immediate saudi goverment the USA would rather keep realtions up with>?

possibly, but then again isnt that why we attacked and froze dozens of accounts within the US including charity organizations suspected of SAUDI and terrorist money flow? isnt that why arrests were made in germany, france, america, and other countries and taking thier accounts because we trailed terrorism wherever it lead? does michael moore live in a bubble?

this is what bastard child meant by perpetuating a lie from a truth, your with holding information to push your agenda hoping to god your audience isnt informed in any way so they cant say, yeah thats true, but why didnt you print THE REST OF THE STORY. just like the news media, present media in a certain light so people will naturally think along certain lines.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

nice job sog...its nice to know people are reading my posts. woot
------->edit
I'm now making the saying apart of my signature just to keep everyone reminded

[Whistler]

Sog pretty much summed up everything I wanted to say.

Micheal Moore may be funny, he may be charismatic, but he is still a lying propoganda artist who preys on the uninformed. I feel kind of sorry for anyone who reads his books and takes them as gospel instead of researching them on their own.

What do you think he would say if the US DID arrest the Bin Laden family? Even though they had done nothing wrong, were in the country legally, and had disowned Osama years ago. Do you think he would be praising the Bush administration for taking the right action?

Yeah right :fork: .

No matter what the US Govt does, especially a US Republican Govt, Micheal Moore will twist it into an evil Imperial plot to hurt poor people and minorities. Hes a spin doctor pure and simple.

If you want just one example of Micheal Moore's lies and twistings of truth, have a browse through this site.

http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

Do it for your own mind :) .

I mean cmon, there are plenty of authors out there that expose American flaws and make the US look bad but DON'T have to resort to flat our lies and twisting the truth. They may not have a flashy title like "Dude Wheres My Country" but maybe you'll expand your mind by reading them.

And hey, if you REALLY want to expand your mind, try a book by somebody on the other side of the spectrum for once ;).

[WARPIG]

The bull**** never ends. Dicamus would model himself after an author like Moore. While trying to validate biased views with incomplete facts he uses that interpretation much like a magician would use visual witness to make believers out of eye witnesses.
For example; a magician would have you believe he can make a coin disappear. One second it is in plain view the next it is gone. The facts are... you visually see the coin, you see no movement nor signs of tampering, no place to hide, yet the coin is gone. What is the truth though? A sleight of hand trick, sometimes a little misdirection is used. The best tricks use no misdirection and are therefore more impressive and believable. Same concept works in media.
Several said it best. To the uninformed an auther like Moore can make a few facts seem miraculous in proving his point. Dicamus is a novice at this. His facts have always been weak and his point of view is way too obvious. If he honestly seeks the truth, he needs to move his perspective around. It is currently a 2d view.
Problem with a book like that is that many are uninformed, and many are fooled.

[Skaman]

Interesting post sog. I think you raise some imporatant points that need to be included. I cannot verify everything you said for its accuracy, yet someone can see how a skewed portrayal is evident. I agree with many of your points while not all. The Bin Laden family did cut relations with Osama, and Moore openly states this, yet should it not be expected that they may know something about his whereabouts. And why they are allowed the sole privelege to leave the nation via air travle while all others are grounded? Again, there are different ways if interpreting this evidence, and I think you bring up some great concerns. I in no way limit myslef to a a narrow minded read, I always take in multiple sources concerning a subject. One should always questions what they read and see, and compare it to other works, you can then later draw simililarities, and common statements to make an argument. Read Chomsky, I think he is great. Time, the National Post etc. All great reads.

[wulfstan]

My problem with Moore is that he is the epitome of the US stereotype (in that he is a negative one). I find all his opinions hard to take not because of his political bias but because he delivers them in a 'i am right, and all your beliefs are misguided' tone of voice.
In the few writings/TV interviews i see i end up being confronted by an overweight, loud-mouthed baseball cap wearing zealot. This kind of stereotype does nothing to help the opinion Europeans have of Americans. Moore does of course have a lot of support and respect in the UK, but that's because we (as a nation, not including myself) enjoy having the opportunity of telling ourselves that the Americans are stooopid. Having an over weight loud mouth Amercian telling you about Americans is ironic!

[Skaman]

The bull**** never ends. Dicamus would model himself after an author like Moore. While trying to validate biased views with incomplete facts he uses that interpretation much like a magician would use visual witness to make believers out of eye witnesses.
For example; a magician would have you believe he can make a coin disappear. One second it is in plain view the next it is gone. The facts are... you visually see the coin, you see no movement nor signs of tampering, no place to hide, yet the coin is gone. What is the truth though? A sleight of hand trick, sometimes a little misdirection is used. The best tricks use no misdirection and are therefore more impressive and believable. Same concept works in media.
Several said it best. To the uninformed an auther like Moore can make a few facts seem miraculous in proving his point. Dicamus is a novice at this. His facts have always been weak and his point of view is way too obvious. If he honestly seeks the truth, he needs to move his perspective around. It is currently a 2d view.
Problem with a book like that is that many are uninformed, and many are fooled.


Its easy to point fingers and jump on the band wagon isint it?

[Skaman]

"Micheal Moore will twist it into an evil Imperial plot to hurt poor people and minorities. Hes a spin doctor pure and simple. "

Moore in no way emphesizes this, thats completely speclatory. Try reading his book before jumping the gun.

[WARPIG]

Honestly dicamus.. your point of view gets shot down every time because you think in 2D. I really try and take a look at your view but it just falls apart under scrutiny. I may have a Pro-
American bias but I don't close my mind to other viewpoints. I do have to hold them to a standard though. Your posts don't meet that standard. Your pick and choose those views and fact tidbits that support your opinion. That is backwards. You should soak up all the facts and views and then form an opinion. Many people have challenged you with this... to change your perspective and look at things from other viewpoints... you haven't accepted yet.
Maybe you should get off of your bandwagon. Walk around with us a little.

[Skaman]

Honestly dicamus.. your point of view gets shot down every time because you think in 2D. I really try and take a look at your view but it just falls apart under scrutiny. I may have a Pro-
American bias but I don't close my mind to other viewpoints. I do have to hold them to a standard though. Your posts don't meet that standard. Your pick and choose those views and fact tidbits that support your opinion. That is backwards. You should soak up all the facts and views and then form an opinion. Many people have challenged you with this... to change your perspective and look at things from other viewpoints... you haven't accepted yet.
Maybe you should get off of your bandwagon. Walk around with us a little.

I think you missed the point. I do not limit myslef whatsoever. I agree, taking in one type of literature is horribly bias and narrowminded. Trust me, I view an obscene abundance of pro Iraq war, republican works etc. After all, I am a member of militaryphotos.net, and where better to get my daily dose? ;) The irony of such accusations when so many are guilty of equal reasoning. I guess we are all stuck in our ways, and there is no changing that. How sad....

[Trigger]

1953: US overthrows prime minister Mossadeq of Iran, US then installs Shah as dictator.

1954-US overthrows democratically elected President of Guatemela, 200,000 civillians are consecutively killed.

1963-1975 America backs assisination of South Vietnimese President Diem.To prevent spread of Communism through a domino effect, they invade North Vietnam and 4 million people in South East Asia die. Communism remained.

1973-US stages coup in Chile, democratically elected President Salvator Allende is assassinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet is installed.
5,000 Chilienas are inturn murdered

1977-US backs military rulers of El Salvador, selling them American made weapons. 70,000 Salvadorans are killed, many by US sold weapons.

1980's-US trains osama bin laden in ways to kill soviets during Afghanistan occupation. CIA provides him wth 3 billion US

1981-US trains and funds "contras", 30,000 Nicirauguans die

1982-US provides billions in foreign aid to Sadam to sponsor his war againt Iran. Weapons are inturn used on his own people.

1987-Disatisfied with Sadams actions, US sells Iran Weapons to be used againt Iraq military.

1989-Noriega, a CIA agent begins serving as president of Panama. USA discourages this. USA eventully steps in to remove him, resulting in 3,000 Panamanian deaths.

1990-Iraq invades kuwait using billions provided by USA 8 years prior.

1991-USA steps in defeating Sadam, fearing Iraq is a chllange to their Saudi oil reserves. Kuwait is used as a "blank check". Kuwait inturn becomes an American puppet with a hardly functioning democracy.

1992-US puts embargoes against Haitian goverement. Currency is inflated, jobs are lost, food runs out. USA steps in to restore order. USA polices for a few months, then leaves before a formal infrastructure is established. Problems return to Haiti.

1993-US leads operation "restore hope" in Somalia in an attempt to overthrow the warlords, restoring peace and ending famine. A US mission goes astray, and results in the entire US military evacuation, crumbling the UN mission. Somalia returns to chaos.

1998-Sudan-USA bombs supposed weapons factory, which apparently was making Aspirin.

1991-current- Bombs are dropped on Iraq continually, and sanctions are places on Iraqi goverment. 500,000 die from bombing and sanctions

2000-USA gives taliban ruled goverment in Afghanistan $245 million in goverment aid.

2001-Osama bin laden uses CIA training and mass amount of American "aid" to plan and carry out the 911 tragedies. 3,000 people are killed

2003-Bush adminisration invades Iraq under false pre-tenses. Thousands of Iraqi's die in struggle. 400 American soldiers are killed.


A more comprehensive list. Hardly. This is the same bull**** you've posted before. Newsflash: Nobody cares.


How about footnotes here, with real documents (not op/ed pieces) as sources? Sorry Nawlins, that would require some original thought. Doofus19 is only capable of parroting the left wing propoganda he has been fed.

Trigger, your ignorace speaks endless numbers
speaks endless numbers? Once more in english please.


quit whining you triffling whelp.
Wow! you sure told her. Is 'triffling whelp' something you read in Moore's book too? By the way YOU are the one doing the whining. "ewww, read my sources that are equally suspect ...ewww, stop bashing Moore....ewww, you're all ignorant..."


Again, there are different ways if interpreting this evidence
It's not evidence. It's opinion, and we are interpreting it differently than you.

[Skaman]

Trigger, quit flogging the horse. Im sure your imputent bashing is warranted somewhere else. Take your un-constructive ****, and shovel it elsewhere.

As for endless numbers....ie. again and again and again you spout the same ignorant tune.

[maw]

just wanted to chime in, ducimus19 and others, i'm afraid that mr. moore is an amatuer and a hack whose prime purpose is self glorification and self promotion.

if you really want objective factual information regarding some of the skeletons in america's foreign policy closet you need to read:
Killing Hope by William Blum isbn 1-56751-052-3
Blum worked at the State Department as a Foreign Service Officer (he was also an analyst for the cia, but don't tell anyone).
in the book he covers countries chapter by chapter and explains what really happened and what exactly was the us intervention.
for example, rather than say we put the shah in place as a puppet, he explains the role of the british and their agenda and goes into detail describing how kermit roosevelt made it happen.
another source is of course noam chomsky. a man who hates his country more than any other.

once you all have read the facts you quickly come to the conclusion that america has indeed instigated some incredible suffering on the world, and then you're faced with the task of rationlizing the actions.

here's how i do it. very simply, we were at war. the cold war. nikita krushcev (sp?) declared that communism would smash the west. the cold war was a giant board game between the super-powers and countries were just squares on the maps. the percieved stakes? global domination. we did some terrible things, no doubt. but the alternative in the eyes of the people running the state dept and the cia was to roll over and learn to speak russian. that's it.

as i see it, america's only crime in all of this, is simply that it hasn't come clean and apologized to the countries that it affected. no compensation, no loans, nothing like that - just an apology and an explanation of the circumstances.

now, if you want to read some really unjustfiable foreign policy decisions? read the trial of henry kissinger by christopher hitchens.

i'm neither right nor left. probably more of a libertarian. if i was allowed to vote i would have voted for nader. i have you read some of his books? forget the green stuff. he see's the corruption in our government and wants to change it. with the exception of the aztecs, the leading cause of social implosion has been corruption. that's the macro issue our children will have to face.

i am grateful to be given the opportunity to live in this country. but i have to travel to some pretty interesting parts of the world, and when i get there i get the usual mouthful of criticism regarding us foreign policy. hence the conviction in my rationalized position.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Moore is a nihilistic, undisciplined, sloppy, self-promoting bafoon with an agenda to push. He cannot be taken seriously by anyone interested in an unbiased analysis. His "sources" are often equally basied, and he conveniently leaves out any evidence contrary to his point of view. Moore is not a journalist, he is an entertainer interested only in padding his wallet. His conclusions are specious. He has made a career of hate disguised as sardonic humor.

[Trigger]

maw wrote:

very simply, we were at war. the cold war. nikita krushcev (sp?) declared that communism would smash the west. the cold war was a giant board game between the super-powers and countries were just squares on the maps. the percieved stakes? global domination. we did some terrible things, no doubt. but the alternative in the eyes of the people running the state dept and the cia was to roll over and learn to speak russian. that's it.

Well said.

doofus19 wrote:

Trigger, quit flogging the horse. Im sure your imputent bashing is warranted somewhere else. Take your un-constructive ****, and shovel it elsewhere. I'm shoveling the **** right where it belongs: Right back at the Prime Bull****ter. If you don't like it, leave because it's not going to stop. Would you like cheese with that whine?

As for endless numbers....ie. again and again and again you spout the same ignorant tune. What? the tune that your crap is unwanted here? Better learn to dance.

[Skaman]

just wanted to chime in, ducimus19 and others, i'm afraid that mr. moore is an amatuer and a hack whose prime purpose is self glorification and self promotion.

if you really want objective factual information regarding some of the skeletons in america's foreign policy closet you need to read:
Killing Hope by William Blum isbn 1-56751-052-3
Blum worked at the State Department as a Foreign Service Officer (he was also an analyst for the cia, but don't tell anyone).
in the book he covers countries chapter by chapter and explains what really happened and what exactly was the us intervention.
for example, rather than say we put the shah in place as a puppet, he explains the role of the british and their agenda and goes into detail describing how kermit roosevelt made it happen.
another source is of course noam chomsky. a man who hates his country more than any other.

once you all have read the facts you quickly come to the conclusion that america has indeed instigated some incredible suffering on the world, and then you're faced with the task of rationlizing the actions.

here's how i do it. very simply, we were at war. the cold war. nikita krushcev (sp?) declared that communism would smash the west. the cold war was a giant board game between the super-powers and countries were just squares on the maps. the percieved stakes? global domination. we did some terrible things, no doubt. but the alternative in the eyes of the people running the state dept and the cia was to roll over and learn to speak russian. that's it.

as i see it, america's only crime in all of this, is simply that it hasn't come clean and apologized to the countries that it affected. no compensation, no loans, nothing like that - just an apology and an explanation of the circumstances.

now, if you want to read some really unjustfiable foreign policy decisions? read the trial of henry kissinger by christopher hitchens.

i'm neither right nor left. probably more of a libertarian. if i was allowed to vote i would have voted for nader. i have you read some of his books? forget the green stuff. he see's the corruption in our government and wants to change it. with the exception of the aztecs, the leading cause of social implosion has been corruption. that's the macro issue our children will have to face.

i am grateful to be given the opportunity to live in this country. but i have to travel to some pretty interesting parts of the world, and when i get there i get the usual mouthful of criticism regarding us foreign policy. hence the conviction in my rationalized position.

