| Topic: |
Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus |
| User: |
"Mr Hankey the Christmas Jobby poo" |
| Date: |
19 Nov 2007 10:22:48 PM |
| Object: |
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PAKISTAN'S NUKES, PEOPLEZ ?!?! HOOROO ! |
http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2007/11/what_will_happe.php
The happy dude called Eric Margolis wrote the following diatribe. I
did not, so fcuk off !
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
----00----
http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2007/11/what_will_happe.php
Eric Margolis
Foreign Correspondent / Defense Analyst & Columnist
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PAKISTAN'S NUKES?
NEW YORK - Henry Kissinger once quipped that being America's ally is
more dangerous than being its enemy. The latest example: Washington is
abuzz with leaks the Bush Administration plans to dump its faithful
but embattled Pakistani retainer, Gen. Pervez Musarraf, and replace
him by a new general or a cooperative civilian-led government.
This column already reported Washington's `regime change' plans a week
ago, citing vice chief of staff Gen. Afshaq Kiyani as Musharraf's most
likely replacement. As turmoil spreads across Pakistan, Musharraf's
grip on power daily grows weaker.
White House efforts to broker a shotgun marriage between Musharraf and
Benazir Bhutto seem to have failed. She just told me there would be no
deal with Musharraf, period. But one never knows. Bhutto also told me
she was wisely reaching out to Pakistan's leading Islamic Party,
Jamiat Islami.
For the first time, I hear Pakistanis calling Musharraf, `pharaoh.'
This is a storm warning signal. `Pharoah' is what Iranians called
their hated, US-backed Shah, and Egyptians the equally hated
US-installed dictator, Anwar Sadat.
Original aricle can be found at the following website:
http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2007/11/what_will_happe.php
.
|
|
| User: "kmiller" |
|
| Title: Re: WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PAKISTAN'S NUKES, PEOPLEZ ?!?! HOOROO ! |
20 Nov 2007 12:41:03 AM |
|
|
On Nov 19, 11:22 pm, "Mr Hankey the Christmas Jobby (poo)"
<sgdecember2...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2007/11/what_will_happe.php
The happy dude called Eric Margolis wrote the following diatribe. I
did not, so fcuk off !
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
----00----
http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2007/11/what_will_happe.php
Eric Margolis
Foreign Correspondent / Defense Analyst & Columnist
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PAKISTAN'S NUKES?
NEW YORK - Henry Kissinger once quipped that being America's ally is
more dangerous than being its enemy. The latest example: Washington is
abuzz with leaks the Bush Administration plans to dump its faithful
but embattled Pakistani retainer, Gen. Pervez Musarraf, and replace
him by a new general or a cooperative civilian-led government.
This column already reported Washington's `regime change' plans a week
ago, citing vice chief of staff Gen. Afshaq Kiyani as Musharraf's most
likely replacement. As turmoil spreads across Pakistan, Musharraf's
grip on power daily grows weaker.
White House efforts to broker a shotgun marriage between Musharraf and
Benazir Bhutto seem to have failed. She just told me there would be no
deal with Musharraf, period. But one never knows. Bhutto also told me
she was wisely reaching out to Pakistan's leading Islamic Party,
Jamiat Islami.
For the first time, I hear Pakistanis calling Musharraf, `pharaoh.'
This is a storm warning signal. `Pharoah' is what Iranians called
their hated, US-backed Shah, and Egyptians the equally hated
US-installed dictator, Anwar Sadat.
Original aricle can be found at the following website:
http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2007/11/what_will_happe.php
Relax 'Beaves" (and you too Butt Head)
The only one that knows the "Launch CODES" (so far) is Musarif [SP-?].
Although, that could all 'change' - once BOOTIES [SP-?] takes over the
"Supreme Power" of the Country.
Last time around, all we had to worry about was - "how many 'shoes'
she had in her closet".
Now - we have to 'worry about' - who is 'hiding' (in her closet) - and
what is their 'ulterior' MOTIVE ???
Just A Thought About - Musarif [SP-?] - he is still THE RIGHT PERSON
(for the Job).
It is better to TRUST an "Enemy" - You KNOW ; Than to RELY on "One You
DON'T".
8< |
.
|
|
|
| User: "Werewolfy" |
|
| Title: Re: WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PAKISTAN'S NUKES, PEOPLEZ ?!?! HOOROO ! |
20 Nov 2007 02:39:40 AM |
|
|
On 20 Nov, 06:41, kmiller <mille...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
" It is better to TRUST an "Enemy" - You KNOW ; Than to RELY on "One
You DON'T".
Well Kim, that goes into my my book as leading the world's worst
quotes. if indeed quote it is. I fancy it is more likely to be from
your own mind, not from anyone else.
Trust and enemy? Who other than a sadist would do that?
Rely on one that you don't know? Well, how can you rely on him, if you
don't know who he is? If he is also an enemy, how can you suggest he
may be relied upon?
