Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Australia  > At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 RorschachTM
Joined: 1/28/2012
Msg: 26
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nationsPage 2 of 3    (1, 2, 3)
Thanks Robert for confusing Indo-china conflict with Vietnam War. Those two mean different things you know? With different belligerants as you have spotted out, US and before them French.

Yes Gulf of Tonkin incident concocted by USA.

So what? I am saying some of the US bashing is deserved because of the hypocritical propaganda they've been spreading and using as an excuse to invade any country.

My claims are non-sensical? do you read your own replies?

Stalin and Hitler have been stopped, Third Reich and USSR doesn't exist anymore... however US still exists with its global empire now, concurrently.

YES genocidal... look at Vietnam war alone... they had to bomb neighbouring countries... Laos and Cambodia, destablizing the whole region. Guess how many millions died.

How about Iraq or Afganistan? or did you want me to talk about events that are no longer relevent... like you?
 Pookie2727
Joined: 8/5/2012
Msg: 27
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 5:55:05 PM

Hey Pookie have you actually thought there's alot of US bashing going on because they deserve it?



Oh yeah, rite ...sorry ..so sorry..forgot that we deserved it...to be bashed...silly me............



BTW do you apply that same philosophy to your every day life...if someones deserves it, add to it ???



I guess thats the difference between 28 and 48 isnt it ?
 RorschachTM
Joined: 1/28/2012
Msg: 28
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 7:35:47 PM
So I should feel guilty for stating the truth?

HAH!

but thanks for having a personal go at me, I can see how mature you really are.

At least I didn't bash US citizens for what its government did.

Only reason why I bought it up was because of your moaning of US bashing.

Its free speech right? You make a statement, I have a right to make a reply on that statement.
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 29
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 8:13:56 PM
The Gulf of Tonkin incident, or the USS Maddox incident, are the names given to two separate confrontations, one actual and one false, involving North Vietnam and the United States in the waters of the Gulf of Tonkin. On August 2, 1964, the destroyer USS Maddox, while performing a signals intelligence patrol as part of DESOTO operations, engaged three North Vietnamese Navy torpedo boats of the 135th Torpedo Squadron.[1] A sea battle resulted, in which the Maddox expended over two hundred and eighty 3-inch and 5-inch shells, and in which four USN F-8 Crusader jet fighter bombers strafed the torpedo boats. One US aircraft was damaged, one 14.5 mm round hit the destroyer, three North Vietnamese torpedo boats were damaged, and four North Vietnamese sailors were killed and six were wounded; there were no U.S. casualties.[5]

The second Tonkin Gulf incident was originally claimed by the U.S. National Security Agency to have occurred on August 4, 1964, as another sea battle, but instead may have involved "Tonkin Ghosts"[6] (false radar images) and not actual NVN torpedo boat attacks.

The outcome of these two incidents was the passage by Congress of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which granted President Lyndon B. Johnson the authority to assist any Southeast Asian country whose government was considered to be jeopardized by "communist aggression". The resolution served as Johnson's legal justification for deploying U.S. conventional forces and the commencement of open warfare against North Vietnam.

In 2005, an internal National Security Agency historical study was declassified; it concluded[7] that the Maddox had engaged the North Vietnamese Navy on August 2, but that there were no North Vietnamese Naval vessels present during the incident of August 4. The report stated regarding August 2:

At 1500G, Captain Herrick (commander of the Maddox) ordered Ogier's gun crews to open fire if the boats approached within ten thousand yards. At about 1505G, the Maddox fired three rounds to warn off the communist boats. This initial action was never reported by the Johnson administration, which insisted that the Vietnamese boats fired first.[7]
and regarding August 4:

It is not simply that there is a different story as to what happened; it is that no attack happened that night. [...] In truth, Hanoi's navy was engaged in nothing that night but the salvage of two of the boats damaged on August 2.
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 30
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 8:17:50 PM
The US sent Marines into Panama to murder the president as they wanted control over the Panama Canal.

If you wanted to get technical, the list is endless.
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 3/30/2010
Msg: 31
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 8:45:32 PM

Hey Pookie have you actually thought there's alot of US bashing going on because they deserve it?


I stopped taking Rorchach seriously after I saw him say this...which was the first line he made in this whole thread.

Using his logic, just because some muslims are extremists, that means every muslim in the world deserves "muslim bashing" treatment.
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 32
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 8:48:55 PM
The U.S. at War - A History of Shame

The U.S. Invasion of Panama 1989: The Injustice of "Operation Just Cause"
Revolution #017, October 9, 2005, posted at revcom.us

This is the second article in this series.

