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.

 

Americans Burn U.N. Flag

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by just_a_pilot
We should get out of the U.N. and right now. I mean just look at all the negatvie posts on here from all of the f'ing' countries trying to tell us in the United States that we f'd up voting President Bush in for a second term, that we ourselves caused 9-11, that the world hates us, blah blah blah and on and on.

Well guess what *world*, we exorcised our rights and America decided as a majority that we want Bush in office.

Bring me the G.D. UN flag and I would happily burn that rag in front of the Headquarters in New York.

Then I would pee on the ashes so it wouldn't smoulder and dilute the cities air with blue and white ink fumes.

[edit on 11/5/2004 by just_a_pilot]

ha nice to know the "land of the free" sure likes the freedom the UN helped it keep.
the US has actually caused most of the UN stuff to fail because oif ther idea of createing terror groups to fight the russians. he he that back fired didnt it.
i could insult the american flag and its people but frankly i dont need to.




posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
sorry i will rephrase the question then, do you want a guy in charge that is prepared to attack a country wich has no chance of hurting your country or any nearby countries because some refugees told him there was a lot of weird looking trucks and stuff in the desert?

well then i'll answer it another way, yes. why, because i'm not stupid enough to believe the rest of your post.

[edit on 8-11-2004 by keholmes]



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by keholmes


well then i'll answer it another way, yes. why, because i'm not stupid enough to believe the rest of your post.

so you dont even consider it?
or are you one of these its against our policy so it cant be true guys.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:38 PM
link   
devilwasp

consider what? i'm not sure of the question.



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by keholmes
devilwasp

consider what? i'm not sure of the question.

you are not considering whether or not you want a leader who will invade a country to let off some anger and to get some oil.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
you are not considering whether or not you want a leader who will invade a country to let off some anger and to get some oil.

well i don't have to consider that anymore clinton is gone.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by keholmes

well i don't have to consider that anymore clinton is gone.

so you still believe there are/was WMD there when we invaded?



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 01:05 PM
link   
devilwasp

I don't believe it, it is just a simple fact that all the reputable intelligence that Ive heard and every intelligence agency that has come forward has reiterated that they are surprised if Iraq had no WMD.....further, it seems that Iraq had quite a disinformation campaign underway either to hide WMD or to convince that they did, which I dont know or care. The prevailing intelligence assessment was that saddam had WMD. Further, the Russians warned us that Iraq was planning terrorist activity in the US. Enough said there are many other reasons that also apply but as far as Im concerned any political leader that had those two pieces and didnt act should face serious consequence himself..and Im not talking elections here. Now, if Iraq didnt have WMD thats too bad oh well, time to move on.

Ill give you some advice here that would be analogous. if you go into a fenced area and realize that there is a bull in the same area.I would suggest leaving and quickly (walk backwards as long as the bull doesnt advance). Trying to convince him that you are somehow tough or a threat probably will not illicit the response your looking for.

Quick note: appears they have found some banned weapons, hmmm. I wonder if this is going to be the tip of the iceberg. www.foxnews.com...


[edit on 11-11-2004 by keholmes]



posted on Nov, 12 2004 @ 12:37 PM
link   
thanks but no thanks for the advice , been there in a field with a bull and know that its better to get outa there like a bat out of hell than stay.
i dont believe there are WMD there that my veiw and opinion. i respect your opinion and it deosnt look like i will change it.



He said he believed that insurgents who rigged the artillery shell as a bomb didn't know it contained the nerve agent, and that the dispersal of the nerve agent from such a rigged device was very limited.

now thsi is just one exstract but i want to highlight the fact that the iraqi spokesperson did not think they knew it was a nerve round because it has no markings, so they probably thought it was a normal shell round, and it probably dated from an Ex-regime time.
now i know "proably" is not good enough but thats all they have right now. it can go etheir way.
AND an iraqi scientist says that he believes ther are many WMD in the desert and in syria yet why is there only one statement from one scientist? i know mabye its a bit dangerous but couldnt they find another to back up the claim?
[edit on 12-11-2004 by devilwasp]

[edit on 12-11-2004 by devilwasp]



posted on Nov, 12 2004 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
..
now thsi is just one exstract but i want to highlight the fact that the iraqi spokesperson did not think they knew it was a nerve round because it has no markings, so they probably thought it was a normal shell round, and it probably dated from an Ex-regime time.
now i know "proably" is not good enough but thats all they have right now. it can go etheir way.
.
let me pick myself up off the floor.the guys who triggered it didnt realize it was WMD so it doesnt count as WMD
that has got to be the lamest rationalization ive heard to date
. And what would be an Ex-regime, Im not familiar with any other than Saddams? if thats the Ex-regime your speaking of then that would kind of be the regime were WMD was an issue.



