Re: [Biofuel] It's imperialism, stupid

Fri, 08 Jul 2005 07:12:27 -0700

"If YOU look at the information out there, you will find the basis for the war."
 
People in this forum have found it important to address the effect of misinformation directed at us from the White House, defense department and corporate media which have been, by enlarge, the cause of statements like the one above.
 
If you really feel strongly about defending your current position, I suspect that Todd will not be your only sparring partner in this debate.
 
Mike

Jill Mello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Okay,

I joined this list to talk about how to create & run engines on biofuel, now
I find I'm bombarded with talk show chatter in my e-mail box? This debate
runs into our daily lives and affects our thoughts and pocketbooks
tremendously. However, it would be nice if we were respectful by not
stating that people have "lack of and disjointed reasoning" and stating to
get their head "out of their own stink". In doing this, you insult all of
us who have the view that the war in Irag is essential to our security.

Baghdad, for the past 30 years, was THE hotbed of terrorist support. If YOU
look at the information out there, you will find the basis for the war.
Most people I know, and I'm from the New England, next to California, the
most liberal minded area of the country, have found that once they've
reviewed ALL the information out there, not just what they hear on the news
and in the newspapers (God help us with the Boston Globe!) that the reality
is that Hussein PAID, in thousands of US dollars, people to blow themselves
up, encouraged the terrorist training camps, supplied Bin Laden with safe
have, worked with Syria to provide comfort to our enemy and threatened us
with creating nuclear arms.

Does this mean that Iran and N. Korea should be ignored? No, as Iran is a
complicated mess and N. Korea has a leader who is varifiably insane. Both
would love to wipe us off the map. But, Iraq being a healthy country will
help us in influencing other countries to discourage terrorists.

You do not have to agree with me, that's what is beautiful about this
country. I have friends fighting and training Iraqi troops, their culture
is one of fear, they don't dare disagree with a leader, it's been ingrained
in them from birth. It will take some years of US presence to help
alleviate this. You and I don't have that, we are allowed to speak, but
what is essential is that we do it respectfully. I enjoy a good debate, but
not one that tears others down. I ask that if you are posting to a public
site, like this one, that you keep it respectful.

A well-respected talk show host said the following yesterday,
If we were united in this country, if we all understood what the purpose
here was, that it's all about guarding against another terrorist attack for
our kids and grandkids, all about making sure there's not another 9/11 -- or
if there is, we'll know of it in enough time to stop it. That's what we're
trying to achieve. But as long as we're not united here and the voices of
opposition to this continually misrepresent what our objective is, and
continually misrepresent our purpose as just "we want oil, Bush and Cheney
want oil, or Halliburton needs more money," or what have you, as long as it
keeps being obfuscated like that, it's just going to make the task all that
much more difficult, as World War II would have been that much more
difficult had we not been unified in beating Hitler and Japan and all the
others, Mussolini, that we faced. So it's not easy. It's very, very hard.
But the answer ultimately, the short version is, we have to establish
circumstances that we know exist because they work here. Culturally it
doesn't matter; all cultures come to this country and thrive because of
freedom. We need to establish the same circumstances where human beings
around the world have the same grand, God-given freedom we do to determine
their own fate. The vast majority of free people want to pursue life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not learning how to fly airplanes
into buildings. - Rush

Best regards,

Jill Mello




----- Original Message -----
From: "Appal Energy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 8:32 AM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] It's imperialism, stupid


