Where the heck are the terrorists?

The truth is, there aren't terrorists on every corner waiting to set off a bomb. This whole thing has blown up in the media. I know people from all over the world, and generally I say most people just pretty much want to live normal lives, have a family, whatever is normal for them.

I'm just not sure who it is we really should be protecting ourselves from, because I know there is something going on despite the exaggerated terrorist claims. After all airplanes did strike the world trade center.

Troy

Originally posted by debbieanne
If the US govt has access to a weather machine why would they use it on thier own people before others?
[edit on 25/9/2005 by debbieanne]

A lil' off topic but......,probably because the UN banned use on "any other State Party" but says nothing about use on your own country.

www.opcw.org...

Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques

"ARTICLE I

1. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party."

"ARTICLE II

As used in article 1, the term "environmental modification techniques" refers to any technique for changing - through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes--the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space."

"ARTICLE III

1. The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall be without prejudice to the generally recognized principles and applicable rules of international law concerning such use."


So in other words.

You can use it peacefully across the board but you can't use it with intent to harm other countries.


Note, I'm not saying Katrina and Rita were, or were not, "engineered" but this should answer your question.


[edit on 25/9/05 by redmage]

Oh yeah; and didn't everybody already know that we were buddies (facilitating meetings) with the ter... I mean insurgents.

news.bbc.co.uk...

"Mr Rumsfeld said the US regularly "facilitates" meetings between Iraqi officials and insurgents."

"It said the insurgents included representatives of Ansar al-Sunna, which has carried out numerous suicide bombings"

Mr Rumsfeld did not confirm any details of the talks - and sought to downplay their significance.

"I would not make a big deal out of it," he told Fox News.

"Meetings go on frequently with people."

"I think the attention to this is overblown."


Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't part of Bush's re-election platform that the country needed someone who would take a "hard stance" on terror and not try to negotiate with terrorists like a democrat would.

Facilitating meetings doesn't look to "hard" to me, imho.


[edit on 25/9/05 by redmage]

"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has 'closed', the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all their rights unto the leader and gladly so.
How do I know? For this is what I have done. AND I AM CAESAR."

--Julius Caesar

Originally posted by Danie
Im sorry, you are right, you are entiltled to your opinion, i was very pissed off at the moment because something just had happened,

But you think soilders want to be over here, miles from my family? of course not, but when you see the things that theyve seen, you dont complain, it something you cant explain, something that makes you think, God if i couldve only stoped it, done something so things couldve turned out differently, what if these were my children? People dont understand the reason we join up and fight. they say we think were heroes, maybe its true, but as soon as the shooting starts, no one asks to be heroes, no one wants to be the hero, its about your buddies, theyre the heroes, im not asking you to understand, because its something that we dont understand, and maybe well never understand.

Danie, first I would like to apologize for sounding a bit harsh & uncaring, I grieve for all the boys & girls who are way from home "fighting for their country" & I appreciate that their hearts believe they are fighting for "mom, home & apple pie", I just don't believe that is what America is fighting for anymore, I am not real sure it was ever anything but an illusion.
I am an old lady, & I have been around plenty of military men before, I do believe for the most part their hearts are good, I don't doubt that your is too... but I am afraid that our government has done something to your heads that make you not think so well...
I do understand, I really do. I know it is about your buddies. They become more important than family, family may be thousands of miles away & your buddy is right by your side. I was married to a Navy man for 10 years, I know the devotion & loyality that comes with being military.
But my love & devotion for mankind is stronger & I must tell them what I know even if I am ridiculed, laugh at or cursed at... I have been warning people for over 20 years about the corruption in government & the conspiracy to bring in a New World Order of government control... it is my duty as a servant of God & mankind.

[edit on 25-9-2005 by Watchman77]

"That's what's so frustrating about the situation. People think they're fighting for America and Americans, but actually they're fighting, first and foremost, for the business interests that control our politicians.

It's sick, and sad, and all the deluded men and women who sacrifice for this frankenstein monster not only hurt themselves and their countrymen, but they help the beast grow stronger. Blood for oil doesn't mean exactly what most people think, at least not to me. To me, it means that this engine uses blood for lubrication instead of oil. "

Exactly! I couldn't agree more. I honestly believe that the "god" Bush serves requires blood service & I believe Bush is raking up the points with "his god". That is the biggest reason I KNOW that Bush does not worship Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by Dallas

Certainly you are an extremely Intelligent person. If I may be so bold as to ask, are you telling these things of importance to family, friends and neighbors? Are they in turn doing the same?

