What would it take for Russia to be #1?
Posted 09 August 2004 - 08:26 AM
puppeteers, both started in Frankfurt wasnt it, we had on this thread a few months back. Even the secret societies cant do anything without money and I dont think they could do it all by blackmail. I link all the dark forces in the big religions into the one label with the satan worshipers of the secret societies- illuminati.
Most people think the world wars broke Britain, but it is obvious who did, where the Kaiser failed. Remember Lincoln saying the
Bankers to his rear were a greater enemy than the the Southern Armies to his front. Britian could have been as prosperous as the US, but they were put to the same fate as the Germans whom Wall St started arming while the international banksters who
controlled British Treasury held back the re-arment of Britain
which put Chamberlain in an embarising position of trying to
stand up to the demands of Hitler whose economy was running better than Britains and better armed. Then Britain had to decalre war on Germany in defence of Poland. All they could do initially was drop leaflets on Germany to appeal to the German public to pressure the govt to stop the war.
Then Wall St left Britain to stand alone and France also slow in re-arming fell easily. Britain from an inferior position won the battle of the Channel and the Battle of Britain, and eventualy the Battle against the German submarine embargo.
There is no question both the British and German nations have been vitimised greatly and we can add the Russians to this as well given the same banksters made huge mess there,
which they are now trying to do to Islam. I suspect the Israelis and Americans who are controlled by the Fed banksters as Britain is by the Bank of England/Crown (not Royal), will get their turn in due course.
And if the Slavs unite they know what to expect. Except Woj.
There could not have been a Treaty of Rome/UE unless these great nations hadnt of been humbled. Rephrase that - there could not be a revival of the old and new Roman Empire (NWO)until after the same three nations were humbled.
Notice the clever three-way split so that each became the enemy of the others. The winner is never in the ring, only the losers.
Hess flew to Scotland to try and break the game up, what a
clamour that must have caused initially.
Unless something stirs up the British grassroots as has happened in the past Putin if he is for real stands alone.
The Spanish Amarda, Bonepart, Kaiser and the Third Reich should have all beaten Britain, who was an inferior force each time.
All the more reason Blair is such a disgrace to the anglosaxon peoples. It is immoral to retain anyone in any British prison
if they leave him loose.
Posted 09 August 2004 - 09:54 AM
relieving the US of this and keeping it on Britain for a decade.
They ratcheted down the volume of money in circulation by reducing/withdrawing treasury notes, and for every treasury note
about tens times this of bank credit is extended to industry/business. So as the Treasury Notes are with drawn in
real terms ten times that is taking out of circulation. The Lufewaffer couldnt have done that much damage.
Purchasing power fell which put businesses and industry under huge stress to the extent the owners had to forgo the losses,
selling at a loss, from their own savings/investments. Thus the desired effect of reducing prices was achieved artificially
(so much for all those Libertarians saying the intervention of govt into the economy has been bad for the market, what about the intervention of the big boys who rule over govts)
"...the situation which was created by the numerous and increasing number of bankruptcies and forced sales merits some attention. .....
As a result of this , and as indeed might be expected from the control over the money system acquired by the banking institutions, it is probably true to say that in Great Britain, 90 per cent of the trade and business has come into the possession or
control of banking interests. Such a tremdous transfer of ownership has probably never occurred in recorded history."
(recall that over in the US they were experiencing the greatest prosperity in recorded history by the policy of the same people )
"The banker per se has not in general, technical knowledge outside the routine of banking....bankers immediate reaction to the day to day acquisition of large businesses has been to put them under the control of chartered accountants, which with the result that a financial result rather than a physical result has been aimed at. Plant has been broken up, since its operation could not be justified by the profits to be expected in existing
circumstances (even though its physical product was urgently required), buildings, with the exception of those for the use of financial institutions, have been cut down both in quality and design with disastrous results to the amenties of the country at large, agricultural properties have deteriorated, and technical enterprise has been stifled. A further complication is introduced as a result of the predominant holdings of National Debt securities by banks and insurance companies, resulting in the chartered accountant, acting for them, being often a scarcely veiled tax-collector.