Great post. I think this forum needs to hear something like that other than from me, as I tend to get quite the negative feedback. ;) An aplogy is warranted from the American goverment.

Ya, I like chomsky, hes an intriguing sociolgist and political analysist to say the least. I will look into Killing Hope for sure. for the record, I never once stated Moore was the word of God, rather he raises some eyeborows and brings up some interesting interpretations. Soley reading Moores work is NOT a good idea.

[Skaman]

Hell Trigger, dance all you want, but Im gonna keep stepping on your feet. :D

[ibstolidude]

http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
Ok thats great it bash's Micheal Moore alot but it still doesnt discredit alot of the film.
For example
1953: Us overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran, US installs a dictator by the name of Shah. BY the Shah do mean the most popular leader (by popular leader I mean public support? Be very careful what you say here, several Iranians I know were involved in the struggle to keep him in power

1977: Us backs the rulers of El Salvador, 4 nuns (that happened to be american) and 70,000 Salvadorans were killed. What does this have to do with anything...in particluar this post?
In the 1980's Us helps train Osama bin Laden and other terrorists to help kill Soviets, 3 Billion dollars were given to them by the CIA.this myth has been debunked time and time again. ONly and idiot believes that the US supported Bin Laden, in lieu of the facts.
The name of the taliban alone is cause enough for understanding from where the "movement" came. The name means - students - named for the groups/movement of students/ refugees from the afghan wars living in Pakistan. They first became a force in Afghan politics in 1994, when the country was in the throes of a civil war between north and south. Many Afghans welcomed a new movement that seemed honest, devout, and eager to impose order, an end to the decades of war - still to day the most common reason many of the "simple people" of afghanistan have forsaken the old government - they seek a return to a degree of normalacy.

It is a common misconception that is often used to critise the US policies, when in fact the US did little to directly support the Taliban's goals..it is wonderful to think that the monstrous apetite of the US's involvment/meddling on other countries came back to bite them, but the reality does not support it in THIS case...although many faliures to curtail the regime or to take steps to prevent the events and failures of US policies in Afghanistan were not taken/failed and warrant great critisism, many people prefer to make up their cases and instead claim the US created the Taliban.

Too many people try and claim "you don't know history if you don't agree with me." The reality is much different.

I posted the following previously about the Taiban's rise to power:
"It was impossible for the US to support the Taliban during the 80's as the Taliban rose to power in Kabul in 1996.
Anticipating the cop-out of" the US supported those that became the Taliban" -The majority of the leaders and upper ranks of the Taliban was comprised of Afghans who originally grew up in refugee camps in Pakistan and were taught this fiery brand of fundamentalist Islam in Madrases. -hence the name "Talib" - "student"
If any US situation created, which aided in the creation of the Taliban, it would be the US withdrawal of support from Afghanistan when at the time of percieved Soviet failure.. as the soviets withdrew (89) (and strong US aid subsided) the soviet placed government (Nagil Bila) continued until overthrown in 1992.. the country fell back into a "warlord" system that in essence was a series of fiefdom's lacking a central government of power...these faction began fighting for the central government control... it was a digression of a hundred years, the economy was shot, the infastructure was destroyed ... the warlords fell into seeking vegencance upon each other and claiming/spreading their own area's of influence. Ethnic division bred into this internal wafare.

Fighting subsequently continued among the various mujahidin factions, giving rise to a state of warlordism that was an opportunity the Taliban took. The Taliban was comprosed of the Pashtun ethnic group which comprised 45% of the population - the next closest group the Tajiks 24%. Backed by foreign sponsors ( arab money and the Pakistani intelligence services that helped train them), the Taliban developed as a political force and eventually seized power. The Taliban were able to capture most of the country, approx 90% at it's peak. They took Kabul in 1996 - gained the seat of power and began a rule impossing Sharia—Muslim law—.

There was certainly a failure of US policy during the end of the Soviet occupation, but lets call apples, apples and oranges, oranges...the US did not back the Taliban movement. The arguement could be made that our efforts to arm the Mujahedin throught the use of the Pakistani Intelligence service as a"proxy", resulted in the growth of the PIS which went on to aid the Taliban, but to claim the US supported the Taliban is just plain false.

The entire mess of a country results from the arbitrary design of borders without regard to ethnic groups during the end of the British occupation in 1919."

If you would like to argue that the US weapons that were given tot hte Mujihadeen during the 80's were used against the US...not quite. Certainly some of the weapons survuved, the majority of weapons used against the US forces were soveit siezed, Iranian made, Pakistani, Chinese ordandance, or improvised... there has yet to be a case of coalition aircraft being hit with US stinger missles/ utilizing carbon copy batteries. In case you have not been to afghanistan see the UserSubmitted section for what an Afghan ammo dump looks like - little of what we left lasted the 10+ years until our return.

The Taliban which was not supported by UBL until after their existance and struggle to power began; sought funding from Saudi Arabi and Pakistan....eventually UBL who's beliefs in strict muslim law mimiced the taliban's rhetoric..began a realationship with the Taliban..to include offering monetary support, some leadership, and described by many as an iconic figure. With his involvement and "leadership" (yes Mullah Omar was the leader) also began to trickle in to the Taliban ideology the beliefs the UBL holds towards the west. Other than that foriegn aid the Taliban chief internal forms of support were from drug trade (the bulk headed to Europe and GB) and smuggling taxations. By UBL own admissions he never recieved US support during the struggle...funny how no one believe him when he says that, but will believe him when he says he didn't organize the 911 bombing..

- http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9998
as Dana Rohrabacher put it:
"We at one point in that march came across a camp of tents," Rohrabacher
said of his visit to Jalalabad, then under siege by the Afghan rebels. "I
was told at that point I must not speak English for at least another three
hours because the people in those tents were Saudi Arabians under a crazycommander named bin Laden and that bin Laden was so crazy that he wanted to kill Americans as much as he wanted to kill Russians."

- the reason people like believe this joke is that it (like many urban myths) offers a "reap what you sow" quality..as aid was offered and given to some in the struggle against the Soviets....unfortunately history does not support it this myth.[color]

1981: Us trains and funds the "contras" which later kill 30,000 Nicaraguans die.[color=red]again what does this have to do with anything??? Should we post the cause and effect of actions of all governments? To what end is this in relation to Mr Moore? or just another USA bash
1982: Us gives an unknown amount of WMD and gives billions in aid to Saddam Hussein to fight the Iranians with, 1983: White house gives Iran weapons to kill the Iraqi's...amazing what can change over a year eh?Actually the only "proof" offerred about this claim is the fact that agents were purchased and shipped from several US companies..considering at this time those agents were also purchased commercially (not well regulated then) and shipped to various agents around the world to included wackos in the US...this snippet f information sounds great..certainly they wer provided by the US but not neccassarily by the government, but by commercial enterprise which at that time had little, few restrictions on those products. Equally as scary but let us place blame where it whould lie. No proof of US government involvement
1989: Manuel Noriega (CIA agent and also the President of Panamabeware of the smoking man!! what a bunch of horse****) wasnt following Washingtons orders, 3,000 Panamanian Civilian casualties.
1990: Iraq using the weapons Please offer times, dates, locations of the use of chemical agents during the invasion of Kuwait. the Us gave them invades Kuwait, this starts the "Gulf War 1". Bush Senior reinstates a dictator to Kuwait (cause dictators apparently are the way to go)U.N. even has estimates that around 500,000 Iraqi childern die between the sanctions and bombings. (from 91-present day)
1998: Us bombs a labeled "weapons factory" in Sudan. In actuallity it was a aspirin factory.sure it was...cause I would definately start saying "yeah, you got me I harbor terrorists." if you bombed my terrorrist riddled country..I mena why would a terrorist lie?? The evidence here again doesn't support you post.. look back at some of the post initial report follow ups..you may be surprised.

Prove that wrong I could bring out a calculator and do the math myself on the amount dead but I'll leave it to the rest of you to add up.

--------------> edit
The KKK was formed the same year the NRA was formed.
you are an IDIOT, if you believe the above about the KKK...
PLease post for me what year it was founded and show your true lack of history knowledge. I'll even give you a hint - Pulanski, Tenn for the KKK and the 2 union officers that founded the NRA (then a marksmanship group) Col. William C. Church and Gen. George Wingate . - good luck!

[WARPIG]

Honestly dicamus.. your point of view gets shot down every time because you think in 2D. I really try and take a look at your view but it just falls apart under scrutiny. I may have a Pro-
American bias but I don't close my mind to other viewpoints. I do have to hold them to a standard though. Your posts don't meet that standard. Your pick and choose those views and fact tidbits that support your opinion. That is backwards. You should soak up all the facts and views and then form an opinion. Many people have challenged you with this... to change your perspective and look at things from other viewpoints... you haven't accepted yet.
Maybe you should get off of your bandwagon. Walk around with us a little.

I think you missed the point. I do not limit myslef whatsoever. I agree, taking in one type of literature is horribly bias and narrowminded. Trust me, I view an obscene abundance of pro Iraq war, republican works etc. After all, I am a member of militaryphotos.net, and where better to get my daily dose? ;) The irony of such accusations when so many are guilty of equal reasoning. I guess we are all stuck in our ways, and there is no changing that. How sad....
Sad indeed. For someone so unlimited, your posts sure are biased and uninformed. (biased: a. bent tendency. Websters dictionary)
Remember your post that Trigger reminded you of above? Proven wrong... you never owned up. You took bits and pieces of facts and used them to propogate your bias.
remember this??

1982- {North Korean hired} Canadian terrorists abort assasination attempt on Republic of Korea President Chun Doo Hwan.
My attempt to show you how anyone can take facts.. and still not come to an accurate picture of reality.
Did some Canadians plot to kill Chun Doo Hwan? Yes. It is a fact.
Did the North Koreans hire them? Yes. Fact again.
What is the truth? North Korean entities hired some organized crime hitters in attempt to assasinate Hwan without being blamed. Easy trick.
Moore and hacks like you use this method to justify your weak views.
I know that I tend to communicate my disagreement with you in the form of insults. I am working on toning that back. Bottom line is your incessant biased rhetoric is killing your ability to post an alternitive view.
Keep trying dicamus19. If your intent is to get a rise out of those who are just as rhetorical as you are but from the opposing side.. well your pretty succesful. If you're seriously trying to communicate an alternitive view point, stop fluffing it.

[SOG]

Interesting post sog. I think you raise some imporatant points that need to be included. I cannot verify everything you said for its accuracy, yet someone can see how a skewed portrayal is evident. I agree with many of your points while not all. The Bin Laden family did cut relations with Osama, and Moore openly states this, yet should it not be expected that they may know something about his whereabouts. And why they are allowed the sole privelege to leave the nation via air travle while all others are grounded? Again, there are different ways if interpreting this evidence, and I think you bring up some great concerns. I in no way limit myslef to a a narrow minded read, I always take in multiple sources concerning a subject. One should always questions what they read and see, and compare it to other works, you can then later draw simililarities, and common statements to make an argument. Read Chomsky, I think he is great. Time, the National Post etc. All great reads.

yah, well i mean, hell, i cant even verify what i said because i just watched it on the history channel because i find stuff like that fascinating, like how in the hell did hitler come to power etc. ive never done my own research although even on stuff like that ive found they leave some stuff out. you could actually say osama's family actually pushed the events forward as he went totally nuts when that happened and really hated the west on a more personal level after getting disowned. i put moore in the same self beating closet as gerry fallwell types, who just ignore **** and push agenda regardless. i think its okay to defend/protect your beliefs but some people out there like moore are just sharks. i mean your right, the guy straight up told the truth, you cant fault someone on that, but to ignore the huge news media investigation into osama and his life etc that was beat into the publics head as they were desperate to find out any tidbit of info on osama and beat the other media to the punch and to ignore all that research is just typical moore.

[spoonman]

1. Captured taliban pamphlets and Jihad works suggets their holy warriors to abuse the Americans weak second amendment right. The right to bare arms. They suggest while within America to join gun clubs, and purposely train with automatic weapons. Americans will gladly assist you in Weapons knowledge. and Military weapons are widely available.


weak 2nd amendment? more like the strongest in the world.

widely avaliable? as opposed to 20$ on the street in most african and middle eastern nations. fully automatic weapons in america are expensive as **** and would be a pointless place to buy them since they could just train with them in their own country where they are cheaper and more plentiful.

[Nawlins]

fully automatic weapons in america are expensive as f***

Not to mention the price tag on the license you have to have to legally own them.

[NcDeuce]

Pulanski, Tenn for the KKK

It's Pulaski, mate. Just a few hours from where I live.

Formed by Ex-Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest...
http://www.battleofsac.com/images/forrest.jpg

Although, I cannot stand extremist groups like the KKK: No one can argue that Forrest was a damn fine military leader.

[Seiyuuki]

...and FORREST GUMP IS RELATED TO HIM!!!!!!

[Vance]

...and FORREST GUMP IS RELATED TO HIM!!!!!!
NO FORREST GUMP WAS ONLY NAMED AFTER HIM N00B!

[IDFM203]

While many people here have done a good job debunking a lot of the stuff that you or others have written and as such there is not really much for me to add in detail, I couldn’t resist commenting on something that I feel highlights the different ways of looking at the world.

I mean its kind of that, do you look at a glass cup with water and see it half full or half empty?


Oh ya also another footnote..Dont forget the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.



fact: over 100,000 people died as a result of that.

Now you and others view it as a tragic occurrence and chastise the U.S. for that

While I and others view it as saving over a million people for it is widely accepted that if those bombs were not dropped and as such the war didn’t end (for they were not going to end it), well then the loss of lives would have been much more be it from U.S. soldiers to Japanese’s people.

