I think this says a lot about the "eminent threat"

[Sethomas]

Go read the message board rules and come back when you can add something pertinant to this conversation.

Go read the goddamn URL of this page. Hint: it rhymes with "i-clockery". Then try to attain at least a middle school comprehension of satire.

[Abcdxxxx]

Zero " If you think all Hitler did was put people in camps, then you are a sad and ignorant individual. Perhaps, I need to spell it out for you. "

So it wasn't Hitlers ACTIONS towards his plan of a final solution that gave Hitler his reputation? You're just impressed with yourself because you understand how Germany was manipulated into rallying behind such a plan. If Bush is writing a new Holocaust intended for the Arab population, he's barely cracked the first few pages.

Zero "Bush and his cronies are emplying the same tactics that Hitler, Goering and Goebbels used; create enemies for your people to hate and to rally behind you against them."

If that's your point, then chose a dictator (and there have been many) better suited to your analogy. Hitler, Goering and Goebbels did much, much more then merely create enemies for their people to solve some domestic problems. Their motives were far deeper then economics, and nationalism.

Zero - "Hitler wanted the Jews out of Germany as he knew that the German people were tired of getting fucked over by them. The Jews had most of the money in Germany at the time, and were extremely stingy with it."

According to you the Germans were "fucked over", and the Jews were "rich" and "stngy". You are a Nazi sympathiser.

Zero - "Hitler created some dogmatic agenda using the theory of the Aryan race to remove them. He knew how to manipulate people. It is an age-old tactic. "

"remove them" or attempt to eradicate their existance from the earth? There's a difference. It matters a great deal.


Also , on your oddly out of place Sharon quote...could you cite a source please? maybe explain how it's relevant to the discussion in this thread? Otherwise I just see you belittling, and rewriting the Holocaust while tossing in some fabricated quote feeding into the blood libels that antisemites have used for years to persecute Jews.

[Jeanette X]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

I was actually talking about Bin Laden's two faced ability to work alongside his enemies, including Saddam. While Saddam might have run a "secular pan-Arab nationalist" government (and how secular was it if every religion outside of Islam was persecuted?) He himself has put up a strong Muslim identity.and that's a pretty strong message in a "my way goes" dictatorship.

I have yet to see any proof of Bin Laden working with Saddam. Furthermore, although Saddam has put up a strong Muslim identity, he has persecuted other Muslims, not just non-Muslim religions. The Shiite Muslims of southern Iraq and the Sunni Muslim Kurds (Saddam is a Sunni Muslim, by the way) of northern Iraq have both been horribly persecuted by Saddam for purely political reasons.

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Ask Abu Nidal.

I'm afraid don't even know who that is. :blush Please explain further.

[Zero Signal]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Zero " If you think all Hitler did was put people in camps, then you are a sad and ignorant individual. Perhaps, I need to spell it out for you. "

So it wasn't Hitlers ACTIONS towards his plan of a final solution that gave Hitler his reputation? You're just impressed with yourself because you understand how Germany was manipulated into rallying behind such a plan. If Bush is writing a new Holocaust intended for the Arab population, he's barely cracked the first few pages.

I am impressed with myself? For reading about the history of what went on? Right.

"Bush has barely cracked the first few pages" What, were you expecting him to completely carry out his agenda in just two and a half years? Oh please. You are so short-sighted you cannot even see the nose on your own face.

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Zero "Bush and his cronies are emplying the same tactics that Hitler, Goering and Goebbels used; create enemies for your people to hate and to rally behind you against them."

If that's your point, then chose a dictator (and there have been many) better suited to your analogy. Hitler, Goering and Goebbels did much, much more then merely create enemies for their people to solve some domestic problems. Their motives were far deeper then economics, and nationalism.

Sure their motives were deeper. You do not think that Bush's are not either? Bush used the word "crusade" to describe their campaigns in the Arab world, and said that God was behind him in doing that. Hitler honestly thought he was carrying out the will of God, too, but that is beside the point.

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Zero - "Hitler wanted the Jews out of Germany as he knew that the German people were tired of getting fucked over by them. The Jews had most of the money in Germany at the time, and were extremely stingy with it."

According to you the Germans were "fucked over", and the Jews were "rich" and "stngy". You are a Nazi sympathiser.

So I am a Nazi sympathizer because I explained it in the mindset of what Hilter was feeding his people? He convinced the Germans that the Jews were to blame for the economic depression that Germany was experiencing. People lit their woodstoves with piles of German marks because they were so worthless. So I guess all of the history books are sympathizing with the Nazis, too.

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Zero - "Hitler created some dogmatic agenda using the theory of the Aryan race to remove them. He knew how to manipulate people. It is an age-old tactic. "

"remove them" or attempt to eradicate their existance from the earth? There's a difference. It matters a great deal.

Eradicating their existence from the Earth is a moot point. He would do the same thing to anyone that disagreed with him, Jews or not. His initial plan was getting them out of Germany first, and as he conquered nations he would remove them from there as well.