"There have been many critics of this policy,...in the ranks of both industry and banking itself. Parliamentary discussion, industrial protests.... without any apparent influence upon the policy pursued, which in the main has not even been defended.
The effect of such criticism, if any, must be sought in the acceleration of the measures taken to increase the strength of the bank organisation against this and similar attacks, a major feature being the formation of twenty eight central banks in the past decade, culminating in the launching of the super-central
bank known as the Bank of International Settlements."
Whats the difference between charter accountants running much of British industry on behalf of banking monopolies and the bureacrats of the societs? And the Board of Directors of the BIS and supreme Soviet officials? The banksters dont necessarily need the likes of trotski and co to achieve much the same power
- so what was their experiment on the Russians etc all about?.
Do you recognise Woj the similarity that has happened to Poland under free market reforms. What does your nose tell you?
Question: can a lion hide behind a daisy?
Answer: yes, when you have your eyes closed.
The British lions is a rugby team.
Posted 09 August 2004 - 10:53 AM
Deflationary policy was brought down on the US (for 6 months
only) and on Britain.
Massive unemployment as businesses fold/ reduce staff and then same by the chatered accountants as most of British industry
is "bombed" by the banksters to reduce prices. Anyway why reduce prices if peole are unemployed since the will still be too dear anyway, but as Douglas said its a financial result they are looking for not a physical one ( people, goods/services, industry,
the economy dont matter, because the financial result is an excuse to achieve absolute power over the nation, instutions like govt and resourses, and the future.
During the war industry booms making war materials, plenty of employment., the central bankers kept out of the way of Govt who didnt want them getting in the way as usual in peacetime, and so they stood back and created money out of nothing for them in exchange for National Debt securities knowing war would bring them more power after its over when govts held huge increases of debt, and it was their turn to move the chess pieces.
Big debts and inflation.
So for ten years Britain was held under destructive deflationary policy that was causingnhuge damage to British industry.
The purpose of deflationary policy is to reduce prices by taking money out of the economy which slows production until there is a normal balance between the volume of good and the disposible
income/consumer demand, if there is too much money per goods
it forces the price up. BUt what they did to Britain was to take industry, goods and money out of the economy, they cripled it.
NOw we go to another book by an ordinary Joe citizen in NZ.
Social Credit For Me by A.E.Willyams.
IN chapter 3:
"About the year 1930 Sir Otto Neimeyer came to Australia and New Zealand as adviser to the respective Governments. He was a noted Economist, Director of the Bank of England, and very well known in financial circles in the 'City' of London. Well he told our Minister of Finance, that the unsatisfactory state of affairs in all countries would not improve until values were brought to a lower
level. The inevitable inflation, which took place during the Great War,meant the securities which the private banks lend money against were overvalued, and whilst the banks were keen to assist industry, they were prevented from doing so by these over
valued secrities, and the only way out was to reduce their values.
So that no one individual should have to bear the brunt, or that
the banks should have to discriminate between one individual and another, Sir otto appealed to State action so that all would be fair share."
( makes your heart bleed, doesnt it, they just wanted to help but the people all had a big gain from the war boom in industry so now they should help the poor old banks, while they had just
run over British industry over ten years like an armoured bulldozer in the Gaza Strip. They bought the securites. They should have taken out insurance on them, they fleece the nation
from money created for nothing. But they said it themselves they would love to help and there was no other way. Orrrshucks. Well there was in the US.) Back to the book-
"Well, many will remember the edict of the Government of that time which ordered that all wages, salaries, interest rates (except the banks, of course- authors brackets) should be reduced by ten percent, and in six months a further 10 percent! Its is not our job here to paint a picture of the depression period in New Zealand from 1930 to 1935. In effect this little gem of a
country, ..........was virtually brough to its knees by this deliberate deflationary policy."
