West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Train of Thought => Topic started by: infinite59 on July 24, 2004, 12:16:59 PM
-
(Props to 41510)
[1] Before we get into the Israel issue, I want to point out that Cameron Kerry is a scumbag piece of sh1t because he is a corporate attorney defending businesses that poison people with environmental toxins:
http://www.mintz.com/about/director...ameron_F_Kerry/
Now onto Israel:
[2] Okay, the law firm this guy works at is actually very pro-Israel, to the point where they put out brochures about their committment to Israel:
http://www.mintz.com/israel_main.cfm
http://www.mintz.com/images/dyn/israelbrochure.pdf
Now onto the brother himself:
[3] from: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/lo...=sfla-news-palm
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Playing to the mostly Jewish audience, Cameron Kerry, 53, focused on what he sees as the Bush family's friendship with the Saudi royal family, the administration's pandering to Arab states and the lack of aggression toward Iran. Though Bush ordered the invasion of an Arab country a little over a year ago and has been a steadfast supporter of Israel, Kerry told the crowd that during a recent visit to Israel officials told him that the United States wasn't doing enough to protect the Jewish state.
"The real threat to us is Iran," said Kerry, a Boston lawyer. "They're the religious fundamentalists, the ones who have contacts with al-Qaida, the ones with the nuclear program, the ones who fund Hamas and Hezbollah."
Kerry said his brother, once elected, will do everything he can to stop terrorism against the U.S. and Israel by going after Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria.
Snacking on cake, cookies and ice cream, the crowd booed every reference to Vice President Dic|k Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and applauded when Kerry mentioned what his brother has done and will do for Israel. Leaving to a standing ovation, Kerry won over many who were skeptical of his brother's allegiance to Israel.
"I wasn't sure about John Kerry's commitment to Israel. He hasn't really said much," said Florice Ambrosio, 75, a Democrat. "But I'm glad he's pro-Israel because it's very important to me." Ambrosio has been locked in a bitter fight with her significant other over who's more of a friend to Israel, Bush or Kerry.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[4] from: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/449363.html
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kerry's visit to Israel aims to strengthen ties between the Democratic candidate and Israel. Senator Kerry had asked to meet Prime Minister Ariel Sharon during his visit to Washington last April, but Sharon did not agree to the meeting, citing a scheduling conflict. At the time, Sharon was visiting Washington in order to receive assurances of U.S. President George Bush's support for Sharon's Gaza disengagement plan.
Sharon promised to schedule a meeting with Bush's rival in May, when a visit to Washington had been planned, but that trip was canceled.
Diplomatic sources in Jerusalem said yesterday the prime minister does not plan a visit to Washington before the November presidential elections. This means that Kerry will not have a photo opportunity with the prime minister prior to the elections.
During his speech on Sunday, during July 4 celebrations at the residence of U.S. ambassador Dan Kurzer, Sharon commended Bush for his friendship to Israel, and his leadership in the war against terror.
Sharon's office, like others in Israel, are in contact with Kerry's Israel adviser, Footlik, who lived in Israel in the past and worked at the Peres Center for Peace.
Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, who returned to Israel last night from the U.S., did not meet with anyone affiliated with Kerry's campaign.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[5] from: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1165222/posts
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cameron Kerry, who lives in Boston, was in New York last weekend politicking for his brother in advance of the March 2 New York Democratic primary. One of the campaign's most public faces in the Jewish community, he spent the Sabbath at Manhattan synagogues and stayed in local homes. On Sunday, he and his brother met with some 40 Jewish communal leaders in Manhattan at a gathering that got glowing reviews in the next day's newspapers. The candidate impressed attendees with his knowledge of Middle Eastern affairs and his emotional grasp of the issues. He also got a chance to correct an earlier faux pas, in which he had suggested naming two figures who are unpopular with the Jewish community — former secretary of state James Baker and former president Carter — as possible envoys to the Middle East.
