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.

 

Bush, at end of roll, denies abuses, claims america promotes "freedom"

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2005 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Moretti
...........
What you're basically saying is that the Amnesty report is wrong. Got any proof ?


You are the one that has to back up your claims, not me, so you have to be the one to bring up the proof.

BTW you are doing a bad job so far.




posted on May, 31 2005 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
..................
"Freedom, liberty, democracy"... thank God these still exist in the world, even though they no longer exist in the good ol' US of A.

[edit on 31-5-2005 by MaskedAvatar]


And someone is puting a gun in your head to continue with your dellusions of being caged and not being free?

Exactly what do you want to do, to be able to say, "you are free"?....

You want to be able to smoke weed in front of police officers, get in a car and run over people? is that free enough for you?....

How about, do you want being able to speed as fast as you want even if it kills you and a few more people?......

How about, you want protesters to be able to get close to the president, even if they get violent, angry and resort to violent acts?....

What you want is anarchy Masked, not freedom. You don't know what freedom means anymore, that there are responsibilities with freedom, and obviously there are things you are not supposed to do because you will be taking away the rights of other people.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Too much rhetoric, not enough fact.

I have not put words into anyone's mouth to determine what the elusive notion of "freedom" is. But I have encouraged people to contribute what they consider to be inherent to the values of "freedom" - not to give me my definition.

I have no gun to my head. Actually, I spend most of my time in countries that are free of violent crime involving guns.


Much of the world outside America can be quite confident that its people live in greater "freedom" than the country that still calls itself "land of the free" under the control of a corrupt administration eroding civil liberties every day.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar



Please list a country that has spread more freedoms around the world than the U.S. / Or list a country that is more "free".



Freedom is not "spread" - that is called cultural imperialism.

I would suggest to you that if you explore the civil liberties, trade policies, and attitudes to diversity of the majority of nations in the western world and other countries that are not dictatorships in developing regions, then you would find a rather long list of countries that are more "free".

Freedom is a catchcry and a myth until you know how it can be measured.



Masked Avatar I am sick and tired of your pseudo intellectual babble. You can in fact spread freedom. This is done by creating climates in countries under which democracy can grow and succeed. The President is doing just that. In America you are free to do as you please, so long, as you don’t hurt others. I challenge you to look at history and see that this great country (America) has done far more good than bad, and will continued to do so in the future.

I see that you do enjoy using the freedoms that your country has given you even as you fail to see their greatness. I suggest that you explore what life is like for people who aren’t as lucky as you!

President Bush is making a difference, others just want to babble on…




[edit on 31-5-2005 by Boatphone]

[edit on 31-5-2005 by Boatphone]



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:18 PM
link   


Originally posted by Muaddib
You are the one that has to back up your claims, not me, so you have to be the one to bring up the proof.


Muaddib, incase you didn't realise there are hundreds (if not thousands) of people locked in a cell at Guantannamo for 23 hours a day - and not one of them is aloud access to a laywer and not one of them has seen the inside of a court-room for the crime they are in detention for...

Regardless of what you say - they are the irrefutable facts...



MaskedAvatar


Please list a country that has spread more freedoms around the world than the U.S. / Or list a country that is more "free".

Freedom is not "spread" - that is called cultural imperialism.

I would suggest to you that if you explore the civil liberties, trade policies, and attitudes to diversity of the majority of nations in the western world and other countries that are not dictatorships in developing regions, then you would find a rather long list of countries that are more "free".

Freedom is a catchcry and a myth until you know how it can be measured.


If I had more WATS votes this month I would give it to you MaskedAvatar...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You all seem to be forgetting that its the first world imperialists (US and others) that have put these people (the third world) in such sxxt states to begin with - then you arrest them for fighting back?!?!

Put yourself in their situation...



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone

Masked Avatar I am sick and tired of your pseudo intellectual babble.



Remedy: Use the ignore button, and be blissfully "free" of home truths while you continue to live in mythological freedom.

I don't even know you, so I miss nothing by doing the same.

This is wonderful diplomacy, isn't it!




posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Okay, so it is possible to spread freedom, just so were clear here. Great.

And yeah, you do have the freedom to do that. I do find it strange that you feel that only people you know are of value....that is a pity...



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Boataphone?

Is the USA spreading freedom in IRAQ right now?

If spreading Freedom was the USA prime objective in the current political world,
why did they feel the need to fabricate evidence, alter facts and pursuade weapons alalysts on this WMD CR@P?

Freedom, huh.
Freedom in the USA, double huh.

You lost your freedom the day that George won elections against Gore.
Would gore of done better, we'll never know.

Freedom in the Middleast wont ever work, it never has worked, and it CANT WORK. They arent that sort of person.

Imagine a 15yr old kid , whom had a gold mine in his back yard. Now imagnie this kids parents were killed and he was put in charge..

