http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3660663.stm
After the Americans attacked Iraq for dubious reasons and refusing to hand over sovereignty, this is Iraq's new 'inclusive' flag http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3660663.stm
Of course, if they had asked Idiot Bush what his preference would be, he would have loved them to just have an American flag with a little green crescent added among the 50+ white stars! And on the other side of the flag are tonnes of '$$$$' signs.
But may be that is a bit too obvious, hor?
Tuesday, April 27, 2004
Thursday, April 15, 2004
To Make An Italian Hero
What does it take to make one Italian hero?
The gall to go whack a 5,000 year old civilization that refuses to take it sitting down just for money, and the stupidity to remain arrogant even when caught....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3628977.stm
(news report on the killing of Italian hostage by Iraqis, and he supposedly wanted to take off hood just before killing to 'show his captors how an Italian die')
The gall to go whack a 5,000 year old civilization that refuses to take it sitting down just for money, and the stupidity to remain arrogant even when caught....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3628977.stm
(news report on the killing of Italian hostage by Iraqis, and he supposedly wanted to take off hood just before killing to 'show his captors how an Italian die')
Confirmed: Me & Palestinians Have One More Thing in Common
Pls read AFP report below. Now, we can confirm I do have one more thing in common with the Palestinians.
And sometime in the future, some of us will find among the people that talk to us on this topic, idiots (especially those from certain religions) with no idea of what happened years before wondering aloud why the idiotic Palestinians do not accept whatever the nice Israelis had to offer. Not knowing, of course, that those Palestinians had already been short changed by deals cut years before by some superpower.
As history is only repeating itself, there are already such idiots existing today. If you, like me, know of such people you can help them with some history to present day Palestine: tell them to find out about the history & players surrounding the Balfour Declaration, and the Sykes-Picot and Hussein-MacMahon Agreements done about a hundred years ago by Bush-like idiots from Britain (it is not a coincidence if they have the same religion).
WASHINGTON (AFP) President George W. Bush broke with a decades-old US policy by stating Israel could keepsome Arab land captured in the 1967 war, infuriating Palestinian leaders who condemned the US leader.
Bush signalled the change as he endorsed a plan by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to withdraw from the Gaza Strip and some West Bank settlements. He caused further controversy by saying Palestinian refugees should not be allowed to land lost to Israel in 1948.
Palestinian premier Ahmed Qorei described Bush's move as unacceptable and in breach of the US-led Middle East peace process.
Bush backed the plan to withdraw from 21 settlements in Gaza and four in the West Bank after a White House meeting with the Israeli leader. He hailed Sharon's proposal as "historic and courageous".
A senior Israeli official said the withdrawal would be completed in 2005.
"If all parties choose to embrace this moment they can open the door to progress and put an end to one of the world's longest-running conflicts," said Bush. The president reiterated his support for the "road map" peace blueprint, which calls for the eventual creation of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel.
But Bush declared that Palestinian refugees from the 1948 upheaval in the region must settle in any new Palestinian state. "In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949," he said, referring to large settlements in the West Bank.
The two leaders exchanged letters on Bush's endorsement of the disengagement plan during their meeting, officials said.
In what appeared to be approval of a key Israeli demand, Bush said in a statement that Israel will "retain its right" after any pull-out to strike Palestinian militants in Gaza. The US leader again warned Palestinians that "they must fight terror." "It is very important for a Palestinian state to emerge in which we have confidence, in which any prime minister of Israel has confidence, in which the United States has confidence, that will be a peaceful partner," he said.
But Bush also said the security barrier Israeli is building in the West Bank must not become a permanent construction. "It should be temporary rather than permanent, and therefore not prejudice any final status issues, including final borders."
At a joint press conference with Bush, Sharon was visibly pleased with the results from his ninth visit to the White House since the president took office in January 2001. "I was encouraged by your positive response and your support for my plan," Sharon said.
Washington's endorsement was likely to give Sharon the backing he needs to win a vote in early May on the disengagement plan by his Likud Party. The withdrawal proposal has drawn fierce opposition from right-wingers.
