To Set the Record Straight.


sorabji.com: What do you want?: To Set the Record Straight.
THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016).

By spunky on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 01:19 pm:

    OK, guys. How many of you think that Bush/Cheney is to blame for
    1. 9/11
    2. The current Economy
    3. Enron
    4. Haliburton
    5. Global Warming
    6. High gas prices
    7. That zit on your nose


By eri on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 02:16 pm:

    does the zit on my forhead count?


By J on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 03:27 pm:

    1 to 6 no,7 maybe.


By Nate on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 03:38 pm:

    your bait sucks, dude.

    like tieing a fly that looks like an insane hungry cat and expecting to hook a trout.


By spunky on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 03:44 pm:

    Hey, who told???

    OH, you are talking about the thread.
    Oooops


By patrick on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 03:52 pm:

    you can't simplify such complex problems as to one single individual spunk, however I'll take a shot at it.

    No one single entity is to blame for 9/11. al Qaida should be brought to justice, American foreign policy modified and American intelligence reformed.

    The current economy is the way it is for a number of reasons. Bush's huge tax cut could be hindering a recovery. There are other reasons unreleated to him though. But voters will hang him like they hanged his dad for the shitter of an economy.

    Enron-To blame? Well no, of course not. Guilt by association? Perhaps. You could directly cite funds that went from investor and employee pockets and retirement funds right into Kenny Boy's hands and right over to Bush's campaign. If al Qaida receives money from Iraq, do we hang Iraq for giving them money? Sure we would.

    Halliburton- Yes, I hold Cheney directly responsible for any corruption and cooking of the books that went on during his stay! How could you not??? He was CEO until he won the election. Who else is there to hold responsible? When the ship sinks, captain goes with it.

    Global Warming- You can't blame the current administration for past administration's actions. We can only hold them accountable for what they have done, or havent done. What Bush hasnt done is take the auto or energy industries to task for their roles in Greenhouse emissions. His policies are incredibly lax and don't encourage the higher standards we need to begin to address the problem.

    High Gas prices? Yes...no. Complicated. If we go to war, you can expect them to go up. We go to war because the dumbass won't back down and is pretty much stuck. If he backs down from war he looks like a pussy. So he has to go. High gas prices are a result of a market economy. We embrace so we can't bitch too much, however, we can reduce our dependency on middle eastern oil by imposing standards on cars that reduc...oh wait, Bush already refused to do that. So...he could be to blame for the prices, when we go to war, and he is to blame for not reducing our dependency on oil.


    Bottom line, Bush acts unilaterally in foreign, acts to benefit corporate America over the individual. Now if i know you.... don't bother citing "well Clinton did this... or didnt do that." Thats irrelavent now. These criticisms of Bush arent don't address what Clinton or fucking Lincoln did. It doesnt matter.


By spunky on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 04:04 pm:

    Correct, it wont do any good to blame the past.
    Clinton was CEO of the USA for 8 years, correct?
    The financial reports for 98, 99 and 2000 were 20-30% higher then they should have been.

    After Aug. 16, 2000, his last day at Halliburton, Cheney exercised stock options and sold 660,000 shares between Aug. 21 and 28 for $35 million; Halliburton shares were soaring because of high oil prices.
    60 days later, the company surprised investors with a warning that its engineering and construction business was doing much worse than expected, driving shares down 11 percent in a day.

    Where is the smoking gun?


By Pancake Boy on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 04:33 pm:

    "like tieing a fly that looks like an insane hungry cat and expecting to hook a trout."

    LMFAO


By patrick on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 04:51 pm:

    "The financial reports for 98, 99 and 2000 were 20-30% higher then they should have been."

    what financial reports? what are you talking about?

    I don't know enough about Halliburton trace to comment much further. All Im saying is if the if the books were cooked on Cheney's watch...fry him. However, my biggest beef with Halliburton is not with cooking of the books (note they used Arthur Andersen, nuff said) but rather the reconstruction of the Iraqi oil industry via a French subsidiary.

    Otherwise...these are pretty simplistic foolish questions that i feel like a dope attempting to answer.

    A college thesis could be constructed on assessing these man. Evidence takes you so far, and then you make a leap. Its impossible to know 100% of the evidence and detail of every single one of these problems.

    Do i think Cheney is an evil corrupt warmonging-for-oil motherfucker? Yes. Why? Because there are indicators that he cooked books, made money indirectly doing business with Iraq and he has come out as one of the most hawkish Veeps for war in my lifetime. Thats enough for me.

    Now runalong with you're silly thread boy.




By spunky on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 04:59 pm:

    "U.S. Policy
    The broad national security interests and objectives expressed in the President's National Security Strategy (NSS) and the Chairman's National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of the United States Central Command's theater strategy. The NSS directs implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests, to other states in the region, and to their own citizens. Dual containment is designed to maintain the balance of power in the region without depending on either Iraq or Iran. USCENTCOM's theater strategy is interest-based and threat-focused. The purpose of U.S. engagement, as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States' vital interest in the region - uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf oil."

    That was stated US Policy set in 1995.

    Source: Milnet
    I never said it was not about oil. Silly.