It was in effect a depression policy. It would have been the same in Australian and Canada and probably Sth Africa.
LIke killing the host to get at the paracite. Meanwhile they were
preparing for another war to put the economies back on their feet that they were knocking off their feet. After the war came Bretton Woods and the centralizing of their power globally through finance and trade in such a manner that articially fed the US economy off everyone else for decades.
They make and break. No institution on earth can challenge them. After every big international crisis they move into a higher state of centralised control over the world. Should only take one more world war.
Posted 09 August 2004 - 01:47 PM
Is this your constitution= slavs unite; just two words?
which put Chamberlain in an embarising position of trying to
stand up to the demands of Hitler whose economy was running better than Britains and better armed. Then Britain had to decalre war on Germany in defence of Poland. Do you recognise Woj the similarity that has happened to Poland under free market reforms. What does your nose tell you?
After every big international crisis they move into a higher state of centralised control over the world. Should only take one more world war.@
It is not secret that that Brits on highest level and from members Queen family cooperated with Hitler because that were interested only in protection of British Empire (colonies); Proof; only one country on this world set 100 years secret for most document from WWII.
British participation in WWII was not caused by intention to help Poland only by l knowledge that Hitler would demand some British colonies for Germany. Italian attack on Abyssinia in 1936 didn
Posted 09 August 2004 - 02:52 PM
There could not have been a Treaty of Rome/UE unless these great nations hadnt of been humbled. Rephrase that - there could not be a revival of the old and new Roman Empire (NWO)until after the same three nations were humbled.>
Howdy Bader, Woj
One thing is clear to me. There's little room for competing lions. What Woj wants, could only result in complicity between lions or the big one crushing the little one. The jungle will absorb the little lion just like it's absorbing Venezuela. Meanwhile the poor will be the first to live in fear and scarcity.
Only decentralized, spontaneous coops have a chance. It's the struggle of the David vs. Goliath, and David must win.
Just look at the sad state of the world. Over forty million Americans go without health insurance but gorillas have it all. Funny, ah?
Lucky this gorilla only had to sign for pain. The voice of the poor in
America though goes unheard...
Gorilla Seeks Help Using Sign Language
By BILEN MESFIN, Associated Press Writer
WOODSIDE, Calif. - When Koko the gorilla used the American Sign
Language gesture for pain and pointed to her mouth, 12 specialists,
including three dentists, sprang into action.
The result? Her first full medical examination in about 20 years, an
extracted tooth and a clean bill of health.
About a month ago, Koko, a 300-plus-pound ape who became famous for
mastering more than 1,000 signs, began telling her handlers at the
Gorilla Foundation in Woodside she was in pain. They quickly
constructed a pain chart, offering Koko a scale from one to 10.
When Koko started pointing to nine or 10 too often, a dental
appointment was made. And because anesthesia would be involved, her
handlers used the opportunity to give Koko a head-to-toe exam.
"She's quite articulate," volunteer Johnpaul Slater said. "She'll tell
us how bad she's feeling, how bad the pain is. It looked like it was
time to do something."
Posted 09 August 2004 - 05:42 PM
"Symbolism can be important in establishing legitimacy," said Anthony Cordesman, a regional expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "Simply having a small group of (Muslim) forces there would send a signal."
Iraq stopped oil production from its southern oil fields Monday after a Shi'ite Muslim uprising led by radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr spread to the oil sector for the first time since the late-June handover of power to Iraqi authorities.Everybody wants a white tiger.
Nader Doesn't Get Spot on California Ballot. Nader has accused Democrats of mounting legal battles to try and block him from getting on state ballots because they fear he would siphon votes from Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry.Everybody wants a white tiger.
A blue-eyed, stripeless white Bengal tiger, one of about 20 in the world, has been born in Spain with black stripes, but because of a genetic mutation he is completely white with no stripes. Domenech said such tigers are sometimes born in the wild but it is almost impossible for them to survive for long as their strange coloring causes them to be rejected or even attacked by other tigers.
