COMMENTS:
It's hard to label things as pure good or pure evil. The USA is less evil than the UN or the EU but that doesn't mean we are flawless. Israel is pretty bad but I'd be killing Palestinians too if I was an Israeli.
Even if you could see how wrong it was?
I deliberately used George Bush's black/white/negative/positive analogy as a way to focus on who might have the greater handle on 'evil' if destructive foreign policy is comparable to evil. I happen to think it is in this case...
What!Three democracies are more dangerous and "evil" than three totalitarian regimes?Come off it ZIG,how can you say that America,Britain and Israel has or will kill more innocent people than North Korea,Iran and Iraq?Why don't you look at the facts instead of just bashing three great countries?
Corrupt: I'm NOT bashing Western Culture, I'm poking a finger in the ribs of Western foreign policy. Big difference.
Corrupt - As for the facts: Those three have killed more innocent lives in the entire history of the world than we can ever have nightmares about.
Really?You mean America,Britain and Israel killed more innocent people then let's say the muslim world?!What about Italy or France?Didn't these two countries use to rule the world and slaughter entire races and civilization?Come on ZIG you are not being fair to these three countries.
Yes, Yes, God Yes.
Yeah but Corrupt these are modern times. You can't say that Israel and the U.S. are allowed to spread war just because the French did it in the 18th century.
Corrupt: Italy (under the Roman Empire) and France (under Napoleon) did untold damage for the timeframe of each, but neither compare in terms of sheer numbers to the destruction wrought by the 1) British empire 2) The baby American Empire and 3) The ambitions of Israel - and also Israel's current ethnic cleansing policy towards the people of Palestine.
for god sake, the british empire doesnt exist anymore, the people that founded it and maintained it are mostly dead, and the ones that are still alive gave it back anyway
yeah, we're evil, thats why we give an equivilant of $74.88 per person to developing countries (check out nationmaster if you dont believe me)
That's small change.
butt_lube,
$74 dollars and eighty eight cents?? :o omg that 88 cents is what's breaking us, 88 cents times three billion people equals our whole deficit! I think the fat rich old pigs in control could afford to support and educate the whole rest of the world without even touching their own people's money. God forbid evryone in the world had a house, no, not as long as some pig somewhere needs another jet plane
by x__ on Wed Aug 18, 04 3:27pm
[+]
Israel is the most evil nation in the world. Britain and America fully support Israel financially, militarily, and politically. That right there is the SOLE reason for Islamic Terrorism. Here in the U.S. they say "they hate us, our way of life, our people," no thats bullshit. They hate Israel and for good reason. Ethnic cleansing should be supported by NO ONE.
I don't know about "evil," but I have no doubt where the majority of damage potential comes from.
Preparation H: Did they really teach you that in High School? The British Empire is as powerful as ever, but they shield themselves very well under the umbrella of the 'Commonwealth.'
It's really amazing how easily people ignore conflicts which don't usually reach the headlines.
You have a masacare of 15000 people, and hundreds of thousands of refugees or something like that in Sudan, but no one mention that, and everyone concentrates on Israel's "current ethnical cleansing policies" with 3000 dead Palestinians, most of them were militants, and only thousands of those who lost their houses, not in a methodical cleaning of entire areas, but following the war which is being fought for 4 years now.
And Sudan is just one example that did reached the headlines shortly. So don't rate the evilness of countries by how much coverage their actions get, but actually about how evil they are. Bush's original axis of evil countries do have long statistics of evil acts against innocent civilians etc., but in general those are the 3 countries that pose the greatest threat to America.
by Yosi on Wed Aug 18, 04 5:06pm
[+]
Despite the lack of media coverage, some of us are very aware of the current atrocities going on in Sudan, but it doesn't - nothing does - excuse the Israeli extermination methods used against the people of the West Bank and Gaza. There is no justification for any attacks on civilians or their property, and the use of helicopter gunships in Palestinian refugee camps is irrefutable and inexcusable.
ZIG:Why do you continue to see the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in such a one sided view.You say that it is wrong for the IDF to kill Palestinian civilians.Well what are they suppose to do when these civilians pick up arms and attck Israelis?Perhasp you would prefer that the IDF throw peta bread at the terrorist and hope that they go away.Also why do you only focus on the mistakes that America,Britain and Israel made?What about the good things that these three countries have done for the world?American and British men gave their LIVES so that you and the rest of the world could be free from Facism.All nations make mistakes and sometimes kill innocent people but you only seem to be concerned with America,Britain and Israel.
ZIG - I don't say that the atrocities in Sudan justify anything - but that you have much better candidates to enter to your correct axis of evil, not based on media coverage.
Israel don't attack civilians - we're fighting a war against numerous militias, which operate from within the Palestinian population, and sadly, collateral damage can't be avoided. We could have just bomb terrorists nests with heavy artillery, and not risk our troops with close and urban combat - but we don't. We send our soldiers to the crowded towns and refugee camps with sole purpose of focusing the firepower on the militants, not on civilian targets.
Compare that with other nations tactics against terror - like Russia's ultimatum for the population of Grozny - those who won't evacuate, will risk being artillery shelled, in an effort to clean the city from the muslim seperatists. And it worked for them, but caused much collateral damage. So why we end up in the axis of evil, when the only reason I can think about is that we use more safe methods, which resuld in little results, allowing the situation to continue for years, instead of months, and thus capture the international public opinion for longer peroid of time.
by Yosi on Thu Aug 19, 04 2:09am
[+]
Corrupt, let me answer you briefly. You're presuming that my view is one-sided, but here's the deal as far as I'm concerned. ALL terrorism against any unarmed civilian population is wrong, but particularly if it's State-sponsored terrorism.
And Yosi: I'm sorry for what your people have suffered, but there is no excusing the methods of retaliation employed by the IDF. The atrocities are well documented and you can't somehow clinicize it all by using a cold term like 'collateral damage.' These repeated attacks are far from surgical and there is ample evidence to demonstrate this as fact.
The 'axis of evil' term I used here was simply to show that the accusers aren't so kid-white innocent, either.
And truly, I feel sorry for how America and Britain will eventually betray the people of Israel, because they will, when Israel has outgrown its usefulness to them.
And yet you can't give an example for a nation which suffered what Israel suffered and retaliated with less force than Israel does, although it was capable for much more.
"The 'axis of evil' term I used here was simply to show that the accusers aren't so kid-white innocent, either. "
OK, but ultimately those countries don't belong to the top of the evil list, and they're in one line with the rest of the enlightened world, because that's the amount of evil that anybody will use.
by Yosi on Thu Aug 19, 04 4:59am
[+]
I'm sorry, your last paragraph didn't make sense to me.
An example of what or where?
As for where those governments' actions might stack up on the pyramid of evil deeds or consequences, that's a matter that you and I will never agree on, Yosi, because we're looking through different ends of a telescope.
Nations which were terrorized, like Israel, have acted against the terror with much greater force, and caused more collateral damage than Israel. So I asked you to bring one example for a nation which was in Israel's position and defended themselves, causing less civilian casualities to the other side.
by Yosi on Thu Aug 19, 04 8:04am
[+]
You know, I can't think of a single one just now which has acted with greater retaliatory force against civilians than Israel has...
