| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Igor The Terrible" |
| Date: |
15 Sep 2006 03:13:34 AM |
| Object: |
IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
Yup, the whole world is fucked except for old dubya. He's got hid head
screwed on straight. Just ask him that ANY time of day; he'll tell
ya.
I guess it hasn't occurred to to him, but had he left Iraq alone, that
would have been the balance of power in the region in terms of keeping
a lid on Iran.
On a more serious note, If that fucking idiot gets his way with the
methods of interrogation he wants, it sure is gonna suck to be an
American GI if they ever get caught by what ever enemy we'll be
fighting in the future. Basically they will be better off putting a
bullet in their own head.
I'm sure this also will be a great selling point for enlisting new
recruits. Perhaps the repukes in office can send their own brats off to
future wars.
IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press
Writer
55 minutes ago
VIENNA, Austria - A recent House of Representatives committee report on
Iran's nuclear capability is "outrageous and dishonest" in
trying to make a case that Tehran's program is geared toward making
weapons, a senior official of the U.N. nuclear watchdog has said.
The letter, obtained by The Associated Press on Thursday outside a
35-nation board meeting of the International Atomic Energy
Agency, says the report is false in saying Iran is making weapons-grade
uranium at an experimental enrichment site, when it has in fact
produced material only in small quantities that is far below the level
that can be used in nuclear arms.
The letter, which was first reported on by The Washington Post, also
says the report erroneously says that IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei
removed a senior nuclear inspector from the team investigating Iran's
nuclear program "for concluding that the purpose of Iran's nuclear
program is to construct weapons."
In fact, the inspector was sidelined on Tehran's request, and the
Islamic republic had a right to ask for a replacement under agreements
that govern all states relationships with the agency, said the letter,
calling the report's version "incorrect and misleading."
"In addition," says the letter, "the report contains an outrageous and
dishonest suggestion that such removal might have been for 'not having
adhered to an unstated IAEA policy barring IAEA officials from telling
the whole truth about the Iranian nuclear program.'"
Dated Aug. 12, the letter was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra (news,
bio, voting record), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence. It was signed by Vilmos Cserveny, a senior director of
the Vienna-based agency.
An IAEA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was
not authorized to comment on the letter, said it was written "to set
the record straight."
Jamal Ware, a spokesman for the House committee, confirmed they had
received the letter and said the chairman had referred it to Rep. Mike
Rogers, R-Mich., and Rep. Rush Hold, D-N.J. They will review it and
issue a formal response if necessary, he said.
"All IAEA complains about is a photo caption. If you read the report,
it's very clear that what it is saying is that Iran is working to
develop the capability to enrich uranium to weapons grade, not that
they have done so," Ware said. "They use a string of adjectives, while
not pointing to any substantive criticism of the report. There are
areas where we would disagree with them. A disagreement does not make
what we say erroneous."
The dispute was reminiscent of the clashes between the IAEA and
Washington over whether Saddam Hussein was trying to make
weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms. American arguments
that Saddam had such covert arms programs were given as the chief
reason for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam.
ElBaradei's criticism of the U.S. standpoint on Iraq and subsequent
perceptions that he was soft on Iran in his staff's investigation of
suspicions Tehran's nuclear activities may be a cover for a weapons
program led to a failed attempt last year by Washington to prevent his
re-election.
.
|
|
| User: "Huh?What?" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
15 Sep 2006 03:12:52 PM |
|
|
Igor The Terrible wrote:
Yup, the whole world is fucked except for old dubya. He's got hid head
screwed on straight. Just ask him that ANY time of day; he'll tell
ya.
I guess it hasn't occurred to to him, but had he left Iraq alone, that
would have been the balance of power in the region in terms of keeping
a lid on Iran.
On a more serious note, If that fucking idiot gets his way with the
methods of interrogation he wants, it sure is gonna suck to be an
American GI if they ever get caught by what ever enemy we'll be
fighting in the future. Basically they will be better off putting a
bullet in their own head.
