It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Intersting find in Iraq.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2005 @ 02:42 PM
link   
This has been dealt with mate. Move along, move along.

Anything contructive to add?




posted on May, 2 2005 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Love



Peace


HAHAHAHAHA, I knew it.........funny!!!

All them years of painting "happy" little trees here and putting
"happy" little leaves there finally made him crack down to draw his
masterpiece....




posted on May, 2 2005 @ 02:51 PM
link   
It would have taken a heck of a blow to get through that hair helmet!


dh

posted on May, 2 2005 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Anyway, Saddam looks perfectly gay in that picture, still with his close relationship with Rumsfeld and the occupants of the White House, he would, wouldn't he? Why we even have the phallic s/m symbolism of the burning cigar against the burning phallic wtcs
That's why they snuck their little rentboy away from Baghdad airport on a Russian jet shortly before they took Baghdad, sometime later chucking some snaggle-toothed underbiting sub down a hole to be 'found' by our boys.
I see there's some talk of letting this braindead control off the hook, if he calls off the wolves of the Republican Guards,
www.kavkazcenter.com...
Well, he says no to the real Saddams mate at present, but there is sure to be a lot of negotiation before Shamdam has to come to trial

[edit on 2-5-2005 by dh]



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 05:08 PM
link   
WOW! Wudya look at that? A bad painting found in Iraq of Saddam gloating over the terrorist events of September 11 2001 COMPLETELY JUSTIFIES lying to the U.S. public and the world concerning the actual threat of Iraq and then going and killing untold numbers of Iraqis and taking over their country. After all, paintings always depict real events and the picture shows Saddam gloating over 9/11 so he obviously was part and parcel of it happening and thus we are right to kill as many Iraqis as necessary in compensation.

Please note my sarcasm.


Originally posted by skippytjc
Um...Hello? Come on all you haters, where is your 2 cents?

Suprisingly silent.....



Originally posted by skippytjc
I just came accross this, I wasnt able to find it here before so I appologize if its been posted already.

Look at this photo taken in early 2003 in Iraq.




I didnt agree with this war, and I certainly didnt vote for the guy who sent my brothers and sisters there. But after seeing this picture, Im not as against this thing as I once was...


[edit on 2-5-2005 by Frith]



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 05:33 PM
link   
"WOW! Wudya look at that? A bad painting found in Iraq of Saddam gloating over the terrorist events of September 11 2001 COMPLETELY JUSTIFIES lying to the U.S. public and the world concerning the actual threat of Iraq and then going and killing untold numbers of Iraqis and taking over their country. After all, paintings always depict real events and the picture shows Saddam gloating over 9/11 so he obviously was part and parcel of it happening and thus we are right to kill as many Iraqis as necessary in compensation."

Please dont completly ignore the fact that shells containing mustard gas and Sarin nerve gas were found in Iraq. Of course not as much as the intelligence indicated but i would suspect as much since saddam had plenty of time to try to get rid of as much as possible.



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Frith & al

Some are stuck in a 2003 time warp, without the facility of a Search button, and looking for relevance in 2005 that did not exist in 2003.

This style of propaganda was dealt with at the time. I concur that knowledge of the origins of this kind of folk art is essential. It's important to know that while Hussein would glorify himself with statues everywhere a la Stalin and prototype dictators, this painting was not authorized by him at all. And that information is available at ATS, but we don't learn at ATS, we just post as if we are expert and that everything we locate at another site imust be new and worthy.

It's hard to know if this kind of topic is "trolling", it doesn't really matter. What does matter more (to some people) is to discern the truth.

Propaganda during 2003 also included the "victory" and "end of war" celebrations where the Bush administration imported rent-a-crowd to make it appear there was revelry in the streets when the 17th largest Saddam statue was toppled in the courtyard outside the International Hotel where media were present. And in the UK in particular, images were manipulated for tabloid front pages to make it appear there was a crowd of hundreds rather than three dozen.

Then Bush ordered an aircraft carrier of returning servicemen and women to stay at sea so he could get into a fighter pilot suit and greet them to celebrate once again in the great "victory".

"Gloating" is not unique to the fundamentalist Islamists who would celebrate the destruction of architectural symbols of US financial strength. It is an ugly human characteristic present in some people in every part of the world.

In conclusion, perhaps in future the more astute amongst ATS members will be able to distinguish propaganda that is folk art from propaganda that is media orchestrated to deceive.



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Apparently many people on this thread would rather see Saddam still in power. I honestly don't care if we were lied to by the Bush administration. The war has already happened, no need for ongoing arguing, the only thing that we americans need to do is make sure it doesn't happen again.

[edit on 2-5-2005 by evanfitz]



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trustnone
Please dont completly ignore the fact that shells containing mustard gas and Sarin nerve gas were found in Iraq. Of course not as much as the intelligence indicated but i would suspect as much since saddam had plenty of time to try to get rid of as much as possible.

Right. Both agents were found in 2004 as part of IEDs, not in any stockpiles. Long after the occupation had commenced and the announcement in January 2004 came that military intelligence was completely wrong. They could have come from anywhere and were not in any way able to strike at the U.S. unless the U.S. was physically in Iraq, which it currently was. Utterly ridiculous.

[edit on 2-5-2005 by Frith]



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by evanfitz
I honestly don't care if we were lied to by the Bush administration.