Cameron Kerry's Jewish connections also extend to his business life, and have paid off for John Kerry. A telecommunications lawyer, Kerry works at a Boston-based firm, Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo, although he has taken a leave to work on the campaign. While Mintz Levin is now a diverse, 450-lawyer shop, it was once known as the "Lox et Veritas" firm — a play on the Yale motto "Lux et Veritas" — having been founded in 1933 by Jewish lawyers "who weren't entirely accepted at white-shoe firms," Kerry said. The firm, which built itself up as counselors to the Jewish entrepreneurs of Boston, even now has a big business in helping Israeli high-tech entrepreneurs gain access to American markets.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[6] from: http://israpundit.com/archives/007572.html
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kerry’s brother met with Israel’s prime minister and opposition leader. Cameron Kerry, one of the closest advisers to the Massachusetts senator and presumptive Democratic Party nominee for president, is on his first visit to the Jewish state. “My brother has been here many times and told me of his trips and has a very deep, personal connection to Israel,” Kerry told reporters. “I finally had the opportunity to make a visit and I jumped at the chance.” Kerry met with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Labor Party leader Shimon Peres on Wednesday. Also planned for his visit — sponsored by an affiliate of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee — is a tour of Israel’s West Bank security barrier.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[7] from: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satell...p=1078027574121
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bush administration, Cameron Kerry said during a phone interview conducted on his way from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv, "has not been aggressive enough toward Saudi Arabia." Kerry said his brother criticizes Bush not over his policies concerning Israel, but "for not doing enough in other areas that affect Israel."
The younger Kerry, who met Thursday with Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom and Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, said that Bush has not waged an effective enough war on terrorism, has not done enough to reduce American dependence on Middle East oil, and "has been timid about challenging Saudi Arabia." Cameron Kerry, who met Prime Minister Ariel Sharon briefly on Wednesday, said the US must do more to get the Saudi government to stamp out hatred being taught in religious schools and distributed through the press, and that more pressure must be leveled on the Saudis to end financial support for terror.
His comments were in line with the Kerry campaign's recently released position paper on Israel entitled "Strengthening Israel's Security and Bolstering the US-Israel Special Relationship." Regarding Saudi Arabia, this paper states that "John Kerry has forcefully spoken out against anti-Semitic statements by Saudi government officials, saying it calls into question their commitment to combating terrorism and pledging that as president he will never permit these kinds of attacks to go unanswered." Regarding Bush's strong support for Israel, Kerry said the administration's policies toward Israel and the peace process have bipartisan support.
"John has supported those policies, he has been a strong supporter with a perfect record in support of Israel in the 19 years that he has been a senator, and he will not walk away from Israel. President Kerry would be a strong friend to Israel," Kerry said.
For those American Jews who choose their candidate based on Israel, Kerry reiterated that his brother is a "staunch supporter of Israel, and for people for whom that is a critical part of their choice, there should at least be no difference [between him and Bush]. And then we can move on to a lot of other issues – economic, justice, church and state, security and education issues – that are important to the American Jewish community, and the reasons that American Jews have historically voted for the Democratic Party."
John Kerry raised some eyebrows in the Jewish community in October when, while speaking to an Arab American audience, he called the security fence a "barrier to peace." He has since changed his tone, referring in his position paper to the fence as "a legitimate act of self-defense erected in response to the wave of terror attacks against Israeli citizens." Asked to explain the change, Cameron Kerry replied, "There is no change. He believes that Israel has the right to protect its security, and that the fence is a reasonable exercise of that right. The statement you are talking about was made when discussing the route, and the Bush administration also has had issues concerning the route, as has the Israeli Supreme Court. And now those issues are being addressed."
Another issue that caused Kerry somewhat of a headache in the Jewish community early in the campaign was his remark that he might appoint former US secretary of state James Baker, remembered by many in Israel for a couple of particularly harsh statements toward Israel, as a special peace envoy.
Kerry said his brother had not made up his mind whom to appoint for this position, but hinted it would not be Baker.
"No candidate will be chosen for that position who doesn't also command the respect of Israel, other players and the American Jewish community," Kerry said.
