Prominent anti war leader on Saddams payroll

[Mike S]

I love it i love it I love it I love it

Yup folks a prominent UK anti war hack was found to be getting kick backs from Saddam. So what? So who else was?

This piece of shit was out at rallies ranting about the poor Iraqi people and how we shouldn't attack.... meanwhile.. he's taking money from their oppressor. Seeing as how the entire anti amer.. I mean anti war movement was so interconnected .. I cant wait to see who else was on the Ba'ath payroll. I mean answer and not in our name refuse to name their benefactors.. even tho they're supposed to be non profit orgs and totally transparent.

*smiles at the thought of NIOR and ANSWER leaders led off in cuffs*


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$BRQ25XG0ULQ1HQFIQMGCFFWAVCBQ UIV0?xml=/news/2003/04/22/ngall22.xml


http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,941141,00.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1-655184,00.html


I love it I love it I loooooooooooove it.

MS

[Mike S]

Have I said how much i love this yet..

and some more...

http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/22/ndocs22.xml

http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/22/ninter22.xml

MS

[Roddimus]

That's really shitty.
But to be perfectly honest, even though I opposed the war, I never really trusted groups like ANSWER in the first place.

[Pler]

Theres no doubt that many of the anti war groups had an anti american bias, were extremists...it would be foolish to assume that all protesters and people with anti war sentiments are politically and ideologically similar to these folks however...anti war folks are just as 'american' as the pro war people, if not more so

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Pler
Theres no doubt that many of the anti war groups had an anti american bias, were extremists...it would be foolish to assume that all protesters and people with anti war sentiments are politically and ideologically similar to these folks however...anti war folks are just as 'american' as the pro war people, if not more so

Then likewise it would be foolish to assume they all werent like these people. Goes both ways Pler.

MS

[Pler]

Originally posted by Mike S


Then likewise it would be foolish to assume they all werent like these people. Goes both ways Pler.


I never said assume anything...its unfair to judge the whole of a group, based on the actions of some...you should recognize that among the anti war crowd there are many different groups, who are all there, for different reasons

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Pler
Originally posted by Mike S


Then likewise it would be foolish to assume they all werent like these people. Goes both ways Pler.


I never said assume anything...its unfair to judge the whole of a group, based on the actions of some...you should recognize that among the anti war crowd there are many different groups, who are all there, for different reasons

I know pler.. I was being a smart ass.

MS

[ZupanGOD]

Mike common this is a no brainer, when you have these radical groups who have organized many of these big protests and have supported ruthless dictators in the past why would it suprise anyone that some of the prominate people who backed it and organized it might be on the payroll of a dictator like Saddam?

-Jason

[Mike S]

Originally posted by ZupanGOD
Mike common this is a no brainer, when you have these radical groups who have organized many of these big protests and have supported ruthless dictators in the past why would it suprise anyone that some of the prominate people who backed it and organized it might be on the payroll of a dictator like Saddam?

-Jason

Me surprised? I'm not. In fact I am so enjoying posting this its not even funny. I knew these guys were a bunch of corrupt opportunists.. In fact I believe I mentioned as much in other posts.. of course I was criticized as being a war mongering so and so for daring the criticize people of such obvious superior moral standing... hehehehehe

Oh man.. I really hope this is just the tip of the iceberg....

S'more goodies...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2965947.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2965427.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2965789.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2966199.stm


MS

[Justin]

Originally posted by ZupanGOD
Mike common this is a no brainer, when you have these radical groups who have organized many of these big protests and have supported ruthless dictators in the past why would it suprise anyone that some of the prominate people who backed it and organized it might be on the payroll of a dictator like Saddam?

-Jason

And yet the idea that this hummanitarian war was proposed by people who support a different set of dictators yeilds, in your eyes, no irony or sense of disquiet.

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Doc Mahem


And yet the idea that this hummanitarian war was proposed by people who support a different set of dictators yeilds, in your eyes, no irony or sense of disquiet.


When you say you're going to enable a democracy right smack in the middle of a bunch of thugacracies as a means to remake the entire region.. it sure doesn't sound like your supporting those other regimes .. does it. huh?
I think the word you were looking for was "tolerate"...for the time being.

So to answer your question...No.
No irony or since of disquiet.. Well a little but its directed at some of those moral midgets in the anti war movement.

Now.. when your a prominent anti war shit bag and your taking money from the Saddam in order to further his agenda and stir up decent against a war to remove his ass.. Now Thaaaaaaaaaaaaats supporting a thug.

If we're lucky Doc well get to see some more examples of this kind of support of Saddam on the part of some of the anti-war slime so you can see the difference between some of the scum in the anti war movement.. and the administration since you still seem to be a bit confused over who holds the moral high ground here.. (hint.. its not the anti war crowd)



MS

[superkool]

mike when iraq becomes just like us, i'll give you 100,000 of my savings........

this being on a public board, so there are witnesses................the day that iraq becomes like america, then you will be 100,000 richer, thats how sure i am that we will NEVER see that in our lifetime.

but good try.

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by Doc Mahem


And yet the idea that this hummanitarian war was proposed by people who support a different set of dictators yeilds, in your eyes, no irony or sense of disquiet.

Huh?

[Cedwyn]

lol so delightfully in character....

anyhooo.....what i love is the fact that mike posts the same article 5 times, hoping it looks like an overwhelming amount of evidence.

[Justin]

Originally posted by Mike S



When you say you're going to enable a democracy right smack in the middle of a bunch of thugacracies as a means to remake the entire region.. it sure doesn't sound like your supporting those other regimes .. does it. huh?
I think the word you were looking for was "tolerate"...for the time being.

So to answer your question...No.
No irony or since of disquiet.. Well a little but its directed at some of those moral midgets in the anti war movement.


I think, in Iraq, the right thing may have happened for all the wrong reasons -- if the administration and later administrations adaquatley (re)builds the region, which I doubt very strongly will happen. However, the fact that this "hummanitarian" war is being proposed by folks who still think massacaring El Salvadorian and Nicaraguan civilians is a good idea, and who are currently working to subvert democracy in Venezuala over their management of their oil, is beyond ironic, beyond funny, and is well into the realm of beret clad french nihilist. That no one on the right even acknowledges this conflict of morality is, while unsurprising, still enough to deepen one's cynicism.

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Doc Mahem


I think, in Iraq, the right thing may have happened for all the wrong reasons -- if the administration and later administrations adaquatley (re)builds the region, which I doubt very strongly will happen. However, the fact that this "hummanitarian" war is being proposed by folks who still think massacaring El Salvadorian and Nicaraguan civilians is a good idea, and who are currently working to subvert democracy in Venezuala over their management of their oil, is beyond ironic, beyond funny, and is well into the realm of beret clad french nihilist. That no one on the right even acknowledges this conflict of morality is, while unsurprising, still enough to deepen one's cynicism.

