Gossamer Forum
Home : General : Chit Chat :

A war against Iraq?

(Page 10 of 18)
> > > >
 
Re: [anup123] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Don't drink the koolaid, step back from the light....
 
Re: [ArmyAirForces] A war against Iraq? In reply to
I do what i want to...
 
Re: [anup123] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
It's not anything but "Oil Interests" which is causing all this Clone Of Gulf War 1 to happen and not the so called Weapons Of Mass destruction etc a theory doctored by B(ush) B(liar).

Interesting....I guess your sources of information are more realiable than that of the President and the Prime Minister Wink.

Quote:
the so called Precision Guided Stuff is actaully undergoing that beta testing killing civilians in Syria, hitting UK War Planes, landing in Turkey etc etc as a consequence of "straying" (used comfortably by military experts just to cloak some ulterior motive) off its "Precision Guided Path"

Well actually your information is not accurate. A patriot missile hit the UK war plane and was likely the result of a malfunctioning signal the plane was supposed to give off to identify the plane as a "friend". As for the other strays, it is well known that on occasions missiles go astray, in the same way as computers sometimes screw up. These missiles contain mini computers inside.

Quote:
Look who's talking the one who just didn't bother to go thru the gates of UN. Absolute hypocrisy.

Well again, the UN resolution clearly stated force is acceptable without full compliance from Saddam.

Quote:
How would one feel when one sees photograph of kids defaced (and still alive) as a consequence of those so called Precision Bombing.

Well for all you know Iraqi troops could have done that - heard of propoganda?

You should have watched the press conference by Tom Franks yesterday. They showed before and after pictures relating to GPS guided missiles. They can hit a building within a compound and totally nuke it whilst leaving all other buildings in tact.

I can see you obviously have strong opposition or some kind of grudge, which seems to be clouding your judgement.
 
Re: [ArmyAirForces] A war against Iraq? In reply to
The US have credible intelligence to suggest that Saddam has told all his republican guards to withdraw into Baghdad and he has drawn a virtual red line around Baghdad. When US/British troops hit that red line the republican guards have authority to unleash chemical and biological weapons.
 
Re: [Argyll] A war against Iraq? In reply to
>>>Personally, I find the outcome of the ground fighting in Iraq quite surprising so far. I thought the US would have a pretty easy time with the whole thing. But at times they seem to be struggling to go toe-to-toe with the Iraqis. They seem to prefer to wait for air support to clean things up for them rather than getting in there and mixing it up. The Iraqis seem to be pretty tough. <<<

Do you know how hard it is trying to wipe out Iraqis when they are hiding in buildings, and dressing up as civilians? Their 'attack' ploys are what keep getting the civilians killed. They come into families homes, use their house as a stake out..and when they get killed, the family does too. Then they can say 'you killed 5 more civilians, and they were just in their house!' . Saddam is a real dirty piece of work...and the sooner he is killed/out of power, the better, IMO.

Cheers

Andy (mod)
andy@ultranerds.co.uk
Want to give me something back for my help? Please see my Amazon Wish List
GLinks ULTRA Package | GLinks ULTRA Package PRO
Links SQL Plugins | Website Design and SEO | UltraNerds | ULTRAGLobals Plugin | Pre-Made Template Sets | FREE GLinks Plugins!
 
Re: [ArmyAirForces] A war against Iraq? In reply to
The Female British Journalist was reporting that the British Army Engineers were shutting down some of the three hundred (or five hundered) oil wells. These oil wells that were shutting down were waiting to be started by private contractors. Who are the private contractors that will start these oil wells? Who will pay these private contractors? Someone will sell these oil. A lot of times, the crude material is only worth 25% of the product sold. Contracts to install new equipment to pump and ship crude oil would cost a lot more than the crude oil. Ask someone in the U.S. whose family memeber owns a small piece of land with one or two natural gas well or curde oil well. They only get very small portions from the final sales of the gas or oil well. I believe the contracts that Iraq signed with France, German, and Russia are probably about the installation of new equipment to pump and tranport the Crude oil. That's where their interests is. The Crude oil lies under Iraq no doubt belongs to Iraqis. Blindly rubbing Iraqis of their oil is not acceptable but charging billion and billion to install new equipment is acceptable. What is not acceptable to U.S. interests is that the construction and installation contracts will be award to Russians, Germans, and the French if Sadam is in power. If a new Iraqi goverment that is under the control of U.S. will yield to the U.S. and award the these contracts to U.S.
 
