I’ll go first:
Why is it that AmeriKKKa is “unleashing a new nuclear arms race by planning to deploy anti-missile systems in Eastern Europe” yet Iran gets a pass from Margolis.
Iran’s two best friends on the council, their huge business partners, China and Russia voted for sanctions against Iran – a clear message.
See, the thing is, Iran having nukes scares the crap out of its neighbors. It could very well “unleashing a new nuclear arms race” by not adhering to the demands of the international community. And if nothing is done about Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and it seems as though they will not accept anything (see: rejection of Russia’s plans to provide peaceful nuclear technology to them in a manner acceptable to the UN), then what lessons will their neighbors take from all of this? Go ahead and get building - there are no repercussions from the toothless UN!
Do any of you think they’re willing to just sit beside a nuclear capable Ahmadinejad? Hell no, so we’re off to the races - America’s fault, all of it!
Posted by Bino at February 26, 2007 03:33 PM
Great article as usual Mr. Margolis, but I am not sure what you mean when you say that a missile defence system would “nullify” Russian and Chinese articles. Surely you know that the Russians in particular are capable of overwhelming any system that the US is ever likely to put in place.
I see “missile defence” as a first strike weapon. Attack and destroy the majority of the arsenal, and then use a partially effective shield to eliminate most of the remaining warheads. This is what keeps Putin up at night.
Posted by gary_7vn at February 26, 2007 03:34 PM
Bravo I say.
Finally the feet are being held to the fire. Mr. Bush’s globe trotting will be dealt a swift blow if he persues any action agaist Iran. The Iranins have spent the better part of eight years modernizing their military with modern Russian weaponary and avionnics like the SU-29 Falcrum. Mr. Putin can not wait to have his country’s equiptment field tested. All of this thanks to the high price of oil, which the Cheney-Bush consortium helped engineer, that has infused billions of dollars into the coffers of the Rusians and the Iranins.
So much for your Ivey League MBA Mr. Bush.
Posted by Frank at February 26, 2007 04:45 PM
To Zionist Israel-loving Bingo:
Nukes = Insurance against U.S. invasion.
Iraq: no nukes = U.S. invasion
North Korea: nukes = no U.S. invasion
…something Zionist Bingo does not understand, or does not want to understand or understands but ignores. Oh and in case we forget:
USA: 8000 nukes
Israel: 200 nukes
Iran: 0
Iran is surrounded by nuclear-armed countries: Israel, India and Pakistan. Iran is also surrounded by U.S. occupied countries Afghanistan and EYE-Raq. So Zionist Bingo: STFU.
Posted by hedagem at February 26, 2007 08:20 PM
Zionist Bingo is violently jerking his flacid penis, desperately hoping for war against EYE-Ran. It is his ultimate dream.
Posted by hedagem at February 26, 2007 08:26 PM
My Iranian colleague tells me that Iran has a pact with Russia stating that if anyone invades Iran, the Russians have free reign to enter the country for defense purposes (he is not impressed with this deal). Any thoughts on that?
Posted by guesswho at February 26, 2007 08:33 PM
Is it out of the realm of the impossible to think that a desperate and demoralized Bush Junior would launch an Arial attack against Iran in the futile hope to salvage a besmirched legacy? However, said Junior has not given thought to the ramifications of his supposed two dimensional thought patterns. The geography of Iran and the Gulf region where Iran resides puts it in a position to cut off supply lines into the Gulf through the Straight of Hormuz. Suddenly two carrier groups become targets of water rocket torpedoes supplied by Russian allies. Then comes Iraq and the sectarian violence that engulfs the Sunni and Shia to now be turned on a 100 000 plus American soldiers. Then there is the Israel option for joining this attack. The only problem is a Hezbollah offensive that would follow an attack on Iran, plus the fact that every medium range missile that Iran has would be targeting Israeli infrastructure there by putting that state in a multiple front war. Therefore, I would urge Junior to leave his options for a fiction novel that he may want to have ghost written.
Posted by Frank at February 26, 2007 10:29 PM
The U.S. refuses to allow inspection of its nuclear, chemical, or biological warfare arsenals, or to destroy the nuclear warheads it has. Without inspection and destruction of America’s weapons of mass destruction, the world cannot be safe. Who knows, the US might strike at any nation that displeases it.
Posted by hedagem at February 26, 2007 11:19 PM
Mr. Frank: cheers! You are my hero of the day.
Posted by hedagem at February 26, 2007 11:21 PM
Hedagem, would you please stop with the ad hominem attacks? Eric has already asked you to stop; I don’t see why you can’t resist the temptation to act like a 10-year old on these clearly mature topics. If anything, it shows that Bino knows how to push your buttons, rather than the possibility of you having any wit to support your disgusting insults. You disrespect only yourself and the owner of the blog.
