Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bush Wanted To Bomb Al Jazeera HQ  
User currently offlineQR332 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3765 times:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_obje...%2don%2dbush%2dleak-name_page.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...64-F5C0-41EF-A613-EBA745ACEF7A.htm

I would love to hear the comments of Bush supporters now... Bush wanted to bomb Al Jazeera, a news station which is located in Qatar, one of America's biggest Arab allies, and which is full of civilians and innocents, as is the area around it. What does everybody think?

I seriously cannot believe that nobody posted this yet. This is something very serious, as the President of the world's most powerful country wanted to bomb his ally because one of its news stations was practicing free speech, something which is ironically a key feature of the US constitution.

God help us.

213 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24811 posts, RR: 56
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3761 times:

Unfortunately people still think of Al Jazeera as a terrorist TV station, which it isn't.


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3752 times:

Quoting QR332 (Thread starter):
I seriously cannot believe that nobody posted this yet. This is something very serious, as the President of the world's most powerful country wanted to bomb his ally because one of its news stations was practicing free speech, something which is ironically a key feature of the US constitution.

Maybe no one posted it because it is an absurd and unbelieveable allegation.


User currently offlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4975 posts, RR: 44
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3749 times:

Quoting QR332 (Thread starter):
I would love to hear the comments of Bush supporters now

Let me help you:

"Bush was right! He should have bombed them because Al-Jazeera is a terrorist-supporting station."

Signed,
The Bush supporters.

Let's see how close I am.


User currently offlineGkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24811 posts, RR: 56
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3740 times:

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 3):
"Bush was right! He should have bombed them because Al-Jazeera is a terrorist-supporting station."

Signed,
The Bush supporters.



Quoting Scorpio (Reply 3):
Let's see how close I am.

I would imagine very close  Wink



When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineSebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3675 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3727 times:

The problem with Al Jazeera is that the US can't control what they say and show, contrary to CNN. That's a big problem in time of war, especially when the American public must NOT see what really happens when you drop a "smart" bomb on a building.
Death, desolation and pain is not the best thing to show to the voters.

More of that, it's possible that some people at Al Jazeera had remote links with the terrorists. I think one journalist had problems for that, am I wrong ?


User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 20
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3721 times:




Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineDelta767300ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2562 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3716 times:

He would be a dumbass if he did bomb Al-Jazeera's HQ in Doha. I agree with QR reference Qatar being one of our best allies as well as the innocent/civilian population.

-Delta767300ER


User currently offlineAGM114L From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3692 times:

Consider the sources. The Mirror, a Brit tabloid, Aljazeera; English version, cause they're completely unbiased about this.

This thread is worthless.


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 19
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3678 times:

Quoting Gkirk (Reply 1):
Unfortunately people still think of Al Jazeera as a terrorist TV station, which it isn't.

It is, period. Even if not run directly by them they're extremely friendly towards them and are a semi-official channel for their propaganda.
They're not called the Osama News Network for nothing.

Quoting QR332 (Thread starter):
I seriously cannot believe that nobody posted this yet.

That would be because it's baseless allegations.
I'm also surprised noone here posted it before though, but only because of the largescale anti-US, anti-Bush, pro-terrorist attitude of a large subgroup of posters here.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineArsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3678 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I wouldn't be suprised if it was true, we are dealing with a new breed of cold blooded, cold-natured politicians with complete disregard for human life and a lack of tolerance of other opinions. It's his way or no way. And this is the same monkey which travels the glode in a 747 lecturing the world on "peace", "human rights" and justice. Not only that, but the Middle East and the rest of the world will not witness complete peace unless creeps like Bush and Blair are eliminated from society.


In Arsene we trust!!
User currently offlineJoness0154 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 667 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3674 times:

Quoting Arsenal@LHR (Reply 10):

I wouldn't be suprised if it was true, we are dealing with a new breed of cold blooded, cold-natured politicians with complete disregard for human life and a lack of tolerance of other opinions. It's his way or no way. And this is the same monkey which travels the glode in a 747 lecturing the world on "peace", "human rights" and justice. Not only that, but the Middle East and the rest of the world will not witness complete peace unless creeps like Bush and Blair are eliminated from society.

Hell, you'd be bitching even if Churchill still ran your country. Grow up



I don't have an attitude problem. You have a perception problem
User currently offlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4975 posts, RR: 44
Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3674 times:

Quoting AGM114L (Reply 8):
Consider the sources. The Mirror, a Brit tabloid, Aljazeera; English version, cause they're completely unbiased about this.

So are you saying they're lying, and the memo doesn't exist? If so, please explain this one: (from the second link)

"A British civil servant has been charged under the Official Secrets Act for allegedly leaking the government memo."

and

"Civil servant David Keogh, 49, is now accused of passing the memo to Leo O'Connor, who once worked for Clarke.

Both Keogh and O'Connor are due to appear in court next week on charges under the Act. "

If the memo didn't exist, or didn't contain this info, why would they charge these people for leaking it?

Quoting AGM114L (Reply 8):
This thread is worthless.

Because you don't like the content?


User currently offlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4975 posts, RR: 44
Reply 13, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3670 times:

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 9):
It is, period.

See, that didn't take long, did it?

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 9):
I'm also surprised noone here posted it before though, but only because of the largescale anti-US, anti-Bush, pro-terrorist attitude of a large subgroup of posters here.

Name ONE person here who is 'pro-terrorist'. And don't run away this time, like you usually do.


