Guest bengalrick Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 be nice to them, they'll be nice back... yeah right!!!!!!! listen to this fuck: [url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4661633.stm"]click here[/url] [quote][b]Galloway: Bombings price of Iraq[/b] Mr Galloway was a vocal opponent of the Iraq war Londoners have paid the price for Iraq and Afghanistan, says George Galloway. The Respect MP, whose Bethnal Green and Bow constituency includes the site of at least one of the bomb attacks, said the attacks were "despicable". [b]But he told MPs it was the US-led coalition's actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo which had inflamed hatred of the West in the Muslim world. [/b] In response, minister Adam Ingram accused Mr Galloway of "dipping his poisonous tongue in a pool of blood". The armed forces minister added that Mr Galloway's comments were "disgraceful". Same mistakes? Earlier Mr Galloway said he was absolutely clear the bombings had been carried out by Islamic extremists inspired by Osama Bin Laden's world outlook. [b]He argued that the bombings had not come out of the "clear blue sky" - the background was the invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, photographs of abuses by US troops at Abu Ghraib prison and the continuing confinement of people by America at Guantanamo. [/b] Mr Galloway said the West was in danger of making the same mistakes over and over again, continuing with "war and [b]occupation[/b] as the principal instrument of our foreign and defence policy". He added: "And if we do then some people will get through and hurt us as they have hurt us today." Paid the price? [b]Mr Galloway who was expelled from the Labour Party over his outspoken comments on the Iraq war, linked the deaths of people in London to the deaths of those in Falluja at the hands of coalition forces. [/b] Earlier, in a statement, the MP said: "The loss of innocent lives, whether in this country or Iraq, is precisely the result of a world that has become a less safe and peaceful place in recent years. "We have worked without rest to remove the causes of such violence from our world. [b]"We argued, as did the security services in this country, that the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq would increase the threat of terrorist attack in Britain. "Tragically Londoners have now paid the price of the government ignoring such warnings." [/b] [b]He urged the government to remove people in the UK from "harm's way" by ending the occupation of Iraq and focusing on finding a real solution to conflicts in the Middle East.[/b] Downing Street declined to comment on Mr Galloway's comments.[/quote] he wants us to quit and give up... what a pussy... the anti-war folks have laid extremely low today, and i'm not calling them out, but i do want to know if any of you agree w/ this nonsense... heres some more shit spewed, though this is from a regular retard, and not a politican: [url="http://coldheartedtruth.com/htsrv/trackback.php?tb_id=1305"]click here[/url] [quote][url="http://coldheartedtruth.com/htsrv/trackback.php?tb_id=1305"]http://coldheartedtruth.com/htsrv/trackback.php?tb_id=1305[/url] According to cold, "(I) have become barely human from all (my) hate." First, go screw yourself, cold. I'm "barely human" because I hate war, and people who want to go to war based on what someone *might* do, some day, if they only acquire the means to do it, based on one man's opinion? I'm filled with "hate" because I hold you accountable for supporting a war that our own intelligence agencies tell us is "training terrorists in urban combat"? A war that we are losing, and you don't have the stones to admit it? Guilty as charged. Now, will you accept the responsibility for the blood on your hands? Hell no. You're too stupid to see it's there. But it is. Bush has told you, and you unquestionably believe him, that "the world changed on 9-11", but you and he don't bother to note that the constitution hasn't. It's only a matter of time before you repeat his spew about "we're fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here." But what happened in London today proves that not every terrorist is in Iraq, today. Until people like you see the error of Bush's ways, America is in danger. I hate people that place my country, my family, and me in danger. You are one of those people. You are less than human. You are a pawn, a dupe, a frightened child. Spare me your sanctimonious flaming. Don't put words in my mouth, and don't claim to know what motivates me. I am blaming EVERYONE who supported Bush's illegal war of aggression in Iraq for provoking more terrorist attacks. There is a better way to deal with it, but you and your ilk won't allow it. You're too worried about "appeasing" the terrorists to help the people that they're recruiting to attack us. Diplomacy at the point of a gun is the only thing you'll allow, and that "diplomacy" ends up creating even MORE enemies. I am NOT saying that innocent people deserve to die in a terrorist attack, any more than I'm saying innocent people deserved to die in Abu Graibh or Bagram or in their own home or at their own wedding when a bomb is