Well I sincerely doubt that anyone of these people think massacring anybody is a good idea. AND there is no democracy in Venezuela right now. My very good friend Carlos is Venezuelan and has been keeping me appraised of what is going on down there.. it is definitely a place we need to pay more attention to because the leader down there as dissolved both the legislature and the constitution.. he's another Castro.

Is this the kind democracy we're subverting.. or are you still clinging to the rumor that we had something to do with the attempted coup down there? Its a damn shame the coup didn't succeed doc because that guy has stripped all vestiges of democracy from the Venezuelan system.

But.. hey.. he was elected so he can do what ever he likes right?

MS

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Cedwyn
lol so delightfully in character....

anyhooo.....what i love is the fact that mike posts the same article 5 times, hoping it looks like an overwhelming amount of evidence.

I know Cedwyn... I kept on being asked questions and I kept on linking the article as a way to say read this..
Finally I got sick of linking and just decided to post it.


MS

[Mike S]

Originally posted by superkool
mike when iraq becomes just like us, i'll give you 100,000 of my savings........

this being on a public board, so there are witnesses................the day that iraq becomes like america, then you will be 100,000 richer, thats how sure i am that we will NEVER see that in our lifetime.

but good try.

Like America..or Democracy?

If your saying that it'll never be a democracy then logic dictates that the Palestinians would be able become free and democratic people.. so best leave them in "occupied territories".. huh?

MS

[superkool]

just because our government is the right way for you to go, doesn't mean that it is the right way for them to go mike, whats wrong with letting them leave how they want to live?

why do they have to have mickey d's and dq's? does that make them better people?

it hasn't made us better people, in fact we are one of the most hated country's on the planet, wonder why?

guess the rest of the world is wrong, cause they dont believe in the american, lazy ass, fast food, corp rule that we do. lets not kid ourself and say that corp. controlled government is the way to go for everybody mike.

[Mike S]

Seems our anti war Saddam loving brittish pol had a charity and may have sent the funds Saddam gave him far and wide..

Now it gets interesting.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-655984,00.html

MS

[Mike S]

Originally posted by superkool
just because our government is the right way for you to go, doesn't mean that it is the right way for them to go mike, whats wrong with letting them leave how they want to live?

why do they have to have mickey d's and dq's? does that make them better people?

it hasn't made us better people, in fact we are one of the most hated country's on the planet, wonder why?

guess the rest of the world is wrong, cause they dont believe in the american, lazy ass, fast food, corp rule that we do. lets not kid ourself and say that corp. controlled government is the way to go for everybody mike.

Would you at the least agree that it would be better for those people to have a government of their own choosing than a dictatorship or thugacracy?

MS

[Cedwyn]

isn't that exactly what hte venezuelans have? an elected leader?

[Justin]

Originally posted by Mike S


Castro.

or are you still clinging to the rumor that we had something to do with the attempted coup down there?
MS

Er. . .yeah. Rumor. Considering US history in Latin America, you'd have to be crazy to assume the US was involved. And what with our well documented policy of non-intervention south of the border, and respect for democracy down there. And what with the instantanious press release of support made by the white house during it, and all.

The man is trying to nationalize the countries oil reserves. Of course the White House will take action. Look at the hell we perpetrated on Nicaragua and El Salvidor over, what, cheap clothes and fruit? We're going to get involved in an oil struggle, and I'm sure we already are. If not, well, then I'll need to seriously reevaluate my values. It would be like leaning gravity was a lie.

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Doc Mahem


Er. . .yeah. Rumor. Considering US history in Latin America, you'd have to be crazy to assume the US was involved. And what with our well documented policy of non-intervention south of the border, and respect for democracy down there. And what with the instantanious press release of support made by the white house during it, and all.

The man is trying to nationalize the countries oil reserves. Of course the White House will take action. Look at the hell we perpetrated on Nicaragua and El Salvidor over, what, cheap clothes and fruit? We're going to get involved in an oil struggle, and I'm sure we already are. If not, well, then I'll need to seriously reevaluate my values. It would be like leaning gravity was a lie.

Wow Doc great assumption about our being involved in venezuela. Now substantiate it.

Prove it.


MS

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Cedwyn
isn't that exactly what hte venezuelans have? an elected leader?

Yes an elected leader that literal threw out the legislature.. suspended the constitution and - on his own - decided how long his term should be.

Sound like democracy to you Cedwyn..

Its too bad we weren't involved in the coup... it would have gone off correctly and that country might be back on the right track instead of in the mess its in now. The guy is another Castro and we're going to have to deal with that him sooner or later.


MS

[superkool]

Yes an elected leader that literal threw out the legislature.. suspended the constitution and - on his own - decided how long his term should be.

Sound like democracy to you Cedwyn..




hell that sounds like america under bush to me, lets see patriot act,h.r.11, patriot act 2, rollbacks on the freedom of information act,etc,etc.

that statement right there mike shows what you know about whats going on, you dont even have a grip.

of course your gonna say that h.r. 11 aint gonna pass, and then your gonna say that if it does, the people can vote him out, but we all saw what happened at the last election, popular vote dont mean shit anymore.

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by superkool
hell that sounds like america under bush to me, lets see patriot act,h.r.11, patriot act 2, rollbacks on the freedom of information act,etc,etc.

Yeah it's all Bush's doing, that fuckin dictator! :rollseyes: What about the house and senate? What about the previous adminstration? And your telling someone else they are detached? I know it's the cool thing with your friends to hate the prez, but if you are really concerned about liberty you'd be a little more intellectually honest here and include everyone and everything.

-Jason

[superkool]

Originally posted by ZupanGOD


Yeah it's all Bush's doing, that fuckin dictator! :rollseyes: What about the house and senate? What about the previous adminstration? And your telling someone else they are detached? I know it's the cool thing with your friends to hate the prez, but if you are really concerned about liberty you'd be a little more intellectually honest here and include everyone and everything.

-Jason

no your right jason it aint just bush, bush is a puppet for pnac, as well as clinton was someones puppet also.....however the patriot acts 1and 2, h.r. 11 all have come out under bush and co, unless of course you would like to suggest that they had this planned for longer?


i dont like either party's in control, but from what i can see with my own eyes, i know who is taking away my freedoms and who did not..........it's doesn't get any clearer then that. how you can support someone who has no respect for his own country and the problems we face, while tring to fight injustice in the world but not at home, baffles me......it's the most ignorant thing i have ever seen, and clinton was pretty ignorant, but bush takes the cake for sure.

every law he's passed, e.o. he put in, and bill he's signed has fucked up this country in one way or another, his tax cut is a joke, his new tax cut is even more of a joke, will it ever end?