Kerry is slated to tour the Golan on Friday, and return to the US on Saturday. He was brought to Israel by an affiliate of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, The American Israel Education Fund, which sponsors trips to Israel for key policy and opinion makers.
-
your a tool
-
honestly i dont think anyone is gonna read that.
there is no way to predict what kind of president kerry will be. There is no "evidence" that he is worse........because hes never been president.
When you vote its,
1) Has bush done a good job
2) Do you think he will do a good job in his 2nd term
3) Do you think kerry has what it takes to be president
Honestly right now i dont think kerry can. Kerry really isnt doing a whole lot to show the american people his views on anything. Right now he's basically just hoping that theres enough "bush haters" to win him the election.
-
1) Has bush done a good job
2) Do you think he will do a good job in his 2nd term
3) Do you think kerry has what it takes to be president
1. No
2. No
3. No
-
1) Has bush done a good job
2) Do you think he will do a good job in his 2nd term
3) Do you think kerry has what it takes to be president
1. No
2. No
3. No
ya, and 2 No's are worse than 1 No.
-
1) Has bush done a good job
2) Do you think he will do a good job in his 2nd term
3) Do you think kerry has what it takes to be president
1. No
2. No
3. No
good the less people that vote the more chance that Bush will be president.
-
1) Has bush done a good job
2) Do you think he will do a good job in his 2nd term
3) Do you think kerry has what it takes to be president
1. No
2. No
3. No
good the less people that vote the more chance that Bush will be president.
1. Bush sucked his first term
2. Bush is gonna suck his second term
3. Kerry is gonna suck as president, but so does Bush, so it's all in the air. With Kerry our foreign affairs are going to be just as fucked up as they are right now with more shit behind closed doors, but at least we'll be better off here at home; no fuckin Patriot Act, less bullshit terror alerts with their retarded "level orange" crap, etc.
-
I mean look at it this way, atleast bush is funny, lol
-
I mean look at it this way, atleast bush is funny, lol
Yeah, I don't think the public has had the chance to laugh AT any other president this much.
-
I mean look at it this way, atleast bush is funny, lol
Yeah, I don't think the public has had the chance to laugh AT any other president this much.
LOL it's sad that this is the deciding factor for some peoples' votes.
-
I don't think no one can really predict whether Kerry will be a bad president or a good one.
What I know is that I am vry disappointed with the Bush administration, and that it doesn't deserve another 4 years.
Kerry couldnt possibly do worse with foreing affairs than Bush has.
-
At this moment it really doesn't have any use to predict who is gonna win. Why aren't we, no you, gonna do that let's say 2 weeks before the elections?
-
With Kerry our foreign affairs are going to be just as fucked up as they are right now with more shit behind closed doors, but at least we'll be better off here at home; no fucking Patriot Act, less bullshit terror alerts with their retarded "level orange" crap, etc.
With Kerry´s foreign affairs the US will end up in another terrorist attack. As bad as Bush may be, we can feel safe that no terrorists attack will happen. Also with Dick Chaney and Donald Rumsfield as part of his administration, people are more scared cuz Dick has the balls to say "Fuck you" to a senator with no legs and a war hero on live T.V., and Rumsfeild has the balls to do whatever it takes to kill those fuckers over in the middle east. (Even if it means abusing them).
With Kerry's administration, his Secarty of Defense and Vice president will be a bunch of pussys, that will be scared shitless to do some baddass shit to defend our country. And thats what the election is gunna be about which president do you feel safer with.
-
With Kerry our foreign affairs are going to be just as fucked up as they are right now with more shit behind closed doors, but at least we'll be better off here at home; no fucking Patriot Act, less bullshit terror alerts with their retarded "level orange" crap, etc.