I'm sure this also will be a great selling point for enlisting new
recruits. Perhaps the repukes in office can send their own brats off to
future wars.
IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press
Writer
55 minutes ago
VIENNA, Austria - A recent House of Representatives committee report on
Iran's nuclear capability is "outrageous and dishonest" in
trying to make a case that Tehran's program is geared toward making
weapons, a senior official of the U.N. nuclear watchdog has said.
The letter, obtained by The Associated Press on Thursday outside a
35-nation board meeting of the International Atomic Energy
Agency, says the report is false in saying Iran is making weapons-grade
uranium at an experimental enrichment site, when it has in fact
produced material only in small quantities that is far below the level
that can be used in nuclear arms.
The letter, which was first reported on by The Washington Post, also
says the report erroneously says that IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei
removed a senior nuclear inspector from the team investigating Iran's
nuclear program "for concluding that the purpose of Iran's nuclear
program is to construct weapons."
In fact, the inspector was sidelined on Tehran's request, and the
Islamic republic had a right to ask for a replacement under agreements
that govern all states relationships with the agency, said the letter,
calling the report's version "incorrect and misleading."
"In addition," says the letter, "the report contains an outrageous and
dishonest suggestion that such removal might have been for 'not having
adhered to an unstated IAEA policy barring IAEA officials from telling
the whole truth about the Iranian nuclear program.'"
Dated Aug. 12, the letter was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra (news,
bio, voting record), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence. It was signed by Vilmos Cserveny, a senior director of
the Vienna-based agency.
An IAEA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was
not authorized to comment on the letter, said it was written "to set
the record straight."
Jamal Ware, a spokesman for the House committee, confirmed they had
received the letter and said the chairman had referred it to Rep. Mike
Rogers, R-Mich., and Rep. Rush Hold, D-N.J. They will review it and
issue a formal response if necessary, he said.
"All IAEA complains about is a photo caption. If you read the report,
it's very clear that what it is saying is that Iran is working to
develop the capability to enrich uranium to weapons grade, not that
they have done so," Ware said. "They use a string of adjectives, while
not pointing to any substantive criticism of the report. There are
areas where we would disagree with them. A disagreement does not make
what we say erroneous."
The dispute was reminiscent of the clashes between the IAEA and
Washington over whether Saddam Hussein was trying to make
weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms. American arguments
that Saddam had such covert arms programs were given as the chief
reason for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam.
ElBaradei's criticism of the U.S. standpoint on Iraq and subsequent
perceptions that he was soft on Iran in his staff's investigation of
suspicions Tehran's nuclear activities may be a cover for a weapons
program led to a failed attempt last year by Washington to prevent his
re-election.
You are believing the IAEA? Did you ride the short bus and
lick the windows when young? That is the same as believing
the United Nations.
They are ALL SCAM Kings
Give Iran 120 days and then start bombing
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hugh Gibbons" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
15 Sep 2006 10:45:00 PM |
|
|
In article <qLDOg.93$zF5.36@bignews1.bellsouth.net>,
Huh?What? <figureitout@bellsouth.net> wrote:
You are believing the IAEA? Did you ride the short bus and
lick the windows when young? That is the same as believing
the United Nations.
They are ALL SCAM Kings
Give Iran 120 days and then start bombing
Here we have an epitome of evil, and unfortunately typical
of a large class of Republican hatemongers. They would
rather kill everybody than do anything else. Anyone who
discourages large-scale killing (by the United States)
is bad, in their book, because they frustrate their
desire to do mass-murder while pretending to be virtuous.
Ann Coulter is the same way.
Frankly, I am surprised that the IAEA didn't find more, because
if I was in the Iranians' shoes, developing and demonstrating
nuclear weapons capability would by my number 1, 2 and 3 priority.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Huh?What?" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
15 Sep 2006 10:53:14 PM |
|
|
Hugh Gibbons wrote:
In article <qLDOg.93$zF5.36@bignews1.bellsouth.net>,
Huh?What? <figureitout@bellsouth.net> wrote:
You are believing the IAEA? Did you ride the short bus and
lick the windows when young? That is the same as believing
the United Nations.