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by superkool


no your right jason it aint just bush, bush is a puppet for pnac, as well as clinton was someones puppet also.....however the patriot acts 1and 2, h.r. 11 all have come out under bush and co, unless of course you would like to suggest that they had this planned for longer?

Ok.. please illustrate a clear example of how Clinton and Bush was someone's puppet. Thanks.

i dont like either party's in control, but from what i can see with my own eyes, i know who is taking away my freedoms and who did not..........

It doesn't really matter much on a grand scale which party is in control they both further statism.

Who's taking away your freedoms and who did it?

it's doesn't get any clearer then that. how you can support someone who has no respect for his own country and the problems we face, while tring to fight injustice in the world but not at home, baffles me......it's the most ignorant thing i have ever seen, and clinton was pretty ignorant, but bush takes the cake for sure.

Who doesn't respect their own country and how?

every law he's passed, e.o. he put in, and bill he's signed has fucked up this country in one way or another, his tax cut is a joke, his new tax cut is even more of a joke, will it ever end?

Education Bill? Trade Act Bill? Worker assistance bill? Terrorism Insurance Act? Homeland Security? All of them? what's wrong with tax cuts?

Explain for me..

Thanks,
-Jason

[superkool]

sorry jason we have been over this before, a clear example of bush being a puppet? maybe it has something to do with pnacs statement from 6 years ago reading like a play book today, with alot of pnac members in power also.


his tax cuts and bullshit laws he's passed is under attack from even people in his own party, look at first for christs sake, lol.

wage-slave.org spells out what he has done since being in office, there are so many fucked up things he's done with the labor dept. epa.,etc,etc


Bush exempts oil and gas industries from clean water regulations. New clean water regulations require small construction sites to ensure that they have plans to handle storm water, preventing pollution from entering waterways. But the Bush administration is granting the oil and gas industries an exemption to the new rules, claiming that the issue needs "further evaluation." But according to six senators who have opposed the exemption, the issue has already received plenty of study. Could it be that Bush is simply doing a favor for old friends?
3-5-2003


Washington Post

Bush proposes pushing seniors into private insurance plans for a Medicare prescription drug benefit. Again letting his friends in the insurance industry write legislation (see 3-5-2003 below), President Bush proposes forcing seniors to join private health plans to receive a prescription drug benefit under Medicare. His plan would give private health plans enormous power over Medicare, allowing them to set the prices for prescription drugs, squeezing seniors for higher profits.
3-5-2003


New York Times

Bush proposes caps on malpractice lawsuits. The rising cost of malpractice insurance is a serious problem affecting the medical industry. But President Bush's proposal to cap awards from malpractice suits at $250,000 is like using an axe for heart surgery. Instead of working to prevent frivolous lawsuits, Bush is essentially making the victims of genuine malpractice pay for reform. He also refuses to hold the insurance industry accountable, and in fact is letting them write the legislation. I wonder why.
3-1-2003


Washington Post

Bush opens Alaska forest to logging. The Tongass National Forest contains 30 percent of the world's temperate coastal forests -- for now. The Bush administration rules that no more of the forest will be declared protected wilderness, opening up hundreds of thousands of acres for logging. If the administration succeeds in reversing the Clinton ban on new roads in national forests (see 5-4-2001 below), then millions of acres could be at risk.
2-27-2003


New York Times

Bush lies about homeland security funding and blames his allies in Congress. Since September 11, President Bush has consistently fought to block spending on homeland security, even opposing the creation of a Department of Homeland Security until he saw the political upside. Looking at the recently passed 2003 budget, the White House praised the Republican Congress for providing "critical funding for our nation's homeland security." He even urged them to block a Democratic proposal to provide an additional $5 billion for homeland security needs. But at least he's consistent about endangering the nation, right? Wrong. In a breathtaking act of hypocrisy, Bush turns around and blames the Republican Congress for not providing enough funds. This 180-degree flip-flop comes as an enormous surprise to his GOP allies, who predictably react with fury.
2-26-2003


Detroit Free Press

Bush restricts family-planning programs from AIDS-prevention funds. When President Bush announced increases for AIDS prevention funding in Africa, even his critics were pleased to see the additional funds (regardless of the political reasons behind the proposal). But anyone with common sense knows that family-planning advice is crucial to serious AIDS prevention. Under restrictions attached to the funding, doctors and nurses may not even be able to discuss basic contraception use with people as part of AIDS prevention. A State Department memo indicates that the administration is using the new AIDS funds as a tool to expand the gag rules it has put on foreign aid as a gift to the right-wing extremists who have Karl Rove's ear.
2-24-2003


Time

Bush relaxes rules on ready-to-eat meat products. In 2002, an outbreak of Listeria bacteria killed seven people, caused three miscarriages, and sickened dozens. In response, the Bush administration proposed tougher rules on plants that produce products at risk for Listeria, including ready-to-eat deli meats. The meat industry (which, big surprise, gave a bunch of money to the Bush campaign in 2000) cried foul and urged the White House to weaken the regulations they had proposed. And when campaign donors talk, Bush listens. So the strong regulations were shelved and replaced with ones the meat industry could live with. An industry newsletter crowed that "a number of key [USDA] personnel have bought into much of the industry proposal" and that the changes came thanks to "industry efforts made at the White House level."
2-24-2003


LA Times

Bush proposes canceling tests for a missile defense system. You can argue all you want about whether a national missile defense system will work or not, or whether it's a good idea in the first place. But one thing is for certain: if you're planning on building a NMD system, you should definitely test the thing to make sure it works. But even this seemingly obvious bit of logic is beyond the Bush administration, which tries to bypass testing requirements for major weapons programs so it can have the system up and running by 2004. Given the administration's reckless and incompetent handling of the North Korea crisis, it's understandable that it is in a rush to get NMD working. But shouldn't they make sure it works first?
2-23-2003


Newsday

Bush lies about economists' support for his tax plan. Serious, nonpartisan economists are fairly unanimous about President Bush's latest tax cut proposal: it won't do anything to help the economy. After all, most of the cuts come years later and most of the benefits go to those most likely to save rather than spend the money. (Boy, that sounds a lot like his last tax cut plan to help the economy. Which didn't.) So when White House spokesman Ari Fleischer claims that the Blue Chip Economic Forecast had endorsed his plan, it comes as quite a surprise. What isn't surprising is when the editor of the Blue Chip newsletter says that he had published no such endorsement, and that the White House was simply lying.
2-20-2003