Bino: You know why Iran troubles you? Because you believe, like many Neocons, that it is not governed by rational actors. Most of U.S foreign policy is based on the assumption that our “enemies” have no rational reason to pursue military programs, and instead do so only to fulfill some suicidal desire to wipe certain countries off the map. Despite all you say about Ahmadinejad’s rhetoric to that effect, I would point out that (1) his domestic policies are notoriously ineffective, and (2) he doesn’t run the show in Iran, Khatami does. Khatami has stated, through proxies, that he would welcome dialogue with the West, and has even organized the opposition to keep Ahmadinejad’s violent mouth shut. While I still believe that Ahmadinejad is more bark than bite (it’s always easier to blame your nation’s problems on foreigners), he is not the one who calls the shots.
The very fact that we invaded Iraq on the paranoid fantasy of a “suitcase dirty bomb” was because our administration could not believe that Saddam had a rational interest in holding on to power in Iraq. He knew he was in Washington’s crosshairs, and it would have been highly unlikely that he would have done the things that Washington feared he was capable of. Similarly in Iran, our government refuses to even talk to the Iranians; instead, they use coercion as a means of trying to get Iran to do things that no rationally led nation would be willing to do. If Iran told the U.S tomorrow that they must open the doors to their strategic nuclear program or face the consequences, what do you think would happen? Would we bend over backwards and do it? Hah! Foreign militaries can’t even SEE our bases without filing thousands of forms with the Pentagon.
Yet we, as a constant aggressor in the modern world (See e.g.: Manifest Destiny, Spanish American War, Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Granada, Iraq I and II) ask a nation who has constantly been the subject of foreign aggression (Trajan of Rome, Genghis Khan, the Arabs, Iraq in 80’s, U.S Sanctions, the 1987 U.S.S. Vincennes incident) to submit to inspections and abandon nuclear programs. Why should they? Iran’s nuclear neighbors are either apathetic or hostile to their plight. The Iranians sit on enormous natural resources, and have a population of almost 70 million people. Don’t they have a rational entitlement to a minimum sufficient deterrence nuclear regime, given that Alan Dershowitz and his ilk have already threatened “pre-emptive” action against Iran if they “come close to building a nuclear weapon,” not caring if the Iranians “ever use such a weapon?” And before you start quoting Ahmadinejad’s bombast again, may I remind you that U.S. officials have engaged in a fair volume of bellicose rhetoric; the difference between the U.S and Iran is that the U.S has often attached the use of real, significant, invasive, and disproportionate force to the rhetoric (Axis of Evil). By contrast, the best Iran has been able to manage is Hezbollah and, allegedly, a handful of “explosive penetrators.”
Clearly the Iranians could do more, but they haven’t. Why? Because they are interested in their own survival. If, in fact, Ahmadinejad seeks nuclear weapons, he has ample historical precedent guiding that decision. You talk up the plight of the “poor hated Israelis,” but Iran has suffered more from invasions of its own territory than Israel ever did, and it has not yet formally prosecuted an offensive war, as Israel has. Yet, because Ahmadinejad can’t keep his foot out of his mouth, you assume that he speaks for his whole government when he engages in aggressive rhetoric.
If the Iranians ever acquired nuclear weapons, they would be foolish to use them offensively, as you and many pro-war hawks suggest. Such use would guarantee their annihilation, and no rational government would want that after having spent billions of dollars on a nuclear program. They want nukes so because nukes give them more soft power to negotiate away sanctions, or talk about the fate of their neighbors to the east and west, without the Israelis telling the world that no one should talk to them. Is it stands, neither the Americans nor the Israelis are prepared to talk about anything but “shock and awe” and “terrorism” in talking about (but never to) Iran. This position is neither fair nor appropriate.
Finally, I always wonder about the logic of those who contend that Iranian nukes could fall into the hands of Hezbollah or some other terrorist irregulars. If a government spends inordinate amounts of time and money developing nuclear weapons, does it make any sense for that government to turn around and hand these carefully and expensively manufactured articles to a bunch of terrorist irregulars for deployment who-knows-where? No rational government would hand off nuclear weapons to terrorists, because liability for such handovers always runs back to the government, and a terrorist organization is just as likely to use such weapons against Iran is it is against Iran’s enemies. Either way, the result is the same; Iranians die from the retaliation, or from the acts of angry terrorists turning on their masters. This is why Pakistan’s nukes are some of the most secure on the planet, despite the fact that Pakistan is swarming with fundamentalist extremists.