I mean there really is no point in arguing with you for besides overtly inflating your causality numbers and also attributing it falsely to the U.S. without even putting in any context or any other factors which are vital to this discussion, you don’t even bother to tally up how many lives the U.S. has saved. I guarantee you with your types of calculations the amount of lives that the U.S. saved is astronomically more then you claim they have killed.

I repeat from a previous post titled “How do you see the US?”

Before I go into this I am going to answer the post question in a very straight and unapologetic way.

How do you view the U.S?? Simple: Its the greatest nation on earth!!! Period.

Now of course as many of you know by now, I am a staunch supporter of Israel and it might be a bit surprising that I didn’t do whatever everyone else is doing here in praising their own nations and putting down the U.S. (more on that later) but I just feel that yes Israel is a great nation and it has achieved remarkable things but I feel that it is in a minuscule scale as to what the U.S. has achieved for the entire planet. Of course as a Jew I love and respect Israel but at the same time I am not blind and intellectually dishonest as a lot are here and as such the only reasonable and sane conclusion is to come up with the above answer.

I say this only after looking at the planet as a whole and how it has behaved and what are its values and virtues. The conclusion I came to is that the bar for that answer is actually pretty low. The world for the most part is a selfish and uncaring and ungrateful world where most everyone looks out for their own selfish interests. The world is also a very immoral world and where the negatives far outweigh the positives. As such the bar for the greatest isn’t a high one but rather a low one.

The U.S. is far from perfect. Yes it has acted in a lot of time out of its own self-interests. Yes it has made plenty mistakes. Yes it has committed at times wrongs that it should never have done. With all that said, it is the only country that I can think of that at the same time has done the reverse and has acted a lot of times out side of its sole interests, or even when acting for its sole interests it has also at the same time gone a step futher outside of it in a unselfish way, it has corrected many mistakes that others have committed, it has committed many “rights” which would never have happened if it were not for the benevolence of the U.S.

From that imperfect standpoint it deserves that mark. It is that bar which every nation looks up to (whether they admit it or not). Europe, Asia, south America, Canada, are all below that bar. Period.

I believe the world resents the U.S. not out of pure hate but out of jealousy. Europe especially. America represents what Europe could have been and should have been. They failed and failed miserably and it was the U.S. and not Europe that pushed ahead and has been a flicker of light in a dark world.

Lets not forget that all the peacekeeping that Europe or Canada points to as some sort of counter balance to the U.S. many goods, (which is their only major bright spots) is primarily due to the U.S. defending them in thus allowing those nations to not have massive armies in defense of thier own nations individually but to have their token ones(like Canada for example) in order to do those peace keeping jobs. It’s the U.S. military backing that has ended nazism and had stopped the spread of communism and has defeated it that has allowed these other nations to concentrate on peace keeping mission’s. It’s the U.S. presence, militarily and economically that has allowed Europe, Canada and Southeast Asia to be as prosperous as it is today.

I could go on and on but to summarise. I say the U.S. is the greatest nation from a low standpoint that the world is in. I say that for yes I recognise that the U.S. is imperfect and has made mistakes but all that does not negate the good that they have done and its that simple fact that puts them on top of anyone else in the world.

For me it all boils down to the simple fact is that the world is a better place with the U.S. existence then without it. And I cannot say that about any other country on this planet in terms of benifiting the entire planet.

On a personal note to some of the Americans that I have clashed with. While we perhaps don’t see eye to eye on everything, its to me much more irritating to hear your (wrong views in my opinion) views then anyone else's for with the Europeans or anyone else I don’t expect any better and I don’t have the same type of respect when it comes from them as I do to an American for in my view an American has earned the right to agree or disagree more so then anyone else due to their actual actions (be it good or bad) that they have done VS. The rest of the worlds inaction or negative ones which they are as or more guilty then the U.S. has ever done. So our disagreements is coming from a view of respect (I can only hope that its shared) and not out of any resentment or any jealousy or hatred.

To everyone else out I can only hope that you don’t make this into a flame war or make this personal or even do the usual and go off topic and blab away about Israel simply because an Israeli posted his view’s here about the U.S. its tiring and disingenuous not to mention pretty lame by now and its and obvious tactic to one that has no constructive thought to add here

Shalom to all :D


I know that despite my above plea, I am now Preparing to be flamed by the anti Israelis (eerr only “anti Zionists") and anti Americans in 5…4….3…2…1…

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

"fact: over 100,000 people died as a result of that.

Now you and others view it as a tragic occurrence and chastise the U.S. for that "
The war was pretty much over with anyways, the Japanese were ready to surrender as seeing majority of the Islands that they controled in the pacific had already been taken over by american forces which was a great blow to them. True maybe there would have been more bloodshed, but dropping bombs like that on 2 cities wasnt called for.

ibstolidude dont get me started. I dont claim to know everything as in history as you claim to. I dont have the time/yet and or need to go threw and ridicule your post. But I will take some parts of it:
for example:
1990: Iraq using the weapons Please offer times, dates, locations of the use of chemical agents during the invasion of Kuwait. the Us gave them invades Kuwait, this starts the "Gulf War 1". Bush Senior reinstates a dictator to Kuwait (cause dictators apparently are the way to go)U.N. even has estimates that around 500,000 Iraqi childern die between the sanctions and bombings. (from 91-present day).

Now were did I say that Iraq used chemical weapons on the Kuwait (they used them on the Kurd's)..please point it out for me because I didnt say that they were...or did. All of the weapons were used were conventional. If you want to get technical maybe you'd want to ask some of the Kurds that were killed using chemical weapons.

another example: 1982: Us gives an unknown amount of WMD and gives billions in aid to Saddam Hussein to fight the Iranians with, 1983: White house gives Iran weapons to kill the Iraqi's...amazing what can change over a year eh?
Actually the only "proof" offerred about this claim is the fact that agents were purchased and shipped from several US companies<------You said it yourself Us companies...the bloods on your hands not mine. I didnt say the Us government was involved anywere..maybe you should invest in some glasses because your not reading these posts properly and adding **** that isnt there.

I could go on but I do have better things to do...feel free to follow up though.

-----------------------------> edit
In every lie there is a grain of truth
Everyone feel free to believe what you want, I post it as I see it. If you dont like it well prove me wrong.

[Trigger]

nice try at a backpedal :roll:

Now were did I say that Iraq used chemical weapons on the Kuwait
Your previous sentence spoke of the WMD we allegedly gave to Saddam, immediately followed by the sentence about Iraq using said weapons. WTF other weapons were you talking about?
Also you said 'the US' gave those weapons, but now you try to squirm out of it by saying 'I never said the US government. That's pathetic.
Just take your lumps.
Stoli knows his sh*t because he's been there and dealt with it first hand while you were doing bhang hits.

[Beowulf]

There are a few things worth mentioning in regards to the long lists of American involvements in foreign affairs. (some good, some bad, that is not crucial to my post).

First: "America did X, and America did Y, ergo America is (insert adj. here: good, bad, etc)"

These sorts of comments are grossly inaccurate. One must understand that the executive branch in America has a large degree of power, and it would be far more accurate to mention the administration during actions X, and Y. Also those sorts of statements are useless w/o a thorough examination of the circumstances around actions X, and Y. For example "Jim killed his father" is a far cry from: "jim killed his father to prevent the murder of his mother"

Secondly, it is generally a good idea when presenting criticism to do it well and thoroughly; this usually includes providig an alternative cours of action/improvement for the one being critiqued.

Finally I believe the underlyin issue of the indictments againt the US are based upon two options in US foreign policy. Namely: Isolationism vs. Internationalism. I will post an excerpt from another thread:


The US has a choice to make about it's foreign policy. Either Isolationism, and an adherence to Westphalian political notions or "to go out abroad in search of monsters to destroy"1

What is the right choice? I am not an isolationist. The US has an obligaton first and foremost to its own citizens, their safety and welfare. So the question is how is this safety and welfare best achieved. By going abroad or by shutting oneself in, or perhaps something in between.

Isolationists would argue that going abroad causes more problems in the long run. That helping the mujahadeen defeat soviet russia would have the unforseen backlash of 9/11. And other examples, their accuracy could be argued one way or the other.

An internationalist would say that we must secure US interests abroad, that we are already involved in world dealings through trade, trade involves politics, and war is of course an extension of politics. That it is in our own best interest to ensure stability in certain regions (GW1) Furthermore that we have a moral obligation to help our fellow man.
(The US is founded on a judeo-christian ethic, and should IMO remain adherent to those values, although that is for another discussion)

Sometimes securing our interests, and fulfilling what we perceive as a moral obligation to protect and help other humans are deligthfully convergent a la stopping the spread of communism.

The point is this there are two sides to the argument, I believe that the US should be a presence on the world stage, to what extent is debatable.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

1990: Iraq using the weapons the Us gave them invades Kuwait, this starts the "Gulf War 1". Bush Senior reinstates a dictator to Kuwait (cause dictators apparently are the way to go)U.N. even has estimates that around 500,000 Iraqi childern die between the sanctions and bombings. (from 91-present day)

WERE THE F*CK DOES IT SAY THAT??
what are you sniffin trigger? please point it out for me :bash:

[IDFM203]

"fact: over 100,000 people died as a result of that.

Now you and others view it as a tragic occurrence and chastise the U.S. for that "
The war was pretty much over with anyways, the Japanese were ready to surrender as seeing majority of the Islands that they controled in the pacific had already been taken over by american forces which was a great blow to them. True maybe there would have been more bloodshed, but dropping bombs like that on 2 cities wasnt called for.

.listen I am not a ww2 buff and as such I will let others go into it in more detail

What I do know is that most historians do accurately credit those bombs for ending the war. Period.

Now you say they were about to surrender (which is highly debatable) but I think regardless, I brought that down to show your way of overall thinking for I think that even if it was proven to you that they would not have surrendered and that as a result a million or more lives would have been lost, you still would only harp about the 100,000 lives that were lost due to the dropping of those bombs.


Again the example do you see a cup half empty or half full is pertinent as to how people view things differently.

You view things one-way and others view it another.

I think what’s important and critical to obtain truth or close to it, is to understand context.

Personally I feel that you are lacking major context to your opinions here but I don’t really care to delve (sp?) into all of your points. I will just try to leave it at that.

Shalom :D

[Trigger]

OK bastardchild, this is your f**king post I will highlight in red the relevant areas since you don't recall your own words:

http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
Ok thats great it bash's Micheal Moore alot but it still doesnt discredit alot of the film.
For example
1953: Us overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran, US installs a dictator by the name of Shah.
1954: Us overthows a democratically elected President Arbenz of Guatemala, after this 200,000 civilians were killed.
1963: Us supports the assassination of then the South Vietnamese President Diem
1973: On September 11th Us helps stage a coup in Chile. The then president Salvador Allende that was democratically elected by Chilean's was assassinated. Then Augusto Pinochet is then installed as there Dictator, 5000 Chileans were systematically murdered.
1977: Us backs the rulers of El Salvador, 4 nuns (that happened to be american) and 70,000 Salvadorans were killed.
In the 1980's Us helps train Osama bin Laden and other terrorists to help kill Soviets, 3 Billion dollars were given to them by the CIA.
1981: Us trains and funds the "contras" which later kill 30,000 Nicaraguans die.
1982: Us gives an unknown amount of WMD and gives billions in aid to Saddam Hussein to fight the Iranians with, 1983: White house gives Iran weapons to kill the Iraqi's...amazing what can change over a year eh?
1989: Manuel Noriega (CIA agent and also the President of Panama) wasnt following Washingtons orders, 3,000 Panamanian Civilian casualties.
1990: Iraq using the weapons the Us gave them invades Kuwait, this starts the "Gulf War 1". Bush Senior reinstates a dictator to Kuwait (cause dictators apparently are the way to go)U.N. even has estimates that around 500,000 Iraqi childern die between the sanctions and bombings. (from 91-present day)
1998: Us bombs a labeled "weapons factory" in Sudan. In actuallity it was a aspirin factory.

Prove that wrong I could bring out a calculator and do the math myself on the amount dead but I'll leave it to the rest of you to add up.

--------------> edit
The KKK was formed the same year the NRA was formed.

Is this starting to ring any bells?
Think Man!

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

I never said they used the WMD did I? They did on the Kurds though.
------------------->edit
http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/usgenocide/HiroshimaNagasaki.html
theres some food for thought.


----------------->edit
“The use of the atomic bombs was precipitated by a desire to end the war in the Pacific by any means before Russia’s participation.”

— Albert Einstein

Apparently I was not the only one that thinks like this.

[Skaman]

"fact: over 100,000 people died as a result of that.

Now you and others view it as a tragic occurrence and chastise the U.S. for that "
The war was pretty much over with anyways, the Japanese were ready to surrender as seeing majority of the Islands that they controled in the pacific had already been taken over by american forces which was a great blow to them. True maybe there would have been more bloodshed, but dropping bombs like that on 2 cities wasnt called for.

.listen I am not a ww2 buff and as such I will let others go into it in more detail

What I do know is that most historians do accurately credit those bombs for ending the war. Period.

Now you say they were about to surrender (which is highly debatable) but I think regardless, I brought that down to show your way of overall thinking for I think that even if it was proven to you that they would not have surrendered and that as a result a million or more lives would have been lost, you still would only harp about the 100,000 lives that were lost due to the dropping of those bombs.


Again the example do you see a cup half empty or half full is pertinent as to how people view things differently.

You view things one-way and others view it another.

I think what’s important and critical to obtain truth or close to it, is to understand context.

Personally I feel that you are lacking major context to your opinions here but I don’t really care to delve (sp?) into all of your points. I will just try to leave it at that.

Shalom :D



Look, Japanese military traditon at the time was based on extreme devote honour code (ie, sepuku, kamikaze, "divine wind") This outdated practice reminscent of the days of the Samaurai ensured Japanese would never surrender and would ultimately fight to the end.

Operation olympic and coronet (http://www.ahoy.tk-jk.net/macslog/OperationDownfallThePlann.html) were planned amphibious landings in the event the "A" bombs were not to be used. Heavy causaulties among Japanese/USA forces was expected. 700,000 Japanese troops were available versus 550,000 US troops.

110,000 Japanese citiizens died immidely, following 230,000 which died of radiation and injuries. Together, that is 340,000 civillian casualties.