A senior Israeli official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Gaza withdrawal would be completed by an unspecified date in 2005. And Sharon said in his letter to Bush that Israel plans to speed up work on the security barrier in the West Bank, that has faced widespread international criticism, but promised it would be "temporary rather than permanent" in line with Bush's demands. The senior official hailed Bush's comments on Jewish settlements in the West Bank and negating the right of Palestinian refugees to return to Israel as an historic first. "The United States made unequivocal statements not heard in 56 years," the official told reporters after the White House talks.
The Palestinian premier angrily accused Bush of an "unacceptable" violation of the peace process. "It cannot be decided by the president of the United States what is realistic and what is not realistic," Qorei told reporters at his West Bank offices. "This is a real violation of the road map." Qorei said the borders and the status of refugees must "be decided in negotiations" involving all sides as laid down in the US-backed road map peace plan, which was launched last June.
He also criticised Bush for not demanding that the Israel tear down the separation barrier. "It is not realistic that the Israelis occupy Palestinian territories; it is not realistic that the Israelis build the separation wall on the Palestinian territories." Qorei said he had been let down by the Americans after being told by a group of visiting envoys this month that "the permanent status issues would be negotiated in a permanent status agreement. "Today we are really disappointed," he added.
The Palestinian leadership warned in a statement before the Bush-Sharon meeting that any US endorsement of the disengagement plan would trigger a new cycle of violence. Any deal "would lead to the destruction of any possibility of peace, of stability and security in the region and will launch a new cycle of violence," said the statement.
Sharon has argued that he has no option but to implement his disengagement plan in the absence of a Palestinian negotiating partner, accusing Qorei and his government of not moving to crack down on militants groups who have carried out a string of suicide attacks.
The two prime ministers have not met since Qorei came to office in October and the Palestinian premier ruled out the prospect of talks with Sharon after his visit to Washington. "I do not know what we would have to talk about," he said.
And sometime in the future, some of us will find among the people that talk to us on this topic, idiots (especially those from certain religions) with no idea of what happened years before wondering aloud why the idiotic Palestinians do not accept whatever the nice Israelis had to offer. Not knowing, of course, that those Palestinians had already been short changed by deals cut years before by some superpower.
As history is only repeating itself, there are already such idiots existing today. If you, like me, know of such people you can help them with some history to present day Palestine: tell them to find out about the history & players surrounding the Balfour Declaration, and the Sykes-Picot and Hussein-MacMahon Agreements done about a hundred years ago by Bush-like idiots from Britain (it is not a coincidence if they have the same religion).
WASHINGTON (AFP) President George W. Bush broke with a decades-old US policy by stating Israel could keepsome Arab land captured in the 1967 war, infuriating Palestinian leaders who condemned the US leader.
Bush signalled the change as he endorsed a plan by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to withdraw from the Gaza Strip and some West Bank settlements. He caused further controversy by saying Palestinian refugees should not be allowed to land lost to Israel in 1948.
Palestinian premier Ahmed Qorei described Bush's move as unacceptable and in breach of the US-led Middle East peace process.
Bush backed the plan to withdraw from 21 settlements in Gaza and four in the West Bank after a White House meeting with the Israeli leader. He hailed Sharon's proposal as "historic and courageous".
A senior Israeli official said the withdrawal would be completed in 2005.
"If all parties choose to embrace this moment they can open the door to progress and put an end to one of the world's longest-running conflicts," said Bush. The president reiterated his support for the "road map" peace blueprint, which calls for the eventual creation of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel.
But Bush declared that Palestinian refugees from the 1948 upheaval in the region must settle in any new Palestinian state. "In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949," he said, referring to large settlements in the West Bank.
The two leaders exchanged letters on Bush's endorsement of the disengagement plan during their meeting, officials said.
In what appeared to be approval of a key Israeli demand, Bush said in a statement that Israel will "retain its right" after any pull-out to strike Palestinian militants in Gaza. The US leader again warned Palestinians that "they must fight terror." "It is very important for a Palestinian state to emerge in which we have confidence, in which any prime minister of Israel has confidence, in which the United States has confidence, that will be a peaceful partner," he said.
But Bush also said the security barrier Israeli is building in the West Bank must not become a permanent construction. "It should be temporary rather than permanent, and therefore not prejudice any final status issues, including final borders."