Posted by chatman at February 27, 2007 12:16 AM
—-This is why Pakistan’s nukes are some of the most secure on the planet, despite the fact that Pakistan is swarming with fundamentalist extremists.——
Thank you…. I think…
Posted by The Questioner at February 27, 2007 03:35 AM
the russian armory is great at official stats, however they’re extremely bad at actual performance.
in the eriterean - ethiopean war(2000), about 25 R27 air to air missiles were launched by russian planes on both sides. only one managed to hit.
the poor performance of russian tech is the reason why the pakistani airforce gave their counterparts a trouncing in air conflicts. That wont be the case anymore, since india has wised up
same situation in the arab israeli conflicts. fact of the matter is that Iran will continue on its path. same goes for north korea.
The days when america threatened and world leaders listened are gone. people know that conflicts can only be won by ground warfare (iraq / lebanon)
Posted by _RealityBites_ at February 27, 2007 03:46 AM
I think what is more important than the russian growl is what is currently happening in pakistan and kabul.
bush desperately needs a win in afghanistan.
funny thing is that its a “better” situation than iraq because there arent any reporters who can see whats going on in the country side.
Posted by _RealityBites_ at February 27, 2007 03:53 AM
bino,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6399471.stm
Posted by _RealityBites_ at February 27, 2007 04:05 AM
“But senior US officials are so … used by now to having Moscow agree to whatever Washington wanted to do around the globe …”
“Russia has long fumed over NATO’s advance to its western borders …”
Which is it? Has Russia been agreeing or fuming?
And regarding Iran’s non-threatening long-range missiles: nobody should be so naive as to assume that the Shahab-4 will be the final word. Plans exist for the Shahab-5, with a range of 2,600 miles, more than enough to reach Europe.
http://www.sarbaz.org/articles/WMD/shahab-5.htm
Posted by jkwilson at February 27, 2007 09:05 AM
Chatman – you have me all wrong. The last thing I want to see is a war with Iran. I can see why my failure to simply “accept” their nuclear ambitions might lead you to think as much, but it simply isn’t the case. I repeat – No War with Iran! Chant it with me now – No War with Iran!
Sadly, I’m in a meeting all day today, and want to address some of your points. It will have to wait until tomorrow (or tonight if I’ve got the energy).
It was an excellent post. A few quickies:
Re: “If a government spends inordinate amounts of time and money developing nuclear weapons, does it make any sense for that government to turn around and hand these carefully and expensively manufactured articles to a bunch of terrorist irregulars for deployment who-knows-where?”
See: Dr. A.Q. Khan. Who knows who he sold secrets and technology to?
“This is why Pakistan’s nukes are some of the most secure on the planet, despite the fact that Pakistan is swarming with fundamentalist extremists.”
The concern on my end, of course, is that Mushy falls and a regime that puts the fun back in fundy fills the void and takes the helm.
Anyhow, appreciate the thoughtful post, and will reply in full when time permits.
Finally, I realize Ahmadinejad isn’t running the show. He is imploding. Even the State papers are openly criticizing him now:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2022029,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=12
Another reason to hold hands and yell “No War with Iran!”
Unless, of course, they are actively supporting an insurgency in Iraq, but I’ve yet to see any proof of that.
Reality Bites: Re “bush desperately needs a win in afghanistan.”
We agree on something!
hegadem: Stay classy, bro!
Posted by Bino at February 27, 2007 09:15 AM
Although I have read these comments for a few years now, it was only recently that I signed up to allow me to post a comment. Sadly, it was the continued degeneration of the comments that was the topic of my first post. I implored contributors to ignore BINO and his ilk.
Over the next few weeks some comments have escalated the childish in-fighting, and gone so far as to raise the ire of the Host, Mr. Margolis.
I don’t watch schoolyard fights, and I don’t hang around accident scenes, and I won’t bother to enter the Comment Section any more. I apologize if my initial post helped start any off-topic debates, or in any way fanned the flames of rancor which now seems to permeate the area.
I will, however, continue to read Mr. Margolis articles, which I consider to be the most insightful and prescient I have found.
“You pave Paradise, put up a parking lot”.
Posted by Mr. Ted at February 27, 2007 11:17 AM
I will just say this : Eric, terrific article. It puts things into perspective. Thank you.
Posted by theking01 at February 27, 2007 02:21 PM
Iran was included in the infamous “Axis if Evil” section of Bush’s speech that was penned by David from, an ex-Canadian who shames the memory of his respected broadcaster mother.
Will Bush settle for humbling 1/3 of the AoE, or go for at least 2/3 so the self-styled War President can claim military victory two out of three times, i.e. go out with a “winning” record?
