| Author | Message | | World Citizen | | Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm Post subject: Re: Israel's war |
| | Anonymous wrote: | | theedge wrote: | This proposed war on Iraq will only benefit Israel. Why should America fight Israel's war? Let Israel fight Iraq. Let the Israeli army suffer the casualties. Why should the Americans send their children off to fight somebody elses war? Iraq poses no threat to the U.S. Even if they had WMD, they don't have the means to launch the weapons against the U.S. They can strike at Israel of course. So Iraq only poses a threat to Israel. Why should America stick it's neck out for Israel?  |
NO AMERICAN and BRIT SOLDIER/MARINE SHOULD HAVE TO DIE FOR ISRAEL... HELL WITH ISRAEL.. |
So, when the US or the UK want's help with terrorist activities against their own people, especially if they require help from an ally in the Middle East, no one will be should be too surprised when Israel turns round and says "to hell with you both"... | |  | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 4:08 pm Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | So, when the US or the UK want's help with terrorist activities against their own people, especially if they require help from an ally in the Middle East, no one will be should be too surprised when Israel turns round and says "to hell with you both"... |
What is your take that perhaps the Israelis may have had some advance indication through their superb inteeligence apparatus about 9-11..
Fox News even mentioned some Israeli activity immediately after the 9-11 attacks and then stopped reporting. Oransky the Mossad tell all has written that advance information on the USMC attacks were known but not passed along. It was not in Israel's interest to do so and you cant fault them for that.
Honestly, Israel can afford to trust no one including the US for her primary survival and thus will follow her own course regardless. We shouldn't kid ourselves that they are endearing to us. There has been and will always be a lot of Israeli subterfuge against the US if they feel it is warranted and history proves that. We are a checknook, a provider and R & D of arms for Israel who is protected in the US by a powerful and perfectly legal minority constituent who advances this relationship brilliantly. It's the US 's fault if they choose to allow it to continue and the US forgoes it historical ideals and purposes in the world. | | | | Guest | | Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 9:10 am Post subject: Re: Israel's war |
| | World Citizen wrote: | | Anonymous wrote: | | theedge wrote: | | This proposed war on Iraq will only benefit Israel. Why should America fight Israel's war? Let Israel fight Iraq. Let the Israeli army suffer the casualties. Why should the Americans send their children off to fight somebody elses war? Iraq poses no threat to the U.S. Even if they had WMD, they don't have the means to launch the weapons against the U.S. They can strike at Israel of course. So Iraq only poses a threat to Israel. Why should America stick it's neck out for Israel? |
NO AMERICAN and BRIT SOLDIER/MARINE SHOULD HAVE TO DIE FOR ISRAEL... HELL WITH ISRAEL.. |
So, when the US or the UK want's help with terrorist activities against their own people, especially if they require help from an ally in the Middle East, no one will be should be too surprised when Israel turns round and says "to hell with you both"... |
If the USA wasn't sending BILLIONS of US taxpayer dollars to Israel via a pro-Israel lobby-corrupted and Zionist-occupied US government, we would greatly reduce our terror concern as Pat Buchanan mentions so eloquently in the article (found via the following URL) that such aid contributes to the hatred of the USA by the Arab/Moslem world (and such hatred contributed to the motivation of the tragic World Trade Center attack):
Ariel Sharon's Shakedown (of the US Taxpayers):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/01/07/ariel-sharon-s-shakedown-of-the-us-taxpayers.php | | | | Guest | | Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 9:16 am Post subject: |
| | Jefferson Davis wrote: | | Quote: | | So, when the US or the UK want's help with terrorist activities against their own people, especially if they require help from an ally in the Middle East, no one will be should be too surprised when Israel turns round and says "to hell with you both"... |
What is your take that perhaps the Israelis may have had some advance indication through their superb inteeligence apparatus about 9-11..
Fox News even mentioned some Israeli activity immediately after the 9-11 attacks and then stopped reporting. Oransky the Mossad tell all has written that advance information on the USMC attacks were known but not passed along. It was not in Israel's interest to do so and you cant fault them for that.
Honestly, Israel can afford to trust no one including the US for her primary survival and thus will follow her own course regardless. We shouldn't kid ourselves that they are endearing to us. There has been and will always be a lot of Israeli subterfuge against the US if they feel it is warranted and history proves that. We are a checknook, a provider and R & D of arms for Israel who is protected in the US by a powerful and perfectly legal minority constituent who advances this relationship brilliantly. It's the US 's fault if they choose to allow it to continue and the US forgoes it historical ideals and purposes in the world. |
9/11 Hijacker Attended US military School:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2002/12/31/9-11-hijacker-attended-us-military-school.php | | | | Alpha | | | | Guest | | Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 2:29 pm Post subject: |
| Gaps in Iraq document, Blix expected to tell U.N.
Thursday, January 9, 2003 Posted: 5:33 AM EST (1033 GMT)
Blix will travel to Baghdad later this month.
UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix is expected to tell the Security Council on Thursday that his inspectors continue to find more information gaps as they comb the 12,000-page Iraqi weapons declaration.
Since the document was handed over on December 7, teams of analysts in New York have been scrutinizing the weapons declaration, comparing it to prior declarations and to a database of information kept by the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission.
Rather than resolving outstanding questions in the various weapons areas UNMOVIC is looking at -- chemical, biological and missile -- a U.N. official said, "We're finding more holes ... in all categories." The official would not specify particular gaps.
