Africa: the Prison Continent, page 10

This topic is in the Regional Politics discussion forum. (rss)

Africa: the Prison Continent << 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 >>

reply posted on 8-2-2006 @ 05:03 PM by AceOfBase
Originally posted by Rebel_Lion Can you please provide the full website for that ^graph^ please? This is the link for the weapons transfers: Conventional Arms Transfers to Developing Nations, 1997-2004 (pdf)
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 8-2-2006 @ 06:00 PM by Rebel_Lion
To start off with its obvious that you guys don't really care and are on here running in circles playing catch the tail. If you haven't got anything other than slight insults and ridiculous comments with no factual backing then please don't bother. The arms fair is held in England; la.indymedia.org... www.guardian.co.uk... Websearch -Geopolitics- and read this; www.fpif.org... That the armament firms have been active in fomenting war scares are in persuading their countries to adopt their countries to adopt warlike policies and to increase their armaments. That armament firms have attempted to bribe government officials, both at home and abroad. That armament firms have disseminated false reports concerning the military and naval programs of various countries, in order to stimulate armament expenditure. That armament firms have sought to influence public opinion through the control of newspapers in their own and foreign countries. That armament firms have organized international armament rings through which the armament race has been accentuated by playing off one country against another. That armament firms have organized international armament trusts which have increased the price of armaments sold to governments. Theres even a current advertising campaign highlighting Europe & Americas trade in arms. LONDON (Reuters) - The government has been accused by leading charities of allowing the export of deadly weapons components to countries where human rights abusers could use them to kill, torture and rape at gunpoint. International charity Oxfam on Wednesday accused the government of exercising "double standards" on export licences, making it easier to obtain a licence for weapons components while tightening up on licences for entire weapons. "The government has put lives at risk by setting up false and dangerous double standards. Whether a machinegun comes in pieces or ready-made, the suffering it can cause in the wrong hands is just the same," said Justin Forsyth, Oxfam’s director of policy. "These aren’t simply nuts and bolts we’re selling, these components include firing mechanisms, bomb making equipment, guidance systems and gun barrels." The government rejected the report called "Lock, Stock and Barrel", written by Oxfam for the Control Arms Campaign. Foreign Office minister Baroness Symons said the report had no evidence to support its claim that Britain was too lax on exports of arms components. "It is simply not the case," she said in a statement. "We take full account of what the components might be used for...We simply would not issue a licence where there was an unacceptable risk of it being misused or diverted." The report said there had been an 11-fold increase since 1998 in the number of different arms components licensed for export to countries including Zimbabwe, Israel, Indonesia, Colombia, Nepal and the Philippines. "Arms components are clearly central to the operation and maintenance of weapons systems, and if it is wrong to export a whole system then it is equally wrong to license the parts that make that system work," the report said. It said the export of weapons parts rather than entire weapons systems created "a smokescreen that hides the true extent of the British arms trade". "Components for deadly weapons are being sold to known human rights abusers," Lesley Warner, spokeswoman for Amnesty International UK said. "It doesn’t take much to re-assemble them. And from there it takes even less to kill, to torture or to rape at gunpoint." Foreign Secretary Jack Straw provoked fury among members of the ruling Labour Party when he announced new export guidelines in July 2002 which allowed the sale of parts of military equipment to countries such as Indonesia and Israel. "These new criteria allow arms components to go to a whole host of countries where human rights abuses are common," Rebecca Peters of the International Action Network on Small Arms said. "It seems that the government is attending to the needs of the British defence industry above the human rights of people living in countries where the weapons will be used." www.fas.org... Download and read, this report^^^ in 2004 the usa lead in arms transfer agreements world wide making agreements valued at, $12.4 billion - Russia ranked second with $6.1 billion Where you got your graph from I don't know. Does your graph factor in the fact that, as SoulJah has shown, Africa is owned by those ''major europeans'' and so deliveries may not be shown on the graph on technicality? I think you lot have stooped a bit and made that one up to back up, baseless claims and immature commentry. I'll carry on; These guys are fighting for reforms and have stats and figures on the US arms industry. fas.org... In a February 1995 fact sheet, the White House cited "control, restraint and transparency" as critical elements of the Clinton administration's arms transfer policy. The following year, Congress passed H.R. 3121, a law that increased the level of openness around U.S. arms exports. Listed below are ten steps Congress could take this year to build on that progress and further assist the Clinton policy. Glad this didn't work out; The Defense Export Loan Guarantee (DELG) Program was established in 1996 to provide up to $15 billion worth of guaranteed loans to 39 qualifying countries for the purchase of U.S. military wares, theoretically at no net cost to the U.S. government. As an auto-financing program, the DELG Program requires borrowers to pay high fees to cover the risk of a loan default and the costs of running the program. As a result, the only loan granted since its inception was $17 million to Romania, and the program is losing money. This was mentioned earlier in the thread, support for the economy if weapons bought. Corrutption. Offsets are side-deals used by arms manufacturers to attract customers and clinch deals by providing some economic benefit back to the customer country. Typical offsets are the co-production of the weapon system or its components in the purchasing country, investment in the importing state's non-military industries, or assistance marketing the foreign country's goods and services in the United States or elsewhere. Every year, the U.S. government gives away nearly $3.5 billion in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) grants and loans. Except for a portion of Israel's annual aid package, all of this aid must be spent on American-made weapons, meaning that such sales are not subject to international competition-the usual rationale for offsets. The throes of capitalism, how can people be so poor in the US when things like this are going on? (the us being used as an example) The Pentagon spends over $30 billion of public money annually on research and development (R&D) of weapons systems for U.S. forces Heres why your stats are a bit ''offset'' themselves; Little information is available about U.S. arms exporters' offset agreements with foreign customers Some people supporting Fairness and Accuracy in repoting; www.fair.org... I was on about miseducation before and heres why many people just seem blind to the facts in history and in present world policits. Note that I can bring up books and more proof of anything mentioned here. I'm skimming the surface much like a Lockheed might do prehaps. Its the same thing in the rest of Europe and its in school history lessons as well as the newspapers. The Military-Editorial Complex Q. What do MacNeil/Lehrer's Mark Shields, U.S. News & World Report's Steve Roberts and Gloria Borger, syndicated columnist Haynes Johnson and former New York Times reporter Hedrick Smith have in common? A. They all receive a weekly paycheck from Lockheed Martin, the nation's largest military contractor. The pundits are paid to appear on a D.C.