Jesus H Murphy, all Iran wants is nuclear electircal generation which they truly need and deserve. If they build the bomb later, well, the case for it has been made by others here, namely everyone else in the neighbourhood has them as a deterrent so why not Iran too? I won’t lose any sleep over it, and nor should any of us, including you Bino, and that sick puppy Israel.
The US neocons and their British allies have mastered the art of killing the messenger as a ploy to avoid addressing the message. Imagine discounting Putin’s concerns by saying, in effect, he is a sore loser so don’t listen to him. The Bear has growled and I thank Eric for not letting this significant fact go unnoticed.
Posted by ghawley at February 27, 2007 05:17 PM
Russia is in a most difficult position, threatened by NATO to the west and Sunni Islamic fanatics in the south. The only way forward, against American hegemony, against the Anglo-American-Saudi-Israeli Axis, is a strengthening of the Russian-Indian-Iranian and French-German-Russian alliances. But the Europeans are probably too compromised, especially by England and the EU’s newest (East European) members.
By the way: isn’t it interesting that (Zionist) Bino and the (Pakistani) Questioner are of one mind about Iran?
Posted by hyperbolus at February 27, 2007 06:36 PM
Chatman, could you please stop playing message board king and stop using complicated words I do not understand? For example what does “ad hominem” mean? My vocabulary is not as extensive as yours so I fail to understand your advanced level of English. I am only 14 years old and have only recently begun to study English.
And Chatman, Zionist Bingo is more than welcome to push my buttons, since I am always looking for an excuse to have my buttons pushed. Sometimes I even push my buttons myself. If I want him to push my buttons I do not need your stinking permission. So there. Go shove it.
Posted by hedagem at February 28, 2007 10:31 PM
Ad hominem attack = personal attack
Posted by The Questioner at March 1, 2007 12:18 AM
Hedagem:
I am not obliged to use words you understand. Given that you already know how to use the internet, you could practice your study of English (or Latin, in this case) by looking words up; google is only a click away. If you did, you might learn that ad hominem is a common latin phrase describing attacks based not on reason but emotion.
As for playing message board king, you hardly need me to tell you what is appropriate or not appropriate to say. I only echo what Eric has already asked of you; be courteous and polite in your commentary. Clearly, you are FAR less capable of courteous and rational discourse than Bino or anyone else you claim to hate and despise. Your constant resort to childish insults only sullies your credibility and the endangers the rest of the discussion board. I only hope that Eric will tell you to “shove it” before he decides to shut down this message board because of your antics.
Posted by chatman at March 1, 2007 12:43 AM
LOL… I didn’t notice that Hedagem posted his age… well that DOES explain a lot. I suppose there’s little use reasoning an angry teen. Questioner, I think you might be right; best to stay out of personal business entirely at times like this…
Posted by chatman at March 1, 2007 01:00 AM
CM the guy has not “only recently begun to study English”
and hyperbolous, there are no alliances or any such thing. everyone is their own best friend. there are only common interests.
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 1, 2007 07:02 AM
This weeks Economist has a fantastic, balanced artricle on this very topic. The Economist is, IMHO, an excellent weekly.
Posted by Bino at March 1, 2007 10:35 AM
Bino:
Which article are you referring to? My issue just came in yesterday, and I’m not even sure what issue we are on at the moment.
Posted by chatman at March 1, 2007 11:18 AM
Chatman - There is a (relatively) lengthy article in the lastest (got it in the mail Monday) edition about Putin’s roar. It’s the edition where the cover is a cartoon of a bandaged Bush being tended to by an elephant and a donkey - the topic being “Saving the Bush Presidency”.
Posted by Bino at March 1, 2007 11:47 AM
Correction Chatman - it’s in the Feb 17-23 “The end of the cash era” issue. Sorry.
Posted by Bino at March 1, 2007 02:46 PM
amerikan women are fine women for Arab warriors.
Posted by hedagem at March 1, 2007 05:35 PM
see…
the guy’s got an agenda…
another interesting news release… when you wonder how people couldnt screw the situation up any furhter; they up and surprise you
such an american tactic is going to do only one thing. create another iraq in pakistan. only thing is where iraq constitutes 25 million people; we’re 150 +
what do you guys think the pakistani response to such a thing should be?
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 2, 2007 01:11 AM
The Pakistani response to this Amreekan bullshit can be seen on the front page of today’s newspaper (DAWN). LOL.
Do we have a problem with Amreeka? Hell no. And with this attitude we never will. Too slippery to pin down.
I’ve said so before… the Taliban are like currency to us. We use them and spend them when we need to (for example when certain American lawmakers get tummy aches).
