One Down Two to Go

Since we are only now finishing up with Slobodan Milosevic trial after Wesley Clark’s testimony last month, there is a reasonable argument over how long would it take to bring Saddam to justice? But rest assured that Saddam’s trial would be speedy for several reasons: we (Americans) are there to do it right this time. To guide the process through with help from U.N. and respected judges of Iraq as well as other countries. Since at present it’s too big a case for fragile Iraqi judiciary to handle. I also have hope that Osama be next, though I’m cautious to bet on it because he’s got too many supporters in Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan. We will let our troops add to his misery.

actually 303 does not sound bad either.

Oye Sheehdeya, pharha meri 3 nuT 3 di ruffel te dou chaar hawai phayar kar ke nawaN saal manayeye.

...look what you did killjoy....now i have to post another 99 inane posts to make it round 400... :(

khamkhwa #300 in other words, the information content of your post is zero. hmmmmmm.....after due deliberations, you are awarded the MVP (Most Valuable Poster) award for this board!! (the information content in the remainng 300 posts being less than zero).

We need more thoughtful posters like you on chowk.

...i aint interested in any of this political bullshit. i just wanted this article to have a nice round figure of 300 than the awkward 299....that`s all i have to say ...;)

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

re:hamidm2 # 293

The end never justifies the means.

Ciao

naqshbandi,

.......... don`t blame the white man for your problems .......... even god is white - or at least his son appears to be .............

shobuz #286 You make the important point that people who do not wish muslims well (and there is no shortage of those, as we can also see on chowk with examples like arjun and jay) were delighted with 9/11.

Muslim conspiracy theorists are like the boy who cried wolf: they cry ``wolf`` (e.g. by bad mouthing the US or the west at every opportunity; by complaining loudly at the extra safety precautions that the US has rightly introduced at airports; by cooking up conspiracy theories out of thin air) when there is no wolf because they think it is fun.

When a real wolf appears (like a Milosovic perhaps, or a Modi, or in the form of a Chinese crackdown in Sinkiang, or in the form of sectarian killings as in Pakistan), these conspiracy theorists are nowhere to be found. By pointing fingers to people who wish muslims no harm, these conspiracy theorists are perhaps the worst enemies of the ordinary muslim who has to suffer the consequences.

Naqshbandi (who has popped his head on this board) is a perfect example of such individuals who are the true enemies of the muslim people because they enjoy crying wolf: this man spares no opportunity to bad mouth the west and to separate the muslim community from the west - all the while himself living comfortably in the west, safe from harm because he is protected by western forces of law and order. While living their lives in hypocrisy, these people engender negative feelings towards muslims which ultimately translate into the real wolf emerging - in the form a of a milosovic or a modi. Individuals like naqshbandi represent the most despicable among men in the world, the only true enemies of the muslim people.

for people like sigalph/hamidm and other Uncle Toms/slaves etc.:-

``...
[As] long as the white man sent you to Korea, you bled. He sent you to Germany, you bled. He sent you to the South Pacific to fight the Japanese, you bled. You bleed for white people. But when it comes time to seeing your own churches being bombed and little black girls be murdered, you haven`t got no blood. You bleed when the white man says bleed; you bite when the white man says bite; and you bark when the white man says bark. I hate to say this about us, but it`s true...To understand this, you have to go back to what [the] young brother here referred to as the house Negro and the field Negro -- back during slavery. There was two kinds of slaves. There was the house Negro and the field Negro. The house Negroes - they lived in the house with master, they dressed pretty good, they ate good `cause they ate his food -- what he left. They lived in the attic or the basement, but still they lived near the master; and they loved their master more than the master loved himself. They would give their life to save the master`s house quicker than the master would. The house Negro, if the master said, ``We got a good house here,`` the house Negro would say, ``Yeah, we got a good house here.`` Whenever the master said ``we,`` he said ``we.`` That`s how you can tell a house Negro.

If the master`s house caught on fire, the house Negro would fight harder to put the blaze out than the master would. If the master got sick, the house Negro would say, ``What`s the matter, boss, we sick?`` We sick! He identified himself with his master more than his master identified with himself``...
quote from the great shaheed of America Malcolm X al-Hajj Malik al-Shabazz (rahmatullah alayhi).