Reuters

Bush delays report on the dangers of mercury. When the public faces danger from environmental hazards, the Bush administration doesn't rush to inform them. When the EPA recently put together a report on a dangerous form of asbestos, the administration kept it from the public for as long as possible. (See 12-27-2002 below.) Similarly, a report was due last May on the dangers posed by mercury. But the administration delayed it, forcing the report to go through an unprecedented review from other federal agencies. The EPA's report will be coming out soon. Who knows what's missing, thanks the administration's review?
2-20-2003


Washington Post

Bush explores creating new nuclear weapons. You know what this world needs? More nuclear weapons. New kinds of nuclear weapons! Nuclear weapons that do less damage, making it more likely that we'll use them, especially given Bush's enthusiasm for preemptive strikes! (See 9-21-2002 below.) And now you'll get those new nukes, thanks to the ridiculously irresponsible Bush administration. How about this new rule: if the president can't pronounce "nuclear," then his administration doesn't get to create new nuclear weapons. Can we make this happen?
2-16-2003


San Diego Union-Tribune

Bush cuts education for military dependents. It is impossible to emphasize this point enough: just because Republican administrations are good for military contractors doesn't mean they're good for the men and women who serve in the military. Not only did Bush stop telling veterans about the health care benefits they're entitled to (see 8-1-2002 below), but now he's cutting funds that help pay for the education for the sons and daughters of the people he's about to send off to war. When will the military -- and everyone else for that matter -- realize just how bad President Bush treats them?
2-13-2003


BBC News

Bush proposes no aid for Afghanistan. The reason the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan in the mid-1990s was that they had one thing to offer: law. It was a harsh and oppressive law, but the lawlessness that preceded the Taliban's rule set the stage for their ascendance. The worst possible thing the United States can do now that it has deposed the Taliban is allow Afghanistan to sink back into lawlessness, a country united only in name that is controlled by warlords. Such conditions would allow extremists to rise to power again, or at the very least, ensure there are always places friendly to terrorists in the country. But with the Taliban gone, the Bush administration apparently thinks the job is done. President Bush's 2003 budget includes no money to aid Afghanistan, despite the fact that Hamid Karzai's government has no power outside the capital. If this is the kind of commitment to democracy we are planning to show in Iraq, the Iraqi people should be very worried.
2-11-2003

[superkool]

New York Times

Bush cuts federal housing subsidies. Sometimes little changes are the most devious. The Bush administration proposes changing the phrase "not more than $50" to "at least $50" in the law setting the amount that those receiving federal housing subsidies pay in rent per month. Now the sky is the limit on the rent paid by America's poorest families, those for whom every dollar counts most.
2-8-2003


New York Times

Bush proposes national sales tax. Sales taxes are by far the most regressive taxes. Unlike income taxes, where higher incomes are taxed at higher rates, sales taxes hit families harder the less they make, since they spend a bigger portion of their incomes on necessities. Thus it should come as no surprise that Bush is looking at the possibility of eliminating income taxes in favor of a national sales tax, given his earlier attempts to find ways to justify increasing the tax burden on the poor. (See 12-16-2002 below.) What's more, sales taxes are bad for the economy since they reduce consumption -- just what our country needs!
2-8-2003


Washington Post

Bush proposes more restrictions on civil liberties. Call it "USA PATRIOT Act II: The Freedom Eliminator." (See 10-26-2001 below.) In what can only be described as an attempt to gauge just how much political capital the administration has left from the September 11 attacks, the Justice Department is proposing a new law to strengthen law enforcement powers even further. It would allow more wiretaps and more clandestine searches with even less judicial oversight. Once again, Bush is trying to stop the "freedom-hating terrorists" by eliminating our freedoms. A brilliant strategy.
2-6-2003


New York Times

Bush proposes retirement savings plan to benefit the wealthy. Most retirement savings plans that offer tax benefits include provisions that ensure they don't bankrupt the Treasury. Income caps and deposit limits are the most common. So when President Bush proposes doing away with those restrictions, it is only people with higher incomes who will benefit. Best of all for Bush, the real costs of the plan are hidden because they don't appear until 15 or 20 years down the road.
2-4-2003


Washington Post

Bush cuts aid to the poor in his budget. When President Bush declares a war on poverty, he means it. He'll do whatever it takes to make sure America's poor don't get the help they'll need. (What, you thought a war on poverty was supposed to help the poor?) His latest budget is an excellent example. While he creates enormous, record-breaking deficits with big tax cuts for the rich, he cuts programs to the poor, like rural redevelopment, vocational education, Medicaid, the earned income tax credit, and even school lunch programs! More money in the hands of the wealthy and fewer services for America's neediest. Bush's 2004 budget is an abomination.
2-2-2003


Washington Post

Bush makes tuna less safe for dolphins. The idea of "dolphin-safe" tuna was something of a revolution, one of the few times that activism on behalf of animals made an enormous mainstream impact. Regulations that require tuna fishermen to protect dolphins save tens of thousands of the marine mammals every year. But now President Bush wants to allow tuna caught by Mexican fisherman to carry the "dolphin safe" label, even though they don't follow the same recommendations. Not only will this result in the death of more dolphins, but it will squeeze out the responsible companies that actually make sure the tuna they sell is safe for dolphins.
1-31-2003


Associated Press

Bush proposes changing labor laws. When business bleats, President Bush answers. Such is the case when the administration calls for a revision to labor laws that could make millions of workers no longer eligible for time-and-a-half overtime pay. The Labor Department is also looking into changing the Family and Medical Leave Act, adding new restrictions on the law that allows people to take care of new children and ailing relatives.
1-31-2003


New York Times

Bush ignores his administration's own report on snowmobiles in Yellowstone. Everyone knew President Bush was going to reverse the Clinton-era ban on snowmobiles in Yellowstone National Park. (See 11-12-2002 and 6-24-2001 below.) But what he has not told the public is that his administration did so despite its own report saying that banning the snowmobiles was the only way to protect the park, its wildlife, and the rangers who work there. Bush has made a habit of saying that he makes decisions based on "sound science." When the science doesn't fit his politics -- and that happens a lot -- he tosses it aside.
1-26-2003


LA Times

Bush proposes privatizing National Park Service jobs. Free-market enthusiasts believe that competition is the solution to every problem, and that regulations can only hinder all that is right and good. But when put into practice, these idealistic laissez faire attitudes often lead to unfortunate circumstances, like environmental destruction. That's why the Bush administration's suggestion to privatize jobs in the department that protects national parks seems ill-advised. In what could turn out to be the quote of the year, a former Park Service employee who managed Joshua Tree and the Mojave Reserve says of the Bush proposal, "Ask Enron about the efficiency of the unregulated private marketplace."
1-21-2003