At a joint press conference with Bush, Sharon was visibly pleased with the results from his ninth visit to the White House since the president took office in January 2001. "I was encouraged by your positive response and your support for my plan," Sharon said.
Washington's endorsement was likely to give Sharon the backing he needs to win a vote in early May on the disengagement plan by his Likud Party. The withdrawal proposal has drawn fierce opposition from right-wingers.
A senior Israeli official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Gaza withdrawal would be completed by an unspecified date in 2005. And Sharon said in his letter to Bush that Israel plans to speed up work on the security barrier in the West Bank, that has faced widespread international criticism, but promised it would be "temporary rather than permanent" in line with Bush's demands. The senior official hailed Bush's comments on Jewish settlements in the West Bank and negating the right of Palestinian refugees to return to Israel as an historic first. "The United States made unequivocal statements not heard in 56 years," the official told reporters after the White House talks.
The Palestinian premier angrily accused Bush of an "unacceptable" violation of the peace process. "It cannot be decided by the president of the United States what is realistic and what is not realistic," Qorei told reporters at his West Bank offices. "This is a real violation of the road map." Qorei said the borders and the status of refugees must "be decided in negotiations" involving all sides as laid down in the US-backed road map peace plan, which was launched last June.
He also criticised Bush for not demanding that the Israel tear down the separation barrier. "It is not realistic that the Israelis occupy Palestinian territories; it is not realistic that the Israelis build the separation wall on the Palestinian territories." Qorei said he had been let down by the Americans after being told by a group of visiting envoys this month that "the permanent status issues would be negotiated in a permanent status agreement. "Today we are really disappointed," he added.
The Palestinian leadership warned in a statement before the Bush-Sharon meeting that any US endorsement of the disengagement plan would trigger a new cycle of violence. Any deal "would lead to the destruction of any possibility of peace, of stability and security in the region and will launch a new cycle of violence," said the statement.
Sharon has argued that he has no option but to implement his disengagement plan in the absence of a Palestinian negotiating partner, accusing Qorei and his government of not moving to crack down on militants groups who have carried out a string of suicide attacks.
The two prime ministers have not met since Qorei came to office in October and the Palestinian premier ruled out the prospect of talks with Sharon after his visit to Washington. "I do not know what we would have to talk about," he said.
Wednesday, April 14, 2004
25 Reasons Why Bush is Right
See below AFP report on Bush's claim that comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam are false.
Here may be the reasons why that idiot think that way :
1. One happened in the 20th century, the other in 21st
2. One was started by Truman, the other by Bush
3. One the U.S. continued from immediately where the French left off, the other 40 years after the British left off (hey, if you want to pick on this, remember they had wanted to whack Iraq since 1990 hor)
4. One war started after the US torpedoed elections promised by the French, the other started before the US torpedoed free elections (supposedly because it was not suitable for the country they attacked)
5. One started after they claimed Truman’s military advisers did not do a good enough job, the other after they claimed the UN inspectors did not
6. One was supposedly inspired by ‘evil’ Marx, the other by ‘evils’ Saddam & Osama (see there are 2 evils for this one, so more evil lah)
7. One was against ‘evil’ Communism, the other against ‘evil’ Islamism/terrorism (see, more evils again)
8. One was against ‘illegal’ yellow faced commies, the other ‘illegal’ non-yellow Shites and Sunnis (evil nevertheless)
9. One was whacked supposedly for having WI (wrong idea), the other for having WMD (more evil, the US having more of both notwithstanding)
10. One was conducted with conventional arms, the other by high tech weapons (ha, finally a non evil way of killing those evil fellas)
11. One they managed to get the locals to kill each other, the other they have yet to (see, one was not entirely their fault)
12. Which is why one they managed to get 6 million killed, the other only 30,000 (shucks, what a big difference)
13. And the ‘kill ratio’ for one is 1 of theirs to 100 of everyone else, while the other is worse at 1 to 50 (more disappointment)
14. One made tones of money for the US military complex, the other for that, the oil companies and others like ‘security contractors’ etc. (this makes up for all the disappointments. And you see the beauty of free market? Now, thanks to the ingenuity of America’s businessmen, the world has a new business line called ‘security contracting’. Compare that to the Spaniards 500 years ago when they only had the Conquistadors which is why the Spanish were so happy to go along on this one)
15. One they managed to only destroy, the other they have a chance to stay around after the destruction for ‘rebuilding’ efforts (always mean more money that way)
16. One they have to bluff idiots like my parents, the other they have to bluff idiots like me (ha, they failed on both counts on this one! Even my father, as uneducated as he was, could see through them. In fact, one of my most memorable sight was my old man laughing every time a James Bond or Rambo movie came to town. His comment was: if the Americans had a few of those fellas in Vietnam they would have had it easy)
17. One was shown on TVs by reporters they lost control of, the other by reporters they did not
18. One’s war frenzy was whipped up with the help of the likes of Time magazine, the other by Fox TV
19. One took place before the world of internet, the other after
20. One took the world about 20 years to realize what happened, the other the world realized it 2 years before it happened! (why do you think the French, Germans etc. were against it even before it started?)