President Bush is George Bush Junior and not senior. He lacks for certain his Father's experience eg CIA. But his Dad no doubt is telling George things as he go's along. Seems to me George Bush Senior is under heavy U.S. security clearance oaths and can't tell his President Son all.

But can help guide GW if he wishes to hear his Dad? The thing is this. I feel GW screwed up a while ago and now knows it and cannot exactly retract his treatment of Canada, the United Nations as well as his staff that already left.

It's his last term, and I would think GW Bush must do right by the American people. But not allowing freedom to sue big business, standing down on health cost Insurances etc.. costs older Americans the right to feel secure in that way.

Bush was elected from money given to his Presidential campaign from big business. And he had to strike a deal if he were elected to the first and second term with Big Business, eg Oil and Insurance Corps. One deal was to aNOT allow law suits on the big Insurance.

Anyway..it gos on and on and..well..

Dallas

Yes, I am telling these things to as many people as I can, some tell others & some laugh at me & some worry & think I need to get my head examined.
IMHO GW has no desire whatsoever to "do right by the American people".. these people are wanting to build a New America, check out the PNAC a very powerful bunch of people, many of them are good buddies with Bush.

Originally posted by debbieanne
Do any of you understand the background of the Islamic terrorists?
They have an agenda to take over the world. It is a part of their history. they still live in the last millenium.
If the US govt has access to a weather machine why would they use it on thier own people before others?

[edit on 25/9/2005 by debbieanne]

No offence Debbieanne but that is just propaganda BS. There is no islamic plot to take over the world, there was no communist plot to take over the world & there is not even an American plot to take over the world.
The world HAS BEEN TAKEN, now it is just a matter of relocating people where they are wanted & deciding who to let live & who to exterminate.
The reason the US government would use weather machines on there own people is for population reduction, there is a UN mandate for all countries to depopulate & bring their populations down to a "substainable" level in order to preserve & restore the natural wildlands & coastal areas... "Wildlands Project & Rewilding America"

Originally posted by redmage

Originally posted by debbieanne
If the US govt has access to a weather machine why would they use it on thier own people before others?
[edit on 25/9/2005 by debbieanne]

A lil' off topic but......,probably because the UN banned use on "any other State Party" but says nothing about use on your own country.

www.opcw.org...

Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques

"ARTICLE I

1. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party."

"ARTICLE II

As used in article 1, the term "environmental modification techniques" refers to any technique for changing - through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes--the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space."

"ARTICLE III

1. The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall be without prejudice to the generally recognized principles and applicable rules of international law concerning such use."


So in other words.

You can use it peacefully across the board but you can't use it with intent to harm other countries.


Note, I'm not saying Katrina and Rita were, or were not, "engineered" but this should answer your question.


[edit on 25/9/05 by redmage]

Thank you very much for contributing this information, I searched for something on this & didn't have any luck.

Since our government can control weather why didn't they control these hurricanes to help? I completely believe that they were in complete control of these hurricanes & were practicing especially with Opheila... that one was just way to strange in how it acted.

Originally posted by Danie
pay attention to the soilders, maybe youll understand what i dont, its not about politics, its about your buddies,theyre family, dont tell you dont know why were over here, when you watch a suicide bomber blow himself up and kill civilians, yea theyres oil and other crap but why dont you look at the positive, and youre right soilders do complain, but not as much as civilians cuz *gasp* gas prices.

everything gets pushed to the side when your best friend is over there. It sucks not knowing when he will come back or if some asshole will set up a roadside bomb....the fact remains they are overthere and they need to be supported. no matter what your political veiws are or the fantasies about the government creating katrina to wreak havok against its own people.....family and friends are over there and need to be supported. I give complete respect to anyone serving our country...

Originally posted by Danie
since when does the us army kill women and children, was there any reason to accuse the military of something like that?

Yes because mostly that's who the US military kills. I understand perfectly, and I agree - if you're hunting for a few terrorists, then killing thousands of civilians in the process is simply mass murder, just as the US army is doing.

Go to google and type "Iraq civilian casualties" to get an idea of just how many women and children are regularly killed by the psychopathic US forces.

we get 2 seconds to react when an iraqi "civilian" pulls out a gun or lobs a grenade, You have as long as you want to criticize us for our decisions. you tell me whats easier, pulling the trigger and ending the life of a person whos goal in life is to strap himself to a bomb and kill as many people as he can, or writing to the family of a dead buddy trying to explain why he died? Any one that has children will know that they would want that soilder to pull the trigger and kill the "civilian" thats trying to kill their son. Just because google says that we kill civilians doesnt mean its true, they arent up there on the front lines.