Will think about that.
Oh yes, America - in Iraq.
Britain in Northern Ireland.
Sorry, can't think of any more right at this moment. Can you?
I'm sorry, I read your last few lines too quickly, I realize that now. But I honestly can't answer re: which nation has been in a similar position and has caused less damage to unarmed civilians.
Or greater damage. This conversation is getting tangled up. I apologize if it's me who's doing the tangling. :)
Do any of you know of the involvement and support given to Hitler and the Nazis by U.S. industry and the support given by the House of Windsor and the city of Londons Crown Bankers?
When you find the truth you'll then realise just how many people died as a result of that support.
I know because a close relation to me went through the second world war and told me in particular of their knowledge of how the U.S. industies were manufacturing tanks, trucks and other military hardware in Germany for the Germans well into the war.
Have you ever wondered why Buckingham Palace was not destroyed in that war?
The answer is simple, check out the Royal bloodlines.
A lot of people died because of that war and many died as a result of the support given by the U.S. industries and the House of Windsor.
They killed their own people !
Now tell who is the AXIS of EVIL
A letter written by Albert Pike, the Grand Commander of American Freemasonry in 1871 and published in 1925. The letter foresaw three world wars designed to bring about Illuminati world hegemony. 'The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the 'agentur' of the 'Illuminati' between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic WorldThe war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other.
Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion..'
' "Those that print the money and charge us interest are the true devils of this world supported by a beligerent middle class who refuse to accept the guilt and responsibility of allowing power and privilege to reach for the big stick...again."
Just to add, a third world war is made all the more likely due to the work of Bruce Cathie who said
'The bomb is, in short a geometric device which can only be detonated in accordance with the unbreakable laws of geometry. The device is detonated by the manipulation of the relative motions of the atomic particles enclosed within it's casing; and this can only be effected by placing the bomb on, under or over a specific geometric point related to the earths surface, at a specific time.
"The geometric nature of the bomb makes a nuclear war completely illogical"
The Afghan 'secret war' was designed by Britain's Viscount Cranbourne, scion of the Cecil family, and his sidekick, Lord Bethell, as part of their general 'Arc of Crisis' policy of using 'Islamic fervor' to undermine the Soviet Union (while also, eventually, eliminating U.S. presence from the region)
Bin Laden, whose Saudi family became fabulously wealthy through government construction contracts, was one of a number of so-called private, dissavowable channels used to fund the war.
Sheikh Salim Bin Laden, one of four Saudis allowed entry into Britain's Prince Philip's exclusive 1001 Club, the financial conduit of his World Wildlife Fund. ; Sheikh Salim was considered excessively Anglophilic, even by Saudi standards.
Sheikh Salim also found U.S. patrons. By 1979, he had become a business partner of George Bush's son, current Texas Governor George W. Bush, in the family's Zapata Oil and Arbusto Ltd.
By the time the Afghan war broke out in 1980, Sheik Salim was already a dominant figure in the British-run Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI)which Thatcher and Bush used to fund their Afghan war. Osama, then a 20-year-old kid, was enlisted as the Sheikh's junior partner. His zeal for the 'Afghan cause,' and his $400 million in personal assets, came in handy.
In 1988, the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, and the Bush and Thatcher governments dropped the Afghan Mujahideen from their roster of 'Freedom Fighters,' and dumped them on the job market. They remained under British Intelligence control, however. Many were soon redeployed to North Africa and the Mideast, to carry out terrorist actions ascribed to 'Islamic terrorist groups,' on behalf of British geopolitical aims. Bin Laden remained Britain's primary paymaster for these groups, and nothing more.
shite.it always turns out longer than it looks on the comment box.
Thanks Alien_Invader and bigmonkeynuts for some amazing comments.
Interesting that the person who created the ballot choice "Out! Out! Demons of Stupidity" couldn't manage to spell stupidity properly... :o)
Perhaps he meant Cupidity?
And interesting that the person chose to associate himself with dragons.
Here's some more information on just how corrupt and evil U.S. industries were in the lead up to and in World War 2 with their support for Hitler and the Nazis all in the name of making money at the expense of millions of lives.
Helping Hitler: Nazi support from the U.S.
Without help from U.S. industrialists, Hitler might never have been able to wage World War II.
While most Americans were appalled by the Nazis and the rearming of Germany in the 1930s, some of America's most powerful corporations were more concerned about making a buck from their German investments. Here are a few examples of how U.S. industrialists supported Adolph Hitler and Nazi Germany.
General Motors
The Nazi connection: GM, which was controlled by the du Pont family during the 1930s, owned 80% of the stock of Opel AG, which made 30% of Germany's passenger cars.
Helping Hitler: When Hitler's panzer divisions rolled into France and Eastern Europe, they were riding in Opel trucks and other equipment. Opel earned GM a hefty $36 million in the 10 years before war broke out, but because Hitler prohibited the export of capital, GM reinvested the profits in other German companies. At least $20 million was invested in companies owned or controlled by Nazi officials.
GM may have even been plotting against the Roosevelt administration. According to Charles Higham in his book Trading With The Enemy, GM representatives met secretly with Baron Manfred von Killinger, Nazi Germany's West Coast chief of espionage, and Baron von Tippleskirsch, the Nazi consul general and Gestapo leader, in Boston on November 23, 1937. The group "signed a joint agreement showing total commitment to the Nazi cause for the indefinite future," and proclaimed that "in view of Roosevelt's attitude toward Germany, every effort must be made to remove him by defeat at the next election. Jewish influence in the political, cultural, and public life in America must be stamped out. Press and radio must be subsidized to smear the administration," and a führer, perhaps Sen. Burton Wheeler of Montana, should be in the White House.
Although the group tried to keep the agreement secret, Representative John M. Coffee of Washington found out about it and had the entire text of the agreement printed in the Congressional Record in August 1942.
HENRY FORD, founder of the Ford Motor Company
The Nazi connection: Ford, an outspoken anti-Semite, was a big donor to the Nazi party.
Helping Hitler: Ford allegedly bankrolled Hitler in the early 1920s, at a time when the party had few other sources of income. In fact, the Party might have perished without Ford's sponsorship. Hitler admired Ford enormously. In 1922, The New York Times reported, "The wall beside his desk in Hitler's private office is decorated with a large picture of Henry Ford. In the antechamber there is a large table covered with books,
nearly all of which are translations of books written and published by Henry Ford." (Hitler actually borrowed passages from Ford's book The International Jew to use in Mein Kampf). The same year, the German newspaper Berliner Tageblatt, a Hitler foe, called on the American ambassador to investigate Ford's funding of Hitler, but nothing was ever done. Ford never denied that he had bankrolled the führer. In fact, Hitler presented Nazi Germany's highest decoration for foreigners, the Grand Cross of the German Eagle, to Ford.
THE CURTISS-WRIGHT AVIATION COMPANY
The Nazi connection: Employees of Curtiss-Wright taught dive-bombing to Hitler's Luftwaffe.