At the invitation of the Iraqi government, Blix is planning to travel January 19 to Baghdad, where he will raise the questions with the Iraqis. | | | | Alpha | | | | Guest | | Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2003 2:38 pm Post subject: Scott Ritter on Zionist Extremists Perle and Wolfowitz |
| As WorldNetDaily reported yesterday, Ritter is calling for the ouster of President Bush for what he feels are unnecessary and murderous actions in the conflict with Iraq.
"I would be in favor of the impeachment of President Bush for high crimes and misdemeanors," the 41-year old former Marine told WND. "Murder is a high crime and misdemeanor, and I can't think of any better definition than murder when he talks about American service members and putting them in a war which is not only illegal but is based on a foundation of lies."
"When you go to war you open up a Pandora's box, the results of which cannot be predicted," he said. "Therefore, there better be a darned good reason to go to war. It's got to be worth the sacrifice that you're asking others to make."
WorldNetDaily recently interviewed Ritter via telephone as he drove from his New York home to appear on Fox News. Throughout the interview, he contended that media have consistently missed his primary concern regarding the proposed military strike against Iraq.
Ritter said the issue is the abrogation of the rule of law, which he views as setting the U.S. up for a particularly nasty potential scenario – U.S. troops cornered in Iraq, subject to chemical attack, which then prompts the use of nuclear weapons by the U.S.
"The Bush administration has put forward a nuclear policy planning document which clearly states a scenario in which nuclear weapons can be used pre-emptively and that scenario is tens of thousands of troops in a hostile land, threatened by the potential of chemical and biological weapons," he said. "And clearly, Iraq could evolve into such a situation.
"What's wrong with diplomacy, what's wrong with inspectors, what's wrong with the rule of law?" he asked.
WorldNetDaily asked Ritter whether he agreed with the contention that Bush's foreign policy constituted a violation of the United Nations and Nuremberg charters.
Ritter reiterated that the U.S. is a signatory to the U.N. Charter, which "stipulates that war is rejected as a means to resolve disputes and conflicts," although he allowed that there are exceptions, as "when the collective, the U.N. Security Council, finds a situation exists that threatens international peace. Then under chapter seven of the charter, it can be resolved by use of force."
Still, Ritter does not find the current situation in Iraq to meet this criteria, and therefore views the idea of a pre-emptive strike as unconstitutional and a violation of American law.
"It has no grounds in legality," he said.
"This is a constitutional issue," he continued. "I think there can be no doubt his policy is a violation of the Constitution, except that constitutional lawyers will say that judicial system will not get involved in matters of national security … There are interpretation issues – what are the limits of executive authority? … I think that it's not so much the legality of his actions. I view it as being unconstitutional … I'm sure many will say the president has these authorities regarding national security."
Ritter also said that impeachment and indictment were legitimate issues.
"What I would find to be grounds of impeachment is the president lying to the American people," he said. "I believe the president has lied to the American people. I believe the vice president has lied to the American people.
"And if we go to war where American service members are killed, I think the president should be held accountable for this judicially," Ritter stated.
"I would be in favor of the impeachment of President Bush for high crimes and misdemeanors," said Ritter. "Murder is a high crime and misdemeanor, and I can't think of any better definition than murder when he talks about American service members and putting them in a war which is not only illegal but is based on a foundation of lies."
WND also asked Ritter about comments he made in an interview with William Pitt, appearing in the book "War on Iraq: What Team Bush doesn't want you to know."
In that interview, Ritter said that "Donald Rumsfeld was politically dead. No one thought of Donald Rumsfeld as having any potential. Paul Wolfowitz was seen as a raving lunatic of the far right. Richard Perle is not called 'The Prince of Darkness' without cause."
Ritter characterized the leaders as "sniping from the fringes," and said "suddenly they're running the show," adding that for this reason, these are "extremely dangerous times."
WND asked Ritter whether he viewed these people as having taken this turn since taking office, or always having been that way.
"Well, they were always this way," he said. "Wolfowitz was always a very dangerous man. He is a walking affront to the Constitution of the U.S. He is a walking affront to international law. The same with Richard Perle . He was openly boastful how President Bush has no other choice but go to war because he's committed too much political capital."
Ritter concluded, "If Richard Perle thinks [that's] a reason to go to war then he might as well remove the American flag from outside his building and put on a swastika and call himself what he is, which is a Nazi. This is the rule of law, not about going to war for political convenience of any single individual."
WorldNetDaily then asked Ritter why, if these political figures were always this way, he voted them into power by voting for President Bush. The former U.N. inspector argued that he didn't vote for them, just for Bush, adding that Gore was a "known commodity – a liar," and that he had actually initially supported Sen. John McCain. | | | | Guest-400c | | | | Guest-43e1 | | Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2003 8:20 am Post subject: That shitty little country |
| Look, Jews have been getting other people to fight and die for their causes since the beginning of Time.
They wouldn't kill Christ themselves. They got the Romans to do it for them. So Israel's behavior is nothing new. They wanted to goad the U.S. into attacking their neighbors in order to take the land, the oil, "transfer" 3.5 million Palestinians, and for now they're on the verge of succeeding.
But, unless this incipient catastrophe can be stopped, all the Jews (the good, the clueless, the wishy-washy, and the bad alike) will pay mightily for the actions of the wicked and odious Perle, Wolfowitz & Co.,, Ariel Sharon's Likud Party, and America's Jewish establishment that is bleeding the country dry for Israel, via buying the U.S. Congress.
All Americans are "led" by a cabal of Zionist wacko Jews. They don't care about America, or Americans, but only about israel, and themselves.
These Jews fantasize over enslaving the planet. And if millions have to die to achieve it, they don't care.
They're the common enemy of humanity - NAZI JEWS.
And, defeating them won't be easy, but it is actually possible. | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