21. One they tried to be funny at Mao’s backyard, the other at the Ayatollah’s
22. One they lost, the other they have yet to
23. One ended when their own protesters invaded Washington, the other started when some foreigners with nothing to do with Iraq attacked Washington
24. One the Israelis were not there to cheer about, the other Israeli agents were caught cheering when it happened.
25. One ended shortly after Nixon tried to cheat to stay elected, the other started shortly after Bush cheated to be elected.
You see, everything was so different. Bush is no idiot and he is right (the neo-con type, hor).
WASHINGTON (AFP) President George W. Bush was holding his first press conference of this election year, hoping to reassure Americans after the bloodiest two weeks in Iraq since the fall of Baghdad a year ago.
Bush Tuesday warned against the "unthinkable" consequences of failing to rebuild Iraq and set it on course for democracy, saying that would embolden terrorism worldwide. "The consequences of failure in Iraq would be unthinkable," he told a press conference. "Everyone against America would celebrate, proclaiming our weakness."
Bush also said he would send additional forces to Iraq if needed, and vowed to stand by a plan to transfer Iraq to self-rule on June 30 despite deadly clashes between US-led forces and Shiite and Sunni insurgents.
"On June 30th, Iraqi sovereignty will be placed in Iraqi hands," Bush said in a lengthy opening statement at the start of just his third primetime news conference since taking office in January 2001.
Bush flatly rejected as "false" comparisons between deadly fighting in Iraq and the bloody Vietnam war that bitterly divided the US public.
"I think the analogy is false," he told reporters at just his third prime-time press conference since taking office in January 2001.
"I also happen to think that analogy sends the wrong message to our troops and sends a wrong message to the enemy but this is hard work," he added after some commentators and critics raised the specter of Vietnam following the two bloodiest weeks of fighting in Iraq since Baghdad fell a year ago.
Bush warned that radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr must answer the charges against him and disband his illegal militia.
"Al-Sadr must answer the charges againt him and disband his illegal militia," Bush said of al-Sadr, who is believed to be in hiding but has continued to send messages to supporters urging action against the US occupation.
He tied radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whose supporters have clashed with US forces in Iraq, to extremist groups Hamas and Hezbollah.
In a lengthy opening statement at the third prime-time press conference of his presidency, Bush said al-Sadr led an illegal militia and had in "public supported the terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah."