For the sake of arguement, if the landings had indeed occired a rough assesment of 500,000 Japanese would die, and likely a further 100,000 Americans. The war would likely progress a further three years, and ultimately devestate he American economy. With such a drained "wallet" the USA would likely lack the financial backing to ensure a rebuild of Japan and Germany, leaving them ****e to Russian Communists.

600,000 deaths from war, or 340,000 in a relatively quick death, and udder end to the war. It seems rational to me. Unfourtenetly the war came at such a heavy cost, yet one must examine the ramifications of sustained conflict and the proposed Japanese naval landings.

[Skaman]

Dont worry bastardchild, Trigger is a spouting monkey looking for a rise. No matter what you say, provide or examine, he will refute and ultimately resort to insult. Shove turns to punch, and while its great to be civil with most users, dont give this primate the satisfaction, and feed him a healthy dose of his own verbal trash. He will resort to postings pm's, making fun of spelling, etc., Nontheless, he is a petti ****kicker that moves from individaul to individaul like a irritating scratch. Dont take anything he says seriosuly, hes as logical as Shelia Cops for PM.


Take it easy.

[spoonman]

it was estimated that the invasion and subsequent occupation of japan would have cost 1,000,000+ deaths on the american side plus an untold number of japanese. what we did was right.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

shelia cops? PM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA rofl rofl rofl

--------------------.edit
http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/weapons/Assassination.html

Another interesting site.

[IDFM203]

110,000 Japanese citiizens died immidely, following 230,000 which died of radiation and injuries. Together, that is 340,000 civillian casualties.

For the sake of arguement, if the landings had indeed occired a rough assesment of 500,000 Japanese would die, and likely a further 100,000 Americans. The war would likely progress a further three years, and ultimately devestate he American economy. With such a drained "wallet" the USA would likely lack the financial backing to ensure a rebuild of Japan and Germany, leaving them ****e to Russian Communists.

600,000 deaths from war, or 340,000 in a relatively quick death, and udder end to the war. It seems rational to me. Unfourtenetly the war came at such a heavy cost, yet one must examine the ramifications of sustained conflict and the proposed Japanese naval landings.

ok a couple of things

First off, your 600,000 are a minimum conservative estimate for a lot of historians claim that there would have been over a million.

But regardless whether it is 600,000 or a million it sure is much more then the amount of lives that were lost due to these bombs.

That’s the whole point. Yes war is bad and I wish no one had to lose their lives, but if lives were going to be lost, I much rather see 340,000 (which is a extreme estimate) then see a million lives lost.

Even in your post, you agree with that more lives would have been lost if those bombs were not dropped.

The fact is that those bombs saved much more lives then if they were not dropped. That’s the point and that’s the context that is needed.

The problem here is that some of you refuse to understand that and refuse to put any context to that and to other things as well which are vital in understanding the truth but simply find it easy to just harp on the U.S. for doing a correct thing.

Context is key!!! A lot of you imply fail (be it on purpose or actual ignorance) to include any factual context and that is simply wrong!!

shalom :D

[Jack Mehoff]

Yes, blame everything on the Yankees even if the Japanese started WW2 in the Pacific and they refused to end it. :lol:

[Skaman]

I appreciate USA efforts in the pre 1950 period. Too many "Mistakes" and I mean TOO many , have caused waaaay too many lives. The USA has refused to step up to plate like the man it should be and accept resbonsibility for these atrocities.

Its not like there Germans denied they killed close to 11 million people.
Do americans recongnize el salvador, niciragua, panama, haiti, bay of pigs...

Heeel no.

[NcDeuce]

:cantbeli: WTF are you talking about?

[California Joe]

Its not like there Germans denied they killed close to 11 million people.
Do americans recongnize el salvador, niciragua, panama, haiti, bay of pigs...

Heeel no.

Your fractious mind really considers those events to be of the same magnitude? Drugs are bad MmmmmmKay?

[Skaman]

No, not nearly the same magnitiude, but hundreads of thousands have died as a direct result of American political interests.

Im saying, when you screw up, owe up.

I dont know any Germans who deny their poor actions in the 1930's and 1940's, any Russians who denied a history of communism and the iron curtain, Spanish who deny their native mascares, any Canadians....wait

[Skaman]

Is that clear enough?

[James]

There are a few things worth mentioning in regards to the long lists of American involvements in foreign affairs. (some good, some bad, that is not crucial to my post).

First: "America did X, and America did Y, ergo America is (insert adj. here: good, bad, etc)"

These sorts of comments are grossly inaccurate. One must understand that the executive branch in America has a large degree of power, and it would be far more accurate to mention the administration during actions X, and Y. Also those sorts of statements are useless w/o a thorough examination of the circumstances around actions X, and Y. For example "Jim killed his father" is a far cry from: "jim killed his father to prevent the murder of his mother"

Secondly, it is generally a good idea when presenting criticism to do it well and thoroughly; this usually includes providig an alternative cours of action/improvement for the one being critiqued.

Finally I believe the underlyin issue of the indictments againt the US are based upon two options in US foreign policy. Namely: Isolationism vs. Internationalism. I will post an excerpt from another thread:


The US has a choice to make about it's foreign policy. Either Isolationism, and an adherence to Westphalian political notions or "to go out abroad in search of monsters to destroy"1

What is the right choice? I am not an isolationist. The US has an obligaton first and foremost to its own citizens, their safety and welfare. So the question is how is this safety and welfare best achieved. By going abroad or by shutting oneself in, or perhaps something in between.

Isolationists would argue that going abroad causes more problems in the long run. That helping the mujahadeen defeat soviet russia would have the unforseen backlash of 9/11. And other examples, their accuracy could be argued one way or the other.

An internationalist would say that we must secure US interests abroad, that we are already involved in world dealings through trade, trade involves politics, and war is of course an extension of politics. That it is in our own best interest to ensure stability in certain regions (GW1) Furthermore that we have a moral obligation to help our fellow man.
(The US is founded on a judeo-christian ethic, and should IMO remain adherent to those values, although that is for another discussion)

Sometimes securing our interests, and fulfilling what we perceive as a moral obligation to protect and help other humans are deligthfully convergent a la stopping the spread of communism.

The point is this there are two sides to the argument, I believe that the US should be a presence on the world stage, to what extent is debatable.

I wanted to re-post this in the hopes that SOMEONE might read it. Beowulf makes a very good point. The farther back in history one goes, the more important this is.

Let's call America bad because of what we did in Guatemala and Iran in the 1950s. My father was a young child at the time. America is bad because we helped Iraq out against Iran. Gee, I was in Junior High. I'm sorry if some of you think all Americans should feel responsible for this. I don't. I've said it in other posts - arguing in this manner about history is obtuse. Perhaps the UN should call for sanctioins against the U.S. because of the extermination and deportation of natives that took place during the 18th and 19th centuries. Perhaps we need sanctions against Britain for the acts of Oliver Cromwell in Ireland in the 17th century. Or how about the EU for all the crusades that took place in the middle east during the middle ages?

Any of those would be as valid as arguing about how good or bad America is because of our history.

[martinexsquaddie]

The thing is most of the really bad things done in the Name of the american people were not public policy. I doubt anyone ran on the ticket hey lets kill the first democraticly elected president in africa and replace him with a murderous kelptomanic or lets get rid of a leftie elected president and encourage a wannabe nazi to slaughter over 5000 people and start that on september 11 1974.
So when americans start on about being a force for good in the world people start looking at your record its not good :roll:
Now most people don't expect the same standards from europe because A most of us had empires so are not realy operating from any sort of moral high ground in the first place.and are either following the US lead or being very covert I.e the defeat of the eqyptians invasion of the yemen even when supported by the USA or the Coup in Oman. And the bad old commies really did'nt give a **** what anyone thought of them and had nukes

[WARPIG]

Am I the only one that sees this? While dicamus accuses on person of resorting to insult when outclassed, he goes straight to the name calling without breaking stride.
No matter how much anyone tries to explain how bits and pieces of fact are only part of the whole truth, Bastard, and Dicamus still quote factoids as US foul ups. "Prove me wrong!" is the best they can do and even when someone gathers just as much fact content to prove them wrong they never concede. Problem with that, most of us aren't trying to prove thier facts wrong, just trying to tell them that they only see half the picture.
How many of us have tried to explain that to them?
I have to add this.. having an opposing view, even a biased and uninformed view, like dicamus19's... is benefit to me. Scrutinizing his posts and finding the facts he posts and then adding them to what I know and what I research gives me a better picture of things. His limited view point is just one view I never considered before and am better for having seen it. Too bad he hasn't gained the same way.

[ibstolidude]

Its not like there Germans denied they killed close to 11 million people.
Do americans recongnize el salvador, niciragua, panama, haiti, bay of pigs...

Heeel no.Please explain what the US does not admit to in these countries???

Considering they are commonly taught in history lessons in the US.

Please explain since you are the Subject Matter Experton US international History.

[WARPIG]

dicamus19 is the Subject Matter Expert on hammered monkey poo.

Baha! Guess I'm just in that mood today.

[Trigger]

OK just to set the record straight for the audience at large:

Dont worry bastardchild, Trigger is a spouting monkey looking for a rise No that's you. No matter what you say, provide or examine, he will refute and ultimately resort to insult Only after you fail to accept the fact that you are wrong and initiate the insulting you whine so much about. Shove turns to punch, and while its great to be civil with most users, dont give this primate the satisfaction, and feed him a healthy dose of his own verbal trash I'd like to see a list of users you've been civil to once they disagree with your mindless rantings. He will resort to postings pm's YOU ARE THE ONE WHO STARTED PMing ME AND CALLING NAMES, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. NOW YOU'RE GOING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT IT WHEN I REPLY??, making fun of spelling, etc., Nontheless, he is a petti ****kicker that moves from individaul to individaul like a irritating scratch. Dont take anything he says seriosuly, hes as logical as Shelia Cops for PM. I have no idea what that means, but it sounds like a weak attempt at sarcasm.
and

Im saying, when you screw up, owe up.
Why don't you try taking your own advice.
For the record I don't have a problem with Bastard Child. I was just pointing out the error in his post.

...and regarding Atomic bombs, with estimates of over 1 million allied casualties, MANY OF YOU OWE YOUR VERY EXISTENCE TO THE FACT THAT YOUR FOREFATHERS DIDN'T HAVE TO INVADE JAPAN.
Think about it.

[Adri]

if you read all the post on this topic then you will understand why wars start........

[Trigger]

Adri wrote:

if you read all the post on this topic then you will understand why wars start...
I agree. Wars always result when ducimus19 posts something dumb. :D

[Spooky]

1 Million US casualties and as many as 10 million Japanese casualties. I think that killing 300,000 people with nukes sort of outweighed 11 million people dying in a protracted land war that would have left Soviet Russia with a massive superiority in conventional weapons.

Moore makes some good points but overall his arguments are flawed. Has America made mistakes? Yes, of course. Every superpower makes mistakes. I think at some point Ducimus19 mentioned that that U.S. should 'fess up to their mistakes" (paraphrased) and claim responsibility for the millions killed asa result of U.S. intervention. Ducimus supported this by saying that "The Germans did".

In fact, the Germans only did directly after the war. They did so because the occupying American military forces MADE them. Today, the Germans don't walk around everyday discussing Nazi Germany and the murder of 11 million Jews. It's an uncomfortable subject that no one over there wants to talk about. Russia is the same way. Russians don't walk around everyday lamenting Stalin's murder of as many as 20 million citizens of his own state. It's an awkward subject.

As is evidenced by this thread, almost all Americans know that we messed up pretty bad in a lot of instances. Bay of Pigs, Noriega, Somalia, Vietnam - basically all of the instances that Ducimus listed. We don't walk around banging our heads into walls and screaming "WHHHHYYYY? I AM SOOOO SORRY!!!"

It's an awkward subject and it's not really spoken of very often. Two more points, Ducimus: Don't you dare draw a comparison between Nazi Germany and the actions of the CIA and American government during the last 50 years in any way other than the one I just mentioned. That is sick and disrespectful to the victims of the holocaust.

Point two: As someone already mentioned, what you're doing is comparable to flying over to Britain and accusing every man, woman, and child you see of being repressive and tyrannical because of what happened in India or China or even America during the height of British colonization. Notions of responsibility and blame completely change when placed within a political context. Just something to think about.

[RealUltimatePower]

Yea I think most people are aware of the questionable things some people in the US has done in the past. But here's what matters Bin Laden is a danger and should be killed.

War is dirty especially in todays world. Pick a side and get on with it. Personally the US is a far better place to live than what Bin Laden wants.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Ok good post WARPIG, maybe I'm not seeing the whole picture here but nobody is enlightening me with the rest of it. So I decided maybe I'd provide some facts.
http://www.jebhemelli.org/Mosadegh/English-Mosadegh.htm
This is a biography on Mr Mosadegh and his life. In it it states the following: - On August 19, 1953, the intelligence services of U.S.A. and Britain (CIA - MI6), enforced a more precise and expensive coup d'etat plan, and this time succeeded in overthrowing Mossadegh's government. On this day, after bribing some of the grand Ayatollahs, army officers, ruffians, and the prostitutes, the coup makers pulled large mobs into the streets to demonstrate against the national government of Dr. Mossadegh. Because of the police chief treachery, the coup makers reached the house of the Prime Minister and after several hours of bombarding the house and bloody battle with the small group of Mossadegh's loyal guards, they entered the house and after plundering it, they burned the house. Mossadegh and his companions used a ladder and took refugee inside the neighbor's house. Some of Mossadegh's previous companions were among the coup makers.


On the next day, Dr. Mossadegh and his loyal companions surrendered themselves to the coup Prime Minister, General Zahedi. A few days latter, the Shah returned to Iran from Italy, and began his 25 years of despotic reign.

As for Mr President Arbenz of Guatemala: I found that in 97' the CIA released over "1400 pages of over 100,000 estimated to be in its secret archives on the Guatemalan destabilization program."
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/
Feel free to look there the pages yourself as I have...
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/cia-guatemala1_1.html
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/cia-guatemala4_1.html
Most are unsigned by officals..I can see why.. Quite an interesting read though.

South Vietnamese President Diem information about this was a lil harder to find. http://www.historychannel.com/speeches/archive/speech_488.html
The history channel doesnt lie though..
"On November 2, 1963, South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem and his closest adviser, his brother Ngo Dinh Nhu, were killed in a U.S.-instigated military coup. Diem had served as South Vietnam's president since the division of Vietnam in 1954 and had since taken on dictatorial powers."