"Everybody wants a white tiger. It's not going to be hard for him to find a nice place to live," http://www.reuters.c...storyID=5912892
McGuire urged the governments of Spain and the United States to fund monitoring of the volcanically active La Palma -- The slow collapse -- started by an eruption in 1949 -- would almost certainly be turned catastrophic by another eruption of the volcano which erupts every 25 to 200 years.
That leaves the field clear for Hollywood to move on to volcanic eruptions and tsunami for the next generation of apocalyptic movies. Everybody wants a white tiger.
David is a symbol of deceit , why to follow his steps if you might be a white tiger ? Slavs unite in pure Slavic a socio-economic and economic entities instead of join poor gorilla coops seeking help using sign language ? Everybody wants a white tiger.
Posted 09 August 2004 - 06:11 PM
The evil that is in the world almost always comes of ignorance, and good intentions may do as much harm as malevolence if they lack understanding.
Posted 09 August 2004 - 07:06 PM
No specimen of it created more heat or less light than the Portland African-American Baseline Essays.
According to this curriculum, the ancient Egyptians had built flying machines, mastered psychokinesis and even devised electric batteries.
Some of these claims rested on fragments of archaeological evidence, interpreted with little or no reference to their original contexts. AS he studied other claims for the scientific achievements of non-Europeans, he realized that a great many of them were valid.
Westerners rejected them not because they were unfounded but because they undermined what he calls "the traditional account" of the rise of Western science.
Historians and scientists believed that the Greeks created science in the first millennium b.c., while non-Westerners remained mired in "prescientific" ignorance until Europeans enlightened them.
But the more research Teresi did, the clearer it seemed to him that central achievements of Western science and technology had in fact been anticipated
Posted 10 August 2004 - 10:48 AM
Gorillas today , Yanks tomorrow- endangered species.
Decentralised Coops: I would say DonQ, are for survival when the
lion kingdom disintergrates. A sort of pre-emptive strike. The kind that doesnt invite the opposition to go on the offensive defence.
More anti-european/white literature, to reinforce "white-trash"
attitudes. The fact still remains although europeans gathered from afar, like many others, when they were at the top the so-called pre-superior werent there at the top when they got there.
When did europeans every claim they were the best for all time
when it has been europeans that archaeology has confessed to about ancient civilisations that had knowledg lost a long time back?
All these claims do is make those who once had something feel bad about loosing their way. So its anti-nonwhite as well.
The Masons have chapture in history about knowledge and who really discovered what claims and science which is a matter of secret politics.
Thats the other big difference between you Woj and me and Donq, we say there is a puppeteer and you say its only the British, meanwhile the Lion continues to sneek up behind the daisy.
I have a copy of an article I came across on the net written by a Muslim who refusted the claims made and parotted about the
glorious past of Arab culture/science/knowledge etc and she said it came from the Assyrians I think it was who had an academic
tradition which became swallowed up by the early muslim conquest and become an influence but the new Arab force never
subjected itself to the learning tradition, so it was a matter of time and 'light' so to speak began to fade and thus its empire
likewise. There is a lesson to be learnt here about truth and knowledge and political correctness. Jonestown was a minature
British Royals and top level Brits: There were a sizable group of British that admired the nationalism of germany, and how they
got themselves out of the depression etc. I remember reading about over 50 Tory MPS visited Germany at some stage and went back boasting how wonderfull changes were being made. The
enthusiasm of some here when the free market revolution took over reminded me of that. We usually only hear the same old one sided propoganda about Germany.
One of the Royal family was a supporter of the early goals of the
National Socialists and a few of the British Aristocracy, and big businessman, but dont think for a minute they were party of Mosleys British Nazi Party.
By the same token I wouldnt insult you be trying to suggest your
nationist fervour is nazi-ish.
Govts may pass bills/laws etc but the puppeteer may be the power behind the 'throne'. It is news to me the British set 100
year embargoes on records from history, but you may well be right. But who comes close to making public historical facts better than Britannia. In regards WW 11 records, the US and Russia
held the control over Germany and if anything I would have guessed the Soviets got Berlin and the best information which they famously kept to themselves.