Here may be the reasons why that idiot think that way :
1. One happened in the 20th century, the other in 21st
2. One was started by Truman, the other by Bush
3. One the U.S. continued from immediately where the French left off, the other 40 years after the British left off (hey, if you want to pick on this, remember they had wanted to whack Iraq since 1990 hor)
4. One war started after the US torpedoed elections promised by the French, the other started before the US torpedoed free elections (supposedly because it was not suitable for the country they attacked)
5. One started after they claimed Truman’s military advisers did not do a good enough job, the other after they claimed the UN inspectors did not
6. One was supposedly inspired by ‘evil’ Marx, the other by ‘evils’ Saddam & Osama (see there are 2 evils for this one, so more evil lah)
7. One was against ‘evil’ Communism, the other against ‘evil’ Islamism/terrorism (see, more evils again)
8. One was against ‘illegal’ yellow faced commies, the other ‘illegal’ non-yellow Shites and Sunnis (evil nevertheless)
9. One was whacked supposedly for having WI (wrong idea), the other for having WMD (more evil, the US having more of both notwithstanding)
10. One was conducted with conventional arms, the other by high tech weapons (ha, finally a non evil way of killing those evil fellas)
11. One they managed to get the locals to kill each other, the other they have yet to (see, one was not entirely their fault)
12. Which is why one they managed to get 6 million killed, the other only 30,000 (shucks, what a big difference)
13. And the ‘kill ratio’ for one is 1 of theirs to 100 of everyone else, while the other is worse at 1 to 50 (more disappointment)
14. One made tones of money for the US military complex, the other for that, the oil companies and others like ‘security contractors’ etc. (this makes up for all the disappointments. And you see the beauty of free market? Now, thanks to the ingenuity of America’s businessmen, the world has a new business line called ‘security contracting’. Compare that to the Spaniards 500 years ago when they only had the Conquistadors which is why the Spanish were so happy to go along on this one)
15. One they managed to only destroy, the other they have a chance to stay around after the destruction for ‘rebuilding’ efforts (always mean more money that way)
16. One they have to bluff idiots like my parents, the other they have to bluff idiots like me (ha, they failed on both counts on this one! Even my father, as uneducated as he was, could see through them. In fact, one of my most memorable sight was my old man laughing every time a James Bond or Rambo movie came to town. His comment was: if the Americans had a few of those fellas in Vietnam they would have had it easy)
17. One was shown on TVs by reporters they lost control of, the other by reporters they did not
18. One’s war frenzy was whipped up with the help of the likes of Time magazine, the other by Fox TV
19. One took place before the world of internet, the other after
20. One took the world about 20 years to realize what happened, the other the world realized it 2 years before it happened! (why do you think the French, Germans etc. were against it even before it started?)
21. One they tried to be funny at Mao’s backyard, the other at the Ayatollah’s
22. One they lost, the other they have yet to
23. One ended when their own protesters invaded Washington, the other started when some foreigners with nothing to do with Iraq attacked Washington
24. One the Israelis were not there to cheer about, the other Israeli agents were caught cheering when it happened.
25. One ended shortly after Nixon tried to cheat to stay elected, the other started shortly after Bush cheated to be elected.
You see, everything was so different. Bush is no idiot and he is right (the neo-con type, hor).
WASHINGTON (AFP) President George W. Bush was holding his first press conference of this election year, hoping to reassure Americans after the bloodiest two weeks in Iraq since the fall of Baghdad a year ago.
Bush Tuesday warned against the "unthinkable" consequences of failing to rebuild Iraq and set it on course for democracy, saying that would embolden terrorism worldwide. "The consequences of failure in Iraq would be unthinkable," he told a press conference. "Everyone against America would celebrate, proclaiming our weakness."
Bush also said he would send additional forces to Iraq if needed, and vowed to stand by a plan to transfer Iraq to self-rule on June 30 despite deadly clashes between US-led forces and Shiite and Sunni insurgents.
"On June 30th, Iraqi sovereignty will be placed in Iraqi hands," Bush said in a lengthy opening statement at the start of just his third primetime news conference since taking office in January 2001.
Bush flatly rejected as "false" comparisons between deadly fighting in Iraq and the bloody Vietnam war that bitterly divided the US public.
"I think the analogy is false," he told reporters at just his third prime-time press conference since taking office in January 2001.
"I also happen to think that analogy sends the wrong message to our troops and sends a wrong message to the enemy but this is hard work," he added after some commentators and critics raised the specter of Vietnam following the two bloodiest weeks of fighting in Iraq since Baghdad fell a year ago.
Bush warned that radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr must answer the charges against him and disband his illegal militia.
"Al-Sadr must answer the charges againt him and disband his illegal militia," Bush said of al-Sadr, who is believed to be in hiding but has continued to send messages to supporters urging action against the US occupation.
He tied radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whose supporters have clashed with US forces in Iraq, to extremist groups Hamas and Hezbollah.
In a lengthy opening statement at the third prime-time press conference of his presidency, Bush said al-Sadr led an illegal militia and had in "public supported the terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah."
