<< You know something Media, the far left isn't left enough for you, which is quite telling, and your comments about Mathews are BIZZARE >>


What is bizarre is how conditioned you are to think Israeli policies are OK. No wonder it was so hard to end slavery and establish equal rights, people like you JUST DON'T GET IT. (or are too intellectually lazy or to cowardly to even try)

I have seen Matthews question a political candidate for Palestinians and fuss about what will happen to the demographics of a Jewish State, will it maintain enough of a Jewish majority? (could you imagine today an interviewer fretting over if South Africa can remain "white enough"? It would be so racist and disgusting the interviewer would most likely lose his job.

The U.S. used to view South Africa differently, seeing Mandella as a terrorist. Not concerned about the oppression of the blacks. Today the same is true with the Palestinians. What is bizarre is not seeing this.

What is bizarre is that you admit what the motives were for 9/11 but you think it is OK to allow Bush to get away with deceiving the public about why they are in harm's way. This is your idea of a good citizen. Seems to me there are far to many with your mindset, so full of it with your "far liberal" talk and yet allow this country to wallow in corruption without lifting a finger to hell set the record straight and allow the public to why things are actually happening to them.
What kind of sick idea do you have in your head about what AMERICA should be? You think it is OK for a NATION to be made fools of about the most important event in their lifetime? To be made ignorant because powerful people prefer the public not to know and therefore possibly question foreign policies? WHY aren't you doing something?

<<>>

thank you. now we need to wake America up to the fact that the President and others lie about why we were attacked and that we don't owe these liears a damn thing. We need to be honest and admit that the real reason was hidden from the public. How noble and jus can these polices be if these leaders are unwilling to admit that these polices are the reason we were attacked. Clearly Bush and others don't admit that it is the policies that are the issue becasue they want to shield these polcies from public scrutiny. Bush and company are serving the interests of those that want these foriegn polcies to continue.

It looks like "Jihad in America" was put together with the intention of serving special interests. Emerson appears to have an agenda and a problem with being honest.
"When one can check the source that Emmerson cites. it does not always lend credence to his claims. When he appeared on WBAI's Radio Broadcasting (12/ 5/ 94), the host of the programme noted that, according to the Council on American Islamic Relations, a Muslim Community School in Maryland that was mentioned in "Jihad In America" had been vandalised shortly after the show was aired. Emmerson demanded, "Did you check with the Montgomery County Police Department to verify the report of vandalism ? because I did and in fact they never received a report."

But in a Feb., 18 letter to the New York Times, Emmerson made reference to the same vandalised attack. "Maryland police revealed that Islamic students at the Mosque were responsible." He claimed. He did not indicate how the police could close a case that had never been reported to them.

(Fairness And Acuracy IN Reporting) (FAIR) took Emmerson's advice and checked with the Montgomery County Police. "I don't have any information of anybody that did it." Sgt Frank Young the department's chief press liaison, told us. Officer Robin Xander, Who took the police report, said she suspected that the vandals were students, but said that they could have been from a number of schools.

After FAIR pointed to these discrepancies in a letter published in the New York Times (3/ 4/ 1995), Emmerson produced yet another version of the vandalism attack (New York Times, 3/ 11/ 1995) - again without indicating that any other version had existed."Maryland Police officers... told me students at the school were likely responsible," Emmerson now claimed. (emphasis added)

On One of the few of Emmerson's claims that could be independently checked, his position shifted continually as the facts emerged: from non - existent attack on a Muslim school, to an attack perpetuated by Muslim students, to an attack that may have been committed by Muslim students.