That's too bad for you.

Perhaps one day you can get over apathy.



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by evanfitz
Apparently many people on this thread would rather see Saddam still in power. I honestly don't care if we were lied to by the Bush administration. The war has already happened, no need for ongoing arguing, the only thing that we americans need to do is make sure it doesn't happen again.


Who cares that people died over lies? Its stupid to think that way. I mean in the U.S. that would be a prosecutable offense of premeditated mass murder, but who needs accountability, right?



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Frith & al

Some are stuck in a 2003 time warp, without the facility of a Search button, and looking for relevance in 2005 that did not exist in 2003.



If they did not exist, how in the hell did the insurgents get a hold of one that contained WMD's?

Fact they used a shell as a bomb not out of a gun as it would normally be fired. Had they fired the shell out of a gun it could have killed far more people then the few it did.

Shells loaded with wmds need to be fired from a gun to spin them which in turn mixes the agents; What do you think the world would have said then?



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Thats a horrible painting. Why is that guy on the right smiling?



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 06:42 PM
link   
You miss understood me Fristh, the lies were just a reason. I would have rathered wanted us to go to war with Saddam. In its pure form the war was justified, yet many people fail to see this in their politically corrupted eyes. The way it was carried out was a complete failure.

When I say the lies do not mean a thing to me, I am saying that people should never live under a regime as wicked as Saddam's and no matter what little things that leave the president's and his administrations mouths doesn't deter the way I and many feel about whats going on.

I do challenge Bush's way of handling it, complete disaster.

[edit on 2-5-2005 by evanfitz]



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Ummm, that doesn't really prove anything, except someone painted a picture in 2003. Notice who's holding it. It was probably created by Americans, desperate to prove Saddam had connections.
Propaganda reprograms you that easily? There's no reason to believe it's anything but the artist's idea. Anyone translated the text? It could be satire.


Please dont completly ignore the fact that shells containing mustard gas and Sarin nerve gas were found in Iraq. Of course not as much as the intelligence indicated but i would suspect as much since saddam had plenty of time to try to get rid of as much as possible.

From what was reported, they were empty. They only contained traces of what was once in them.


[edit on 2-5-2005 by Moe Foe]



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 06:44 PM
link   
shots

I have no idea of the relevance of your comments to the material you quoted from me. Perhaps you intended to quote someone else?

I wasn't on the subject of the mythical WMDs at all, but it is comical that the one place they could be found is on a piece of folk art with a leering Saddam Hussein.

This is a big picture from a larger than life comic book with Hussein as the superhero. It's all someone's fantasy, given pictorial form to capture the viewer's imagination. Do you get it yet?



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Moe Foe
Ummm, that doesn't really prove anything, except someone painted a picture in 2003.



But there is no evidence of all as to when the picture was painted.

We ought to be disappointed that people can attribute so much to something without any background on it. Perhaps in cognitive dissonance it is the last bastion, seeing an evil gloationg face as a symbol to support xenophobia and hatred.

I know that's not you Moe Foe, but what tells you anything about the history of this art work?


*hypnotically* uuuuuuuuuse the seeeeeeeearch butttttttttttton


[edit on 2-5-2005 by MaskedAvatar]



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc


Here it comes.....


I do not. I actually know nothing about this photo other than the date is was taken. I found it on a site that hosts interesting pics submitted by people like you an me.

But, let me beat you to the punch: Of course you are questioning its validity. But that’s exactly what you would do as it contradicts your opinions.

You can’t come up with a reply to support your belief, so you question the source of the data. Typical….


This site's motto is to deny ignorance. Thus, we question anything that does not come from some sort of valid source, such as this picture. Since we know nothing about the circumstances, other than it comes from some website, its hardly proof of, well, anything.

I question anything and everything regardless of it confirming or contradicting my beliefs, because I make it a point to deny ignorance. I also think for myself.

So of course we shall question the source, as the internet is full of fraud, photoshopping, and other assorted garbage. This picture is hardly graound shaking evidence that Saddam was involved in 9/11 or for that matter, any terrorism recently.

As far as to the circumstances of this picture, only an ignorant person would take it at face value of proof of anything. Since we do not know what the circumstances were of this photo, who created the mural, ect, it really doesnt say much or prove much.

And I find it odd to see two American soldiers smiling while holding up such a piece of artwork. I sure as hell wouldnt be smiling about it.

Insufficent data for any intelligent person to make an informed descision.

So, you wanna try again?



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
This is a big picture from a larger than life comic book with Hussein as the superhero. It's all someone's fantasy, given pictorial form to capture the viewer's imagination. Do you get it yet?

Amazing what people will accept as evidence to justify their hatred, isn't it?



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by dixon
Rejoicing at such horrendous loss of innocent lives.

Makes me wanna tell Dubya that he is not such a bad guy compared to Saddam.


To be fair, there are many people on this side of the world that rejoiced when the "Shock and Awe" campaign began. Bush himself was shown as being giddy just before making his address to the nation announcing the war had begun.

Even if you believe the war was justified, it still should have been a disappointing time knowing that many innocent people would be horribly effected (as it was war). The frothing at the mouth joy that some displayed was sick.

They may not have had their happiness glorified in a painting, but is there any fundamental difference? Both sides were happy at something that was causing great misfortune to others.



[edit on 2-5-2005 by Hajduk]




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join