User currently offlineArsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 20
Reply 14, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3663 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Joness0154 (Reply 11):
Hell, you'd be bitching even if Churchill still ran your country. Grow up

Perhaps you should learn to tolerate other peoples opinions instead of telling them to grow up, sound very much like your lord, George Bush. And Churchill defended his country from a REAL and PRESENT threat from the Nazi's. Iraq was the biggest propaganda exercise of this century.



In Arsene we trust!!
User currently offlineJoness0154 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 667 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3660 times:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/11/22/us.al.jazeera/index.html


I don't have an attitude problem. You have a perception problem
User currently offlineJoness0154 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 667 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3657 times:

Quoting Arsenal@LHR (Reply 14):

Does that include murdering hundreds of thousands of civilian in firebombing raids of Dresden, etc?



I don't have an attitude problem. You have a perception problem
User currently offlineArsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3651 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Joness0154 (Reply 16):
Does that include murdering hundreds of thousands of civilian in firebombing raids of Dresden, etc?

No ofcourse it doesn't, but care to explain to us which conflict, WW2 or Iraq 2003 had the moral, ethical, political and military support? Would you like to explain which war was based on falsifying information, lies, propaganda, half-truths and myths, as opposed to a threat which was blatant and clear to see?



In Arsene we trust!!
User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4276 posts, RR: 12
Reply 18, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3650 times:

It is true there is a strong anti-US media bias in many many places.

But I also refuse to understand why Americans are so naive about their government, and the belief it is so benevolent (republican or democrat). Get over it. The US government is as corrupt and evil as governments in Europe, Asia, and Latin America:

- The US government can switch people from one service to another (insurance, etc), at will and not notify it's citizens of the change or if they have just been switched with a 400% increase in premiums. That seems plain wrong.

- The US government now is in the business of jailing it's own citizens for years and years with no probable cause. Some will say those are wartime circumstances, so this one is debatable.

- The US government now can seize it's citizens property in order to give it to a wealthier individual (more tax revenue). Basically, the US government can and has taken American citizens to court, to build a case against them with their own tax money as to why they should lose their own property, and then take it away without paying a penny in compensation. Not for roads or bridges, but for shopping malls. Land of the free, right?

- US citizens cannot make reforms or remodelings to their homes without onerous and usually denied applications to their respective home owners associations. Basically, US citizens cannot do as they please with their own property. Even a satellite dish can be denied. Land of the free II.

- US citizens do not have full rights over their OWN minor children under 18. Minors can do many things that under common sense would suggest or require parental supervision or consent, without their parents knowing. Woe...

- The US government now protects companies that cheat their workers cents to the hour. Companies do not raise the paychecks of their employees just to save 10 or 20 cents. Pathetic. The US government also has been giving tax breaks to oil companies, while denying tax breaks for poor Americans in the winter. Quite progressive huh?

- The US government now is beginning to restrict the use of holiday displays and other seasonal decorations so as to not offend a tiny group of people. So that a tiny group of people can restrict the freedom of speech of a large majority. Very democratic.

- The US government denies Americans from travelling to certain places. Doe government have any right to tell people where they can or can't go?

These are not my inventions, friends have told me these things because it has happened to them. They have been Americans for generations, in fact, totally disgusted with their government. All that is definately not Bush's fault, it is his fault and Clinton's, Reagan's, Carter's, etc.

I have been meaning to say this for a couple of weeks now, so sorry for my indulgence but I'm just amazed how naive Americans are beginning to sound. They all tell the world how their country is so free, better than the rest, but it seems to me more and more they are sticking their heads in the sand in denial. Instead of worrying about Europe's own problems (they have many many), or the Middle East lack of freedom and backwardness, they should start looking at their own backyard and realize they are not nearly as free as they think they are.



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlineFlyAUA From Austria, joined May 2005, 4604 posts, RR: 56
Reply 19, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3647 times:

Quoting QR332 (Thread starter):

Well they show what's really happening in the Middle East so I'm not surprised. Bush want's people to believe the bullshit he's spoonfeeding them with, and any station showing and reporting the reality is seen as an obstacle. Isn't that what Bush always does... Get rid of those who are bugging him?  sarcastic 



Not drinking, also isn't a solution!
User currently offlineQR332 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3641 times:

Quoting AGM114L (Reply 8):
Consider the sources. The Mirror, a Brit tabloid, Aljazeera; English version, cause they're completely unbiased about this.

Consider this: the judge passed a gag order, which means that a memo does exist; no libel suit was filed, yet they were forced to be quiet with the threat of the Official Secrets Act. Also, there are several government employees involved,

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 9):
It is, period. Even if not run directly by them they're extremely friendly towards them and are a semi-official channel for their propaganda.
They're not called the Osama News Network for nothing.

How? They give an Arab perspective, and they report things fully without leaving out unimportant bits that are left out in the states such as "50 dead Iraqis". They are a 100% official channel with two sports channels, a documentaries channel, a kids' channel and a soon to be international channel.

Plus, your forgetting something very important - this would be an attack on an allies lands, and even if they did give pro-Osama opinions and were all dressed in turbans, they still have the right to free speech, something all democratic countries endorse. That is not to mention the innocent civilians who would die because Bush wants the world to see what he wants them to see.

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 9):
That would be because it's baseless allegations.
I'm also surprised noone here posted it before though, but only because of the largescale anti-US, anti-Bush, pro-terrorist attitude of a large subgroup of posters here

Such as..? Are you giving allegations of people being pro-terrorist while you are endorsing the bombing of a country's ally? An attack which would hurt many innocents?

Quoting Joness0154 (Reply 16):
Does that include murdering hundreds of thousands of civilian in firebombing raids of Dresden, etc?

This is not about Dresden or Churchill, so don't change the subject. Don't bring up irrelevant issues and concentrate on the issue at hand.