By spunky on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 05:27 pm:

    USCENTCOM, 1995 Posture Statement, 1.


By spunky on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 05:31 pm:

    Do i think Cheney is an evil corrupt warmonging-for-oil motherfucker?

    Again, this is the United States. It has been policy. The President's National Security Policy, set forth in 1995, stated it was about "uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf oil."
    Oh, so Cheney was CEO of Halliburton in 1995 AND President of the United States in 1995!
    Or was GWB or GWHB? I am getting confused as to who set that national policy now.....
    But you bet, it is all Bush's and Cheney's fault.

    For the record, Cheney was CEO of Halliburton from 1998-2000. He had nothing to do with US Foreign Policy in 1995.

    FACTS
    FACTS
    FACTS


By Nate on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 05:55 pm:

    ditto


By patrick on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 05:58 pm:

    trace, despite your your vigorous net searching, you dont know all of the facts. the answers to such large and looming questions don't easily reside floating on the net waiting for you to pluck them.

    There's a certain amount of gut-feeling you have to apply.

    My source says Cheney was CEO if Halliburton from 95-2000.


By Antigone on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 06:08 pm:

    "Oh, so Cheney was CEO of Halliburton in 1995 AND President of the United States in 1995!"

    Spunk, why are you bitching about other people providing FACTS while simultaneously lying about their arguments? Please point out where patrick has said that Cheney was President of the United States in 1995.

    Now, was Cheney "responsible" for Haliburton?

    He was CEO from 1995-2000. Therefore, was responsible for the actions of the company while he was CEO, from 1995-2000. PLease stick to the facts in your arguments, spunky.


By spunky on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 06:42 pm:

    I stand corrected. For some reason, I thought it was from 1998-2000.


By Antigone on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 07:10 pm:

    And, where did patrick say he was President of the United States?


By spunky on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 07:49 pm:

    I was being feciscious for pete's sake


By Nate on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 09:07 pm:

    frisky, too.

    rrrr.


By agatha on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 12:05 am:

    feciscious? that's awfully suggestive.


By dave. on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 12:31 am:

    spunk, that's shitty.


By spunky on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 09:38 am:

    ? what is shitty?


By JusMiceElf on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 09:52 am:

    There was a recent New Yorker that talked about the stock option thing. The article (which I should dig out) delved into the economics behind the increase in granting options and the way corporations have used them. Among other things, corporations have timed option grants based on projected earnings, delaying the grant if earnings are expected to come up short, or granting them just before the report if earnings are good, to keep the strike price as low as possible, thereby maximizing the options' future value.

    Cheney didn't invent the system, but he sure did nothing to make it fair for the ordinary shareholder, either.

    Certainly the seeds of the current economy were planted a while ago. We're feeling the effects of the next greed cycle after the leveraged buyout days of the 1980s. Throughout the boom, nobody had the courage to put the brakes on, and everyone was trying to get their piece of the action. Now, nobody wants to take responsibility for the systemic portion of what went wrong. It's much more fun to point fingers at greed-mongers like Dennis Kozlowski, who spent his time building a mega-conglomerate, and robbing it blind.


By patrick on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 11:39 am:

    see Einstein quote ---->


By spunky on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 01:05 pm:

    I still think you suck


By patrick on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 01:17 pm:

    i still think you're a tool.


By The Watcher on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 01:35 pm:

    I think Corporate Higherarhies have been corrupt for a long time. They're run by boards of directors. Where each board is made up of a relatively small number of people. Everybody is on everybodyelses boards. So they each get golden parachutes and huge salaries and stock options.

    Everybody else gets screwed.


By dave. on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 01:50 pm:

    dood, wirr awl scrude.


By spunky on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 02:42 pm:

    My wife says you and I fight like little kids.
    I told her "Do Not!"


By Art Garfunkle on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 02:44 pm:

    "i still think you're a tool"

    I'd rather be a hammer then a nail....


By J on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 03:03 pm:

    I like to get hammerd then nailed.


By agatha on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 09:08 pm:

    you need to read up on your latin roots, spunky. some of your misspellings are rather unfortunate.


By semillama on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 06:08 pm:

    "engineering and construction business was
    doing much worse than expected"

    Can't say that now, can you?

    And j, you are a treasure.


By J on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 01:22 am:

    Thanks Sem,you know I love you.


By By SENTRY on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 11:42 am:

    UNITED STATES POLICY TO REVERSE IRAQ'S OCCUPATION OF KUWAIT (Senate Floor Debate—January 12, 1991)

    The Magnificent Grand Opening by Al Gore:

    "I have been an intent student of these events . . . attended virtually every minute of the long hearings . . . But my decision today is the product of an intense, may I say, excruciating, effort to find my way to a place as close to a sense of the ultimate truth in this matter as I am capable of getting. I have struggled to confront this issue in its bare essence: to separate what I think is fact, or at least highly probable, from what I think is false, or at least highly improbable; to strike a balance and to take my stand . . ."
    The Crescendo and Heart of the Oration

    "We have all made that journey, regardless of where it has led us . . . I stood in a different place halfway through last year . . . I felt, up until recently, especially after the hearings, in which I played an active role, questioning, probing, searching for the truth . . . As I searched my heart on this issue over the last few days with special intensity . . . I found myself feeling . . . I found myself pulled . . . I cannot reconcile myself to a point of view and a vote . . .my effort to explain why I feel that way. I think there is wishful thinking . . . But I believe it is wishful thinking . . . in my heart and the hearts of us all . . ."
    The Stately and Convincing Closing Point

    "None of us should have any doubt . . . but I fear that it may again be only wishful thinking . . . that I will never be guilty of any kind of action . . . I wish that were so. It may be so . . . I doubt that . . ."