On December 20, 1989, over 27,000 U.S. troops invaded the small Central American country of Panama. The world’s most powerful military overwhelmed the Panama Defense Force (PDF) and its 3,000 soldiers. AH-64 Apache helicopter raked the country, both military bases and working class communities. After the PDF crumbled, fighting by irregular Panamanian militia lasted a few days.

The invaders called this "Operation Just Cause."

What were the reasons given for this invasion? They are all too familiar:

The U.S. President, then George Bush, Sr., said he was removing an evil dictator, General Manuel Noriega, who was brutalizing his own people. Noreiega was portrayed on TV as a madman waving a machete. After a concocted incident provoked by U.S. troops, Bush claimed that an invasion was needed to "protect American lives."

Meanwhile, this same Noriega was actually on the CIA payroll (right up to invasion), and the main reason for the invasion was to make sure that the Panama Canal remained under U.S. imperialist conrol.

Saving Panama’s People from Brutality?
The U.S. has never had qualms about brutalizing the Panamanian people--not during this invasion and not during the previous 83 years of U.S. domination.

In the 1989 invasion, heavy U.S. firepower was turned on civilian communities. The poor working class neighborhood of El Chorillo was burnt to the ground and quickly got a new nickname--"Little Hiroshima." Panamanians estimate that between 2,000 and 6,000 people were killed in this invasion. Many of them were dumped into mass graves. Witnesses reported that U.S. troops used flame-throwers on the dead, the bodies shriveling up as they burned.

This invasion was obviously NOT done to protect Panama’s people!

Protecting American Lives?
A U.S soldier was killed by PDF troops. Bush said this meant all 35,000 Americans stationed in Panama were in danger.

In reality, the U.S. government had been working hard to provoke such an incident for months--by running military "exercises" through the streets of Panama City. A schoolteacher was killed by U.S. troops in one exercise. In this artificially charged climate, U.S. soldiers ran a Panamanian checkpoint near a sensitive military installation--and one of them got shot.

And what, after all, were all these 35,000 Americans doing in Panama? They served the U.S. economic, military, and political domination of Panama. And what did it mean to "protect" their safety? It could only mean tightening that domination.

Freeing a Country from a Thug?
General Noriega was a military officer handpicked and trained by U.S. to run Panama. He became a paid CIA operative in 1967 and attended the U.S. Army’s notorious School of the Americas (also known as the School of Assassins). When the previous Panamanian leader Omar Torrijos fell out of U.S. favor (and then fell out of the sky in a 1981 plane crash), Manuel Noriega was hoisted into power with U.S. backing.

Noriega certainly was a corrupt and vicious thug. This was (in part) why Noriega was seen as a valuable "asset," as a ruthless man whose loyalty could be bought, who would do whatever was needed to serve U.S. interests (including suppress the Panamanian people).

Under Noriega, U.S. military operations expanded in Panama. Bush, Sr. personally met with Noriega in 1967 (when he was head of the CIA) and in 1983 (when he was vice president). In the early ‘80s, Noriega helped set up the CIA’s "drugs-for-guns" trade that used cocaine trafficking to finance their secret Contra war against Nicaragua. All during the Reagan ‘80s, Noriega got personal CIA and Pentagon payments of nearly $200,000 a year.

So it was complete hypocrisy for the U.S. government to claim that they were liberating the Panamanian people. The U.S. government (and Bush Sr. personally) had after all imposed this brutal agent on Panama for many years.

When Noriega stole the 1984 Panamanian election, Reagan’s Secretary of State praised the farce for "initiating the process of democracy." But then (with more hypocrisy) the Bush administration suddenly started claiming by 1989 that their invasion was now needed to overthrow Noriega and "restore democracy."

And so what did the invading U.S. force replace Noreiga with in 1989? More handpicked puppets!

Elite U.S. forces seized Noriega and flew him to the U.S. to stand trial--and to take care that he was never allowed to spill all the secrets he knew about the CIA and George Bush 1.

Meanwhile, Guillermo Endara--the U.S. government’s hand-picked choice--was sworn in as president of Panama on a U.S. base in the U.S.-controlled Canal Zone. The new Panamanian president and others in his government were tied to Panamanian banks deep into drug trade and money laundering. And none of them, of course, came to power to serve the Panamanian people.

