Terrorism????...Blame America!!!!

[zambuck]

Oh, come on! The Red Indians and the Aztecs, Mayas, Esqimos and Australian aborigines are history. Now we are being flooded with immigrants and, eventually, the white race will merge with the asiatics through reproduction and we will be history, too.

This is because a minority people are dominated by the majority. The same started to happen in Yugoslavia, Nazi Germany, Africa with genicide.

This has, always, happened and it will happen in Iraq. The same thing happens when city people move to a pleasant country village and take the place over, moving into the council, etc. It is change and is a continuous process.

Split

....Yes...it is a continuous process and from your post you appear to be saying - appear to be saying - and I stand corrected - that this will happen and has to be accepted.....

....OK...next time the Burma Veterans are gathering just tell them that forget what Japs did to you all as it is part of a historical 'destiny'.....This will happen more and more....

......Go to battle of Britain gathering and say Ok chaps...you did what you had to do but it was part of the history that you had to fight Germans.....So forget what Germans did to the East End and London....No problems....carry on...

The point I am making is that, YES...it is history and events will take place - BUT some events cannot be that easily be swept under the carpet just like that....

I remember a very good Canadian Comic called Russell Peters (Russell is Canadian Indian Indian) who once said that one day the whole world will be Beige in colour.....The majority of people are Chinese and Indians on this planet.....And if the people mix you will have one Beige colour of skin....You lot in West can escape us now but sooner of letter we will hump you....!!...So start mixing now...!

 

[zambuck]

Clearly, im refering to the modern day era.
So when did the so called Modern Era start?.....After 1962..?..Because before that an old black lady could not sit on any seat on a bus.

I'm sure your aware America was not the only country involved in the slave trade.
Yes you are right....But on a Industrial, managed and calculated scale of slave trade there is NO parallell.....Prove it otherwise or keep your silence..!

Well im sure this can discussed at length but it really has nothing to do with the topic of this discussion, it's just too far back.

When are things too far back and when not.....?..Time scale?

 

[kagein]

When are things too far back and when not.....?..Time scale?

how this turned into an issue with the slave trade i have no idea, the slave trade started long before the US was formed in the 15th century.

But on a Industrial, managed and calculated scale of slave trade there is NO parallel

This is false. how do reconcile black populations in Brazil and the west indies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade#African_versus_European_slavery

some light reading for you.

If you want to debate the slave trade i suggest you start a thread.

i would say for the purpose of this arguement anything before 1950 should be discounted

 

[A Dashing Blade]

Where should i be getting my news ?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/
http://whatreallyhappened.com/categories/index.htm
http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives.html

mwha ha ha ha ha ha ha
I trust you don't take your trading ideas from that bunch of conspiriloons

 

[zambuck]

how this turned into an issue with the slave trade i have no idea, the slave trade started long before the US was formed in the 15th century.

But on a Industrial, managed and calculated scale of slave trade there is NO parallel

This is false. how do reconcile black populations in Brazil and the west indies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade#African_versus_European_slavery

some light reading for you.

If you want to debate the slave trade i suggest you start a thread.

i would say for the purpose of this arguement anything after 1950 should be discounted

Wikipeadia is written by anyone and everyone....so devil may be in details if pressed further on the issue and statistics....Wikipeadia is the LAST thing I will read for research and any concrete fact on any issue.....

Quite frankly I have no desire to start any debate on slavery but as an issue on US and that it does not kill civilians this was one of the subject....But as you have now narrowed the debate by the date 1950 and everything before as irrelevant there is nothing much to debate apart from what yoy would really love to hear.......!

 

[Splitlink]

....Yes...it is a continuous process and from your post you appear to be saying - appear to be saying - and I stand corrected - that this will happen and has to be accepted.....

....OK...next time the Burma Veterans are gathering just tell them that forget what Japs did to you all as it is part of a historical 'destiny'.....This will happen more and more....

......Go to battle of Britain gathering and say Ok chaps...you did what you had to do but it was part of the history that you had to fight Germans.....So forget what Germans did to the East End and London....No problems....carry on...

The point I am making is that, YES...it is history and events will take place - BUT some events cannot be that easily be swept under the carpet just like that....