You must have heard of David Irving the British historian, branded a revisionist because he has debunked the propoganda
with researched facts. I have a copy of a tape of his in which he gave speach about his research into the life and works of
Goebols. Perhaps the most interesting fact that came out was that all the critical parts of Gs dairy were missing and he later
was informed that in Russia they had records of his diaries on microfis (dont ask me how to spell it) and eventually he managed to get access to them and all the missing parts were there.
Someone at some time at the end of the war had the task of targeting certain information and putting it under wraps.
When he went back a second time they werent available, obviously someone found out he had been there and went into
lockdown mode. However he had seen about 95% of what he wanted. I dont for a minute believe these things are national issues, it is in the international field and I would expect it is trans-national, like secret societies.
You have made some fantastic statements Woj:
like the british only stood up for poland to avoid having to surrender colonial territory to Germany,
like, Britain declared war on germany to help them attack Russia
I would suggest that Poland was stripped, for the same reason
Jugoslavia was broken up, to make them have to join the UE, and in Polands case to wttle down the Russian sphere of influence.
Thanks for your reply to my challenge to come out from hiding
with a conception of your ideal society. It suggest to me that its
a version of state capitalism, with its multi-pyramid state structure suggests competition for power and mini or is it petti capitalism (competition) at the grass roots.
Competition will stop them from going to sleep and waking up in the thirteenth century but because you oppose coops you are making sure no one is capable of escaping dependancy. Competition within the state is also to allow the supreme council to have all the lesser lions fight amongst themselves so they never challenge the supreme council.
The tax required to fund a multi-pyramidal state structure
will need every Slav you can lay your hands on and to create a
distinct culture you will have to ban tv.
What makes you think the brightest young people after Uni will want to stay?
The way the British economy was kept being put back into a straight jacket while the US stimulated to be more prosperous meant many of Britains brightest at different stages went to live in the States to their great gain.
Posted 10 August 2004 - 01:56 PM
It's only because of the jungle that you need to be a gorilla in America. "Human being" is the perfect role for us...
<Decentralised Coops: I would say DonQ, are for survival when the
lion kingdom disintergrates. A sort of pre-emptive strike. The kind that doesnt invite the opposition to go on the offensive defence.>
Howdy Bader, Woj
Exactly if you come up with a white tiger the big lion will take him for competition and use every excuse to kill him. It's better to say to the lion:
"Listen lion, I'm no predator and I pose no threat to the jungle, but I don't like either what you are doing to the little animals. The little animals were made by God to roam free, not to be preyed upon by you predators."
Then you take this declaration to the little animals so they see what's going on. Whether they want to do something or not, that's where your job ends.
<The tax required to fund a multi-pyramidal state structure
will need every Slav you can lay your hands on and to create a
distinct culture you will have to ban tv.>
Only to crumble before Rock-and-Roll on VOA and Radio Free Europe...
<What makes you think the brightest young people after Uni will want to stay?>
Only to feed the Western lions.:confused:
<The way the British economy was kept being put back into a straight jacket while the US stimulated to be more prosperous meant many of Britains brightest at different stages went to live in the States to their great gain. >
Exactly, revolutions--or whatever it is--based on scarcity and repression only feed the lion.
The lion though needs Perestroika!
Does America need Perestroika?
Posted 10 August 2004 - 03:09 PM
Everybody has the rights to make their claims but only in their borders.
Problem starts when defense of western values penetrates the boundaries of countries .
Then , the protection of Western values is simply Nazi @Main Kampf.@>
I can get along with that. But what's really behind it, is not culture, but economics. "It's OK to worship Allah, so long as you work for us, consume Western goods, and provide us with cheap resources."
< Lion and sheep are not separated;>
They are. If you are a communist of some sort, then you'll believe in the "class struggle." If you are not, common sense tells you that every predator out there is on the side of the lion.