They are ALL SCAM Kings
Give Iran 120 days and then start bombing
Here we have an epitome of evil, and unfortunately typical
of a large class of Republican hatemongers. They would
rather kill everybody than do anything else. Anyone who
discourages large-scale killing (by the United States)
is bad, in their book, because they frustrate their
desire to do mass-murder while pretending to be virtuous.
Ann Coulter is the same way.
Frankly, I am surprised that the IAEA didn't find more, because
if I was in the Iranians' shoes, developing and demonstrating
nuclear weapons capability would by my number 1, 2 and 3 priority.
You sound like an Anti-American Fag. San Francisco perhaps?
Why don't you just get the ***** out if America is so bad?
Or are you sucking the "Guvment" Tit?
Thought so
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hugh Gibbons" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
17 Sep 2006 02:54:06 PM |
|
|
In article <2vKOg.1011$eW5.623@bignews5.bellsouth.net>,
Huh?What? <figureitout@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Hugh Gibbons wrote:
In article <qLDOg.93$zF5.36@bignews1.bellsouth.net>,
Huh?What? <figureitout@bellsouth.net> wrote:
You are believing the IAEA? Did you ride the short bus and
lick the windows when young? That is the same as believing
the United Nations.
They are ALL SCAM Kings
Give Iran 120 days and then start bombing
Here we have an epitome of evil, and unfortunately typical
of a large class of Republican hatemongers. They would
rather kill everybody than do anything else. Anyone who
discourages large-scale killing (by the United States)
is bad, in their book, because they frustrate their
desire to do mass-murder while pretending to be virtuous.
Ann Coulter is the same way.
Frankly, I am surprised that the IAEA didn't find more, because
if I was in the Iranians' shoes, developing and demonstrating
nuclear weapons capability would by my number 1, 2 and 3 priority.
You sound like an Anti-American Fag. San Francisco perhaps?
Why don't you just get the ***** out if America is so bad?
Or are you sucking the "Guvment" Tit?
Thought so
You're so irrational it isn't worth the time to read your
further posts.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
15 Sep 2006 03:24:53 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:12:52 -0400, Huh?What?
<figureitout@bellsouth.net> wrote:
You are believing the IAEA? Did you ride the short bus and
lick the windows when young? That is the same as believing
the United Nations.
Yeah that Hans Blix was such a liar when he said Saddam had no WMDs.
But when Bush said it, well that was different.
________________
I am human; nothing in humanity is alien to me.
Terence
.
|
|
|
| User: "Huh?What?" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
15 Sep 2006 10:50:34 PM |
|
|
wrote:
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:12:52 -0400, Huh?What?
<figureitout@bellsouth.net> wrote:
You are believing the IAEA? Did you ride the short bus and
lick the windows when young? That is the same as believing
the United Nations.
Yeah that Hans Blix was such a liar when he said Saddam had no WMDs.
But when Bush said it, well that was different.
________________
I am human; nothing in humanity is alien to me.
Terence
Define WMD?
You DemoRATS keep screaming like Barney Fife
"No WMD's, No WMD's"
Define WMD
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
16 Sep 2006 10:45:52 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 23:50:34 -0400, Huh?What?
<figureitout@bellsouth.net> wrote:
retrogrouch@comcast.net wrote:
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:12:52 -0400, Huh?What?
<figureitout@bellsouth.net> wrote:
You are believing the IAEA? Did you ride the short bus and
lick the windows when young? That is the same as believing
the United Nations.
Yeah that Hans Blix was such a liar when he said Saddam had no WMDs.
But when Bush said it, well that was different.
________________
I am human; nothing in humanity is alien to me.
Terence
Define WMD?
You DemoRATS keep screaming like Barney Fife
"No WMD's, No WMD's"
Define WMD
Now you sound just like Clinton and his definition of sex. When your
original definition doesn't work then redefine the terms. WMD's kill
people on a large scale - what don't you understand about mass
destruction? There were no weapons of this type found by the UN
inspectors or the US military. Iraq was not part of the War on Terror
until Bush's invasion created a magnet for every loose cannon in the
Middle East.