Helping Hitler: When Hitler's bombers terrorized Europe, they were using American bombing techniques. The U.S. Navy invented dive-bombing several years before Hitler came to power, but managed to keep it a secret from the rest of the world by expressly prohibiting U.S. aircraft manufacturers from mentioning the technique to other countries. However, in 1934, Curtiss-Wright, hoping to increase sales of airplanes to Nazi Germany, found a way around the restrictions: instead of telling the Nazis about dive-bombing, it demonstrated the technique in air shows. A U.S. Senate investigation concluded, "It is apparent that American aviation companies did their part to assist Germany's air armament."
STANDARD OIL
The Nazi connection: The oil giant developed and financed Germany's synthetic fuel program in partnership with the German chemical giant, I.G. Farben.
Helping Hitler: As late as 1934, Germany was forced to import as much as 85% of it's petroleum from abroad. This meant that a worldwide fuel embargo could stop Hitler's army overnight. To get around this threat, Nazi Germany began converting domestic coal into synthetic fuel using processes developed jointly by
Standard Oil and I.G. Farben.
Standard taught I.G. Farben how to make tetraethyl-lead and add it to gasoline to make leaded gasoline. This information was priceless; leaded gas was essential for modern mechanized warfare. An I.G. Farben memo stated, "Since the beginning of the war we have been in a position to produce lead tetraethyl solely because, a short time before the outbreak of the war, the Americans had established plants for us ready for production and supplied us with all available experience. In this manner we did not need to perform the difficult work of development because we could start production right away on the basis of all the experience that the Americans had had for years." Another memo noted that "without tetraethyl-lead, present methods of warfare would not be possible." (Trading With The Enemy)
Still another I.G. Farben memo chronicled Standard's assistance in procuring $20 million worth of aviation fuel and lubricants to be stockpiled for war: "The fact that we actually succeeded by means of the most difficult negotiations in buying the quantity desired by our government... and transporting it to Germany, was made possible only through the aid of the Standard Oil Co." (Note: According to a 1992 article in the Village Voice, Brown Brothers Harriman was the Wall Street investment firm that "arranged for a loan of tetraethyl lead to the Nazi Luftwaffe" in a 1938. A senior managing partner of the firm was George Bush's father, Prescott Bush.)
Standard Oil may also have undermined U.S. preparations for war. A congressional investigation conducted after World War II found evidence that Standard Oil had conspired with I.G. Farben to block American research into synthetic rubber, in exchange for a promise that I.G. Farben would give Standard Oil a monopoly on its rubber-synthesizing process. The investigation concluded that "Standard fully accomplished I.G.'s purpose of preventing the United States production by dissuading American rubber companies from undertaking independent research in developing synthetic rubber processes."
Standard Oil may have also helped distribute pro-Nazi literature in Central America. According to Charles Higham in Trading With The Enemy, "on May 5, 1941, the U.S. Legation at Managua, Nicaragua, reported that Standard Oil subsidiaries were distributing Epoca, a publication filled with pro-Nazi propaganda. John J. Muccio, of the U.S. Consulate, made an investigation and found that Standard was distributing this inflammatory publication all over the world."
INTERNATIONAL TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH
The Nazi connection: IT&T owned substantial amounts of stock in several German armaments companies, including a 28% stake in Focke-Wolf, which built fighter aircraft for the German army.
Helping Hitler: Unlike General Motors, IT&T was permitted to repatriate the profits it made in Germany, but it chose not to. Instead, the profits were reinvested in the German armaments industry. According to Anthony Sutton, author of Wall Street and the Rise Of Hitler: "IT&T's purchase of substantial interest in Focke-Wolfe meant that IT&T was producing German planes used to kill Americans and their allies - and it made excellent profits out of the enterprise." IT&T also owned factories in the neutral countries of Spain, Portugal, Switzerland, and Sweden, which continued selling products to Axis countries.
The relationship with the Nazis continued even after the U.S. entered the war. According to Charles Higham in Trading With The Enemy, the German army, navy, and air force hired IT&T to make "switchboards, telephones, alarm gongs, buoys, air raid warning devices, radar equipment, and 30,000 fuses per month for artillery shells used to kill British and American troops" after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. "In addition," Higham writes, "IT&T supplied ingredients for the rocket bombs that fell on London... high frequency radio equipment, and fortification and field communication sets. Without this supply of crucial materials, it would have been impossible for the German air force to kill American and British troops, for the German army to fight the Allies in Africa, Italy, France, and Germany, for England to have been bombed, or for Allied ships to have been attacked at sea."
CHASE NATIONAL BANK (later Chase Manhattan Bank)
The Nazi connection: Chase operated branches in Nazi-occupied Paris and handled accounts for the German embassy as well as German businesses operating in France.
Helping Hitler: As late as 6 months before the start of World War II in Europe, Chase National Bank worked with the Nazis to raise money for Hitler from Nazi sympathizers in the U.S.
According to Higham in Trading With The Enemy, "In essence, the Nazi government through the Chase National Bank offered Nazis in America the opportunity to buy German National Bank offered Nazis in America the opportunity to buy German marks with dollars at a discount. The arrangement was open only to those who wished to return to Germany and would use the marks in the interest of the Nazis." Americans who were interested had to prove to the Nazi embassy that they supported Hitler and his policies.
Cooperation with the Nazis continued even after America entered the war. For example, Higham says, Chase offices in Paris remained open long after other American banks had shut down, and even provided assistance to the Nazis: "The Chase Bank in Paris was the focus of substantial financing of the Nazi embassy's activities throughout World War II with the full knowledge of New York. In order to assure the Germans of its loyalty to the Nazi cause... the Vichy branch of Chase at Chateau-neuf-sur-Cher were strenuous in enforcing restrictions against Jewish property, even going so far as to refuse to release funds belonging to
Jews because they anticipated a Nazi decree with retroactive provisions prohibiting such a release." (Trading With The Enemy)
All the fools that come on to this site disputing conspiracies had better wake up fast and realise just how bad and dangerous is the EVIL that lurks amongst us all.
DON'T come later to people like ZIG, bigmonkeynuts, cretin_slap, myself or some others here who are very aware of the EVILS of the banks, big industries, secret orders and Monarchies and say to us that you should've listened to us, because when it comes to the crunch, we will be busy looking after our families and or fending for ourselves and may not have the time or resources to help you then.
Look, learn and listen now while we go to the trouble of trying to show you the truth.
Excellent stuff, there Alien_Invader. All of it can be corroborated as fact, too, in case anyone is wondering.
the "cut and paste" ASSHOLES are out in full force once again. hahahahha
YYYYawn
Whatever mindy.
Yup whatever.
I'm sorry I don't want to bitch on Some people not wanting to focus long enough to learn something but I have to say it, the long sentences loose them, some people can not learn humanity, they need to be taken out.
by x__ on Fri Aug 20, 04 1:55pm
[+]
crap, wrong poll sorry
by x__ on Fri Aug 20, 04 1:55pm
[+]
I don't know. Are British forces in Basra as hated as the Americans in Bagdad? Israelis certainly wouldn't be very welcome. Britain and the US control more than their fair share of the world's wealth and military. The USA is the only country to have used nuclear weapons on a defenceless civilian (defeated) population.