User currently offlineME AVN FAN From Switzerland, joined May 2002, 13920 posts, RR: 25
Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3608 times:

Quoting AGM114L (Reply 8):
The Mirror, a Brit tabloid, Aljazeera; English version, cause they're completely unbiased about this.

the DailyMirror is what is called a boulevard-journal, but their reputation is good, which means that they are NOT lying or distorting things, so that their reliability is good. english.aljazeera.net is a reliable organisation

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 9):
a terrorist TV station, which it isn't.

It is, period. Even if not run directly by them they're extremely friendly towards them and are a semi-official channel for their propaganda.
They're not called the Osama News Network for nothing.

# it is NOT a terrorist station
# your "period" is NOT appropriate, as it indicates that you do NOT accept
your perception of things being discussed or taken into doubt
# they are NOT called "the Osama News Network" ! if some people do,
it is their business
# they are NOT a "channel" for elQaeda propaganda (libel of your part ! )
# they are NOT friendly towards terrorists
-


User currently offlineJoness0154 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 667 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3591 times:

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 21):
they are NOT a "channel" for elQaeda propaganda (libel of your part ! )

You have got to be kidding, right?

Who broadcasts all the beheadings of soldiers and kidnapped civilians. It sure as hell isnt CNN

Who broadcasts all the Osama videos? Again, it sure as hell isn't BBC

Now I wonder, have you ever seen an al jazeera broadcast?



I don't have an attitude problem. You have a perception problem
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3580 times:

Quoting QR332 (Thread starter):
I would love to hear the comments of Bush supporters now...

How about the comments of someone who can't stand Bush, QR, like myself:

I think it's a load of garbage, and I don't buy it at all.

Enough said.

Quoting Derico (Reply 18):
- The US government can switch people from one service to another (insurance, etc), at will and not notify it's citizens of the change or if they have just been switched with a 400% increase in premiums.

Uh, Sherlock, most people are insured through priavate companies for health insurance, car insurance, life insurance, home insurance, if that's what your're tallking about, and the government does not switch people. You don't have a clue to what you're talking about.

Quoting Derico (Reply 18):
- The US government now can seize it's citizens property in order to give it to a wealthier individual (more tax revenue).

Wrong. Stop making a fool of yourself. The USSC did recently agree that cities do have a right to Emminent Domanin for COMMERCIAL ventures, i.e., that they can sieze property to promote economic expansion. But it cannot be used for a rich person to take the property of a poor person on an individual and personal basis.

Quoting Derico (Reply 18):
- US citizens cannot make reforms or remodelings to their homes without onerous and usually denied applications to their respective home owners associations.

Wrong again, Derico. When expanding your property, you must follow certain guidelines set up by COMMUNITIES, not the U.S. government. For instance, I cannot expand out on the sides of my property any further than it is now, because CITY ORDINANCE requires a 10-foot buffer between building and where any possible underground cables may be place. Those are CITY ORDINANCES, not ordinances put up by Uncle Sam.

You're really on a roll, dude.  sarcastic 

Quoting Derico (Reply 18):
Basically, US citizens cannot do as they please with their own property.

As long as it follows ordinances, mostly put out for safety reasons, I can do what I want with my property. I'm paying for it. In fact, in a year or two, we're putting an addition on the back of our house-a "four-season" room, as it's called. I won't have any problems with that expansion, because it falls within CITY ordinances.

Quoting Derico (Reply 18):
- US citizens do not have full rights over their OWN minor children under 18

ROTFL. Where the hell do you get that one? The opposite is true, actully, Derico! Until a child is 18, I am their guardian, and what I say pretty much goes. At 18, they're considered an adult and my ability to guide them and tell them what they may/may not do, especially if they go away to college, changes, as they're no longer considered minors.

This is incredible stuff, Derico. Keep going..........

Quoting Derico (Reply 18):
- The US government now protects companies that cheat their workers cents to the hour.

The U.S. government does not control wages of private companies, my friend. That's all that needs to be said.

Quoting Derico (Reply 18):
- The US government now is beginning to restrict the use of holiday displays and other seasonal decorations so as to not offend a tiny group of people.

Those decisions are not handed down by U.S. government courts, Derico. They're handed down by city, county or state courts, which are NOT United States Government jurisdictions. And I don't like the fact that Nativity scenes are being banned, but they're not being banned by the U.S. Government, Derico.

Quoting Derico (Reply 18):
- The US government denies Americans from travelling to certain places. Doe government have any right to tell people where they can or can't go?

If you're talking about Cuba, I agree the travel ban should be lifted. But I can travel damn well where I please. Is it fair that other goverments demand that I get visa's and the like? Do those governments have the right to do that?

Unfortunately, Derico, you've made a complete fool of yourself, because you fail to understand that there are multiple layers of goverment: local, country, state, and federal. They all have their jurisdictions, and they all make decisions independent of each other. Most things you mentioned the United States government has absolutely no input, and are mostly local, county and state rulings. They can be appealed up the chain to a Federal court, but the implimentation is on a more local level.

I cannot help it if you do not understand the fact that we have multiple jurisdictions in our goverment-that my city government can make it's own ordinances on their own; that the state of Ohio can do the same.

But it was entertaining. I suggest you bone up on the multiple forms of goverment in the United States before making such naive statement next time.


User currently offlineME AVN FAN From Switzerland, joined May 2002, 13920 posts, RR: 25
Reply 24, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3554 times:

Quoting Joness0154 (Reply 22):
(A) You have got to be kidding, right?

(B) Who broadcasts all the beheadings of soldiers and kidnapped civilians. It sure as hell isnt CNN

(C) Who broadcasts all the Osama videos? Again, it sure as hell isn't BBC

(D) Now I wonder, have you ever seen an al jazeera broadcast?