WB Yeats
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
17 Sep 2006 03:59:43 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Sep 2006 15:45:52 GMT, wrote:
Now you sound just like Clinton and his definition of sex.
Or Bush defining torture.
When your original definition doesn't work then redefine the terms.
Which is what the hard right wing hawks are doing.
The Administration has formally announced that there were the WMDs it
believed Iraq had were not found. Even Rove is unwilling to try to
spin the bits rusty junk we found into the imminent threat to the
United States that we were sold in 2002-2003.
Swill
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "can_o_worms" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
15 Sep 2006 06:13:02 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:12:52 -0400, Huh?What?
<figureitout@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Igor The Terrible wrote:
Yup, the whole world is fucked except for old dubya. He's got hid head
screwed on straight. Just ask him that ANY time of day; he'll tell
ya.
I guess it hasn't occurred to to him, but had he left Iraq alone, that
would have been the balance of power in the region in terms of keeping
a lid on Iran.
On a more serious note, If that fucking idiot gets his way with the
methods of interrogation he wants, it sure is gonna suck to be an
American GI if they ever get caught by what ever enemy we'll be
fighting in the future. Basically they will be better off putting a
bullet in their own head.
I'm sure this also will be a great selling point for enlisting new
recruits. Perhaps the repukes in office can send their own brats off to
future wars.
IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press
Writer
55 minutes ago
VIENNA, Austria - A recent House of Representatives committee report on
Iran's nuclear capability is "outrageous and dishonest" in
trying to make a case that Tehran's program is geared toward making
weapons, a senior official of the U.N. nuclear watchdog has said.
The letter, obtained by The Associated Press on Thursday outside a
35-nation board meeting of the International Atomic Energy
Agency, says the report is false in saying Iran is making weapons-grade
uranium at an experimental enrichment site, when it has in fact
produced material only in small quantities that is far below the level
that can be used in nuclear arms.
The letter, which was first reported on by The Washington Post, also
says the report erroneously says that IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei
removed a senior nuclear inspector from the team investigating Iran's
nuclear program "for concluding that the purpose of Iran's nuclear
program is to construct weapons."
In fact, the inspector was sidelined on Tehran's request, and the
Islamic republic had a right to ask for a replacement under agreements
that govern all states relationships with the agency, said the letter,
calling the report's version "incorrect and misleading."
"In addition," says the letter, "the report contains an outrageous and
dishonest suggestion that such removal might have been for 'not having
adhered to an unstated IAEA policy barring IAEA officials from telling
the whole truth about the Iranian nuclear program.'"
Dated Aug. 12, the letter was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra (news,
bio, voting record), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence. It was signed by Vilmos Cserveny, a senior director of
the Vienna-based agency.
An IAEA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was
not authorized to comment on the letter, said it was written "to set
the record straight."
Jamal Ware, a spokesman for the House committee, confirmed they had
received the letter and said the chairman had referred it to Rep. Mike
Rogers, R-Mich., and Rep. Rush Hold, D-N.J. They will review it and
issue a formal response if necessary, he said.
"All IAEA complains about is a photo caption. If you read the report,
it's very clear that what it is saying is that Iran is working to
develop the capability to enrich uranium to weapons grade, not that
they have done so," Ware said. "They use a string of adjectives, while
not pointing to any substantive criticism of the report. There are
areas where we would disagree with them. A disagreement does not make
what we say erroneous."
The dispute was reminiscent of the clashes between the IAEA and
Washington over whether Saddam Hussein was trying to make
weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms. American arguments
that Saddam had such covert arms programs were given as the chief
reason for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam.
ElBaradei's criticism of the U.S. standpoint on Iraq and subsequent
perceptions that he was soft on Iran in his staff's investigation of
suspicions Tehran's nuclear activities may be a cover for a weapons
program led to a failed attempt last year by Washington to prevent his
re-election.
