regarding unclean women

May 19, 2003

Hi Tom

> Look, if there are facts there of "thousands", please supply them

How many people do you reckon would normally be killed by a cluster bomb falling on a hospital. As I mentioned earlier - if you believe it is less than a few thousand people killed by these tactics, the burden of proof must be on you.

> If the coalition was fighting the whole Iraqi people, as in Vietnam, their victory would not have been nearly so brief, or so assured.

Of course, they hadn't spent 8 of the previous 12 years disarming Vietnam before starting the war with them - unlike Iraq. People with pea shooters don't really have much effect against planes dropping bombs from a few thousand feet above, Cruise missiles fired from a few thousand miles away, or even against soldiers with tanks and machine guns.

> Hussein may have been propped up by the west in the past, but he was still a vicious, murderous thief and dictator.

But this was OK in the 1980s - what has Hussein done since falling out with America that makes him any more of a "threat to world peace" than he was when America supported him?

BB

Peter

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

May 19, 2003

Hi Tom

> I agree the US has done some serious damage in it's military adventurism

> over the decades, but by the same token, I think it's a little too pat and

> simplistic to only blame them (or the Brits). I mean, doesn't the Chinese

> Gov. under Chairman Mao have to wear some of the blame for the " great leap

> forward " , when an estimated 20,000,000 peasants died of starvation and

> imprisonment? Doesn't the North Korean Gov. take some of the blame for

> letting it's own people starve, when Sth Korea is so (comparatively)

> wealthy?

Ever heard the phrase " two wrongs don't make a right " ? Just because other

people have done something wrong doesn't just mean that the US government

has behaved OK.

> And don't people like Milosevic have to own up to war crimes they

> and their cohorts committed?

Milosevic's cohorts - that would presumably include Bush Sr who was

President of the US when America helped Milosevic into a position of power.

> By all means, bring the US Gov. to account for

> it's sins, but don't let other regimes off the hook with their

> responsibility for crimes done in their name.

I agree completely - but I have a philosophy of tackling the worst first,

and there aren't many worse than the US government when it comes to world

atrocities. In 1996 an Amnesty International report stated: " Throughout the

world, on any given day, a man, woman or child is likely to be displaced,

tortured, killed or " disappeared " , at the hands of governments or armed

political groups. More often than not, the United States shares the blame " -

I would say that warrant attention, wouldn't you?

BB

Peter

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

May 19, 2003

Hi Tom

> I was actually refering to the Taliban in Afghanistan, but I agree, deaths

> of all innocent people are tragic in the extreme, but you can't also

ignore

> the hundreds of thousands of people Hussein killed and would most likely

> have continued to kill if he had remained in power. Most of these were

> fellow Muslims, plus he destroyed several mosques as well. Why isn't

Hussein

> also seen as anti-muslim as much as Bush, Blair & co.?

Hussein *is* seen as anti-muslim. Osama Bin Laden (you remember him, the guy

who was, according to Bush, linked with Hussein) calls him " the secular

infidel " . The only reason that our media and governments portray him as a

fundamentalist muslim is because they want to demonise Islam so they can

start more wars in the future. No-one ever seems to ask why this supposed

fundamentalist muslim had a Catholic as his deputy Prime Minister, or why

the chief Immam was in exile for the last 12 years of Hussein's rule!

BB

Peter

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

May 19, 2003

Hi Tom

> No, I don't believe in torture, but all

> evidence showed that this was an evil, fundamentalist regime, which

> obviously did not enjoy widespread popular support.

You're still ignoring the point. Which people have been found guilty of

being a part of this regime?

BB

Peter

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

May 19, 2003

Hi Fraggle

> its 50-50 iran er syria in my view...> syria smaller and easier to beat up therefor...also..isreal is right there...iran on the other hand...theocracy with lotsa oil, a lot

> more then syria...> its a toss up whom we'll bomb into smithereens...iran maybe first also cuz they have a nuclear program we can use to justify...

