What would it take for Russia to be #1?
Posted 28 October 2003 - 08:41 PM
The Lion seeks to eliminate the violent monkeys and these seek to eliminate the Lion, using the mightiest of weapons. And the little animals--perhaps indifferent, perhaps scared, perhaps not knowing what to do--are caught up in the crossfire. Like Kofi Annan said: "The choice is not between multilateralism and unilateralism, it's between cooperation and catastrophe.":confused:
U.S. Position in Iraq Seen as Increasingly Perilous
By Jefferson Morley
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 28, 2003; 9:30 AM
In the international online press, the U.S. presence in Iraq is seen as increasingly perilous. Even supporters of the U.S. role express fear of a deteriorating situation.
The coordinated suicide bombings Monday across metropolitan Baghdad that killed at least 35 people came barely 24 hours after a sophisticated remote control rocket attack on the al-Rashid Hotel, a symbol of American occupation of the Iraqi capital and guest quarters for visiting deputy U.S. defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz.
"Baghdad is burning," writes Canadian-Iraqi journalist Firas Al-Atraqchi for Islam Online, a news site based in the Persian Gulf emirate of Qatar.
Patrick Cockburn, Baghdad correspondent for The Independent of London added, "the carnage . . . signalled a decisive moment in the Iraqi crisis, which has become the supreme test of Washington's power in the world."
In Cockburn's view, the U.S. is now losing the war.
"Three months ago, the U.S. occupation seemed evenly balanced between success and failure. Today, seeing how it can succeed has become very hard," writes Cockburn.
Cockburn argues that the Iraqi public opinion has turned against the Americans.
"At the time of the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, Iraqis were evenly divided on whether they had been liberated or were facing an old-style colonial occupation. . . . Just after the invasion, 43 per cent saw the U.S.-led Allies as 'liberating forces.' A poll earlier this month showed that 15 per cent now see the Americans as liberators. Iraqis who see them as occupiers have risen from 46 per cent to 67 per cent."
In Saudi Arabia, the editors of the Saudi Gazette, the English language version of Okaz, one of the country's largest circulation daily newspapers, described the attackers as "skilled and patient professionals" from the defeated Iraqi Army.
"Even though many chose not to fight the invaders in March, it's clear some have taken up arms now. Iraq is their country. They know the terrain and the language far better than even the GPS-wielding Americans. They have homes and honor to defend. They will prove a difficult and perhaps unbeatable opponent."
"The morale of the U.S. military will continue to fall," the Riyadh-based editors warned.
News24.com, a South African news site, carried a report on commentary in Arabic-language newspapers in the region which were even more scathing than their English counterparts.
"Occupation forces are sinking in the quicksands of Iraq and drowning in a bloody swamp," said Jordan's Al-Arab Al-Yom daily . . . The attacks, blamed on loyalists of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and anti-U.S. Islamic fundamentalists, 'are turning into a wearing war of attrition for the U.S. administration,' it said. Another Jordanian newspaper, Al-Dustur, asked whether U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and "the others realise that this is only the beginning."
More than one commentator noted the irony of Wolfowitz coming under attack during a trip in which he sought to promote the message that security is improving. A survey of the German press, published by the Web site of the German radio network Deutsche Welle quoted a Dresden daily, Dresdner Neueste Nachrichten, as saying "Wolfowitz's hopes for a short occupation at low cost could be relegated to the realm of myths."
In India, the editors of the Dehli-based Hindustan Times said former Hussein loyalists "have realised that the U.S. will not get much help from outside because of its decision to start the war after snubbing the U.N."
"Mr. Wolfowitz was one of the main supporters of such unilateralism," they noted. "He learnt on Sunday the dangers inherent in such aggressive policies."
The Straits Times in Singapore predicted the attack on the "White House insider most closely allied with the justification for war will have a numbing impact on Washington's power elite, whatever Mr. Wolfowitz may say about 'impressive progress' being achieved in rebuilding Iraq."
One measure of the hatred of the U.S. occupation was the reaction of Lebanese parliamentary leader Walid Jumblatt to the attack.
"We hope the firing will be more precise and efficient (next time), so we get rid of this microbe and people like him in Washington who are spreading disorder in Arab lands, Iraq and Palestine," Jumblatt said in a statement quoted by news.com.au, the Web site of billionaire Rupert Murdoch's media empire in Australia."
The U.S Embassy in Beirut responded angrily and demanded the Lebanese government condemn the remarks.
The Scotsman, the leading newspaper of Scotland, declared the U.S. must stand firm.