You are believing the IAEA?
IAEA inspectors, unlike Junior's neoCONs, have no political
axe to grind and have no reason to lie the U.S. into or out
of a war with Iran.
ElBaradei was right on Iraq and probably right on Iran.
The credibility problem lies with U.S. pols who are proven
liars for any war or policy deemed to benefit Israel at the
expense of U.S. security and not with IAEA inspectors
who are not.
Did you ride the short bus and
lick the windows when young? That is the same as believing
the United Nations.
They are ALL SCAM Kings
Give Iran 120 days and then start bombing
--
other choices:
www.lp.org
www.gp.org
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "PagCal" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
15 Sep 2006 05:48:51 AM |
|
|
Igor The Terrible wrote:
Yup, the whole world is fucked except for old dubya. He's got hid head
screwed on straight. Just ask him that ANY time of day; he'll tell
ya.
I guess it hasn't occurred to to him, but had he left Iraq alone, that
would have been the balance of power in the region in terms of keeping
a lid on Iran.
On a more serious note, If that fucking idiot gets his way with the
methods of interrogation he wants, it sure is gonna suck to be an
American GI if they ever get caught by what ever enemy we'll be
fighting in the future. Basically they will be better off putting a
bullet in their own head.
I'm sure this also will be a great selling point for enlisting new
recruits. Perhaps the repukes in office can send their own brats off to
future wars.
Reciently, the IAEA was denied site access by Iran.
Why was this so?
And, if the IAEA has been denied access, how can their reports be accurate?
IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press
Writer
55 minutes ago
VIENNA, Austria - A recent House of Representatives committee report on
Iran's nuclear capability is "outrageous and dishonest" in
trying to make a case that Tehran's program is geared toward making
weapons, a senior official of the U.N. nuclear watchdog has said.
The letter, obtained by The Associated Press on Thursday outside a
35-nation board meeting of the International Atomic Energy
Agency, says the report is false in saying Iran is making weapons-grade
uranium at an experimental enrichment site, when it has in fact
produced material only in small quantities that is far below the level
that can be used in nuclear arms.
The letter, which was first reported on by The Washington Post, also
says the report erroneously says that IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei
removed a senior nuclear inspector from the team investigating Iran's
nuclear program "for concluding that the purpose of Iran's nuclear
program is to construct weapons."
In fact, the inspector was sidelined on Tehran's request, and the
Islamic republic had a right to ask for a replacement under agreements
that govern all states relationships with the agency, said the letter,
calling the report's version "incorrect and misleading."
"In addition," says the letter, "the report contains an outrageous and
dishonest suggestion that such removal might have been for 'not having
adhered to an unstated IAEA policy barring IAEA officials from telling
the whole truth about the Iranian nuclear program.'"
Dated Aug. 12, the letter was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra (news,
bio, voting record), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence. It was signed by Vilmos Cserveny, a senior director of
the Vienna-based agency.
An IAEA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was
not authorized to comment on the letter, said it was written "to set
the record straight."
Jamal Ware, a spokesman for the House committee, confirmed they had
received the letter and said the chairman had referred it to Rep. Mike
Rogers, R-Mich., and Rep. Rush Hold, D-N.J. They will review it and
issue a formal response if necessary, he said.
"All IAEA complains about is a photo caption. If you read the report,
it's very clear that what it is saying is that Iran is working to
develop the capability to enrich uranium to weapons grade, not that
they have done so," Ware said. "They use a string of adjectives, while
not pointing to any substantive criticism of the report. There are
areas where we would disagree with them. A disagreement does not make
what we say erroneous."
The dispute was reminiscent of the clashes between the IAEA and
Washington over whether Saddam Hussein was trying to make
weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms. American arguments
that Saddam had such covert arms programs were given as the chief
reason for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam.