With Kerry´s foreign affairs the US will end up in another terrorist attack. As bad as Bush may be, we can feel safe that no terrorists attack will happen. Also with Dick Chaney and Donald Rumsfield as part of his administration, people are more scared cuz Dick has the balls to say "Fuck you" to a senator with no legs and a war hero on live T.V., and Rumsfeild has the balls to do whatever it takes to kill those fuckers over in the middle east. (Even if it means abusing them).
guys like you are a disgrace to humanity.
-
^^a moderator should show more respect
-
^^a moderator should show more respect
ironic, since you insulted me like no other person on this board. it's all good, you aint no moderator I know.
Im not urged to be polite to a dude who appreciates torture to ppl, helpless fuck you's from vice presidents to vets and unjustified war.
-
With Kerry our foreign affairs are going to be just as fucked up as they are right now with more shit behind closed doors, but at least we'll be better off here at home; no fucking Patriot Act, less bullshit terror alerts with their retarded "level orange" crap, etc.
With Kerry´s foreign affairs the US will end up in another terrorist attack. As bad as Bush may be, we can feel safe that no terrorists attack will happen. Also with Dick Chaney and Donald Rumsfield as part of his administration, people are more scared cuz Dick has the balls to say "Fuck you" to a senator with no legs and a war hero on live T.V., and Rumsfeild has the balls to do whatever it takes to kill those fuckers over in the middle east. (Even if it means abusing them).
With Kerry's administration, his Secarty of Defense and Vice president will be a bunch of pussys, that will be scared shitless to do some baddass shit to defend our country. And thats what the election is gunna be about which president do you feel safer with.
We can feel safe that no terrorist attacks will happen? Then why do they keep telling us and warning us of attacks?
"Secarty" ? Are you even worth arguing with? You don't seem to know jack-shit about anything. So you're admitting that Rumsfeld aka the Bush administration were behind the whole torture scandals? Good to know the truth has finally come out on what this government stands for... abusing human rights.
-
With Kerry our foreign affairs are going to be just as fucked up as they are right now with more shit behind closed doors, but at least we'll be better off here at home; no fucking Patriot Act, less bullshit terror alerts with their retarded "level orange" crap, etc.
With Kerry´s foreign affairs the US will end up in another terrorist attack. As bad as Bush may be, we can feel safe that no terrorists attack will happen. Also with Dick Chaney and Donald Rumsfield as part of his administration, people are more scared cuz Dick has the balls to say "Fuck you" to a senator with no legs and a war hero on live T.V., and Rumsfeild has the balls to do whatever it takes to kill those fuckers over in the middle east. (Even if it means abusing them).
With Kerry's administration, his Secarty of Defense and Vice president will be a bunch of pussys, that will be scared shitless to do some baddass shit to defend our country. And thats what the election is gunna be about which president do you feel safer with.
You may feel safer, but our nation will get more and more hated and that's not necessarily a good thing.
Right now, we need a president that is willing to work with other nations, not against them. An administration that will mend relationship and use diplomacy to solve problems instead of war.
-
the weird thing is, your country actually is pretty safe.
yall just get manipulated. the government puts you into fear, so that you want to feel safe. in consequence, you want a war-government. that's the strategy of the bush administration. Level Orange and shit. I doubted it'd work so damn well. But now I know it does.
-
To be honest, I would feel just as safe with Kerry as president as I do with Bush. Attacking countries that have nothing to do with terrorist attacks will not decrease the chances of a terrorist attack, so I don't see how Bush makes anyone feel safer. If Bush would've taken the warnings he received seriously and as more than a joke (unless of course he wanted the attack to happen for his friends' financial gain) then the attack might have been prevented. Since, more and more precautions are being taken when it comes to Homeland security, and I don't think that will change with Kerry. To me it makes no difference who's president, as long as I get my welfare checks aka your tax money. 8)
-
I definitely don't feel safer with Bush because his actions worry me. Every action has a reaction.
-
I dont care who are president it, you will never be able to stop terrorism, there is just no way to stop it. You can slow al-queda down by bombing their hideouts and bases, but you'll never be able to fully stop them.