New York Times

Bush proposes a tax break for the biggest SUVs. If the administration isn't going to raise fuel-economy standards for SUVs, the least it could do is not make it more profitable to own one. But that's just what the administration is proposing when it suggests increasing the tax deductions for small businesses when they purchase vehicles over 6,000 pounds. Originally designed to help farm and blue-collar businesses that needed heavy trucks or tractors, this law now helps doctors, accountants, and other professionals who feel like buying a behemoth SUV even though they don't need it for their work. Bush's proposal would only further encourage people to buy a gas-guzzling vehicle, increasing U.S. dependence on foreign oil and the profit of Bush's friends in the energy industry.
1-21-2003


LA Times

Bush opens federal lands for road building. In a policy change meant to please a plethora of campaign donors -- ranging from energy companies to timber companies to mining companies and more -- the Interior Department makes it easier for states and counties to build roads across federal lands, endangering the wildlife and natural splendor of places like Death Valley, Joshua Tree, and the Mojave National Preserve. Once again, given a choice between priceless natural treasures and big corporate profits, the administration picks the profits.
1-16-2003


Washington Post

Bush joins court fight against affirmative action. It's easy to mischaracterize and attack affirmative action. President Bush did it plenty when he was campaigning. Just equate it with "quotas" (which the Supreme Court declared illegal years ago), and strongly imply that it favors less qualified applicants. But affirmative action isn't about giving jobs or educations to less qualified people. It's about making sure those who are qualified don't miss opportunities because of their minority status. Racism is not dead in America, as much as we wish it were so. Bush's decision to intervene in a Supreme Court case against the University of Michigan's affirmative action policies proves his ignorance of the problems minorities still face in this country.
1-15-2003


CNN

Bush declares "National Sanctity of Human Life Day." Never one to shy away from using public declarations as political tools (see 6-12-2002 and 6-1-2001 below), President Bush appeases the far right extremists of the Republican party by declaring a day for the sanctity of human life. In a clear (if mild) attack on women's reproductive rights, Bush calls on Americans to "reaffirm the value of human life and renew our dedication to ensuring that every American has access to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." In other words, "please don't be angry that I haven't declared abortion illegal yet. Just wait until there's an opening on the Supreme Court."
1-7-2003

[superkool]

1-7-2003


Washington Post

Bush proposes yet more tax cuts for the rich. Paul Krugman put it best (as usual) when he said, "Faced with a real problem ... the Bush administration's response has nothing to do with solving that problem. Instead it exploits the issue to advance its political agenda." That's just what President Bush does when he proposes a new round of tax cuts that will help the richest Americans. They include a speeding up of the last cut, which means the richest Americans will get the cuts promised in 2001 even sooner. They also include a $300 billion ending of taxes on dividends. If you have an enormous income and huge stock holdings, this is pretty good news. If you're, say, the American economy, it won't do much to help you.
1-3-2003


San Francisco Chronicle

Bush kills Labor Department report on mass layoffs. The Bush administration loves reversing Clinton administration policies, especially if they involve informing the public. So when Bush's Labor Department ends a program that reports the numbers of mass layoffs (more than 50 workers fired) -- a program killed by his father and revived by President Clinton -- it's hardly a shock. It's also the first shot fired by the Bush camp for the election in 2004. Layoffs certainly don't make a president look good, especially if unemployment is on the rise. According to the axed program, there were more than 2 million layoffs between January and November of last year. By ending this report, Bush hides one more bit of bad news for his administration from the public.
1-3-2003


Associated Press

Bush grants taxpayer funds to religious organizations to promote marriage. Everyone knows that staying married is always the best option, no matter what the circumstances. Well, anyone who follows President Bush's religion knows that, anyway. After ignoring Congress and implementing his faith-based initiative by fiat (see 12-13-2002 below), Bush takes the first step of implementing it by granting money to religious groups who will help the poor by teaching them that marriage is really, really great. A spokesman for Americans United for the Separation of Church and State said it best: "Whether a person gets married or stays married is none of the government's business."






need more?

[superkool]

Bush stops telling veterans about the benefits they're entitled to. How do you cut benefits for veterans without cutting benefits for veterans? It's a Zen koan worthy of the Bush administration. The answer: stop telling them about the benefits they're entitled to. And that's exactly what Bush's Veterans' Affairs department does, sending a memo to local VA administrators to stop marketing healthcare programs to veterans and their families. When there's a crisis in veteran healthcare, it doesn't occur to Bush that stopping his massive tax cut for the rich and increasing the VA's budget is the answer. Instead, he decides to stick it to those who served their nation in the armed forces by making them guess about the healthcare programs available to them.
7-31-2002


CNN

Bush undermines corporate responsibility bill right after he signs it. President Bush made it clear when he made his Wall Street speech that he supported only weak reforms for corporate responsibility. When Congress actually managed to send him a strong bill thanks to a public outcry, Bush had no choice but to swallow his pride and sign it. But veteran Bush watchers know Bush has a way of fighting bills he doesn't like even after they become law (Presidential Records Act of 1978, anyone?), and this bill was sure to be no exception. But who knew he'd act so fast! Just hours after signing the bill, Bush releases a statement that interprets the whistleblower protections to be much weaker than the bill's authors intended. Surely this is just the first strike of many as Bush looks to undermine the Sarbanes bill for his corporate cronies.
7-29-2002


Charleston Gazette

Bush praises miners' rescue while cutting the budget for the department that saved them. Even the most cynical among us must have breathed sighs of joy and relief when the nine miners stuck in a flooded Pennsylvania mine for three days were brought up alive. It was a victory not only of individuals, but also of government, as the Mine Safety and Health Administration played a vital part in the rescue. President Bush praises the rescue, of course, as anyone in his position would. But his budget included massive cuts to the agencies devoted to mine safety, endangering the lives of miners everywhere. Bush, unsurprisingly, didn't learn his lesson as a result of the three-day ordeal. He doesn't seem able to make a connection between the federal budget and miners stuck in a well. It's certainly easier to make budget cuts if you can't imagine the effects they'll have on real people.

