Burma

[Les Biehn]

particularly with the WWF accusation - a new one on most here I should imagine.

Looks a bit neo-nazi to me.

 

[Eastleigh Seagull]

Refreshed by a night of sleep I can continue to combat your ability to write half truths and total balls - at least until 09:33. Considering you predicted just about everything yesterday from the US doing nothing as there was no oil in Burma to the UN/NATO/US invading and building the US empire then at some point you were going to be right.

Obviously I was watching the big corporate news channels - BBC and CNN - and they naturally were only telling me what they thought I could be allowed to handle.

But I am still confused. Could you tell us all what you think should happen in Burma? Bush goes to the UN and announces sanctions directly against the junta. The EU announces they will do the same. China keeps quiet having vetoed a Security Council Bill on Burma a few months back. So, should the US do something/nothing/go through the UN/NATO. Advise us all please or at least tell us what the pothead anarachist failed singer would do?

 

[Nibble]

Refreshed by a night of sleep I can continue to combat your ability to write half truths and total balls - at least until 09:33. Considering you predicted just about everything yesterday from the US doing nothing as there was no oil in Burma to the UN/NATO/US invading and building the US empire then at some point you were going to be right.

Obviously I was watching the big corporate news channels - BBC and CNN - and they naturally were only telling me what they thought I could be allowed to handle.

But I am still confused. Could you tell us all what you think should happen in Burma? Bush goes to the UN and announces sanctions directly against the junta. The EU announces they will do the same. China keeps quiet having vetoed a Security Council Bill on Burma a few months back. So, should the US do something/nothing/go through the UN/NATO. Advise us all please or at least tell us what the pothead anarachist failed singer would do?

I never once pretended to have the answer, all I have been suggesting all the way through is that the US would probably have more involvement than it appears.

There really is no point explaining ideas I have about why and how the US are involved in these things because you have latched onto this conspiracy nonsense and you are using this to write off the suggestion that there is more to the news and world events than is reported by the media. If you cannot even recognise this fact and instead go on to make out that I have said things that I haven't even implied or that I don't even believe in (aliens, jewish conspiracies, 911 conspiracies etc) then I hardly think you would listen to the rational arguments I am making.

You have pretty much ignored anything I have to say that makes sense (go on, say it -none of it makes sense) to you and gone straight for the conspiracy nutjob accusations without even considering the idea of media censorship. Even in the admission of lies by the US government you continue to try to turn the debate into a rant against conspiracy theorists, which I am not and have quite clearly stated that I think most conspiricys, their websites and their sources are at best questionable and at worst bullshit.

Even when I made a joke out of the conspiracy theories, aliens and Jello Biafra you seem to take it seriously and bang on about conspiarcy theories when this has nothing to do with the issue.

 

[Eastleigh Seagull]

but apart form the grand global media censorship collusion (is Al Jazeera in on this?) and the accusations about the World Bank, WWF and who knows who else, you havent actually said anything, apart from implying that you know more than we all do and arent you superior because you can see through the great corporate web of deceit and one day we will all wake up and join you. T

That is where your arguments are irritating because you havent proposed anything - all you do is state that you wont waste your time telling us what you know because we wont believe you anyway.

Your polemics are a massive scattergun approach as I said in my last post - by being so massively general when events happen you can claim all along that is what you are saying. Like a modern day Nostradamus. Nibble update - 'tomorrow George Bush will say something about Burma' - no shit sherlock - the world's greatest power commenting on the greatest global issue of the day. Whoop - you must be in the know.

 

[Nibble]

but apart form the grand global media censorship collusion (is Al Jazeera in on this?) and the accusations about the World Bank, WWF and who knows who else, you havent actually said anything, apart from implying that you know more than we all do and arent you superior because you can see through the great corporate web of deceit and one day we will all wake up and join you. T

That is where your arguments are irritating because you havent proposed anything - all you do is state that you wont waste your time telling us what you know because we wont believe you anyway.