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So there you have it—the Bore's so called "support" of evicting Iraq from Kuwait in 1991.

    Is anyone out there (still awake) convinced Al Gore "fully supported" action against Iraq in 1991 as he claims?

    Anyone?

    Anyone?

    No only was this the most boring speech ever presented in the US Senate, it would later prove Gore to be a liar.

    The Boor

    On September 23, 2002, in that bastion of nationalism and founding principles—San Francisco—Al Gore proved once again that being a boor is easier done than said.

    Stating that going after Hussein is the wrong course of action because "the vast majority of those who sponsored, planned and implemented the cold blooded murder of more than 3,000 Americans are still at large," the Boor said "I do not believe that we should allow ourselves to be distracted from this urgent task . . ." Al Gore was the sidekick to Bill "15 felonies and impeachment" Clinton who certainly found an intern to get distracted with instead of going after bin Laden after Al-Qaeda's multiple attacks on the United States during Clinton's corrupt regime.

    The Boor also stated that "by shifting from his early focus after September 11th on war against terrorism to war against Iraq, the President has manifestly disposed of the sympathy, good will and solidarity compiled by America . . ." Has Saudi Arabia shown any solidarity? I don't think telethons for homicide bombers' families is "solidarity" any more than their refusal early on to not allow us the use of the air bases in their territory that we built. What about Germany? Has all that anti-American hatred shown by Schroeder and the kook who equated "Bush to Hitler" a sign of good will"? America better learn to be nationalistic because, unlike Gore, many of us know the thugs of the world community could care less about helping America—other than help facilitate more American dollars flowing their way.

    This gem stands out: "From the outset, the Administration has operated in a manner calculated to please the portion of its base that occupies the far right . . ." Has amnesty for illegal aliens appealed to the far right? Has social spending so extreme it makes Maxine Waters blush appealed to the far right? The Bush administration has ballooned social spending and global welfarism to such an extreme it makes Karl Marx rise from the dead and do a double take. And the Boor thinks that Bush's Iraq strategy is trying to appeal to the far right?

    Anyone out there buying this absurd nonsense?

    Anyone?

    Anyone?


    The Gore

    It would be wise for all Americans to review Al Gore's leadership during war throughout the corrupt Clinton regime. Usama bin Laden formally declared war against the United States during Clinton's regime and launched a series of attacks against us.

    February 26, 1993
    Islamic attack on the World Trade Center

    April 14. 1993
    Iraqi attempt to assassinate former President Bush

    November 13, 1995
    Islamic attack on US military compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    June 25, 1996
    Islamic attack on US military's Khobar Towers housing facility, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

    February 23, 1997
    Palestinian attack at the Empire State Building

    November 12, 1997
    Islamic murder of US businessmen in Karachi, Pakistan

    August 7, 1998
    Islamic attack on US Embassies in East Africa

    October 12, 2000
    Islamic attack on a US naval vessel, the USS Cole

    There was not even a hint by Clinton-Gore that they even considered serious plans to protect our nation and attack those enemies at war with us. Usama bin Laden was offered to Clinton-Gore, free of charge on a silver platter, on more than one occasion, by the government of Sudan. They refused. Clinton-Gore wanted a peaceful legacy—they refused to engage the enemy.

    It is clear from the transcripts and facts presented here that Al Gore is a hypocrite, a liar, and a traitor to principles as the Vice-president to a "Commander in Chief" during time of war and attacks on our nation.

    A greater shame is the failure by the Republicans to bring forth a loud and clear case to the American media and public about the facts and themes presented here.

    The debased state of this nation is exemplified when a hypocrite like Al Gore is given major media exposure on a topic that he should be barred from even speaking on, or—at the very least—castigated for.

    The only explanation for the exposure and lack of stern criticism to Gore's speech is a naive and apathetic American public, a socialist media that never asks the hard questions, and spineless Republicans who refuse to expose the truth.
    Published originally at EtherZone.com


By semillama on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 11:53 am:

    Was that you, spunky?

    I don't know about a source that confuses
    "Islamic" as a synonym for "terrorist"


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 11:59 am:

    19 of the 19 terrorists were islamic.
    Not all islamics are terrorists, of course.
    I know quite a few who are not.
    Not all terrorists are islamic.
    But you have to admit that the majority of them are.

    Why overlook the obvious? Should we really continue the policy of strip-searching old ladies in wheel chairs? Making mothers drink their own breast milk?
    Or conserve our resources and energy for a profile that has created itself?



By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:00 pm:

    By the way, was it not a teacher of Islam (Taliban) that declared war on America?
    Did they not declare a jihad or holy war on America?
    Did you know they want nothing from us, except to cease existing?