There are resistance fighters hiding out in the city of mosques, some with their wives and children.

So, instead of sweep and clear to detain fighters, y'all just let off a few hundred broadsides using the gunships. No more terrorists, no more city.

This is what they're talking about with women and children.

Fallujah will never be the same, and if there is any justice in the world, neither will the trigger-men responsible for the swaths of destruction. This is the real problem, gross disregard for innocent life.

Not many marines are hardcore enough to blow away women and children lined up on the street, if it does happen at all it would have to be isolated incidents. On the other hand, one 'hooah' and any marine worth his salt will shed all compunctions about laying into a civilian population with heavy ordinance.

This is the separation of modern warfare.

Button pushing doesn't give sufficient reason for restraint, unlike genuine face to face murders. There's no visual detterent, no cowering women, no crying children. It's all displayed in cold, dispassionate pixels on a monitor.

It's not that soldiers fighting this war are bad people. They're normal folks, conditioned to kill, commanded by civilian business men with no compassion. This is the real problem, the detachment at various levels. Y'all are worlds away from the victims, and the REAL perpetrators are even further removed from the pain and consequence of war.

It's a shame.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
There are resistance fighters hiding out in the city of mosques, some with their wives and children.

So, instead of sweep and clear to detain fighters, y'all just let off a few hundred broadsides using the gunships. No more terrorists, no more city.

This is what they're talking about with women and children.

Fallujah will never be the same, and if there is any justice in the world, neither will the trigger-men responsible for the swaths of destruction. This is the real problem, gross disregard for innocent life.

Not many marines are hardcore enough to blow away women and children lined up on the street, if it does happen at all it would have to be isolated incidents. On the other hand, one 'hooah' and any marine worth his salt will shed all compunctions about laying into a civilian population with heavy ordinance.

This is the separation of modern warfare.

Button pushing doesn't give sufficient reason for restraint, unlike genuine face to face murders. There's no visual detterent, no cowering women, no crying children. It's all displayed in cold, dispassionate pixels on a monitor.

It's not that soldiers fighting this war are bad people. They're normal folks, conditioned to kill, commanded by civilian business men with no compassion. This is the real problem, the detachment at various levels. Y'all are worlds away from the victims, and the REAL perpetrators are even further removed from the pain and consequence of war.

It's a shame.

are you saying were in wrong killing the people that are trying to kill us?

we dont push buttons, we pull triggers.

we walk down the streets waiting to get shot at to shoot back, its not about bombing from 30,000 ft.

[edit on 25-9-2005 by Danie]

are you saying were in wrong killing the people that are trying to kill us?

Of course not. You have the right to self defense no matter what.

But it's not as though it's your goddamn living room. It's Iraq. You're not defending your house, or your family, or your front yard, or even your neighborhood or state. There's no imminent danger to your people.

You're there on a lame-brained humanitarian mission coinciding with a shooting war. It's a freakin' disaster no matter how you slice it, and your presence there is voluntary, just like every other soldier.

You are essentially twisting the question, because it's really not one of self-defense, it's one of personal responsibility. You're responsible for yourself being in that street with a rifle, just like your enemy.

If I take my rifle and start doing house to house searches for terrorists in a neighboring city, can I claim self-defense when some person draws a gun on me and I plug 'em? NO! Of course not! I wasn't supposed to be there! That's their house!

This is the issue.

The self-defense angle wouldn't enter into it if y'all had stayed home and actually defended the country from foreign agressors. Are the muslim extremists going to shoot across the ocean with RPG rounds and hand-me-down Kalashnikovs?

The American military is not a police force for hire, available to corporate interests for the forcible opening of new markets. If it were, your self defense angle would be viable, because you would have jurisdiction on the streets of Iraq.

we dont push buttons, we pull triggers.

Some of you maybe. Are you saying Marines weren't flying the gunships providing air support for the assault on the city of mosques? Because that would contradict what I know about the incident. If I'm wrong, I'd like to be corrected.

we walk down the streets waiting to get shot at to shoot back..

What do you suppose would happen if the Chinese and Russian militaries combined to pull this stunt on American streets?

Look, I know it's just a job, but I can't excuse personal responsibility.

Decisions were made, by you and your buddies. As a result of those decisions, y'all are in a world of #. It sucks.