Would you trust him to be able to make the right decisions, the FAIR decisions? or woudl you expect him to buy all the toys in the world, to abuse simple liberties and freedoms.

Democracy can never work in the middleeast because of the OIL situation.
Whom ever controls Iraq, controls the oil, and whom ever controls the oil controls the middleeast.

The USA doesnt give a rats A$$ about iraqi's.
The USA Doesnt give a rats A$$ about its citizens.
The USA DOES give a rats A$$ about its bankers, its oil industry execs, and its leaders.

Citizens are mearly cannon fodder.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by GlobalDisorder
Boataphone?

Is the USA spreading freedom in IRAQ right now?

If spreading Freedom was the USA prime objective in the current political world,
why did they feel the need to fabricate evidence, alter facts and pursuade weapons alalysts on this WMD CR@P?

Freedom, huh.
Freedom in the USA, double huh.

You lost your freedom the day that George won elections against Gore.
Would gore of done better, we'll never know.

Freedom in the Middleast wont ever work, it never has worked, and it CANT WORK. They arent that sort of person.

Imagine a 15yr old kid , whom had a gold mine in his back yard. Now imagnie this kids parents were killed and he was put in charge..

Would you trust him to be able to make the right decisions, the FAIR decisions? or woudl you expect him to buy all the toys in the world, to abuse simple liberties and freedoms.

Democracy can never work in the middleeast because of the OIL situation.
Whom ever controls Iraq, controls the oil, and whom ever controls the oil controls the middleeast.

The USA doesnt give a rats A$$ about iraqi's.
The USA Doesnt give a rats A$$ about its citizens.
The USA DOES give a rats A$$ about its bankers, its oil industry execs, and its leaders.

Citizens are mearly cannon fodder.



America has gone out of its way to protect the civilians of Iraq. Yes, many have died but this cannot be avoided in war. No military operation is prefect. If are only goal was to control Iraq oil then why did we not just make a deal with Saddam? It could have gone like this…

…Hey Saddam give us free oil and we will let you stay in power…

…But no instead we spent Billions of dollars to remove him. Its not all about the money its about a safer world!


[edit on 31-5-2005 by Boatphone]



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:52 PM
link   

If you have a legitimate gripe, reasonable people will listen to you.


Genocides, dictatorships, mass killings, criminality, human rights abuses, assassination of children, slavery, illnesses, and global environnemental destruction financed and promoted by what you would probably call the "force of freedom, happiness, and democracy around the world" is not legitimate gripe ? Another such ignorant comment comment and ill hit the ignore button.






[edit on 31-5-2005 by Moretti]



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Moretti

If you have a legitimate gripe, reasonable people will listen to you.


Genocides, dictatorships, mass killings, criminality, human rights abuses, assassination of children, slavery, illnesses, and global environnemental destruction financed and promoted by what you would probably call the "force of freedom, happiness, and democracy around the world" is not legitimate gripe ? Another such ignorant comment comment and ill hit the ignore button.






[edit on 31-5-2005 by Moretti]


Can you please list a mass killing carried out by the U.S., slavery? We abolished it a long time ago.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone
Please list a country that has spread more freedoms around the world than the U.S. / Or list a country that is more "free".



Most of the western world is more 'free' than America.
America just wins the contest of 'who THINKS they are the most free'.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 09:58 PM
link   


Originally posted by Boatphone
[...]If are only goal was to control Iraq oil then why did we not just make a deal with Saddam? It could have gone like this…

…Hey Saddam give us free oil and we will let you stay in power…

…But no instead we spent Billions of dollars to remove him. Its not all about the money its about a safer world!


Or maybe Saddam had had enough of America bull-sxxx and decided that he was going to trade more extensively with China... The US put all kinds of restrictions on Iraq after the first time they bombed them to smitherenes, and its no wonder Saddam would have felt betrayed...

Especially considering the US put him in power, gave him his WMD's and then basically let him loose on Iran... Its a shame that Saddam had his eye on Kuwait, its even more of a shame that the invasion of Kuwait bit into the US business interests... But the biggest shame was when the US crippled the monster they helped create - to the point of him not being trusted to help them fight Iran in the very near future...



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Moretti

If you have a legitimate gripe, reasonable people will listen to you.


Genocides, dictatorships, mass killings, criminality, human rights abuses, assassination of children, slavery, illnesses, and global environnemental destruction financed and promoted by what you would probably call the "force of freedom, happiness, and democracy around the world" is not legitimate gripe ? Another such ignorant comment comment and ill hit the ignore button.


Wow, so you can't corroborate anything that you are saying yet you come and say that you are not going to listen to anyone and will put people in ignore because you are right and everyone else is wrong....