-area radio talkshow, WMAL- AM's Look at Today, that is sponsored by the conglomerate; their checks come directly from Lockheed Martin, a company spokesperson told Washington City Paper (8/4/95). Nationally prominent pundits don't usually appear as regular commentators on local radio shows, even in Washington, D.C. Local stations generally can't afford the famous journalists. Giant military contractors can afford to pay appropriate fees, of course- -but what exactly do they think they're buying? A company dependent on government contracts obviously needs to stay on the good side of the Washington elite. What better way than by sending regular checks to some of the city's most influential pundits--especially those who are considered liberals, and might be expected to be critics of Pentagon spending? Mark Shields, for instance, is positioned as the "left" edge of conventional wisdom on MacNeil/Lehrer and CNN's Capital Gang--but is hardly a critic of the military. (He once wrote a column that said that "anti-military bias" was the "anti-Semitism of the American intelligentsia and elites"--Rocky Mountain News, 3/1/94.) But not everyone sees a conflict of interest in the Lockheed Martin arrangement. When asked by City Paper whether being in the pay of a major military contractor posed a problem, Steve Roberts was unconcerned: "We all work for corporations and it baffles me that people see this as any different. It's not." That's what we were afraid of. Taken from www.fair.org... written in 1995... they have an archive so don't worry about date relevance. I'll dig into their files and stop on the arms trade for a bit to comment on Katrina, take note that they're highlighting these news companies for distorting the truth and malnipulating the news worldwide... again it can be put down to capitalism and a, ''sell sell sell'' nation... major racial Predjice and corruption. In the aftermath of a hurricane that killed more than a thousand people, Blitzer reiterated this concern about violence throughout the broadcast: People with guns are opening fire, including on ambulances leaving hospitals. . . . There are still many, many people who are stranded, they can’t get out of their homes, they can’t walk anyplace, A, because it’s too flooded; B, because it’s disease-ridden, many of those waters; and C, because it’s getting very ugly and violent in many parts of New Orleans. Preoccupied with broadcasting the bounty of rumors emerging from New Orleans, Blitzer and most corporate news purveyors seemed unable to fulfill one of their primary roles in reporting on the Katrina disaster—that of verifying claims made by sources, whether officials or ordinary people. Responsible, skeptical reporters might have erred on the side of caution, anticipating that a different image of the flooded city would likely emerge once evacuation and rescue procedures finally proceeded. Indeed, weeks later, the Los Angeles Times (9/27/05) noted that follow-up reporting had discredited most of the wilder reports, including those of pedophilic rape, murder at the Superdome and “roving bands of armed gang members attacking the helpless.” The New Orleans Times-Picayune (9/26/05), in a story headlined “Rumors of Deaths Greatly Exaggerated,” found an official count of only four violent deaths citywide for the entire flood period—a figure it noted was “typical in a city that anticipated more than 200 homicides this year.” Back to the arms trade; "Jobs and Good Relations are Formed with Arms Sales" Many arms contractors maintain that arms sales are essential to foster good relations and also create more jobs at home. Yet, when new weapons development is funded the rationale used is that it is because so many countries have sophisticated weapons. These weapons are often the very same ones that these manufacturers have also sold around the world. It makes a nice circular argument to continue the development and manufacture of newer and more advanced weapons. Demonizing countries that you sell arms to so you can sell more to others is not going to foster good relations. When sales are made there are often other economic incentives provided to ensure the sale. For example, in some cases manufacturing operations required for the weapons are moved abroad. Manufacturers often make the point that sales will help create jobs. Obviously in these cases it does, but not in the home nation as they make it out to be. www.fas.org... Since 1992, the United States has exported more than $142 billion dollars worth of weaponry to states around the world.[1] The U.S. dominates this international arms market, supplying just under half of all arms exports in 2001, roughly two and a half times more than the second and third largest suppliers. [2 ] U.S. weapons sales help outfit non-democratic regimes, soldiers who commit gross human rights abuses against their citizens and citizens of other countries, and forces in unstable regions on the verge of, in the middle of, or recovering from conflict. U.S.-origin weapons find their way into conflicts the world over. The United States supplied arms or military technology to more than 92% of the conflicts under way in 1999.[3] The costs to the families and communities afflicted by this violence is immeasurable. But to most arms dealers, the profit accumulated outweighs the lives lost. In the period from 1998-2001, over 68% of world arms deliveries were sold or given to developing nations, where lingering conflicts or societal violence can scare away potential investors.[4] Of course, a loss of investment opportunities is not the only way Americans are impacted by the weapons trade. In addition to paying billions of dollars every year to support weapons exports, Americans may also feel the impact of increasing instability overseas. The United States military has had to face troops previously trained by its own military or supplied with U.S. weaponry in Panama, Iraq, Somalia, Haiti, and now in Afghanistan. Due to the advanced capabilities these militaries have acquired from past U.S. training and sales, the U.S. had to invest much more money and manpower in these conflicts than would have otherwise been needed. There are few restrictions on whom the government may export arms to. One notable exception is the Leahy Law, which prohibits U.S. military aid or training to foreign military units known to have committed human rights abuses. Under the Pentagon's interpretation of the law, however, these restrictions may be lifted if the foreign government filters out the "few bad apples" in that particular unit. An International Code of Conduct on Arms Sales is also being negotiated with other arms exporters in the hopes of creating a common set of export criteria. Read on for more facts. Still haven't reached for my books on the topic and others. What I'm expecting back is a tirade of comments about anti-americanism when the truth is that being the worlds No 1 at the moment along with the fact that you guys own the net. Its a lot easier to find information on the us than it is on England. It could go on and on but theres no getting through to people who are so unrationally blind. Either take pride in your contries dealings and join the KKK or at least take note of what is undeniably going on out there. Thank you
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 8-2-2006 @ 07:19 PM by AceOfBase
Said by Rebel Lion www.fas.org... Download and read, this report^^^ Where you got your graph from I don't know. That's the same report I linked to just above your post and that's where the graph came from. Look at page 77. That report does say that the US leads in arms shipment to developing nations but they include Israel and Egypt as developing nations. [edit on 8-2-2006 by AceOfBase]
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 8-2-2006 @ 07:42 PM by DeusEx
Originally posted by AceOfBase That report does say that the US leads in arms shipment to developing nation but they include Israel and Egypt as developing nations. Those two nations, especially Israel I'm guessing, probably consume the better part of the military spending. I know that the US's arms shipments to Israel probably top 2b$ a year. As for Egypt, I am rather indifferent towards them politically. I'm a little pressed for time right now, but I'm guessing Indonesia and South Africa are up there too. To be frank, most African nations can't afford bleeding edge Western gear, so they go to former Bloc states and pick up Soviet gear on the cheap. Remember the statistics for the AK, Rebel. That certainly isn't Western. DE
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 8-2-2006 @ 08:04 PM by AceOfBase