Re: [oilrights] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Iraqi oil sales are already administered by the UN. You've heard of the UN Oil for Food program right? Even with that program Saddam has made billions and billions from oil smuggling.

For decades the Iraqis have not benefited from the sale of Iraqi oil, while Saddam clearly has.

I did see last night that Kuwaitis were in the area helping with the survey of the oil fields. Remember that Kuwait is still awaiting war reparations from the August 1990 invasion by Saddam.

Also, if we can get some of this equipment up and running - they might be able to feed some refined product directly into the war effort. As it is now they've been building a pipeline from Kuwait up to the border area, so they can get that fuel forward to coalition assets.
 
Re: [Paul] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
Interesting....I guess your sources of information are more realiable than that of the President and the Prime Minister
B(ush) and B(liar) opinion is not shared by majority. Evident from burgeoning anti war protests. Don't go by the "Propaganda" of 45 countries supporting....count the World Population For And Against....

Quote:
Well actually your information is not accurate. A patriot missile hit the UK war plane and was likely the result of a malfunctioning signal the plane was supposed to give off to identify the plane as a "friend". As for the other strays, it is well known that on occasions missiles go astray, in the same way as computers sometimes screw up. These missiles contain mini computers inside.

So that means it was unmanned? Or manned by D&D pilots. It's quite surprising to see that Iraqi's were not blamed for that. Or possibly there would be a theory postulated that Russians are hiding in Iraq jamming the communication systems of so called "Allied Forces"

Quote:
Well for all you know Iraqi troops could have done that - heard of propoganda?

It could be the other way round. This is being used as an excuse by the "Aggressors" as a cover to hide their action of "Organised Violence Against Humanity" Yeah and heard of the "Propaganda" as postulated by some Australian Professor that Aggressors are trying to "Buy Over" Iraqi Commanders and the propoganda was so ill placed that a junior rank officer of iraqi force was projetced as Commander who had surrendered and when later exposed.... the so called "Press Conferences" shamelessly put up a smiling face to say .... oh it was he who lied for a few dollars more....

Quote:
I can see you obviously have strong opposition or some kind of grudge, which seems to be clouding your judgement

I am not as insensible as the one's who just go by one side of the story and get personal if the discussion is not in tandem with their line of thinking..

And if it satiates your ego to go about being personal (like you always have been on most of the forums with i don't know how many.... will have to track all posts) you can carry on that way becasue with some people habbits die hard be it a Bug Forum or a chit chat forum....

Anup
 
Re: [anup123] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
B(ush) and B(liar) opinion is not shared by majority. Evident from burgeoning anti war protests. Don't go by the "Propaganda" of 45 countries supporting....count the World Population For And Against....

The majority of the US support war and the majority of British people do too. That's all I worry about =)

Quote:
So that means it was unmanned? Or manned by D&D pilots.

No, it was manned and the pilots died.

Quote:
It could be the other way round. This is being used as an excuse by the "Aggressors" as a cover to hide their action of "Organised Violence Against Humanity"

Well some more info for you. There is a popular uprising is Basra and the republican guard have been firing mortars and the people celebrating at the US troops arriving. That's the kind of people we are talking about here.

Quote:
I am not as insensible as the one's who just go by one side of the story and get personal if the discussion is not in tandem with their line of thinking..

Well I believe the war is justified and you don't so really you are only going by one side of the story too =)

I don't mind people having a different opinion to mine but there just seems to be a lack of supporting information to change my view in any way. Normally war opposers end up at the issue of oil.

Last edited by:

Paul: Mar 25, 2003, 11:52 AM
 
Re: [ArmyAirForces] A war against Iraq? In reply to
I've been following the war closely since it began as I suppose everyone has and what I've noticed seems to be a little worrying. It might be my imagination, but what I see is the American troops all rushing to Baghdad as quick as possible whilst leaving a mess behind them that the British have to clear up. The American's are flying through the desert whilst the British are involved in street fights. This may be intentional due to our experience with street fighting in Northern Ireland but I would have like to see a bit more support from the US, especially regarding Basra.