"At stake here is not the perpetuation of foreign occupation v the U.S. has no interest in remaining in Iraq a day longer than necessary v but the successful establishment of an Iraqi civilian government acceptable to the Iraqi people as a whole. That is why the terrorists must not win."
But even among supporters of U.S. policy there were expressions of fear v of the Bush administration.
The editors of the Sydney Morning Herald said, "Mr. Wolfowitz was right to insist the U.S. would not be 'cowed' into retreat. The only morally credible exit strategy for the U.S. is the substantial reconstruction of Iraq and its civil institutions."
At the same time, the Australian daily said, "There is a fatal flaw in attempting to meet the amorphous terrorist threat v either locally or globally v by reaching for a bigger gun."
The editors expressed worry about the Pentagon's latest plan to incorporate low-yield nuclear weapons, so-called 'mini-nukes,' into the U.S. military's arsenal.
"Mini-nukes are supposed to transform the U.S. military's nuclear capacity into what the Pentagon terms as 'relevant to the threat environment' of terrorism. Yet, in the 1980s, the U.S. judged another weapon, the shoulder-held Stinger missile, as similarly relevant. Stingers were supplied to Islamic 'jihad' guerillas, including the Taliban, fighting Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Now they have become one of the most dangerous weapons in terrorists' hands."
The world faces a dual challenge, says Rami G. Khouri, editor in chief of Daily Star in Lebanon.
"The urgent task is to stabilize Iraq, restore native sovereignty, revive economic growth and end the Anglo-American-led occupation. The equally significant longer-term challenge is how to deal with the unilateral projection of American power around the world. . . . We must rebuild a violent, fragile Iraqi state, and prevent the emergence of a violent, predator American state," he wrote.
Posted 29 October 2003 - 09:50 AM
Thats the options that challenges the world.
First there is the manufactured clear course set by the Bush administration that all terrorists must be hunted down and destroyed before they destroy the world. So one by one nation after nation is being destroyed to get those terrorists.
The confused calm is the misleading news rush between the explosions of individual and state terrorism.
They didn't fight the Viet Nam war to win and there is no evidence that there was preparation to avoid this bigger mess
becoming unwinable as well. They even lied to the troops as to what to expect.
Lactantius' chapter about God is full of ifs and buts and conclusions draw from these and unsubstantiated premises.
I will trade you this for a cup with no bottem DonQ.
By the same technique we could prove man curbs God.
"But religious men undertook the Crusades.."
We know how religious the Roman Catholics were then but what about the Zionists of the Latter Day Crusade, how religious are they?
In her book "My Life"former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, recalled the 7th meeting of the Canadian Jewish Congress in the spring of 1947, where future Zionist leader Dr Nahum Goldmann
explained "we insisted on Palestine not because of religious, historical or sentimental reasons, but because Palestine is a turning table of three continents and in the military, political and strategic sense it is the worlds centre". "Besides the oil
reserves in this area are much higher than the whole American
Some crusade, still going on.
Behind the Catholic crusades were the Knights Templers, the fore-
runners of the Free-Masons, and their main objective was to
find certain artifacts for their cult practices. The Bushs have their Skull and Bones cult. One wonders if certain artifacts stolen from Bagdad are now in the company of others also stolen or unearthed from Jerusalem hundreds of years ago. (power
relationships are interactive...) The Masons today are trying to
regain lost powers of the dim past.
Then we have the fundamentalist Muslims who allegedly hate freedom in the west. Religion must the root of all evil.
Prof. R.J. Rummel of Uni of Hawaii claims 200 million people were killed in the twentieth century. Religion? Or any abuse of power?
"All power relationships are interactive, mutually modulating, reciprical."- for good and evil?
Russian Muslims influencing U.S. foriegn policy? After Afghanistan and Irag they have some serious self-examination before Syria,
Iran and Saudi Arabia get destroyed as well.
Russia and the U.S. becoming friends is a big favourite. Well they are neighbours after all.
Posted 30 October 2003 - 09:32 PM
We have exposed the Lion--and we must congratulate ourselves for the job if nobody does it for us;)--and we have proven beyond reasonable doubt that, as Kofi Annan put it, the option is *cooperation or catastrophe*, the problem being the Lion is unable or unwilling to make any adjustments. It seems to be in his nature to eat and attack until a catastrophe is brought upon us. I have said before, "Inertia is the law of physics that dooms humanity.":confused:
The hope being that the cooperative little animals take over and replace competition with cooperation. It may be a slim hope but it's all we got. We can do many things, and I've put together some message--the little stories and the solution discussed here, among others--the little people do get--and like very much--but the logistics of it is the major problem. Not even the leaders that are supposed to challenge the Lion can be counted upon as they seem to enjoy the scraps left by him. Perhaps after all we should take a break...