I remember a very good Canadian Comic called Russell Peters (Russell is Canadian Indian Indian) who once said that one day the whole world will be Beige in colour.....The majority of people are Chinese and Indians on this planet.....And if the people mix you will have one Beige colour of skin....You lot in West can escape us now but sooner of letter we will hump you....!!...So start mixing now...!

No, I am not saying that such things are inevitable. The Spanish threw the muslims out of Spain, for example, but muslim culture is all over Spain. If a people are willing to fight and are able to win, then they will survive and the minority will be absorbed into their society. However, the mixture of blood and culture will change both cultures --- for the better, in my view.

When the Angles, Celts, Saxons, and Normans fought it out no one came to their aid. The result was, really, a phenomenal nation. Who knows what the result will be in Iraq?

The Battle of Britain, the 14th Army, etc were great moments in British history which we will never forget but the result of WWII was a bankrupt nation and the end of the British Empire.

My view of all this, and I'm 75, is that I saw the Jamaicans coming over in the Empire Windrush and, since then, there has been a steady influx, now a flood of immigrants. The Spanish language is spoken by many US senators ,these days, so that they can get through to their voters. All this is good and healthy for us all and when I see tribal battles going in other parts of the world I see no sense in interfering. We should back off and let them sort it all out. On the other hand, I realise that we cannot leave people, who were our allies, to get on with it.

So we should have learned our lesson. Darfor? Let someone else go in there, if they must. If I was Brown, I'd stay out of it. There are plenty of other nations in the UN.

Split

 

[kagein]

Wikipeadia is written by anyone and everyone....so devil may be in details if pressed further on the issue and statistics....Wikipeadia is the LAST thing I will read for research and any concrete fact on any issue.....

Quite frankly I have no desire to start any debate on slavery but as an issue on US and that it does not kill civilians this was one of the subject....But as you have now narrowed the debate by the date 1950 and everything before as irrelevant there is nothing much to debate apart from what yoy would really love to hear.......!

well...read it, if you find an error in the facts let us know, better yet, edit it!!

The reason i suggest 1950 is to direct the debate a bit, otherwise we'll be talking about things like the slave trade.

 

[dcraig1]

well...read it, if you find an error in the facts let us know, better yet, edit it!!

The reason i suggest 1950 is to direct the debate a bit, otherwise we'll be talking about things like the slave trade.

Oh, it's 50s onwards you want. Well try this one.

In a reign of terror almost beyond belief, the US dropped more bombs in secret operations on Cambodia during it's war against Vietnam than were dropped by all Allied forces in WW II. 10% of the bombing was indiscriminate.

http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/2420

Now tell me about the concern for civilian life.

 

[zambuck]

well...read it, if you find an error in the facts let us know, better yet, edit it!!
As I said that I have no desire to read or indeed edit the site where facts are wrong or are constantly queried........You don't have to tell me what to do....!

The reason i suggest 1950 is to direct the debate a bit, otherwise we'll be talking about things like the slave trade.

The debate and it's content and the death and torture in slave trade is VERY relevant part of the subject matter but it's just that YOU have problems with it....

It's good to have debate but not a flimsy sulky - You can't say that! - debate...! So carry on...Hopefully someone will make your day..!

I have said what I wanted to say......!

 

[A Dashing Blade]

The debate and it's content and the death and torture in slave trade is VERY relevant part of the subject matter but it's just that YOU have problems with it....

Don't really see what events from a couple of hundred years ago have to do with the price of bread either, but there you go.

Getting back to the original post, this quote is from an Iraqi blogger . . .

I always hear the Iraqi pro-war crowd interviewed on television from foreign capitals (they can only appear on television from the safety of foreign capitals because I defy anyone to be publicly pro-war in Iraq). They refuse to believe that their religiously inclined, sectarian political parties fueled this whole Sunni/Shia conflict. They refuse to acknowledge that this situation is a direct result of the war and occupation. They go on and on about Iraq's history and how Sunnis and Shia were always in conflict and I hate that. I hate that a handful of expats who haven't been to the country in decades pretend to know more about it than people actually living there.