Alien_Invader.
Buckingham Palace was actually hit by a bomb during the war. Look it up.
I agree with much of what you said though.
True, England_Patriot, one wing was hit pretty badly, but King George and the Queen Mum got to survey the damage with Pricesses Lilibet and Margaret Rose. Great PR stunt for the movie reel news at the time. But, why, when the RAF had full recon of Auschwitz did they decide not to bomb the infrastructure...not even the railway tracks? Could it have been because of IG Farben? Just a rhetorical question, but that's worth looking up, too.
*princesses
Preparation H: Did they really teach you that in High School? The British Empire is as powerful as ever, but they shield themselves very well under the umbrella of the 'Commonwealth.'
Explain yourself zig.please.
The commonwealth is worthless. Even Jamaica now wants 2 get rid of Queen. However the Anglo Saxon brotherhood is still strong Great Britain,Australia and New Zealand as well as Anglo-South Africans. I think we hav e probably lost Canada though, which is a shame.
Oh yes, America - in Iraq.
Britain in Northern Ireland
Britain in Northern Ireland?What!? In the modern Troubles the British have never targeted civilians. granted there have been controversial instances of the Collusion between loyalist paramilitaries and British forces but N ireland is not in the same league as Israel/Iraq. There are also incidents of British wrongdoings like the Bloody Sunday. Being a loyalist i dont give a rats arse. Maybe the IRA are the terrosists in N ireland Zig and not the British?
And before Irish-Scandinavian has a go at me, yes the British did do great wrongs before the troubles. Like the Black and Tans who where a pretty infamous bunch of nutters. perhaps the British army should bring the Black and Tans back!
Hmmmm I have gotten quite an education while on this ballot.I found out that America and not the German people were responsible for the rise of the Nazis.Israel is the most evil nation in the world.And British intellence controls Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.Well to you experts in world history I have this to say.What type of drugs are you on and how can I get some?:)
Hitler once paid a compliment to the British when he called tem the true nazis.
He said repeatedly 'the world needs an England'. Hitler was renowned for his love of Royal families and threatened with execution anyone who laid a hand on the Royals of Europe during actual hostilities accidental or otherwise. The entire Operation Sea Lion was a covert op to distract the Soviets. Hitler admits this repeatedly in such books as 'Hitlers Table Talk'.
' "... occasionally I hear someone say you're one of those 'conspiracy theories' nuts... that term was created by a government think tank back in the 60's to de-rate and ridicule anything not broadcasted by the official news media on the evening news ... there was a famous man that once said ... 'never attribute to a conspiracy that which can amply be attributed to the actions of a bunch of greedy stupid self serving men in power' ... I would add to this ... ' and the majority of people who are fooled into believing these men are honest and have the interests of the populous at heart' ... Prof. James McCanney M. S.
** karma **
England_Patriot you are correct about Buckingham Palace being hit by a bomb, thankyou for drawing my attention to this.
But what was the Royal Family doing while this bombing was going on?
During WW2 while Londoners were being barbecued alive by Hitlers Blitz. The royal family were waited on hand-and-foot, as-per-usual, in the Little Palace 100 feet underneath Buckingham Palace. The war made no difference to the gluttonous royal menu. They even insisted on their personal Royal Coats Of Arms stamped on their individual butter pats, as per usual.
Nice people the Royal family, LIKE HELL!, at least members of Royal families back several hundred years ago or more would go with their armies to fight the enemy, but not the greedy devious cowardly Royals we have now.
They like to start a war and have everyone else die for them.
Corrupt: What drugs are we on? Nothing but truth serum, I'm afraid. You can research all of this for yourself and come to your own conclusions based on what you find out.
BritishPatriot: The whole system of the Commonwealth was devised so as to allow British controlling interests to survive in former colonies whilst they could appear to be gracefully relinquishing power. That's why the British Empire is still as powerful today: Their influence is covert, but no less deadly than before.
Alien_Invadeder has some good points.
ZIG
You just talk complete and utter nonsense.
You don't have a clue what you're going on about.
Either about Northern Ireland or Auschwitz
I'm pretty knowledgeable on WW2 and I have it from several sources that the RAF did not know Auschwitz was used for, there was reconnaissance photos of Auschwitz but a full reconnaissance was not mounted, this is presumptious information on your own whim.
The RAF took in the area of millions of photo's and thorough analysis was only given to legitimate military targets.
and ZIG don't pretend you know more or even by your biased supposed research know more than me abotu WW2 or the RAF, because quite simply, you don't.
Rhetorical question?
It has all the rhetoric merit of ... well your statements as I suppose.
Your statements such as the empire is as powerful is laughable.
EVERYONE IS IGNORING THE MOST IMPORTANT THING! The AXIS of Evil. AXIS!!! This implies alliance. There was no alliance between Libya, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea! There is, however an alliance between Israel, Britain, and USA, therefore, logically the term 'axis of evil' fits more for them. 'axis of evil'- I spit on this comparison to World War 2. And COALITION of the willing...? What is this- a comparison to the coalitions of the Napoleonic wars?!?
Iran, North Korea, etc are evil, but they are not an axis- so you can simply call them 'evil' but NOT 'axis of evil'!
USA-Britain-Israel have a combination of evil policies PLUS an actual axis relationship. Therefore the term 'axis of evil' is more appropriate for them.
EUROTOPIA the references to what the American industries, the British Monarchy and the Crown Banks of London is here to shed light on just how far back this Axis of Evil goes back and is still in existance today and has brought Israel into its evil plans regarding the future of the Middle East.
England_Patriot, I'm sorry to upset your claims, but the RAF did know what was going on in Auschwitz, not only from the lines of prisoners that could be seen in reconnaissance photographs.
The pictures show thick black smoke rising from crematoriums connected to the gas chambers. Other pictures show smoke billowing from mass funeral pyres. In one, from the summer of 1944, individuals can be made out as they line up for a roll-call.
Why therefore were the extermination camps not destroyed after the reconnaissance planes of the Britons and Americans photographed them in such detail? At the very least, the railway tracks on which the Jews were transported into the extermination camp?
From 1942 there were reports by resistance fighters of the construction of concentration camps, but they were not believed at first.
By 1943 at the latest, London and Washington were informed enough to know that we weren't just talking about prison camps, but pure death camps.
England_Patriot:
I'm sorry you don't like this information, but your knowledge could improve with a little more research.
England_Patriot: Little do you know what this powerful AXIS is planning. Have you ever wondered why Queen Elizabeth II was anointed as Queen of ISRAEL as well as Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?
I'll have to partly agree with Zig on this.US, British goverments do sometimes play a good role player for the world, but they also try to influence others for they're own agendas, one example is Iraq in the 80's right up to the 90's supporting Saddam Hussain in his war with Iran because they were public enemy no1. It did not matter what he did to his people then or what WMD's he had as a blind eye was turned, and now it's the opposite.