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 10:11 PM
link   
Guess what you ignorant liberals.....

gulags were mostly made up of innocent people, i.e. civilians.

guantanamo is a detention center for armed forces.


guantanamo should be like the gulags, atleast it would teach terrorists a lesson.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 10:26 PM
link   
If Bush is so obsessed with freedom, maybe he ought to have the Patriot Act repealed and stop FORCING "democracy" on other countries!

Maybe Bush fancies himself as Big Brother...you know, Freedom is Slavery.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 10:33 PM
link   
I'm pretty sure we could trust Saddam to fight his mortal enemy Iran. That's a safe bet dude...



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone
I'm pretty sure we could trust Saddam to fight his mortal enemy Iran. That's a safe bet dude...


It was considered to be a safe bet by the US when Rumsfeld and others formed part of regular envoys to Iraq 20+ years to train Saddam to fight Iran, and sell him weapons of mass destruction and their "programs", yes...

Meddling foreign incursion is never a good thing. It's easier to turn the mess into a fast buck war profits scenario for your cronies.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by omega1
Guess what you ignorant liberals.....
gulags were mostly made up of innocent people, i.e. civilians.
guantanamo is a detention center for armed forces.


Actually, the people being tortured(according to the Red Cross and Amnesty International) at camp Guantanamo are suspects who haven't been charged for three years now, innocents.

We have only the administration's words that they are involved in terrorist plannings against the united states, but in fact i highly doubt that, given the administration's level of credibility on these kind of issues.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
...........
Especially considering the US put him in power, gave him his WMD's and then basically let him loose on Iran... Its a shame that Saddam had his eye on Kuwait, its even more of a shame that the invasion of Kuwait bit into the US business interests... But the biggest shame was when the US crippled the monster they helped create - to the point of him not being trusted to help them fight Iran in the very near future...


And some people keep claiming this bunch of lies, over and over, like it is a mantra for them...

Let's take a look at the facts.


Despite Baath attempts to institutionalize its rule, real power remained in the hands of a narrowly based elite, united by close family and tribal ties. By 1977 the most powerful men in the Baath thus were all somehow related to the triumvirate of Saddam Hussein, Bakr, and General Adnan Khayr Allah Talfah, Saddam Hussein's brother-in-law who became minister of defense in 1978. All were members of the party, the RCC, and the cabinet, and all were members of the Talfah family of Tikrit, headed by Khayr Allah Talfah. Khayr Allah Talfah was Saddam Hussein's uncle and guardian, Adnan Khayr Allah's father, and Bakr's cousin. Saddam Hussein was married to Adnan Khayr Allah's sister and Adnan Khayr Allah was married to Bakr's daughter. Increasingly, the most sensitive military posts were going to the Tikritis.

Beginning in the mid-1970s, Bakr was beset by illness and by a series of family tragedies. He increasingly turned over power to Saddam Husayn. By 1977 the party bureaus, the intelligence mechanisms, and even ministers who, according to the Provisional Constitution, should have reported to Bakr, reported to Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein, meanwhile, was less inclined to share power, and he viewed the cabinet and the RCC as rubber stamps. On July 16, 1979, President Bakr resigned, and Saddam Hussein officially replaced him as president of the republic, secretary general of the Baath Party Regional Command, chairman of the RCC, and commander in chief of the armed forces. On July 17, 1979, he was promoted to the rank of Field Marshal.


Excerpted from.
www.globalsecurity.org...

Wait a second, so Al Bakr nominated Hussein for vice president, and then willingly gave power to Hussein as president of Iraq... Wow isn't the truth more refreshing than exagerations and lies?...

The truth shall set you free!!!


Let's find a couple more facts.


The Soviet-Iraqi Intelligence Relationship
The relationship between Primakov and Saddam Hussein cannot be understood without an understanding of the Soviet Union-Iraq intelligence relationship which developed in the “second ba’athi regime”. In 1971, Saddam Hussein assumed the vice-presidency of the Revolutionary Command Council. Russia’s closest links in the Middle East were with Iraq. Two months after Saddam returned from Moscow, a fifteen-year Iraq-U.S.S.R. Friendship Treaty was signed in April 1972, with an increased supply of arms to Iraq and growing Soviet involvement in Iraq’s rapidly developing oil industry.

At the end of 1973, Hussein and K.G.B. Chairman Yuri Andropov signed a secret liaison agreement between the K.G.B. and the Iraqi intelligence service. The K.G.B., under clauses in the Friendship Treaty, provided for the modernisation of Iraq’s State Internal Security Service, the A.M.N., and included the provision of sophisticated interrogation and surveillance equipment, K.G.B./ G.R.U. training for Iraqi personnel in the Soviet Union and intelligence exchange arrangements and operational support and assistance by Iraqi personnel for Soviet intelligence agents operating in areas and countries in which the Soviets did not have diplomatic relations.