That's a 'classic', Kim. I hope you don't mind if I spend the rest of
the day in paroxysms of laughter.
Werewolfy
.
|
|
|
| User: "kmiller" |
|
| Title: Re: WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PAKISTAN'S NUKES, PEOPLEZ ?!?! HOOROO ! |
20 Nov 2007 03:57:21 AM |
|
|
On Nov 20, 3:39 am, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 20 Nov, 06:41, kmiller <mille...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
" It is better to TRUST an "Enemy" - You KNOW ; Than to RELY on "One
You DON'T".
Well Kim, that goes into my my book as leading the world's worst
quotes. if indeed quote it is. I fancy it is more likely to be from
your own mind, not from anyone else.
Trust and enemy? Who other than a sadist would do that?
Rely on one that you don't know? Well, how can you rely on him, if you
don't know who he is? If he is also an enemy, how can you suggest he
may be relied upon?
That's a 'classic', Kim. I hope you don't mind if I spend the rest of
the day in paroxysms of laughter.
Werewolfy
From a POLITICAL APPROACH - HERE.:
Known Adversaries - are PREDICTABLE
NewBees (to the GAME) - Are NOT.
8< |
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "kmiller" |
|
| Title: Re: WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PAKISTAN'S NUKES, PEOPLEZ ?!?! HOOROO ! |
20 Nov 2007 03:45:30 AM |
|
|
On Nov 20, 3:39 am, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 20 Nov, 06:41, kmiller <mille...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
" It is better to TRUST an "Enemy" - You KNOW ; Than to RELY on "One
You DON'T".
Well Kim, that goes into my my book as leading the world's worst
quotes. if indeed quote it is. I fancy it is more likely to be from
your own mind, not from anyone else.
Trust and enemy? Who other than a sadist would do that?
Rely on one that you don't know? Well, how can you rely on him, if you
don't know who he is? If he is also an enemy, how can you suggest he
may be relied upon?
That's a 'classic', Kim. I hope you don't mind if I spend the rest of
the day in paroxysms of laughter.
Werewolfy
It is a saying from the Grreat Gangas Kahn. - there Wolfy !!!
And , more notably, it is the 'common' montra of any "street
dweller" (here in North America).
Knowing who your enemies are - is much better better than having to
rely on someone who could 'stab' you in the BACK - for no know
REASON' !!!
Just A Thought.
;-)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?UTF-8?Q?The_Last_1850_Days_=E2=98=BB_HOOROO_!?=" |
|
| Title: Re: WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PAKISTAN'S NUKES, PEOPLEZ ?!?! HOOROO ! |
20 Nov 2007 10:19:14 PM |
|
|
On Nov 20, 7:39 pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 20 Nov, 06:41, kmiller <mille...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
" It is better to TRUST an "Enemy" - You KNOW ; Than to RELY on "One
You DON'T".
Well Kim, that goes into my my book as leading the world's worst
quotes. if indeed quote it is. I fancy it is more likely to be from
your own mind, not from anyone else.
Trust and enemy? Who other than a sadist would do that?
Rely on one that you don't know? Well, how can you rely on him, if you
don't know who he is? If he is also an enemy, how can you suggest he
may be relied upon?
That's a 'classic', Kim. I hope you don't mind if I spend the rest of
the day in paroxysms of laughter.
Werewolfy
Hi Ricky, Kimbo's saying something along the lines of "Better the
devil U know
than the devil U don't know" or the "enemy of my enemy is a friend"
which kind of means something that you say to mean it is better to
deal with a person or thing you know, even if you do not like them,
than to deal with a new person or thing who could be even worse.
Anyway, Kimbo's right here. Better Mushareff than the possibility of
some crackpot tinhead fanatic coming to power with his trigger-happy
fingers on the nuclear button.
Extremely dangerous times we live in, yes siree yes indeedy deedy
deedily do !
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
----00----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Docrodile" |
|
| Title: Re: WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PAKISTAN'S NUKES, PEOPLEZ ?!?! HOOROO ! |
21 Nov 2007 02:36:42 PM |
|
|
"The Last 1850 Days ? HOOROO !" <sgdecember2012@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:d8fec33f-28db-474e-9cc9-ca14b35c6200@i37g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 20, 7:39 pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 20 Nov, 06:41, kmiller <mille...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
" It is better to TRUST an "Enemy" - You KNOW ; Than to RELY on "One
You DON'T".
Well Kim, that goes into my my book as leading the world's worst
quotes. if indeed quote it is. I fancy it is more likely to be from
your own mind, not from anyone else.
Trust and enemy? Who other than a sadist would do that?
Rely on one that you don't know? Well, how can you rely on him, if you
don't know who he is? If he is also an enemy, how can you suggest he
may be relied upon?
That's a 'classic', Kim. I hope you don't mind if I spend the rest of
the day in paroxysms of laughter.