[superkool]

Bush says toxic sludge is good for fish. The EPA under President Bush has done a lot to hurt the environment: crippling the Superfund program, proposing ineffective Clean Air programs, and driving out key enforcement personnel. In perhaps its stupidest move yet, Bush's EPA says that toxic sludge is good for fish because it drives them away from fishermen. A Republican Congressman points out the stupidity of this logic, saying it's "like suggesting that we club baby seals to death to prevent them from being eaten by sharks."
6-14-2002


Washington Post

Bush refuses to enforce an important provision of the Clean Air Act. The utility industry asks, and President Bush gives. In the past few years, the EPA has begun to sue utility companies for expanding their operations without installing new pollution safeguards, which is prohibited under the Clean Air Act. But this costs the utilities money, and our president won't stand for that. So he does their bidding and tells the EPA to stop the suits and let utilities blacken the sky as much as they please.
6-13-2002


Time

Bush robs an American citizen of his constitutional rights. Let's set the scene. It's early June, and questions about the CIA and FBI are dominating the news. What's an administration addicted to secrecy to do? Attorney General John Ashcroft, thinking quickly, cobbles together a news conference during a trip to Moscow to announce important breaking news: the Justice Department arrested someone who maybe was thinking about releasing a dirty bomb someday, if he could find the parts and come up with a plan. Oh, and the arrest was a month earlier. While the media was trying to explain why dirty bombs aren't really any worse than regular, clean bombs, they mostly missed the big story. The Bush administration has put Jose Padilla away without charging him, without giving him access to a lawyer, and without any obligation to release him. Ever. When did we throw out the Constitution?
6-12-2002


Washington Post

Bush shields missile defense plans from congressional oversight. The justifications for Congressional oversight are simple and obvious. The executive branch is made up mostly of appointed, not elected, officials who must be held accountable to the people for their actions. Congress is an elected body that can be completely changed every two years if it's the will of the people, and thus is the appropriate body to protect the people's interests. But the Bush administration isn't interested in the public interest. His missile defense program, a bloated, quixotic mess that serves only to shovel money into the hands of defense contractors, isn't something he wants Congress to oversee. So the Defense Department takes steps to ensure that there's no oversight of the mess. Does it work? Does it cost too much? Guess we'll never know!

[ZupanGOD]

For a second there I thought all that you posted was actually what was printed in the press but I figured nah the journalist integrity of these papers cannot be that bad, turns out this is the The Wage Slave Journal's spin on everything.

I don't want the spin, I want what to know what you think.

-Jason

[DJ Rawkus]

Originally posted by ZupanGOD
For a second there I thought all that you posted was actually what was printed in the press but I figured nah the journalist integrity of these papers cannot be that bad, turns out this is the The Wage Slave Journal's spin on everything.

I don't want the spin, I want what to know what you think.

-Jason Just thought i'd drop in and say hello.. and then mention oh so casually, this is exactly why i quit posting. You, nor the rest of the conservative crowd listen to print unless it spins into something you want to read. You deliberate until someone comes out with facts you can't refute, and then turn around say its "propoganda" and ask for their own views so you can attack those too. I see nothing's changed. :D By the way, while we're on the subject of prominent people.. anyone found Osama yet? Or is he yesterdays' forgotten headline?

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by DJ Rawkus
Just thought i'd drop in and say hello..

Rawk!!!! What's up man?

and then mention oh so casually, this is exactly why i quit posting.

I thought you quit posting becuase you were on your way off to some foriegn country.

You, nor the rest of the conservative crowd listen to print unless it spins into something you want to read.

Are you surious? Got any examples? Superkool posted some wack spin, I can deal with spin but that shit was just wack.

You deliberate until someone comes out with facts you can't refute, and then turn around say its "propoganda" and ask for their own views so you can attack those too. I see nothing's changed. :D

Your making no sense and letting your emotions direct your thoughts again. I see nothing's changed. :D

By the way, while we're on the subject of prominent people.. anyone found Osama yet? Or is he yesterdays' forgotten headline?

I don't know if Osama is even alive or not, do you?

Well I'm glad to see you, I hope you stick around.

Take care,
Jason

[Mike S]

I'd like more.. but can I get the relevant information minus your color commentary? For a sec there I thought you'd gone and done some serious homework -BUT- I was disappointed.

Interesting stories ya got there.. and as with all stories theres more than one side to em..

Nice try tho.

MS

[Mike S]

Hey Nathan welcome back..

I was starting to miss ya.. ;)

You off to SE asia yet or ya puttin that on hold till the SARS thing dies down?

MS

[Mike S]

Originally posted by DJ Rawkus
Just thought i'd drop in and say hello.. and then mention oh so casually, this is exactly why i quit posting. You, nor the rest of the conservative crowd listen to print unless it spins into something you want to read. You deliberate until someone comes out with facts you can't refute, and then turn around say its "propoganda" and ask for their own views so you can attack those too. I see nothing's changed. :D By the way, while we're on the subject of prominent people.. anyone found Osama yet? Or is he yesterdays' forgotten headline?



Osama - well he's either the worlds greatest hide and go seek player.. or .. he's feeding a family of worms somewhere.

Ya gotta wonder.. who in the hell would invite that guy to stay for a few days at their pad?
"sure osama..c'mon over ..kick your feet up, take the towel off your head and make yourself right at home"
Could you imagine if whomever did that forgot to mention the fact to their house mates? ( I know not realistic but fun to think about)

How would you like to wake up one morning to find your roomie is letting Osama surf your couch.. ?

Ha.. there's a mental image for ya




MS

[Mike S]

More bad news pilin' on our distinguished and respected UK anti amer.. I mean anti war leader.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0425/p01s04-woiq.htm


You can bet your ass if that guy distributed funds through out the anti war "establishment" as is suspected or if he wasn't the only traitor that saddam rewarded.. the shredders are gonna be working over time over at places like ANSWER & NION HeadQuarters.

I can just see it..
Dateline San Francisco.
"mysterious fire guts workers world/ANSWER office destroying everything. Membership lists, financials, donor lists... its a total loss WW officials are said to be devastated"

OK maybe just an over active imagination on my part - but - I'm really excited to find out where all this money Saddam gave out to reward his foreign supporters (his words) went.

MS

[Mirko]

Originally posted by DJ Rawkus
Just thought i'd drop in and say hello.. and then mention oh so casually, this is exactly why i quit posting.
(Good to hear from you.) Similarly, that's why I took a couple weeks off of even reading nwtekno. Just think of all that time some (mostly regressive) folks here waste ridiculing others, when their time could be spent doing something that would actually make a difference. Small comfort maybe, but I've found it's often occasion enough for a smile.

[ZupanGOD]

http://www.nwtekno.org/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54052

[DJ Rawkus]

Originally posted by Mike S
Hey Nathan welcome back..

I was starting to miss ya.. ;)

You off to SE asia yet or ya puttin that on hold till the SARS thing dies down?

MS April 28th 2nd, 2003 -- I write this reply from Beit Sahour, a Palestinian town -- no more than thirty minutes south of Jerusalem -- that has been enduring 24-hour curfew for almost one-month. It is delayed, because I had to email it to a housemate while in Jerusalem. Communications are kinda sketchy (putting it very lightly!) where I'm at for the moment. Technically, I'm inside the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories. And technically, I've disobeyed a State Dept. ruling that allowed me to stay in Israel for seven days on the very specific condition that I not visit the Palestinian territories. All this in spite of the failed attempts of the Israeli Secret Service and the Interior Ministry here to have people like me deemed a security threat, based on "secret evidence" presented in closed court hearings back in the US that excluded citizens. All hail military tribunals!