ElBaradei's criticism of the U.S. standpoint on Iraq and subsequent
perceptions that he was soft on Iran in his staff's investigation of
suspicions Tehran's nuclear activities may be a cover for a weapons
program led to a failed attempt last year by Washington to prevent his
re-election.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hugh Gibbons" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
15 Sep 2006 10:37:53 PM |
|
|
In article <oyvOg.54$Af2.46@newsfe02.lga>, PagCal <pagcal@runbox.com>
wrote:
Igor The Terrible wrote:
Yup, the whole world is fucked except for old dubya. He's got hid head
screwed on straight. Just ask him that ANY time of day; he'll tell
ya.
I guess it hasn't occurred to to him, but had he left Iraq alone, that
would have been the balance of power in the region in terms of keeping
a lid on Iran.
On a more serious note, If that fucking idiot gets his way with the
methods of interrogation he wants, it sure is gonna suck to be an
American GI if they ever get caught by what ever enemy we'll be
fighting in the future. Basically they will be better off putting a
bullet in their own head.
I'm sure this also will be a great selling point for enlisting new
recruits. Perhaps the repukes in office can send their own brats off to
future wars.
Reciently, the IAEA was denied site access by Iran.
Why was this so?
And, if the IAEA has been denied access, how can their reports be accurate?
How can lies about what the IAEA reports contain not be lies?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
15 Sep 2006 11:26:27 AM |
|
|
PagCal wrote :
Reciently, the IAEA was denied site access by Iran.
Why was this so?
And, if the IAEA has been denied access, how can their reports be accurate?
Did you read the reuter's original report, paying attention to the
exact
points of disagrement between IAEA and the report ?
http://tinyurl.com/gk8rx
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Republicunts" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
16 Sep 2006 12:34:21 AM |
|
|
On 15 Sep 2006 01:13:34 -0700, "Igor The Terrible"
<igor_the_terrible@mad.scientist.com> wrote:
On a more serious note, If that fucking idiot gets his way with the
methods of interrogation he wants, it sure is gonna suck to be an
American GI if they ever get caught by what ever enemy we'll be
fighting in the future. Basically they will be better off putting a
bullet in their own head.
I'm sure this also will be a great selling point for enlisting new
recruits. Perhaps the repukes in office can send their own brats off to
future wars.
Indeed since Bush has disreguarded every International Treaty why
should any country catching US troops treat these prisoners the same
as America does as enemy combatant at Abhu Graib What's good for the
goose is good for the geese
The US troops in Iraq are losing their lives to defend the interests
of Corporate Welfare Bums like the Oil and Defence Industry.
The war in Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11 or the so called War on
Terror.
Bush wants to nuke Iran with these Nuclear Penetrating bombs while
hypocritically preaching to the rest of the world of not using Nukes.
Urgh hhhh the double standards of hypocrisy keep piling up
.
|
|
|
| User: "FluckIt" |
|
| Title: Re: IAEA: U.S. report on Iran 'dishonest' |
16 Sep 2006 07:27:30 PM |
|
|
Republicunts wrote:
On 15 Sep 2006 01:13:34 -0700, "Igor The Terrible"
<igor_the_terrible@mad.scientist.com> wrote:
On a more serious note, If that fucking idiot gets his way with the
methods of interrogation he wants, it sure is gonna suck to be an
American GI if they ever get caught by what ever enemy we'll be
fighting in the future. Basically they will be better off putting a
bullet in their own head.
I'm sure this also will be a great selling point for enlisting new
recruits. Perhaps the repukes in office can send their own brats off to
future wars.
Indeed since Bush has disreguarded every International Treaty why
should any country catching US troops treat these prisoners the same
as America does as enemy combatant at Abhu Graib What's good for the
goose is good for the geese
The US troops in Iraq are losing their lives to defend the interests
of Corporate Welfare Bums like the Oil and Defence Industry.
The war in Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11 or the so called War on
Terror.
Bush wants to nuke Iran with these Nuclear Penetrating bombs while
hypocritically preaching to the rest of the world of not using Nukes.
Urgh hhhh the double standards of hypocrisy keep piling up
Stupid ***** Alert
.
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|