Kissinger of Death

#78 by tahmed32 on December 10, 2002 2:35pm PT

It is extremely painful to read aamir`s posts. I had to read them a couple of times before I could figure out what he was trying to say. I am not trying to prove I am a english babu....whatever that means. Thanks for pointing out my spelling mistake.

#71 by GhalibZaman

Is it any wonder that US is considered the Most Hated nation in the world.
*******************************

You mean in the Islamic world right??

The 2billion+ people in China and India (Not to mention hundreds of millions in South America) seems to love the US.

ssdhillon #73: you point to some misspelt words by aamir and ask him which madrassah he went to. Being always pleased to prick babuenglishmen of your kind, I am glad to point out that in writing ``Can’t buy a descent keyboard`` you betray similar spelling problems on your part.

PS: I needed to pick on some jerk on chowk today. arjun is stale meat by now, and jay is undergoing treatment for insanity. so thanks for providing some variety on chowk. :-)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

# 59 Aamir

Can’t buy a descent keyboard….Looks like the Wahabi funds to your madrassa have dried up.

Add Trent Lott to the list of Foot in Mouth in regards to his comments at Strom ``Dixiecrat and Proud`` Thurman`s retirement party...anyone see the internet image parody of ``We Weren`t Soldiers``?

Arjun,

To get back to a comment you had made about my preferring military people in politics...Sahib, you are well aware that I am a except in extraordinary cases, a pacifist...I do know people who have served in the US military and a good number chose that route for financial reasons, youth, lack of options. If their feelings about nationalism were a bit ambigious before, they arent when these workers had completed their duty- they question the constant militaristic standoffs....while the chickenhawks who went awol are chomping at the chains...and whose blood is it? All of our blood....

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

WORTH REPEATING:
Is it any wonder that US is considered the Most Hated nation in the world.
Uncle Toms not to worry. US likes your kind.


email this to all.

How did Iraq get its weapons? We sold them
By Neil Mackay and Felicity Arbuthnot

THE US and Britain sold Saddam Hussein the technology and materials Iraq needed to develop nuclear, chemical and biological wea pons of mass destruction.
Reports by the US Senate`s committee on banking, housing and urban affairs -- which oversees American exports policy -- reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Snr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia. Other bacteria sold included brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene.

Classified US Defence Dep-artment documents also seen by the Sunday Herald show that Britain sold Iraq the drug pralidoxine, an antidote to nerve gas, in March 1992, after the end of the Gulf war. Pralidoxine can be reverse engineered to create nerve gas.

The Senate committee`s rep orts on `US Chemical and Biological Warfare-Related Dual-Use Exports to Iraq`, undertaken in 1992 in the wake of the Gulf war, give the date and destination of all US exports. The reports show, for example, that on May 2, 1986, two batches of bacillus anthracis -- the micro-organism that causes anthrax -- were shipped to the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education, along with two batches of the bacterium clostridium botulinum, the agent that causes deadly botulism poisoning.

One batch each of salmonella and E coli were shipped to the Iraqi State Company for Drug Industries on August 31, 1987. Other shipments went from the US to the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission on July 11, 1988; the Department of Biology at the University of Basrah in November 1989; the Department of Microbiology at Baghdad University in June 1985; the Ministry of Health in April 1985 and Officers` City, a military complex in Baghdad, in March and April 1986.

The shipments to Iraq went on even after Saddam Hussein ordered the gassing of the Kurdish town of Halabja, in which at least 5000 men, women and children died. The atrocity, which shocked the world, took place in March 1988, but a month later the components and materials of weapons of mass destruction were continuing to arrive in Baghdad from the US.

The Senate report also makes clear that: `The United States provided the government of Iraq with `dual use` licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programmes.`

This assistance, according to the report, included `chemical warfare-agent precursors, chem ical warfare-agent production facility plans and technical drawings, chemical warfare filling equipment, biological warfare-related materials, missile fabrication equipment and missile system guidance equipment`.

Donald Riegle, then chairman of the committee, said: `UN inspectors had identified many United States manufactured items that had been exported from the United States to Iraq under licences issued by the Department of Commerce, and [established] that these items were used to further Iraq`s chemical and nuclear weapons development and its missile delivery system development programmes.`

Riegle added that, between January 1985 and August 1990, the `executive branch of our government approved 771 different export licences for sale of dual-use technology to Iraq. I think that is a devastating record`.

It is thought the information contained in the Senate committee reports is likely to make up much of the `evidence of proof` that Bush and Blair will reveal in the coming days to justify the US and Britain going to war with Iraq. It is unlikely, however, that the two leaders will admit it was the Western powers that armed Saddam with these weapons of mass destruction.

However, Bush and Blair will also have to prove that Saddam still has chemical, biological and nuclear capabilities. This looks like a difficult case to clinch in view of the fact that Scott Ritter, the UN`s former chief weapons inspector in Iraq, says the United Nations des troyed most of Iraq`s wea pons of mass destruction and doubts that Saddam could have rebuilt his stocks by now.

According to Ritter, between 90% and 95% of Iraq`s weapons of mass destruction were des troyed by the UN. He believes the remainder were probably used or destroyed during `the ravages of the Gulf War`.

Ritter has described himself as a `card-carrying Republican` who voted for George W Bush. Nevertheless, he has called the president a `liar` over his claims that Saddam Hussein is a threat to America.

Ritter has also alleged that the manufacture of chemical and biological weapons emits certain gases, which would have been detected by satellite. `We have seen none of this,` he insists. `If Iraq was producing weapons today, we would have definitive proof.`

He also dismisses claims that Iraq may have a nuclear weapons capacity or be on the verge of attaining one, saying that gamma-particle atomic radiation from the radioactive materials in the warheads would also have been detected by western surveillance.