It's this sort of slippery use of evidence that makes people wary of Emmerson's report." http://www.islam.co.za/themessage/docs/S_emerson.html
http://www.freeworldalliance.com/newsflash/pre_2002/newsflash252.htm

As far as Baath party. the BBC did have an article on the web about it http://212.58.226.18/1/hi/world/from_our_own_correspondent/2694885.stm

I am looking into Atkins (stange that he would lie don't you think? What would he gain? He was even our Ambassador to Saudi Arabia. The logical conclusion is that Atkins is telling the truth. )
Also PBS's frontline writes this: 1963 American diplomats encourage Kurdish leaders to support the new Ba'ath government in Baghdad, following a U.S.-supported coup. (See interviews with Jalal Talabani and James Akins) The Ba'ath Party leadership issues a statement saying it "recognized the rights of the Kurdish people." (these is more to this than current U.S> leaders have let on)
www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saddam/kurds/cron.html+%22James+Akins%22+%22Baghdad%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Seems to me that Atkins is telling the truth. I will try to contact him. perhaps you will do the same?

<< I agree, I read and listened to all the sruff Bin Laden said, however there are Muslims like Bin Laden who've in many interviews have said they hated the U.S way of life for the reson I stated, and PBS did a special by Steve Emerson, called Jihad in Amerca >>

thank you. now we need to wake America up to the fact that the President and others lie about why we were attacked and that we don't owe these liears a damn thing. We need to be honest and admit that the real reason was hidden from the public. How noble and jus can these polices be if these leaders are unwilling to admit that these polices are the reason we were attacked. Clearly Bush and others don't admit that it is the policies that are the issue becasue they want to shield these polcies from public scrutiny. Bush and company are serving the interests of those that want these foriegn polcies to continue.

Exerpts from the REPORT OF THE JOINT INQUIRY INTO THE TERRORIST ATTACKS OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 – BY THE HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE AND THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE:
Bin Ladin drew on a broad network of Islamic radicals fighting in the Balkans, Chechnya, and Kashmir in an attempt – in their eyes – to defend Islam against its persecutors.Fighters from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, and many other countries took up arms to aid their co-religionists, while Muslims from around the world contributed money. Although the specific actions of al-Qa'ida often did not enjoy widespread support, the causes it championed were viewed as legitimate, indeed laudable, in much of the Muslim world. (p194)
On page 195 of the report it says, "According to DCI Tenet's testimony before the Joint Inquiry, "[o]nce Bin Ladin found his safehaven in Afghanistan, he defined himself publicly as a threat to the United States. In a series of declarations, he made clear his hatred for Americans and all we represent." The Tenet quote is refered to as "testimony before the Joint Inquiry", it appears to be the written statement: Statement of DCI George Tenet Before the Congressional Joint Inquiry on 9/11: October 17, 2002.
The quote carries over the deceptive quoting that Tenet used in his statement to the Joint Inquiry because it leaves out what bin Laden "made clear". By ommitting what it is that is behind the hatred, Tenet avoids informing the reader about the motives for bin Laden's terrorism. Here is the section of Tenet's statement from which the 9/11 report quotes highlighted below in blue:
Later in 1996, it became clear that he had moved to Afghanistan. From that safehaven, he defined himself publicly as a threat to the United States. In a series of declarations, he made clear his hatred for Americans and all we represent.
* In July 1996, Bin Ladin described the killing of Americans in the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia in June 1996 as the beginning of a war between Muslims and the United States.
* One month later, in August 1996, Bin Ladin issued a religious edict or fatwa entitled "Declaration of War," authorizing attacks against Western military targets on the Arabian Peninsula.
* In February 1998, six months prior to the US Embassy bombings in East Africa, al-Qa'ida-under the banner of the "World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders"-issued another fatwa stating that all Muslims have a religious duty "to kill Americans and their allies, both civilian and military" worldwide.
- (from Statement of DCI George Tenet Before the Congressional Joint Inquiry on 9/11: October 17, 2002. )
In this section of his statement, Tenet refers to the February 1998 fatwa. Tenet quotes from that fatwa, BUT HE LEAVES OUT THE WHY BY NOT QUOTING THIS FULL SENTENCE: "The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim."
Tenet wrote in his statement to the Joint Inquiry Committee, "In February 1998, six months prior to the US Embassy bombings in East Africa, al-Qa'ida-under the banner of the "World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders"-issued another fatwa stating that all Muslims have a religious duty "to kill Americans and their allies, both civilian and military" worldwide."
Tenet is refering to the above quoted sentence highlighted in green above. (It is clear Tenet is refering to this particular sentence since it is the only sentence in the fatwa that mentions "civilians and military".)
But when Tenet refers to the sentence he quotes only part of it and avoids writting the reason why bin Laden targets American civilians and military. Looking at the sentence we can see that Tenet has left off the section highlighted in red below (the part that explains "in order to ...", where it is explicietly stated WHY the "rulling to kill" is issued in the first place. Notice Tenet has focused only on the part highlighted here in gray: "The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim."