<Main defect in your and Donq model is that you unwisely expect sheep be morally higher than lions. I don-t see anything supporting this hypothesis, I assume that they are the same individuals. >
Actually, some sheep are worse. I've seen some preying on their fellow little animals and some even defending the lion.
The lion is only defending his interests but these betray their own people. No doubt they would become a lion, and we must always have our guard up against that.
Posted 10 August 2004 - 03:38 PM
These are the problems with the Media: "trivial sound-byte journalism, hypercommercialism, and narrow political debate."
No wonder many sheep don't see the lion...
For all of us concerned about the sorry state of the media in America, the Democratic Convention was a mixed bag. On the bright side, the official Democratic platform states: "Because our democracy thrives on public access to diverse sources of information from multiple sources, we support measures to ensure diversity, competition, and localism in media ownership." This provision reflects the tremendous work of labor leaders, activists and policymakers who increasingly understand the problems of the media: trivial sound-byte journalism, hypercommercialism, and narrow political debate.
We can also celebrate our crucial victory in June when the federal appeals court blocked FCC Chairman Michael Powell's effort to let Big Media get bigger. But the court ruling was a rear-guard defense against the latest assault on our democratic discourse by a well-organized media lobby with deep pockets. They aren't quitting. And the convention, sponsored in part by these same media conglomerates, provided another reminder of how much work we have ahead of us.
Senator John Kerry laid out a relatively long list of policy goals, but once again media were missing from his remarks. One thing is clear: media reform will not be realized until politicians add it to their list of issues like the environment, education, the economy and health care. Real reform --breaking up monopolies; real increases in access to independent, diverse media; more funding for non-commercial and Indy media; stemming the commercial carpet-bombing of our culture; expanding the number of community radio stations, to name a few-- will not occur until the American people demand that their political representatives address the media.
The television networks' decision to air a mere three hours of the convention was another shining example that the U.S. media system is at an all-time low. These networks --presently enjoying colossal profits-- own stations that receive free monopoly broadcast licenses to use airwaves owned by the U.S. public. The law states that in exchange for the right to rake in big bucks using scarce public property they must serve the public interest. But Big Media have again shown their contempt of the public: one of the rare moments when Americans are open to discussing politics was squandered on our public airwaves. (see the excellent NY Times article about this below)
This fall the networks and big TV stations will continue their assault on democracy as they collect billions of dollars to flood the airwaves with dubious TV candidate ads while providing minimal and mostly superficial campaign coverage otherwise. In 2000, TV stations ran an average of 74 seconds of election coverage per night in the months leading up to the election. And over half of the 74 seconds was coverage about campaign strategy, not actual social and political issues. In fact, much of the TV "news" coverage this year will be assessing the ability of the costly TV candidate ads to "spin" the public!
Running a massive slate of TV ads is now the ante for admission to "legitimate" candidacy for federal office in the United States. Most of the money for these TV ads will come from the wealthiest 2% of Americans, making all candidates far more beholden to wealth than is healthy for a democratic system. This massive windfall explains why the big media companies are the most significant lobby that opposes campaign finance reform, and why campaign finance is a media reform issue. This is an issue Free Press is working on in collaboration with allies like Common Cause and the Alliance for Better Campaigns. We will keep you posted as the campaign develops.
Despite the opposition of the leadership in the House, Senate, and White House, media reform has held its own in Washington. The drive to gut media ownership limits has been turned back. We have won a significant victory in the Senate Commerce Committee to expand low power FM radio (although we may have to wait until 2005 to see it become law). And Congress has begun to hold hearings to investigate cable monopolies, broadcasters' hoarding of the digital spectrum, and the future of public service communications.
We have a long way to go, but we've come a long way in the past year. Several million more Americans are aware of media and media reform this year than last. Scores of U.S. Senators and members of Congress have joined the media reform movement, and new media reform organizations and activists are mobilizing across the nation. There is so much great work being done, and I'm so glad that you're part of it.