Ah, those blasted Europeans interfering in Africa again. EU Business "The 'long rains' are due in May but if they dont come, we could be facing a terrible situation," he said. "That is why we propose to earmark further funding of almost 40 million euros in the coming weeks and months." The commission, the EU's executive arm, has already allocated 73 million euros in support against the current drought, including the five million euros offered Wednesday. The United Nations and Kenya appealed Wednesday for more than 230 million dollars to help 3.5 million Kenyans threatened by famine from a drought that aid groups warn may become the country's worst post-independence crisis. I wonder how much money the Saudis will kick in? It'll probably just be Europe and the US supplying the aid. [edit on 8-2-2006 by AceOfBase]
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 8-2-2006 @ 09:33 PM by The time lord
This may sound offensive warning its just a theory.... Not to be racist stereotyping or any thing but are certain countries of their race or culture in situation of a genetic make up that gives certain personality types. I'm not saying all people of a particular race, but a majority trait have certain personality characteristics and not just bodily. Do certain races have certain traits that self-destruct on a personal level and also on a national scale? Are white people more intelligent but greedy in there genetic make up so they gain out of weaker nations and take advantage. Do Africans have trouble being organised to work together. We hear all over the world of black gangs killing each other its on every scale from a small party to a nation. Are Jews genetically more intelligent and have (like Einstein) had organisational creative skills better than most but have trouble looking after their systems. I could go on but its about patterns and every generation of a particular race has a trait that is good or bad. Its about personal experiences on a small scale then you see their origins and find out the nation or society continues that same trait. Not everyone is the same I know but even history seems to repeat it self with the same people. Sorry people not to offend anyone but has anyone else noticed if they are not afraid to speak up. I do deserve to be slaughtered on here but i would still like to know and maybe we humans have subspecies one does things this way and one that way you could be born on the moon and still be the same as the people of the nation you came from. Even children have characteristics of their parents why would races be any different? A female will always be different from a male that’s a fact. The ones who are caught in between gender are obvious to spot but not all; they have traits that make them that way. [edit on 8-2-2006 by The time lord]
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 9-2-2006 @ 12:48 PM by Rebel_Lion
We hear all over the world of black gangs killing each other its on every scale from a small party to a nation. Poverty does that. If it wasnt nessary it wouldn't happen. I won't go any further about the demonizing of my people and our culture. Its goes as far back as the noses on the statues of Egypt. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AceOfBase; I noticed that you had the same report but was in the middle of posting when you did. You need to go back into it and read a bit more. Its blatant. I've posted the quotes and info above. Not sure why Israel is labeled as Developing but even that is to do with further 3rd world conflicts upsetting the whole of the middle east... lets not forget who gave Israel the land they occupy... lets not forget who carved the nations of Africa for themselves, causing conflict... lets not forget who brokered deals with these dictators to suppot their hold on the global economy. You probably didn't even read half of the site, where you got that graph from was probably on about what we are here and as said I've mentioned it all in my last post. After World War II Kenya experienced one of the highest rates of economic growth in the world because of large-scale foreign investments and the influx of European management and technical personnel. The colonial government’s policy was to leave economic growth to private enterprise. The privitization of Water, oil for aid, ''we'll give you money if you sell us''... The World Bank? The World Bank is one of the most powerful financial institutions in the world. People in the global South (or the so-called "Third World") struggle every day with harmful structural adjustment programs imposed upon them by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Among other things, these programs require governments to increase fees for health care and sell off public water utilities to profit-seeking multinationals, putting clean water out of reach for the people who need it most. Moreover, because governments of impoverished countries have to prioritize debt repayments to the World Bank and IMF over social needs, poor people go without education, AIDS prevention and treatment, and clean water. The UN has estimated that 19,000 children die every day from preventable diseases because of the debt burden - and much of the debt is owed to these institutions. Who Controls the World Bank? The World Bank is controlled by the world's richest countries -- the U.S., the U.K., Canada, France, Germany, Japan and Italy, also known as the G-7. Combined, these powers hold more than 40% of the votes on its Board. They set the institution's agenda and the World Bank acts in their interests, promoting a model of economic growth (called neo-liberal) that pushes free markets and that benefits the richest countries and the international private sector. Ok, we've got that right? How did the World Bank gain influence in Africa? In the 1980s, as market prices for export commodities slumped, and international interest rates skyrocketed, many African countries found themselves in economic crisis, unable to repay mounting foreign debts. In desperate need of new loans to pay off these debts, they turned to the World Bank and IMF, who were very willing to lend them money, as long as they instituted certain economic policy changes in return. These changes, called "structural adjustment programs", adjusted the economies of borrower countries to suit the interests of the wealthiest players in the global economy. African countries, in need of these loans, had no choice but to accept the conditions attached. Over the past two decades, Africa's debt crisis has worsened, and the failure of World Bank and IMF economic policies has left African countries more dependent than ever on new loans. The World Bank and IMF, now major creditors to African governments, have gained huge control over the running of African economies. What does the World Bank do in Africa? The World Bank uses its structural adjustment programs to effect economic policy changes in African countries. These changes cut back government services to the people, reduce trade barriers, and maintain economies as sources of cheap raw materials and cheap labor for multinational corporations. The results have been a decline in average incomes, worsening conditions of poverty and underdevelopment, and an increase in Africa's foreign debt. Last year (2000-2001), the World Bank provided loans totaling some US$3.4 billion to countries in sub-Saharan Africa, though this was still at least US$250 million less than it took from African countries in debt repayments. The World Bank claims to promote economic growth and development in Africa - in reality it takes far more from the continent than it gives I'm going to mention the effect of denial. Its in my previous posts if you've read them and its what many on here are going through. I've said it too many times now. This thread is becoming pointless and is one sided in that you aren't taking in anything thats being said. All we are doing here is going over the same information and statistics while you tail chase trying to deny western involvement in the woes of the 3rd world. The FACTS are there all you need to do is look but you don't, you just keep coming back with rubbish as though you haven't read whats been posted in the last few weeks. I'm actually ashamed that I came on here expecting a decent debate about world politics its as though we're talking with a bunch of bricks that can't read and aren't educated enough to do so. Again, this goes back into what 'i was saying before, something that falls into the lines of what the Time Travelling guy is on about but in a less insulting, ''if I'm wrong feel free to correct me'' type of way. ------------ --Too many of you have been victims of a system that you know is doing wrong. You cannot accept the truth for fear of change and feel helpless to stand against your rouge governments who go to war against the publics wishes, who go to war in secret, and who LIE to their own people to maintain their hold over global politics leaving people of other nations in poverty whilst blaming them/demonizing them at home. This thread stands as evidence to that and is something that I'll use to back up my standing when ever talking to people on this type of issue. Something mentioned by Steven Biko before he was killed in South Africa. Citizens of the west live in a state of denial as to what is happening in the world and that is why so called, ''innocent'' people in these lands are being terrorized by people who are doing nothing but fighting for their peoples basic human rights. They don't hate 'us' (westerners) but they hate our lack of action and our IGNORANCE which is pushing them into doing things that they would not otherwise consider.