By Nate on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:07 pm:

    bigot.


By semillama on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:08 pm:

    Isn't it a Christian that is proposing a massive
    air war that will certainly result in the deaths of
    innocent civilians?

    Did you know that FDR,who yourevile so
    much, was a christian?

    How about Lt. Calley? I bet he went to church.

    Look at all those christians in africa hacking
    each other to death with machetes.

    How about them Christians who came up with
    napalm?

    Seems to me that those terrorists blowing up
    abortion clinics and shooting doctors are
    Christian too.

    See the flaw in your logic yet?


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:13 pm:

    Yes, there are many other Terrorist Groups out there.
    They Are:

    Abu Nidal Organization (ANO)-
    AKA Fatah Revolutionary Council
    Arab Revolutionary Brigades
    Black September
    Revolutionary Organization of Socialist Muslims

    Activities
    Has carried out terrorist attacks in 20 countries, killing or injuring almost 900 persons. Targets include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Israel, moderate Palestinians, the PLO, and various Arab countries. Major attacks included the Rome and Vienna airports in December 1985, the Neve Shalom synagogue in Istanbul and the Pan Am flight 73 hijacking in Karachi in September 1986, and the City of Poros day-excursion ship attack in Greece in July 1988. Suspected of assassinating PLO deputy chief Abu Iyad and PLO security chief Abu Hul in Tunis in January 1991. ANO assassinated a Jordanian diplomat in Lebanon in January 1994 and has been linked to the killing of the PLO representative there. Has not attacked Western targets since the late 1980s.

    Strength
    A few hundred plus limited overseas support structure.

    Abu Sayyaf Group
    Activities
    Engages in bombings, assassinations, kidnappings, and extortion to promote an independent Islamic state in western Mindanao and the Sulu Archipelago, areas in the southern Philippines heavily populated by Muslims. Raided the town of Ipil in Mindanao in April 1995--the group's first large-scale action--and kidnapped more than 30 foreigners, including a US citizen, in 2000.

    Strength
    Believed to have about 200 core fighters, but more than 2,000 individuals motivated by the prospect of receiving ransom payments for foreign hostages allegedly joined the group in August.


    Al-'Asifa
    Activities
    In the 1960s and the 1970s, Fatah offered training to a wide range of European, Middle Eastern, Asian, and African terrorist and insurgent groups. Carried out numerous acts of international terrorism in western Europe and the Middle East in the early-tomiddle 1970s. Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles (DOP) with Israel in 1993 and renounced terrorism and violence. There has been no authorized terrorist operation since that time.
    Strength
    6,000 to 8,000

    Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya
    Activities
    Group specialized in armed attacks against Egyptian security and other government officials, Coptic Christians, and Egyptian opponents of Islamic extremism before the cease-fire. From 1993 until the cease-fire, al-Gama'a launched attacks on tourists in Egypt, most notably the attack in November 1997 at Luxor that killed 58 foreign tourists. Also claimed responsibility for the attempt in June 1995 to assassinate Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The Gama'a has never specifically attacked a US citizen or facility but has threatened US interests.
    Strength
    Unknown. At its peak the IG probably commanded several thousand hard-core members and a like number of sympathizers. The 1998 cease-fire and security crackdowns following the attack in Luxor in 1997 probably have resulted in a substantial decrease in the group's numbers.

    Algerian Terrorism
    Activities
    Frequent attacks against regime targets, particularly police, security personnel, and government officials; these include assassinations and bombings. Algerian terrorists have turned increasingly to violence against civilians. Since June 1993, for example, they have killed seven Algerian journalists. In September 1993, Algerian terrorists began targeting foreign nationals in Algeria, murdering two Frenchmen. In October, they killed five foreign nationals and kidnapped several more, including three French Consular officials, and threatened to begin indiscriminate attacks on all foreign residents by December. Since 1992, at least 1,500 people have died in Algerian violence.
    Strength
    Unknown

    al-Jihad
    Other Names
    Egyptian Islamic Jihad
    Islamic Jihad
    Jihad Group
    Activities
    Specializes in armed attacks against high-level Egyptian Government personnel, including cabinet ministers, and car-bombings against official US and Egyptian facilities. The original Jihad was responsible for the assassination in 1981 of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. Claimed responsibility for the attempted assassinations of Interior Minister Hassan al-Alfi in August 1993 and Prime Minister Atef Sedky in November 1993. Has not conducted an attack inside Egypt since 1993 and has never targeted foreign tourists there. Responsible for Egyptian Embassy bombing in Islamabad in 1995; in 1998, planned attack against US Embassy in Albania was thwarted.

    Strength
    Not known but probably has several hundred hard-core members.