Below are quotes from bin LAen that make it clear what the motives for 9/11 were.

Question: What do you seek?
Osama bin Ladin: What I seek is what is right for any living being. We demand that our land be liberated from enemies. That our lands be liberated from the Americans. These living beings have been given an inner sense that rejects any intrusions [of their lands] by outsiders.
Let us take an example of poultry. Let us look at a chicken, for example. If an armed person was to enter a chicken's home with the aim of inflicting harm to it, the chicken would automatically fight back. - Interview Osama bin Ladin gave to Al-Jazeera Arab television channel in 1998 http://www.robert-fisk.com/usama_interview_aljazeera.htm
Question: What is the meaning of your call for Muslims to take arms against America in particular, and what is the message that you wish to send to the West in general?
Osama bin Ladin: The call to wage war against America was made because America has spear-headed the crusade against the Islamic nation, sending tens of thousands of its troops to the land of the two Holy Mosques over and above its meddling in its affairs and its politics, and its support of the oppressive, corrupt and tyrannical regime that is in control. These are the reasons behind the singling out of America as a target. And not exempt of responsibility are those Western regimes whose presence in the region offers support to the American troops there. We know at least one reason behind the symbolic participation of the Western forces and that is to support the Jewish and Zionist plans for expansion of what is called the Great Israel. Surely, their presence is not out of concern over their interests in the region. ... Their presence has no meaning save one and that is to offer support to the Jews in Palestine who are in need of their Christian brothers to achieve full control over the Arab Peninsula which they intend to make an important part of the so called Greater Israel. - Osama bin Laden answers questions posed to him by some of his followers at his mountaintop camp in southern Afghanistan. May 1998 http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/interview.html
John Miller: Mr. bin Laden, you have issued a fatwah calling on Muslims to kill Americans where they can, when they can. Is that directed at all Americans, just the American military, just the Americans in Saudi Arabia?
Osama bin Ladin: Allah has ordered us to glorify the truth and to defend Muslim land, especially the Arab peninsula ... against the unbelievers. After World War II, the Americans grew more unfair and more oppressive towards people in general and Muslims in particular. ... The Americans started it and retaliation and punishment should be carried out following the principle of reciprocity, especially when women and children are involved. Through history, American has not been known to differentiate between the military and the civilians or between men and women or adults and children. Those who threw atomic bombs and used the weapons of mass destruction against Nagasaki and Hiroshima were the Americans. Can the bombs differentiate between military and women and infants and children? America has no religion that can deter her from exterminating whole peoples. Your position against Muslims in Palestine is despicable and disgraceful. America has no shame. ... We believe that the worst thieves in the world today and the worst terrorists are the Americans. Nothing could stop you except perhaps retaliation in kind. We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian. As far as we are concerned, they are all targets, and this is what the fatwah says ... . The fatwah is general (comprehensive) and it includes all those who participate in, or help the Jewish occupiers in killing Muslims. - Part of the mountaintop camp interview in May 1998. ABC reporter John Miller is videotaped asking questions of bin Laden. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/interview.html#video



The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim.*This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah." -"Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders", World Islamic Front Statement, February 23, 1998 http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm

*NOTE: This the sentance from the 1998 fatwa that George Tenet, Director of the CIA, refers to in his written statement of October 17, 2002. BUT HE LEAVES OUT THE WHY BY NOT QUOTING THIS FULL SENTENCE: "The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim."
Tenet wrote in his statement to the Joint Inquiry Committee, "In February 1998, six months prior to the US Embassy bombings in East Africa, al-Qa'ida-under the banner of the "World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders"-issued another fatwa stating that all Muslims have a religious duty "to kill Americans and their allies, both civilian and military" worldwide."
Tenet is refering to the above quoted sentence highlighted in green above. (It is clear Tenet is refering to this particular sentence since it is the only sentence in the fatwa that mentions "civilians and military".)
But when Tenet refers to the sentence he quotes only part of it and avoids writting the reason why bin Laden targets American civilians and military. Looking at the sentence we can see that Tenet has left off the section highlighted in red below (the part that explains "in order to ...", where it is explicietly stated WHY the "rulling to kill" is issued in the first place. Notice Tenet has focused only on the part highlighted here in gray: "The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim."
�

<< don't beleive the U.S put the Baath party into power for common sense reasons
1. It didn't come out in the Church hearings, and a lot of strange stuff came out of the hearings >>
did the Church hearings mention the "Health Alteration Committee"?
your "common sence" reasons ignore the fact that the U.S. did not want Kassem in power.
Both Roger Morris and James Akins say the CIA was involved.

Roger Morris, a former State Department foreign service officer who was on the NSC staff during the Johnson and Nixon administrations, says the CIA had a hand in two coups in Iraq during the darkest days of the Cold War, including a 1968 putsch that set Saddam Hussein firmly on the path to power.

Morris says that in 1963, two years after the ill-fated U.S. attempt at overthrow in Cuba known as the Bay of Pigs, the CIA helped organize a bloody coup in Iraq that deposed the Soviet-leaning government of Gen. Abdel-Karim Kassem.

David Wise, a Washington-based author who has written extensively about Cold War espionage, says he is only aware of records showing that a CIA group known as the "Health Alteration Committee" tried to assassinate Kassem in 1960 by sending the Iraqi leader a poisoned monogrammed handkerchief.

"Clearly, they felt that Kassem was somebody who had to be eliminated," Wise says.

US diplomat James Akins served in the Baghdad Embassy at the time. Mr. Akins said, "I knew all the Ba'ath Party leaders and I liked them".

"The CIA were definitely involved in that coup. We saw the rise of the Ba'athists as a way of replacing a pro-Soviet government with a pro-American one and you don't get that chance very often.

<< So much for just ignoring the fact that you have called me a liar HOW many times about Bin Laden saying the bit about "our work targets world infidels in the first place". How....typical of you. >>

NO, Cookie. No. You quoted: "but first of all our war is against the world infidels" THAT was the "quote you wrote, not "our work targets world infidels in the first place" so don't even try to pull your usual crap. Do you know what a quote is?


<< WERE WRONG except for two. >>
you have yet to provide that "proof", I have read bin LAden reapeatedly listing things the U.S. did as reasons he targets the U.S.
bin Laden and THE FBI (so the FBI is wrong and you are right?) have made it clear.

"We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine. This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula, and until it stops its support of Israel." -bin Laden, Oct. 2001 Bin Laden doesn't say "until the U.S. is gone, or until the U.S. converts to Islam." what he says explicitaly is: until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula and until it stops its support of Israel.

You have got to be kidding me if this isn't clear to you.

bin Laden was asked specifically about how this can end:
Question: As you call it, this is a war between the crusaders and Muslims. How do you see the way out of this crisis?

BIN LADEN: We are in a decisive battle with the Jews and those who support them from the crusaders and the Zionists. We won't hesitate to kill the Israelis who occupied our land and kill our children and women day and night. And every person who will side with them should blame themselves only. Now how we will get out of the tunnel, that is the [unintelligible] of the other side. We were attacked, and our duty is to remove this attack. As far as the Jews are concerned, the prophet has announced that we will fight them under this name, on this land. America forced itself and its people in this [unintelligible] more than 53 years ago. It recognized Israel and supported its creation financially. In 1973, under Nixon, it supported Israel with men, weapons and ammunition from Washington all the way to Tel Aviv. This support helped change the course of history. It is the Muslim's duty to fight. ...

