Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (92862)	1/7/2005 7:23:56 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

There is nothing here that has not been known since it happened. Remember the Iranian hostage crisis? Victims? I think the victims were American diplomatic personell, not Iranians. Following that, relations between the US and Iran chilled noticeably. Then SH decided to invade Iran. It was hard to pick sides in this one; it would have been nice had both lost. But the US gov't backed Iraq against what it regarded as the greater threat of Iranian Islamic fundamentalism. And supplied Iraq with weapons. Including the makings of chemical weapons (the US kept a stockpile of its own, being uncertain the Soviets had destroyed all of theirs). There's a real world out there. And it isn't pretty. You don't always get nice clean choices. It is not just the buyers, it is suppliers of death who are accountable under the Nuremberg Conventions. Would you care to supply the clause of the treaty(ies) that says that? And links? That censored report, which rightfully belongs to the victims, not Bush, constitutes a major piece of evidence for any impartial war crimes tribunal. Bush is NOT going to be tried by a war crimes tribunal. Get used to it. It was not Saddam's atrocities-his torture rooms, his gassing of the Kurds, the use of chemicals against Iranians, You may have slept through this. I remember hearing of such BEFORE the Kuwait invasion.

To: Grainne who wrote (92862)	1/7/2005 8:29:10 PM
From: cosmicforce	Respond to of 108807

Anyone who cares to be informed probably is by now and I only want to occasionally rally the troops, so to speak, and in some small way increase the cohesiveness of the Truth (whatever that may be). The apologists will continue to banter about why U.S. companies' contributions (allowed and approved by the Reagan administration) to Iraqi gas attacks is different than, say, I.G. Farben (link: dw-world.de who produced gases for the camps. There are those pictures of Rummy shaking hands with the infamous "butcher of Baghdad". Anyone who refuses to see the obvious parallels will dismissively disavow any responsibility, or they start talking about what Clinton did. This is a false dichotomy. Clinton AND Reagan AND Bush AND Nixon AND Johnson could ALL have been wrong in aspects of their foreign policies. And when they acted outside of international law, were wrong. However, I don't think there will be much of a head of steam for prosecuting anyone because the U.S. does control the field. People of conscience still care. Bush's grand-dad Prescott was one of the few people who could finance the Nazi's and funnel money to them. (link: guardian.co.uk And while I don't believe that the sins of the father should be visited upon the son (or grandfather/son/grandson, in this particular case), only an idiot wouldn't recognize that the fruit doesn't fall far from the tree, especially in powerful and connected ruling dynasties ... JMO.