If however, they still want to attack some Pakistani territory over some BS about Ladin and camps… well… we will get to see what American troops are made of. LOL. Even if we don’t blow the hell out of them I fail to see how they can survive in that area. The local folk alone would tear them apart.
Posted by The Questioner at March 2, 2007 03:02 AM
Nation Building
http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=45052
http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=45054
Pakistani articles are always alot more illuminating than their western counterparts. :)
find alot of copy paste jobs on NYTimes, Washington Post, CNN and the BBC
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 2, 2007 05:15 AM
http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=45056
Another one; originally from the Guardian
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 2, 2007 05:22 AM
Aha.. link-baazi…?
The first one is just plain sad.
About the second one, as someone wrote in today’s letter section… if these fools can’t stop a suicide bomber from getting near that loser (Cheney), how do they expect Pakistan to seal it’s border? LOL
The last one is also printed in today’s DAWN.
Another thing to read today.. again on DAWN’s editorial page (exactly where Eric can sometimes be found) is an article by Ayaz ‘boozer’ Amir. I think the man is an insolent prick, but he has finally written something I can agree with this time. Very true, very true, what the man sez.
Another something which has got something to do with Iran….
http://www.dawn.com/2007/03/02/top8.htm
“the Iranian authorities appeared to be in a hurry to complete the project”
I wonder why? Is that in case Pakistan makes trouble for Iran at Amreeka’s behest?
Point is, they are getting jittery.
To read DAWN in life-like format:
Posted by The Questioner at March 2, 2007 07:05 AM
—- Russia and China are drawing closer together to challenge American power.——
At least this is what China had to say yesterday about the US in general and Cheney in particular:
————————-
BEIJING: China’s Foreign Ministry likened US doubts about Chinese defence spending on Thursday to a peeping tom poking through Beijing’s underwear.
US Vice President Dick Cheney raised concerns about China’s military build-up last week when touring Asia.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang quickly rejected Cheney’s criticism.
“If someone always tears through your clothes and even wants to lift open your underwear, saying ‘Let me see what’s inside’, how would you feel? Would you want to call the police?” Qin told reporters when asked about Cheney’s remarks. —Reuters
———————
This is the respect the US has earned for itself by it’s childish behavior.
Posted by The Questioner at March 3, 2007 04:43 AM
Questioner you should read articles by Masood Hasan
The guy writes good articles.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=44364
Dawn is a bit too lefty lucy for my taste
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 4, 2007 10:13 AM
They bitch about everything
which means they’ll always have something to write about
Good business sense if you ask me
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 4, 2007 10:16 AM
try this one; http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=24440
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 4, 2007 10:25 AM
LOL! Thanks for the link Reality…. this could very well be a descriptor of Calcutta (replace the camels with herds of sheep), or the I-10 heading out of LA at 5 PM (replace the gadha garis and and bicyclists with angry rich people who can’t drive their $100,000 cars.
That was a riot…. I guess it still is. :)
Arka C.
Posted by chatman at March 4, 2007 01:51 PM
—-Mobile phones are snatched at a speed that would have impressed Einstein.——
From what I have observed only the people who are asking for it, have their phones snatched.
Only yesterday I saw this guy bobbing his head in time to some music like some ghetto-nigger. He obviously couldn’t hear anything with the ear-plugs and his eyes were half closed and he was walking in the middle of the street.
I thought, Buddy.. it is only a matter of time before you get run over or your phone gets snatched.
Something has happened in the last few years. I have suddenly noticed a huge increase in assholishness. I don’t know if it is just us or it is happening all over the world?
——Tulli’s bullet train——-
Nothing much scares me… but this thing is worrisome. Pakistan Railways running bullet trains is a real scarey thought. LOL
Posted by The Questioner at March 4, 2007 03:57 PM
Reality:
Since you mentioned Lahore, I’ll give you a glimpse of Karachi:
http://karachi.metblogs.com/archives/2007/03/street_crime_si.phtml
hahahahahahaha
Oh… and I am on topic actually. The very fact that we are discussing crap about Pakistan, is our way of saying that Eric’s topic this week is done being discussed. There wasn’t anything we could possibly add to it. Russians want attention while Amreeka pretends not to notice. Old french-fries microwaved.
Posted by The Questioner at March 4, 2007 05:32 PM
Eric’s next article?
Posted by The Questioner at March 5, 2007 02:56 AM
Redarging the link to Eric’s “new” article, I am curious what “negotiating a deal with Taleban” actually means. What would that look like? How would it go down? What are the Taliban’s requirements at the bargaining table? What about NATO’s? Anyone want to take a stab at how something like that might play out?
