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.

 

Video - Iranians Response to the London Bombings

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 12:52 PM
link   
to believe they have any regrets is to believe in the devil and then you sit right in the hands and pockets of evil. you put yourself next in line to be taken down. believe in it at your own peril. a fool is anyone who takes things at face value.






what you see might be there. what you don't see is right next to you.




posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 01:37 PM
link   
The Clerics history of AL Queda is correct, the CIA created them in Afghanistan in the 80's to combat Russian. We armed and trained them.

The Clerics history of Saddam is Correct, we armed Iraq to the teeth so they could battle Iran. There are famous pics of Rumsfeld shaking hands with saddam during a meeting where millions of tons of weaponry was sold to Iraq.

The Clerics conclusions are correct, America Created the very groups we are now fighting. you cannot fault his knowledge of history and conclusions.
If i remember correctly, kill a Commy for Mommy was a popular saying after WW2...so exactly what is the whining about?


US paramilitaries killed thousands of Central American Farmers for the United Fruit company, so americans could have cheap fruit for breakfast.
The CIA engineered the overthrow of peacefull and democratically elected governments in Chile and Iran....thousands upon thousands died a result of these two conspiracies alone so america could have cheap copper and oil.

Dont Ever whine about patriotism and defense of the Nation to people that know the truth about American Foreign Policy. Read your own History first. The Cleric knows more about American Foreign Policy than most Americans.


cjf

posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by toolmaker
The Clerics history of AL Queda is correct, the CIA created them in Afghanistan in the 80's to combat Russian. We armed and trained them.


To an extent, certainly not alone and the time between the assignation of Azzaz in 1989 and the invitation to OBL to move operations to the Sudan 1991, any previous ‘ties’ would have become stretched at best (imho nonexistent).


Originally posted by toolmaker
The Clerics history of Saddam is Correct, we armed Iraq to the teeth so they could battle Iran. There are famous pics of Rumsfeld shaking hands with saddam during a meeting where millions of tons of weaponry was sold to Iraq.


If you mean ‘We’ in the sense as a ‘nations of the world’ you are correct. But why not give the following nations credit:

Soviets/Russia, France, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Brazil, Egypt, Austria, Romania, Switzerland, South Africa, Yugoslavia, Germany, United States, Spain, Jordan and the UK.........

All the above have had a hand in arming Iraq prior to 1991 and fully combined more than dwarf the contribution by the US. Moreover; the United States is certainly not the only nation to ‘meddle’ in the Middle East.

Here is a start:

1970-2004 conventional weapons transfers to Iraq by nation/order
Ratio of arms transfers as %nation Iraq

Several nations were supplying both sides during the entire war; of course, including the US. France was by far the major source of Iraq's high-tech weaponry given to protect its financial stake in that country. The Soviet Union was Iraq's largest weapon's supplier, all the while jockeying for influence in both capitals during the entirety of the conflict between Iraq and Iran.
See MERIP Reports, number 148 (Sept.-Oct. 1987, pp. 8-9)

On the topic of the post:

The clerics introductory caveat acknowledges the condemnation by others (certainly not directly by himself); but condemnation of the ‘acts’ are not his message…or is it?

.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Wow ! This thread is is very vitrolic. I don't think some of you even think before writing something to post--just open mouth insert feet and chew.

The arguments seem only superficially about the Iranians and their acts, intentions, plans, etc.. They have the look & feel of liberal -vs- conservative, or democrat -vs- republican, or even creationist -vs- evolutionist.



[edit on 17-7-2005 by Astronomer68]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 06:18 PM
link   
well i think what it is they reject terrorism but because the us isreal and england wants to go to war with them they say death to them using normal means of war.

you know tanks planes and nuke bombs.



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 07:43 PM
link   
treat the cause not the symptom i say.
dont you wonder why half the world seems to hate the US so much?
maybe we should start thinking about that sometime soon.
because as i see it, certainly in my part of the world people seem to be starting to get sick and tired of supporting the US and having to send our kiwi soldiers overseas to help them clean up the messes they and others have made.
given the choice i highly doubt i would have gone and faced a suicide bomber walking towards us while doing security at the ballots during afghanistan elections.
it wasnt fun!



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join