PS: Thank you Pravda. You are already #1!
Posted 31 October 2003 - 01:15 AM
If the Lion avoids inertia and stays on top he has to control the changes and the direction of the change. So then everything changes but everything remains the same, underneath.
Inertia can have a meaning for the lesser animals in that they
remain in the being led disposition (captive) and dont move out of their dependancy on Lion Speak and lion Think thus their actions are always conducive to the continuing supremacy of the Lion.
Russia number one:
Please the lion and get the highest awards/rewards
Attack the Lion and dethrown him
Set an alternative change/direction in competition so the little animals can vote with their feet ( if inertia hasn't leadened them).
I am not moved by Mr Annan. He is probably thinking in terms of a world govt superceding the U.N. under which nations will
cooperate by law. I am anticipating that this is in waiting and part of the forward direction of the Lion avoiding inertia.
The Cooperation or catastrophy policy of Bush, which Afghanistan and iraq and other are subject to is the precursor that will
demand world govt to restore order.
What we see happening in the world is the outcome of Lion policy. We will not see the values we place on labels (eg coop)coming from the servants of the Lion who run the world.
If they believed what you and I believe in DonQ they would not be in office.
Mr Putin seems to be very careful to the point of being an acception to the others. We can see there is no hope with the others.
If you are suggesting this thread has become subject to inertia
and time to invest time elsewher or another thread, I am quite
happy to do so. I have enjoyed your company.
Posted 31 October 2003 - 06:51 AM
Posted 31 October 2003 - 01:36 PM
Posted 31 October 2003 - 01:43 PM
Posted 01 November 2003 - 08:42 PM
Whether communism or so called democracy the power that belongs to the people gets usurped and abused by a small number of the population.
A small percent of the population are party members. A small
percent of the party are in control of the party/govt. Power corrupts and only respects power. It despises people because they get in the way.
If Mr Putin can balance/neutralise forces both at home and abroad
that sanity can have some hope he would be an exceptional man indeed. Hoever a man of the right kind of steel is more likely to come out of an environment of past tyrany than the soft corruption that the likes of Bushs and Clintons represent.
If capitalism wanted to destroy the Soviet Union they would have done it with Atoms bombs in the late forties as some desired,
before the Soviet Union got the bomb.
Why did Washington hold back the Allied armies until The Soviet Armies got to Berlin first and share German technology, scientists and intelligence? Why did Roosevelt give away Eastern Europe and ignore the rigged elections of the communist parties?
Why have big American corporations played an important role
in the development of Soviet industry, including the worlds largest truck making plant?
The Foreign Relations Committee a key influential think-tank
behind American govts opted for a balanced (cold war) military
standoff that allowed the Soviet Union to catch up on the basis
that this balance would secure a no-war situation as neither would risk an all out war. Who lets the enemy catch up???????
Scratch the surface of common notions feed by the media and govts and you inevitably find there is another colour underneath,
someone has done a re-paint to sell a lemon. On both sides of the Iron Curtain.
Posted 07 November 2003 - 12:50 AM
and since I have not posted here before, let me tell
'Guest" viewers the regular contributors that
Russia has zero effective lobby in the USA.
Should the Russians have had an effective lobby in
the USA promoters would not be left alone, to fend for
themselves in peddling one of Russia's most potent.
most visible, most worthy, public relations vehicles -
the world's most powerful (by far) firefighting airplane.
In recent publications, and in the context of the killer
fires of California, which took 22 lives, 750K biomass,
and over 3000 structures (homes and other) one
of the US' foremost aviation scholars, knowing the
Russian airplane would have saved consiberable
losses, has complained that he, a noted scholar and
contributor to the US aviation industry CANNOT GET
THE CNN, PBS, OR THE LA TIMES to cover this abuse
of common sense.
Among the minor publications covering the incident
the second piece on this page:
and a private effort: http://sacredearth.org/cal_911_T.html
Simply put: the forces at work in the US whose careers
involve sustaining the leftovers from the Cold War are
alive and well and would rather see Americans burned out
of house and home and even lose their lives than turn to
the Russians for help.
This is GW Bush's Kursk, but it will never, ever, be regarded
as such in the USA.