Technically, I'm now open to arrest and expulsion by the Israeli authorities, not because of any criminal act, or potential act, but because I've dared to visit Palestine in defiance of their orders.

But, speaking of technicalities, it is worth remembering that Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is unequivocally illegal, according to international laws and conventions. And to get even more technical, East Jerusalem -- where I spent several days "legally" before traveling past checkpoints and soldiers to Bethlehem and Beit Sahour – was illegally annexed to Israel after the 1967 war. All part of a colonization
project -- involving the building of illegal Jewish-only settlements in the occupied territories, and the continued expropriation of Palestinian land -- that goes criminally beyond the righteous goal of securing a safe and sustainable Jewish homeland within Palestine.

It's not just easy-to-dismiss anarchists like me that point to the illegal Israeli-occupation of Palestine, and the accompanying illegal settlements, as the principal acts of violence in the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Thousands of dissident Israelis increasingly speak out – a fellow travelers’ $5000 bail (US) was generously posted by one of these peace activists -- while more and more soldiers are jailed for refusing to serve in the territories. To obey the Israeli court ruling on not traveling to Palestine is to be complicit in the process of normalizing Israel's occupation. It allows the occupying power to continue to dictate its rule over the occupied, and it's nothing less than the imposition of a colonial practice and mentality. It's a mentality mimicked by the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs that consistently refuses to strongly object to the occupation and Israel's policy of inhibiting the presence of what they term "Palestinian sympathizers" in the occupied territories, even when those sympathizers hold a Canadian passport.

It's not for an occupying power to decide who can or can't enter Palestine. Rather, it is those Palestinians who daily resist the occupation, to determine whether they want to welcome international solidarity activists.

I received an invitation about a week ago to come to Palestine by members of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a Palestinian-led organization using non-violent direct-action methods of resistance to confront and challenge the illegal Israeli Occupation Forces and its policies, while recognizing the Palestinian right to resist Israeli violence and occupation via legitimate armed struggle (again, according to widely recognized international conventions). That offer was taken up as I heard across the Web, reports of my fellow activists being sentenced to federal prison time and extreme fines, for “acts against all Americans”. The crime? SOA/WHISC protests and vandalizing. All 86 members.

The ISM is part of longstanding efforts to cultivate direct solidarity between Israelis, internationals, and the Palestinian grassroots resistance that is at the heart of the intifada. It aims to break the silence about the reality of occupation, about the collective punishment that the Israeli Occupation Forces impose on Palestinians through land
confiscations, home demolitions, mass arrests, checkpoints, curfews, and the killing of unarmed civilians by one of the best-equipped armies in the world.

The ISM, and their many allies -- including the tireless members of Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR) in Montreal -- dare to stand in the way of a colonial occupation, by direct action if necessary. I feel privileged to be able to observe, support and participate in this crucial work, and notwithstanding the Israeli Security Service, I intend to stay until May 5th, which appropriately, is Cinco De Mayo. :p

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by DJ Rawkus
April 28th 2nd, 2003 -- I write this reply from Beit Sahour, a Palestinian town -- no more than thirty minutes south of Jerusalem

What was the point in posting this? Sorry I just didn't see how that answered the question posed by Mike S. [shrugs]

Take care,
Jason

[DJ Rawkus]

Relevance is always an issue with you isn't it jason? I'm suspect to think that if i had been fighting the good battle against Arafat and his cronies and then toss in a lil' Hezbollah action..well shit..you'd be right in there congratulating me for finally getting some goddamn common sense. Well... I'm back. I saw many things, and they weren't empty words on the cover of the liberal ivory tower of the Times or rhetoric spilled out over the pages of some useless conservative rag like the Post. It was real and it was living, or rather dying. And whether you like it or not, or think it's relevant while you sit in your cushy computer chair and spit meaningless drivel at me about "is this answering the question?" ...the questions that have yet to be asked are the ones that need to be answered the most. In short, I detest the myopic world view that some people hold when it concerns us after sept 11th. The solution at hand is currently the worst one, as i have witnessed firsthand. I don't see how Bush thinks somehow he can can scoot past Nature and pull off this magic trick of violence not begetting more violence. Palestinians and Isrealis are as bent on liberty and freedom and this whole fucking trip about personal gain as any american imagines they are. It's the methods they employ which distinguish them so vividly, not invisible lines that are drawn out on rand-mcnally maps. I can for certain tell you this, as I asked an IDF soldier myself while he glared at me, 'did you know I paid for your job?': That part of the world would LOVE for us to get more involved in that spat so that we can dole out even more sympathy via our wonderful tax system. That way, they don't hafta deal with the problem, they can just keep perpetuating it while appearing to keep peace talks in session. That's all they know is war. I have empathy for citizens of both countries as they are confused and led about like sheep to the slaughter; I have no empathy for you and people like you who can't even get past their boring poltical shtick and find some fucking decency to grasp onto, knowing all too well what's going on and thinking it 's "irrelevant".

[bungle bliss]

Good to hear from you Nathan. You're doing more than they ever will. And thus, understanding more than a lot of us ever will.

[Mike S]

Originally posted by DJ Rawkus
I don't see how Bush thinks somehow he can can scoot past Nature and pull off this magic trick of violence not begetting more violence.


You kind of answered your own question Nathan. If you consider the hopeless situation that many middle easterners live in to be a form of violence.. I believe that transforming that region, part of which required that we commit an act of violence, from being a terrorist incubator to a productive involved part of the world community is stopping this cycle of violence you mentioned.

I think the interesting - and dangerous part- hasn't even started. Once we get a free and democratic Palestine and a free and democratic Iraq and we start to see the effect those communities have on the dictatorships around them.. I think we going to see some dictatorships attempt to undermine both those countries.
Then its going to get real interesting over there.

MS

[ZupanGOD]

by Jaggi Singh

December 20, 2002 Beit Sahour -- I write this article from Beit Sahour, a Palestinian town -- no more than thirty minutes south of Jerusalem -- that has been enduring 24-hour curfew for almost one-month. Technically, I'm inside the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories. And technically, I've disobeyed an Israeli high court ruling that allowed me to stay in Israel for seven days on the very specific condition that I not visit the Palestinian territories. All this in spite of the failed attempts of the Israeli Secret Service and the Interior Ministry here to have me deemed a security threat, based on "secret evidence" presented in a closed court hearing that excluded my lawyer and me.

Technically, I'm now open to arrest and expulsion by the Israeli authorities, not because of any criminal act, or potential act, but because I've dared to visit Palestine in defiance of their orders.