As for Mr Salvador Allende:http://www.fas.org/irp/world/chile/allende.htm

"President Nixon directed CIA to prevent Allende's inauguration through a military coup. One of the opponents of a coup, Army Chief of Staff General Rene Schneider was assassinated, but Allende took office as scheduled"
"According to notes taken by CIA director Richard Helms at a 1970 meeting in the Oval Office, his orders were to "make the economy scream." It was widely reported that at the covert level the United States worked to destabilize Allende's Chile by funding opposition political groups and media and by encouraging a military coup d'état. The agency trained members of the fascist organization Patria y Libertad (PyL) in guerrilla warfare and bombing, and they were soon waging a campaign of arson. CIA also sponsored demonstrations and strikes, funded by ITT and other US corporations with Chilean holdings. CIA-linked media, including the country's largest newspaper, fanned the flames of crisis. While these United States actions contributed to the downfall of Allende, no one has established direct United States participation in the coup d'état and few would assign the United States the primary role in the destruction of that government. "
Once again prove me/the site wrong.
Covert Action in Chile, 1963-1973, a Staff report of The Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities (US Senate), 18 December 1975.
William Blum, Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions since World War II, (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, s1995).
Thomas Hauser, Missing. New York: Avon Books, 1982 [first published in 1978 as The Execution of Charles Horman: An American Sacrifice] 255 pages.

Theres some resources for the rest of you that think that me presenting websites is not enough "proof"
As for Mr Augusto Pinochet,http://www.trentu.ca/~mneumann/pinochet.html
Feel free to read threw those.
http://www.lakota.clara.net/
And that too.

El Salvador 1977: http://www.uua.org/actions/international/77el-salvador.html
http://nsarchive.chadwyck.com/elintro.htm
"This set of documents focuses on United States policy toward El Salvador and events in El Salvador from the Carter Administration's formulation of a new Central American policy in January 1977 through the Salvadoran Presidential elections of May 1984 that brought José Napoleón Duarte to power. Major events in the period include: the military coup of October 1979; the agrarian reform efforts launched in 1980 and 1981; significant labor and peasant protests followed by a growing number of guerilla actions by leftist organizations."
Yet again for all those people who say "posting websites isnt enough proof"
http://nsarchive.chadwyck.com/elacknow.htm
read threw the acknlowledgements.

1980's Us helps train Osama bin Laden: This was a lil harder to find, a lil looking on google and of course I found it.
http://www.bud.com/98/08/tkles/21.wb.binladen/
"Finally, the most disturbing aspect of this story has recieved very little attention in the media. Yesterday either on NPR or the News Hour with Jim Lehrer, there was the first mention of a CIA connection with Osama bin Laden. Friday night on ABC "World News Tonight," there was a short piece which went into the details. In the 1980's bin Laden was in a terrorist war with another powerful nation, the Soviet Union. The CIA apparently was funding his battle in Afghanistan against the Soviets, despite the fact that he is reportedly worth somewhere between 300-350 million US$."
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/News/Trifkovic/NewsST091901.htm

"Thanks to a drumfire of leaks from CIA and the Pentagon, Osama Bin Laden, an almost unknown religious eccentric from Saudi Arabia, became an overnight international celebrity. He joined the long list of Muslim malefactors that have disturbed the Pax Americana: Nasser, Arafat, Khadaffi, Khomeini, Saddam Hussein. With his long beard, wild eyes, and bloodcurdling threats, the sinister Bin Laden was the perfect image of the modern Islamic terrorist.

I visited the same guerilla training camps in Afghanistan's Khost province during the 1980's and early 90's that the US attacked last week. A ramshackle collection of huts, tents, caves, and firing ranges, they hardly fit our image of a James Bondish terror central. The guerillas were deeply idealistic young men from across the Muslim world who had come to fight the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the Great Jihad, or holy war.

In 1986, I became the first journalists to learn the full story about the Islamic International Brigades that had been formed to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. The CIA, Saudi intelligence, and Pakistan's Inter-Service Intelligence(ISI) transported, trained, armed and directed the Islamic Brigades, whose story I covered in Peshawar, Pakistan, and in combat against the communists, inside Afghanistan. Osama Bin Laden was employed by CIA as a chief recruiter, as was the Egyptian cleric, Sheik Omar Abdul Rahman, who was jailed for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. "

Believe what you will apparently alot of people are sating the same thing.

As for the "Contra's": http://www.onwar.com/aced/data/november/nicaragua1981.htm
"Anti-Sandinista exile groups, backed by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) soon after their formation, began in the spring of 1981 to plan paramilitary operations against the government of Nicaragua. A year later, a new civil war was well under way. Together referred to as the Nicaraguan Resistance, the two main antigovernment organizations were the Nicaraguan Democratic Force (Fuerza Democrática Nicaragüense-- FDN) and the Revolutionary Democratic Alliance (Alianza Revolucionaria Democrtica--Arde). Based in Honduras, the FDN consisted largely of former members and officers of the National Guard in alliance with other groups, deserters from the FSLN militia, and disgruntled Miskito. According to a 1985 United States Congressional study, forty-six of the forty-eight command positions in the FDN were held by former members of the National Guard. In lower units, the majority of group and detachment leaders had no previous National Guard service. Ordinary soldiers were mainly disaffected peasants or peasant mercenaries with no guard affiliation. As the fighting continued, many field commanders were promoted from the ranks. Miskito, Sumo, and Rama (Misura), a right-wing Miskito group of 1,500 to 3,000 indigenous troops led by a former Somoza agent, operated in coordination with the FDN. Miskito, Sumo, and Rama All Together (Miskito, Sumo, Rama, Asla Takanka--Misurasata), a Costa Rican-based Miskito group under Brooklyn Rivera Bryan that was aligned with Arde, fought for Caribbean coast autonomy rather than against the Sandinista government.

Beginning with raids across the border, the FDN had by 1983 established a foothold along the Honduran border in the northern section of easternmost Zelaya Department. The FDN was estimated to have a strength of 10,000 to 15,000 persons by mid-1984. Advisory, financial, and material help from the CIA were crucial. According to the United States Department of State, military and nonmilitary assistance between 1982 and 1990 amounted to US$300 million. This figure did not include an additional US$100 million gathered by the United States National Security Council, and aid solicited from private organizations and foreign governments, much of it devoted to weaponry. "

http://www.uoregon.edu/~caguirre/478_6.html
Wow even your own College's and Univesities do reports on this stuff.
"The Contra War and its consequences

November 1981: Reagan approved covert CIA operations against Nicaragua: former members of the National Guard ("Contras"), concentrated in Honduras, began to receive funds from the CIA (6,000 to 12,000 troops).
For the next 9 years, Nicaragua had to fight a war against the Contras.
Contras committed all sorts of atrocities: murder, torture, kidnapping, as well as psychological campaigns against the Nicaraguan population
November 1986: Iran-Contra scandal explodes; US congress votes for the cancellation of US aid to the contras; funds continued being channeled to support anti-Sandinista actions
1988: Sandinistas and contras signed an agreement, but that did not end the war
In 1989: Sandinistas agreed to hold elections in Feb. 1990 if the Contras were dismantled (the US had not recognized the election of 1984)
Harassment and intimidation continued throughout the electoral campaign
US offered economic aid ONLY if opposition candidate Violeta Chamorro was elected (continuation of contra war was a message to intimidate Nicaraguan voters)
February 1990: Violeta Chamorro was elected. Contras were demobilized.
The cost of the war: between 30,000 and 50,000 deaths (in a country of 3.5 million), 100,000 homeless, economic devastation, entire communities destroyed
After 1990: precarious democracy, attempts to reverse Sandinista reforms, continuous economic crisis and widespread poverty"

http://www.monitor.net/monitor/free/crackreport.html
Wow the CIA sold crack to fund a war. So thats were the "I Sell Crack for the CIA" shirts came from.

"The yearlong Mercury News investigation uncovered proof of how financiers for the Fuerza Democratica Nicaraguense (FDN) sold cocaine to a Los Angeles drug wholesaler who turned it into crack. FDN used the cash to buy weapons and equipment for the guerrilla army.
According to the series, the 5,000-man FDN was run by both American and Nicaraguan CIA agents and was the largest of the organizations commonly called the Contras. It was created in mid-1981 when the CIA combined several existing groups of anti-communist exiles into a unified force it hoped would topple the new socialist government of Nicaragua.

Funded by a secret Dec. 1, 1981 order signed President Reagan authorizing the CIA to spend $19.9 million on covert paramilitary operations in Nicaragua, CIA officials acknowledged this was not nearly enough to fund the army. That same year, Danilo Blandon -- called "the Johnny Appleseed of crack" by the San Jose newspaper -- sold $54 million of wholesale cocaine to benefit the FDN.

Although the FDN waged a losing war against the Sandinista government from 1982 to 1988, the Mercury News revealed that Blandon is today a "well-paid and highly trusted operative for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration" and one of the DEA's top informants in Latin America.

In March, Blandon was the DEA's star witness at a drug trial in San Diego, where, for the first time, he testified about his career as a drug smuggler. "The ends justify the means," Blandon quoted the U.S. commander of FDN as justification for the operation.

Besides Blandon's testimony earlier this year, the Mercury News investigation used an FBI report from the files of former Iran-Contra Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh. Efforts to uncover further connections were blocked by the CIA and DEA on grounds of "national security" or privacy interests.

Similar government claims of privilege have frustrated reporters investigating the story for the past decade, when CBS News producer Leslie Cockburn and Associated Press reporters Brian Barger and Robert Parry first uncovered the CIA Contra-Coke trail. Until now, reports on the topic have been confined to alternative media such as Covert Action. "

Even your own newspapers report it...quite sad to say the least.

As for Saddam and the Iranian conflict in 1982:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Saddam_MadeInUSA.html

"The Bush administration [has] sent U.S. technology to the Iraqi military and to many Iraqi military factories, despite over-whelming evidence showing that Iraq intended to use the technology in its clandestine nuclear, chemical, biological, and long-range missile programs."
No this quotation is not pulled from a conspiracy-minded website, but from the Congressional Record from July 27, 1992. They are the words of the late Congressman Henry Gonzalez of Texas.
For months in the early 1990s Gonzalez released hundreds of documents that outlined how the highest levels of the U.S. government - including Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and current Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld - had secretly and illegally helped arm Saddam Hussein. The scandal was known as Iraqgate."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1413.htm

Another interesting article.

In the Spring of 1982, Iraq teetered on the brink of losing its
war with Iran. In May and June, 1982, the Iranians discovered a gap in
the Iraqi defenses along the Iran-Iraq border between Baghdad to the north
and Basra to the south. Iran positioned a massive invasion force directly
across from the gap in the Iraqi defenses. An Iranian breakthrough at the
spot would have cutoff Baghdad from Basra and would have resulted in
Iraq's defeat.

4. United States Intelligence, including satellite imagery, had
detected both the gap in the Iraqi defenses and the Iranian massing of
troops across from the gap. At the time, the United States was officially
neutral in the Iran-Iraq conflict.

5. President Reagan was forced to choose between (a) maintaining
strict neutrality and allowing Iran to defeat Iraq, or (b) intervening and
providing assistance to Iraq.

6. In June, 1982, President Reagan decided that the United States
could not afford to allow Iraq to lose the war to Iran. President Reagan
decided that the United States would do whatever was necessary and legal
to prevent Iraq from losing the war with Iran. President Reagan formalized
this policy by issuing a National Security Decision Directive ("NSDD") to
this effect in June, 1982. I have personal knowledge of this NSDD because
I co-authored the NSDD with another NSC Staff Member, Geoff Kemp. The
NSDD, including even its indentifying number, is classified.

7. CIA Director Casey personally spearheaded the effort to ensure
that Iraq had sufficient military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to
avoid losing the Iran-Iraq war. Pursuant to the secred NSDD, the United
States actively supported the Iraqi war effort by supplying the Iraqis
with billions of dollars of credits, by providing U.S. military
intelligence and advice to the Iraqis, and by closely monitoring third
country arms sales to Iraq to make sure that Iraq had the military
weaponry required. The United States also provided strategic operational
advice to the Iraqis to better use their assets in combat. For example,
in 1986, President Reagan sent a secret message to Saddam Hussein telling him that Iraq should step up its air war and bombing of Iran. This
message was delivered by Vice President Bush who communicated it to
Egyptian President Mubarak, who in turn passed the message to Saddam
Hussein. Similar strategic operational military advice was passed to
Saddam Hussein through various meetings with European and Middle Eastern heads of state. I authored Bush's talking points for the 1986 meeting with Mubarak and personally attended numerous meetings with European and Middle East heads of state where the strategic operational advice was communicated.

8. I personally attended meetings in which CIA Director Casey or
CIA Deputy Director Gates noted the need for Iraq to have certain weapons such as cluster bombs and anti-armor penetrators in order to stave off the Iranian attacks. When I joined the NSC staff in early 1982, CIA DirectorCasey was adamant that cluster bombs were a perfect "force multiplier"
that would allow the Iraqis to defend against the "human waves" of Iranian
attackers. I recorded those comments in the minutes of National Security
Planning Group ("NSPG") meetings in which Casey or Gates participated.

9. The CIA, including both CIA Director Casey and Deputy Director
Gates, knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin
military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to Iraq. My notes, memoranda
and other documents in my NSC files show or tend to show that the CIA knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin military
weapons, munitions and vehicles to Iraq."

As for Mr Manuel Noriega :
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA%20Hits/Panama_CIAHits.html
http://campus.northpark.edu/history/WebChron/Americas/PanamaInvade.CP.html
"The invasion of Panama in 1989 was known as Operation JUST CAUSE. Its key objectives were the capture of Manuel Noriega and the establishment of a democratic government. Noriega was the Panamanian leader who US officials had indicted on drug trafficking charges.1 With the transfer of the Canal Zone from US to Panama approaching, the US government wanted to make sure Panama was in the hands of people they could control. Many believe that Noriega's illegal operations were known long before, but it had not been in the interest of the US to get rid of him. However, when he suddenly withdrew his support, the US pressed charges.2
First, a military coup was tried but failed. On December 20, 1989, following the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War, an aerial bombardment burst upon Panama's sleeping cities. In this surprise and forceful attack, the US military hit 27 targets in densely populated areas. Thousands of Panamanians, especially those in poor slum areas, were killed, injured, or lost their homes. This was unlike a typical military action where civilian areas were avoided. At the time, it was the largest US military action since the Viet Nam War.