[America] made hilarious claims. They said that Osama's messages have codes in them to the terrorists. It's as if we were living in the time of mail by carrier pigeon, when there are no phones, no travelers, no Internet, no regular mail, no express mail, and no electronic mail. I mean, these are very humorous things. They discount people's intellects.

We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine. This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula, and until it stops its support of Israel. This equation can be understood by any American child, but Bush, because he's an Israeli agent, cannot understand this equation unless the swords threatened him above him head. http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/02/05/binladen.transcript/
you cookie apaprently "don't understand" this too.

He is attacking becasue of the action of U.S. foreign policy. When you screw people over you can't expect to dictate how they will respond. Ever here of two wrongs?

Here is what the shoe bomber (Richard Reid) has said:"The reason for me sending you (a document he calls his "will") is so you can see that I didn't do this act out of ignorance nor did I just do it because I want to die, but rather because I see it as a duty upon me to help remove the oppressive American forces from the Muslim land and that this is the only way for us to do so as we do not have other means to fight them."

"We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine. This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula, and until it stops its support of Israel." -bin Laden, Oct. 2001

does this say until the "US coverts to Wahabism or Islam"? NO. your theory means you must ignore the above quote from bin Laden.

and I have expalined to you why Bush doesn't tell the public the truth. the public might question the foreign policies. they might question if it is wroth putting our lives at risk for them.

<< >It is proven here: Bush lied about 9/11 terrorists' motives

You JUST do not GET IT! This is an OPINION piece. >>


Forget the article look at the facts. U.S. Intelligence agencies has stated the motives and bin Laden has made it clear why America was targeted.
BUSH LIED, he claimed we were targeted because we simply are what we are. This is BS and you have got to be kidding me if you don't understand this.
THE LIE BUSH TOLD KEEPS THE AMERICAN PUBLIC FROM QUESTIONING THE POLICIES THAT WERE THE MOTIVE FOR 9/11. THIS IS SICK. IT IS SICK TO ROB THE AMERICAN PUBLIC OF THE CHANCE TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES IF THEY WANT TO BE PUT IN HARMS WAY FOR THESE POLICES.
PEOPLE WHO ARE DUPED BY BUSH'S LIE THINK WE WERE ATTACKED BECAUSE "WE ARE A BEACON OF FREEDOM"
(THE SPECIAL INTERESTS THAT MAKE MILLIONS OFF OF THESE POLICES CAN BE HAPPY WITH BUSH THAT HE KEPT THE PUBLIC FROM UNDERSTANDING 9/11.
BELIEVE ME, HISTORY WILL MAKE SURE THAT BUSH IS SEEN AS ONE OF THE DIRTIES BASTARDS IN HISTORY.
HOW DARE YOU DEFEND A MAN LIKE BUSH WHO HAD THE AUDACITY TO LIE TO AMERICA ABOUT WHY WE WERE ATTACKED.

Bush doesn't have a clue about recent events concerning Saddam and Iraq! The Media fails to inform the public about Bush's extreme cluelessness

A Bush fan trys to explain it away by claiming the whole thing is just an opinion in an opinion piece, "Sorry, but an opinion piece by ..."

I am not talking about an opinion peice! What Bush said is totally off the wall>Does he have ANY idea what he is talking about? He is clueless about Iraq and the press kept that from most Americans. DEAL WITH IT.
Visit the whitehouse website for the quote President Reaffirms Strong Position on Liberia
See how I provided the link? it isn't an opinion, it is a fact.

While the world continues to parse President Bush's 16 little words in his State of the Union message on Iraq's alleged try to buy nuclear fuel in Africa, it seems to have ignored his latest contribution to, as he likes to say, "revisionist history."

In an exchange with reporters the other day after the White House visit of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the president offered this to explain why he invaded Iraq:

"The fundamental question is, did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power, along with other nations, so as to make sure he was not a threat to the United States and our friends and allies in the region."

What? Unless memory fails, Mr. Hussein did let the weapons inspectors in, and they had to be withdrawn for their own safety when Mr. Bush decided to bypass them and the U.N. Security Council and proceed with his invasion of Iraq.