Certainly some valid points re Iran... my money's still on Syria, though, simply because the subtle propaganda against Syria started a long time ago, and Iran hasn't been quite so much in the media. Also, attacking Syria has one major advantage... Syria are the Arab representative on the UN security council, and therefore a very useful nation for the US to control.

BB

Peter

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

May 19, 2003

Tom

I think we are all pleased that the Taleban is gone, and that Saddam Hussein has been replaced, but the citizens who were killed are no longer around to feel pleased. Maybe they would rather have been alive.

If you support overthrowing bad regimes for ethical reasons, the only way this can be done is by the people themselves overthrowing them. It never works when some other country comes barging in.

Jo

-

Vegecentric

Tuesday, May 20, 2003 6:25 AM

Re: regarding unclean women

Look, if there are facts there of "thousands", please supply them, but of course all innocent deaths are bad. However, if I was living under such tryants as the Taliban, I would not be sorry to see them destroyed, as the Iraqi people were happy to see their dictator go. If the coalition was fighting the whole Iraqi people, as in Vietnam, their victory would not have been nearly so brief, or so assured. Hussein may have been propped up by the west in the past, but he was still a vicious, murderous thief and dictator.

Tom

-

Heartwork

Sunday, May 18, 2003 5:04 AM

Re: regarding unclean women

If not many innocent citizens were killed in the Afghan bombing why did the American government feel the need to stop the official body count? There is an unofficial body count now for the Iraq war but you don't hear much about the 2000 + innocent citizens killed, do you?

Jo

What women were slaughtered in their thousands? Verifiable facts please.

Tom

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03To send an email to -

May 19, 2003

Tom

You seem to be under the misapprehension that someone on the list has argued

that the Taleban was a good regime. I think I can speak for everyone here

when I say that nobody has thought or said that, and I cannot understand why

you cannot understand that. The choice we have is not confined to choosing

in a black and white fashion whether the Taleban or US government is right.

Just because a regime is bad doesn't mean that bombing the * out of a

country is a good idea, or have the desired effect.

Jo

> There was a really poignant moment when Afghanis were shown playing the

> previously banned game of soccer in a stadium that was previously used by

> the Taliban as an execution arena. Then there were people flying kites,

> playing music, shaving beards, girls going to school,...just some of the

> simple rights we take for granted. No, I don't believe in torture, but all

> evidence showed that this was an evil, fundamentalist regime, which

> obviously did not enjoy widespread popular support.

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

May 19, 2003

Go-go Fraggle!

I've never been a cheerleader - but feel like I could do that right now.

Jo

their barbarism came as a result of 20 years of war...after the soviets invaded there was war on a never ending scale....then, the soviets pulled out, and we stopped fundin all those cute little groups...the country didn't have much going for it, and collapsed even futher..it was divided up amongst competing tribal warlords..you couldn't go around the corner sometimes cuz it was another war lords territory..the taliban came to power in this because they said they would bring the power of God to the people, stop the street rapings, stop the random violence, etc, so, they got a big following...instead, they brought codified violence and strict unyielding view of the world which was frozen in a sect of Islam stuck in the 11th century...that is how those "barbarians" came to power..maybe if we hadn't abandoned those people to fate after we had our fill, maybe this wouldn't have happened....

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

May 19, 2003

> You're still ignoring the point. Which people have been found guilty of

> being a part of this regime?

True - and they won't get a trial either - theyll just be kept prisoners by

the benevolent GWB

Jo

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

May 20, 2003

Well, it looks really bad when your daddy and his buddies helped this guy

into power, helped the Taliban into power, and now, all of a sudden you say,

" Oh, no, he's a brutal dictator, he's got WMDs, he's gotta go. " I'm quite

sus because there are other equally brutal dictators--like Dubya's dinner

guest the other night, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, for one--and he's

not doing diddly about them. Hey, if they'd let the inspectors do their

work, they'd have found nothing, and Dubya would have no real justification.

You know who I think is a far greater threat to the US? North fucking

Korea, thank you very much.