BTW, have you ever heard of eric rudolph, or even more on point seen any figures from the illicit drug trade in the US. i just love it when people make the assumption that if a material was present in a country, that it should be easy to find.

[edit on 12-11-2004 by keholmes]

[edit on 12-11-2004 by keholmes]



posted on Nov, 12 2004 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by keholmes
lol: let me pick myself up off the floor.the guys who triggered it didnt realize it was WMD so it doesnt count as WMD


uhh no thats not what i meant but go ahead laugh all you want. the fact is that there was no way the iraqi's could have known it was one so how could they have used it as a WMD?


that has got to be the lamest rationalization ive heard to date
. And what would be an Ex-regime, Im not familiar with any other than Saddams? if thats the Ex-regime your speaking of then that would kind of be the regime were WMD was an issue.



uhh you do remember sadam done a coup and took the government right?



BTW, have you ever heard of eric rudolph, or even more on point seen any figures from the illicit drug trade in the US. i just love it when people make the assumption that if a material was present in a country, that it should be easy to find.


uhh no since drugs in the USA doesnt concern me. well then how did they find this one? pure luck?




[edit on 12-11-2004 by devilwasp]



posted on Nov, 12 2004 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
uhh no thats not what i meant but go ahead laugh all you want. the fact is that there was no way the iraqi's could have known it was one so how could they have used it as a WMD?
well the reasoning wasnt that they knew what WMDs are, it was that they had them..nice spin though.


Originally posted by devilwasp
uhh you do remember sadam done a coup and took the government right?
uh wasnt that more than 3 decades ago. So you think that both are 40 year old 155mm rounds....what military might have left those from that time. i doubt the prior regime had 155mm artillery. And its funny that you took part of the article incorporated into your argument and then spun it


Kimmitt said the shell belonged to a class of ordnance that Saddam's government said was destroyed before the 1991 Gulf war (search). Experts believe both the sarin and mustard gas weapons date back to that time.
"It was a weapon that we believe was stocked from the ex-regime time and it had been thought to be an ordinary artillery shell set up to explode like an ordinary IED and basically from the detection of that and when it exploded, it indicated that it actually had some sarin in it," Kimmitt said.

but you failed to note that they were attributing it TO the saddam regime see the italics


Originally posted by devilwasp
uhh no since drugs in the USA doesnt concern me.

that would at least partially explain why you believe that two years is more than enough to find what they are looking for.


Originally posted by devilwasp
well then how did they find this one? pure luck?\
read the article, yes.and it wasnt one it was two. One of which was a type the UN didnt even know that saddam had, the other was 1 of 550, that saddam and the UN said were destroyed. more proof of those so sucessful inspectors, he had weapons of a type that they didn't even know of.


[edit on 12-11-2004 by keholmes]



posted on Nov, 12 2004 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWObringer
They need to be kicked out of our country, that's just sad, especially since it damages foreign relations.



You dont need any help with that (damaging foreign relations), its well understood.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 12:14 AM
link   
To the Original Post:

Burning the U.N. flag? Sounds like fun.
I love how so many of you condem this even though you'd probably get some sick joy out of burning your own. (if you're American)
They rest of the world has the right to burn our flag, and we have the right to burn one that represents all of theirs.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:39 PM
link   
HAHAHAHA you people are all mad!

Well at least 9/10 are...

First I hate the reasoning that because someone else does it we should do it too that kind of "logic" leads only to selfdestruction. "To destroy my enemy I must become my enemy!" yeah that makes alot of sense! and just because I think burning the UN flag is stupid and insulting doesnt mean that I think of the Star spangled Banner as something to roast smores over

Second your always bringing up the glory days when America was isolationist
and never got involved in international politics. Well these days were along time ago and America back then was an international nobody. We were a mostly agrarian society that nobody would really give the time of day and were very far from being "the best country in the world". If you look at history youll notice we only really started becoming powerful when we started making our selves noticed that we developted any real power. Seriously look at history when ever we became involved overseas thats when you also see a corresponding surge in American power. I dont know if you people are seriously advocation going back to being a glorified third world nation but you can count me out thank you very much.

Third everyone talks about corruption scandals in the UN as reason to leave. Well I say so what... America has had corruption scandals at all levels of its government at some point in history but is that reason to disband America?
Some of you probably think it is but I could care less what you neoconfederate traitors think anyway...

I keep on hearing this word sovereignty thrown around. "We have to maintain the sovereignty of America!" Well to be honest I could care less because "sovereignty" is just a word that means nothing. What differnce does it make whether the top of the food chain is in DC or in NY. What should I be scared that our UN overlords will send American jobs over seas? or that they'll allow corporations to make mockeries of our workers rights and workplace safety laws? Maybe I should be concerned that I'll be sent off to fight some country that poses no direct threat to my interests?
Oh wait all those things are already happening....
Maybe you people should be more concerned with the sovereigny our government is trading away to big business as we speak....
Besides if sovereignty means maintaining the right to act as an international ass I dont think I need sovereignty that much.