But i do agree that america's government, and the media overhype the threat. I really hate it because everyone i talk to thinks that really soon another 911 is going to happen, and keep happening. Everytime i turn on the news, i hear about more "possible terrorist attacks." Truth is they dont know shit about when a new attack is going to happen, or how its going to happen. But as long as they make the americans scared about another attack happening, they think they can do what they want.
-
Everytime i turn on the news, i hear about more "possible terrorist attacks." Truth is they dont know shit about when a new attack is going to happen, or how its going to happen. But as long as they make the americans scared about another attack happening, they think they can do what they want.
Exactly.
-
I definitely don't feel safer with Bush because his actions worry me. Every action has a reaction.
True, but Kerry won't change much when it comes to relations with the Middle East.
-
^^a moderator should show more respect
ironic, since you insulted me like no other person on this board. it's all good, you aint no moderator I know.
Im not urged to be polite to a dude who appreciates torture to ppl, helpless fuck you's from vice presidents to vets and unjustified war.
ok, thanks for the info.
-
I definitely don't feel safer with Bush because his actions worry me. Every action has a reaction.
True, but Kerry won't change much when it comes to relations with the Middle East.
Unfortunately, I think you're right. I do feel he will improve things domestically, something Bush hasn't really done.
To me Kerry is the lesser of two evils
-
Yeah, that's how I feel. I think things at home will be better, we will have better relations with other nations because we won't be attacking random countries for no reason, but as far as foreign policies (minus wars) go, nothing much will change.
So if everything stays the same, but we improve things here at home, then why not. Kerry will get my vote.
-
speaking of striking a fear of possible terrorism, lets see how the 1 billion dollar price tag of security at the olympics pays off.
-
Yeah, that's how I feel. I think things at home will be better, we will have better relations with other nations because we won't be attacking random countries for no reason, but as far as foreign policies (minus wars) go, nothing much will change.
"Attacking countries for no reason"...
so you think going into afganistan was for no reason...I think you forgot 9/11. Afganistan was ruled by a terriost taliban government that housed Al Quiada and was resnsible for 9/11.
Also we attacked Iraq cuz there was a dictaor there that killed hunderds of thousands of incent people in the middle east and was threating countries(isreal0 and was invading kuwait and all the oil filled countries and taking there oil.
speaking of striking a fear of possible terrorism, lets see how the 1 billion dollar price tag of security at the olympics pays off.
would u rather be safe or sorry?
-
Yeah, that's how I feel. I think things at home will be better, we will have better relations with other nations because we won't be attacking random countries for no reason, but as far as foreign policies (minus wars) go, nothing much will change.
"Attacking countries for no reason"...
so you think going into afganistan was for no reason...I think you forgot 9/11. Afganistan was ruled by a terriost taliban government that housed Al Quiada and was resnsible for 9/11.
Also we attacked Iraq cuz there was a dictaor there that killed hunderds of thousands of incent people in the middle east and was threating countries(isreal0 and was invading kuwait and all the oil filled countries and taking there oil.
speaking of striking a fear of possible terrorism, lets see how the 1 billion dollar price tag of security at the olympics pays off.
would u rather be safe or sorry?
the only reason i disagree with the iraq war is because they changed the reason for doing it so many times...other than that, i think good things will come from it.....we just have to wait and sit it out
-
Yeah, that's how I feel. I think things at home will be better, we will have better relations with other nations because we won't be attacking random countries for no reason, but as far as foreign policies (minus wars) go, nothing much will change.
"Attacking countries for no reason"...
so you think going into afganistan was for no reason...I think you forgot 9/11. Afganistan was ruled by a terriost taliban government that housed Al Quiada and was resnsible for 9/11.
