You are being lied to about pirates

[Cassin]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/pirates-the-80m-gulf-connection-1671657.html

Interesting!

 

[The Gardener]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/pirates-the-80m-gulf-connection-1671657.html

Wouldn't surprise me if the loot is all being sucked up by Wall Street cronies... like they've been doing with drug money from other developing parts of the world.

 

[patagonia]

.

 

[patagonia]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/pirates-the-80m-gulf-connection-1671657.html

Wouldn't surprise me if the loot is all being sucked up by Wall Street cronies... like they've been doing with drug money from other developing parts of the world.

I`m glad you said this Gardener.

as they say: wanna know who`s really in charge..... just follow the money.

 

[The Gardener]

If you're looking for a great read on the topic of "who's in charge" and how ugly things have gotten, this one is excellent. It's long, but fascinating.... Written by a former investment banker and assistant secretary at HUD, the government housing agency:

http://www.dunwalke.com/1_Brady_Bush_Bechtel.htm

 

[chore boy]

IMO, this is just another example of people testing our military and coming up short. Guess it's the patriot in me but I'd like to have been the one that pulled the trigger. They were threats to America's freedoms and they were dealt with accordingly.

 

[patagonia]

IMO, this is just another example of people testing our military and coming up short. Guess it's the patriot in me but I'd like to have been the one that pulled the trigger. They were threats to America's freedoms and they were dealt with accordingly.

why don`t you start by pulling the trigger on your avatar? its such a bummer.

 

[patagonia]

If you're looking for a great read on the topic of "who's in charge" and how ugly things have gotten, this one is excellent. It's long, but fascinating.... Written by a former investment banker and assistant secretary at HUD, the government housing agency:

http://www.dunwalke.com/1_Brady_Bush_Bechtel.htm

good link... been reading it all day at work... :whistle:

on the same avenue, id recomend Dope Inc. (the group behind this book is contoversial) but a good read if you want to follow the timeline and who really controls the "Drug" business .....


http://www.amazon.com/Dope-Inc-Drov...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240524394&sr=8-1


chore boy: int:

 

[HughJass]

IMO, this is just another example of people testing our military and coming up short. Guess it's the patriot in me but I'd like to have been the one that pulled the trigger. They were threats to America's freedoms and they were dealt with accordingly.

so I take you are either serving in Iraq or Afghanistan right now?

 

[Dblbass128]

IMO, this is just another example of people testing our military and coming up short. Guess it's the patriot in me but I'd like to have been the one that pulled the trigger. They were threats to America's freedoms and they were dealt with accordingly.

how were the pirates a threat to american freedom? Pirates from a third world country should be the last of your worries

 

[chore boy]

How are they not a threat? They're launching RPGs at American vessels and attempting to intercept ships conducting legal business.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/International/story?id=7331134


They are engaging in terrorist operations, and like I said, are dealt with accordingly.

 

[The Gardener]

"terrorist" operations?

While I might agree that they are engaging in criminal conduct to make money, I would HARDLY call them "terrorists". It's not like they have killed anyone, or done ANYTHING with the intent of creating "terror".

I am so tired of this Orwellian "Bush-speak" where all who oppose sovereign interests are labelled "terrorists".

 

[patagonia]

Noam Chomsky on "terrorism":

"The problem lies in the unwillingness to recognise that your own terrorism is terrorism"

Excalibur (Ex): How important is an understanding of the role of states such as the U.S. and the U.K. when examining the question of terrorism?

Chomsky (Ch): It depends on whether we want to be honest and truthful or whether we want to just serve state power ( . . . ) We should look at all forms of terrorism.

I have been writing on terrorism for 25 years, ever since the Reagan administration came in 1981 and declared that the leading focus of its foreign policy was going to be a war on terror. A war against state directed terrorism which they called the plague of the modern world because of their barbarism and so on. That was the centre of their foreign policy and ever since I have been writing about terrorism.