Tuesday, April 13, 2004
Zhou En Lai's History Lesson
Zhou En Lai (if you don’t know who he was, this story should apply well to you) was once asked how he found the Americans to which he laughed and said that they had no sense of history. Of course, Zhou En Lai was only partly correct. The ones in power in the US do know history. In fact, they know from history what works and practice that to a fine art. One example is the art of war and plunder at others’ expense. Also, Zhou En Lai would probably laugh at the lack of sense of history around the world today despite all the high tech media & communications we claim we have.
For example, do you know what is common between Vietnam, Palestine, and now Iraq?
1. One powerful country whacking another whenever it likes.
2. The powerful one sends its own well armed hooligans to someone else’s homes on their whim to satisfy these men’s bestial instincts and these animals kill up to 10 times their opposite numbers for everyone of them killed. In the meantime, their powerbrokers’ geopolitical objectives are conveniently satisfied.
3. They get their co-conspirators in the media to glorify such animal acts in the name of freedom and all sorts of drummed up heroics, and paint their opposite numbers in bad light by labeling them terrorists, insurgents and enemies (unless, of course, when these fellas are fighting the Russians, Germans or Chinese!)
4. They manage to fool a tonne of idiots in the world who are all too happy to parrot after them, cry for their dead, and are totally impervious to the plight of their opposite numbers. For example, I know of Australians that cry at Washington’s Vietnam War Memorial, and the PM of Singapore organized a crying session in the National Stadium 2 years ago when 2,000 Americans were killed in September 11. But they are no where to be seen when 6 million Vietnamese and 30,000 Iraqis are killed by what the Americans started (but of course, such idiots of this world are usually not aware of this)
5. And they actually succeed in doing so most of the time which pushes
their opposite numbers to greater desperation and to adopt drastic measures against them
6. They then use these drastic reactions from their opposite numbers to justify their doing all the above.
7. The world starts from step 1 above all over again, year after year, decades after decades. Which is why people like me seems to keep harping on the same thing!
If you don’t believe in the above, try this trick: ask your neighbours what they think people like Christopher Columbus are commonly known for versus what history books say they really did. Then see the difference….
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3620109.stm
For example, do you know what is common between Vietnam, Palestine, and now Iraq?
1. One powerful country whacking another whenever it likes.
2. The powerful one sends its own well armed hooligans to someone else’s homes on their whim to satisfy these men’s bestial instincts and these animals kill up to 10 times their opposite numbers for everyone of them killed. In the meantime, their powerbrokers’ geopolitical objectives are conveniently satisfied.
3. They get their co-conspirators in the media to glorify such animal acts in the name of freedom and all sorts of drummed up heroics, and paint their opposite numbers in bad light by labeling them terrorists, insurgents and enemies (unless, of course, when these fellas are fighting the Russians, Germans or Chinese!)
4. They manage to fool a tonne of idiots in the world who are all too happy to parrot after them, cry for their dead, and are totally impervious to the plight of their opposite numbers. For example, I know of Australians that cry at Washington’s Vietnam War Memorial, and the PM of Singapore organized a crying session in the National Stadium 2 years ago when 2,000 Americans were killed in September 11. But they are no where to be seen when 6 million Vietnamese and 30,000 Iraqis are killed by what the Americans started (but of course, such idiots of this world are usually not aware of this)
5. And they actually succeed in doing so most of the time which pushes
their opposite numbers to greater desperation and to adopt drastic measures against them
6. They then use these drastic reactions from their opposite numbers to justify their doing all the above.
7. The world starts from step 1 above all over again, year after year, decades after decades. Which is why people like me seems to keep harping on the same thing!
If you don’t believe in the above, try this trick: ask your neighbours what they think people like Christopher Columbus are commonly known for versus what history books say they really did. Then see the difference….
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3620109.stm
What Me & Others in Palestine Have in Common
Fifty plus years ago, Japanese forces invaded Malaysia supposedly, among other reasons, to free people like my parents and grandparents from the ‘terrible’ British colonialists. During that occupation, they took away one of my father’s brothers one night and he never returned. No one knew what happened to that poor young man. A couple of years later, the Americans and British whacked the Japs and ‘freed’ (supposedly from the ‘terrible’ Japs as the Brits got to keep their prize) all the Malaysians alive then. And when the Americans through an idiot known as Mac Arthur signed the surrender agreement with the Japs, they agreed that Japan will not be required to account and compensate for everything they did to all the Asians during the war. This was of course very different from Germany which was required to pay war reparations to its European counterparts.