dropped to "liberate" them. What I AM saying is, it's not only been predicted, it's expected. And I am saying that if you supported the war, I have no compassion for you. You have none for anyone else. You don't deserve it. You WANT people to die in wars, just not any of your own. You are, in the truest definition of the word, insane. I agree that "Most of the blood is on the hands of the terrorists." "Most." The rest is on yours. Stop trying to wash it off. Revel in it. Your lies are absolutely shameless. I want to STOP terrorism, not give al Qaida more and better reasons to recruit people who hate America, because we killed their family in Iraq, based on lies about wanting to "give them democracy." You base everything on a military response, and won't listen to those of us who want an END to the bloodshed, not more of it. Comment by Timbuk3 [Visitor] · [url="http://www.timbuk3.com"]http://www.timbuk3.com[/url]  07/07/05 @ 08:51[/quote] is this how some of you feel? if so, very scary shit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 Fucking pussy! Thats exactly what the terrorist want, they want us to quit, if we quit then they win and it will get worse, they will demand more and when we don't give in then more bombings Wake up people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 I would agree only in that Iraq and their alliance w/ the US probably made them a more appealing target, that is about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='Ben' date='Jul 7 2005, 04:24 PM']I would agree only in that Iraq and their alliance w/ the US probably made them a more appealing target, that is about it. [right][post="111698"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] definately true... but i would also argue that that just justifies it for them... if 9/11 or the iraq war never happened, they would have done the same thing... this guy isn't argueing it that way though, he is blaming the US and UK for terrorism, saying that that is the reason they got bombed... thats bullshit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Henrys Dealer Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 The fact that Galloway gets elected in one of the UK's toughest ridings despite being an independent obviously indicates that some of his constituents agree with him. I think it'll be interesting to see the response of the British public. While I don't think it will be like the Spaniards last year, given how unpopular this war is amongst certain sections of the Brits, I think it will probably cause more cracks and divisiveness, as well as calls to question the efforts. While some parts of the population will argue that the campaign needs to be continued. The guy who's thoroughly pissed is Gordon Brown, the Brit Chancellor of the Exchequer. He was all set to become the new Biritish prime minister in the next two years as Blair slowly gives way to him. Now with this bombing, Blair is back up front and centre, and Brown has to step back to the background and put his leadership ambitions on hold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='Stanley Wilson's Dealer' date='Jul 7 2005, 04:40 PM']The fact that Galloway gets elected in one of the UK's toughest ridings despite being an independent obviously indicates that some of his constituents agree with him. I think it'll be interesting to see the response of the British public. While I don't think it will be like the Spaniards last year, given how unpopular this war is amongst certain sections of the Brits, I think it will probably cause more cracks and divisiveness, as well as calls to question the efforts. While some parts of the population will argue that the campaign needs to be continued. The guy who's thoroughly pissed is Gordon Brown, the Brit Chancellor of the Exchequer. He was all set to become the new Biritish prime minister in the next two years as Blair slowly gives way to him. Now with this bombing, Blair is back up front and centre, and Brown has to step back to the background and put his leadership ambitions on hold. [right][post="111704"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] blair won't get beat for a long, long time... how many terms can the PM get in the britain? imo, i feel like this makes the supporters want to fight harder, and moves the moderates closer to supporting... the extremists will never support bush and blair, so i don't include them... needless to say though, they won't change their minds and will definately use this as propaganda... i didn't expect it less than 12 hours from the attacks though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest #22 Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 Sort this out for me. Why are we in Iraq and Afghanistan? I they said thought it was to prevent further attacks from occuring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Jul 7 2005, 04:45 PM']blair won't get beat for a long, long time... how many terms can the PM get in the britain? imo, i feel like this makes the supporters want to fight harder, and moves the moderates closer to supporting... the extremists will never support bush and blair, so i don't include them... needless to say though, they won't change their minds and will definately use this as propaganda... i didn't expect it less than 12 hours from the attacks though... [right][post="111710"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Britain has dealt w/ terrorism for a long time, it was the IRA before this. They are pretty similiar to us, in the fact, that when someone bloodies your nose, you want to bloody theirs back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='#22' date='Jul 7 2005, 04:46 PM']Sort this out for me. Why are we in Iraq and Afghanistan? I they said thought it was to prevent further attacks from occuring. [right][post="111712"][/post][/right][/quote] not making fun of you man, but what the hell does this mean?