But what I write causes extreme anger for the very simple reason that I use the U.S. government's official definition of terrorism from the official U.S. code of laws. If you use that definition, it follows very quickly that the U.S. is the leading terrorist state and a major sponsor of terrorism and since that conclusion is unacceptable, it arouses furious anger. But the problem lies in the unwillingness to recognize that your own terrorism is terrorism. This is not just true of the United States, it's true quite generally. Terrorism is something that they do to us. In both cases, it's terrorism and we have to get over that if we're serious about the question.

Ex: The colonial legacy is generally dismissed by the media. What role does this legacy play in the emergence of home-grown terrorists in countries such as the U.S., the U.K. and Canada as well as to the creation of terrorism as a whole?

Chomsky: It's not brought up in the West because it's inconvenient to think about your own crimes. Just look at the major conflicts going on around the world today, in Africa, the Middle East, in South Asia, most of them are residues of colonial systems.

Colonial systems imposed and created artificial states that had nothing to do with the needs and concerns and relations of the populations involved. They were created in the interests of colonial powers and as old fashioned colonialism turned into modern neo-colonialism, a lot of these conflicts erupted into violence and those are a lot of the atrocities happening in the world today.

How can anyone say colonialism isn't relevant? Of course it is and it's even more directly relevant.

Take the London bombing in 2005. Blair tried to pretend that it had nothing to do with Britain's participation in the invasion of Iraq. That's completely ridiculous. The British intelligence and the reports of the people connected in the bombing, they said that the British participation in the invasion and resulting horrors in Iraq inflamed them and they wanted to do something in reaction.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15416.htm

 

[Bryan]

While I might agree that they are engaging in criminal conduct to make money, I would HARDLY call them "terrorists". It's not like they have killed anyone, or done ANYTHING with the intent of creating "terror".

"Please, your Honor, I'm not a 'terrorist', I'm just a humble kidnapper/murderer trying to make a living. So can you please remove these handcuffs and let me get back to work?"

 

[chore boy]

It appears that there's no clear definition of terrorism. I found this definition and it's what I'd assume the correct definition to be:

"the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear"

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/terrorist

While the Somalis' M.O. might not fall directly into this definition, you have to admit that they are conducting themselves as terrorists... i.e. the threat of violence or intimidation in order to attain goals. Hell, even if they're not terrorists, they're still criminals. There's no way they weren't warned repaeatedly to stop HIJACKING ships. I don't give a sh*t how hard they're strapped for cash... they know the difference between right and wrong and they choose the latter. All's fair at that point.

 

[HughJass]

so when are you going over there to pull that trigger chore boy?

 

[chore boy]

Is there something wrong with being a patriot? Is there something wrong with having pride in your country and fully supporting its military endeavours? I apologize to everyone that thinks all the world's problems can be solved through negotiations.

 

[The Gardener]

Whoa Whoa Whoa....

I, speaking for myself at least, am not questioning at all the use of force to free the hijacked crew from the pirates. I'm just saying that I don't believe they are "terrorists", I believe they are criminals. "Terrorist" is a loaded Orwellian "Bush-speak" term that I think has been applied too liberally in order to justify unquestioned use of force and RELINQUISHMENT of freedoms and civil rights. That's what makes it so "Orwellian" to me... the relinquishment of freedom in order to protect freedom?

I DO question the use of force as the be and and end all of solutions to problems. NO I DO NOT think that "all the world's problems can be solved through negotiations" (thanks for throwing that smelly red herring out for all of us to smell), but I DO think that SOME situations are best dealt with using non-military solutions. Sometimes the military solution creates a bigger problem in the end than the initial problem did.

And is not questioning things the government does "patriotic" in a democratic society? Correct me if I am wrong, but did not this country's founding patriots believe strongly in a free and open press, and in checks and balances to government, and in the right of the public to have representation and a voice in government?

 

[chore boy]

but I DO think that SOME situations are best dealt with using non-military solutions.

Like what, Iran and N. Korea? They know we're not invading them and as you've seen, they're flipping us a fat birdie while they continue to do whatever the fuk they want.

 

[chore boy]

How do you guys quote a portion of what another poster said like Bryan did up there? I tried it just now and obviously it didn't work out too well.