Danielle

" You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake " --Jeanette Rankin

----Original Message Follows----

" Vegecentric " <vegecentric

Re: regarding unclean women

Mon, 19 May 2003 22:25:41 -0700

Look, if there are facts there of " thousands " , please supply them, but of

course all innocent deaths are bad. However, if I was living under such

tryants as the Taliban, I would not be sorry to see them destroyed, as the

Iraqi people were happy to see their dictator go. If the coalition was

fighting the whole Iraqi people, as in Vietnam, their victory would not have

been nearly so brief, or so assured. Hussein may have been propped up by the

west in the past, but he was still a vicious, murderous thief and dictator.

Tom

-

Heartwork

Sunday, May 18, 2003 5:04 AM

Re: regarding unclean women

If not many innocent citizens were killed in the Afghan bombing why did

the American government feel the need to stop the official body count?

There is an unofficial body count now for the Iraq war but you don't hear

much about the 2000 + innocent citizens killed, do you?

Jo

What women were slaughtered in their thousands? Verifiable facts

please.

Tom

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

May 20, 2003

I don't think anyone was suggesting letting these brutal dictators off the

hook. There's plenty of blame, so to speak, to go around. I might have

appreciated it far more if Bush had said, " My predecessors put them in, they

turned around and bit us on the behind, and I am going to clean up the

mess. "

Danielle

" You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake " --Jeanette Rankin

----Original Message Follows----

" Vegecentric " <vegecentric

Re: regarding unclean women

Mon, 19 May 2003 22:37:35 -0700

I agree the US has done some serious damage in it's military adventurism

over the decades, but by the same token, I think it's a little too pat and

simplistic to only blame them (or the Brits). I mean, doesn't the Chinese

Gov. under Chairman Mao have to wear some of the blame for the " great leap

forward " , when an estimated 20,000,000 peasants died of starvation and

imprisonment? Doesn't the North Korean Gov. take some of the blame for

letting it's own people starve, when Sth Korea is so (comparatively)

wealthy? And don't people like Milosevic have to own up to war crimes they

and their cohorts committed? By all means, bring the US Gov. to account for

it's sins, but don't let other regimes off the hook with their

responsibility for crimes done in their name.

Tom

-

" Peter " <Snowbow

Sunday, May 18, 2003 2:43 AM

Re: regarding unclean women

> Hi Tom

>

> > I read about what the Taliban were doing to women and others years ago.

It

> > was not a secret, and I for one was thankful that someone went in and

put

> a

> > stop to their barbarism.

>

> Really - which bit of the barbarism has stopped? The only difference in

> Afghanistan now is that the basic standard of living is even lower than

it

> was under the Taliban. It's just not splashed all across the media now

> because Mr Cheney has the pipeline he wanted so doesn't need to convince

us

> that something needs to be done in Afghanistan. And since we're on the

> subject of US imperialism and aggression - here's a list of countries

bombed

> by the US since the end of WWII - perhaps you could tell me how many of

> these have resulted in any improvement of living standard, or of the

> installation of a democratic government respectful of human rights as a

> result (I'll give you a clue - it's less than one):

>

> China 1945-46

> Korea 1950-53

> China 1950-53

> Guatemala 1954

> Indonesia 1958

> Cuba 1959-60

> Guatemala 1960

> Congo 1964

> Peru 1965

> Laos 1964-73

> Vietnam 1961-73

> Cambodia 1969-70

> Guatemala 1967-69

> Grenada 1983

> Libya 1986

> El Salvador 1980s

> Nicaragua 1980s

> Panama 1989

> Iraq 1991-99

> Sudan 1998

> Afghanistan 1998

> Yugoslavia 1999

>

> BB

> Peter

>

> ---

> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

> Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

>

> To send an email to -

>

May 20, 2003

I was actually refering to the Taliban in Afghanistan, but I agree, deaths

of all innocent people are tragic in the extreme, but you can't also ignore

the hundreds of thousands of people Hussein killed and would most likely

have continued to kill if he had remained in power. Most of these were

fellow Muslims, plus he destroyed several mosques as well. Why isn't Hussein

also seen as anti-muslim as much as Bush, Blair & co.?