    ***************others, research if you like**************
    Anti-Imperialist International Brigade (AIIB)
    Arab Revolutionary Brigades
    Arab Revolutionary Council
    Armed Islamic Group
    Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA)
    Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA)


    Euskadi ta Askatasuna (ETA) Special Profile
    Black September
    Chukaku-Ha (Nucleus or Middle Core Faction)
    Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP)
    Dev Sol
    Devrimci Sol (Revolutionary Left)
    DHKP/C
    EGTK
    Ellalan Force
    ELN
    Fatah Revolutionary Council
    Federation of Associations of Canadian Tamils (FACT)
    15 May Organization
    Force 17
    GIA
    HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement)

    HAMAS Special Profile
    Harakat ul-Ansar (HUA)
    Hizballah (Party of God)

    Hizballah Special Profile
    The Islamic Group (IG)
    Islamic Jihad
    Jamaat ul-Fuqra
    Japanese Red Army (JRA)
    Jihad Group
    Kach
    Kahane Chai
    Khmer Rouge
    Kurdistan Labor Party (PKK)

    Kurdistan Labor\Workers Party (PKK) Special Profile
    Kurdistan Workers Party
    Lautaro Popular Rebel Forces (FRPL)
    Lautaro Youth Movement (MJL)
    The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)
    Manuel Rodriguez Patriotic Front (FPMR)
    The Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) / Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO)

    Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization Special Profile
    Morazanist Patriotic Front (FPM)
    Muslim Iranian Students Society (MEK front organization used to garner financial support)
    National Council of Resistance (NCR)
    National Liberation Army (ELN) - Bolivia / Nestor Paz Zamora Commission (CNPZ)
    National Liberation Army (ELN)--Colombia
    The National Liberation Army of Iran (The military wing of the MEK)
    New iihad Group
    New People's Army (NPA)
    Organization of the Oppressed on Earth
    The Orly Group
    Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)
    Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)

    Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) Special Profile
    Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)
    Party of Democratic Kampuchea
    The People's Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI)
    PKK
    Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)
    Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC)
    Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-Special Command (PFLP-SC)
    Popular Struggle Front (PSF)
    Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA)
    The Provos
    Puka Inti (Sol Rojo, Red Sun)
    Red Army Faction (RAF)
    Red Brigades (BR)
    Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)
    Revolutionary Justice Organization
    Revolutionary Organization 17 November (17 November)
    Revolutionary Organization of Socialist Muslims
    Revolutionary People's Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C)
    Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path, SL)

    Shining Path Special Profile
    Sikh Terrorism
    Sol Rojo
    Talaa'al-Fateh
    3rd October Organization)
    Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA)

    Tupac Amaru (MRTA) Special Profile
    Tupac Katari Guerrilla Army (EGTK)
    United Popular Action Movement (MAPU/L) [Lautaro faction of ]
    Vanguards of Conquest
    World Tamil Association (WTA)
    World Tamil Movement (WTM)



    SOURCE:Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2000. United States Department of State, April 2001.


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:17 pm:

    I understand your point, and do not propose that there are not any Christian Terrorists.

    I was channel flipping the other night and accidently paused on Cops. I was about to change the channel when something caught my attention.

    I do not remember what city they were in, but they were arresting a couple of people for fighting.
    The charge: Making Terroristic Threats and engaging in Terrorism.

    Be very careful and very specific on what you choose to brand terrorism.


By The Watcher on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:23 pm:

    Spunky,

    You reminded me of someone I heard call in to a local radio talk show. He wanted a Constitutional Amendment to ban the practice of Islam in the United States and to deport any and all practioners to the Islamic state of their choice.

    Since Islam seems to not be the peace loving religion its practioners claim, (I have been informed that the Koran has multiple places where it calls for killing all non believers), even though most of its practioners in this country are peaceful, it sounded like a good idea.

    But, I still wouldn't go along with him!


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:30 pm:

    I would never even dream of such a thing.
    You have the right to believe in God, Allah, Satan, Budah or the magic white rock if you so choose. I would not have it any other way.
    I am a firm beleiver in the freedom of or from religion.
    I would hate it if I were forced by the government to attend any type of religious ceremony.


By J on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:34 pm:

    I consider Christians that bomb abortion clinics terrorist. I'm sure Timothy McVeigh was probably brought up Christian.


By patrick on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:39 pm:

    fucking A spunk.


    who gives a shit about Gore.


    what exactly are you hell bent on proving? i cant be bothered to read half this shit you are posting.

    "Not all terrorists are islamic.
    But you have to admit that the majority of them are."

    no, just the ones you hear about dumbass. fucking christ spunk....you don't like being thought of as an idiot but then you go and spout this shit.

    the IRA has more than its fair share of terrorist. Note: white, pasty, christian terrorists.






By The Watcher on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 01:01 pm:

    I agree with you spunk. It was just that your post reminded me of the guy.

    He was a real right wing fanatic. Even to right wing for the conservative talk show host.


By The Watcher on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 01:31 pm:


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 02:56 pm:

    "the IRA has more than its fair share of terrorist. Note: white, pasty, christian terrorists."

    Why do you think I accuse you of sticking your head in the sand?
    When was the last time the IRA took over a jet and flew it to a sky scraper?
    When was the last time the IRA drove a bomb into a United States Naval Vessel?
    Or bombed a US embassy?

    I know they are out there killing people, but god dammit, it is the USAF, USMC, USA & USN'S job to protect the United States.
    We need to address direct threats to the United States. First.

    These fuckers have had the nerve to not just kill civilians but to go after US Military Targets.
    They have those kind of cajones, that is why we need to worry about fundamentalist, radiacal, militant terrorist organizations that target US Civilian, Government and Military targets.