A) no, why  no 
B) rebels and terrorists prefer a local station with a wide audience and NOT
a channel they perceive as being in the service of Mr Bush
C) the Osama videos were to THEM as they were more likely to broadcast
those videos than the USA/UK world channels
D) yes of course


25 Falcon84 : Al Jazeera is nothing but a mouthpiece for terrorist. Why do you think OBL always had someone run to them with his latest audio/video tape? Because he
26 Post contains images EA CO AS : Wrong. The U.S. government doesn't control private insurance. No one is required to live in areas governed by homeowners associations. Those who choo
27 Post contains images Halls120 : Hmmm. Calling for their execution, are you? What does the above have to do with the baseless unsupported allegation that Bush wants to bomb a TV netw
28 BigOrange : Don't forget it was the Nazi's who invaded Europe and were on their way to England but were stopped by the courageous British troops. The bombing of
29 ANCFlyer : Wow. . . This thread went from bizarre with the initial allegation stright to assinine with all the crap in Reply 18 . . . I'm done here now.
30 Arsenal@LHR : Putting words into my mouth, typical of a.net and it's members. Not much, but one of your countrymen bought it up in the discussion after he read my
31 Post contains images ME AVN FAN : NO, el-Jazeera is NOT a "mouthpiece for terrorists", not at all. But of course, to "tweak the USA" is a pleasure for many people, not only terrorists
32 EA CO AS : Is he? Honestly? I maean, what were we meant to assume by your "the world will not witness complete peace unless creeps like Bush and Blair are elimi
33 Scorpio : I repeat: then please explain the gagging order, the fact that people were charged for leaking what according to you doesn't exist, and why the UK go
34 Solarix : What about Osama and Zarqawi? Terrorists are the real problem with the middle east. It amazes me people like yourself fail to see it. Even more worry
35 Falcon84 : Btw, Solarix, I don't know how it happened, but Aresenal said that load of garbage, not Halls. I'm no fan of Bush or Blair, but I think getting rid of
36 Solarix : Falcon, thanks for the heads up and sorry Halls. Don't know how that happened but I fixed the error. Well said.
37 Toulouse : You're wrong, while I'm not a fan of parts of the British press, The Daily Mail, while published in tabloid form, is quite a respectable newspaper. A
38 Falcon84 : Nice post, when he was dead wrong on everything he put in there about the U.S. goverment? What's nice about showing yourself not to know what the hel
39 Toulouse : This was the post I wanted to state as being good, IMO, but accidentally selected previous post! Silly me! On this I apologise Falcon84, I misquoted
40 L-188 : I agree with you on that. One just has to look at the McNeil-Laher News Hour on PBS to see and example of that. Actually, the Soviets deserve most of
41 ME AVN FAN : to be honest I do NOT know more than anybody else, so it of course is pure guess. When having the choice between trusting your most honourable presid
42 Post contains images QR332 : Amazing... instead of concentrating on the issue people chose to derail the thread... as soon as Falcon posted his post about Derico everybody hooped
43 Halls120 : I'm not defending Bush as much as calling the allegation for what it is - a load of unsubstantiated garbage. I'm very curious as well. What did he me
44 Scorpio : So you've been telling us. Still I find it quite funny, and quite telling, that none of you have even attempted to explain what me and others have al
45 ME AVN FAN : worse even, what is shocking is how much they desire to defend the denial of anything to be true as I myself only understand PARTS of what people say
46 Wingman : You guys crack me up. If you had any idea what topics are discussed at governmental levels during time of war or even peace you'd be appalled. So beca
47 Post contains images ANCFlyer : And in other news an elephant farted at the Anchorage Zoo this morning knocking over a stray polar bear sneaking up for the kill . . . .
48 Post contains images EA CO AS : That's correct. Something that graphic and offensive would not be aired. They'd report that it occurred, but they'd never play it for the public. All
49 Post contains images Falcon84 : Derico opened his keyboard up, dude, not me. He wants to show himself as naive, then I'm going to correct him and his errors. Not my fault, man. Why
50 MDorBust : BREAKING NEWS: As reported by our very own ANCFlyer, captive elephants have been found to be contributing to dangerous levels of Ozone depletion by me
51 BHMBAGLOCK : The US government certainly does not control CNN. Are you saying that the US gov liked the idea of CNN cozying up with Saddam in return for access? H
52 Aleksandar : Forgive me for being ignorant, but are we talking about "plans" to bomb Al Jazeera in Doha or the bombing of their office in Baghdad? During the last
53 Scorpio : Aah, the typical reponse: no arguments, so you deflect from the subject and start calling people names. FWIW, you will never see me defend what Leopo
54 Post contains images MDorBust : And here I thought the $15bil donation was going to be unique. Glad to see Belgium has matched it.
55 UAcosCS : Out of the first 9 post on this thread, he is the only person without his head in his ass. Very well put.
56 Post contains images Solarix : Uhhh, how about 2 weeks ago in Amman? They invaded the country of Jordan and blew up some wedding. You're a funny guy! Bush will be gone in 3 years (
57 EA CO AS : Speaking of which... Change the words "leaking the government memo" to "leaking a government memo" and it would be accurate. Because there is no way
58 Arsenal@LHR : It is a rhetorical statement (what English do they teach in the US?), the world will be a safer and more stable place if the likes of Bush and Blair
59 Scorpio : A few points, in response: a) look up 'comparatively' in the dictionary nearest to you; b) Belgium, on average, spends up to 4 times as much (as perc
60 L-188 : Wasn't quite where I was going. I just had a picture of a group of goverment officials around a table in a room that looks like a Ken Adams set discu