And i don't see how setting up jewish homes on Palestinian lands is fighting terrorisom.
by isay on Sat Aug 21, 04 1:57pm
[+]
Britishpatriot, I don't give a shit whether you target civilians in N.Ireland or not. The fact is that you are there and you are an occupation force. A few other examples of English imperialism would be India, Native Americans (17th century), and South Africa. Need I go on. I have nothing against England I really don't they've contributed to civilization a whole lot but the fact remains that England is and imperial nation. Sorry, you are wrong.
Britishpatriot, I don't give a shit whether you target civilians in N.Ireland or not. The fact is that you are there and you are an occupation force. A few other examples of English imperialism would be India, Native Americans (17th century), and South Africa. Need I go on. I have nothing against England I really don't they've contributed to civilization a whole lot but the fact remains that England is and imperial nation. Sorry, you are wrong.
Got something to say? Please say something because I'm starving for good debate. Especially against someone I know is wrong.
This is getting interesting - Does anyone have exact numbers of civilians and militants that the British killed in north Ireland? French in Algeria?
by Yosi on Sun Aug 22, 04 5:59am
[+]
British patriot said..In the modern Troubles the British have never targeted civilians.
Which is a fact!
Ant British colony left that wants self rule would be granted it, as long as the majority votes for it.
by isay on Sun Aug 22, 04 9:29am
[+]
Yeah daddy is correct apart from the last bit saying Britain is still an imperialistic nation, since after ww2 Britain has only been fighting small wars against coups and insergents trying to stop civil wars and unrest in former colonys not repressing people.
I would ilke to see you're list of targeted civilians by Britsh soldiers, we know about bloody sunday and a few incidents where joyriders rammed through army checkpoints!
by isay on Sun Aug 22, 04 10:15am
[+]
Full list of casualties in Northern Ireland from 1969-1998 from the book, 'Northern Ireland's Troubles, The Human Cost'. Link here:
http:// www.conflictresearch. org.uk/ publications/ cotts_nitcosts .html
(Close spaces)
Britain will always be an Imperialistic nation, imo. It's in the blood.
Anybody else here think that either Alien_Invader or ZIG have a better knowledge of WW2 than me.
Can I see evidence relating to the fact that it was known to the RAF what happened at Auschwitz.
For some reason I doubt that any will be conjured.
You can't just state it matter of factly and expect someone like me to believe it.
England Patriot:
You may want to read this article from the Daily Telegraph before going to the Aerial Reconnaissance Archive at Keele University.
http: //www.telegraph .co.uk/news /main.jhtml? xml=/ news/2004/01/20/ wausc20.xml
(close spaces)
Aerial Reconnaissance Archive, Keele University (also known as TARA).
I dont need to buy a book thankyou, i was asking someone for they're information regarding British troops deliberately targeting civilians.
Britain will always be an Imperialistic nation, imo. It's in the blood.
What a silly statement to make, so please give you're opinion's why this is?
England_patriot there are recon photos of Auschwitz in the RAF and American archives, bombers flew over Auschwitz on the way to targets flying on they're attack profiles and knew they were there but i dont think bombing them would have eleveated the problem the invasion of Europe and men on the ground was needed for that.
by isay on Sun Aug 22, 04 1:44pm
[+]
Actually after WW2 England changed its imperial laws around a little. Before 1945 they tell you that they will conquer you and tell you that they will try to conquer you. Now they make some excuse like "that country harbors terrorists, bomb it", stuff like that. It still is imperial just has a different style. If you go into another country to liberate you make sure that you get something out of it. You make sure you take some of it with you.
isay: When I stated that Britain will always be an Imperialistic nation, it was an opinion. I am also British so the opinion was and is based on observation.
When I stated that Britain will always be an Imperialistic nation, it was an opinion. I am also British so the opinion was and is based on observation
You dont make an opinion with no reasons, you must have some, i asked you why you think that way?
Big daddy.. what babble are you going on about Britain does not have any imperial laws anymore, every last colony out there has the right to self rule if they choose to.
If you are trying to talk about Iraq i said in my 1st post i agree with zig and so does the majority of the UK.
by isay on Sun Aug 22, 04 3:03pm
[+]
OK isay, here's why I still think Britain is an Imperialistic nation.
British people, unfortunately have a habit of not looking to the bigger picture. A huge majority are still easily whipped into jingoism when it comes to foreign conflicts. (I'm thinking the Falklands War here and the first Gulf War). When it comes to their immediate loyalties, for the majority of Brits it's still, "God Save the Queen" at least south of the border, and unfortunately that sentimentality leads to blindness. And it allows manipulation by the government and the media. Which is exactly what is intended by the Crown, who controls both.
BigDaddy, I agree with you. The power is just more covert now than it was before WWII and the early part of the 20th century. Now Britain has its military agents based at the Pentagon and NATO to fight all its little wars of conquest. It's called the "Special Relationship." America is happy to oblige, as it means huge profits for arms and oil companies. Incidentally, Britain created, or helped to create, the CIA and the Mossad of Israel. British Intelligence still works very closely with those foreign agencies, because they work in tandem: They are a team.
I totally disagree the British people are not stupid and you're examples of the Falklands and the 1st gulf war are wrong!
The Falklands were discoverd by the English in 1690 they did not take them off nobody as the islands were uninhabited and have been administered by the British since 1833. Since they were wrongfully militarily invaded those civilians on that island have the right for protection from the British government.
The 1st gulf war again was about the invasion of Kuwait and yes oil as well i might add. those two examples does not make Britain's involvement an imperialist nation.
By the way i dont agree with the monarchy i think it's old and dated.
by isay on Sun Aug 22, 04 3:31pm
[+]
I didn't say the British people were stupid, they are not. Just a bit overly loyal, perhaps.
As for the Falklands, they never should have been held onto for so long anyway. It's only logical that they belong to Argentina, if they belong to anyone.
As for past Imperialism, they controlled a full one third of the earth's surface at one time, setting up colonies in each of the 24 time zones. They learned that it was cheaper and more effective to develop the art of stewardship and covert rule through an elaborate system of Governorships and installed puppet dictatorships. They also learned that they could fund both sides of a conflict, which they have done in a number of instances, so that it could appear to outsiders to be simply an ethnic conflict. Very sneaky technique.
I never said they didn't have any reconnaissance photos, I was very careful about that as I had already seen that article and already knew about it before that from The Third Reich at War. which I'm now gonna quote at length and I'm just going to point out that is incredibly accurate, best account of the European war in general that I have seen, over 600 pages:
"On 4 April 1944, an American reconnaissance plane actually flew over Auschwitz and photographed the I.G Farben synthetic rubber factory at Monowitz . The plant and portions of the Auschwitz main camp showed up clearly, but the gas chambers were not recognised for what they were"
Even if they had, it's likely there wouldn't have been an operation against it, Most planes were being commited to ensuring the suucess of the D-Day landings.
"On 16 June, at the very peak of the killing, the Allies at last became aware of what was happening at Auschwitz. Eye-witness reports from two pairs of escaped prisoners reached London and Washington via Geneva from occupied Slovakia. The reports of Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler, both Slovaks; statements by Arnost Rosin, a slovak, and Czeslaw Mordowicz, a Pole."