I remember Baghdad before the war- one could live anywhere. We didn't know what our neighbors were- we didn't care. No one asked about religion or sect. No one bothered with what was considered a trivial topic: are you Sunni or Shia? You only asked something like that if you were uncouth and backward. Our lives revolve around it now. Our existence depends on hiding it or highlighting it- depending on the group of masked men who stop you or raid your home in the middle of the night."

http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com

My take on it? The US was conceptually right to go in and overthrow Saddam but, for many reasons, totally f*cked it up. However, that is no reason to withdraw, as to do so would probably incite a fill blown civil war.

 

[kagein]

i have no problems with discussing slavery but i just can see it's relevance to modern day terrorism. If anyone can make a direct connection, please state it and i'll stand corrected.

 

[zambuck]

Don't really see what events from a couple of hundred years ago have to do with the price of bread either, but there you go.

The originator of thread said and I quote - US don't go out to kill civilians - end quote.....

But I see my mistake now.....slaves were just not civilians....so I take all my comments back.....

 

[zambuck]

i have no problems with discussing slavery but i just can see it's relevance to modern day terrorism. If anyone can make a direct connection, please state it and i'll stand corrected.

You keep missing the point....The point was made in relation to your statement that US do not go and kill civilians.....it was an example amongst many others posted........

But as I said ih earlier post I take it all back as slaves were not considered as civilians at that time....They were slaves..! So are really not part of this discussion...!

 

[fibonelli]

Where should i be getting my news ?



mwha ha ha ha ha ha ha
I trust you don't take your trading ideas from that bunch of conspiriloons

These alternative news sites are essential to counterbalance useless broadcasting services like the BBC which exist to serve the sheeple.

BBC News Report Proves Prior Knowledge of 9/11 (Building 7)
http://www.livevideo.com/video/1EA714F18A254C0CA0E3A9523D6D6C88/bbc-news-report-proves-prior-knowledge-of-9-11.aspx

BBC Responds to Building 7 Controversy; Claim 9/11 Tapes Lost
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/270207bbcresponds.htm

 

[Splitlink]

The perpetrators have a complete indifference to human suffering. The slaves were loaded en masse onto the ships and those that died were thrown overboard, in the same way that a chicken breeder tosses out the dead chicks that have not lasted the night. The terrorists of today are, equally, indifferent to human life. It's not assassination, where a specific target is selected. It's like the slaves of today where the women are gradually demoted, as they get worn out, until they are living under the bridges.

Split

 

[TheBramble]

Try Pointing the Finger of Blame while standing in front of a Mirror

The key to why this thread is meandering the way it currently is, is in the title. Blame.

Blame is a call for an accounting for something which has happened, or is likely to happen and where there is no direct, empirical cause directly attributable to the party or parties potentially being held responsible.

It tends to be a knee-jerk reaction to or call-of-the-mob excitation to self-righteous indignation as events outside the control of those calling for blame to be attributed. It also tends to be related to a reciprocal degree to the extent that the events impact upon those calling for such attribution.

It is also, in my experience, normally heaped on those least responsible for such attribution and far more importantly, least able to state their side of the apparent rationale for being so nominated.

Blame is also a panacea for imagined wrongs, normally exacerbated by the distance the blamer is from the problem and the extent to which they feel they should feel enraged, or should feel some emotion, but rarely do in truth. The Sun (UK tabloid daily) bases its content almost exclusively on meeting the needs of those who need to see blame attributed, regardless of the validity of the action and target, and especially the cause. Blame doesn’t seek to expand awareness of the problem, mitigations for the impacts or a basis for how to avoid any future reoccurrence. The prime and probably single motivation for blame is to feel better because someone else is wrong and you aren’t.

But there’s a problem.

Terrorism exists because terrorists exist. Not because America exists. Or what America does or does not do. Any more than terrorism existed (was born?) in the Transvaal by virtue of British Imperialism, or in Afghanistan a century ago or India (to a lesser extent) a shorter period of time ago. Or in Northern Ireland until relatively recently.

Everything that exists today, good and bad, is as a result of the cumulative effects of all of our actions and lack of actions, and those of those before us. We are all as responsible each in our own way for each act of terrorism by neglecting to take action to prevent these acts, or the development of those acts as they arise in the minds of those that plan and perpetrate them as are those who actually prime the explosives and trigger the detonators. Be that by voting for the ’other’ party, or petitions to your MP (or Senator) or direct to Parliament (or the Senate), right through to direct acts of terrorism yourself on the terrorists. By our (and your) continued willingness to whittle on about these various ‘issues’ on these boards rather than take overt, specific and physically external action you are as responsible as anyone else for what occurs – or does not occur.