But you've got nobody to blame but yourselves for the decision, and it's the decision that carries all the weight.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne

are you saying were in wrong killing the people that are trying to kill us?

Of course not. You have the right to self defense no matter what.

But it's not as though it's your goddamn living room. It's Iraq. You're not defending your house, or your family, or your front yard, or even your neighborhood or state. There's no imminent danger to your people.

You're there on a lame-brained humanitarian mission coinciding with a shooting war. It's a freakin' disaster no matter how you slice it, and your presence there is voluntary, just like every other soldier.

You are essentially twisting the question, because it's really not one of self-defense, it's one of personal responsibility. You're responsible for yourself being in that street with a rifle, just like your enemy.

If I take my rifle and start doing house to house searches for terrorists in a neighboring city, can I claim self-defense when some person draws a gun on me and I plug 'em? NO! Of course not! I wasn't supposed to be there! That's their house!

This is the issue.

The self-defense angle wouldn't enter into it if y'all had stayed home and actually defended the country from foreign agressors. Are the muslim extremists going to shoot across the ocean with RPG rounds and hand-me-down Kalashnikovs?

The American military is not a police force for hire, available to corporate interests for the forcible opening of new markets. If it were, your self defense angle would be viable, because you would have jurisdiction on the streets of Iraq.

we dont push buttons, we pull triggers.

Some of you maybe. Are you saying Marines weren't flying the gunships providing air support for the assault on the city of mosques? Because that would contradict what I know about the incident. If I'm wrong, I'd like to be corrected.

we walk down the streets waiting to get shot at to shoot back..

What do you suppose would happen if the Chinese and Russian militaries combined to pull this stunt on American streets?

Look, I know it's just a job, but I can't excuse personal responsibility.

Decisions were made, by you and your buddies. As a result of those decisions, y'all are in a world of #. It sucks.

But you've got nobody to blame but yourselves for the decision, and it's the decision that carries all the weight.

What makes you think the war in iraq is the reason i joined up, ive been in the marines for a while. i didnt say oh yes theyres a war im cant wait to go shoot people. A good soilder never asks for war. Before the terrorist attacks before everything. the difference between us going into iraq and patroling the streets, and russia and other countries invading and patroling our streets is that we wont strap ourselves into a bomb and kill other american civilians such as suicide bombers are attacking their own civilians.

[edit on 25-9-2005 by Danie]

Danie
the difference between us going into iraq and patroling the streets, and russia and other countries invading and patroling our streets is that we wont strap ourselves into a bomb and kill other american civilians such as suicide bombers are attacking their own civilians.

I would say that this is an invalid argument.

I defy any american to turn on their local news and not hear about civilian on civilian violence/murder.

Gang warfare with drive-by's and stray bullet casualties, Columbine highschool, various "crazies" going "postal" at work, and the like occur on a daily basis.

Recently, in my city, a teen girl's body was found in multiple parks, dismembered, due to an argument over a guy with another girl.

Does this give Russia/China a right to intervene?

Sure, methods vary, but civilian on civilian murder is rampant here; and imho, it does not give a foreign power responsibility or right to intervene.

Watchman77
Thank you very much for contributing this information, I searched for something on this & didn't have any luck.

Since our government can control weather why didn't they control these hurricanes to help?

Your welcome and good question.

whskybarjd67
family and friends are over there and need to be supported.

Agreed, and I wish them all a safe and quick return home.

However, there is a great difference between supporting our troops, and supporting those in power who are misusing and abusing them.

Iraq is a War of choice, not nescessity, based in lies. A gross misuse of our troops there, and as for abuse it is disgusting.

As for just one example; is it not enough that their lives are in danger from weapons of war but now they need to worry about their own food?

www.halliburtonwatch.org...

Halliburton is already proffiting from inflated "no bid" contracts for rebuilding and support; but, to further line their pockets, they do so at our troops expense. Where is the "support" there?

Unfortunately, for most americans, support seems to mean buying a magnetic ribbon for their car and giving up a "yay troops" every once in a while; instead of trying to get to the root of the misuse and abuse that our troops recive and making these atrocities public knowledge to promote change.


[edit on 25/9/05 by redmage]

since when is the life of one individual more valuable than the life of of 20?

sadly enought .....Since 9/11....