--- ---------- Theres too much information on Geopolitics to post up on here especially if people don't read it and just want to run around in circles. Unless anyone can come up with anything worth while I'm just going to end up posting quote after quote about what is infront you already... I'll just finish posting on the world bank; How has the World Bank denied Africa's Right to Health? Forced cut-backs in spending on health care Over the past two decades, as part of structural adjustment, the World Bank has forced African governments to reduce government spending on health care. This has resulted in the closure of hundreds of hospitals and clinics, and has left the remaining medical facilities under-staffed and lacking in essential supplies. Under the tutelage of the World Bank and IMF, in the 42 poorest countries in Africa, spending on health care fell by 50% during the 1980s. Privatization of health care services and introduction of "user fees" The World Bank has forced African governments to privatize government-held services such as health care, and to introduce "user fees" for receiving basic care. This has created a two-tier system, and has denied access to health care to the poor, who cannot afford to pay these fees. Demanding debt repayments take precedence over health Across Africa, governments are forced to spend more money on debt repayments to the World Bank and rich country governments each year than they do on health care for their own populations. The current debt relief framework has not changed this fact, and Africa's AIDS crisis continues to escalate. Most info is from here; www.africaaction.org... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Clothe yourself in righteousness, for that is armor enough. I like that saying. Where did you get it from? [edit on 9-2-2006 by Rebel_Lion] [edit on 9-2-2006 by Rebel_Lion] [edit on 9-2-2006 by Rebel_Lion]
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 9-2-2006 @ 02:04 PM by Souljah
National Security Study Memorandum 200 OK Boys and Girls, lets Open up a New Chapter in this Thread. Let's move from the Conventional Weapons to Biological Warfare. Now I know All of you know Mister Henry Alfred Kissinger; a Jewish-American diplomat, a Nobel peace prize winner and Statesman that served as National Security Advisor and later Secretary of State in the Nixon administration, continuing in the latter position after Gerald Ford became President in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal. All around nice guy, that won the Nobel Prize, right? Or a War Criminal? Not only that he was RESPONSIBLE for the following: Ordered the U.S. military to conduct illegal air raids in Cambodia in 1969, and to misreport the targets as Vietnamese. Convinced Nixon to order the 1972 "Christmas bombing" of Hanoi, which killed thousands of North Vietnamese civilians, as a political sop to weakened South Vietnam President Nguyen van Thieu. Got Ford to okay arms sales to Indonesian President Suharto in 1975, knowing they would be used, illegally, in the slaughter of rebels and civilians in East Timor. Ordered the CIA to instigate a coup of the democratically elected left-wing Chilean government of Salvador Allende, clearing the way for the murderous right-wing dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. But was also Involved in the DE-Population of the Third World Countries with Biological Agents - Viruses. Well, lets start our Trial of Henry Kissinger. According to Mister Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz, HIV/AIDS is a "synthetic biological agent" designed to DE-Populate the Countries of the expanding Third World - Africa to be exact. Dr. Donald MacArthur, a US Army biological warfare expert, stated in the 1970s the Following: "Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective micro-organism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms." But why? HIV/AIDS & African American Genocide During the early 1970s, Dr. Horowitz writes, National Secret Security Memorandum 200, advanced by Nixon's National Security Advisor, Henry Kissinger, called for massive Third World depopulation among efforts to maintain the economic alignment of the superpowers. Zbigniew Brzezinski, who replaced Dr. Kissinger for the Carter administration, secretly dispatched National Security Memorandum 46 to cabinet chiefs only. This document, the most telling, authorized the FBI and CIA to initiate genocidal policies. Genocide is defined as the mass killing of people for economic, political, and/or ideological reasons. According to Dr. Horowitz, this term is contextually consistent with Dr. Kissinger's security policy that specifically cited the economic need to dramatically reduce African populations, and Brzezinski's memorandum that explained that Black nationalism posed both economic and security threats to America. Previously, in his national bestselling book, Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola—Nature, Accident or Intentional? (Tetrahedron, LLC Press, 1998), Dr. Horowitz reviewed Dr. Kissinger's oversight of America's biological weapons race. According to testimonies of CIA directors Richard Helms and William Colby before the U.S. Congress, Dr. Kissinger selected the option to develop immune system ravaging viruses similar in definition and function to the AIDS and Ebola viruses. "The curious manner in which HIV/AIDS disproportionately affects Black people in the United States and Africa today," Dr. Horowitz concludes, "likely represents an extension of Dr. Kissinger's African depopulation policies and the development of viruses best capable of effecting them. Brzezinski's policies, too, foreshadow ongoing African American genocide." State Sponsored Genocide by a "synthetic biological agent"? A.I.D.S. - Born in the USA "De-population should be the highest priority of US foreign policy towards the Third World." This sentence formed the hard backbone of NSSM 200. The memo went on to state that "Reduction of the rate of population in these States [Third World nations] is a matter of vital US national security." Why? Simply because "The US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries." In stating this the focus was exclusively, on the "...economic interests of the US." Well, that sure is Going on right now in Africa, if you have Read previous Posts made in this Thread. It is more then obvious, that the Foreign - mostly WESTERN - Coprorations OWN African Natural Resources, Own African Corrupt Goverments and Own the Small Arms Trade. Basicly, planes loaded with Weapons go to Africa, and fly away with precious metals and other resources. While the People of Africa are dying of Diseases, Wars, Famine... Mister Kissinger once said, "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac!" - and I guess that for him it was the Ultimte aphrodisiac to be responsible for Millions of Deaths around the Globe. Anyway, where does A.I.D.S. come from? Was it really FIRST Found in Africa, as reported? Was it really a Natural Made Virus? Well, Professor Jakob Segal and his wife Lilli do not think that. A.I.D.S. - Born in the USA Part II AIDS was laboratory manufactured at Fort Detrick, Maryland - home of America's Chemical and Biological Warfare programme. Segal, a Russian-born Professor of biology at Humboldt University in then East Germany stated that AIDS was the result of a US germ warfare programme. The couple published their findings in a 1986 pamphlet "AIDS: USA Home-Made Evil. The couple set about trying to show that the AIDS virus HIV is almost identical, in some regards, to two other viruses. These are Visna, a deadly disease that kills sheep, but is not infectious to humans, and HTLV-1 (Human T-Cell Leukemia Virus) which though not fatal is highly infectious to humans. Segal then went on to state that the P4 High Security laboratory at Fort Detrick, was responsible for splicing both Visna and HTLV-1 together, thus creating an artificial biological weapon that was both highly infectious and deadly to humans. The result was HIV. Segal maintains this virus was finally created between late 1977 and the spring of 1978. Disparaging the then common view that AIDS had first arisen in Africa, Segal insisted that the Fort Detrick cocktail was tested on prison inmates who had volunteered to participate in experiments in exchange for their release. Because symptoms did not show up inside six months, the convicts were released according to the prior agreement. Since a number of them were gay, Segal claimed, they travelled to New York and unknowingly began infecting other members of New York's gay community. From here the first known AIDS case appeared in 1979 and soon began spreading like wildfire. FURTHERMORE, Emerging Viruses - AIDS & Ebola The iatrogenic and genocidal theories of AIDS are meticulously explored within the social and political context of this stormy period of American military science. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) activities and foreign policy initiatives in Central Africa in response to the alleged threats posed by communism, black nationalism, and Third World populations are examined. The important roles played by political leaders including National Security Advisor Dr. Henry Kissinger, Department of Health, Education and Welfare secretaries Frank Carlucci, Jr. and Joseph Califano, presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, and economic notables Nelson and Laurence Rockerfeller are considered. The text hauntingly dissects the potential motives and administrative mechanisms underlying the prevalent belief that HIV and Ebola may have been deliberately deployed, and that the AIDS epidemic may be accomplishing what was desired. A NEW THEORY ON THE ORIGIN OF AIDS U.S. Government documents show that AIDS-like viruses were developed by National Cancer Institute researchers along with military biological weapons contractors between 1962 and 1974 during the "Special Virus Cancer Program." The possibility of this research giving rise to contaminated experimental hepatitis B (HB) vaccines, and thus, the simultaneous emergence of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) in New York City and Central Africa in 1978 is advanced. Contrary to widespread speculations that human AIDS viruses arose from African green monkey viruses that naturally jumped species, in 1971, National Cancer Institute (NCI) researchers noted that "only one virus [of 27 then known retroviruses] which contains reverse transcriptase, does not seem to be oncogenic", the simian foamy virus (SFV). Well, the Idea of De-Population of this Planet has been long time around in the Circle of the Global Elite, that wants, and is, Ruling this Planet according to their Wishes and Desires. It all goes back to the start of the Cold War. The mental background behind AIDS The world has seen four major international conferences launched, all focused on human depopulation, beginning in Rome in 1954, then held in Belgrade in 1965, then in Bucharest in 1974, and finally in Cairo in 1994. Each conference represents a significant milestone in the ratcheting downwards the image of man to ever lower levels of worth or liability, to the point of being called a disease. This grinding down towards radical depopulation by policy, created the policy atmosphere in which Henry Kissinger prepared his most infamous document, the National Security Study Memorandum 200 (MSSN200), which states that Third World population growth is a threat to U.S. control of raw materials. The document cites 13 developing nations as recommended depopulation targets for the U.S. government. Henry Kissinger's policy for selective depopulation by overt means was formally adopted in 1975. Henry Kissinger warned, however, at this time, that the imperial reason behind the U.S. population reduction efforts must be strictly concealed. AIDS emerged in full force, at which time it was regarded as a new disease, in the 1980/81 time-frame. Both HIV-1 and HIV-2 infections became endemic at this time although traces of HIV infection can be found as far back as the 1950s. HIV-1 is believed to have its origin in the mutation of a chimpanzee virus in Central Africa, while HIV-2 is believed to have come from the sooty mangabey monkey of West Africa. It is possible that HIV infections have occurred also prior to the 1950s and that the detection of this occurrence is prevented by the lack of available technologies. Read more about AIDS and The History of Depopulation Policies Into 2005, UNAIDS estimates suggests that the situation does not look much better. In Sub-Saharan Africa, there were: 25.8 million (out of 40 million worldwide) living with HIV 3.2 million (out of 4.9 million worldwide) new HIV infections 2.4 million (out of 3.1 million worlwide) AIDS deaths And as if that is not Enough, American pharmaceutical industry and some of the politicians are More Worried for their profits that would be hurt by African nations, such as South Africa, who were trying to do something about it to help their own people; US was actually THREATENING South Africa with trade sanctions for trying to develop generic and cheaper drugs to fight AIDS etc. Drug giants set to cause violation of human rights Oxfam believes that 39 of the world’s biggest drug companies are contributing to a gross breach of human rights in South Africa and has today called on the United Nations to investigate. Nice. So the Global Elite are still in Control of the Situation in Africa. Everything is going according to their Master Plan. Interesting to think, which OTHER "synthetic biological agents" the Goverments of this New World Order have prepared for the People of This Planet. It looks like a NEW Epidemic of Bird Flu has a Big Impact on the People of Asia - maybe a virus designed to DE-Populate people of Asia, like A.I.D.S./HIV was Designed to DE-Populate Black people? A.I.D.S. - Born in the USA Part III Strecker also argues that a virtual armoury of biological weapons - not just AIDS - has been developed and are in use. Collectively, he says, these secret weapons are set to destroy mankind - or at least a significant part of it - once again evoking the fears of Third World slaughter. He also points to the massive outbreak of bovine leukaemia in Europe in the 1950's - which led to the wholesale slaughter of cattle herds. The reference draws clear parallels with the recent outbreak of Mad Cow Disease. Unsurprisingly, the future of biological weapons occupies the minds of military strategists. In a paper entitled "Twenty-First Century Germ Warfare" by USAF Lt. Colonel Robert P Kadlek, the author has this warning "Using biological weapons under the cover of an endemic or natural disease occurrence provides an attacker the potential for plausible denial." He then continues "Biological warfare can include the use of Bacteria, Rickettsia, Viruses and Toxins to induce illness or death in humans, animals and plants." So A.I.D.S./HIV Today is nothing more, but a Commodity, designed by the Corporate Elite, which have reduced just about everything in to a Commodity, with which they can then make Profits, Business Deals and Alot of MONEY. AIDS and the World Bank: Global Blackmail? AIDS policy is now a key world commodity—right up there with shiploads of computers, crude oil and wheat. I would say, that that is a very Well Crafted Design Virus. Deadly Conditions? Examining the relationship between debt relief policies and HIV/AIDS Although there are numerous factors in the spread of HIV/AIDS, it is largely recognised as a disease of poverty, hitting hardest where people are marginalised and suffering economic hardship. IMF designed Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs), adopted by debtor countries as a condition of debt relief, are hurting, not working. By pushing poor people even deeper into poverty, SAPs may be increasing their vulnerability to HIV infection, and reinforcing conditions where the scourge of HIV/AIDS can flourish. As you can see with your Own eyes, the Faith of the African People was SEALED along time ago, we are just Observing the EFFECTS of the De-Population Policies - the National Security Study Memorandum 200 to be Exact, which CLEARLY states, that *Third World population growth is a threat to U.S. control of raw materials!!!* The MAN Behind this PLAN? Mister Henry Kissinger. Will he Ever be Brought to TRIAL? He is STILL WANTED! We can thank Guys like him, that we are now Living in a TECHNO-Tronic Era - the Era of Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare. And the World's Number One state Terrorist is still at large...