Which is why to this day, you still see old people in China & Korea still try to raise the issue of justice and compensation (if you are not aware of all the above, it’s OK, it is not your fault. Not many people are interested in such trivials).
Perhaps America thought that Asians are more magnanimous than Europeans, or, may be, they thought Asians are idiots that do not deserve a fair settlement for any injustice done to them. Whatever the case, they had the gall to assume that they had the right to decide everything for Asia.
Of course, people like me could never accept such things (forget the past and look ahead, so to speak) and considers America a bastard country while to many other buggers it is a great country with much to teach or offer to the world.
Ha, I sound just like those idiotic Palestinians that can never accept those nice Israelis.
But then I see history repeating itself again and again. Like in this attached report where the Israelis are trying to get the Americans to ‘agree’ to them annexing huge tracts of Palestinian land without bothering with the Palestinians nor the UN. And if those bastard Israelis get their way with the bastard Americans, many buggers in time to come will be wondering why in the name of God can those Palestinians not agree to whatever the nice Israelis have to offer (which is of course always gonna be lesser after the Americans are through with them).
If you are not aware of this, it is OK too. Again, it is not your fault. Perhaps, you do not want to be an idiot like me….
And if you are a Non-Jap Asian, check with your grandma. You never know if you have something in common with those idiotic Palestinians.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/414640.html
Which is why to this day, you still see old people in China & Korea still try to raise the issue of justice and compensation (if you are not aware of all the above, it’s OK, it is not your fault. Not many people are interested in such trivials).
Perhaps America thought that Asians are more magnanimous than Europeans, or, may be, they thought Asians are idiots that do not deserve a fair settlement for any injustice done to them. Whatever the case, they had the gall to assume that they had the right to decide everything for Asia.
Of course, people like me could never accept such things (forget the past and look ahead, so to speak) and considers America a bastard country while to many other buggers it is a great country with much to teach or offer to the world.
Ha, I sound just like those idiotic Palestinians that can never accept those nice Israelis.
But then I see history repeating itself again and again. Like in this attached report where the Israelis are trying to get the Americans to ‘agree’ to them annexing huge tracts of Palestinian land without bothering with the Palestinians nor the UN. And if those bastard Israelis get their way with the bastard Americans, many buggers in time to come will be wondering why in the name of God can those Palestinians not agree to whatever the nice Israelis have to offer (which is of course always gonna be lesser after the Americans are through with them).
If you are not aware of this, it is OK too. Again, it is not your fault. Perhaps, you do not want to be an idiot like me….
And if you are a Non-Jap Asian, check with your grandma. You never know if you have something in common with those idiotic Palestinians.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/414640.html
Saturday, April 10, 2004
Idiots In Common
What is common between the countries forming the 'coalition to free Iraq' and some of the Korean hostages in Iraq?
1. They are idiots 'enlightened' by a certain religion
2. They are there to teach Iraqis the lesson that freedom (like eternal life as these idiots believe) can only be attained by death. That's why killing Iraqis that disagree with them is actually good for 'em Iraqis (so the world shouldn't complain).
3. They are dumbfounded by the stupidity of the Iraqis who do not seem to appreciate these idiots' divine efforts. That's why such Iraqis are terrorists that should be terminated.
4. They are there for selfish reasons including plundering and making tonnes of money without having to submit to free market forces that their idiot leader a.k.a. Bush a.k.a. the US preach to others.
5. They think the whole world is full of idiots that don't know what they are up to.
6. All the above
1. They are idiots 'enlightened' by a certain religion
2. They are there to teach Iraqis the lesson that freedom (like eternal life as these idiots believe) can only be attained by death. That's why killing Iraqis that disagree with them is actually good for 'em Iraqis (so the world shouldn't complain).
3. They are dumbfounded by the stupidity of the Iraqis who do not seem to appreciate these idiots' divine efforts. That's why such Iraqis are terrorists that should be terminated.
4. They are there for selfish reasons including plundering and making tonnes of money without having to submit to free market forces that their idiot leader a.k.a. Bush a.k.a. the US preach to others.
5. They think the whole world is full of idiots that don't know what they are up to.
6. All the above
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)