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest #22 Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 Besides, do we know this is even Fundamentalist Islamic terrorism? We (myself included) go about making all of these assumptions, when it could have very well been something else. It might not even be in relation to Bush's war. The Conference is a HUGE affair, the Olympics are much smaller, but still possible, and the IRA definately did not do it. Striking during peak hours like this is not their style, and they haven't had any attacks since 9/11 As for Galloway, or whatever, I say that's his own opinion and he is the one who has to deal with the British people, not us. He might be echoing popular sentiment for all we know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest #22 Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Jul 7 2005, 05:51 PM']not making fun of you man, but what the hell does this mean?? [right][post="111718"][/post][/right][/quote] Isn't this what Brits already questioning the war are going to think? I don't know what logic they were given, but being attacked [i]after[/i] going to protect their security probably rubs some of those surly old europeans the wrong way. My Bro is in Ireland this month, I'll see what he has to say. And I really respect your civility bengalrick, especially since this has been a terse day and I just say a lot of this shit to get people upset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Henrys Dealer Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Jul 7 2005, 05:45 PM']blair won't get beat for a long, long time... how many terms can the PM get in the britain? imo, i feel like this makes the supporters want to fight harder, and moves the moderates closer to supporting... the extremists will never support bush and blair, so i don't include them... needless to say though, they won't change their minds and will definately use this as propaganda... i didn't expect it less than 12 hours from the attacks though... [right][post="111710"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] The Brit system is different, there is no limit on terms. But the succession of leaders is also different than what you guys have in the States. The party can remain in power for the elected term, but the leader doesn't have to be the same guy. In the British system it's not uncommon for leaders to get elected, and then at the request of the party to step aside at some point through the 5 year term to make way for the next leader. Example is with Margaret Thatcher. She won the general election in 1987, (a 5 year term), but rather than serve till 1992, she gave way to John Major in 1990. There were several other factors, she was becoming unpopular with the public, and hence there was pressure to do it. Canada follows the same sort of deal. (The Brit model) So Jean Chretian won the last election, and then bowed out to let Paul Martin lead. Going into the elections this year, the labour party and Blair himself made it clear that Brown would become the Prime Minister before the end of his term. Blair even said "Brown will make an excellent prime minister" as he wanted to spend time with his family. Obviously with the bombings now, and the fact that the war on terror is seen as a cornerstone of Blair's policy, means that he can't stick to the original timetable of leaving. He'll have to stick around. This article explains the deal and also gives past history of this happening in Brit poilitics: [url="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000102&sid=a5ESrWvn5IGo&refer=uk"]http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=100...vn5IGo&refer=uk[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote][u]Galloway: Bombings price of Iraq [/u][/quote] [quote]Mr Galloway was a vocal opponent of the Iraq war said the attacks were "despicable".[/quote] [quote]But he told MPs it was the US-led coalition's actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo which had inflamed hatred of the West in the Muslim world.[/quote] [i][b]True statement.... many in the Middle East are pissed when they see Naked bodies stacked up , Gitmo prisoners being held without charges, etc this statement is correct[/b][/i] [quote]Earlier Mr Galloway said he was absolutely clear the bombings had been carried out by Islamic extremists inspired by Osama Bin Laden's world outlook.