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 9-2-2006 @ 03:12 PM by DeusEx
Originally posted by Rebel_Lion We hear all over the world of black gangs killing each other its on every scale from a small party to a nation. Poverty does that. If it wasnt nessary it wouldn't happen. That is, as we say, a copout. It isn't neccesary, and a lot of unnecessary things happen in the world anyways. Black gangs killing each other over who controls their favorite whoring or crack dealing corner is unnecessary, no matter what anyone says. To be fair, it has nothing to do with the present argument. I'm going to mention the effect of denial. Its in my previous posts if you've read them and its what many on here are going through. I've said it too many times now. This thread is becoming pointless and is one sided in that you aren't taking in anything thats being said. All we are doing here is going over the same information and statistics while you tail chase trying to deny western involvement in the woes of the 3rd world. The FACTS are there all you need to do is look but you don't, you just keep coming back with rubbish as though you haven't read whats been posted in the last few weeks. We're listening. Yeah, the World Bank and IMF are bad. We got that. They're also a group of private citizens, not neccesarily representing the west. Of course, there is something to be said for internal mismanagement. If a government can't balance a budget, or spends more on weapons, what's the IMF going to do? Extend the line of credit so more gusn can be bought? The World Bank is not a charity. It is, as the name suggests, a bank. I don't see too many people going to banks for handouts. As far as what's been posted, you're falling into a souljah-ish pattern of posting the same thing over and over again and not listening to the replies. Why don't you calm down, read over the last few pages, and listen to our arguments? Yes, almost everyone has admitted to western wrongdoing, but the difference is that YOU are trying to pin every problem in Africa onto the west, specifically the States. I'm actually ashamed that I came on here expecting a decent debate about world politics its as though we're talking with a bunch of bricks that can't read and aren't educated enough to do so. Again, this goes back into what 'i was saying before, something that falls into the lines of what the Time Travelling guy is on about but in a less insulting, ''if I'm wrong feel free to correct me'' type of way. Then, if you consider the arguments of myself, Herr Doktor, and Muaddib unworthy, you can always take your ball and go home. You've fallen in with a bad crowd here, who do the exact same thing. Souljah is ignored by more than a few people, including myself, for his inability to argue coherently or display any ability to listen to anyone else. Much the same, we're mountaining the proof that -of late- Africa's problems are increasingly Africa's fault. You did not dispute the arms charts. The leaders of Africa always have the option of saying 'no' to arms dealers. This is, of course, simply an example. If you're not going to listen, I encourage you to leave. We're listening - we provide proof to back up our claims, instead of vague allusions to the US being the source of all evil in the world. Here's a few points I'd like you to consider: African internal mismanagement, from Mugabe to the warlords of Somalia and back again. The countries of Africa- who is keeping them together when they're trying to split themselves apart? How come every other colony seems to be doing at least a little better than most African nations? I live in a former colony of both France and England, both of whom raped the land for three centuries. Hell, we're still doing it now, and we're a G nation. Australia, ditto. Former penal colony. India, doing okay. Vietnam- two large wars, former colony, and it's getting back on its feet. Most of South America was Spanish, along with Mexico, and there are areas of considerable wealth there. though there was no actual enslavement here, we did suffer from economic enslavement. Yet, we're doing okay. Clothe yourself in righteousness, for that is armor enough. I like that saying. Where did you get it from? Book called Endgame, by Loren L. Coleman. DE
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 10-2-2006 @ 09:49 AM by AceOfBase
Originally posted by Rebel_Lion The Arabs didn't hack off the noses of the Egyptian statues. Oops. Looks like you may be wrong about that. It wasn't the europeans who took the nose off of the Sphinx. napoleon-series.org Finally, an article by Ulrich Haarmann, "Regional Sentiment in Medieval Islamic Egypt," published in the University of London's Bulletin Of The School Of Oriental And African Studies (BSOAS), vol.43 (1980) p.55-66, states that according to Makrizi, Rashidi and other medieval Arab scholars, the face of the Sphinx was vandalized in 1378 A.D. by Mohammed Sa'im al-Dahr, a "fanatical sufi of the oldest and most highly respected sufi convent of Cairo." The nose and ears are mentioned specifically as having been damaged at this time. According to one account, Haarmann states, the residents in the neighborhood of the Sphinx were so upset by the destruction that they lynched him and buried him near the great monument he ruined.
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 10-2-2006 @ 02:26 PM by Muaddib
Originally posted by AceOfBase Originally posted by Rebel_Lion The Arabs didn't hack off the noses of the Egyptian statues. Oops. Looks like you may be wrong about that. It wasn't the europeans who took the nose off of the Sphinx. Not only is he wrong about that but he doesn't want to acknowledge that Muslims enslaved Africa for more than 10 centuries, castrated black men to be eunuchs of their stolen wives and traded in slavery, as well as mutilated and killed blacks and even their own Arab brethen from other tribes, at least those Arabs who did not submit to Islam. Also one thing he doesn't mention is the fact that the tribes of Arabs were "nomad", most of the knowledge that Muslims are supposed to have given to the world, was actually taken from other ethnic groups that they conquered such as the Assyrians. But some people want to dismiss some facts of history, and instead want to write a new chapter blaming everything on the western world; all for their agenda against the west. It is true that the west caused a lot of missery to Africans, but they are not to be blamed for everything that has happened in Africa, or even what is happening now. Many of the warlords that are killing other blacks, are black themselves, along with their thugs. Arab militias are also killing and making blacks and other ethnic groups living in Africa suffer, because their extremist Islamic governments are backing them up, but of course, it has to be the fault of the west right?........ [edit on 10-2-2006 by Muaddib]
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 11-2-2006 @ 08:00 AM by IAF101
I am sorry that this took so long, I have a life you know ! Originally posted by Souljah AND what does that have to do with these Five Countries, being also the TOP ARMS SELLERS to the Third World Countries in the World Apparently, sarcasm is wasted on you! Anyway, let me explain this like I would to a 4 year old. When a country has a large army, they need a lot of guns. When they manufactur guns for a large army they manufactrue in bulk and thus a separate industry is set up to produce weapons. They make more than they need and when they have a surplus they sell it to their friends ! ^^ That is what makes them the "largerst arm sellers" as you say. Since most of the people who need weapons to maintain stability are in the 3rd world and also which dont produce their own weapons thus the weapons end up going there. Really CUTE - you Quoting National Rifles Association. Also a Member of NRA are you? Convenienty you have abstained form answering the central question and instead sidetracked to cheap humor. Question is, do you think that quoting from a promotional page of a group is a source of objective analysis ?? [ So? Do the Laws represent anything today, apart from the most probable option that it will get BROKEN? And I am sorry, but you got it all Wrong in your second statement - America Sold arms to some of the most Oppessive Dictator Regimes, and still is. Like Saudi Arabia. Remember them? What?? First you claim that there is a shortage of regulation and that is why you need that "a UN accord" on small weapons and now when I show you that the US is self regulatory you twist your argument and say 'do laws mean anything today' ? So which is it? regulation or no regulation and what is the difference between the self imposed US regulations and UN regulations, which are volunatry ? Again the Saudi Arabia ! I think I have described the situation atleast 4 times in your various