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:00 pm:

    Oh, and we cannot afford to, and should not, wait until the world gives us permission to protect ourselves either.


By patrick on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:06 pm:

    spunk...I'll slow it down for you...

    you can't say this...

    "Not all terrorists are islamic.
    But you have to admit that the majority of them are."

    ...without consideration for all the other terrorist in the world. Noooo, i don't have toadmit the majority of terrorist are Muslim. There are Hindu terrorist plaguing the Kashmiri region. Christian terrorists throughout Africa, South America and Europe and domestic terrorists right here in the US...Ted Kazinski? Timothy McVeigh? HELLO!!!!

    You can't make that statement because you have no fucking idea. Its a bigoted statement. You are only taking into consideration what has happened to America in the last year which is a typical American "head in the sand" thing to do.

    So the only one who as their head in the sand is you with your xenophobic, bigoted statements.


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:07 pm:

    "I consider Christians that bomb abortion clinics terrorist." as do I J.
    I'm sure Timothy McVeigh was probably brought up Christian."

    Are you sure McVeigh and Nichols did it alone?


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:11 pm:

    Oh, I did not know the American Embassies are in the US, and the USS Cole was here in the US as well as the Kohbar Towers.
    Thanks for setting me straight on that.


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:12 pm:

    "...without consideration for all the other terrorist in the world. Noooo, i don't have toadmit the majority of terrorist are Muslim. There are Hindu terrorist plaguing the Kashmiri region. Christian terrorists throughout Africa, South America and Europe and domestic terrorists right here in the US...Ted Kazinski? Timothy McVeigh? HELLO!!!! "

    Do we need to sharpen up on our reading and retention skills?
    "I know they are out there killing people, but god dammit, it is the USAF, USMC, USA & USN'S job to protect the United States.
    We need to address direct threats to the United States. First."


By patrick on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:14 pm:

    defend ourselves against what spunk? Saddam? You think Saddam poses a threat to us? On what grounds? Give me the evidence he has the ability and the historical inclination to launch an unprovoked attack upon the US.

    We deterred the great Soviet Union from attacking us for 50 years. What the fuck makes you think, Saddam, knowing our might first hand is going to attack us unprovoked? You think he's that dumb? I guarantee you, he has more brains than Bush does.

    As far as the war on terrorism, we already have the worlds support. That is not the issue here.

    The issue is attacking premptively, against world opinion, without consideration for our allies, risking the coalitions we have built with the war on terrorism and killing innocents for what????

    The war on Iraq is a ploy spunk. Wake the fuck up.

    *If it was a matter of threat, North Korea and Iran are far more threatening than Iraq. So its not really a threat issue, despite what they say.

    *Its not a matter of breaking UN mandates. We do that all the time.

    *Its not a matter of protecting a 3rd party, such as Kuwait.

    *And its not proven there are links between al Qaida and Iraq such as their were between al Qaida and Afghanistan.

    The only reason we are bullying Iraq is because we can win, and that dumbass of a president can feign himself a hero. Its pussy. Its constructed of lies. Prove me wrong.


By patrick on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:15 pm:

    i should just learn to be as concise as nate.

    you're an idiot.




    there. thats better.


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:20 pm:

    "As far as the war on terrorism, we already have the worlds support. That is not the issue here."
    i should just learn to be as concise as nate.

    you're an idiot.


By Nate on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:24 pm:

    you should all learn from me.

    here are our true allies.


By Nate on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:35 pm:


By Jacques Brel on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:49 pm:


By J on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:50 pm:

    Well the fact that the goverment is really pushing for us U.S.A. citizens to get those smallpox vacination tells me they know something is coming that makes me nervous,reading the Arizona Republic today made me even more nervous. It seems federal prosecutors accidently handed over classified documents to Zacarias Moussaaoui,way to go assholes. A few pages over I see that taliban fugitives and Afghan fighters are getting arms and money from al-Qaida and Iran for planned suicide attacks on American troops in Afghanistan.


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:51 pm:


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:53 pm:

    Thank you J.
    If I had said that, they would have told me it was all just a ploy to link Al Queda with Iraq.


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 04:00 pm:


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 04:22 pm:

    May 23, 2000
    Gore addressed the American Israel Political Action Committee:
    "In 1991 I broke with many of my own party and voted to use force to stop Saddam Hussein's aggression in the Middle East. Despite our swift victory and all our efforts since, there is no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein still seeks to amass weapons of mass destruction. You know as well as I do: as long as Saddam Hussein stays in power, there can be no comprehensive peace for the people of Israel or the people of the Middle East. We have made it clear that it is our policy to see Saddam Hussein gone."


    September 24, 2002:
    Al Gore in San Fransisco, CA:
    "I am deeply concerned that the policy we are presently following with respect to Iraq has the potential to seriously damage our ability to win the war against terrorism and to weaken our ability to lead the world in this new century,"


By Antigone on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 04:35 pm:

    Spunk, are you trying to say that Gore's 2000 and 2002 views are contradictory?


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 04:37 pm:

    Do I really need to?