[/quote] [i][b]They claimed responsibility once again true[/b][/i] [quote]He argued that the bombings had not come out of the "clear blue sky" - the background was the invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, photographs of abuses by US troops at Abu Ghraib prison and the continuing confinement of people by America at Guantanamo.[/quote] [i][b]Again true.... these bombers didn't just wake up today and decide to blow shit up.... why is it so hard to believe that they are vehemently pissed about the US invading other countries..... [/b][/i] [quote]Mr Galloway said the West was in danger of making the same mistakes over and over again, continuing with "war and occupation as the principal instrument of our foreign and defence policy".[/quote] [i][b]Any student of history sees the validity of this statement and the countless # of dozens of countries that have been invaded and tinkered with puppet dictators by the West in the last half century[/b][/i] [quote]Mr Galloway linked the deaths of people in London to the deaths of those in Falluja at the hands of coalition forces.[/quote] [i][b]Explain to me again how a young boy hit by crossfire in Fallujah and killed doesn't also die as an innocent victim just like the Londoners.... a death is a death and tragic in both spots...... regardless of the killers motives or intentions[/b][/i] [quote]I agree that "Most of the blood is on the hands of the terrorists." "Most." The rest is on yours. Stop trying to wash it off.[/quote] [i][b] There are guilty parties on both sides.... Most of the guilt on the Wests side is with the Govts but the politicians are shrouded from attack... so unfortunatley the public gets hit with the attack[/b][/i] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oldschooler Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jul 7 2005, 04:31 PM'][i][b]True statement.... many in the Middle East are pissed when they see Naked bodies stacked up , Gitmo prisoners being held without charges, etc this statement is correct[/b][/i] [i][b]They claimed responsibility once again true[/b][/i] [i][b]Again true.... these bombers didn't just wake up today and decide to blow shit up.... why is it so hard to believe that they are vehemently pissed about the US invading other countries..... [/b][/i] [i][b]Any student of history sees the validity of this statement and the countless # of dozens of countries that have been invaded and tinkered with puppet dictators by the West in the last half century[/b][/i] [i][b]Explain to me again how a young boy hit by crossfire in Fallujah and killed doesn't also die as an innocent victim just like the Londoners.... a death is a death and tragic in both spots...... regardless of the killers motives or intentions[/b][/i] [i][b] There are guilty parties on both sides.... Most of the guilt on the Wests side is with the Govts but the politicians are shrouded from attack... so unfortunatley the public gets hit with the attack[/b][/i] [right][post="111737"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] [b]I don`t feel like responding to your horse shit today. But I guess both of these posts pertain to you Mr Moore... errrr... I mean BJ... [/b] [quote name='bengalrick' date='Jul 7 2005, 03:12 PM']be nice to them, they'll be nice back...  yeah right!!!!!!! listen to this fuck: [url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4661633.stm"]click here[/url] he wants us to quit and give up... what a pussy... the anti-war folks have laid extremely low today, and i'm not calling them out, but i do want to know if any of you agree w/ this nonsense... heres some more shit spewed, though this is from a regular retard, and not a politican: [url="http://coldheartedtruth.com/htsrv/trackback.php?tb_id=1305"]click here[/url] is this how some of you feel? if so, very scary shit... [right][post="111690"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] [quote name='Storm' date='Jul 7 2005, 03:19 PM']Fucking pussy! Thats exactly what the terrorist want, they want us to quit, if we quit then they win and it will get worse, they will demand more and when we don't give in then more bombings Wake up people [right][post="111693"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 I heard Mike McConnell make an exellent analogy today on WLW... He compared the terrorists to children throwing a hissy fit. The "hissy fit" the terrorists throw is to blow something up to get something that they want, since they are incapable/afraid to take on any sizable military directly. Children see the candy, they want the candy, if you say no, then they throw a fit. If you're a bad parent, your reaction to this is to give in and get the child as much candy as they want so they will shut up. But they WON'T shut up, because you have just taught them a valuable lesson, which is that they can have whatever they want provided they make enough noise. So, as a result, we are guilty as a country of bad parenting in the past. But no more. We will not cave to any demands like the cowardly Spanish people did after "their 9/11"...nor will the Brits... If anything, this will just strengthen our resolve to kill them all, if possible... It is a war that will never end...just like the war against crime...just because the war on crime isn't entirely winnable, does it mean we should just give up and quit fighting against criminal behavior? Same applies here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [i]Warm up the SUV stickers now !!![/i] [img]http://www.bushflash.com/jpg/img_03.