threads and yet you still bring it up ?? Go look it up in your earlier threads and come back. Plus KSA is not a dictatorship ! Take that back to your michlemore.com If you do not LIKE the Source, it does not mean it is not TRUE. But I guess Some people really hate to look themselves in the Mirror. Spare me the platitudes !! If you think a "Mormon group" is a credible political analyst than I envy what you're smoking. Such a Hypocritical List of Countries - most of them with ALOT of Oil and members of OPEC, Again, with expected continuity you have not addressed the central issue that I have raised. From your source I have shown that most of the top american arms exports are to stable nations and not one of them is Africa. This clearly refutes the baseless allegations of massive arms sales to Africa by the US. Come on - just Admit it already! United States and Soviet Union were BOTH Responsible Don't make me start with the CIA Latin America Campaign, and what was happening there in the Name of DEMOCRACY... Admit it ? the only thing I can admit is yout crafty attempts at devitaing from the central issue in my rebuttal to your baseless allegations. The Carlyl gorup makes a mention in your reply and I would think you are under some NWO etc line of reason which is rediculous.They are a bunch of financial consultant who take peoples pensions and invest them in profitable enterprises for their financial security in old age. Even my uncle has big investment on them. Are you saying that he "owns" the planet ! .Well, atleast here your statement has improved with the "BOTH" from the standard " US is Satan" approach to reason. About Latin America, I would again complement the drugs you are on because no body, not even the state department, can find enough proof to take the CIA to court for that. Well if you have enough "proof" to back up your allegations then I think you would be the first to sue the CIA ! So you are free to bring your best game. No - that does NOT change ANYTHING. Sadly, nothing seems to change the position in your case! It just tells alot of your Culture - the Culture of Guns, Money and Power. So a Slovenian rebel militant can tell the people of America about Culture ?? Well what ever maybe our culture, we know one thing for sure, we dont beg like the africans do for day to day exsistence. That is not the American way ! And unlike your Slovenian independence, we didnt have Croatia to do all the fighting for us! Actually it Contradicts the Small Arms Sales around the Globe - not in Americas. Where do you think America is ? On MARS ?? What about the Arms that are Smuggled and Sold "Above" the Law? What about them ? You think that the Corrupt Corporations and Individuals from the United States do not get alot of Money by selling non-American Small Arms? No, they dont ! Firstly, tell me how is it corrupt to sell arms? and secondly, why do you think that Americans would sell foreign weapons to people who can hardly afford them ? Also most arms sales are through US govt military aid so unlike the Nicholas Cage movie, there are no "global gun runners" from the US. No - AK is a Rifle that was produced in the BIGGEST numbers ever. That is why it is so Spread across the Globe, because there was so many of them being made. And thats they are cheap. Who do you think makes them and who has sold that technology to other 3rd world countries ?? The only two nations that actively produce the AK are Soviet bloc nations and China. Well, where are the Small Arms Factories? Where are the Small Arms Magazines? In Africa? In the Middle East? YES. Africa and the middle east both assemble their own weapons. Do you think every single one of them is made in the West ? How do you think they get shipped to Africa without running up a high cost?? Also Africa has one of the largest arms producer. heard about Danel arms ?? The ammunition is also produced in africa and the middle east. Heck anybody can poduce it wif they have access to the right machines and chemicals. You said it yourself, that AK is the Rifle most used in the World - was it made by Islamic Terrorist Fundamentalist Regime? Nope. It was made by Russia. Which is a White, Catholic Orthodox Country. Period. I guess you need to read up a little more dont you ?? Russia isnt the sole producer of AKs is it ? Exactly the TYPICAL United States Answer - like the UN Resolutions targetting ILLEGAL Isreali Occupation of Palestinian Land is a JOKE right? Israel is another topic that can be discussed in another thread where I can say with certainity that I can refute any of your slander campaignes with ease. But this is Africa and lets stick to that. By going through your cheap attempts at humor coupled with your desperate attempts to avoid the topic in your post I find it devoid of ANY points that can be seen as answer to my rebutal of your allegations. You have merely wasted space in an attempt to beat around the "bush"' without actually saying anything concrete. Your sources are a biased, you assertions are nothing but slander, your facts skewed. In short you campaigne doesnt fool anyone. The only thing I can appreciate is your skill in diggin up the most arcane and vile propaganda on the ner, for which you seem to have a natural talent. Also the rest of the "facts" you have posted on this thread, I am sure I can refute every single one of them but unfortuantaly I dont have the time or the energy to spend on this frivolous exercise. [edit on 11-2-2006 by IAF101]
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 11-2-2006 @ 10:35 AM by Rebel_Lion
If a government can't balance a budget, or spends more on weapons, what's the IMF going to do? Extend the line of credit so more gusn can be bought? Again; Offsets are side-deals used by arms manufacturers to attract customers and clinch deals by providing some economic benefit back to the customer country. Typical offsets are the co-production of the weapon system or its components in the purchasing country, investment in the importing state's non-military industries, or assistance marketing the foreign country's goods and services in the United States or elsewhere. Oh please; Why don't you calm down, read over the last few pages, and listen to our arguments? Yes, almost everyone has admitted to western wrongdoing, but the difference is that YOU are trying to pin every problem in Africa onto the west, specifically the States. You're repeating exactly what i'm saying. Theres too much information on Geopolitics to post up on here especially if people don't read it and just want to run around in circles. And I've said that theres more info about the sates than europe because you guys own the net and have more sites, are a larger country etc. Stop trying to twist my words around. The leaders of Africa always have the option of saying 'no' to arms dealers. Read the top quote again and the last post abuot the world bank privitization deals. Money for ownership of the economy. You're contradicting yourself saying that I'm not reading the posts and am going around in circles when you haven't even read the fact that I've already said that. How come every other colony seems to be doing at least a little better than most African nations? Because we are still colonised/privately owned and the people reject it. So the French (for example) move in to blow up air planes and disrupt the community. Whenever the people try and draw attention to the fact that things are unbalanced and the French people occupying their land are getting better deals than the people they've settled with war breaks out and things become unbalanced... Zimbabwe is an example of that and this is an example of us going round in circles, if you keep asking questions that have already ben answered then we're going no where. As an example I'll reply to your comments (if there are any more same 'o same 'os) with quotes from previous posts. Clothe yourself in righteousness, for that is armor enough. I like that saying. Where did you get it from? Book called Endgame, by Loren L. Coleman. Thank you. What is it about? (I could go and do a search but the net breaks down the need to ask questions sometimes, I'm a humanitarian in the full sence of the word) It wasn't the europeans who took the nose off of the Sphinx. One monument that Alexander didn't get to. Not only is he wrong about that but he doesn't want to acknowledge that Muslims enslaved Africa for more than 10 centuries Another same 'o same 'o. As I stated earlier in the topic, along with the points about the twised things the arabs used to, and still do; Yeah the Arabs were persecuting Africa 800bc times
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 11-2-2006 @ 10:39 AM by Rebel_Lion