To the extent that you stand aside and allow these acts of terror to continue without taking an overt, external and vigorous action to prevent, is the extent to which you are personally responsible yourself.

My guess is, those who call most fervently for blame to be apportioned will be standing the greatest distance away from any action in place or being planned to bring about its cessation and will likely be least impacted by such acts and have the least real emotion (or sense) for what is really going on, and why.

And before anyone suggests I put up or shut up and I am falling on my own sword here (which to some extent I am, and am not) in suggesting specific ways to bring these acts about, my response would be, I do, and its up to you how you do your bit, in your way and take the consequences – both success and failure – as your own personal responsibility. The problem with just talking about it, is that it is sometimes felt as being sufficient in and of itself to bring about the needed change. It rarely is, in and of itself. The real trouble is that in airing one’s views, there is sometimes a sense that something has been done and therefore, no further action (or thought) need be taken. That’s the problem.

It’s an interesting phenomenon to see just how much self-assumed indignation is generated by events so far away from having any impact on those saddling up (in words) on this thread to do battle (in words) with the ‘cause’.

If you want to find a reason for why things like this occur (and my main motivation for spending so much time on this), can I suggest you do your own detailed and independent research and expend some more thought and effort into establishing what more likely really lies beneath the surface of what you are given as ‘fact’ and develop your own criteria for establishing what is closer to the Real Truth, rather than come up with the ‘foe of the day’ trip that requires little more than a glance at whatever today’s tabloid headlines suggest.

 

[Mayfly]

FWIW, I think that history shows the Americans are rank amateurs when it comes to the mass murder stakes, and they don't seem to show any real talent for it. By contrast, the Europeans aren't too bad and the Asians have obviously been hidding the lights under a very large bushel? If you think i'm joking, then take a look at these figures: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_toll

The truth of the matter is that there are plenty of places around the world where the local populaces would no doubt welcome US intervention: Darfur being one of them, and not forgetting to mention Mugabe's Zimbabwe, where three times as many people are dying than in Iraq! This entirely without the help of US intervention, in fact they're dying for the lack of it; and I'm given to wonder if this isn't somekind of perverse racism in reverse: we can't intervene because they're black?

Anyway, if the Americans we're suddenly endowed with a double dose of original sin in 1945 (in flash and almost to the day as I recall), then let's not forget that we all thought that it was the Germans who similarly endowed for the first part of 20th century and our friends in France in the century before that? mind you, this is a peculiarly eurocentric point of view, no doubt if I were borne in Manchuria i'd have a entirely different perspective?

So, it's all about the exercise of power and if we live in a Hobbesian world where life is generally nasty, brutish and short then you have to ask why people of the calibre of Robert McNamara came to head up the World Bank: and remember that was back in the days when the global population was probably half of what it is today.

Just my two penny worth, guys and sorry if it causes any offence.

Cheers

Mayfly

 

[A Dashing Blade]

The originator of thread said and I quote - US don't go out to kill civilians - end quote.....

If the Americans were deliberately targetting Iraqi civilians as a matter of policy (as you imply), the death toll would be far, far higher.

Wrt to those who think the Americans were only the guily parties in the slave trade, where do you think they got the slaves? Answer is they were sold them by other Afriacn tribes.

 

[JTrader]

Where should i be getting my news ?



mwha ha ha ha ha ha ha
I trust you don't take your trading ideas from that bunch of conspiriloons

Step out of the closet ADB. Be loud & proud. You seem like a truther in denial at the moment.....I'm guessing you visit PrisonPlanet.com daily....

AJ actually knows quite a lot about the markets.........

 

[zambuck]

If the Americans were deliberately targetting Iraqi civilians as a matter of policy (as you imply), the death toll would be far, far higher.

Wrt to those who think the Americans were only the guily parties in the slave trade, where do you think they got the slaves? Answer is they were sold them by other Afriacn tribes.

Regarding slave trade...read...understand and then proclaim.....

....Don't just dash....