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nati Ice Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote][i][b]Explain to me again how a young boy hit by crossfire in Fallujah and killed doesn't also die as an innocent victim just like the Londoners.... a death is a death and tragic in both spots...... regardless of the killers motives or intentions[/b][/i][/quote] they are both innocent bystanders and neither should be in the line of fire, however war is not fought in pre-determined firing lines anymore and sometimes innocent bystanders are caught within the crossfire and are killed on accident... but this only roughly applies to those murdered in london... there is no remorse for the deaths of the londoners and in fact this was a blatant attempt by the terrorists to kill innocent bystanders, whereas no such ploy is used by the soldiers who are fighting against these same cowardly terrorists... you see bj... unlike the terrorists we are fighting against, we do not need to target innocent bystanders, we chose to attack the source of the problem and do what is necessary to eliminate the targets, however these terrorists chose to attack innocent bystanders because they are not fighting for freedom from oppression or any other type of worthy cause... these terrorists are fighting out of jealousy, spite, and hatred against all christian "infidels," if they indeed were fighting for a worthy cause then they would go after key targets and not innocent civilians (and no, innocent civilians are not worthy targets regardless of the cause of war) the problem with your statement is where you say "regardless of the killers motives or intentions," this is not relevent when in fact this is the main dilemma, terrorists are intentionally targeting innocent civilians and are doing it without cause, this is why we call them "terrorists" and not freedom fighters, the resistance, or any of the other respectable terms. people who terrorize and are not fighting from oppression or any other worthy causes are killers plain and simple. these killers should have their balls cut off and left to rot out in the middle of the desert to die like the little snakes they are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [img]http://www.bushflash.com/jpg/nuke.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nati Ice Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote]I don`t feel like responding to your horse shit today. But I guess both of these posts pertain to you Mr Moore... errrr... I mean BJ...[/quote] mr moore deserves better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [url="http://www.ericblumrich.com/antiwar2.html"]http://www.ericblumrich.com/antiwar2.html[/url] 2 Flashes on "Liberation" [url="http://www.bushflash.com/liberation.html"]http://www.bushflash.com/liberation.html[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 bunghole, nati ice.. [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/41.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/41.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/41.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/41.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/41.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/41.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted July 7, 2005 Report Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jul 7 2005, 05:39 PM'][url="http://www.ericblumrich.com/antiwar2.html"]http://www.ericblumrich.com/antiwar2.html[/url] 2 Flashes on "Liberation" [url="http://www.bushflash.com/liberation.html"]http://www.bushflash.com/liberation.html[/url] [right][post="111788"][/post][/right][/quote] Eric Blumrich is Michael Moore with a computer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaker Posted July 8, 2005 Report Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jul 7 2005, 10:31 PM'][i][b]Explain to me again how a young boy hit by crossfire in Fallujah and killed doesn't also die as an innocent victim just like the Londoners.... a death is a death and tragic in both spots...... regardless of the killers motives or intentions[/b][/i] [right][post="111737"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] The innocents in London were the intended targets, the boy hit in the crossfire was not. Clear enough explanation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted July 8, 2005 Report Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote name='Beaker' date='Jul 8 2005, 12:02 AM']The innocents in London were the intended targets, the boy hit in the crossfire was not. Clear enough explanation? [right][post="111965"][/post][/right][/quote] What a cold, calculating definition! Are you sure you wouldn't like to dress that phrase up with some filler-type reality deterring material like "nice" and "pink puffy clouds of peace"? Your politics are WAY too sharply defined...be ambiguous and win wars... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.