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Who let the rednecks out the trailer park?


God, they get so hyped up when someone burns a US Flag, then they do this and wonder why the world hates them. LMAO at them. Idiots.

Its nice to know folks have the money to waste on buying a flag to burn too. *goes to by US flag to burn tomorow outside American embasy* Only joking folks.

I bet they guys who did it arrived in pickups flying the Confederation flag too. Yeah, Redneck for life fellas! I mean, come on, could they not be doing something whic h would make people pay attention instead of laugh at them and forget about it? There are ways to get your message across. probaby they don't have one, a were just doing it becasue its "Evil Commies!" "They want to HELP people! Burn their Flag!"

As I said before, IDIOTS.

And as for Iraq, your Yankee Army sucks, You've killed more British soldiers that the Iraqi's have. Good Training? Pfft, no training more like. That is the REAL Tradgedy of Iraq. Go and TRAIN your troops between freindly and hostile. I just hope we stay out of your next war. I don't think its fair we have to fight alongside a "Freindly" force that has killed more of ours that the "Hostile" Force has. I wish our troops were allowed to shoot back. Then the Iraqi's would assume we had gone mad and run.



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Burning the flag is just an act of expression, burning the UN flag means you have discourse to the rest of the peace loving countries, don't be supprised that when the next act of catastophic terror occurs, the UN thumbs it's nose at the U.S. We really need to drop the ticked-off cowboy attitude and work towards reunification. United we stand now applies to the World, not the U.S. standing alone. Remember, everyday the greenback become worth less, our buying power diminishes and go-it alone attitude just smacks in the face of all of our debtors.

As for burning Old Glory, I see 2 ways that it can be done.
1) Destruction of retired flags in a dignied manor.
2) Burning is protest while mounted on a metal pole (non-flamable). The protest should be organinzed with explict reason provided for torching it.

Things you should not be allowed to do,
Never placed on door matts or ground to be stepped on. Wearing in on one's butt. Burning a flag as vandelism.



posted on Dec, 9 2004 @ 10:51 PM
link   
Wear gloves with that metal pole, eh?

Yeah, the Dollar is getting worth less and less everytime I look. Whats going on there? Although Cuba is having a stealthy revenge there, stopping using it will have really hit the US. Although they bought it upon themselves, with the "Axis of Eeevil" list and trade embago's and so forth.

You want world peace, then integrate, don't segregate. For the worlds sake, huh?



posted on Dec, 12 2004 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlabamaCajun
Burning the flag is just an act of expression


Yes that is true, although I don't like it.


burning the UN flag means you have discourse to the rest of the peace loving countries, don't be supprised that when the next act of catastophic terror occurs, the UN thumbs it's nose at the U.S.


No it does not mean that to me at all. Burn the thing and kick them out of the U.S. Ever think they attacked New York because thats where U.N. hq is? I don't see the U.N. stepping in to help Israel with the PLO. Israel is a member of the U.N. and a soverign country but it seems on this board that most think Israel is illegal, occupying etc. I am not a huge fan of Israel but I can see them fighting back. If Great Brittan tried to "take back the colonies", do you think we Americans should just stand aside and let them? I think not.


We really need to drop the ticked-off cowboy attitude and work towards reunification. United we stand now applies to the World, not the U.S. standing alone. Remember, everyday the greenback become worth less, our buying power diminishes and go-it alone attitude just smacks in the face of all of our debtors.


Well read the *world* news. There are other countries starting to think about shoot first too. Good for them. Do you want a one gov't world errr NWO I think they call it? NOT ME BROTHER. United we stand on my VA license plate says NOTHING about the *world*. Plus now, all kinds of people from around the world are shopping like crazy here in our stores because of the dollar. Good things and bad about that.


Things you should not be allowed to do,
Never placed on door matts or ground to be stepped on. Wearing in on one's butt. Burning a flag as vandelism.


Don't know. In survival training I was 'captured'. Told to mop the floor with the U.S. Flag and I said very loudly " I WILL NOT". Got smacked and in debrif was told to do it. Was also told to tell them everything I know. So guess I would.



posted on Dec, 12 2004 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by verfed
Burn all of the UN flags in protest of that corrupt bloodmoney loving Jew hating organization.


Just because the UN is trying to hold Israel accountable for its shocking human rights violations, that does not make it a jew hating organization.

don't you love it how whenever anyone criticizes Israel (and rightly so), for any reason, they are labeled an anti-semite? If being an anti-semite means refusing to be quiet when Israel bulldozes palestinian homes and supports illegal squatters on palestinian land, then I am an anti-semite. Never mind the fact that I am semitic.




top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join