Posted by Bino at March 5, 2007 12:12 PM
Afghanistan = worst amerikan state. I once went there on holiday with my girlfriend, before the U.S. occupation, but the Taliban customs inspectors confiscated my girlfriend and I could not get her back on my way out. So I returned home single. Pretty cool.
Posted by hedagem at March 5, 2007 02:12 PM
Hedagem,
Are you friggin’ serious? Or are you just pulling my leg? If you’re serious, that’s totally insane. What ended up happening?
Posted by Tovy at March 6, 2007 01:09 PM
He lived happily ever after :)
Bino, can you define attainable objectives/goals of the war against terror?
as context to the taliban question, the taliban are the entire afghan pushtun tribe. thats about 12.5 million people living in afghanistan.
the “good” pushtun live in Pakistan (about 25 million)
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 6, 2007 11:12 PM
——the “good” pushtun live in Pakistan——
Thank you!
Posted by The Questioner at March 7, 2007 12:04 AM
The war against terror doesnt have any defined objective or goal. If Iraq had been digestable, they’d have moved on to Iran, then maybe Egypt or Saudi Arabia or Syria, or God knows who else.
From the looks of it they may have decided to move forward just for the heck of it. thats a very small number of people pushing the world towards a world war. remember the bully punching the kid repeatedly in Simpsons and going “stop hitting yourself”??? thats what Iraq was all about.
the person behind all this is mic (military industrial complex)
you should go get yourself the documentary “Why we fight”. its about eisenhower and his warnings about mic. while you’re at it, get al gore’s “an inconvenient truth”. then theres “loose change 911”
all good ones
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 7, 2007 12:11 PM
why we fight
http://www.torrentspy.com/torrent/347228/BBC4_Storyville_Why_We_Fight_avi
an inconvenient truth
http://www.torrentspy.com/torrent/906260/An_Inconvenient_Truth_2006_DVD_rip_divx_avi
loose change 911
http://www.torrentspy.com/torrent/506503/911_Loose_Change_2nd_Edition_DVDRip
Enjoy for free. Ain’t the internet great?
Posted by The Questioner at March 7, 2007 01:12 PM
I haven’t posted here in a while, but I drop by to witness the insanity. Hedagem, you dog… That’s the funniest sh!t I’ve read in months!
a) You went to Afghanistan… on vacation!?!?! I guess Beirut was booked solid.
b) The Taliban confiscated your girlfriend??!?! Was she inflatable? Was she a Pamela Anderson look-alike that they wanted to keep to make-a-wild-n-crazy-sex-party?
c) You kept vacationing, and then on your way out “Excuse me. I think you have something of mine. 5’ – 5” tall, 98 kilos, smells like cabbage…”
I gotta admit, that was a treat. But isn’t this a semi-serious website?
DCanuck
Posted by D. Canuck at March 7, 2007 04:01 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMWn-bQYfSc
Heres another one; need to watch the entire thing and make your own opinion.
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 7, 2007 10:28 PM
Hahaha! So this is the moonbat 911 conspiracy theory board now? Loose change. Classic. Charlie Sheen is on board too! And here I am without a tinfoil hat.
Are we all just linking off topic videos now? I’ve got some great ones…
Posted by Bino at March 8, 2007 08:18 AM
I don’t think Eric is going to update this place this week considering the topic. He knows that since it is about Pakistan, someone here will say something stupid and then little-Pathan-me will have fun at their expense and go to market.
Guy is smart.
Posted by The Questioner at March 8, 2007 09:14 AM
Get Firefox and install “Unplug” add-on from the Firefox add-ons page. That will let you download and save any video from YouTube (and Google video and many others). Just rename extension to “.flv” and play in VLC player.
Posted by The Questioner at March 8, 2007 09:17 AM
9/11 = jewish holiday.
9/11 = inside job.
Global Hawk = technology to remotely radar guide passenger aircraft.
Fake terror = the road to dictatorship.
Posted by hedagem at March 8, 2007 01:45 PM
My compliments to Mr. Margolis for another insightful piece on the state of chaos in the Muslim world brought forth by President Cheney and VP Bush (or is it the other way around?). An interesting point to ponder is what is next for the two Amigos in the Oval office. If one takes a look at the map of the Middle East, the US is engaged in Afghanistan, and Iraq. It is itching to pick a fight with Iran and encroach on Pakistan’s sovereignty by sending in NATO troops to pursue the Taliban. This entire approach to the conflict would mean that the US would be engaged in four countries that share common boarders, thereby putting the US in a four front war with over 100 million people. Brilliant strategy, just a brilliant as Adolph Hitler who believed that he could fight a four front war.