Media coverage of the invasion was marked by significant misrepresentation. Destruction caused by the military was underreported. The US media tended to interview upper middle class, English-speaking Panamanian whose lives had not been disrupted and destroyed by the attack and siege of the country.3 According to them, the operation was a success and of great benefit to Panama. The US government was happy that the rich white elite was back in control. It has been overthrown by Omar Torrijo, Noriega's predecessor. This small group of people was much more ready to cooperate with the US officials in their best interests.

Upon his capture, Manuel Noriega was sentenced to 40 years in a US federal prison for drug racketeering, money laundering and drug trafficing."
http://www.specialoperations.com
http://www.zmag.org/chomskiy/sam/sam-2-05.html
http://users.erols.com/rpdigest/02046.html

Theres some more info on Mr Noriega, Although I do admitt some sites say he was a CIA agent some dont. Either way hes in jail right now.

Either way a lil research and being asked to provide "facts" and "proof" I just have. I am not anti american, I just believe when mistakes are made they should be admitted to, then corrected.

[ibstolidude]

Ok good post WARPIG, maybe I'm not seeing the whole picture here but nobody is enlightening me with the rest of it. So I decided maybe I'd provide some facts.
http://www.jebhemelli.org/Mosadegh/English-Mosadegh.htm
This is a biography on Mr Mosadegh and his life. In it it states the following: - On August 19, 1953, the intelligence services of U.S.A. and Britain (CIA - MI6), enforced a more precise and expensive coup d'etat plan, and this time succeeded in overthrowing Mossadegh's government. On this day, after bribing some of the grand Ayatollahs, army officers, ruffians, and the prostitutes, the coup makers pulled large mobs into the streets to demonstrate against the national government of Dr. Mossadegh. Because of the police chief treachery, the coup makers reached the house of the Prime Minister and after several hours of bombarding the house and bloody battle with the small group of Mossadegh's loyal guards, they entered the house and after plundering it, they burned the house. Mossadegh and his companions used a ladder and took refugee inside the neighbor's house. Some of Mossadegh's previous companions were among the coup makers.


On the next day, Dr. Mossadegh and his loyal companions surrendered themselves to the coup Prime Minister, General Zahedi. A few days latter, the Shah returned to Iran from Italy, and began his 25 years of despotic reign.

As for Mr President Arbenz of Guatemala: I found that in 97' the CIA released over "1400 pages of over 100,000 estimated to be in its secret archives on the Guatemalan destabilization program."
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/
Feel free to look there the pages yourself as I have...
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/cia-guatemala1_1.html
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/cia-guatemala4_1.html
Most are unsigned by officals..I can see why.. Quite an interesting read though.

South Vietnamese President Diem information about this was a lil harder to find. http://www.historychannel.com/speeches/archive/speech_488.html
The history channel doesnt lie though..
"On November 2, 1963, South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem and his closest adviser, his brother Ngo Dinh Nhu, were killed in a U.S.-instigated military coup. Diem had served as South Vietnam's president since the division of Vietnam in 1954 and had since taken on dictatorial powers."

As for Mr Salvador Allende:http://www.fas.org/irp/world/chile/allende.htm

"President Nixon directed CIA to prevent Allende's inauguration through a military coup. One of the opponents of a coup, Army Chief of Staff General Rene Schneider was assassinated, but Allende took office as scheduled"
"According to notes taken by CIA director Richard Helms at a 1970 meeting in the Oval Office, his orders were to "make the economy scream." It was widely reported that at the covert level the United States worked to destabilize Allende's Chile by funding opposition political groups and media and by encouraging a military coup d'état. The agency trained members of the fascist organization Patria y Libertad (PyL) in guerrilla warfare and bombing, and they were soon waging a campaign of arson. CIA also sponsored demonstrations and strikes, funded by ITT and other US corporations with Chilean holdings. CIA-linked media, including the country's largest newspaper, fanned the flames of crisis. While these United States actions contributed to the downfall of Allende, no one has established direct United States participation in the coup d'état and few would assign the United States the primary role in the destruction of that government. "
Once again prove me/the site wrong.
Covert Action in Chile, 1963-1973, a Staff report of The Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities (US Senate), 18 December 1975.
William Blum, Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions since World War II, (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, s1995).
Thomas Hauser, Missing. New York: Avon Books, 1982 [first published in 1978 as The Execution of Charles Horman: An American Sacrifice] 255 pages.

Theres some resources for the rest of you that think that me presenting websites is not enough "proof"
As for Mr Augusto Pinochet,http://www.trentu.ca/~mneumann/pinochet.html
Feel free to read threw those.
http://www.lakota.clara.net/
And that too.

El Salvador 1977: http://www.uua.org/actions/international/77el-salvador.html
http://nsarchive.chadwyck.com/elintro.htm
"This set of documents focuses on United States policy toward El Salvador and events in El Salvador from the Carter Administration's formulation of a new Central American policy in January 1977 through the Salvadoran Presidential elections of May 1984 that brought José Napoleón Duarte to power. Major events in the period include: the military coup of October 1979; the agrarian reform efforts launched in 1980 and 1981; significant labor and peasant protests followed by a growing number of guerilla actions by leftist organizations."
Yet again for all those people who say "posting websites isnt enough proof"
http://nsarchive.chadwyck.com/elacknow.htm
read threw the acknlowledgements.

1980's Us helps train Osama bin Laden: This was a lil harder to find, a lil looking on google and of course I found it.
http://www.bud.com/98/08/tkles/21.wb.binladen/
"Finally, the most disturbing aspect of this story has recieved very little attention in the media. Yesterday either on NPR or the News Hour with Jim Lehrer, there was the first mention of a CIA connection with Osama bin Laden. Friday night on ABC "World News Tonight," there was a short piece which went into the details. In the 1980's bin Laden was in a terrorist war with another powerful nation, the Soviet Union. The CIA apparently was funding his battle in Afghanistan against the Soviets, despite the fact that he is reportedly worth somewhere between 300-350 million US$."
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/News/Trifkovic/NewsST091901.htm

"Thanks to a drumfire of leaks from CIA and the Pentagon, Osama Bin Laden, an almost unknown religious eccentric from Saudi Arabia, became an overnight international celebrity. He joined the long list of Muslim malefactors that have disturbed the Pax Americana: Nasser, Arafat, Khadaffi, Khomeini, Saddam Hussein. With his long beard, wild eyes, and bloodcurdling threats, the sinister Bin Laden was the perfect image of the modern Islamic terrorist.

I visited the same guerilla training camps in Afghanistan's Khost province during the 1980's and early 90's that the US attacked last week. A ramshackle collection of huts, tents, caves, and firing ranges, they hardly fit our image of a James Bondish terror central. The guerillas were deeply idealistic young men from across the Muslim world who had come to fight the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the Great Jihad, or holy war.

In 1986, I became the first journalists to learn the full story about the Islamic International Brigades that had been formed to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. The CIA, Saudi intelligence, and Pakistan's Inter-Service Intelligence(ISI) transported, trained, armed and directed the Islamic Brigades, whose story I covered in Peshawar, Pakistan, and in combat against the communists, inside Afghanistan. Osama Bin Laden was employed by CIA as a chief recruiter, as was the Egyptian cleric, Sheik Omar Abdul Rahman, who was jailed for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. "

Believe what you will apparently alot of people are sating the same thing.

As for the "Contra's": http://www.onwar.com/aced/data/november/nicaragua1981.htm
"Anti-Sandinista exile groups, backed by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) soon after their formation, began in the spring of 1981 to plan paramilitary operations against the government of Nicaragua. A year later, a new civil war was well under way. Together referred to as the Nicaraguan Resistance, the two main antigovernment organizations were the Nicaraguan Democratic Force (Fuerza Democrática Nicaragüense-- FDN) and the Revolutionary Democratic Alliance (Alianza Revolucionaria Democrtica--Arde). Based in Honduras, the FDN consisted largely of former members and officers of the National Guard in alliance with other groups, deserters from the FSLN militia, and disgruntled Miskito. According to a 1985 United States Congressional study, forty-six of the forty-eight command positions in the FDN were held by former members of the National Guard. In lower units, the majority of group and detachment leaders had no previous National Guard service. Ordinary soldiers were mainly disaffected peasants or peasant mercenaries with no guard affiliation. As the fighting continued, many field commanders were promoted from the ranks. Miskito, Sumo, and Rama (Misura), a right-wing Miskito group of 1,500 to 3,000 indigenous troops led by a former Somoza agent, operated in coordination with the FDN. Miskito, Sumo, and Rama All Together (Miskito, Sumo, Rama, Asla Takanka--Misurasata), a Costa Rican-based Miskito group under Brooklyn Rivera Bryan that was aligned with Arde, fought for Caribbean coast autonomy rather than against the Sandinista government.

Beginning with raids across the border, the FDN had by 1983 established a foothold along the Honduran border in the northern section of easternmost Zelaya Department. The FDN was estimated to have a strength of 10,000 to 15,000 persons by mid-1984. Advisory, financial, and material help from the CIA were crucial. According to the United States Department of State, military and nonmilitary assistance between 1982 and 1990 amounted to US$300 million. This figure did not include an additional US$100 million gathered by the United States National Security Council, and aid solicited from private organizations and foreign governments, much of it devoted to weaponry. "

http://www.uoregon.edu/~caguirre/478_6.html
Wow even your own College's and Univesities do reports on this stuff.
"The Contra War and its consequences

November 1981: Reagan approved covert CIA operations against Nicaragua: former members of the National Guard ("Contras"), concentrated in Honduras, began to receive funds from the CIA (6,000 to 12,000 troops).
For the next 9 years, Nicaragua had to fight a war against the Contras.
Contras committed all sorts of atrocities: murder, torture, kidnapping, as well as psychological campaigns against the Nicaraguan population
November 1986: Iran-Contra scandal explodes; US congress votes for the cancellation of US aid to the contras; funds continued being channeled to support anti-Sandinista actions
1988: Sandinistas and contras signed an agreement, but that did not end the war
In 1989: Sandinistas agreed to hold elections in Feb. 1990 if the Contras were dismantled (the US had not recognized the election of 1984)
Harassment and intimidation continued throughout the electoral campaign
US offered economic aid ONLY if opposition candidate Violeta Chamorro was elected (continuation of contra war was a message to intimidate Nicaraguan voters)
February 1990: Violeta Chamorro was elected. Contras were demobilized.
The cost of the war: between 30,000 and 50,000 deaths (in a country of 3.5 million), 100,000 homeless, economic devastation, entire communities destroyed
After 1990: precarious democracy, attempts to reverse Sandinista reforms, continuous economic crisis and widespread poverty"

http://www.monitor.net/monitor/free/crackreport.html
Wow the CIA sold crack to fund a war. So thats were the "I Sell Crack for the CIA" shirts came from.

"The yearlong Mercury News investigation uncovered proof of how financiers for the Fuerza Democratica Nicaraguense (FDN) sold cocaine to a Los Angeles drug wholesaler who turned it into crack. FDN used the cash to buy weapons and equipment for the guerrilla army.
According to the series, the 5,000-man FDN was run by both American and Nicaraguan CIA agents and was the largest of the organizations commonly called the Contras. It was created in mid-1981 when the CIA combined several existing groups of anti-communist exiles into a unified force it hoped would topple the new socialist government of Nicaragua.

Funded by a secret Dec. 1, 1981 order signed President Reagan authorizing the CIA to spend $19.9 million on covert paramilitary operations in Nicaragua, CIA officials acknowledged this was not nearly enough to fund the army. That same year, Danilo Blandon -- called "the Johnny Appleseed of crack" by the San Jose newspaper -- sold $54 million of wholesale cocaine to benefit the FDN.

Although the FDN waged a losing war against the Sandinista government from 1982 to 1988, the Mercury News revealed that Blandon is today a "well-paid and highly trusted operative for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration" and one of the DEA's top informants in Latin America.

In March, Blandon was the DEA's star witness at a drug trial in San Diego, where, for the first time, he testified about his career as a drug smuggler. "The ends justify the means," Blandon quoted the U.S. commander of FDN as justification for the operation.

Besides Blandon's testimony earlier this year, the Mercury News investigation used an FBI report from the files of former Iran-Contra Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh. Efforts to uncover further connections were blocked by the CIA and DEA on grounds of "national security" or privacy interests.

Similar government claims of privilege have frustrated reporters investigating the story for the past decade, when CBS News producer Leslie Cockburn and Associated Press reporters Brian Barger and Robert Parry first uncovered the CIA Contra-Coke trail. Until now, reports on the topic have been confined to alternative media such as Covert Action. "

Even your own newspapers report it...quite sad to say the least.

As for Saddam and the Iranian conflict in 1982:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Saddam_MadeInUSA.html

"The Bush administration [has] sent U.S. technology to the Iraqi military and to many Iraqi military factories, despite over-whelming evidence showing that Iraq intended to use the technology in its clandestine nuclear, chemical, biological, and long-range missile programs."
No this quotation is not pulled from a conspiracy-minded website, but from the Congressional Record from July 27, 1992. They are the words of the late Congressman Henry Gonzalez of Texas.
For months in the early 1990s Gonzalez released hundreds of documents that outlined how the highest levels of the U.S. government - including Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and current Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld - had secretly and illegally helped arm Saddam Hussein. The scandal was known as Iraqgate."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1413.htm

Another interesting article.

In the Spring of 1982, Iraq teetered on the brink of losing its
war with Iran. In May and June, 1982, the Iranians discovered a gap in
the Iraqi defenses along the Iran-Iraq border between Baghdad to the north
and Basra to the south. Iran positioned a massive invasion force directly
across from the gap in the Iraqi defenses. An Iranian breakthrough at the
spot would have cutoff Baghdad from Basra and would have resulted in
Iraq's defeat.

4. United States Intelligence, including satellite imagery, had
detected both the gap in the Iraqi defenses and the Iranian massing of
troops across from the gap. At the time, the United States was officially
neutral in the Iran-Iraq conflict.

5. President Reagan was forced to choose between (a) maintaining
strict neutrality and allowing Iran to defeat Iraq, or (b) intervening and
providing assistance to Iraq.

6. In June, 1982, President Reagan decided that the United States
could not afford to allow Iraq to lose the war to Iran. President Reagan
decided that the United States would do whatever was necessary and legal
to prevent Iraq from losing the war with Iran. President Reagan formalized
this policy by issuing a National Security Decision Directive ("NSDD") to
this effect in June, 1982. I have personal knowledge of this NSDD because
I co-authored the NSDD with another NSC Staff Member, Geoff Kemp. The
NSDD, including even its indentifying number, is classified.