I hope I'm wrong but it seems like the Americans are rushing Baghdad to be able to claim all the eventual glory.
 
Re: [Paul] A war against Iraq? In reply to
It's difficult for civilians, and even ex-military types, to follow the progress of a war. We are not seeing nearly enough to give us the big picture. We see bits and pieces, the breathless on the spot 'analysis' by media types, a lot of retired military commentators (some better than others), and very generic briefings from the military commanders.

What we can say is that there are certainly more US units moving on Baghdad than British, that's simply an issue of numbers as our force is much larger.

Is there a division of tasks, of course. But the British, Australian, and Polish forces are integrated well, and each brings unique abilities to the table. I note that the British command of a sizable US Marine element is apparently going very well. At least I gather that from the report I saw on the BBC.

Baghdad, and the Republican Guard armor divisions, are where this war will be fought and won. The British will be there you can be sure.

And don't forget, Basra is Iraq's 2nd largest city. So for it to be taken by the British is a measure not of any second cousin status, but of the confidence in their ability.

Last edited by:

ArmyAirForces: Mar 25, 2003, 12:11 PM
 
Re: [Paul] A war against Iraq? In reply to
During the colonial regime, the Sun Never Set on british Empire. Look at the situation now.... stated literally and metaphorically, Sun Hardly Rises on British Empire. Nothing was done wrong as per Brits Opinion then.

Why? Well this is the point. It has been the consequence of "Forcefull Repression" of the masses. Even Brits supported that Repression then. When this attitude of "Selective Organised Violence Against Selected Human Beings" dictated on grounds of religion or color of the skin by establishments goes beyond tolerance that such Ambitious "Expansionism" desired are subjected to a "Sudden Death" type of end.... like it happened with Brits, Like It Happened ..... well there are many examples which history has not left untouched.

Did u hear about that F-16 hitting it's own patriot launcher? Again a "Supposedly Malfunction" or else "Pilot Going Mad"

You know it would be good to agree to disagree instead of expressing that "Heavy Weight Impression" that B(ush) and B(liar) are sanctified by God and they could do no wrong and are reincarnation of god having only one mission of "Apparently Liberating" Human Race (Selective Again). Western World forgets their attitude of "Gaining Supremacy" by Organized Violence but rest may not forget and that's the prime reason for Birth Of Phantom Menace "OBL" You may not agree again but both OBL and SH are earstwhile Blue Eyed Boys pampered by US administration.....

Afterall, Why is Anderson the Ex CEO of Union Carbide which unleashed havoc by that deadly gas in mid 80's in Bhopal (India) is not handed over for trial? Well that's the type of "Selective Natural Justice" which often hurts. Probably because the Race Affected was not the ones which hurt the Brits or Americans and that's why he is lying safe in US.

I don't follow developments with fanaticism but i let common sense prevail. Afterall, world is not Just Amreicans And Brits....

Last edited by:

anup123: Mar 25, 2003, 1:06 PM
 
Re: [anup123] A war against Iraq? In reply to
I'm not sure what to say to you.

Bush and Blair have said their goal is to remove Saddam and free the Iraqi's in the name of peace. There have already been celebrations in Basra so it is obviously welcomed.

Quote:
world is not Just Amreicans And Brits....

Correct, that's why the US/Brits are defending and saving the Iraqi people.
 
Re: [Paul] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
There have already been celebrations in Basra so it is obviously welcomed.

I believe it is still early days!!!.

To conclude without having any hint of evidence is out of context. I would wait and watch instead of concluding so soon. May be the same ( will be Pooh Poohed like it happened with UN/ IAEC /Environmentalsits/ Doctors who all wrote to B(ush) etc etc....

When the motives are clouded with an element of doubt one cannot conclude. I read somewhere in this thread a a British lady called her soldiers war criminals...(probably she would hurriedly be labelled insane)...Michael Moore uttered something objectionable (as per US sentiments) about B(ush)

It seems that there is some genetic peculiarity or a mere coincidence that human being responsible of spreading that horrible aroma of Gunpowder have that "B" appearing in their names..... B(ushes), B(liars), B(in) Laden And celeberations In Basara Again that "B" Aiming For Baghdad again that B and surprisingly no one is talking of environmental damage, cruelty to animals (dolphins used) etc etc. And when the ulterior motives are met (defying UN/ IAEC etc ) again there will be talks of Environmental Damage/ Labor laws Reforms in thrid world countries (so to ensure that the cheap labor cost is utilised effectively by US), Funding agitations against Hydel projects (so that more Enrons and Come and go)... Isn't it a Classical Case Of Absolute Hypocrisy.....Sometimes one is made to think that BB have twosets of rules (1) Which Is Comforting And Soothing For Their Personal Arrogance (2) Which Least Bothers Their Basal Instincts..... going at war is Basal Instincts At It Full Throttle....