61 MDorBust : Not even going to bother going there since a comparission requires standards to be evaluated. Since one of your standards is "more for Africa than yo
62 TPAnx : IIRC, the bureaus of AJ in Kabul and Baghdad were both hit by US aircraft.. "accidents", was the explanation.. TPAnx
63 Scorpio : My God, are you for real? Are you ACTUALLY comparing the amount of money given by a country of 290 million people to the actual amount of money given
64 Solarix : That crack cocaine probably enhances the experience too. Then why do they come running to the US for help when shit hits the fan? I guess you have to
65 Post contains images MDorBust : Wait... So now that I've called you on your claim that Belgium gives more than the US could ever imagine... now I'm being a bad guy for pointing out
66 Solarix : I agree. It is pathetic. The US needs to stop foreign aid since it's not good enough. We're doing a piss poor job at helping those in need. American
67 Post contains images Jalto27R : Because whether or not it was fake, they claimed it to be real, and are government employees, abiding under that law. Simple as that. Where the hell
68 Post contains links QR332 : It's a lot more suspicious than a libel allegation for one. And the same can be said for you; as another person in this thread has said, the Daily Mi
69 Post contains images MDorBust : Yeah, because before Bush... no one in the middle east ever called the US "The Great Satan", or took our citizens hostage. They never hijacked our pl
70 Post contains images Arsenal@LHR : Facts? Just perceptions?, i guess the millions around the world are still shrugging their shoulders at those phantom WMD's. I guess the FBI, CIA, MI6
71 EA CO AS : So let me get this straight - while you don't have conclusive evidence, you believe it goes further than those who say there's nothing to it, right?
72 Scorpio : Aah, the good old desease of 'selective reading' comes into play again, I see. Where did I claim Belgium gave more money, in absolute terms, than the
73 Scorpio : Um.. apples and dumptrucks this time. Several years of finding absolutely no WMDs speaks slightly louder than whatever intel the US had. FACTS got in
74 EA CO AS : No, there is NO difference whatsoever - the concept you've put forth is EXACTLY the same. You say that even lacking conclusive evidence, if you have
75 Solarix : You stereotype all the time. So why can't I?
76 Post contains images Clipperhawaii : This thread and the article are a waste of time. There is nothing of substance to comment on other than people are and can be very desperate in showin
77 EZEIZA : Regardless of the truth behind the allegations against Bush, to the ones that claim that Al-jazeera is pro-terrorist, do you have any proof? (honest q
78 Post contains images UAcosCS : That one was the first of nine responses that made sense. The first 8 had their heads up high.
79 Blackbird1331 : Well, he did want to go into Iran, and he was eager to take on North Korea. Hey, he likes the bomb. he just does not know when to stop. How many of ou
80 Solarix : I don't necessarily think they are pro-terrorist; they just aren't pro-American either. They report news with a Middle Eastern perspective. The stati
81 UAcosCS : As many as it takes! A good day in Vietnam was what we've lost so far. This isnt a Vietnam, We will win this one.
82 EZEIZA : Solarix, not only what I highlighted, but everything in your post is IMHO 100% correct!
83 Post contains images BA : And the Islamists like Zarqawi and the rest of Al-Qaeda say it is too pro-American and the mouthpiece of the Americans. It's like a comic opera. Many
84 Soyuzavia : Please people. This is a load of shite. The US would never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever deliberately target and bomb a news network which is demonstr
85 Jalto27R : Have you been to Iraq, and checked every known location a WMD could be found? No, and neither has anyone who intends to do so. Perception, it's all a
86 Post contains images BA : Excellent point. Speaking of BBC, Al Jazeera was mostly founded by former BBC World Service employees. BBC World Service shut down its Arabic TV news
87 Post contains images Halls120 : So why didn't you say the above in the first place, which leaves no doubt as to your intent and meaning? No, we're calling it BS because up to now, i
88 Post contains links UAL777 : All you guys talking about Al Jazeera being neutral are full of bulls$it! go to www.english.aljazeera.com and look at the article on Fallujah. They ar
89 MDorBust : That would be when you said that your nation did more for Africa then we could ever dream of. As for "comparatively". Please show me a definition tha
90 DL021 : Oh, for God's sake....are we still talking about this crap? Who the hell actually thinks that this report is based in any fact......that we would bomb
91 Aleksandar : Hmm, it seems that you said something about my home town and what happened there. Yes, unfortunately, Chinese embassy and HQ of National TV were bomb
92 Post contains links BA : That's the wrong Al Jazeera my friend. That's Al Jazeera Publishing which is nothing more than a general online publication. This is the Al Jazeera T
93 Post contains images Falcon84 : Thick? WTF? You make me sound like a McDonald's milkshake, man.
94 Post contains images DL021 : What flavor would you be?
95 Falcon84 : Chocolate, dude! Chocolate!
96 Post contains links Alberchico : http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/11/23/britain.jazeera/index.html If this memo is supposedly fake and this whole story bogus, then why did the gov
97 Aleksandar : Since you both can understand Arabic unlike me, could you tell me how much does AJ website differs from TV channel? I suppose it is the very same mat
98 Alberchico : So why would the British goverment get so uppity? Perhaps they were planning to make it look like an accident, like the ''accidental'' bombing" of th
99 BA : The news is first announced on TV, then an article about the news is posted on the websites. There is a slight delay, but usually they update the web
100 We're Nuts : Eh-hem, I believe my post was dead on, if you'll care to double-check.