The UN`s former co-ordinator in Iraq and former UN under-secretary general, Count Hans von Sponeck, has also told the Sunday Herald that he believes the West is lying about Iraq`s weapons programme.

Von Sponeck visited the Al-Dora and Faluja factories near Baghdad in 1999 after they were `comprehensively trashed` on the orders of UN inspectors, on the grounds that they were suspected of being chemical weapons plants. He returned to the site late in July this year, with a German TV crew, and said both plants were still wrecked.

`We filmed the evidence of the dishonesty of the claims that they were producing chemical and biological weapons,` von Sponeck has told the Sunday Herald. `They are indeed in the same destroyed state which we witnessed in 1999. There was no trace of any resumed activity at all.`

Iraq Indicates Names of Arms Suppliers in Document
Mon December 9, 2002 03:32 PM ET
By Evelyn Leopold
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Iraq`s long declaration of its past weapons programs is expected to include names of foreign suppliers, disclosures that may be embarrassing for nations on the U.N. Security Council.

A table of contents, circulated to the Security Council on Monday, says Iraq listed ``procurements`` of its nuclear programs as well as imported chemical precursors and foreign technical assistance for its chemical arms programs.

Under biological weapons, the index says 33 pages are devoted to ``acquisition of equipment, material, supplies and empty munitions containers for all phases of the program.``

The table, contained in a covering letter from Baghdad`s Foreign Minister Naji Sabri, lists all of Iraq`s banned weapons programs, but does not indicate if any arms were procured after U.N. sanctions were imposed in August 1990.

In the past, sensitive information, has not been disclosed by U.N. weapons inspection units. Companies around the world, which cooperated with the United Nations did so on condition they not be identified publicly, although the United States and others are presumed to have access to such information.

But this time all 15 Security Council members are to get the report, which means it could leak to the press quickly.

Unknown is whether the United States and other council members will try to repress this part of Iraq`s 12,000-page declaration, delivered to the United Nations on Sunday.

Washington now has the sole copy of the report, which it is expected to distribute to Russia, Britain, France and China, the other permanent council members.

The U.N. Security Council decided on Friday to purge the document of information that could lead to weapons proliferation, such as how to make a bomb. But no decision has been made on information about the suppliers.

President Saddam Hussein`s government met a Dec. 8 deadline called for last month in a crucial Security Council resolution that sets the ground rules for new tough weapons inspections and give Iraq one more chance to disarm or face ``serious consequences.``

The Bush administration intends to show that significant information about any illegal weapons programs will put Baghdad in ``material breach`` of resolution 1441, adopted on Nov. 8, which would allow Washington to go to war.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Ref scout #62

[arjun_m #49, ``Umm..isnt that an evolutionary instinct? Beautiful women are preferred because they are more likely to bear children who have a higher chance of surival?``

what a load of bull.....healthy women are preferred.... correct me if i`m wrong, when a guy sees a beautiful woman, he doesn`t instinctively think about her capacity to bear children.]

You are both right and wrong. A professor studied Western concepts of beauty as expressed by the selection of Miss America and other beauty pageants and came to the conclusion that the waist-to-hips ratio of 0.7 is the ideal female figure. In all the beauty pageants, the winners fell in the range of 0.68 to 0.72 for the waist-to-hips ratio. This ratio is adequate for healthy child-bearing.

I am kicking myself for not studying sociology and becoming a professor for I could have been applying for research grants in this area. As usual, somebody else beat me to it: in this case, Prof. Devendra Singh of the University of Houston. A Desi, would you believe it?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

[ #10 by Saminasha on December 7, 2002 7:14am PT
einstein,
You are aware that your namesake was quite a progressive?....Go see the movie and then talk....also Noam Chomsky`s got a doc. about him.... ]

No thanks, I will pass.

Movies. Books. These are ``kind of sort of`` religions of USA. Freedom of information is religionized in USA. Information is purveyed and consumed with religious fervor. Didn`t I say my prayer five times a day? Didn`t I watch CNN? May God save me from such religion(s).

-ew

hamidm2 #47, ``..... it is not an ``either/or`` thing - as long as she gets a minimum of 1400 on her SAT (which she did), she can do anything she wants .........``

granted she can do anything she wants, but would you HONESTLY be happy if she decided to put a great SAT score on the back burner to fulfill the beauty pageant nonsense?

``and really, it is not a question of what you or i or urstruly think is right and proper - we all have the right to do or not do something, we simply don`t have the right to tell other people what to do and then if they don`t do it go on a burning and killing rampage ........``

i`m not condoning burning/killing because i don`t believe in something, but anyone with a little common sense knows the actual worth of beauty pageants. people just don`t win the Nobel Prize for beauty pageants.
and the sooner women realize it, the better.

``........ and, oh by the way, mrs hamidm watched the entire victoria`s secret fashion show, even though i got thoroughly bored after the first five minutes and wanted to switch to cnn..........and here is a woman with enough brains for a clan of mad mullahs and their harem of virgins ......... ``

maybe she was thinking about buying the lingerie. besides, modeling by profession is a slightly different concept than beauty pageants.

arjun_m #49, ``Umm..isnt that an evolutionary instinct? Beautiful women are preferred because they are more likely to bear children who have a higher chance of surival?``

what a load of bull.....healthy women are preferred.... correct me if i`m wrong, when a guy sees a beautiful woman, he doesn`t instinctively think about her capacity to bear children.

``urstruly is getting his undies in a know because the contests are ``demeaning to women``....i dont see the women participating of their own free will expressing this sentiment.``

why would they......you`re kind of stupid.