Surprisingly, neither The New York Times nor many other newspapers paid any attention to this colossal misstatement. The Washington Post, in a Page One story focusing on the faulty intelligence controversy, did note that Mr. Bush had said he had given the Iraqi dictator "a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in."

But the Post story merely observed that "the president's assertion that the war began because Iraq did not admit inspectors appeared to contradict the events leading up to the war this spring: Hussein had, in fact, admitted the inspectors and Bush had opposed extending their work because he did not believe them effective."
"appeared to contradict the events leading up to the war"!! can this reporter bend over backwards any more! talk about downplaying!
At the regular White House press briefing the next day, the presidential press secretary, Scott McClellan, was asked why Mr. Bush had said what he did -- a patently false reconstruction of what had happened, in justification of going to war.

Mr. McClellan put this evasive spin on Mr. Bush's clear words: "Yes, I think he was referring to the fact that Saddam Hussein had a long history of deceiving inspectors. Saddam Hussein was not complying with [U.N.] Resolution 1441, and he was doing everything he could to thwart the inspectors and keep them from doing their job. So that's what he was referring to."

A reporter later asked Mr. McClellan whether he was "clarifying" what Mr. Bush had said "or conceding that he misspoke." Mr. McClellan repeated his answer. Well, a reporter said, "people misspeak all the time. It's possible that he did misspeak." McClellan replied: "It's what I've said. I've addressed this two or three times now." (this is another lie, McClellan had just started that day!!! we saw him BS an answer then when he was asked to clarify he said this crap!! these guys are liars and the press goes out of its way not to call attention to it.)
source:
http://www.sunspot.net/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.witcover.18jul18,0,7002303.column?coll=bal-home-columnists

<< What Bush said is true, however I'm sure he knows it's not the only reason. I've watched Muslim clerics interviewed, and ever the moderates say they don't likes Americas way of life, especially women having freedom and the right to vote, and we know this, becasue women don't have very many rights in most Islamic countries >>

No, Bush said, "America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world."

That is a lie. The FBI told the truth, American was targeted because bin Laden hates what American foreign policies do to him and the people in his region. The terrorists attacked in order to terrorize the public into forcing their government to change the policies. This has been explained by the FBI and stated by bin Laden.
Clearly the terrorists did not attack because of our freedoms, they went and got lap dances and drank alcohol.

information clearing house
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4110.htm
NOTICE the media once again sweeps a Bush whopper under the rug!

"The larger point is, and the fundamental question is, did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power," - President Bush.07/15/03

President Caught In Another Lie of total delusion.
Bush is not fit to be President. Republicans, don't open your mouths like pathetic robots and start making excuses for this clown. This guy has to go. And of cource MOST Americans don't know about this since the media has once agains swept another Bush lie under the rug. (BUSH LIED ABOUT WHY WE WERE TARGETED ON 9/11 also)
There is no way that Clinto would have been let off the hook for such a delusional statement. The media is not doing what you think it is doing. The SERVE POWER. wake up. we need a Representative Media NOW!
information clearing house

<< now the media is behind you about the Bush lie. >>
yet the media is still downplaying it. ALSO the media is still playing games. They didn't report this:
Bush is totally out of control (he stated that Saddam didn't let the inspectors in!)
People think the media reports all important news stories and that the only issue is how that news is presented. This isn't the case. Probably the most harm done by major media is in what they withhold from the public.
It is crazy that we can hear about the Israel astronaut's mission from 20 years ago but no one in mainstream media thought it important enough to make it clear to the public that the U.S.'s CIA helped put the Ba'ath party into power in the first place.

<< I'm not the one calling for the destruction of a nation which any clear minded person knows can only be accomplished through violence and the death of millions.
That's you, you sick piece of shit. >>


there is something EXTREMELY TWISTED about the Zionist mentality.

No other ideology lays it on so thick and so over the board nasty and offensive.