101 Aleksandar : Chinese Embassy was in Belgrade and it was easier to bomb it "accidentally" because Belgrade was bombed every night (and during the day, too). Bombin
102 UAcosCS : Ok, what does it mean?
103 Scorpio : Yes, as in: taking the difference in size into account. Why the hell else woul I have used the term 'coparatively' in the first place, if I meant 'in
104 ME AVN FAN : no reason to get emotional and "cracked up" ! as you mention YOURSELF it was just a "consideration". The point however is that it was a most peculiar
105 We're Nuts : You don't know what a fire extinguisher is for?
106 Arsenal@LHR : No, the question is have YOU? It was you and his supporters who were making the false allegations so it is up to you to prove with facts. When you ac
107 Halls120 : And you apparently believe in a wild, unsubstantiated allegation about an attack on a TV facility. How gullible does that make you?
108 ME AVN FAN : Nobody wants to have a war for that reason. THAT is the difference. To have weird and mad ideas is NOT a criminal offence anyway.
109 MDorBust : Twice actually, but nice try anyways. We had better give?.... simply disgusting. Sure..... In the real world. The US IS the single largest monetary a
110 Arsenal@LHR : That's funny, i never said i believed these allegations, this is how i started my sentence, and then i went on and gave my opinion on two disgraceful
111 ME AVN FAN : only by 15 ? Switzerland has 7 mio. people, that multiplied by 15 means 105, but the USA has at least 286 mio. So that Swiss by average per capita pa
112 Post contains images UAcosCS : I do apologize, I wasn't with it. The first 7 had their heads up their rears not you. So I am a
113 Post contains images Scorpio : MDorBust, You just don't get it, I see. And i'm not going to keep repeating myself. But just for shits and giggles, let's look at your exclamations of
114 EA CO AS : Incorrect, and you know it. Stop kidding yourself. Nice attempt at changing the point. Fact of the matter is that you're a hypocrite. Your "arguments
115 EA CO AS : THANK YOU! Apparenly we can add Arsenal@LHR to the list of hypocrites. You have no problem believing stories that reinforce beliefs you already hold,
116 Post contains images Halls120 : You mean it isn't a criminal offense to have deviant ideas - for now. Given that we have started down the road of criminalizing thought by making hat
117 Scorpio : Changing what point? That you're comparing two things that can not be compared? Let's compare the two in detail, shall we? -The WMD case: Intel indic
118 EA CO AS : The flaw in your logic is that you're applying the knowledge we NOW possess as if it were a given BEFORE we went into Iraq. Disregard that, and act a
119 Scorpio : That's exactly what I did when comparing the arguments of 'believers' vs 'non-believers'. I quote: Those 'years of inspections' were BEFORE the war.
120 EA CO AS : Good grief, man! Just admit you have your biases already - you're more inclined to believe something that reinforces your bias than something that goe
121 Wingman : The problem Scorpio is that even European Intel Agencies were convinced Saddam had WMD leading up to this present war, virtually all Western governmen
122 ME AVN FAN : your leadership knew precisely well that the material delivered to the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission of Tuwaitha-Baghdad included scientific materia
123 Post contains links BA : Journalists throughout the Arab world have been staging demonstrations demanding that an international probe is launched. Ahmed el-Sheik, the station'
124 Scorpio : Wingman, Look up 'paragraph' in a dictionary. I refuse to read a chunk of text like that. Can't be bothered. Want me to read it? Make it readable. Thi
125 EA CO AS : And my point was that the U.S. had far more to back up their WMD argument than you have to back up your Al Jazeera memo argument. However, you place
126 Scorpio : Biased against the US? No. Against the Bush administration? Guilty. Who wouldn't be? And I don't believe 'anything that makes them look bad'. I am on
127 Arsenal@LHR : Nice one, here's a guy that comes from a country that cherry picks who can have WMD's and who needs liberating, who supports the double standards his
128 Halls120 : I'm still wondering if it is your common practice to post allegations that you don't support or believe in.
129 Arsenal@LHR : Get your facts straight. A) I didn't start this thread B) I didn't "post any allegations" C) I didn't say i believed Bush wanted to bomb Al-Jazeera,
130 Post contains links and images EA CO AS : Ok. Read on. Why? Because you may change your tune later? Nope, sorry. This is about your initial position and the evidence (or lack thereof) support
131 EA CO AS : I don't have a problem admitting to a double-standard on who can have WMDs. France and nations like her can keep 'em - they're responsible with them
132 Arsenal@LHR : So you actually admit to the double standards, but think it is OK? Wow, i have to admire your honesty. In that case, is it any wonder that anti-Ameri
133 Post contains images Scorpio : My God, you actually spent all that time looking through the archives to prove a point? That's pretty sad. Anyway, on to the fun: And what would my 'i
134 Post contains images Halls120 : True. But in post 4, you said "I wouldn't be surprised if it was true." See above. When the story alleges that Bush wanted to bomb Al-Jazerra, and yo
135 EA CO AS : Aren't there some rare instances where double-standards ARE acceptable, though? For example, would you cry foul because adults can carry firearms but
136 Scorpio : It is if you claim you DO have that proof. Like what a certain somebody did a few years ago. Once again, with feeling: Bush did NOT say he THOUGHT Sa
137 Halls120 : it isn't, which explains why it is so easy for people like you to twist reality. Look - most rational evidence before we invaded Iraq suggested that
138 Arsenal@LHR : Saying "I wouldn't be surprised if it was true" does not mean i believe these allegations are true, read the statement carefully, i said "IF" it was
139 Post contains links Scorpio : Only have a minute, will look for more tomorrow, but this one's from the very first link I stumbled across: "It possesses and produces chemical and b