Tom

-

" Danielle Kichler " <veggietart

Sunday, May 18, 2003 9:58 AM

Re: regarding unclean women

> In the war against Iraq, thousands of civilians died, many of them

> noncombatant women and children. Iraq is a lawless hellhole, and forces

> have not found a shred of evidence that Hussein ever had weapons of mass

> destruction.

>

> " You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake " --Jeanette

Rankin

>

> ----Original Message Follows----

> " Vegecentric " <vegecentric

>

> Re: regarding unclean women

> Fri, 16 May 2003 22:11:49 -0700

>

> What women were slaughtered in their thousands? Verifiable facts please.

> Tom

> -

> Peter

>

> Wednesday, May 14, 2003 10:06 AM

> Re: regarding unclean women

>

> Hi Tom

>

> > I agree. Obviously I'm not a fan of any organised religion, but the

way

> Islam treats women frankly makes me sick. Whatever you

> > think of the US going into Afghanistan, personally I'm not sorry

those

> evil Taliban * & %$ were blown into Allah's open arms (and I

> > hope they enjoyed their 70 virgins when they got there).

>

> So, because you dislike the way women were treated in Afghanistan, you

> are pleased that those same women were slaughtered in their thousands in

> order to let Dick Cheney dig an oil pipeline through the country. Good

> logic.

>

> BB

> Peter

>

> ---

> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

> Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

>

May 20, 2003

Look, if there are facts there of "thousands", please supply them, but of course all innocent deaths are bad. However, if I was living under such tryants as the Taliban, I would not be sorry to see them destroyed, as the Iraqi people were happy to see their dictator go. If the coalition was fighting the whole Iraqi people, as in Vietnam, their victory would not have been nearly so brief, or so assured. Hussein may have been propped up by the west in the past, but he was still a vicious, murderous thief and dictator.

Tom

-

Heartwork

Sunday, May 18, 2003 5:04 AM

Re: regarding unclean women

If not many innocent citizens were killed in the Afghan bombing why did the American government feel the need to stop the official body count? There is an unofficial body count now for the Iraq war but you don't hear much about the 2000 + innocent citizens killed, do you?

Jo

What women were slaughtered in their thousands? Verifiable facts please.

Tom

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03To send an email to -

May 20, 2003

Are you saying they should have intervened militarily due to human rights

abuses some years ago?

Tom

-

" Heartwork " <Heartwork

Sunday, May 18, 2003 4:54 AM

Re: regarding unclean women

> If that was the reason for them going into Afghanistan (and not the fact

> that Dick Cheney wanted to drive a pipe line through the country) why

didn't

> they help the Afghan women many years before hand - when it was open

> knowledge that they were being treated badly. Or is it just possible that

> our governments didn't actually give a * about the Afghan women.

>

> Jo

> -

> " Vegecentric " <vegecentric

>

> Saturday, May 17, 2003 6:09 AM

> Re: regarding unclean women

>

> > I read about what the Taliban were doing to women and others years ago.

It

> > was not a secret, and I for one was thankful that someone went in and

put

> a

> > stop to their barbarism.

> >

> > Tom

> >

> > -

> > " Peter " <Snowbow

> >

> > Wednesday, May 14, 2003 10:13 AM

> > Re: regarding unclean women

> >

> > > Hi Danielle

> > >

> > > > OK, but for years, feminist groups were trying to get someone to pay

> > > > attention to these human rights violations, but nobody gave a damn.

> > Dubya

> > > > even gave the Taliban $43 million in May 2001, supposedly to assist

in

> > > their

> > > > crackdown on poppy farmers. To hear him excoriate them makes me

ill.

> > > > Actually, to hear him excoriate any human rights violator ticks me

> off,

> > as

> > > > he supports one of the greatest examples of human rights violations

in

> > the

> > > > world: the Saudi Arabian government.

> > >

> > > Don't forget that he is also responsible for Guantanemo.

> > >

> > > BB

> > > Peter

> > >

> > > ---

> > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

> > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

> > > Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

> > >

> > > To send an email to -

> > >

May 20, 2003