Any attempt to call for an end to their vile system and they use the most obnoxious and sick tactics anyone has ever resorted to.
There is something very unhealthy about the Zionist apologists here in America.
People that called for the end to South Africa's unjust system were not subjected to these kind of fanatical attacks.
People that called for the end to South Africa's unjust system did not get accused of "calling for the deaths of millions."
People that called for the end to South Africa's unjust system did not get attacked with slurs and underhanded insinuations.
People that called for the end to South Africa's unjust system didn't get constantly subjected to excuses and vile insinuations that every wrong across Africa must be mentioned otherwise one is "calling for MASS MURDER and GENOCIDE"
People that called for the end to South Africa's unjust system didn't get called "he sickest piece of garbage"
But of course your agenda insists that Israel and its supporters get treated differently.
Your agenda has bullied and threatened and used influence to make the mainstream media play your tune.
"It's not like when you talk about lobbying organizations for say immigrants or the disabled or the Saudi Government for that matter. History, sensitivity and politics make talk of Israel and its supporters different and alot more complicated. I'm John Donvan for Nightline in Washington." -broadcast 4/17/02 ABC's Nightline
so no one can dare call for justice if the violator of human rights is Israel? you guys are too much.

<< Seizing most of the land and pushing 300,000 people of their land
IS AN ATTACK. The Zionists were attacking and killing to grab the land and
ethnically cleanse (this was BEFORE MAY 1948) The Arab countries RESPONDED to
the Zionists land grab, your claim that Israel did not attack is false. >>

Bull!! I have read various articles both Arab and Israeli. The Violence started almost immediately after the partitioning plan was announced November 1947 yes before May 1948. When the partitioning plan was announce the Arab spokesman announced to the UN, Arabs would drench "the soil of our beloved country with the last drop of our blood. Fighting, rioting etc.. ensued. Are you saying Jamal Husseini, the Arab High Committee's spokesman and the so called protector of the Arabs was kidding when he made that statement??? >>

Stop playing games. Are you so brainwashed that you don't know the difference between right and wrong? Are you an American or not? Do you believe in justice and democracy?

33% of Palestine had no right to push for a plan to take most of the land for themselves and insist on a government based on their religion. (this violates the basics that America stands for)
Do you seriously not understand that? What is your agenda here? Democracy and justice doesn't matter if the 33% pushing for un-American values such as violating most (67%) of the peoples' rights happen to be Jews? Is this basically what you are saying? Do you know what American values are? Why do you make excuses for such undemocratic and unjust deeds?

And that percentage would not have even been that high if the British had not denied the population of Palestine the right of self determination. Why do you act as if any of these actions are fair or just?
Why do you quote someone and act like defending your land and human rights is a bad thing? Go look at you pro-Israeli sites and see if you can find them even mentioning the population stats and land ownership percentages. Look which side has things to hide (and they get away with it)

The Zionists used their influence in America to push through such a lopsided and unjust plan. Do you seriously not know this? Why do you act like such a plan is even close to fair? What is the deal with you and Israel? Why are you going out of your way to try to make horrible unjust actions sound reasonable?

By the way, your other comments are basically racists. The Palestinians are not responsible for other undemocratic Arab states, And you act as if the other Arab rulers acted in the interests of the Palestinians, but the didn't. So stop acting like the Palestinians were being helped by the Arabs states. Jordan and Egypt seized Palestinian lands. What happened in 1948 was Zionists and Arab states stole land from the Palestinians. Twisting it to something else is Zionist propaganda.

Retnav4986,
You claim that you know the facts yet you regurgitate Israeli propaganda. you must understand why what people think they know is important. you have so many errors that I will only look at some of them here.

<< justify continued violence such as the right of return. >>

First of all, the right of return is not "violence". Your comment is very extreme.
Second, the right of return is not a suggestion or proposal, it is a right under international law. And Israel was admitted into the UN on condition that it honor the Palestinian's right of return.
Israel was accepted into the United Nations on condition that it accept the Right of Return of the Palestinian refugees. Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations (General Assembly Resolution 273 of May 11, 1949 ) requires Israel to comply with General Assembly Resolution 194 of December 11, 1948 and Israel stated it agreed to comply with this resolution.