140 Halls120 : Splitting those hairs quite closely, I'd say. Be honest. I'll bet deep down, you wish the allegations were true - right? How am I "defending Bush at
141 EZEIZA : Just to add, the administration showed pictures and all sorts of stuff to back up what they were saying: That Iraq had WMD's. So the pictures were ob
142 Gilligan : Considering that WWII was started by the Nazi's I'd venture to say that their false info, lies, propoganda, half-truths, and myths were the base for
143 Arsenal@LHR : Deep down you're probably hoping it is all false, so the battered reputation of your enlightened President isn't tarnished further. Works both ways d
144 Post contains images Halls120 : Didn't answer the question again, I see. Still too difficult? On the other hand, I will answer your question. I don't think we ever thought about bom
145 Gilligan : Along with virtually every other industrilized nation on the face of the earth save France. Check the UN records my friend. Everyone everywhere thoug
146 Post contains images Arsenal@LHR : Name us the "every other industrialised nation" who supported you and tell us what the said. You also said 2000 dead American soldiers is a "small pr
147 Scorpio : Twisted reasoning you use... The scenario in which Bush did not lie was if he was 100% sure that ALL his intel was 100% correct 100% of the time. Tha
148 Post contains images JBirdAV8r : Does anyone else find the irony in this? followed immediately by:
149 Halls120 : Call my reasoning twisted if you like, but I'm not aware of having to be 100% sure that everything I say is factually correct 100% of the time, else
150 Scorpio : My God man, are you this dense to not see the fundamental problem in HOW Bush said what he said? Time to take off the blinkers. Not that it'll do even
151 Halls120 : Wow. Resorting to name calling always seems to raise the intellectual discourse, doesn't it? Where do you get this definition? My dictionary says the
152 Scorpio : I asked you a question. I didn't call you a name. You should learn the difference. If you can't bear being asked such a question, maybe you should gr
153 Halls120 : Calling me dense isn't engaging in name calling? What, then, is it? See your post below if you've forgotten what you posted. I know what Bush said -
154 Scorpio : Where did I call you dense? I ASKED you if you were dense. BTW, you haven't answered yet. Are you? Good to see you're no longer in school, as you'd f
155 Gilligan : Support for the invasion and occupation of Iraq included 49 nations, a group that was frequently referred to as the "coalition of the willing". These
156 Post contains images Halls120 : Asking me if I was dense is just a thinly veiled way of attacking me without doing so directly. However, since you asked, for trying to engage in a c
157 Post contains images FRAspotter :
158 Post contains images FRAspotter : IT'S A TABLOID FOR GOD'S SAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
159 Post contains images FRAspotter : Why are you getting so defensive?....
160 Post contains images FRAspotter :        
161 Post contains images FRAspotter : Oh my God, you guys are PATHETIC... the Daily Mirror as with any tabloid will twist the facts and put it in a way so that it will sell magazines... j
162 Post contains images N229NW : I hope you meant the Daily Mirror, not the Daily Mail!! The Mail is only "respectable" to OAPs who believe that the leak in their faucet is caused by
163 Scorpio : Ah, great, now you can read people's minds too, I see... If you can't handle the truth, grow a pair. It's not, as I've said about 15 times now. It on
164 Post contains images Clipperhawaii : It's really funny to see all of you tear each other to shreds over absolutely nothing. Fact is that no bombing occurred or ever was planed. Sorry to b
165 Post contains images EZEIZA : It is also a fact that there were no WMD's in Iraq yet some are constantly trying to justify that and defend the W administration
166 ME AVN FAN : "tabloids" or "boulevard-papers" sometimes DO blow up things, BUT are in general NOT lying, because they know that if they are "caught" to have been
167 Post contains images Halls120 : If you are now saying that in order not to be regarded as lying that Bush only needs to be 100% sure that everything he says is factual, that is one
168 Post contains images Scorpio : Where did I say or suggest that? Seriously, I have no idea anymore what it is you THINK I said, but it's obvious you STILL have not understood what I
169 Post contains images Usnseallt82 : Please.... Let this thread die.....
170 Post contains images Halls120 : The "first words" are not my words, they are YOUR words - from your post 163, copied in my post 167 - "It only says (and re-read it PLEASE) that one
171 Post contains images Scorpio : My God man, this is now getting to the point where it's becoming surreal. That's what I said indeed. Problem is, in your previous post, you reworded i
172 Post contains images We're Nuts : If our local White House press secretary says so, it must be true.
173 Halls120 : Only for you, perhaps No. What I did - and have continued to do - is point out the discrepancy in YOUR own words. I've stated my position on whether
174 ME AVN FAN : Not 100% sure ? but sure enough to launch a war ! amazing, the most powerful man on earth is, at least up to you, not sure about matters, but ready t
175 Post contains links Mrmeangenes : Here's another point of view-from a respected Middle Eastern newspaper editor: http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=2&id=2823 Surpris
176 Scorpio : There IS none. None of the things I've said contradict each other in any way. Apparently you're the only one who sees those contradictions. He said I
177 ME AVN FAN : Not really surprising but most interesting. However, whenever his paper is alright as such, it is under the orders of the Saudi dynasty. Also journal
178 Halls120 : So - Bush was supposed to go out and gather the evidence personally? I understand that you and many others believed Bush lied. I'll bet that if I cou
179 DL021 : Forgive me for being blunt, but I am no longer as amazed when a German tries to explain to me that he is not insulting me while he is insulting me...
180 EZEIZA : So what? He started a war based on lies. Bad enough.