You see you are still Uncle Tom`s and slaves of the white man. When the white man sleeps with your women for you its an honour. When he rules your country and destroys your culture he is civilising you! You are slaves. You will always be his slaves--mentally. And I just use the phrase ``white man`` as an archetype not in a racist way to refer to those who call the shots in the USA and elsewhere. Thus Colin Powell is also ``white``.

for people like sigalph/hamidm and other Uncle Toms/slaves etc.:-

``...
[As] long as the white man sent you to Korea, you bled. He sent you to Germany, you bled. He sent you to the South Pacific to fight the Japanese, you bled. You bleed for white people. But when it comes time to seeing your own churches being bombed and little black girls be murdered, you haven`t got no blood. You bleed when the white man says bleed; you bite when the white man says bite; and you bark when the white man says bark. I hate to say this about us, but it`s true...To understand this, you have to go back to what [the] young brother here referred to as the house Negro and the field Negro -- back during slavery. There was two kinds of slaves. There was the house Negro and the field Negro. The house Negroes - they lived in the house with master, they dressed pretty good, they ate good `cause they ate his food -- what he left. They lived in the attic or the basement, but still they lived near the master; and they loved their master more than the master loved himself. They would give their life to save the master`s house quicker than the master would. The house Negro, if the master said, ``We got a good house here,`` the house Negro would say, ``Yeah, we got a good house here.`` Whenever the master said ``we,`` he said ``we.`` That`s how you can tell a house Negro.

If the master`s house caught on fire, the house Negro would fight harder to put the blaze out than the master would. If the master got sick, the house Negro would say, ``What`s the matter, boss, we sick?`` We sick! He identified himself with his master more than his master identified with himself``...
quote from the great shaheed of America Malcolm X al-Hajj Malik al-Shabazz (rahmatullah alayhi).


You see you are still Uncle Tom`s and slaves of the white man. When the white man sleeps with your women for you its an honour. When he rules your country and destroys your culture he is civilising you! You are slaves. You will always be his slaves--mentally. And I just use the phrase ``white man`` as an archetype not in a racist way to refer to those who call the shots in the USA and elsewhere. Thus Colin Powell is also ``white``.

ferozek,

......... you keep on harping about on the stated reason for going to war ............ isn`t it possible that the bush administration actually believed that iraq had wmd`s ?........ i believe that they had bigger and better reasons also (like sowing the seeds of democracy and cleaning up the mid-east) but the wmd reason was one that they felt could be sold most easily to congress and the public - hence the emphasis ........... in hindsight, they could have played a different hand, but it really doesn`t matter - the result would (and should) have been the same .......... all it would have done is proplonged saddam`s murderous rule by another six year ............. what would that have achieved?

............. it is silly to wring your hands and go on repeating the same old line - what does it prove?.......... the deed is done and everyone in better off ............ whether the administration embellished the truth doesn`t matter - the end justifies the means ............. and anyway, since when did honor become a virtue with thieves and politicians?.......... so quit parroting the same old line like other saddam apologists and fat girls who can`t say anything good about the blonde babe ............

re: Sigalph

Sorry, for the typo. The P.S. should thus:

``Given your reasons, the North Koreans are wondering when will you and the United States bless them with democracy?``

Ciao

re: Sigalph

Every time you mention ``blonde``, you take an additional step in trivalizing your own agruments. Since you remarked on my gentility once, hence I will say this with the utmost respect: you have not made an argument; all you have done is made an apology for the Bush administration. Did the Bush administration do some thing so gulity that you need to justify it by harping all the time that it was right? Why, because deep down in the core of your conscience you know that what you are defending, is and was wrong?

Every time you mention the word ``blonde``, it seem as if some hidden phobia simmers beneath your conscience. Every time you mention the word ``big``, one wonders if you suffer from a dysfunctional problem of the Freudian persuasion. You are so fixiated on the terms ``blonde`` and ``big``, that one has to wonder if you are sub voce suggesting a personal wish? It happens all the time. A boys plays with a big blonde soldier and soon wishes he could be that big blonde doll of his dreams. He does not like the fact that he is not big and he is not blonde and he goes into and starts to live in a world of Walter Mitty.

Calling those, who disagree with you as ``Saddam apologists`` shows a very immature person, who is insecure about the ideas he is trying to defend. if you are not convinced by the arguments, then openly state such a declaration. Calling people as a ``Saddam apologist`` is not going to make you win an argument.

My friend, you do not have an argument, but I will give you credit where credit is due. You have adoritly tapped danced your way around the issues and have side stepped all the arguments, given contary to your proposition, as you justified your rhetoric as a subsitute for reason. I will tell you a secret; I think in the long run and it will be painful, but Iraq will benefit out of this war. No one will cry for Saddam Hussein and no WMD will be discovered and accidently, there will be democracy in Iraq, but it will be accidental since this war was not started to bring democracy to Iraq; it was started to prevent the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction from threatening the United States.

If you do not believe me, just research the archives of all the newspapers before March 2003 and see what reasons the United States was giving for attacking Iraq?

Ciao

P.S.: Given your reasons, the North Koreans are wondering when will you and the United States bless with democracy?

Sigalph #285,

You are the one to talk. All you could come up with as a way of argument was call everybody who disagreed with you a Saddam apologist.

#285 Sigalph.

Sigalph-The Blonde lover