Founder and President
This is their website...
Posted 10 August 2004 - 04:49 PM
He didn't even spare low blows...
"by saying these are old guys and their opinion doesn't count."
I wonder how he refers in private to the 75% of the people who oppose the war.:confused:
This is "democracy"...
Howard dismisses war criticism
ACCUSATIONS: Australia's prime minister said the officials who accuse him of deceiving the country over Iraq on are out of touch, as they had all retired before the Sept. 11 attacks
AP , CANBERRA, AUSTRALIA
Tuesday, Aug 10, 2004,Page 5
Prime Minister John Howard yesterday tried to discredit former defense chiefs and senior diplomats who lambasted his decision to take part in the US-led invasion of Iraq, saying they had retired before the world changed on Sept. 11, 2001.
The 43 eminent Australians, including two former chiefs of defense and three ambassadors, issued a scathing public statement at the weekend, accusing the government of rubber-stamping US foreign policy and of joining the Iraq war on the basis of false assumptions and deceptions.
Howard questioned the relevance of their opinions in the era of global terrorism.
"Every single person who signed that statement had retired from service well before the 11th of September, 2001," Howard told Sydney radio station 2GB. "We're living in a different and more dangerous world and some of the older approaches are no longer quite as relevant."
Some government lawmakers were even harsher in their criticism.
"I think we have to ask the question, these doddering daiquiri diplomats, would they have done any different?" lawmaker Deanne Kelly said. "The world has changed too from the comfort zone they lived in. Frankly they should keep their opinions to themselves."
One of the statement's signatories, Peter Gration, Australia's military chief from 1987 to 1993, including during the first Gulf War, said the government can not brush aside the criticism "by saying these are old guys and their opinion doesn't count."
"This is the first time in my memory that 43 Australians who've held very senior positions in agencies, have been key diplomats abroad and have been heads of armed services have come out to make such a strong statement," Gration told Australian Broadcasting Corp radio.
The opposition Labor Party lawmaker responsible for foreign affairs, Kevin Rudd, agreed.
"This is classically arrogant John Howard trying to dismiss criticism and remove all responsibility from himself," he said.
"These former military heads have extensive diplomatic experience between them under governments both Liberal and Labor and, because of their professional engagement, remain deeply in contact with the rest of the official community, including in a period since Sept. 11."
Later in parliament, Howard said Gration had also stated in an article published in November 2002 that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
"The argument that I took this country to war based on a lie is itself a lie," Howard told lawmakers.
The statement comes as some commentators predict Howard this week will call for elections to be held Sept. 18. Opinion polls predict the election will be too close to call, but have suggested the Iraq war will be a major issue with up to 75 percent of voters believing the invasion was not justified.
Howard's decision to commit 2,000 troops to the invasion sparked the biggest peace protests in Australia since the Vietnam War. Australia still has nearly 900 troops in and around Iraq, and Howard says they must remain there as long as they are needed. Labor leader Mark Latham has pledged to bring some home by Christmas if he wins power.
Posted 10 August 2004 - 04:53 PM
Ukraine on Sunday trumpeted the revival of its nuclear power industry with the launch of its first new reactor.. With the words "God bless", President Leonid Kuchma gave the order to switch on the new second reactor at the Khmelnitsky nuclear power plant, which he called "another step towards strengthening the energy security of our country and expanding its export potential"
I can bet that Donq would prefer digging the well by hand in candle light...
Posted 10 August 2004 - 05:22 PM
The United States spends almost as much on its military as the rest of the world combined.
Yet this is not enough for the Democrats.
The Democratic Platform insists t
Posted 11 August 2004 - 08:55 AM
But I wouldnt agree with that Woj.
The western world has been transformed quite speedily compared with several centuries before hand by comparison
because the biggest changes come during wars and they are not people/public driven.
Democracy in the US is under attack from the terrorists in the wHITEhOUSE. Similar to Germany on the burning of the Reichstag.
Why would european countries who are western war against each other to protect western values?