Werewolfy
Hi Ricky, Kimbo's saying something along the lines of "Better the
devil U know
than the devil U don't know" or the "enemy of my enemy is a friend"
which kind of means something that you say to mean it is better to
deal with a person or thing you know, even if you do not like them,
than to deal with a new person or thing who could be even worse.
Anyway, Kimbo's right here. Better Mushareff than the possibility of
some crackpot tinhead fanatic coming to power with his trigger-happy
fingers on the nuclear button.
Extremely dangerous times we live in, yes siree yes indeedy deedy
deedily do !
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
----00----
Pakistan obtained nukes not to attack Israel or the US, but to defend itself
from nuke-armed India, its historical archrival.
The US State Dept., according to Richard Armitage, under Powell at that
time, revealed that the Bush administration confronted Musharoff right after
9-11 and warned that it either go along with its WOT and Al Queda opposition
or be removed by force and occupied.
Faced with that no-choice situation, ol' Pervez decided to wise to
cooperate. From the git-go, Bush had an uncooperative *ally* that it
strong-armed into submission.
It's damned hard to have trustworthy so-called *allies* when you threaten
them in such a manner. I would think this would feed into the anti-US
sentiment already there, emboldening Al Queda and other opposition.
It's notable that a close alliance with Iran continues to deepen under
Musharoff's rule, and there's little doubt Bhutto would want to break that
alliance if she regained the leadership.
Iran actually can play a stabilizing influence in Pakistan and global
political analysts contend that the US's open hostility toward Iran helps
fuel anti-US forces within Pakistan.
Bush and Cheney's Mideast policy will undoubtedly be regarded as one of the
worst foreign policies in US history, that actually has destabilized the
Mideast, and created a great recruiting inspiration for terror groups.
Doc
.
|
|
|
| User: "kmiller" |
|
| Title: Re: WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PAKISTAN'S NUKES, PEOPLEZ ?!?! HOOROO ! |
22 Nov 2007 01:46:04 AM |
|
|
On Nov 21, 3:36 pm, "Docrodile" <swampth...@hellsbayou.net> wrote:
"The Last 1850 Days ? HOOROO !" <sgdecember2...@yahoo.ca> wrote in messagenews:d8fec33f-28db-474e-9cc9-ca14b35c6200@i37g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 20, 7:39 pm, Werewolfy <Werewol...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 20 Nov, 06:41, kmiller <mille...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
" It is better to TRUST an "Enemy" - You KNOW ; Than to RELY on "One
You DON'T".
Well Kim, that goes into my my book as leading the world's worst
quotes. if indeed quote it is. I fancy it is more likely to be from
your own mind, not from anyone else.
Trust and enemy? Who other than a sadist would do that?
Rely on one that you don't know? Well, how can you rely on him, if you
don't know who he is? If he is also an enemy, how can you suggest he
may be relied upon?
That's a 'classic', Kim. I hope you don't mind if I spend the rest of
the day in paroxysms of laughter.
Werewolfy
Hi Ricky, Kimbo's saying something along the lines of "Better the
devil U know
than the devil U don't know" or the "enemy of my enemy is a friend"
which kind of means something that you say to mean it is better to
deal with a person or thing you know, even if you do not like them,
than to deal with a new person or thing who could be even worse.
Anyway, Kimbo's right here. Better Mushareff than the possibility of
some crackpot tinhead fanatic coming to power with his trigger-happy
fingers on the nuclear button.
Extremely dangerous times we live in, yes siree yes indeedy deedy
deedily do !
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
----00----
Pakistan obtained nukes not to attack Israel or the US, but to defend itself
from nuke-armed India, its historical archrival.
The US State Dept., according to Richard Armitage, under Powell at that
time, revealed that the Bush administration confronted Musharoff right after
9-11 and warned that it either go along with its WOT and Al Queda opposition
or be removed by force and occupied.
Faced with that no-choice situation, ol' Pervez decided to wise to
cooperate. From the git-go, Bush had an uncooperative *ally* that it
strong-armed into submission.
It's damned hard to have trustworthy so-called *allies* when you threaten
them in such a manner. I would think this would feed into the anti-US
sentiment already there, emboldening Al Queda and other opposition.
It's notable that a close alliance with Iran continues to deepen under
Musharoff's rule, and there's little doubt Bhutto would want to break that
alliance if she regained the leadership.
Iran actually can play a stabilizing influence in Pakistan and global
political analysts contend that the US's open hostility toward Iran helps
fuel anti-US forces within Pakistan.
Bush and Cheney's Mideast policy will undoubtedly be regarded as one of the
worst foreign policies in US history, that actually has destabilized the
Mideast, and created a great recruiting inspiration for terror groups.
Doc- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
'DOC' - ( I find it most difficult to actually AGREE with you, but -
for once) You Are RIGHT.
Pakistan's "Nuclear 'armament' is nothing more that 'RESERVING'
themselves a seat - at the next World Nuclear Summit."
I didn't hear anyone here - "CRY FOUL", when Israel armed its own
country (with nuclear capabilities) ???
Just A Thought.
8< |
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