Also we attacked Iraq cuz there was a dictaor there that killed hunderds of thousands of incent people in the middle east and was threating countries(isreal0 and was invading kuwait and all the oil filled countries and taking there oil.
speaking of striking a fear of possible terrorism, lets see how the 1 billion dollar price tag of security at the olympics pays off.
would u rather be safe or sorry?
the only reason i disagree with the iraq war is because they changed the reason for doing it so many times...other than that, i think good things will come from it.....we just have to wait and sit it out
guess why they changed it so often..
they always named trash reasons, and got sonned easily. so they gave new reasons. sonned again. and so on. truth is, there is no noble reason. the true reasons are 1. personal revenge against saddam (hint: seniour bush) 2. oil 3. taking attention away from the fact they were unable to get bin laden
-
Yeah, that's how I feel. I think things at home will be better, we will have better relations with other nations because we won't be attacking random countries for no reason, but as far as foreign policies (minus wars) go, nothing much will change.
"Attacking countries for no reason"...
so you think going into afganistan was for no reason...I think you forgot 9/11. Afganistan was ruled by a terriost taliban government that housed Al Quiada and was resnsible for 9/11.
Also we attacked Iraq cuz there was a dictaor there that killed hunderds of thousands of incent people in the middle east and was threating countries(isreal0 and was invading kuwait and all the oil filled countries and taking there oil.
speaking of striking a fear of possible terrorism, lets see how the 1 billion dollar price tag of security at the olympics pays off.
would u rather be safe or sorry?
LMFAO. We went into Iraq cuz Iraq threatened Israel? Really? Is that the reason?
Iraq "invaded" Kuwait? Isn't that what the Gulf War in 91 was about?
It invaded other countries as well? Really? Which ones?
Saddam has been a dictator since he came into power, but we chose to support him before, we even gave him the necessary weapons to kill. Why did we do business with him then? Why didn't we care about his torture? Oh yea, he hooked us up with oil, and we got angry when he nationalized the oil fields.
You're a fuckin idiot. Honestly. I can't believe you said this war is about Iraq invading other countries. You should just slowly walk your way out of TOT.
-
LMFAO. We went into Iraq cuz Iraq threatened Israel? Really? Is that the reason?
Iraq "invaded" Kuwait? Isn't that what the Gulf War in 91 was about?
It invaded other countries as well? Really? Which ones?
We went into Iraq beacuse of WMDs. But then we found out that WMDs were never found. So then the reason for going into Iraq was to take out the dictator Saddam Hussinen who was respnonsible for killing hunderds of thousands of people in the middle east. Also Iraq invaded Iran before.
Saddam has been a dictator since he came into power, but we chose to support him before, we even gave him the necessary weapons to kill. Why did we do business with him then? Why didn't we care about his torture? Oh yea, he hooked us up with oil, and we got angry when he nationalized the oil fields.
Cuz during that time he wasnt commiting war crimes and killing people.
You're a fuckin idiot. Honestly. I can't believe you said this war is about Iraq invading other countries. You should just slowly walk your way out of TOT.
I never said it was about invading other countries.
-
LMFAO. We went into Iraq cuz Iraq threatened Israel? Really? Is that the reason?
Iraq "invaded" Kuwait? Isn't that what the Gulf War in 91 was about?
It invaded other countries as well? Really? Which ones?
We went into Iraq beacuse of WMDs. But then we found out that WMDs were never found. So then the reason for going into Iraq was to take out the dictator Saddam Hussinen who was respnonsible for killing hunderds of thousands of people in the middle east. Also Iraq invaded Iran before.
So, we went into Iraq because of WMDs, but then after people realized that was a lie, we changed our reason. LOL, Iraq was at war with Iran in the 80s, I don't know what that has to do with the current war. Are you lost for words or what?
Saddam has been a dictator since he came into power, but we chose to support him before, we even gave him the necessary weapons to kill. Why did we do business with him then? Why didn't we care about his torture? Oh yea, he hooked us up with oil, and we got angry when he nationalized the oil fields.
Cuz during that time he wasnt commiting war crimes and killing people.
Actually he was committing crimes and killing people for decades.
You're a fuckin idiot. Honestly. I can't believe you said this war is about Iraq invading other countries. You should just slowly walk your way out of TOT.
I never said it was about invading other countries.