Third, the UN did not set the boundries of Israel. The UN proposal was never put int effect. that proposal suggested 56% of Palestine for the Jewish state. The Zionists DID NOT ACCEPT THE UN PROPOSAL. BEFOR MAY 1948, the Zionists seized land well beyond the 56% up to 77% percent stolen (keep in mind that Jews only owened 6% of the land and were only 33% of the population)
BEFORE May 1948 they had already ethnically cleansed 300,000 people to achieve their "demographic purity"

You have fallen for the ZIonists propaganda since you think the UN partition plan is what established Israel. As I have shown the plan was never put into effect. The Zionists then seized as much land as possible (even huge portions of land that had been suggested as the Palestinian state) and had ethnically cleansed 300,000 people (they would go on after May 1948 to ethnically cleanse another 350,000 people)

<< In 1948 before the partitioning plan was put into effect >>
as I have pointed out, the plan was never put into effect. (by the way key Zionists made it clear it was only a step in taking over all of Palestine)

<< t is a 2 state solution was viable. The Armies of Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria attacked Israel. Israel did not attack them. >>
WRONG. siezing most of the land and pushing 300,000 people of of their land IS AN ATTACK. The Zionists were attacking and killing to grab the land and ethnically cleanse (this was BEFORE MAY 1948) The Arab countries RESPONDED to the Zionists land grab, your claim that Israel did not attack is false.

What you should think about is why you have so many facts wrong. the reason is that Israeli propganda dominates U.S. media and education. This is power and it is abused. Look into these facts and you will see how it is misrepresented so that you come away with the false impressions that you hold.

This should show you how much of a probnlem we haev with the media and education system here in America.

What you think you know is the result of what has been presented to you and what has been withheld. Take the time to check the fatcs and then think about what extreme manipulations are occring in this country. You have to ask your self if you want to know the truth or do you want to be manipulated.
"The greatest weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed -Stephen Biko (1946-1977) South

<< What's the best way to achieve peace in a region that has known so much war? Could a simple solution be to financially tie all the parties together and make it more profitable to all parties to work together? Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah make to much sense. >>

What nonsense are you trying to sell?
First of all, it is clear you don't understand why there isn't peace concerning Israel and the Palestinians. I get the distinct impression that you don't understand the basic issue that the Zionists insist on violating the rights of millions of people.
But we can put that issue aside for now, the point I was making is that the Iraqis are supposed to be able to make decisions about their own country. The U.S. should not be tying any of the parties into anything. You clearly don't understand the extreme injustices carried out by the Zionists and why people would rightly not want to support or enable such an unjust regime as the Israelis have pushed.
SO no, forcing Iraqis to financially benefit Israel is not only unjust because Iraqis should not be forced to do business with a country they don't like, the policies of Israel are unjust and it is wrong to help them.

You danced around the main point (as Cookie has also) that the story of U.S. and Israeli policy makers pipeline plans has not been reported to most Americans in mainstream media. Reporters in mainstream media "play the game" by not reporting this story. The story reveals too much. It reveals that democracy is not planned for Iraqis. Mainstream reporters keep their jobs by not reporting these kinds of things. This happens by reporters either playing the game consciously or blindly, either way they keep their jobs because of the things the report and don't report.

You seem to assume noble actions and intentions in U.S. foreign policies. This is due adherence to an idea that since these policies are U.S. polices the "must be" noble and good. A point most people don;t understand is mainstream media plays along with this premise. It is more profitable to do so and the people that influence the news coverage like to present this view of the world. This is accomplished by what they report and what they don't report. Another major story not reported to most Americans is how the Baath party and how Saddam came into power in the first place. It is clear mainstream media's bias is catering to a world view that owners and those that influence the news prefer. So the U.S. role in putting the Baath party in power in Iraq goes unreported to most Americans. The corporations that broadcast the news are not serving the public good, they are serving their own interests and withholding facts like these serves their interests more that reporting it.

You need to step back and look at what is really happening. Read "Understanding power" and "manufacturing Consent" by Noam Chomsky.

Just try to think, would you want a foreign country trying you to anything against your wishes?