It is time that the great people of the USA take what ever action needed in securing their future from what is obviously a disaster that is unfolding in front of our eyes. Remember, brave Americans that it will be you that has to pay the price for the repetition of executive incompetence and ineptness and not the two individuals that are currently displacing the air in the Oval Office.
Posted by Frank at March 8, 2007 01:50 PM
Bino:
Did watch the movie? I’m trying to approach any theory with an open mind. Seeing the amount of absolute corruption and opacity in our government today, I find it hard to put much past them (See e.g. the lost $12 billion, the Libby trial, bungled and cherry-picked intelligence, Katrina relief, etc.). While I don’t think the motivation supporting such conspiracy theories are sound, the movie asks some interesting questions with respect to the structure of the buildings, the cause of their collapse, and the nature of their destruction. If nothing else, if you watch the movie with an open mind, you might have cause to wonder how the buildings fell as fast as they did, and how it is that a jet-fuel fire could have melted the steel superstructure of the buildings to prompt so rapid a collapse. I’m not sure they provide the right answers, but they are asking some interesting questions.
Reality:
Here’s my problem with the “pretext” theory in the movie; that the WTC collapse was some sort of Reichstag Fire justifying foreign military adventurism. If the government wanted such a pretext, they needn’t have destroyed the buildings. The crashing of the planes would have been enough to justify the rather ridiculous hard-power policies the current administration has engaged in. If the buildings could, in fact, sustain the impact of two jetliners crashing into them, or the heat of the ensuing fires, why would the government (or military industrial complex, or the insurance companies) need to arrange for the destruction of the buildings? Because they were “white elephants?” It seems a little far fetched to me.
Posted by chatman at March 8, 2007 03:42 PM
Chatman, I’d seen Loose Change before. Even the folks at 9-11 Research crapped on it:
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/green/loose_change.html
Posted by Bino at March 8, 2007 06:16 PM
CM guilt cannot be established upon conjecture.
That much is a confirmed thing. if we point towards possible motives, it can be anyone. even little green men from mars.
what some of these documentaries do is to uncover or bring out facts which are not in line with the official version.
the last link i posted concentrates only upon the towers. make your own opinion.
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 9, 2007 06:23 AM
I think its mic…
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 9, 2007 06:39 AM
A Gwynne Dyer take on Loose Change 9-11.
http://www.gwynnedyer.net/articles/Gwynne%20Dyer%20article_%20%20Loose%20Screws.txt
Posted by Weary at March 9, 2007 08:54 AM
HEDAGEM WROTE:
9/11 = jewish holiday.
9/11 = inside job.
Global Hawk = technology to remotely radar guide passenger aircraft.
Fake terror = the road to dictatorship.
Posted by hedagem at March 8, 2007 01:45 PM
I agree with Fake terror,
but dude, I didn’t get 9/11 off, I never got to take 9/11 off, even the racist jews in my family didn’t take 9/11 off. This is such disinfo. It’s not a holiday - if anything, if there WAS A black flag operation here, people, not all people, were warned of the attack.
This means that the jewish people in the country are also getting duoble-crossed.
You are being pretty racist when you generalize like that.
Just like my Uncle that said, “go into WORD…type in Q33 NY Now change to wingdings one. - The MS programmer who designed Wingdings was arab.”
When you do Q33 NY, you get the picture of a plane, then what looks like two buildings, followed by the “Toxic/Death” Skull&Crossbones and a hebrew star.
If you want to look for conspiracies in the wrong way (IE: blaming entire groups), hedagem, I can match you plot for plot.
I’m not saying it was an inside job, i’m just saying little old lapsed-jewish me had nothing at all to do with it, and you insinuate that I do when you repeat racist generalizations as opinion.
I personally found my uncle’s paranoia to be a little much, considering Wingdings can hardly be a smoking gun.
Tovy
Posted by Tovy at March 9, 2007 01:05 PM
Weary thats just an opinion, not a fact by fact rebuttal
and well loose change isnt the only documentary i posted. what r ur opinions about “an inconvenient truth” ??
after watching that movie you sort of forget about both bush and osama
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 9, 2007 03:19 PM
Ussama WHO???
Posted by hedagem at March 9, 2007 08:33 PM
It looks like Eric is taking the week off.
I haven’t paid much attention to all the Pakistani news above, but surely the funniest (and perhaps most telling) recent news has been the dozen or so deaths during the Pakistani kite festival! I’m relieved to see that The Questioner wasn’t one of the casualties.
Posted by hyperbolus at March 11, 2007 09:38 PM
Eric is not taking the week off. He did write a piece last week. He just didn’t put here. I explained why.