Worse, the USA seems to be able influence most every other
firefighting jurisdiction in the world against using the
Posted 07 November 2003 - 10:34 AM
Here is a copy of a message I received in a newsletter which the
ed. received recently:
"Someone wants San Diego to burn! This has been the most disastrpous situation imaginabale, and it didn't have to get like this. Saturday night four fires started. No one fought them! They were basically allowed to be out of control until Tuesday or Wednesday. Our Representative and city Council members have been trying to get help in here to fight these fires and everything has to go through the Governors office and the Governor has held up all help until now."
Just like Sept 11, four aircraft were "out of control" and the system wasn't allowed to function until the damage was done.
Who needs enemies when you have leadership like this.
'Who's minding the store?'
Posted 08 November 2003 - 03:23 AM
US paper I found in GoogleNews to have carried the story
of this exercise: http://www.nato.int/...02/m020925d.htm
Notice that the Il-76 is down the page a bit. That picture is
worth a lot to me and gives the lie to things said about
the Il-76 among the Smokey Bears in North America.
There were reportedly 30 Americans from various departments
at this exercise. They know who they are. And believe me
when I say the sight of this aircraft delivering a payload is
a sight to behold.
Again back to Russia, however, Amb. Vershbow was pissed that
the Russian media never gave this exercise any coverage
at all. Think of the photo ops they missed! The lost marketing
Posted 08 November 2003 - 04:35 AM
I have heard of expectations re Cali. doing an Atlantis. Also heard that a large part is actually a shelf not on solid gound
which lends itself to such expectations.
If so, raises ones imagination re submarines.
Anyway one could hardly draw a map with an area shaded and the key referring to it as an area expected to drown so we will exclude it. (should they have the same thoughts to begin with)
Yellowstone may be about to make the fires look like a small
Not sure what you meant re eliminating customers and Iraq.
(perhaps I didnt go far enough back on the posts)
Do you have any stats etc on the Il-76. Photo is small but then I guess if a few flew along the fire front and put out the leading edge it would burn out behind it.
Looks like it may be using vectored engine thrust to blast the
substance down into the fire.
Posted 08 November 2003 - 11:44 AM
All you need do is click at "618kB"
To see how the airplane is being marketed
online, (assuming you use Google) enter
"waterbomber" and go through five
pages of links, selecting those related to
the IL-76 or, if you wish, see what the other
planes offer too. The most recent World Net
Daily piece is repeated through other independent
media. The Original World Net Daily piece was
also offered here at Pravda in the Russian language.
In English, it is here: http://www.worldnetd...RTICLE_ID=28739
To see more, go to this page: http://www.vadscorner.com/haze.html
and 2/3 - 3/4 down the page, beside the picture
of the airplane, there is a series of links
to articles (very few dead links) not showing up on the first
five (5) pages of a Google search of "waterbomber".
More efforts if you go deeper into that Google search.
Beats faxing material around!
One of my favourites is Venik's item on Los Alamos
The main site for the project is www.waterbomber.com
U. de Freiburg/Max Planck U./Global Fire Monitoring Center,
a UN project, hosts this mirror site: http://www.uni-freib...ergency/ger.htm
Despite all the publicity (and we have a a letter from
NATO in pdf following on the Los Alamos incident too), US
major news outlets like PBS, CNN, and LA Times, for example,
refuse to carry the Russian miracle plane, doing the
investigative work required.
I once wondered why that was and dilligently sought out
how media censorship works. At a UK media org site
dealing only with the topic of censorship, I found two
reasons why: Seems that two areas where the media can
legitimately keep you below the peoples' radar are
(a) criticisms of civil defence and
( some foreign trade items.
This project contains elements of both.
If Americans knew, they would be incensed.
Ironically, when MSNBC ran this one, now available in
reprint form only (http://www.vadscorne...m/tooproud.html),
MSNBC ran an online poll and the results overwhelmingly
supported bringing on the Russians! We're talking 94%
of about 15K people. I don't care that such a poll is
"unscientific". You could only vote once and beyond a
certain # votes, this "unscientific" thing just gets lower
Somebody in the US besides the US Forest Service is
holding back powerful civil defence services from Americans.
And because these services are held back from Americans,
a global freeze is in effect. I am ashamed of my own nation,
Canada, for making zero efforts, especially since we lost
over 220 homes this summer in British Columbia but this
is the nature of the prejudice against Russia in the
world of firefighting aviation today.
For the darker side of US Forest Service aviation history,
check this link: http://www.tex-la.ne...exclusive.shtml
Posted 08 November 2003 - 10:28 PM
I can appreciate your intense concern. Wow what an aircraft.