Elections were held later--under conditions that guaranteed results that would closely serve what the U.S. wanted and needed in Panama. And the main "guarantee" of those results was, of course, the soldiers, guns, and planes of the U.S. military packed all around Panama--forces who had just proven, in case anyone had doubts, that they could be merciless in enforcing U.S. interests.

So What was the Invasion Really About?
The U.S. interest in Panama has always focused on one main thing: the strategic importance of the Panama Canal. The Canal was crucial to U.S. global operations--its capitalist penetration of Latin America and Asia, and its ability to shift its military forces aggressively around the world.

The U.S. stole Panama from Colombia in 1903. They colonized the Canal Zone and packed it with U.S. bases--so that no one (including Panama’s people) could challenge U.S. control. And after World War 2, it became the headquarters of SOUTHCOM--the U.S. military command center for gathering intelligence, carrying out intrigues, and suppressing insurgencies throughout Latin America.

In the 1970s, faced with defeat in Vietnam and growing challenges from its Soviet rivals, the U.S. ruling class decided to change how they exercised control over the Panama Canal Zone--from direct U.S. colonial control, to control through the Panamanian neocolonial government.

As that changeover approached, Noriega looked less and less like the man-for-the-job. Just ten days before much of the administration of the Canal was scheduled to go over to Panama (on January 1, 1990) the U.S. invaded to get rid of Noriega.

Thousands of Panamanians were killed so that Washington could be confident it would keep control of the Canal--and so a new set of corrupt rulers could imposed.

It represented a tightening of the U.S. grip on Panama and all of Latin America. It was one of the first new global moves (after the collapse of the Soviet Union) to push forward the U.S. as the world’s "only superpower"--soon to be followed by the first Gulf War in 1990 (against that other, estranged U.S. ally Saddam Hussein!).

This invasion of Panama was a U.S. war of lies and shame.

This series is available online at revcom.org/history.htm
 GuessWhat1964
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 33
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 8:50:08 PM
Anyone want to talk about Grenada and Chile ?

In this day and age of information technology, there is no excuse for ignorance or US flag flying.

Burning ??? Hmmmm
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 3/30/2010
Msg: 34
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 9:05:41 PM
A better option would be to bash the people who are actually behind these crimes instead of bashing the whole American population as for burning the flag and shaming everyone who is a part of America.
 Pookie2727
Joined: 8/5/2012
Msg: 35
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 10:19:33 PM
Thankyou Tie me up....notice how both of us dont get bashed over the other site we both belong to and post on :) ??

Im all for free speech and balanced and logical debate.....but you get tired of the American bashing.

Im sorry if Im American and patriotic...hang on Id better apologise for being Jewish too...oooh and a female as well...

Im sorry that my country has offended so many (an Allie of Australia which btw which I note all the bashers are happy to live in) ....I apologise for all the terrible things my country has done....

There.... everyone happy now ???
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 3/30/2010
Msg: 36
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 10:55:49 PM
Pookie

haha what site is that?

I too get tired of all the American and/or white western people bashing. Sure, Americans/whites/ western people have done some very terrible things in the past. But so have other people from other races or countries. No race or religion or country or culture is innocent, they all have their bad side.

I find American liberals disturbing these days as they seem to have a self hate agenda happening. They are too busy beating their own race/country over the head while ignoring the realities of who else is doing wrong and/or how their country is being damaged by extreme forms of political correctness.

Just because it's against the law to criticise islam in muslim countries, muslims have no right in trying to enforce such polices in non muslim nations. Islam and sharia is the law to them muslim nations, not the law to western societies.

Where are these muslims trying to censor any criticism against christians in their muslim nations? Can anyone say "hypocrisy?"

So western people aren't allowed to criticise islam in their own country but muslims can criticise christianity all they want in their countries?

The sad truth in muslim nations when it comes to christianity, is this...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/02/05/ayaan-hirsi-ali-the-global-war-on-christians-in-the-muslim-world.html
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 3/30/2010
Msg: 37
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 11:01:32 PM
Making a video mocking islam is nothing, absolutely NOTHING, compared to what's happening to christians or anyone with a different belief other than islam in the muslim world.

Yet, how many lefties.liberals, PC bandits are complaining about this?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/02/05/ayaan-hirsi-ali-the-global-war-on-christians-in-the-muslim-world.html
 Pookie2727
Joined: 8/5/2012
Msg: 38
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/27/2012 11:51:19 PM
Im sorry 3effervesecent...but as you can see from the postings...much of it is directed at me personally and my country...you may feel different if it was directed at you and your country ...