Your polemics are a massive scattergun approach as I said in my last post - by being so massively general when events happen you can claim all along that is what you are saying. Like a modern day Nostradamus. Nibble update - 'tomorrow George Bush will say something about Burma' - no shit sherlock - the world's greatest power commenting on the greatest global issue of the day. Whoop - you must be in the know.

Well done Eastleigh, for about the twentieth time in a row you have missed the point entirely.

 

[Eastleigh Seagull]

then tell us the bloody point instead of your usual response of 'i know more than you do but because you are all ignorant and blinded by the mainstream then it is a waste of my precious time to tell you all'.

 

[Nibble]

then tell us the bloody point instead of your usual response of 'i know more than you do but because you are all ignorant and blinded by the mainstream then it is a waste of my precious time to tell you all'.

I have told you time and time again. America uses and instigates world events for financial and territorial gain. they did it in Iraq, twice. They have done it in South America countless times. The US plays the role of the World Police by demonising an existing regime, which it uses the media to do. In Sadam Husseins case by telling the world he had WMD's. They then invade or install UN or NATO forces under the pretence that they are a security force. They clear the way for military rule and before you know it the US has governmental rule over a region and full access to all it resources while plunging the region into massive debt with the US for war aid.

What I am trying to say is not that Burma is having a lovely old time and they are protesting merely because of fuel prices (I said that was a catalyst). What I am saying is that history should tell you that the US always seems to gain from these situations and this may be more than just a coincidence.

Can you understand that?

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

What I have learned about Burma from NSC (not havign read the Gruniad yet)...

- The junta is doing something in a country with two different names and two different capiatls, one of which is in the jungle.
- The Chinese and Indians do care The US and UN don't but they are both going to invade because there is nothing there for them.... seemingly no oil... or maybe there is.
- When the US get there they will stock up on fake viagra and teminally cancerous fags and be a global police force into the bargain.
- Not sure what the UN will do.
- There's jelly involved.
- Oh, and some pop star who may or may not be any good know all there is to know, although he's a drugged up punk.

WOW!!!! What a crisis!!!!

 

[Nibble]

What I have learned about Burma from NSC (not havign read the Gruniad yet)...

- The junta is doing something in a country with two different names and two different capiatls, one of which is in the jungle.
- The Chinese and Indians do care The US and UN don't but they are both going to invade because there is nothing there for them.... seemingly no oil... or maybe there is.
- When the US get there they will stock up on fake viagra and teminally cancerous fags and be a global police force into the bargain.
- Not sure what the UN will do.
- There's jelly involved.
- Oh, and some pop star who may or may not be any good know all there is to know, although he's a drugged up punk.

WOW!!!! What a crisis!!!!

You should also add that anyone who questions the US's involvement in world affairs is a conspiracy theorist nutjob.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

I have told you time and time again. America uses and instigates world events for financial and territorial gain. they did it in Iraq, twice. They have done it in South America countless times. The US plays the role of the World Police by demonising an existing regime, which it uses the media to do. In Sadam Husseins case by telling the world he had WMD's. They then invade or install UN or NATO forces under the pretence that they are a security force. They clear the way for military rule and before you know it the US has governmental rule over a region and full access to all it resources while plunging the region into massive debt with the US for war aid.

What I am trying to say is not that Burma is having a lovely old time and they are protesting merely because of fuel prices (I said that was a catalyst). What I am saying is that history should tell you that the US always seems to gain from these situations and this may be more than just a coincidence.

Can you understand that?

So the military junta in Burma is just a front to allow the US to invade and take over? Do all American Governments do this or just the republican ones?
What about Bosnia? Debt for war aid? Who owes the US money for this?

 

[Eastleigh Seagull]

I have told you time and time again. America uses and instigates world events for financial and territorial gain. they did it in Iraq, twice. They have done it in South America countless times. The US plays the role of the World Police by demonising an existing regime, which it uses the media to do. In Sadam Husseins case by telling the world he had WMD's. They then invade or install UN or NATO forces under the pretence that they are a security force. They clear the way for military rule and before you know it the US has governmental rule over a region and full access to all it resources while plunging the region into massive debt with the US for war aid.