lol. As it happens SoulJah, I've already started a topic in the Medical forum about AIDs. Im reserved on it personally and my thoughts are in the thread already. I'm not sure that the US could stoop that low myself although the evidence is there and it weighs a good few tons. The American sponcered AIDS virus Its often said amonst people of the third world that certain diseases are created by man in laborotories and its something I'd like to put forward to you. The history of the origin of AIDS can be traced throughout the 20th Century and back to 1878. On April 29 1878 the United States passed a “FEDERAL QUARANTINE ACT”. A laborotory was setup and run by one Dr. Joseph J. Kinyoun, an apparent racist who found ''mycoplasmas'' an agent found at the heart of many human diseases including aids. (Eugenics Movement) www.eugenicsarchive.org... www.notdeadyet.org... The influenza virus which has killed millions in its time is itself a flu virus modified with a bird mycoplasma. In 1917, the USA formed the “Federation of the American Society for Experimental Biology” (FASEB). www.faseb.org... A lead eugenics philosopher, Betrand Russell himself, publicly supported the “necessity for “organized” plagues” against the Black population in 1921. In 1948 the USA made plans to ''cull'' peoples of ethnic groups. In 1949 Dr. Bjorn Sigurdsson isolates the VISNA virus. A virus that shares unique DNA with HIV. -See, Proceedings of the United States, NAS, Vol. 92, pp. 3283 - 7, (April 11, 1995)- external image ''The 1971 flowchart makes it perfectly clear, the design, intent and purpose of the U.S. Special Virus program. As Dr. Peter Piot, Executive Director of UNAIDS says, the HIV/AIDS virus is the result of many steps in the laboratory, it was no accident. The 1971 flowchart provides absolute evidence of the United States' intent to kill its own citizens and others." I guess that most on here know about all this and it may have been debated before but as there is a discussion on the Imprisionment of Africa on ATS I thought it right that I should bring this up for those people and others to check out. I guess I could go on but its all on the net, really pointless when names can be taken and google.com'ed to find out info and stats. www.apfn.org... [edit on 11-2-2006 by Rebel_Lion]
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 11-2-2006 @ 10:41 AM by Rebel_Lion
Lawsuit Claims US manufactured the AIDS Virus To begin with it appears I will not be able to directly quote anything from the source due to this warning on the site NOTICE: DO NOT POST THIS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL ON ANY MESSAGE BOARD OR BLOG YOU MAY POST A LINK AND A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE ARTICLE INSTEAD Anyways…… According to the article, Dr. Boyd Ed Graves has filed a suit against the United States claiming that AIDS was created as a biological weapon. On Friday June 24, 2005 Federal Judge Sabraw in San Diego will hear oral arguments on whether or not to dismiss the case outright. The reason why Dr. Graves states that the US created the virus is due to a 1971 report by the U.S. Special Virus program that claims that HIV/AIDS is a recombinant (virus) agent that was formed by converging leukemia and lymphoma. The article mentions other proof as well but As you can see I can’t post it www.dldewey.com... ------------------------------------- www.abovetopsecret.com... ---------------------------------------------------------- Theres too much to post, its all in those threads and more. Its a hot topic on ATS.com! After that I suggest we look into the crack epidemic of the 80s. Thats another intresting one. Medical trials in third world countries? [edit on 11-2-2006 by Rebel_Lion]
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 11-2-2006 @ 11:38 AM by AceOfBase
Originally posted by Rebel_Lion One monument that Alexander didn't get to. Can I get a link to the statues that he did break the noses off of? I didn't see any information implicating Alexander the Great in breaking the noses off of statues. I'm aware that he did set fire to a Persian village or temple as revenge for the Persians who set fire to Athens in the centuries before that but I did not see any information regarding the destruction of Greece. Any links would be appreciated. Here's some information I did find from the Brooklyn Museum: brooklynmuseum.org Why are the noses broken on so many Egyptian objects? When a statue falls forward, the nose is the first point to hit the ground. Broken noses are often found on ancient Greek, Roman, Chinese, and Southeast Asian statues. But archaeologists in Egypt have also found mutilated statues upright in sealed tombs, showing evidence of deliberate disfiguration with a hammer and chisel. Such mutilation reflects the function of Egyptian art. The Egyptians believed that tomb statues could be transformed into living beings through a funerary ritual called the Opening of the Mouth Ceremony. A “living” statue served as an eternal home for the deceased’s soul, and smashing its nose effectively “killed” the statue and the soul of the deceased. Statues’ noses were probably sometimes broken by those who wished to defeat or harm the individual represented. Statues could also have been broken intentionally by later generations. Ancient Egyptian statues were sometimes cleared out of temples and put in a pit to make room for new statues. After the rise of Christianity beginning in the 4th century A.D., these temples often became quarries and the statues in them were broken up to make useful things such as doorjambs. While the story about them being broken up to make other objects is terrible I don't see any mention of Alexander being involved. [edit on 11-2-2006 by AceOfBase]
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 11-2-2006 @ 11:51 AM by eternally_damaged
Basically this is global capitlaism at its worst.
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 11-2-2006 @ 12:29 PM by Muaddib
Originally posted by eternally_damaged Basically this is global capitlaism at its worst. How can it be "Capitalism at it's worse" when the countries that have provided most, if not all, the weapons to third countries have been countries who have almost always been the most anti-capitalists? such as China and Russia, and if you think Russia and China are embracing Capitalism as of late for the betterment of their people you better take a look at what is happening in those countries. Yes, they used Capitalism to get money and technologies from the west, and the rest of the world, but their willingness to sell these arms to third world nation is not "because of Capitalism". [edit on 11-2-2006 by Muaddib]
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 11-2-2006 @ 12:52 PM by eternally_damaged
Originally posted by Muaddib ...but their willingness to sell these arms to third world nation is not "because of Capitalism". Isn't the main aspect of capitalism to make a profit Muaddib? I don't think China or Russia have any other motive in mind.
reply to this post: copyright & usage

reply posted on 11-2-2006 @ 01:20 PM by Souljah
Originally posted by IAF101 I am sorry that this took so long, I have a life you know ! Starting with Insults - How Mature. Originally posted by Souljah Anyway, let me explain this like I would to a 4 year old. And you Continue with - Insults. Since most of the people who need weapons to maintain stability are in the 3rd world and also which dont produce their own weapons thus the weapons end up going there. And why do the People in Third World NEED Guns? Why? Who told you that they need Guns? Your Uncle? Your Daddy? Your Employer? People of the Third World need FOOD, WATER, MEDICINE, STABILITY and above all PEACE. Not Guns. With every post you make, you further reveal your True self. Convenienty you have abstained form answering the central question and instead sidetracked to cheap humor. I guess you are the only one who is allowed to use Cheap Humor and insults in this Debate, huh? Oh, and I guess you ARE a member of the NRA. How Convenient. Question is, do you think that quoting from a promotional page of a group is a source of objective analysis ?? [ Again, posting the Patronising sentances - is that your best Shot? Is that what you can do best? And YES I think that the Pages I used for Sources ARE OBJECTIVE! That's why I used them. Again the Saudi Arabia ! I think I have described the situation atleast 4 times in your various threads and yet you still bring it up ?? Go look it up in your earlier threads and come back. Plus KSA is not a dictatorship ! Take that back to your michlemore.com But Ofcourse its not. In your Head its a Democratic Country, which does NOT have a Shari Law in Effect - one just like the Taliban had in Afganistan. And you can take that do your friends on Faux News dot com. Spare me the platitudes !! If you think a "Mormon group" is a credible political analyst than I envy what you're smoking. And you can spear me with your posts AND insults - none of them are trying to actually debate something, they