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 04:43 pm:

    "Former Vice President Al Gore yesterday made his second attack this week on President Bush's war on terrorism, accusing the administration of ignoring signs that al Qaeda terrorist leader Osama bin Laden planned to attack the United States on September 11.
    "The warnings were there" before the attacks, Mr. Gore said.

    Yes, Mr. Gore, there were, and I repeat:
    It would be wise for all Americans to review Al Gore's leadership during war throughout the corrupt Clinton regime. Usama bin Laden formally declared war against the United States during Clinton's regime and launched a series of attacks against us.

    February 26, 1993
    attack on the World Trade Center

    November 13, 1995
    attack on US military compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    June 25, 1996
    attack on US military's Khobar Towers housing facility, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

    February 23, 1997
    Palestinian attack at the Empire State Building

    November 12, 1997
    murder of US businessmen in Karachi, Pakistan

    August 7, 1998
    attack on US Embassies in East Africa

    October 12, 2000
    attack on a US naval vessel, the USS Cole

    And what did you and Mr Clinton do about it?

    "There was not even a hint by Clinton-Gore that they even considered serious plans to protect our nation and attack those enemies at war with us. Usama bin Laden was offered to Clinton-Gore, free of charge on a silver platter, on more than one occasion, by the government of Sudan. They refused. Clinton-Gore wanted a peaceful legacy—they refused to engage the enemy."


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 04:52 pm:

    "Al Gore's former running mate, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, sharply disagreed yesterday with Mr. Gore's assertion that President Bush was pandering to conservative Republicans with his push for military action against Iraq, the Washington Times reports.
    "I have never said that, and I don't believe it," the Connecticut Democrat said in unusually blunt disagreement with Mr. Gore's comments. "I'm grateful President Bush wants to do this [in Iraq], and I don't question his motives."


By patrick on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 04:53 pm:

    yes. because the two are not necessarily contradictory.




    "Thank you J.
    If I had said that, they would have told me it was all just a ploy to link Al Queda with Iraq."

    what the fuck are you talking about spunk? where is your head man? this makes no sense, based on what janny was talking about.

    are you still taking tylenols? because your logic and perception are all out of wack.





    janny dont let the paper make you afraid. they do that to keep you buying more papers.



By patrick on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 04:55 pm:

    what is this shit you are posting???


    have you lost your mind???


    you're so hell bent on citing sources and finding evidence to support your crackpot ideas, you are forgetting to think along the way.


    get back to work and stop posting this nonsense.


By semillama on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 04:57 pm:

    how interesting that suddenly the word
    Islamic is gone.


By semillama on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 05:06 pm:


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 05:07 pm:

    Thank you for reminding me that I do not know why I bother.
    You will never accept anything from me, ever.
    You have to think it up yourself or witness it with your own two eyes to beleive anything....


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 05:09 pm:

    I have heard that before.

    Funny thing is, well, let me just say that I know for an absolute fact that that peice is known as "revisionist history" to try and paint the ending of the Gulf War in a better light.

    I know for a fact that that statement is utter horse shit.


By semillama on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 05:13 pm:

    Check out these terrorists!!!!

    http://
    www.foxnews.com/story/

    0,2933,64092,00.html

    same deal, cut, paste, delete the space

    Thanks Steve Jobs for this hassle of cut and
    paste.


By Antigone on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 05:38 pm:

    Spunk, Gore's statements might not be contradictory because SOME SHIT HAS CHANGED IN THE PAST TWO YEARS. EVENTS HAVE OCCURRED THAT HAVE CHANGED THE WORLD A WEE BIT. THE POLITICAL CLIMATE IS DIFFERENT.

    Do I need to be more explicit?


By patrick on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 05:48 pm:

    moreover tiggy, you can be for regime change, and anti weapon proliferation in Iraq without advocating war by election time.


By Antigone on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 05:53 pm:

    Spunkster, try unleashing your prodigious researching abilities on the following terms and their posible effect on the stability of the middle east vis a vis a unilateral U.S. invasion of Iraq: Ariel Sharon, Intifadah, Arab coalition, Arab sentiments, Pax Americana, War on Terrorism.

    To actually gain a new perspective you must not search at any websites that espouse conservative political views. While reading these sites, refrain from saying "bullshit" after every sentence or foaming at the mouth every time you see the words "Clinton" or "Gore". This may help you keep an open mind.


By semillama on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 05:58 pm:

    Right on.

    I'll admit that Clinton and Gore are weasels. of
    course they are, they are politicians.

    What puzzles me is the lack of bitter vile
    towards Bush and Cheney, who are also
    weasels.

    Goddamn druggie draft dodgers! Wait a
    minute, I can't tell which pair I am talking
    about!


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 07:08 pm:

    "SOME SHIT HAS CHANGED IN THE PAST TWO YEARS. EVENTS HAVE OCCURRED THAT HAVE CHANGED THE WORLD A WEE BIT. THE POLITICAL CLIMATE IS DIFFERENT. "

    And these changes make it safer to allow saddam to remain in power?
    Or do they make it a bigger reason to get him out?

    And one more thing.
    NATIONAL SECURITY IS **NOT** a politcal issue


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 07:09 pm:


By patrick on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 07:29 pm:

    "And these changes make it safer to allow saddam to remain in power?
    Or do they make it a bigger reason to get him out?"