So this makes a few points clear, A the Allies only became known of the actvities of Auschwitz on the 16th of June, whereby almost all aircraft (the fighter-bombers and ground attack aircraft) that could have done something about Auschwitz were rightly committed to the fight in Normandy. B, the discovery of what was happening at Auschwitz wasn't due to aerial reconnaissance. This has been pretty reliabily confirmed by a private letter to a friend.
As a direct result of the British finding out:
"A storm of protests descended on Hungary's Admiral Horthy. Messages forcing him to stop the deportations came from the President of the International Red Cross, the King of Swede, and the Pope. More disturbing to him were intercepted British and American teletype messages that raised the possibility of bombing raids on government offices in Budapest and post-war reprisals against prominant government officials Finially, Horthy acted...he ordered the deportations halted... The participants included diplomats from five neutral nations - Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Turkey and Switzerland - along with papal nucio and representitives of the International Red Cross. In an effort to protect the nearly 200,000 Jews remaining in Budapest in case the deportations to Auschwitz resumed, they issued thousands of diplomatic letters of protection intended to safeguard the bearers, then secured the recipients in hundreds of special apartments and buildings...In Budapest, prehaps 100,000 Jews were now in safe houses maintained by the neutral nations, They and nearly 25,000 other jews in the city were not immune to the random, vicious attacks by roving bands of Arrow Cross thugs, but they did remain safe at Auschwitz and death marches"
To say we did nothing, 125,000 jews saved, not too bad.
So what have we got so far,
didn't know about Auschwitz until 16th June 1944, Auschwitz had been running since 4th May 1942, discovery not due to photo reconnaissance, couldn't have done much about it when we did, 125,000 jews saved after British became aware.
But I'm not finishing yet,
"on 20 August, B-17 bombers from the American Fifteenth Air Force actually hit Auschwitz. They delivered the first of four attacks on the I.G Farben facility at Monowitz"
Which renders your accusation that Auschwitz wasn't bombed because of consideration for I.G Farben beyond ridiculous, I wish the Americans would be so considerate of your property.
it also adds that the Allies refused to bomb the killing centres and rail traffic because
"they pointed out, the Germans would find another means of carrying out the final solution"
This is a very very good point, if they had bombed all the gas chambers, which would have been hard, because it was extensive, Auschwitz was twenty square miles, peak population 160,000. they would have found other ways, in the Ukraine alone, 4 million non-combatants, 900,000 Jews were killed by other means, they would simply have been marched to another camp, where many would have died, hence the term "death march" and once the few that got there, got there, killed. For instance, after the general genocide stopped at Auschwitz, of 3,000 who began one march, only 280 survived.
the other point they made
"trageting Auschwitz would only divert the Allied air forces from their mission of destroying the strategic industries that sustained the Nazi war machine, thus delaying the final victory that would halt the destrution of the Jews"
It also adds that
" the Allies were in no military position to take action against the camps"
a view shared in your arcticle
"Prof Wehler admitted bombing the camp would have been almost impossible, because it would have caused numerous casualties among the inmates"
It also doesn't say in that article that they knew what was happening at Auschwitz, just that there was reconnaissance photo's, which I never denied.
of course you're very good at blaming the Americans and British for this, well what about the Russians, the had very good ground attack craft, the IL-2, couldn't they have done something, now I think of myself as a bit of a traditionalist, what if we don't blame the Americans, British and Russians, what if and it's just a thought, that we blame the Nazi's and SS and collaboraters such as Horthy, you know the ones that actually killed the Jews, just a thought.
As for which offers a better insight, a history book, over 600 (most reliable war book I have) detailed pages dedicated to the European conflict, a fifty page chapter to the holocaust, 15 and a half pages to Auschwitz, or a one page article from a tabloid that doesn't even accuse what you says it does.
that requires some serious thought.
and ZIG,
what are the evil axis planning.
I want to know.
I have to say they've left me out of the loop on this one but you seem to be extremely knowledgeable.
This has been pretty reliabily confirmed by a private letter to a friend
sorry it should read
This has been pretty reliabily confirmed by a private letter to a friend from Winston Churchill.
Nice try England_Patriot, and we can all see how devoted you are to that weighty tome of yours, but consider this:
The British Monarchy, (German by extraction, don't forget) were secretly pro-Nazi, and through their US financial cartels controlled the direction of the war via Washington D.C., and selected which targets were to be bombed by the Allies. Realizing the value and insurance of corporate properties in Nazi Europe, Prudential and Lloyds (British) were in charge of the Strategic Bombing Survey. (Look in your library.)
So, strategically, the Nazi chemical giant I.G. Farben, was NOT bombed and was 93 per cent intact at the end of the conflict. (See "I.G. Farben" by Richard Sasuly, a book by a U.S. military officer in charge of the end of the war survey of Farben.).
Because of the business links with General Electric of the U.S., their facilities in Nazi Germany were not bombed, either. (See Anthony Sutton's "Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler".)
As for the Telegraph - Personally I think it's a stuffy English conservative rag of a newspaper, but 'tabloid' it isn't.
Winston Churchill? I was educated to believe he was a hero, too, but in reality he was a treacherous, traitorous old bastard. 'Scuse the French.
As for what the 'evil axis' are planning, if you stop being facetious for a moment, I might tell you.
Isay, if England goes into another country to "help out" it ends up setting a military base there and claims a piece of land for itself. That is imperialism. If England were to "help out" in Sudan they would put a military base up and stay there. Same for South Africa, your diplomats still own that place and control the puppet government.
Just like America seems to be doing right now. Wonder who they got their ideas from...
Zig.. there is no need to keep going on about the past British Imperialism we all know about it. It's old news,it's not the same thing as we are today. As for the Argentines they are just Spanish settlers from the Spanish conquest of south America so do you really think they have a right to them Islands more than Britain.One other good thing came out of that conflict was the removal of the Argentine military dictatorship.
by isay on Sun Aug 22, 04 6:29pm
[+]
Bigdaddy.. well the UK armed forces is deployed in 80 countrys around the world, do you really think we have some special Imperialistic agenda in all those places, alot of those are under the United nations so your assumptions are silly.
by isay on Sun Aug 22, 04 6:41pm
[+]
isay: What's happening now is a continuation of imperialism, that's why history is relevant when we're discussing Britain.
What counts now, though, is the future, I do agree with you on that.
isay: You're dismissing BD as having silly assumptions, but he is correct in his assertion.
Anyway boys, I'm out of here for tonight...
I may come back tomorrow if there's some reasonable debate and not a bunch of name-calling going on. This is not an ego trip, nor should it be for anyone commenting here.
ZIG
You're writing and believing your own press, I'm laughing at you because my arguement has beaten the shit out of yours.
http :// www. air-photo .com/ english/ bomb4. html
(close gaps, you know the score)
Monowitz was bombed, just accept it.
(German by extraction, don't forget) were secretly pro-Nazi
Who the fuck are you kidding.
You can't tell me anything about WW2, quite simply I know much much more about it.