It may sound discomforting....... but war is crime against Human Race. Intimidating Independent nations with sanctions is a bigger crime and Preaching What Not Practising is the Biggest Crime.
 
Re: [anup123] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
To conclude without having any hint of evidence is out of context. I would wait and watch instead of concluding so soon.

I don't believe I concluded anything without evidence. The evidence of the celebrations and rebellion against Saddam is all over the media. I simply pointed that out to you.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/...q_war_basra_uprising

I'm sure your excellent perception regarding the letter B is worthy of appearing on Sesame Street =)
 
Re: [Paul] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Paul,

Fist of all sorry about my english (still learning)...

I've been reading some of your messages and I think they are perfect. There is an article of ROBERT FISK that says "we are not telling the truth, and the world knows it".

Out of USA the image of the war is very bad. The anti-american feeling is growing. Everybody thinks "we could be the next". But all the voices outside USA can't take effect inside. I think that only the american people can stop the war. We hope you do!
 
Re: [Paul] A war against Iraq? In reply to
I would prefer to read findings of a "Neutral" News Agency.

What's the latest at Nasiriah. If I were to believe CNN then I would have to believe Al Jazeera also. I would want to believe niether as both are biased against the other .... Al Jazeera Reporters were banned from NYSE or somewhere... that only strengthens my conviction of "Biased Reporting" ...Huh...Free Press In Democracy....It's worst than Dictatorship.

I think B(ush) and B(liar) should have a Retreat in the Himalayas only to see how the Snow is turning black there as a consequence of this action ... like it happened in 1991 also. That's the level of envioronmental damage....That's what is irritating. Doing all this for "Few Barells of Oil More"

US wants to bomb all over the world and when it came to India bombing Pakis for the sponsored terrorisms then Collin Powell Rums..... etc all came running as they thought that their "That Time Ally" ( use and throw stuff for western world) would suffer.....What is this? Hypocrisy or is it that the US was worried that just as in 1971 when US supplied Military Assetts of Pakis were blown up like toys would again expose the vulnerability of the latest consignment of High tech Toys to Pakis....Hi tech toys cannot always ensure the same punch. I still remeber how French GNAT (which many ridiculed in press) proved to be a big pain for the "Sabre Jet" with Pakis.

Well Paul, I think that as always, we can always never agree with each others point of view but I am always willing to be lending an ear....I never carry grudge against human / living beings but yes my grudge (if that pleases you) is against "Attitude"

Possibly if Mr Anderson is handed over for trial for causing deaths in India on that ghory night (UCC) I would carry the impression that US preaches what IT Practices. Till then probably it is a never ending exchange of viesws....

PS: B(liar) is not a Typo for sure coz he is lying to the world. : B(ush) H(ush) up the Factual Evidences which may go against his personal vendata.

;-)
 
Re: [anup123] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
I think B(ush) and B(liar) should have a Retreat in the Himalayas only to see how the Snow is turning black there as a consequence of this action ... like it happened in 1991 also. That's the level of envioronmental damage....That's what is irritating. Doing all this for "Few Barells of Oil More"


It was the Iraqis who set the fires in Kuwait in 1991, opened the oil pumps into the Gulf, and again the Iraqis who are burning oil this time. But of course you'll harbor no suspicions of those fine fellows will you?

Last edited by:

ArmyAirForces: Mar 25, 2003, 2:47 PM
 
Re: [anup123] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
I would prefer to read findings of a "Neutral" News Agency.

There's no such thing as a neutral news agency. All of them are led either by their beliefs, religion or country - that's the way the world works. You could say any news article you read is biased in someway and end up believing nothing you read.

By the way, what country are you from?