    The changes are unrelated to Saddam. There is no proven connection between the two!!!!


    Where is the threat to our national security by Saddam trace? Where? Lets see it? Saddam has no history of selling his weapons.

    These are questions conservative fuckwads can't seem to answer very clearly. No one can demonstrate a clear cut threat. No one can demonstrate he has intention to attack us unproked, and no one can demonstrate he even has the ability. Illogical fuckwads. Illogical war-mongering fuckwads.

    Attacking Saddam would only increase the threat to US, not diminish it.




    and

    National security IS a political issue spunk. To think it isnt is foolish.


By dave. on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 07:48 pm:

    hey, sem. could you please send me copies all of your cool mac software?


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 08:12 pm:

    WASHINGTON — President Bush softened his pro-war rhetoric slightly Friday, saying the United Nations should have a chance to force Saddam Hussein to give up his weapons of mass destruction before the United States acts on its own against Iraq.


    HAPPY?



By Nate on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 08:45 pm:

    i'm happy. i just took a shit and smoked a joint.

    crazy spunklations on this board, dudes.


    By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 11:05 am:

    We need to kill them islama terrorists before the kikers set off another bomb in a US embassy and start WWIII.


    By The Watcher on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 11:14 pm:

    I no this is the trooph. If anything is onist, Bush kneads to mache a stand aginst the zionist thuret.


    By DARRIN on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 11:34 pm:

    We must wipe the EARTH of the BLOOD of the A-RABS! Those BROWN anti-SEMITES must DIE!!!

    By Oatmeal Boy on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 11:34 pm:

    White, 24, Male.

    Only the whites must remain!


By spunky on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 08:50 pm:


By semillama on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 09:59 pm:

    What do you wnat, dave.?

    or were you pulling my leg?


By dave. on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 11:44 pm:

    nope, i'm totally serious. i'd like office, adobe stuff, any cool audio stuff . . . maybe a right-handed mitten for the goofy mouse.

    i have os8.6 if that makes a difference.


By semillama on Friday, September 27, 2002 - 11:54 pm:

    yep. All my stuff is OS X.


By dave. on Saturday, September 28, 2002 - 12:55 am:

    so is everyone else's stuff, it seems.

    oh well.


By wisper on Tuesday, October 1, 2002 - 05:31 pm:

    hi spunky!!!

    http://www.theonion.com/onion3836/bush_seeks_un_support.html

    i like watching CNN. it makes me laugh till i cry.

    -Hey, Saddam might possibly start thinking about having the materials to make bombs! Let's bomb him! Bomb that maniac up good!

    -No one is allowed to have bigger guns than us!

    -Flag graphic

    -inane reference of 9-11

    (did you watch yesterday? the US planes started bombing almost random buildings in Iraq but "oh, uhm, that doesn't mean anything! Commie! We're not attacking, just uh... blowing up... stuff...")

    -Only the good guys are allowed to have big guns! We decide who that is by some crazy calculation.

    -What? India? Pakistan? Korea? who's that? They can't possibly be a threat, they have no oil! I mean, er, they're not a threat cuz... shut up! Commie!

    -We need the UN's help! Sure, we tell them to stay the fuck out of our business, but damnit, that evil fuck better listen to them now!

    -Flag graphic


By semillama on Sunday, October 6, 2002 - 05:47 pm:

    yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

    My friend who works on the US army reserve
    post told me that everyone is in desert
    fatigues now.

    Althought the equipment hasn't been switched
    to desert camo yet.


bbs.sorabji.com
 

The Stalking Post: General goddam chit-chat Every 3 seconds: Sex . Can men and women just be friends? . Dreamland . Insomnia . Are you stoned? . What are you eating? I need advice: Can you help? . Reasons to be cheerful . Days and nights . Words . Are there any news? Wishful thinking: Have you ever... . I wish you were... . Why I oughta... Is it art?: This question seems to come up quite often around here. Weeds: Things that, if erased from our cultural memory forever, would be no great loss Surfwatch: Where did you go on the 'net today? What are you listening to?: Worst music you've ever heard . What song or tune is going through your head right now? . Obscure composers . Obscure Jazz, 1890-1950 . Whatever, whenever General Questions: Do you have any regrets? . Who are you? . Where are you? . What are you doing here? . What have you done? . Why did you do it? . What have you failed to do? . What are you wearing? . What do you want? . How do you do? . What do you want to do today? . Are you stupid? Specific Questions: What is the cruelest thing you ever did? . Have you ever been lonely? . Have you ever gone hungry? . Are you pissed off? . When is the last time you had sex? . What does it look like where you are? . What are you afraid of? . Do you love me? . What is your definition of Heaven? . What is your definition of Hell? Movies: Last movie you saw . Worst movie you ever saw . Best movie you ever saw Reading: Best book you've ever read . Worst book you've ever read . Last book you read Drunken ramblings: uiphgy8 hxbjf.bklf ghw789- bncgjkvhnqwb=8[ . Payphones: Payphone Project BBS
 

sorabji.com . torturechamber . px.sorabji.com . receipts . contact