You believe petty conspirasist publications and advertise it as undeniable fact.
You rhetoric statement about Auschwitz not being bombed because of I.G farben is laughable and I have the real proof.
You are both saying it's a continuation of imperialism by the British, if so start by stateing those places around the world then.
by isay on Sun Aug 22, 04 7:14pm
[+]
England_Patriot, forgive me for saying it, but your comments are making you sound like a pompous ass. You presume you are the only authority on history here; you've memorized it well, and parrot it admirably, but your version of history is just a bunch of old hogwash. And contrary to your insult, I happen to study history, too. We just read different books, obviously.
England_Patriot, I didn't realize you were only 16 years old! (I just went to your user page.)
I apologize for my last comment. Just please stop cussing and insulting and let's try and have a decent debate, OK?
This maybe just my impression but when I say something on here, it's normally the last word.
My version of history is the correct one and I dont care what impression I make to you or anyone on B&W.
Are you still denying that Monowitz was bombed, c'mon, I'm not ever gonna accept that you possess the right version of history and that's because you don't.
You can't fight my arguement because it's the truth.
What you read is conpiracy BS, just because something's old doesn't mean it's wrong, gravity well that was discovered over 400 years ago, so now it's just hogwash, give me a break.
You are both saying it's a continuation of imperialism by the British, if so start by stateing those places around the world then.
by isay on Sun Aug 22, 04 7:26pm
[+]
and don't hold back because I'm 16 because whatever age I maybe and whatever age you maybe I'll still deck you to the floor, I already have.
You really can't still believe that your arguement bests mine, you're not that stupid, well listening to the conspiracy bullshit you come out with, prehaps not.
and don't hold back because I'm 16 because whatever age I maybe and whatever age you maybe I'll still deck you to the floor, I already have.
You really can't still believe that your arguement bests mine, you're not that stupid, well listening to the conspiracy bullshit you come out with, prehaps not.
isay: Tomorrow. It's 1.30am here, so goodnight.
England Patriot, my debate with you is over. You got abusive, so you lost. Bye.
haha.
yeah, good riddence.
You've been driven off because my arguements are better and your thoughts are non-existant and belief in conspiracy theories over things like photograpic evidence of Monowitz being bombed.
Actually I don't want you to go, you're just a huge source of fun.
Oh, I'm not going permanently, but I'll pretend you have. :)
Clean your mouth out and try and discuss points a bit more maturely, or you'll find yourself laughed at by a bunch of people on here who've seen twice as much life as you have, junior.
May have been around twice as long but obviously don't know twice as much and sorry but I'm laughing at you first.
You're clearly not worth mature debate because your arguements are clearly not mature, you're just too comical to merit serious consideration, I feel threatened because I'm younger, help, I'm being threatened at being laughed at on a site where I don't care what people think of me b a Scottish women evidentely not even living over here.
Please stop.
I won't be able to sleep I'll be laughing that much, prehaps some warm milk might help.
At least I still have enough manners to wish you goodnight.
Actually my patience with such bullshit got go strained and your arguements had less and less behind them, pretending you won the arguement, I always find that works on people who actually lost.
C'mon admit it, the only reason you come here, is to find an audience who may listen to your conspiracy bullshit.
ISAY
Re British fuckheads
Saddam did not invade Kuwait.There was no trace of any Iraqi army on the satellite photos and the sand banks and terrain indicated no tanks or any troop movement save for their bowels back where they were .At home.Iraw were also set up when they were told that the affair was an internal arab conflict after Kuwait was caught stealing their oil among other things.US Troop buildup was taking place months before the alleged invasion had ever occurred
RE Yugoslavia.There was no genocide being conducted by Slobadan.It was a lie to justify the invasion.What then followed was a total destruction of Yugoslavia.Illegal weapons, assasinations, total destruction of the countryside,crops , hospitals .U name it.But guess what.
The corporate infrastructure remained intact.
The US and Brits oughtta be invaded and their miserable asses fried with the assistance of Johnny Rotten
The world's foremost military power and another of the world's most foremost military powers being invaded and having their asses fried.
Has all the realistic acheivability of Scotland, independentely being the first country to land a man on Mars.
Correct but thats not how its going to happen.
The reason for wars isnt purely imperialistic.That makes no sense.They are done as maintenance.To get Oil, reconstruction , defence contracts, uranium etc.As well as drug trafficking which is one of the biggies.These "transactions" are the thing required to keep the miserable philistines in operation to begin with.If you have a basic economic super-structure collapse due either to global melt down or simply due to losing a racket war ...Then your ass is gone
Besides South America is going to rout the US and then invade it.Russia and Iran will as well.
The british will be flooded with eastern europeans.After centuries of persecution by Germany and the Brits
Also a US army college determined the allegations of Saddam atrocities were bogus as well
I've said what I said and that's what I know. I don't want to argue this because it's pointless.
Yes BD, impossible to communicate with a kid who doesn't yet know how to debate properly without resorting to abuse.
Monkeynuts... Feel free to call me a fuckhead, it's does not bother me at all.
Saddam did not invade Kuwait.There was no trace of any Iraqi army on the satellite photos and the sand banks and terrain indicated no tanks or any troop movement save for their bowels back where they were .At home.Iraw were also set up when they were told that the affair was an internal arab conflict after Kuwait was caught stealing their oil among other things.US Troop buildup was taking place months before the alleged invasion had ever occurred
RE Yugoslavia.There was no genocide being conducted by Slobadan.It was a lie to justify the invasion.What then followed was a total destruction of Yugoslavia.Illegal weapons, assasinations, total destruction of the countryside,crops , hospitals .U name it.But guess what.
The corporate infrastructure remained intact.
I guess it was all a big conspiricy by the west (sigh)
Besides South America is going to rout the US and then invade it.Russia and Iran will as well.
The british will be flooded with eastern europeans.After centuries of persecution by Germany and the Brits
So tell me how Britain persecuted east Europeans for centuries?
By the way still not had any reasons for British interventions for our imperialistic ways.
by isay on Mon Aug 23, 04 9:15am
[+]
Can we all just drop the name calling and get back to the facts?How can anybody say that America,Britain and Israel are the true "axis of evil" when one looks at the horrors committed in Iran,Iraq and North Korea?Does the U.S,Britain and Israel force mothers to kill their own babies like the communist government of North Korea?Do the American,British and Israeli governments use rape rooms and torture chambers?No ofcourse not,these three nations are among the finest protectors of human rights.To say that the attrocities committed in North Korea,Iraq and Iran are not on par with the "attrocities" committed by America,Britain and Israel trivializes the deaths of Korean,Iraqi and Iranian civilians.
Unlike Iran, Iraq and North Korea, The USA, Britain and Israel are connected in a multitude of ways, so they are a tripartite force - an axis -geopolitically and militarily speaking.
Oh I think I might have misunderstood what you meant by "axis of evil" ZIG.If you mean that America,Britain and Israel are an "axis of evil" because they are allies then you are kinda correct.However I still don't think these three countries are "evil".
ZIG
What as opposed to your mate monkeynuts who calls to attention British fuckheads or is he simply more mature because monkeynuts is more complient with your views.