But, speaking of technicalities, it is worth remembering that Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is unequivocally illegal, according to international laws and conventions. And to get even more technical, East Jerusalem -- where I spent several days "legally" before traveling past checkpoints and soldiers to Bethlehem and Beit Sahour -- was illegally annexed to Israel after the 1967 war. All part of a colonization project -- involving the building of illegal Jewish-only settlements in the occupied territories, and the continued expropriation of Palestinian land -- that goes criminally beyond the righteous goal of securing a safe and sustainable Jewish homeland within Palestine.

It's not just easy-to-dismiss anarchists like me that point to the illegal Israeli-occupation of Palestine, and the accompanying illegal settlements, as the principal acts of violence in the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Thousands of dissident Israelis increasingly speak out -- my US$5000 bail was generously posted by one of these peace activists -- while more and more soldiers are jailed for refusing to serve in the territories. Even Michel Sabbah, the soft-spoken Latin Patriarch in the Holy Land (and I don't often find myself agreeing with "patriarchs"), had no hesitation in telling the Jerusalem Post this past week that "[a]ll the Palestinian violence is the justified result of the occupation."

To obey the Israeli court ruling on not traveling to Palestine is to be complicit in the process of normalizing Israel's occupation. It allows the occupying power to continue to dictate its rule over the occupied, and it's nothing less than the imposition of a colonial practice and mentality. It's a mentality mimicked by the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs that consistently refuses to strongly object to the occupation and Israel's policy of inhibiting the presence of what they term "Palestinian sympathizers" in the occupied territories, even when those sympathizers hold a Canadian passport.

It's not for an occupying power to decide who can or can't enter Palestine. Rather, it is those Palestinians who daily resist the occupation, to determine whether they want to welcome international solidarity activists.

I received an invitation to come to Palestine by members of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a Palestinian-led organization using non-violent direct-action methods of resistance to confront and challenge the illegal Israeli Occupation Forces and its policies, while recognizing the Palestinian right to resist Israeli violence and occupation via legitimate armed struggle (again, according to widely recognized international conventions).

That invitation to visit was emphatically re-extended after the Israeli court ruling that barred my entry to the territories. I've decided then to ignore the Israeli security services and listen to the Palestinian activists. It was an easy choice to make.

The ISM is part of longstanding efforts to cultivate direct solidarity between Israelis, internationals, and the Palestinian grassroots resistance that is at the heart of the intifada. It aims to break the silence about the reality of occupation, about the collective punishment that the Israeli Occupation Forces impose on Palestinians through land confiscations, home demolitions, mass arrests, checkpoints, curfews, and the killing of unarmed civilians by one of the best-equipped armies in the world.

The ISM, and their many allies -- including the tireless members of Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR) in Montreal -- dare to stand in the way of a colonial occupation, by direct action if necessary. I feel privileged to be able to observe, support and participate in this crucial work, and notwithstanding the Israeli Security Service, I intend to stay.

http://www.montrealmuslimnews.net/jaggientering.htm

:eek:

Wow! Yer post looks awfully close to this letter. Glad yer back for cinco de mayo though. Drinks on me! :D

Good bye Rawk. Your pathetic.

-Jason

[DJ Rawkus]

What was the point in posting this? I mean.. i know your conservative and all, and those folk love tradition.. but shit, you'd think i committed some sort of felony by improvising. HA!

What? You've never borrowed someone else's words? PUhleez. I've seen you quote entire websites for fuck sake. The only spin here is that I added in my own life instead of someone else's. The circumstances are just the same. We both went under the help of the ISM, in the same cities (becuz there are only so many ways into palestine thanks to Sharon), under the same pretense of activist work. I really don't see where the "pathetic" part comes in. Feel free to pine away and mimic Bush with his "i swear there's WMD in Iraq" act.

[DJ Rawkus]

Originally posted by Mike S




I think the interesting - and dangerous part- hasn't even started. Once we get a free and democratic Palestine and a free and democratic Iraq and we start to see the effect those communities have on the dictatorships around them.. I think we going to see some dictatorships attempt to undermine both those countries.
Then its going to get real interesting over there.

MS I agree with you 100 percent. The interesting part hasn't even begun yet. The walls aren't finished, Bush hasn't laid out his peace plan yet, and nobody on either side is willing to compromise if it means "actual peace" rather than just a cease fire. I'm tellin' ya ..Southcentral Compton looks peaceful compared to what I saw over there. Those people are bred to be warriors, and the Arab world knows it. If any thing permanent gets hacked out with this peace process, you can bet your sweet ass there's gonna be a shitload of angry arabs trying to stir up the pot to get things back the way they were!! They know it's profitable to have war.. just look at the US model!!

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by DJ Rawkus
What was the point in posting this? I mean.. i know your conservative and all, and those folk love tradition.. but shit, you'd think i committed some sort of felony by improvising. HA!

What? You've never borrowed someone else's words? PUhleez. I've seen you quote entire websites for fuck sake. The only spin here is that I added in my own life instead of someone else's. The circumstances are just the same. We both went under the help of the ISM, in the same cities (becuz there are only so many ways into palestine thanks to Sharon), under the same pretense of activist work. I really don't see where the "pathetic" part comes in. Feel free to pine away and mimic Bush with his "i swear there's WMD in Iraq" act.

:rolleyes:

[DJ Rawkus]

Originally posted by ZupanGOD


:rolleyes:
Originally posted by Mirko
Just think of all that time some (mostly regressive) folks here waste ridiculing others, when their time could be spent doing something that would actually make a difference. Small comfort maybe, but I've found it's often occasion enough for a smile. I don't have to justify myself to you or anyone else Jason. I do what i do with deep conviction and good purpose. I can only hope you do the same. If someday you happen to stumble onto the idea that time is not recoverable and pinning people to the wall as a sport is fools work, it will be a step in the right direction. Whether i intentionally decieved or not, words are misleading anyways as they only portray that which we can speak and which are useless in any other territory but the mouth. You may live under any assumption you like; which is evidenced by this threads' title condemning anti-war leaders of deception as well.

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by DJ Rawkus

I don't have to justify myself to you or anyone else Jason. I do what i do with deep conviction and good purpose. I can only hope you do the same. If someday you happen to stumble onto the idea that time is not recoverable and pinning people to the wall as a sport is fools work, it will be a step in the right direction. Whether i intentionally decieved or not, words are misleading anyways as they only portray that which we can speak and which are useless in any other territory but the mouth. You may live under any assumption you like; which is evidenced by this threads' title condemning anti-war leaders of deception as well.

I didn't ask for you justify anything.. Sorry but I'll leave that to your own conscience.

Take care,
Jason

"He who sacrifices his conscience to ambition burns a picture to obtain the ashes." -- Chinese proverb