By 1977, K.G.B./Iraqi liaison was so intimate that Iraq was the only country in the non-communist world in which the K.G.B. did not conduct espionage. Further, in an unprecedented decision, the K.G.B. ordered all Soviet residencies to cease operations against Iraqi targets.

However, in 1979, Saddam Hussein started to imprison and execute many Iraqi communists and the K.G.B. residencies were ordered to reactivate their agent networks, which had been relegated to “confidential contacts”. In September 1980, Iraq attacked Iran and began the Gulf War, and Moscow resolved to provide secret support to Iraq.

Leading Russian foreign policy expert, Nikolai Shishlin, later adviser to Gorbachev, claimed that the arms supply route to Iraq was so carefully selected that it was virtually impossible to trace. Primakov played a complex role in this period; as journalist, envoy for Soviet leader Brezhnev, journalist, Arabist, propagandist, public and media commentator on Middle East affairs.

According to some reports, Primakov played an operational role in delivering funds to the Iraqi Communist party and at other occasions, to Saddam Hussein. Primakov has now changed roles. In the 1960s and 1970s, Primakov acted as a source of funds to Hussein. In 1997, Primakov was identified as the recipient of funds from Hussein.


Excerpted from.
www.ci-ce-ct.com...


Let's continue with some more facts.


In 1998-99, Russia signed deals worth over one hundred million English pounds to reinforce Iraq’s air defences, including overhauling Iraq’s Mig jet fighters and restoration of its air defences. Primakov was a key figure in these deals. Although Russia officially ceased all arms exports to Iraq in September 1990, in compliance with United Nations sanctions, Iraq’s squadrons of MiG 23, 25 and 29 jet fighters are still in service and its anti-aircraft launchers are still operational — due to Russian technical assistance and a regular supply of spare parts and maintenance from Russian technicians — and are used to attack British and United States planes.


Excerpted from above link.


And the evidence that actually backs all of the above?


Gazeta.Ru has obtained sensational evidence proving the involvement of a group of former Soviet generals in preparing the Iraqi army for war against the United States. The generals in question refused to discuss their degree of involvement, but admitted that just before the beginning of the US-led campaign against Iraq they received state awards from the Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

They are retired Soviet officers, Col.-Gen. Vladimir Achalov and Col.-Gen. Igor Maltsev. The former completed his military career as the Soviet deputy defence minister, after being the Air-Borne Troops commander and the first and last Soviet commander-in-chief of the rapid-reaction forces. The latter resigned from the post of the chief of the Main Staff of the Soviet Air Defence. In 1991 both generals backed the GKChP, (the State Committee for the State of Emergency, set up by a group of Gorbachev opponents with the goal of supplanting him and preventing the disintegration of the USSR) and were consequently dismissed from military service.
........................
According to our source who provided the photos, the ceremony was held ''less than 10 days before the beginning of the war'' in a building that was destroyed by US cruise missiles in the first few hours of air raids on Baghdad.
.......................
Gazeta.Ru managed to get in touch with Vladislav Achalov. He confirmed that the photos provided to Gazeta.Ru were absolutely credible, but would not divulge any details as to why he had received his award. Here is an excerpt from a short telephone interview granted by Vladislav Achalov to Gazeta.Ru on March 31:
......................
As to why the two Soviet generals received the top military awards of the Iraqi Republic on the eve of war, Vladislav Achalov would not say. He did remark, however, that he ''didn’t fly to Baghdad to drink coffee''. Thus, one can only conjecture what role the Soviet generals have played in preparing the Iraqi army for the war.


Excerpted from.
www.cdi.org...

Even former Russian defectors who were part of the Russian intelligence agencies say that it was the Russians who provided the wmd to Iraq, and who hid, or destroyed the wmd before the evidence could be traced back to the Russians.


Ion Mihai Pacepa, identified as "the highest-ranking intelligence officer ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc," thinks he knows what happened to the Iraqi stockpiles of WMD. An insider's view, and an analysis to remember as more is disclosed by our investigators currently working in Iraq.

As a former Romanian spy chief who used to take orders from the Soviet KGB, it is perfectly obvious to me that Russia is behind the evanescence of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. After all, Russia helped Saddam get his hands on them in the first place.
The Soviet Union and all its bloc states always had a standard operating procedure for deep sixing weapons of mass destruction — in Romanian it was codenamed "Sarindar," meaning "emergency exit." I implemented it in Libya. It was for ridding Third World despots of all trace of their chemical weapons if the Western imperialists ever got near them. We wanted to make sure they would never be traced back to us, and we also wanted to frustrate the West by not giving them anything they could make propaganda with.


Excerpted from.
www.petrifiedtruth.com...


[edit on 31-5-2005 by Muaddib]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join