Jugoslavia and Iraq are about the NWO which means all values
east or west will be bought into subjection, no protection here.
Islam and the US constitutiuon and the love of freedom, in the hearts of the American people regardless of how real or how unhealthy, are major hinderances to the NWO, both are being restructured simultaneously. The US wont change over night
so the war of terrorism is to go for years. Look at the length of time the Germans, Russians and British have been put through
adversaries and huge changes by forces outside them.
"The lions interest" is the NWO. Hes not protecting it, hes building it.
To state wars to protect ones values, democracy etc is to talk about defending what is yours. I dont see what the type has to do with nazi who wanted to create a selective society based on racism not nationalism.
You might have meant war to extend ones values and political
systems over others, which is not defensive but offensive.
I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments that one rights are to be found in ones own backyard not someone elses.
Prince Edwards "cooperation" with the Germans suggests he was
a traitor, can you enlighten us, I rather thought his connections with people was mainly social, given his choice not to become bound by British institutions. He probably thought he was being free to be sociable to who ever he liked, being a non-conformist,
had he been a staunch institutionalist and true British he might
have embarased the Royals and Whitehall by being outraged that
Wall St was building the Nazi war machine.
Bush's grandfather's corp was using Polish slave labour supplied by the Nazi. Its been a bigger issue about Tedward the outsider than the other guy an insider, but should we expect any different? I would give you .01 out of ten for that point scored
Both Britain and France signed a treaty/agreement to defend
Poland in the interest of european peace and stability, how could Poland be of any interest to Britain?
Since war was desired by the internationalists its little wonder they were prevented from re-arming, recovered economies etc, while Germany and the US did. It is clear from the information I gave that Britain was on a hiding to nowhere and they couldnt do anything about it. Britain has never presumed like the US does to be responsible for and on behalf of the european states.
Britain and France 'won' the war and they were trying to do the decent thing by trying to make it the last world war. The US were also part of the victors but their interests have only been money
and they went back to paradise.
Britain at war with Germany and Russia. The Britsh navy took the
US freebee war supplies to Russia at huge losses of ships and men, while they had to pay for their supplies from big hearted Uncle Sam. They did it for the war, for Russia because they were allies, not because they were at war with them, in which case they would have delivered them by other methods.
I guess Uncle Sams excuse for getting the British to do the donkey work for their war industry was because they were
neutral and not at war at the time, that is until the Japanese struck back after Nuetral Uncle Sam shut off oil supplies to them
intervening like good nuetrals do in the China-Japanese war. Saying Britain was at war with Russia and
Germany is like saying the US was at war with China and Japan.
There was British support for Finlands war of independance by
British people which I rather think was not at govt level.
If I remember rightly spitefires were bought and paid for by a
support movement which obviously must have included some rich
people, and flown to Finland. The spitefires would have been supperior to the Russian stuff. Why would Britain be at war with a country on the other side of a continent when she was under strength against a nation just an hour or two flight away?
Sorry Woj it doesnt compute.
One thing though you are clearly consistent on Woj, you do not
accept there is anything above national level, you deviate where
ever you can to imply there is nothing crouched behind that daisy looking to strike. Thats ok, we can agree to differ, but it would be more ok if you said so instead of just acting so.
Posted 11 August 2004 - 09:55 AM
A local Cossack group organized a protest on 7 August against the construction of a Mormon temple in Saratov, About 100 people wearing Cossack uniforms gathered in the center of Saratov to protest the "devilish, dangerous sect of CIA spies,"
The local Muslim and Russian Orthodox leaders also object to the building because they consider its location too close to a local Muslim mosque and Orthodox chapel. Archbishop of Saratov and the Volga Longin accused the Mormons of being engaged in espionage, noting that "their presence has been noticed on the territory of a local military base more than once."
the Mormons' proximity to the mosque "is extremely unpleasant," because a large part of the local Muslim population "is extremely dissatisfied with U.S. policy in Iraq."
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users