7. CIA Director Casey personally spearheaded the effort to ensure
that Iraq had sufficient military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to
avoid losing the Iran-Iraq war. Pursuant to the secred NSDD, the United
States actively supported the Iraqi war effort by supplying the Iraqis
with billions of dollars of credits, by providing U.S. military
intelligence and advice to the Iraqis, and by closely monitoring third
country arms sales to Iraq to make sure that Iraq had the military
weaponry required. The United States also provided strategic operational
advice to the Iraqis to better use their assets in combat. For example,
in 1986, President Reagan sent a secret message to Saddam Hussein telling him that Iraq should step up its air war and bombing of Iran. This
message was delivered by Vice President Bush who communicated it to
Egyptian President Mubarak, who in turn passed the message to Saddam
Hussein. Similar strategic operational military advice was passed to
Saddam Hussein through various meetings with European and Middle Eastern heads of state. I authored Bush's talking points for the 1986 meeting with Mubarak and personally attended numerous meetings with European and Middle East heads of state where the strategic operational advice was communicated.

8. I personally attended meetings in which CIA Director Casey or
CIA Deputy Director Gates noted the need for Iraq to have certain weapons such as cluster bombs and anti-armor penetrators in order to stave off the Iranian attacks. When I joined the NSC staff in early 1982, CIA DirectorCasey was adamant that cluster bombs were a perfect "force multiplier"
that would allow the Iraqis to defend against the "human waves" of Iranian
attackers. I recorded those comments in the minutes of National Security
Planning Group ("NSPG") meetings in which Casey or Gates participated.

9. The CIA, including both CIA Director Casey and Deputy Director
Gates, knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin
military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to Iraq. My notes, memoranda
and other documents in my NSC files show or tend to show that the CIA knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin military
weapons, munitions and vehicles to Iraq."

As for Mr Manuel Noriega :
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA%20Hits/Panama_CIAHits.html
http://campus.northpark.edu/history/WebChron/Americas/PanamaInvade.CP.html
"The invasion of Panama in 1989 was known as Operation JUST CAUSE. Its key objectives were the capture of Manuel Noriega and the establishment of a democratic government. Noriega was the Panamanian leader who US officials had indicted on drug trafficking charges.1 With the transfer of the Canal Zone from US to Panama approaching, the US government wanted to make sure Panama was in the hands of people they could control. Many believe that Noriega's illegal operations were known long before, but it had not been in the interest of the US to get rid of him. However, when he suddenly withdrew his support, the US pressed charges.2
First, a military coup was tried but failed. On December 20, 1989, following the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War, an aerial bombardment burst upon Panama's sleeping cities. In this surprise and forceful attack, the US military hit 27 targets in densely populated areas. Thousands of Panamanians, especially those in poor slum areas, were killed, injured, or lost their homes. This was unlike a typical military action where civilian areas were avoided. At the time, it was the largest US military action since the Viet Nam War.

Media coverage of the invasion was marked by significant misrepresentation. Destruction caused by the military was underreported. The US media tended to interview upper middle class, English-speaking Panamanian whose lives had not been disrupted and destroyed by the attack and siege of the country.3 According to them, the operation was a success and of great benefit to Panama. The US government was happy that the rich white elite was back in control. It has been overthrown by Omar Torrijo, Noriega's predecessor. This small group of people was much more ready to cooperate with the US officials in their best interests.

Upon his capture, Manuel Noriega was sentenced to 40 years in a US federal prison for drug racketeering, money laundering and drug trafficing."
http://www.specialoperations.com
http://www.zmag.org/chomskiy/sam/sam-2-05.html
http://users.erols.com/rpdigest/02046.html

Theres some more info on Mr Noriega, Although I do admitt some sites say he was a CIA agent some dont. Either way hes in jail right now.

Either way a lil research and being asked to provide "facts" and "proof" I just have. I am not anti american, I just believe when mistakes are made they should be admitted to, then corrected.

ahh your own research cites FOIA released US documents....how is that not admitting the US invlovement??

What exactly do you want a letter of intent and explanation written to BASTARDCHILD?

ohh and some of your "sources" are also questionable...

for instance: "However, according to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), who spent time with Afghani freedom fighters, as early as 1988 "bin Laden was so crazy that he wanted to kill Americans as much as he wanted to kill Russians."
More from the Senator and out right critic of current/former US policies in Afghanistan/war on terror..
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/988285/posts


The internet websites are a bad choice for your evidence:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98115,00.html although other places in which this author writes this is most amusing..as it is from FOX.
or the man's mouth himself:"If a CIA officer tried to give money to bin Laden, he probably would not have lived through the experience. The arch-terrorist was known for his violent anti-Americanism. Dana Rohrabacher, now a Republican congressman from California, told me about a trip he took with the mujahideen in 1987. On that trek, his guide told him not to speak English for the next few hours because they were passing by bin Laden’s camp. “If he hears an American, he will kill you.”
http://www.thecriticalvoice.com/laden_interview.html

[url]http://www.robert-fisk.com/usama_bin_ladin_in_sudan1996.htm[/url[
"“Personally neither I nor my brothers saw any evidence of American help,” bin Laden told British journalist Robert Fisk in 1993. In 1996, Mr. Fisk interviewed bin Laden again. The arch-terrorist was equally adamant: “We were never, at any time, friends of the Americans. We knew that the Americans supported the Jews in Palestine and that they are our enemies.”"

From Victor Hansons' research:
"In the course of researching my book on Bill Clinton and bin Laden, I interviewed Bill Peikney, who was CIA station chief in Islamabad from 1984 to 1986, and Milt Bearden, who was CIA station chief from 1986 to 1989. These two men oversaw the disbursement for all American funds to the anti-Soviet resistance. Both flatly denied that any CIA funds ever went to bin Laden. They felt so strongly about this point that they agreed to go on the record, an unusual move by normally reticent intelligence officers. Mr. Peikney added in an e-mail to me: “I don’t even recall UBL [bin Laden] coming across my screen when I was there.”"

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Nope I dont need no letters of intenet or a explanation, the facts speak for themselves I think. Also sayin my sources are questionable, you used fox as a source. Nuff said. And also saying using websites is a bad choice for evidence? Whats that supposed to mean, that just because its on a website it's not facutal? If you did know some of those sites are your own Universities/College's, besides using the internet everyone can access the links and see the information for themselves. I do ADMITT (something that other people on the forum have a hard time doing) that some sites about Bin Laden could be wrong, but thats the only thing that was posted you can even make a 1/4 of an arguement about...Quite sad really.

[Jack Mehoff]

Yeah, it's like how you used Michael Moore for all your facts rofl


http://members.iinet.net.au/~hzimmerman/images/talk_to_hand.jpg

[StarvingStudent47]

Two more points, Ducimus: Don't you dare draw a comparison between Nazi Germany and the actions of the CIA and American government during the last 50 years in any way other than the one I just mentioned. That is sick and disrespectful to the victims of the holocaust.

Point two: As someone already mentioned, what you're doing is comparable to flying over to Britain and accusing every man, woman, and child you see of being repressive and tyrannical because of what happened in India or China or even America during the height of British colonization. Notions of responsibility and blame completely change when placed within a political context. Just something to think about.

Here are two very good points that need repeating. I'm not touching the rest of this thread with a 10-foot pole.

Welcome, Spooky. You seem pretty level-headed and rational. Hope to see you around more ;)

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Yeah, it's like how you used Michael Moore for all your facts rofl


http://members.iinet.net.au/~hzimmerman/images/talk_to_hand.jpg

Yup, at least it was all proven, you guys asked for facts on repeated occasions I went and provided them. Me posting the information wasnt about Micheal Moore, I couldnt really care less about him or what you think about him. You were the ones saying he was full of ****, but how full of **** does he look now?

[WARPIG]

Hopefully you realize the truth of your signature Bastardchild. There is a grain of truth in every lie. The sourees you listed and info was really great. No matter how much factual evidence there is, don't take it as the true picture of what is going on. My take is that US, and CIA activity has been questionable, in many instances. Of course, Babe Ruth struck out on many occasions. How many sources do you think you can find on CIA or MI6 successes? How factual or truthful would they be? Somewhere in the middle lies the truth. The problem is digging up old foul ups doesn't really make any point. No one claims the US to be a great white savior of the world, nor perfect in any way.
Anyone remember my post asking for an honest take on the US? Most people didn't like US attitude and strategies but agreed that the overall impact of the US on the world was positive. That post died. Flame wars on the US exist by focusing on the little details. Focus on some of the facts and you get a pretty sensational conspiracy. Oldest trick in the book.

[ibstolidude]

I just have. I am not anti american, I just believe when mistakes are made they should be admitted to, then corrected.

as I asked and you still failed to comment on:

ahh your own research cites FOIA released US documents....how is that not admitting the US invlovement??

Allow me to post directly from their site:

The CIA has established this site to provide the public with an overview of access to CIA information, including electronic access to previously released documents. Because of CIA's need to comply with the national security laws of the United States, some documents or parts of documents cannot be released to the public. In particular, the CIA, like other U.S. intelligence agencies, has the responsibility to protect intelligence sources and methods from disclosure. However, a substantial amount of CIA information has been and/or can be released following review. See "Your Rights" for further details on the various methods of obtaining this information.



What about this bad ass research on your part:

The KKK was formed the same year the NRA was formed.

You "research" is largely baised on conjecture and opinion...your own websites reflect op/ed pieces.

You attempt to discredit (re-read my post I even comment on using FOX instead of other pieces written for other news agencies by the same author) Fox, yet are willing to post sources derived from the bowling for columbine website. Sources that have been debunked by many as baseless and false...considering they even lack proper identification as classified materials...also it is interesting that the same incidents you offer research to are the very ones that are listed on the Bowling For Cumbine site....hmmm.?

Several that are legit and proven on the FOIA website that is a US GOVERNMENT website hardly supports you the "US won't admit it" theory....it is half baked, half asses dribble that you attempt to support by posting part truths found on others websites.

Your research also fails to describe the Shah of Iran Pahlavi was in power from 1941 - 1979. Mosaddeq (the then PM) overthrew him in 1953 only to be have the SHah return in 54. Considering he is credited with modernization of Iran and established social reforms that brought forward the nation, how was this a bad thing? Perhaps it is that fact that he was well regarded by the people and continues as one of the peoples most popular figures from their past? The largest problem that brought about his demise was his desire to return to the "Kingdoms - monarchies" of the past and his staunch non-religious reforms that included the adoption of a non-Islamic calander. COnsidering he pioneered the "White Revolution" in Iran, which in addition to land reform, these measures included profit-sharing for industrial workers in private sector enterprises, nationalization of forests and pastureland, sale of government factories to finance land reform, amendment of the electoral law to give more representation on supervisory councils to workers and farmers, and establishment of a Literacy Corps to allow young men to satisfy their military service requirement by working as village literacy teachers. The Shah described the package as his White Revolution, and when the referendum votes were counted, the government announced a 99% majority in favour of the program. In addition to these other reforms, the Shah announced in February that he was extending the right to vote to women.

So what exactly is your point?? Was the US involved in this 1953-54 support of the Shah when the long time ruler was overthrown? Yes even FOIA info supports this (that would mean the US released it) and US history lessons teach it. What more admit do you want?


If you could actually post a logical point I can go on with the research....so far you have posted that the US does not admit it's invovlement and then went on to site US governemnt RELEASED documents...
Your posts speak that the US doesn't admit mistakes....and yet the School of America's which trained officers from El Salvadoran army, that were in volved in the post 77 action, is no more...(granted school baised on the concept continues but in keeping with its mandate from Congress, has developed and implemented meaningful and effective training in democracy and human rights. The purpose is to train Western nations militaries to act IAW Charter of the Organization of the American States, the international law and geneva conventions.

The US openly admits and has LAW on records banning the use of assasination....

Whay do you think these reforms/changes were instituted?


you posted that the US was naughty for being involved with the Shah of IRan when in fact it was s decent (at that time) policy decision..
You posted horse**** about the KKK & NRO and Bin Laden...

your OWN research documents contradict you...and support my posts on Iraqi WMD/E weapons coming from the US... allow me to quote

According to a 1994 Senate report, private American suppliers, licensed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, exported a witch's brew of biological and chemical materials to Iraq from 1985 through 1989. - newsflash PRIVATE COMPANIES....and all exporters ALL EXPORTERS are licensed by the US Department of Commerce. Although irrelevant it is thrown in to make it look US Government sanction..why? Cause it is biased horse****!!!
Certainly oversight allowed it to happen....as during that time it happened with other countries and even with US citizens who purchased these items claiming it was for research... which is all that was required at that time to purchase such agents...unfortunatle and idiotic but the simple truth.

[Nawlins]

Excellent post stoli.


Hopefully you realize the truth of your signature Bastardchild. There is a grain of truth in every lie. The sourees you listed and info was really great. No matter how much factual evidence there is, don't take it as the true picture of what is going on. My take is that US, and CIA activity has been questionable, in many instances. Of course, Babe Ruth struck out on many occasions. How many sources do you think you can find on CIA or MI6 successes? How factual or truthful would they be? Somewhere in the middle lies the truth. The problem is digging up old foul ups doesn't really make any point.

I agree. I'd be willing to bet that we don't hear about it when CIA and MI6 succeed, but rather it only becomes news when they mess up.

[WARPIG]

Great post stoli.
US and International private companies still have very little regulation to stop them from selling or releasing info and products that are used in bio-weapons. As the technology moves to fight disease, it also moves to more dangerous bio weapons. Products and research that are developed and sold today may be the WMD of tomorrow. Laws are starting to focus on that industry but it is not just a US issue.
Easy to see how facts and conjecture can really affect the view of a situation. If you want to see conspiracy, there is always enough facts to back it up. Same goes to the opposing view.

[martinexsquaddie]

Possibly one two many posters going the US is great we support freedom and democracy.
er why could'nt the PM of iran done those things considered the Iranians actually voted for him same with pinochet.
Democracy is always better than a dictaorship

[2Sheds_Jackson]

I fail to see the logic behind these "look what America did" posts. Let me give the classic example of what I mean.

Can we all agree that Hitler was what we'd consider a "bad person"? Ok..so by some magical means, you meet Hitler when he's a cute little 6 year old. But you also know what he will do when he grows up. So you stick a grenade down his lederhosen & kill him. Is this an evil act? Killing a 6 year old certainly is, but you've also saved millions of lives.