181 Post contains images Halls120 : So - you are concerned that he started a war based on lies in general - not that Bush himself lied. Doesn't that mean YOU lied when you posted allega
182 Post contains images Scorpio : Yeah sure Either that or he was supposed to take into account the POSSIBILITY that the info was not 100% correct when he made his speech. Yeah that's
183 Post contains images EZEIZA : huh? you lost me there .... I think you are lying by saying I am lying about Bush lying
184 Halls120 : Well, you are the one who said Bush wasn't allowed to take reports at face value.... IOW, don't confuse me with the facts, I've already made up my mi
185 DL021 : Actually I never commented on that quote before. Are you criticizing me for something you imagine? Yes I can....I simply assumed that you were German
186 Post contains images Scorpio : Funny how you just skipped the actual answer, and chose to go for the (quite obviously, I thought) sarcastic one... The expected answer, and yet more
187 FRAspotter : Iraq's a big country they could have buried them anywhere. What elso do you think that Saddam used on the Kurds in '91?
188 Post contains images FRAspotter : WOW... If a.net had a debate team, we would be UNSTOPPABLE!!!!!!
189 EZEIZA : Ok, find them and prove the rest of the world wrong. As for now, after years of US presence, they haven't been found. The ones he used in '91 are not
190 ME AVN FAN : well, one word for his defence. He would have had the justification, Mrs Thatcher 10 years before gave for removing Mr Saddam Hussein al-Takriti from
191 FRAspotter : Keyword: "were" Bush said that Iraq and Saddam "had" possesed WMD in the past and had used them on his own people.... That should be justification en
192 EZEIZA : Sorry but no. If I have time I'll get some quotes, but Bush, in order to get support stated back then that Saddam was in posession of WMD's and that
193 Scorpio : Nope. When preparing for the war, Bush said, and I quote: "It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons."
194 Post contains images Halls120 : When someone throws up an obvious opportunity like you did, it's hard to resist! Wow. I think our exchange has been very interesting - and obviously
195 Post contains images Scorpio : I never denied them that right, I was obviously referring to the objective right, i.e. if a majority believe there was a connection between Iraq and
196 Halls120 : Not the main reason. Bush had - and still has - a strong core of support in the republican party. But for those of us not in either party, the democr
197 Post contains images Scorpio : ...Which is what moved the balance of the votes towards Bush. So I guess, in general we can say he was re-elected not for who he was, but for who he
198 Post contains images EA CO AS : In a nutshell? Iraq's a big place, and they had plenty of time to move or hide everything. You're making his point for him - Iraq's a lot bigger, mea
199 Scorpio : EA CO AS, Why the 'I agree' with FRAspotter's post? It's already been established, by a direct quote from Bush himself, that no, there was no 'keyword
200 EZEIZA : Really? why did you then wait 15 years? Why did the US, coalition, allies, or however you want to call them not act when he had the weapons instead o
201 Stall : No army use chemical weapons but every army takes measures against them. Nothing unusual with Iraqi army having gas mask. That's only a guess. My gue
202 Post contains images Usnseallt82 : This thread is still going?
203 Halls120 : No army uses chemical weapons? Are you going to ignore the verified fact that Saddam's army used chemical weapons on their own population? Having the
204 Post contains images Stall : Yes but your administration claimed that Irak had WMD that could be engage in 45 minutes. If you dig everything in the desert I don't believe you can
205 EA CO AS : And I think both you and I know that the only way the man could speak with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY about the presence (or lack thereof) of WMDs would be t
206 RichardPrice : How about use of Agent Orange and other 'defoliants' that just happened to cause death and crippling neurological illnesses in humans that it came in
207 Post contains images Scorpio : Exactly. The only way Bush could have spoken with absolute certainty about the presence of those weapons would have been that. ...and yet that's exac
208 EZEIZA : I agree with Scorpio, very well said
209 EA CO AS : As certain as his intel could lead him, yes. But again, to have LIED means he would have only SAID he believed it while KNOWING WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAIN
210 Scorpio : He said he was 100% sure. He wasn't. He lied about being 100% sure. Simple as that. He lied. Seeing as how that's your only reaction, I'll take that
211 Stall : Can you provide link that the french, german and british were absoutely certain that these WMD existed I might be wrong but I think that the Soviet u
212 Post contains images EA CO AS : I never said they were "absolutely certain," since AGAIN, it would require absolute proof. I've said repeatedly that just about every reputable intel
213 Stall : Links please. I have never heard that the french, german or even the british intelligence agencies had evidence that Irak had WMD ready to be used in
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Lucia Newman To Head Al-Jazeera's New Bureau? posted Sun Mar 26 2006 05:41:58 by Derico
Are You Able To Raise Al Jazeera Online? posted Thu Mar 20 2003 03:57:45 by Shawn Patrick
Bush Missed Chance To Get Al-Zarqawi posted Fri May 19 2006 00:34:35 by Tbar220
Bush/Blair Wanted To Provoke War With Iraq posted Wed Mar 29 2006 00:58:41 by Falcon84
Dear Republicans: I Never Wanted To Hate Bush posted Thu Oct 7 2004 08:57:49 by Flyboy36y
Al-Jazeera TV To Launch English Channel In 2003 posted Sun Nov 3 2002 22:27:58 by Bigo747
Al Jazeera English Launches posted Wed Nov 15 2006 16:58:42 by GSM763
Al Jazeera Sets English Launch Date posted Fri Nov 3 2006 14:57:40 by Cedars747
Snapshot: Foley Hurting GOP, Bush Down To 36% posted Fri Oct 6 2006 19:46:57 by Falcon84
Bush Trying To Pardon Self For War Crimes..sick posted Fri Sep 29 2006 23:56:05 by Mdsh00