Quote:
Pakis

Just a side note, but Paki's is deemed offensive in the UK. It's a derogative term for Pakistani's

Quote:
B(liar) is not a Typo for sure coz he is lying to the world

Regarding what exactly?

Last edited by:

Paul: Mar 25, 2003, 2:55 PM
 
Re: [Iraq Boy] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
Everybody thinks "we could be the next".

Oh No I do not feel That Allied Forces Can Ever Attack India.....Not In this century at least....

If it were to happen then it would be great because then a NBOMB (Weapon Of Mass Destruction -- Heroshima Nagasaki Recurrence) would be needed to be dropped on this soil if "Return Of The Colonial Empire" Part-II was to be made a Super Duper Success or else the so called era of "Hi Tech" warfare would be reduced to just "Myth" good for Comics and Science Fiction Novels.

Unfortunately, there can be No Surrenders by Generals Here, No Infighting By That Divide And Rule Policy (One Religion Vs The Other etc etc) when it comes to war, so that Apparent "Basara" Advantage (The Only Weapon That Brits Carry) factor cannot work here.

;-)

Last edited by:

anup123: Mar 25, 2003, 3:39 PM
 
Re: [Paul] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
By the way, what country are you from?

India But I love Israelis. Like their way of treating "Aggressors". I still sometimes wonder as to why so many were on leave on that dreadful day...was it a coincidence?
Quote:
Just a side note, but Paki's is deemed offensive in the UK. It's a derogative term for Pakistani's

Still maintain that (if it is derogatory). Their terrorists killed dozens in Kashmir today. And B(ush) does wants the leadership here to act with restraint. Does he have any right to preach that after the way he has demeaned UN.

Cricket Commentators frequently use the Term Pakis for Pakistan Team....
Quote:
You could say any news article you read is biased in someway and end up believing nothing you read.

That's what i meant when i said let common sense prevail. If Your link were to be believed then it's a case of "religious/sectorial infighting" between Shia And Sunni rather than being a Genuine Rebellion Against SH. it is to the comfort of Western Media that it is being projected as Rebellion. Such Infighting is also predominant in pakistan (Shia Vs Sunni), Ireland (Catholics Vs Protestants) and what not. The art of Religious Intolerance was perfectly mastered, nurtured and perpetuated by the Brits in Colonial Days...That's how they managed to rule till "Common Sense" caused the uprisings which lead to Debacle Of The "Expansionism Attitude"

EDIT: Sorry I skipped accidently to answer this:
Quote:
Regarding what exactly?

Regarding their Ulterior Motives. There was this unison support for Afghan Crisis as the whole world knew about how ppl were shot in cold blood. On Iraq issue there is no conclusive footage (except for some interviews of maids from Iraqi palaces on Swedish Media) of any such attrocities in balck n white despite the fact that Iraq was always more accessible than Afghanistaan. Not that people all over the world were really concerned about Twin Tower Loss. They were more concerned about the day to day attrocities in Afghanistan all covertly masterminded by Pakis who had made Talib Afghanistan as their backyard for Nurturing Terrorism in the region. So thats the point of "Lies"

;-)

Last edited by:

anup123: Mar 25, 2003, 3:48 PM
 
Re: [ArmyAirForces] A war against Iraq? In reply to
But where did it all start from....Pentagon? Or was it that all of a Sudden Saddam Had An Angel Appearing in his dreams telling him to blow up the oil wells so that he would be richer by the night.

Cmon... One has to take the responsibility somewhere. Its not that Saddam is all bad and B(ush) and B(liar) are Gods that they can do no wrong.

Its simple. "Cause n Effect" relationship .... einstein's theory i believe.

You "Slap" (Destructively Bomb) me......I have two options either to slap (Bomb You Back) you or offer my other cheek (Assist You In Your Destructive Attempts Of Fulfilling The Basal Hunger). What I do is dictated by the circumstances and not by instinct. So If You Were To Be Replied Back Forcefully, I would Slap (Bomb back) you back or if I were to Assist You In Your Destructive Ambitions I would Offer My Other cheek (Setting The Oil Wells On Fire). Possibly Saddam Offered the other cheek when he set those wells on fire...Thats what he found most appropriate.

The Other Perspective Would be that it was all clandestinely done by the allied forces (to be unveiled by some reporter somewhere 30 years down the line and suspended subsequently) so as to have a healthier bouyancy for $$ in FCY market.....You never know.