For people to say it could make more destruction than the fire
says it all. Truth and people dont count anymore in the U.S. than
some banana republic or in Husseins Iraq.
Eitel's story reads like the tale of the last American symbolising what made America great, being destroyed by what has become greater through money-power.
I would expect that the darker side includes corporate interests,
especially in aircraft manufacturing.
I also assume the Fire Service is a Fed monster that prevents a State from protecting its citizens contrary to the intentions of the Constitution.
Compare Eitels situation today with those thousands who lost their homes to fire unnecessary, and then compare them to those
who have suffered likewise in Iraq this year.
Powerless people are loosing to the abuse of power everywhere
across the planet.
I was reading some of the articles on Worldnetdaily re christian persectution. Corporate Western media isn't interested in that either.
As long as the public continue to finance the untruth, silence
msinformation etc by subscribing to the corporate media nothing can change broadly and thousands will continue to suffer and corruption will prevail in politics. People don't realise how powerful they could be. Withholding subscriptions is as deadly as withholding a vote on an incumbant.
I cancelled mine last year.
I dont single out the U.S. specifically, but in as much as it has represented the so called free world, justice and FREE enterpise the once hope of the future, (a few decades ago).
Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:07 AM
Pakistan, afghanistan and iran have been home to terrorists against boh
america and russia.
Instead of america and russia, quarelling amongst themselves, they both need to fight the islamic threat that threatens the entire civilized world
internally, the muslims together with the ADL, have been undermining both russia and america, and alienating the ADL worldwide, hoping to destroy both america and russia, and give the ADL another holocaust.
Externally they have been busy pushing russia and the west into a hostile posture, by extensively using the ADL, in the hopes of destroying
Russia survival lies in friendship with america and europe..we share the same culture, the same values and the same social customs...
we both share the same interests as well, a common threat from the islamic world...
If you take a closer look at it...the same muslims, who have been working on jewish paranoia to push them into self destruction by making them alienate all major powers, are also pushing both russia and america into destruction.
A small set of crooks is playing everyone for fools, and pushing the world into destruction, hoping to be the only survivors by advising everyone
else into destruction.
Posted 10 November 2003 - 04:14 AM
Hey pally how ya been. my fingers are wearing out, hopin to make some sense around here.
These posters at least some of them really aint got a clue as to where this old man is comin from, or for that matter going to.
Mac it's good to see your name here.
just one more think, who is the ADL you are referring to?
the only one i know is the anti defamation league.
Posted 10 November 2003 - 09:10 AM
Sort of looks rather cute Muslims and Anti-defamation league
Muslims killed Russians in AFghan = killed foreigners invading
Muslims killed Americans in Afghan. = killed invading foreigners
Russians killed muslims in Afghan = invaders killed defenders
Americans killed Muslims in Afghan= invaders killed defenders
I am trying to think of a non-islamic country that has been invaded by a member country of Islam. I can't think of one.
I have no trouble thinking of member countries of Islam that have been invaded by non-Muslims.
All rather simplistic but the message is clear.
Did muslims force Russian and U.S. to self destruct by invading
Did they force the Allies (US and Uk) to bomb Serbs for the
benefit of Muslims in Kosovo?
Did Iran force the US to encircle it with military bases?
Did muslims force Bush to lie regarding Iraq WMD and terrorist links re SEpt 11. Did they force British intelligence to lie about
Iraq seeking nuclear material from West Africa?
Every now and then someone makes a point about Russia and the U.S. and/ or UE in conflict. Russia is an informal member of NATO, which is still led by the U.S.. The only time they clash is on the sports field.
Could someone explain where the conflict is.
What I can appreciate is the point about the U.S. being pushed into self destruction. I am unaware of any Muslim think tanks in the U.S. that have been over-reaching the Neocons and their
allies amongst the so-called christian evangelicals.
I am also aware that some Israelis have concerns regarding the
similar situation as the U.S., that they are also expendable for
some agenda unknown. However a claim that the conspiracy/agenda is the work of Muslims comes as a supprise.
Obviously James you have strong reasons to make your claims
so you are welcome to go further into detail.
Congressman James Moran had to step down from his House Leadership role because he said in a meeting that the Iraq war was principally supported by the American Jewish community and if it wasn't for them it wouldn't have happened.
No one steps down for telling the truth about Muslims.
Two years ago an Israeli radio station quoted Sharon reminding Peres that Israel/ the Jewish people controlled the U.S., no
muslim objections or counter claims are known to have been made.
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users