It's real easy to criticise Danie when you're not the one out there making life and death decisions daily...He is. Everybody talks like we are some country trying to take over the dessert out there. If our only intentions were oil we wouldn't be rebuillding infrastructure. You think the US is new to nation building? Get real and go get a history book, we've been doing this for 60 years. What makes you people think we will fail for the first time now? Your hate and vitriole for Bush blinds you to the facts. And it's a proven fact no nation has went through a newly elected government without large amounts of civilian casualties. Freedom always has an enemy who will fight until the government is stable. Do I think we are ONLY over there for freeing the Iraqi people...no, Do I think we are over there for several reasons one being freeing an opressed country in a strategic location to our enemies...yes. War is not fair, it never has been and it never will be, there will be ugly parts to every war and people such as yourselves that cannot stomach it, only accept it after it is over and the benefits are too obvious to blind yourself to any longer.

Originally posted by rstrik
It's real easy to criticise Danie when you're not the one out there making life and death decisions daily...He is.

It's real easy for Danie to pretend that being out there in the ranks gives him a better perspective than anyone else. In case you forgot, the army is a hierarchy and all Danie does is obey orders and kill who he's told to kill. More than that, the army is a well-oiled propaganda and patriotism-inducing machine to keep the morale up and soldiers happy thinking that they are doing a "great" thing for the world. Need I remind you that the nazis were convinced that what they are doing is "good" and "right" as well, and necessary for security of the world and Germany at large?

Everybody talks like we are some country trying to take over the dessert out there.

We're not, we already did take it over. Now we're just establishing ourselves permanently and creating the laws/rules we want through our puppet government there.

If our only intentions were oil we wouldn't be rebuillding infrastructure.

Yes we would, to look like we care. For the world, and our victims to go along with us, we need to maintain certain appearances, even if they are only that - appearances.

You think the US is new to nation building? Get real and go get a history book, we've been doing this for 60 years.

Yes CIA has been overthrowing democratically elected leaders and anyone else they didn't like for a long time now, I agree. We've been invading or sponsoring coops throughout history, and have assassinated or overthrown anyone who dared stand up to us. So this is not the first time by far that we're responsible for armed invasion and takeover of a sovereign nation to make ourselves richer and more powerful.

What makes you people think we will fail for the first time now?

Oh I agree, we didn't fail - we invaded and took over Iraq just fine, it doesn't look like we messed up. Though if/when we try the same thing with Iran, the risk is much higher.

Your hate and vitriole for Bush blinds you to the facts.

Maybe your love for him blinds you? Pointing out someone's objective actions is not "hate", it is simply looking at reality. If someone is a murderer and you call him a murderer, it is not hate, it is reality. However, if someone is a murderer and you look away and pretend he's not, that may very well be "blindness from adoration".

And it's a proven fact no nation has went through a newly elected government without large amounts of civilian casualties.

Funny that we're the ones causing all the casualties...

Freedom always has an enemy who will fight until the government is stable.

Yes, usually that enemy is the US of A - we invaded Iraq and took away any freedom and sovereignty that country had, and decided that we're in charge now. We did that with many other places covertly as well. But then again, it's alright to take away freedom and murder thousands as long as you do it in the name of "freedom and democracy", right?

Do I think we are ONLY over there for freeing the Iraqi people...no

That was never the intention, nor the result. They were free before we invaded, they were free to have any government they want, and if they want totalitarian, that is their CHOICE. By denying them the option of having the kind of government they want, we took away their freedom.

, Do I think we are over there for several reasons one being freeing an opressed country in a strategic location to our enemies...yes.

Then why is it that throughout history we overthrew democratic governments and installed fascist dictatorships? Why is it that we dealt and were friends and suppoted Saddam Hussein before, and we were just fine with him? And who are these "enemies" you speak of? It seems anyone who opposes US oppression is an enemy of US. And did we free the country? No, we oppressed it even more, and killed far more people than Saddam ever dreamed of in the process.

War is not fair, it never has been and it never will be, there will be ugly parts to every war and people such as yourselves that cannot stomach it, only accept it after it is over and the benefits are too obvious to blind yourself to any longer.

Was is not fair, you are right - it is always based on lies, and it always ends with the stronger bully becoming even stronger than before. The benefits are obvious I agree - our government gets more power, our corporations get richer, Iraq is under new management, thousands of innocent people die in the process, and we expect the world to look at us not as mass murderers, invaders, and occupiers (which is what we are), but as "liberators", even though we liberated no one, but killed and now control many.

Democracy cannot be installed at gun point, it never has been, and it never will be. People must choose it for themselves, otherwise it's a contradiction - you cannot make people "free" by imposing YOUR will on them and calling it "freedom".