What I am trying to say is not that Burma is having a lovely old time and they are protesting merely because of fuel prices (I said that was a catalyst). What I am saying is that history should tell you that the US always seems to gain from these situations and this may be more than just a coincidence.

Can you understand that?

Better and I understand it - just dont expect me to believe it. What I dont understand is that when you started pronouncing on this issue you said the US didnt care about being involved in Burma yet now they are the power behind the demonising of the military junta and are steering all events for their own benefit. Do they also control the buddhists?

On a similar vein people of your beliefs also fluctuate on the US using or ignoring the UN depending on the issue - surely if the UN was in the power of the US then it wouldnt have opposed Iraq?

Also - how did the US gain from Vietnam?

 

[Eastleigh Seagull]

You should also add that anyone who questions the US's involvement in world affairs is a conspiracy theorist nutjob.

Or more clearly those that say the WWF is a tool of Nazi propaganda

 

[Lokki 7]

What I have learned about Burma from NSC (not havign read the Gruniad yet)...

- The junta is doing something in a country with two different names and two different capiatls, one of which is in the jungle.
- The Chinese and Indians do care The US and UN don't but they are both going to invade because there is nothing there for them.... seemingly no oil... or maybe there is.
- When the US get there they will stock up on fake viagra and teminally cancerous fags and be a global police force into the bargain.
- Not sure what the UN will do.
- There's jelly involved.
- Oh, and some pop star who may or may not be any good know all there is to know, although he's a drugged up punk.

WOW!!!! What a crisis!!!!

You forgot the Nazi pandas that are taking over the world.

 

[Lokki 7]

Also - how did the US gain from Vietnam?

I would say the billions the government spent on arms from US companies made a lot of powerful people a lot richer. Just as the iraq war has in this century.

 

[Nibble]

Better and I understand it - just dont expect me to believe it. What I dont understand is that when you started pronouncing on this issue you said the US didnt care about being involved in Burma yet now they are the power behind the demonising of the military junta and are steering all events for their own benefit. Do they also control the buddhists?

On a similar vein people of your beliefs also fluctuate on the US using or ignoring the UN depending on the issue - surely if the UN was in the power of the US then it wouldnt have opposed Iraq?

Also - how did the US gain from Vietnam?

I would have to do more research on Vietnam as I have heard some ideas about this but nothing concrete or credible.

As I explained I did not know much about the Burma situation, once I had some information and it was explained that there are valuable resources there I put my idea of what the US are like (not your idea, I accept) into that equation. To me it makes perfect sense what the US are doing, as it does to you but we both have very differant explanantions as to why. I am not saying my explanantion is the ultimate truth but that people should question the US more as time and time again the US are revealed to have ulterior motives, sometimes by their own admission.

 

[Eastleigh Seagull]

I would say the billions the government spent on arms from US companies made a lot of powerful people a lot richer. Just as the iraq war has in this century.

but they spend that in peacetime and in wartime?

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

I would have to do more research on Vietnam as I have heard some ideas about this but nothing concrete or credible.

As I explained I did not know much about the Burma situation, once I had some information and it was explained that there are valuable resources there I put my idea of what the US are like (not your idea, I accept) into that equation. To me it makes perfect sense what the US are doing, as it does to you but we both have very differant explanantions as to why. I am not saying my explanantion is the ultimate truth but that people should question the US more as time and time again the US are revealed to have ulterior motives, sometimes by their own admission.

Is this just limited to the current administration or does it not matter whether it is republicans or democrats in? Is there some power behind the throne?

 

[Nibble]

Oh Eastleigh.. It is all okay. No-one has lied to you. It is all as they say it is. No-one makes money from war. The US has the worls interests at heart, It is not about money or power. It is all about helping other people. Go back to bed Eastleigh, All will be fine.

 

[Nibble]

Is this just limited to the current administration or does it not matter whether it is republicans or democrats in? Is there some power behind the throne?

yes. Bankers and corporations. but I am a nut for saying that.

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

You forgot the Nazi pandas that are taking over the world.

Damn..... Iim still trying ot undertanbd how the US sending testosterone-filled wrestlers in skimpy pants will change anything..... maybe they are the ones in need of the cheap viagra.....