Now then… I’m not the only Pakistani here. So I am touched by your concern for my well being. Thank you.
Now that you’re kissing up to us, why not ask Reality how he is doing? He lives in Lahore and am sure, enjoyed Basant as much as anyone else. I, on the other hand, don’t have a “kite festival” where I’m at….. unfortunately. LOL
Posted by The Questioner at March 12, 2007 12:26 AM
http://www.thingsasian.com/stories-photos/all/2333;jsessionid=5AEEC02BFD04C663E36999AB78B765A9
Basant. Pics and basic info.
I think this is the largest, regularly held, seasonal, kite flying event in Asia (if not in the world)?
Unfortunately, if you give matches to a monkey, it will set itself on fire… some people use metal wires for kite strings (so they can win kite dog-fights… metal string will cut the other guy’s string. Huge bets are placed on the dog-fights). However, metal strings will also decapitate other human beings under the right conditions.
Other deaths are caused by traffic accidents (people chasing kites getting squished under a vehicle), people chasing/flying kites and falling off rooftops, people getting fried as the metal string touches live wires, people getting injured by fireworks and lastly, people getting injured by stray bullets due to firing in the air.
But 99.9% still manage to enjoy themselves and not get injured. I would like to be part of this event , but we don’t have any of this here. :-(
Posted by The Questioner at March 12, 2007 12:45 AM
http://www.thingsasian.com/stories-photos/all/2333;jsessionid=5AEEC02BFD04C663E36999AB78B765A9
click on the pics to get more info.
Posted by The Questioner at March 12, 2007 12:47 AM
http://pakistaniat.com/2007/01/11/pakistan-basant-idiot-video/
Watch the videos! Watch the videos! LOL
Man… some of these guys are just asking for it.
Despite many many attempts to control the hoipolloi, they will do as they please. I feel this is as it should be (dangerous though it is) because I would rather live in Pakistan, not in some nanny-state as you find the US and Canada becoming. Just watch out for the flying fireworks! LOL
Posted by The Questioner at March 12, 2007 01:49 AM
:)
Didnt do much kite flying. The practise isnt as rampant as it used to be a couple of years ago. Nowadays people just dont have the time to go out and dismember any fellow man unwise enough to ride a motorcycle. In my opinion, the casualties this year were less than the ones before.
We are improving
God help you if you’re going over a bridge on a motorcycle and arent armoured like a tank
Posted by _RealityBites_ at March 12, 2007 03:30 AM
I saw this pic in the papers that they were installing these flexible antennas over the motorcycles… front to back, over the rider. That seems like a damn good idea and would probably save one from being decapitated by any stray metal string.
Maybe it is good idea to wear some kind of neck collar also? Just in case. LOL
If you are going on a bike, you can’t even see the damn thing, can you? Before it is too late?
Posted by The Questioner at March 12, 2007 03:53 AM
Speaking of kite flying, a strong, strong reco for this book:
The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini.
“The Kite Runner tells the story of Amir, a well-to-do Pashtun boy from the Wazir Akbar Khan district of Kabul, who is haunted by the guilt of betraying his childhood friend Hassan, the son of his father’s Hazara servant. The story is set against a backdrop of tumultuous events, from the fall of the monarchy in Afghanistan through the Soviet invasion, the mass exodus of refugees to Pakistan and the United States, and the Taliban regime.”
Really, really excellent book.
Posted by Bino at March 12, 2007 08:55 AM
RealityBites
The link to Gwynne Dyer’s wasn’t a rebuttal. It was a link to an alternate perspective.
As for “An Inconvenient Truth”, global warming is something that has been known in the scientific community, and by any one who made a minimal effort to be informed, for the last 10 years at least. 10 years before that, the first indications were being reported in the scientific literature. That the earth undergoes periodic shifts in climate, for whatever reason, is a fact that has been know for at least 50 years. That climate change causes problems for populations of organisms is also old news.
“An Inconvenient Truth” is merely the beginning of the mass marketing of the idea, in the same way media anti-smoking campaigns in the 1970’s were the beginning of the mass marketing of that idea. The ill effects of smoking were also known well in advance of its mass marketing.
What will be the outcome of global warming? That is more difficult to say. However, I think that any shift in climate invariably results in falling food production, mass starvation and mass migration of people. Whether our societies and civilization will survive is not at all clear to me, although I don’t think that humans will disappear entirely just yet.
Posted by Weary at March 12, 2007 09:11 AM
Bush and Bin Laden serve the same MASTERS.
Posted by hedagem at March 15, 2007 04:06 AM