Wink
 
Re: [anup123] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
But where did it all start from....Pentagon? Or was it that all of a Sudden Saddam Had An Angel Appearing in his dreams telling him to blow up the oil wells so that he would be richer by the night.


The Pentagon did not invade Kuwait in August 1991, Iraq did. Iraqis raped and murdered Kuwaitis. Iraqi troops fleeing Kuwait after the world came after them set the wells on fire to destroy Kuwait, and dumped millions of barrels of oil into the northern Persian Gulf to spite Kuwait and the rest of the GCC states.

You can't credibly claim that the US or UK is at fault for Iraqi environmental crimes. And then let's see how far along India is in enacting the Kyoto protocols (edited).

Last edited by:

ArmyAirForces: Mar 25, 2003, 3:46 PM
 
Re: [ArmyAirForces] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Probably it created a situation for invasion. On Raping And Murder... well it's all a part of tortourous society. Ask the Koreans about what Japaneses did during days of aggression.

As on Kyoto Portocols. Well B(ush) is the one who is opposing. A nation with 5% of world population forces upon the world to accept that they WILL CONSTITUTE 23% of World CO2 emission. That spells out the reasons.

Basically it is the "Environment Control" Equipment Sellers who bribe the administrations to force upon the world certain things which may not be appropriate.

Today morning I got a call from owner (it was 1AM for him there) of a california based company (i would not name) and he agreed to one logical point of discussion (regarding a software) that whatever can work in US need not necessarily work in other regions of the world. So the same has to be revamped if he wants to enter this region.

The point I am trying to highlight is that Envioronment Control may be the need of the hour there but it may not be the priority investment area for underdeveloped/developing nations. So how does these Environment Messiahs Survive? Thrust upon the Thrid world countries. Gain:
  • The equipments sell so they make money.
  • The third World countries do this Forcefull Unplanned expenditure which takes a toll on the Natinal balance Sheet.
  • Western World Offers Loads Of Loans to Thrid World Countries (on interest rates which is much more than domestic interest rates)
  • These loans are eventually taken back in terms of payments for these environment control assetts.


So continues this viciuos circle of BOP/Debt Financing etc etc and is i line with the US policy of "NEVER Practise What You Preach" While on Kyoto Issue you know why B(ush) is opposing:
  • Gasoline, by reliable estimates, would rise more than 50 cents per gallon.

  • The cost of running industrial plants, not to mention energy-hungry computers, would soar.

  • The growth of Gross Domestic Product in the United States would be cut by more than half as businesses moved offshore to escape the higher costs.

    The Department of Energy estimated GDP could drop by four percentage points, plunging the United States into a recession.


Source: James K. Glassman, "Forget Kyoto," American Enterprise Institute, January 2001.

So thats about it.....Thrive on flesh of others. Ruin other nations and yet never implement anything when it comes to ratifying such attempts at saving Human race.

Smile

Last edited by:

anup123: Mar 25, 2003, 4:15 PM
 
Re: [anup123] A war against Iraq? In reply to
Quote:
Still maintain that (if it is derogatory).

I should point out that by derogatory I meant racist. If you "maintain" that as you say, then perhaps you should re-read a post you made a few hours ago commenting on the racism of George Bush.

Quote:
Cricket Commentators frequently use the Term Pakis for Pakistan Team....

You certainly wouldn't hear it here in the UK.

Quote:
Regarding their Ulterior Motives. There was this unison support for Afghan Crisis as the whole world knew about how ppl were shot in cold blood. On Iraq issue there is no conclusive footage (except for some interviews of maids from Iraqi palaces on Swedish Media) of any such attrocities in balck n white despite the fact that Iraq was always more accessible than Afghanistaan. Not that people all over the world were really concerned about Twin Tower Loss. They were more concerned about the day to day attrocities in Afghanistan all covertly masterminded by Pakis who had made Talib Afghanistan as their backyard for Nurturing Terrorism in the region. So thats the point of "Lies"

That doesn't answer my question asking what he lied about.

Quote:
Not that people all over the world were really concerned about Twin Tower Loss.

Hmm perhaps not people like yourself who seem to have a rather bizarre and somewhat offensive attitude.
> > > >