Are you still trying to claim that monowitz wasn't bombed?
yes or No, straight answer.
You're simply withdrawing under pathetic false pretenses, really it's because your arguement was beaten by a better one.
My argument wasn't beaten England_Patriot, but your arrogance makes it impossible to debate anything rationally, so give it a rest, please.
I'm still putting it to you, was Monowitz bombed, your opinion after what you've seen, yes or No?
Quote: The Strategic Bombing Survey described the missions of the 15th Air Force that bombed the Auschwitz-Monowitz industrial complex August 20 -September 13, 1944, and incidentally hit some of the barracks, but did not bomb any concentration camp or the railroads.
So, what was your point?
"I guess it was all a big conspiricy by the west (sigh) "
Conspiracy ? *yaaaawn*
YUGOSLAVIA
The testimonies and statements of members of the U.S. Congress who visited the Balkans, a former State Department official under the Bush administration, a former deputy commander of the U.S. European command, several UN and NATO generals and international negotiators, Spanish air force pilots, forensic teams from various countries, and UN monitors who offer revelations that contradict the picture drawn the apologists of U.S. officialdom and sources from within the European Union, the European Community's Commission on Women's Rights, the OSCE and its Kosovo Verification Mission, the UN War Crimes Commission, and various other UN commissions, various State Department reports, the German Foreign Office and German Defense Ministry reports, and the International Red Cross.
IRAQ
deoxy. org/wc/ wc- consp.htm
irrefutable
England Patriot
You are quite right.I am sorry.Its not your fault you are fuckheads.Please accept my sincerest apologies
That your "rhetoric" statement that they didn't bomb the Auschwitz because of the IG Farben plant is total shite.
That it amazes me that you still want to attribute this evil to Britain and America but not the Nazi's or SS or the Russians who were closer and had the avaliable ground attack aircraft thereby pretty much proving that you will go to any lengths to blame America and Britain and that anything you say probably will be lies or biased.
I'd just like to point out that without Britain and America this world would be under occupation of the Japanese and Germans but probably according to you this would be a good thing rather than be under the ruthless tyranny of the evil America, dispicable Britain and the merciless Israel,
bigmonkeynuts. The attack wasn't really directed at you, it was directed at ZIG's contradictable attitudes when it suites her best but how well you know me.
Trust me, I really took it to heart.
You have a lot to learn Nappyrash.
YUGOSLAVIA
The testimonies and statements of members of the U.S. Congress who visited the Balkans, a former State Department official under the Bush administration, a former deputy commander of the U.S. European command, several UN and NATO generals and international negotiators, Spanish air force pilots, forensic teams from various countries, and UN monitors who offer revelations that contradict the picture drawn the apologists of U.S. officialdom and sources from within the European Union, the European Community's Commission on Women's Rights, the OSCE and its Kosovo Verification Mission, the UN War Crimes Commission, and various other UN commissions, various State Department reports, the German Foreign Office and German Defense Ministry reports, and the International Red Cross.
No genocide my arse, since i was a mark1 eyeball on the ground there in 1996 with the British Army under UNPROFOR i think thats very irrefutable.
by isay on Mon Aug 23, 04 4:46pm
[+]
LMFAO
I'm laughing but for all the right reasons.
Scotland, famous for it's women comedians.
By the way monkeynuts where are you from?
by isay on Mon Aug 23, 04 4:48pm
[+]
Just out of asking, what do I have a lot to learn about, I am eager to possess your wealth of knowledge that apprantely no-one else is privilaged enough to have.
Live twice as long, study twice as hard, read some books other than high school fodder, and maybe you'll find out the truth for yourself. Maybe not.
Anyway, I'm gone. It got boring a while ago. Ciao! :o)
Scratch that part where I'm done. First of all there was a massacre in Kosovo and Srebrenka. I don't know who said it was a stage but who ever did say it is wrong. All the bodies that I had to recover I think were pretty dead. No? And the whole Kuwait thing, yeah I think he did invade it. Saddam even made speeches on it. I beleve in theories but some are so fake. And I repeat, there was a genocide, if is foolish to say there wasn't. I didn't fight in that war for fun I fought in it for the reason of genocide. I wasn't brainwashed I got myself into it. After being sent into Kosovo in 1988 and taking a look at the 10,000 massacered Albanians I was for sure that there was a massacre and civil war was at sight.
Well i have not resorted to name calling yet, does that mean i'm winning?
And again...You are both saying it's a continuation of imperialism by the British, if so start by stating those places around the world then.
Although i dont have any luck with replys to that question.... just one more time though!
by isay on Mon Aug 23, 04 5:03pm
[+]
I have no proof, and that is because you leave no proof. I'm not going to argue it because its impossible even with proof to make you believe it and that is because you dont want to believe it.
living twice as long doesn't mean anything.
Pull the average 32 year old off the street and challenge my knowledge against his.
I would destroy it, totally.
Last time I checked every single war book I have isn't on the ciriculum, North Africa, my biggest area of expertise isn't even taught in schools, glad to see your conclusions are as accurate as usual.
What you read is conspiracy bullshit, you have pretty much been inreffutably proved wrong on a "rhetoric" statement of yours.
Your thoughts are non existant, your conclusions are idiotic, yeah let's blame America and Britain for the halocaust not the Nazi's and SS, what kind of idiot are you, thinking that your knowledge is superior because you read books with non-factual information and conspirasist bullshit, such as the I.G Farben facilities were never bombed.
You've been beaten in a debate and you can't accept it.
I think it's time you found out the truth, of course I could help you, but a realistic, logical thought will never find home in that conspriacy filled head of yours,
what books have you read anyway, the two you've named, simply from the titles can be dismissed as conspirasist books and the others are probably, "conspiracys and me" by you and "the big book of conspiracys for the mentally unbalanced and illogical"
Yeah get back to your conspiracy convention or as sane people refer to it, the asylum.
England Patriot, hope thats not pointed toward me because what I know of is that the Nazis commited mass murder in Poland not the UK. As for you calling everything against England propoganda, well... that's just wrong.
Pull the average 32 year old off the street and challenge my knowledge against his.
I would destroy it, totally. - Nappyrash.
Sweetheart, you just proved yourself wrong.
And you know, you can insult me all you want, but it doesn't change a thing. You know nothing.
directed at ZIG about the wrong conclusions that she comes to about WW2.
Say what you want about Britain if it's merited, Irish potatoe famine and such but people like ZIG are beyond redemption.
Pull the average 32 year old off the street and challenge my knowledge against his.
I would destroy it, totally. - Nappyrash.
Sweetheart, you just proved yourself wrong.
And you know, you can insult me all you want, but it doesn't change a thing. You know nothing
No.
What I think here is that you've been proved wrong and that you can't accept it.
BigDaddy, I wasn't saying the Nazis didn't commit atrocities in Poland, or Nazi Germany, they did. But they couldn't have done it without their friends in Wall Street...or London.
No extermination camps in Germany, I'm sure you're aware of that, will all your knowledge and all.
attrocities also commited elsewhere, Ukraine, for example.
|