> Jerry Turner,
>
> Pull your head out of your back socket son and grab some fresh air, at
> least enough so as to start seeing straight instead of being asphyxiated
> by your own stink.
>
> Perhaps the reason why Mr. Chomsky doesn't mention September 11th and
> doesn't play upon the lives lost is because that event and the Iraq war
> are completely unrelated. In case you've managed to grab a little fresh
> air by now - presuming you stilll have the strength left to relax your
> sphincter and let some air flow - it was Benladin and his lot that
> wreaked havoc upon NYC, not Iraq, "stupid."
>
> One should suppose, using your lack of and disjointed reasoning, that
> your household would ground your fourteen year old for life because your
> sixteen year old stole the keys to your car and wrecked it. Or maybe
> it's just anyone with a genetic tan and dark hair? After all, "they all
> look alike to you," anyway, right?
>
> And, presuming you can remember back so recently, it was your mindset
> that was crucifying Mr. Clinton for attempting strikes, declaring that
> they were intentional distractions from his "domestic" concerns. And you
> might also care (probably not) to take a moment to remember that in his
> exit briefing to "Mr." Bush, Mr. Clinton warned that the biggest threat
> to national security at that time was Benladin and Al Quaeda.
> Unfortunately, the new leader of "the free world" chose to dismiss this
> advice and declared that a national missile defense system was the
> biggest national security priority.
>
> But you'd rather white wash Bush's blunder and declare it as someone
> else's fault.
>
> Make up your mind. Or, like the rest of uncivil society on your side of
> the fence, is your expectation to have the best of all worlds and leave
> reality and truth completely out of your fabricated picture?
>
> What seems extremely obvious is the fact that what you "know" is
> relatively little in comparison to what the rest of the world knows.
>
> Todd Swearingen
>
>
> Jerry Turner wrote:
>
> >NOWHERE in Mr. Noam Chomsky post is mentioned that over 2600 AMERICANS
lost
> >their lives and did so on AMERICAN soil!!
> >
> >IMO you would have to be a total moron to even think that the terrorist
> >would have been satisfied taking down the WTC! Hell no they would have
kept
> >on killing AMERICANS at every opportunity.
> >
> > If Clinton would have had the guts to run this country instead of
getting
> >blows jobs in the oval office, 9/11 would have never happened....you know
it
> >and I know it.
> >
> >Jerry Turner
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Keith Addison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To:
> >Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 2:44 PM
> >Subject: [Biofuel] It's imperialism, stupid
> >
> >
> >See also:
> >http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9394.htm
> >Terror Attacks Near 3,200 in 2004 Count
> >
> >----
> >
> >http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9387.htm
> >
> >It's imperialism, stupid
> >
> >By Noam Chomsky
> >
> >07/05/05 "ICH" - - IN his June 28 speech, President Bush asserted
> >that the invasion of Iraq was undertaken as part of "a global war
> >against terror" that the United States is waging. In reality, as
> >anticipated, the invasion increased the threat of terror, perhaps
> >significantly.
> >
> >Half-truths, misinformation and hidden agendas have characterised
> >official pronouncements about US war motives in Iraq from the very
> >beginning. The recent revelations about the rush to war in Iraq stand
> >out all the more starkly amid the chaos that ravages the country and
> >threatens the region and indeed the world.
> >
> >In 2002 the US and United Kingdom proclaimed the right to invade Iraq
> >because it was developing weapons of mass destruction. That was the
> >"single question," as stressed constantly by Bush, Prime Minister
> >Blair and associates. It was also the sole basis on which Bush
> >received congressional authorisation to resort to force.
> >
> >The answer to the "single question" was given shortly after the
> >invasion, and reluctantly conceded: The WMD didn't exist. Scarcely
> >missing a beat, the government and media doctrinal system concocted
> >new pretexts and justifications for going to war.
> >
> >"Americans do not like to think of themselves as aggressors, but raw
> >aggression is what took place in Iraq," national security and
> >intelligence analyst John Prados concluded after his careful,
> >extensive review of the documentary record in his 2004 book
> >"Hoodwinked."
> >
> >Prados describes the Bush "scheme to convince America and the world
> >that war with Iraq was necessary and urgent" as "a case study in
> >government dishonesty ... that required patently untrue public
> >statements and egregious manipulation of intelligence." The Downing
> >Street memo, published on May 1 in The Sunday Times of London, along
> >with other newly available confidential documents, have deepened the
> >record of deceit.
> >
> >The memo came from a meeting of Blair's war cabinet on July 23, 2002,
> >in which Sir Richard Dearlove, head of British foreign intelligence,