Similarly, the US takes action based upon what it thinks is the best thing to do. The US gov't, is not run by gods. They are people who do the best they can. They also make mistakes. But on balance I'd have to say that their intentions are good. Our system works by assessing a plurality of opinion, and making broad based decisions. It is not a 1 man show.

Looking at snippets of history while ignoring the context in which these things happened is intellectually bankrupt and serves no purpose.

[Trigger]

Nice one stoli woot

*standing ovation*

[Durandal]

Interesting facts.


1. Captured taliban pamphlets and Jihad works suggets their holy warriors to abuse the Americans weak second amendment right. The right to bare arms. They suggest while within America to join gun clubs, and purposely train with automatic weapons. Americans will gladly assist you in Weapons knowledge. and Military weapons are widely available.

5.Bin laden himself in a horrible medical condition could do little to command his "jihad forces" as he was immobile, in a cave in hiding on dialysis. This may suggest that binnie was easy to lable as the 911 perpetrator, and infact outside interets were also likely responsible. Possibly the immediate saudi goverment the USA would rather keep realtions up with>?

I'll tackle the easy ones. Where would the train with automatic weapons? This is Moore's attack on 2nd Amendment rights using typical American fear tactics (used by both sides of course :) ).

Saying Bin Laden was sick and maybe Saudi Arbai was behind it is silly. Could it have happened? Maybe, but doubtful. Is it proof, fact, and without a doubt, Bolack and White? NO.

Man, why are you so Moore whipped?

You need to read ya some Ralph Peters!

[WARPIG]

I fail to see the logic behind these "look what America did" posts. Let me give the classic example of what I mean.

Can we all agree that Hitler was what we'd consider a "bad person"? Ok..so by some magical means, you meet Hitler when he's a cute little 6 year old. But you also know what he will do when he grows up. So you stick a grenade down his lederhosen & kill him. Is this an evil act? Killing a 6 year old certainly is, but you've also saved millions of lives.

Similarly, the US takes action based upon what it thinks is the best thing to do. The US gov't, is not run by gods. They are people who do the best they can. They also make mistakes. But on balance I'd have to say that their intentions are good. Our system works by assessing a plurality of opinion, and making broad based decisions. It is not a 1 man show.

Looking at snippets of history while ignoring the context in which these things happened is intellectually bankrupt and serves no purpose.
You hit it on the head 2sheds. I have to tell you that it won't sink in. Dicamus and many others on this forum are limited to focus on details either by weak minds or strong biases. The weak minded simply don't have the ability to take in the big picture or are so naive that they believe in absolutes. The biased minds are simply resorting to the old rhetorical parlor tricks that have been used since man began disagreeing. They choose facts that support thier views and use them to turn focus to those details instead of the whole truth.
I can't tell whether Dicamus19's view is limited because of his environment or simply his own bias. Then again.. we can't all see from the same view.. otherwise the world would be 2 dimensional.

[Seoulstriker]

Nice one stoli woot

*standing ovation*

woot woot woot

[StarvingStudent47]

Ducimus wrote:5.Bin laden himself in a horrible medical condition could do little to command his "jihad forces" as he was immobile, in a cave in hiding on dialysis.

No, wrong. Just because he can't fight the battle himself doesn't mean he can't organize people or give orders.

Some examples of physically unhealthy people taking major leadership positions:
Sheik Rahman, one of the main conspirators of the first WTC bombing, was blind.
Sheik Yassin, the head of Hamas, is paralyzed.
FDR was crippled by polio, yet was one of the most influential US Presidents of the 20th century.
Andropov ran the Soviet Union for two years from his hospital room.

Just because Bin Laden wasn't healthy enough to hijack a plane himself doesn't mean he wasn't capable of planning a hijacking.

[WARPIG]

What!!! Another proven fact taken out of context??!!
Can you imagine my shock and surprise? :roll:

[JF45]

I'll take a few of the less argued ones.

1. Captured taliban pamphlets and Jihad works suggets their holy warriors to abuse the Americans weak second amendment right. The right to bare arms. They suggest while within America to join gun clubs, and purposely train with automatic weapons. Americans will gladly assist you in Weapons knowledge. and Military weapons are widely available.

Probably more assumption on their part than fact. Even law-abiding Americans can't do what they are saying. They'd probably get more training in automatic weapons use in their caves than in the US.


4. in the days following 911, the Bin Laden family was allowed to leave the country via prvate jet although a no fly zone and all commerical aircraft were grounded. The bin ladens left unexpectedly, and no questioning of substantial nature was taken.

Yet the source he used and quotes in the following pages, the November 12, 2001 New Yorker article by Jane Mayer, states: ""Once the FAA permitted overseas flights [after Sept. 11], the jet [with the Bin Ladens] flew to Europe." So he debunked his own lie.


5.Bin laden himself in a horrible medical condition could do little to command his "jihad forces" as he was immobile, in a cave in hiding on dialysis. This may suggest that binnie was easy to lable as the 911 perpetrator, and infact outside interets were also likely responsible. Possibly the immediate saudi goverment the USA would rather keep realtions up with>?

This has been tossed back and forth, and noone has ever shown any proof of it. Would be great if it was true, but no one can say for sure. Moore latched onto this simply because he could use it for his argument. From his public announcement messages to his little jihad party video, it seems to work against this. Hell, I remember reading about how he was in that particular condition as far back as 97-98, and should have been dead by now.

1990: Iraq using the weapons the Us gave them invades Kuwait, this starts the "Gulf War 1". Bush Senior reinstates a dictator to Kuwait (cause dictators apparently are the way to go)U.N. even has estimates that around 500,000 Iraqi childern die between the sanctions and bombings. (from 91-present day)

Which war were you watching? Everyone else saw Soviet Bloc weapons rolling into Kuwait, as well as those faced in combat. And sanctions have never prohibited or limited the import of medicine. Even the UN urged Iraq to order more basic medicines, but the government refused. Nor did the sanctions prohibit humanitarian contributions. Saddam turned these all down, probably over some warped sense of personal pride.

[WARPIG]

Don't forget.. even if 500, 000 Iraqi children die between sanctions and bombings... those are numbers polled by recording deaths of children in that time frame. No-one counted reasons for death nor did Iraqi doctors sort any documentation by "death by sanction, death by bombien, other"
Even if all of them died of sanction related causes, trade and money for food and humanitarian needs were not blocked. By the way.. UN santions, not US sanctions.. Must have been a typo. Saddam's new palaces didn't suffer too much during that time. Iraqi women would walk several miles to get dirty water and have to pass his palace (with pool) to go get it by the bucket full.

[Saranof]

Wholagun, that may be true for some people, but the reason most of the people I know don't like him is because he's very misleading and manipulative. There's a site somewhere, don't know what the address is, that shows all the false truths and misguidances in Bowling for Columbine.

So you mean that the likes of Bush and co aren't misleading and manipulative? :) the election itself was a scam, everone knows that.


I still think most americans don't like Moore because he has the guts to criticise his own country. They don't like that.
Even though he himselft said he loved his country.

[duck]

It's good to have all kinds of opinions voiced: For every Michael Moore blurting out left-wing BS there is a Bill O'Reilly busy with his right-wing BS.

[Trigger]

So you mean that the likes of Bush and co aren't misleading and manipulative? :) the election itself was a scam, everone knows that.


I still think most americans don't like Moore because he has the guts to criticise his own country. They don't like that.
Even though he himselft said he loved his country.
slight correction:
Some people think the election was a scam.

Many Americans don't like Moore because he chooses to criticize his own country and makes things up in order to sound informed.
Anyone can say they love their country, but actions speak louder than words. :D

[California Joe]

I hate to be cynical but I don't ever believe any of those assholes. I think blind faith in a political party or media personality is tantamount to being borderline retarded. Weak minded people only read or listen to opinions that reinforce their own fragile beliefs. Please, don't ever challenge me.

[Trigger]

Stupid Nitroglycerin...

[ibstolidude]

First, all Politicians are manipulative from ANY country supporting ANY agenda and party.

You yourself are manipulative in the manner with which you attempt to lambast Bush....their are SOOOOO many glaring things that deserve question and critique.....and yet this is the dribble you choose to attack?
Of all this issues involved in Bush's life and career, you choose to attack with your lack of understanding of the US electorial system! Why? There are so many issues that are real instead of the fantasies and myths people here choose to attack.



So you mean that the likes of Bush and co aren't misleading and manipulative? :) the election itself was a scam, everone knows that.


allow me to repost:
The United States of America's voting system is not based upon a direct nation wide vote..anyone who feels it is is ignorant of our system.
It is however based upon the Electoral College system ..and in 2000 the count was 271 v/s 266 (1x vote not cast) although the popular vote was in favor of Al Gore, the electorial vote was not...as states have limited electorial votes.
The founders of the nation devised the Electoral College system as part of their plan to share power between the States and the national government. Under the Federal system adopted in the Constitution, the nation-wide popular vote has no legal significance. As a result, it is possible that the electoral votes awarded on the basis of State elections could produce a different result than the nation-wide popular vote. Nevertheless, the individual citizen's vote is important to the outcome of each State election, as whichever party slate wins the most popular votes in the State becomes that State's Electors-so that, in effect, whichever presidential ticket gets the most popular votes in a State wins all the Electors of that State. [The two exceptions to this are Maine and Nebraska where two Electors are chosen by statewide popular vote and the remainder by the popular vote within each Congressional district].
If people choose to argue that Florida gave their votes to Bush as his brother is governor that is not entirely true....it is actually horribly inaccurate...Florida's state constitution and the limited duration of acceptance of the voting results madated by the electorial college system gave Bush the votes. The mandate of the electoriual college clearly states the timeline in which the votes must be tallied and rcvd...if they have not been tallied and rcvd in this timeline it will fall to the guidelines required in the state constitution to determine the vote.

If people are not satisfied by the result; their options are the most common method for amending the Constitution, an amendment must be proposed by a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress and ratified by three-fourths of the States, or push for the removal of you Electors/Vote.

Cerainly a case can be/has been made against this system, but until it does the black and white is the law and the Supreme Court decision appears to be in strict adherence

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html

[budanski]

So you mean that the likes of Bush and co aren't misleading and manipulative? :) the election itself was a scam, everone knows that.

I still think most americans don't like Moore because he has the guts to criticise his own country. They don't like that.
Even though he himselft said he loved his country.

Its easy to criticise when in Europe, Aristocrats rule the EU from the top down while being appointed, rather than elected.

George W may have lost, to some, the popular vote. So did JFK p-)

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Well I'm not posting this stuff to bash America, many of you asked me for proof after posting that list so I went and found some. And I still get bashed for it. If Micheal Moore was "so full of ****" like you guys all think he is why cant you riddicule all that part of the post? And why would your own college's and Universities have reports done on some of the topics listed. The whole reason behind the post's was to show that even if something was done with good intentions, sometimes it goes wrong.

History does repeat itself, and if you don't look at the mistakes, correct and learn from them, we are doomed to repeat them again.

Call me what you will, but the truth at times maybe harder to find/accept to some in the end.

[Trigger]

The whole reason behind the post's was to show that even if something was done with good intentions, sometimes it goes wrong.
That's funny, the way most of us (Americans) saw it, the whole reason was for some non-Americans to say 'Look what the Bad Americans did' repeatedly....again.





and again....






and again.

[JF45]

If Micheal Moore was "so full of ****" like you guys all think he is why cant you riddicule all that part of the post?
I thought I already did. Though to be correct I didn't ridicule, I refuted it.

[Nawlins]

The whole reason behind the post's was to show that even if something was done with good intentions, sometimes it goes wrong.

Whoa, slow down there captain obvious. I don't know how many more of those brilliant revelations I can take.

No **** sometimes it goes wrong. People with the best of intentions make mistakes. A couple hundred years worth of the best intentions is, well, alot of mistakes. We all know that. Thanks.

[Skaman]

Keep plugging BC, the war is not easily won! I will be back to throw some blows when I get some time. Anyways, keep up with the great posts guys!

woot

[JF45]

1980's-US trains osama bin laden in ways to kill soviets during Afghanistan occupation. CIA provides him wth 3 billion US
You mean him personally? Support for the MUJAHIDEEN(not bin Laden himself) went through the Pakistani ISI, like the mentioned 3 billion. Bin Laden himself denied he ever received American support in his interview with British journalist Robert Fisk.


1993-US leads operation "restore hope" in Somalia in an attempt to overthrow the warlords, restoring peace and ending famine. A US mission goes astray, and results in the entire US military evacuation, crumbling the UN mission. Somalia returns to chaos.

Wrong. Restore Hope was successful The famine was stopped. It was UN nation building that raised the tensions with the Habr Gidr clan. US control had been handed over to the UN on 04May93. After a UN weapons inspection on 05June93, 24 Pakistanis were ambushed and massacred by Somalis(Habr Gidr, as to not clump all Somalis together). 12June is when the UN attacks against Aidid's strongholds begin. On 12July, the UN mission, using US forces, on the Abdi House results in the clan moderates swinging to full support of Aidid. The "US led operation" didn't begin until 26August.


2000-USA gives taliban ruled goverment in Afghanistan $245 million in goverment aid.

2001-Osama bin laden uses CIA training and mass amount of American "aid" to plan and carry out the 911 tragedies. 3,000 people are killed
Wrong. The $245M in government aid was given to non-governmental organizations to relieve famine in Afghanistan, not the Taliban. Even Moore corrects himself in his new book. That pretty much kills the next statement of how those millions went to fund 9/11. And if anything, OBL's construction experience had more influence on 9/11.

[Mortimer]

blah blah blah................

[WARPIG]

Keep plugging BC, the war is not easily won! I will be back to throw some blows when I get some time. Anyways, keep up with the great posts guys!

woot

Proof that dicamus is not seeking to enlighten us with truth but rather enjoys bashing us with trivia. Battle is his intent, ignorance is the result, and reality seems to keep moving further and further out of his reach.

[Trigger]

Keep plugging BC, the war is not easily won! I will be back to throw some blows when I get some time. Anyways, keep up with the great posts guys!

woot

throw some blows?
I think this belongs in the 'Three Cheers for Head' thread rofl

not easily won? as in never. rofl

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Well I'm glad that some (<----key word) people are sorta seeing the reason why I posted that information {wakes up from 2 weeks in intesive care burn unit...}. Yes Nawlins being Captin Obvious at times is hard, but at least I get a cool looking eye patch p-).