You didn't? Here is what you said:
threating countries(isreal0 and was invading kuwait and all the oil filled countries and taking there oil.
I believe the correct term to describe this situation is.... OWNED 8)
-
Iraq was at war with Iran in the 80s, I don't know what that has to do with the current war. Are you lost for words or what?
I said that cuz u asked me this:It invaded other countries as well? Really? Which ones?
Actually he was committing crimes and killing people for decades.
ok i dindt know that. But maybe the US was unaware of this.
You're a fuckin idiot. Honestly. I can't believe you said this war is about Iraq invading other countries. You should just slowly walk your way out of TOT.
I never said it was about invading other countries.
You didn't? Here is what you said:
threating countries(isreal0 and was invading kuwait and all the oil filled countries and taking there oil.
I believe the correct term to describe this situation is.... OWNED 8)
I also said this:
Also we attacked Iraq cuz there was a dictaor there that killed hunderds of thousands of incent people in the middle east
-
ok i dindt know that. But maybe the US was unaware of this.
LOL you dont believe that do you? US unaware of this... lol, classic! they even supported him!
(http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/Rumsfeld_Saddam.jpg)
I also said this: Also we attacked Iraq cuz there was a dictaor there that killed hunderds of thousands of incent people in the middle east
aha, and I said this, which devastated your argument beyond recognition:
Hm, so I guess the country that does unjustfied war on the USA and dropping bombs on New York and stuff to kill Bush has to get props for getting a man who is responsible for the murders of hundreds of thousands of people in the Middle East.
-
LOL you dont believe that do you? US unaware of this... lol, classic! they even supported him!
(http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/Rumsfeld_Saddam.jpg)
When was this picture taken?
-
LOL you dont believe that do you? US unaware of this... lol, classic! they even supported him!
(http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/Rumsfeld_Saddam.jpg)
When was this picture taken?
approximately 20 years ago
-
approximately 20 years ago
ok so in the mid 80s. A this time the US never knew about Iraqs intentions or what they were doing.
Its like today Rumsfield going to India(for example) and then 20 years later the US is in war with them and shit. Do you think Rumsfield knew that India was doing this shit 20 years early?
-
approximately 20 years ago
ok so in the mid 80s. A this time the US never knew about Iraqs intentions or what they were doing.
Its like today Rumsfield going to India(for example) and then 20 years later the US is in war with them and shit. Do you think Rumsfield knew that India was doing this shit 20 years early?
LoL how dont they know what he is doing when they give him the money to do this stuff? How dont they know what he's doing when they contribute to his rise, like with bin laden? or are the american leaders so irresponsible, that they support a man who they dont know shit about?!
-
kerrys not Christian & has no belief & his bro is muslim which makes matters worse
-
kerrys not Christian & has no belief & his bro is muslim which makes matters worse
No Kerrys Cathlioc.
-
approximately 20 years ago
ok so in the mid 80s. A this time the US never knew about Iraqs intentions or what they were doing.
Its like today Rumsfield going to India(for example) and then 20 years later the US is in war with them and shit. Do you think Rumsfield knew that India was doing this shit 20 years early?
In the mid 80s the U.S. was already labeling Saddam as an evil dictator. They knew about his torture of civilians, they were obviously aware that he's at war with Iran since the U.S. was supplying both sides with weapons, etc. Seriously, I don't know why you're trying to argue against FACTS.
-
In the mid 80s the U.S. was already labeling Saddam as an evil dictator. They knew about his torture of civilians, they were obviously aware that he's at war with Iran since the U.S. was supplying both sides with weapons, etc. Seriously, I don't know why you're trying to argue against FACTS.
I don't know. I have never fully researched this subject but from what i know is that during the Iran - Iraq war, the US would switch back and forth of Iran or Iraq on which they support.
-
I don't know. I have never fully researched this subject but from what i know is that during the Iran - Iraq war, the US would switch back and forth of Iran or Iraq on which they support.
I appreciate your honesty, but it's exactly what I've been telling you all along, YOU DON'T KNOW.