> >made the now-notorious assertion that "the intelligence and facts
> >were being fixed around the policy" of going to war in Iraq.
> >
> >The memo also quotes British Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon as saying
> >that "the US had already begun 'spikes of activity' to put pressure
> >on the regime."
> >
> >British journalist Michael Smith, who broke the story of the memo,
> >has elaborated on its context and contents in subsequent articles.
> >The "spikes of activity" apparently included a coalition air campaign
> >meant to provoke Iraq into some act that could be portrayed as what
> >the memo calls a "casus belli."
> >
> >Warplanes began bombing in southern Iraq in May 2002 - 10 tons that
> >month, according to British government figures. A special "spike"
> >started in late August (for a September total of 54.6 tons).
> >
> >"In other words, Bush and Blair began their war not in March 2003, as
> >everyone believed, but at the end of August 2002, six weeks before
> >Congress approved military action against Iraq," Smith wrote.
> >
> >The bombing was presented as defensive action to protect coalition
> >planes in the no-fly zone. Iraq protested to the United Nations but
> >didn't fall into the trap of retaliating. For US-UK planners,
> >invading Iraq was a far higher priority than the "war on terror."
> >That much is revealed by the reports of their own intelligence
> >agencies. On the eve of the allied invasion, a classified report by
> >the National Intelligence Council, the intelligence community's
> >center for strategic thinking, "predicted that an American-led
> >invasion of Iraq would increase support for political Islam and would
> >result in a deeply divided Iraqi society prone to violent internal
> >conflict," Douglas Jehl and David E. Sanger reported in The New York
> >Times last September. In December 2004, Jehl reported a few weeks
> >later, the NIC warned that "Iraq and other possible conflicts in the
> >future could provide recruitment, training grounds, technical skills
> >and language proficiency for a new class of terrorists who are
> >'professionalised' and for whom political violence becomes an end in
> >itself." The willingness of top planners to risk increase of
> >terrorism does not of course indicate that they welcome such
> >outcomes. Rather, they are simply not a high priority in comparison
> >with other objectives, such as controlling the world's major energy
> >resources.
> >
> >Shortly after the invasion of Iraq, Zbigniew Brzezinski, one of the
> >more astute of the senior planners and analysts, pointed out in the
> >journal National Interest that America's control over the Middle East
> >"gives it indirect but politically critical leverage on the European
> >and Asian economies that are also dependent on energy exports from
> >the region." If the United States can maintain its control over Iraq,
> >with the world's second largest known oil reserves, and right at the
> >heart of the world's major energy supplies, that will enhance
> >significantly its strategic power and influence over its major rivals
> >in the tripolar world that has been taking shape for the past 30
> >years: US-dominated North America, Europe, and Northeast Asia, linked
> >to South and Southeast Asia economies.
> >
> >It is a rational calculation, on the assumption that human survival
> >is not particularly significant in comparison with short-term power
> >and wealth. And that is nothing new. These themes resonate through
> >history. The difference today in this age of nuclear weapons is only
> >that the stakes are enormously higher.
> >
> >Noam Chomsky is a professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts
> >Institute of Technology and the author, most recently, of Hegemony or
> >Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance.
> >
> >Copyright: . All rights reserved. You may republish under the
> >following conditions: An active link to the original publication must
> >be provided. You must not alter, edit or remove any text within the
> >article, including this copyright notice.
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Biofuel mailing list
> >Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
> >http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
> >
> >Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> >
> >Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000
> >messages):
> >http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Biofuel mailing list
> >Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
> >http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
> >
> >Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> >
> >Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000
messages):
> >http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Biofuel mailing list
> Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
> http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
>
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>
> Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000
messages):
> http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
>
>



_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Reply via email to