[Zero Signal]

Originally Posted by Jeanette X

I'm afraid don't even know who that is. :blush Please explain further.

http://i-cias.com/e.o/abu_nidal.htm

[Jeanette X]

Thank you for the link Zero Signal. Very informative.

[Abcdxxxx]

Zero -

A) if a history book explained Hitler's motivations by describing the mass majority of WW2's victims with such blame and scorn - it most certainly would be considered sympathetic and antisemetic. Worse you're doing it to back up a lame Hitler-Bush comparison.


B) Hitler's targets were a lot more specific then "anyone who disagreed with him". The periphial deaths involved with large scale war play do zero to negate that.

Jeanette - That bio doesn't really explain what I was getting at...plus he cut of most of his Palestinian ties 25 years ago. Abu Nidal was a mercenery for hire used by everyone from the IRA to the Japanese Red army. Sometimes they'd hire him just to take credit for terrorist actions. He was untouchable. His strongest relations were with Libya and most recently - Iraq, where he was found dead. The official story is he commited suicide but, in reality it's more likely that Saddam wanted him to train the Al Qaeda sects in Iraq, and when he refused, they assasinated him... even if you don't want to believe that, one thing is for certain.... Abu Nidal was living in a retirement complex near the Tibris set up for Senior Terrorists of virtually every terrorist group, both state sponsored or otherwise - regardless of affiliations.

[Anonymous]

uh, just to clarify, do we have any proof that Osama and/or Al Qaeda were responsible for the 9/11 attacks yet? I mean, when I was watching the news that day they already had his picture up and were listing him as the prime suspect within 30 minutes of the second tower getting hit. Just seems a little...uh...stupid?

[Zhukov]

I was watching the news that day they already had his picture up and were listing him as the prime suspect within 30 minutes of the second tower getting hit. Just seems a little...uh...stupid?

Maybe it wasn't the total surprise to the CIA as they led you to believe.

[Jeanette X]

Why would Nidal refuse though?

[Abcdxxxx]

Nidal was sick. He was in Iraq to recieve treatments for a mild skin cancaer. He was trying ti retire...

...plus he was living undergound as one of the most wanted men alive , before popping up in Egypt around 1997. Pres. Mubarak hired him to fight Al Qaeda and Islamic Jihad, before they gained too much power. Even the Clinton White House backed the plan to try and turn the fundamentalist groups against each other. There's no proof, but it's been said that the Abu Nidal Organization worked alongside US Special Ops to clear out terrorist cells in prep for maneuvers in Kosovo.

In 2000. Nidal started double dealing, and selling intelligence on the US and Egypt, most likely to Al Qaeda itself, then took off for Iraq Clinton killed the CIA investigation into Nidal and Al Qaeda went ahead with 9/1 shortly after.

If you believe there were Al Qarda training camps in pro-Iraq fundamentalist Kurdish towns of Biyar and Tawil in the shoman district of Norhtern Iraq - then Nidal played the laison role between Saddam and the Al Qada. He would have been killed for knowing too much, and to send a message to Yassar Arafat and others who might want to deal with the US. A terrorist by the name of Abu Iyad was killed in 1991 for the same reason.

If you don't believe the training camps existed, or that a connection exists, then it's like Abu Nidal was killed for refusing to make the arrangements. He was brought to Baghdad shortly after working with Bin Laden.

[Jeanette X]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

If you believe there were Al Qarda training camps in pro-Iraq fundamentalist Kurdish towns of Biyar and Tawil in the shoman district of Norhtern Iraq -

Wait...why would any Kurd be pro-Iraq, given the past history of atrocites enacted against them by Saddam? And why would any fundamentalist Kurd support Saddam, when he is not a fundamentalist?

[Abcdxxxx]

Originally Posted by Jeanette X

Wait...why would any Kurd be pro-Iraq, given the past history of atrocites enacted against them by Saddam? And why would any fundamentalist Kurd support Saddam, when he is not a fundamentalist?

Not all Kurds are anti-Iraq. Not all Kurds belong to the same faction.

Weren't you the one trying to call Saddam an equal opportunist mass murderer? I think you're confused.

Saddam wasn't some liberal or progressive leader, and his support/opposition wasn't as black and white as you seem to think. Remember that when Saddam stopped the coup attempt against him after the first Gulf War it was because of inside tip offs. Once again it's a case of "my brother, my enemy". To understand why Kurds, Bin Laden and Saddam would all work together you have to also ask yourself why Saddam and Iran would want to work together? Or Syria with Sadam? You don't have to agree or like your partners in terror to make deals with them, and use their resources.

[Jeanette X]

I just can't understand how any Kurd would be pro-Iraq. Can you tell me more about the pro-Iraq Kurdish faction(s)?

[Abcdxxxx]

The Kurds are known for being the best fighters in the Middle East, and they work as guns for hire. The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan has a long standing feud with the Kurdistan Democratic Party, who joined up with Iraqi troops.

Some of it also goes back to wars against Iran, and the Turks.

It's confusing, but I think all this stuff is VERY relevant to forming an opinion based on something other then distrust and dissent.