Petulant child..was that necessary ? and Im sorry as I do not dictate to you how to react or feel to any particular etc...you feel the need to do that to me do you ???
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 3/30/2010
Msg: 39
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/28/2012 12:15:18 AM
Pookie, you have every right to be offended and have your say about Americans being bashed as a generalised whole.

It irks me how when it comes to political correct standards, such generalised bashing and hatred is so allowed towards Americans or western societies while any similar attitudes towards other countries is socially forbidden.
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 40
view profile
History
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/28/2012 1:46:31 AM
^^^ If the deletion is unrelated, you are not to blame. If it is related, then to an extent it validates your analogy. Occasionally we all have to choose between speaking what we perceive as the truth or holding our tongue for fear of hurting people's feelings. What we choose is usually based on our perceptions of what we think does that person the most good in the long run. Whether it does or not, we never know, but the important thing is that your intention was good.

"There is no contradiction between being compassionate and blunt" -Peter Boghossian
"He has a right to criticize who has a heart to help." - Abe Lincoln
 qldblue
Joined: 2/4/2009
Msg: 41
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/28/2012 7:52:15 PM
The blame for the Vietnam Conflict should be at the French as to the cause of the war, not the Americans, read the history books.

Noreiga may have been an employee of the CIA but he was also the leader of his own drug cartel.

As history reveals there are other countries that dominated smaller emerging nations long before the USA came on the scene.

If you were born in Japan and your parents were not Japanese then officially you cannot claim Japanese nationality.

I don't always agree with what the USA does but I do not attack the people personally and then claim free speech.

Then we have the policies of the Italians in their conquest of the Ethiopians in the 1930's as well as the policies of the Europeans in China at the start of the 20th century that led to the collapse of the then government, the occupation of Chinas northern lands by the Japanese.

The policies of Saudi Arabia I definately don't agree with but I don't hate the people.

A lot of western people believe in free speech but only to the extent of their views being the only ones that count, that isn't free speech that is being dictatorial.

I always wonder at the slogan chanting stooges who will claim that other countries are bad but will NEVER put themselves in the firing line.
 robertaus
Joined: 1/26/2010
Msg: 42
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 9/29/2012 2:37:41 AM

Thanks Robert for confusing Indo-china conflict with Vietnam War. Those two mean different things you know? With different belligerants as you have spotted out, US and before them French.



The blame for the Vietnam Conflict should be at the French as to the cause of the war, not the Americans, read the history books.


^^^^Good point really.The conflicts were fought in Vietnam.They are different in name only.No confusion there.


Yes Gulf of Tonkin incident concocted by USA.


So what.It was once again the fear of the spread of Communism that led to this:


The outcome of these two incidents was the passage by Congress of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which granted President Lyndon B. Johnson the authority to assist any Southeast Asian country whose government was considered to be jeopardized by "communist aggression". The resolution served as Johnson's legal justification for deploying U.S. conventional forces and the commencement of open warfare against North Vietnam.
....Wiki

Look it up and enlighten yourself.One of the incidents actually happened.


So what? I am saying some of the US bashing is deserved because of the hypocritical propaganda they've been spreading and using as an excuse to invade any country.


What hypocritical propaganda? Examples please.


Stalin and Hitler have been stopped, Third Reich and USSR doesn't exist anymore... however US still exists with its global empire now, concurrently.

YES genocidal... look at Vietnam war alone... they had to bomb neighbouring countries... Laos and Cambodia, destablizing the whole region. Guess how many millions died.
How about Iraq or Afganistan? or did you want me to talk about events that are no longer relevent... like you?


Well guess how many died at the hands of Stalin and Hitler.Oh I forgot that is no longer relevant.Why then is the Vietnam War relevant then?You mentioned the bombing of Laos and Cambodia, why is that relevant? Does that mean WW2 is not relevant? Probably would be to the surviving relatives of millions of people who died in that conflict.
How about Iraq of Afghanistan?

Saddam was a dictator who launched chemical weapons against his own citizens.

Afghanistan-Training base for Al-Queda.Oh I forgot they were responsible for 9/11.Remember that? Who knows what other attacks they had planned.

I suppose that the US preventing Australia being isolated in WW2 is not relevant either.
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 3/30/2010
Msg: 43
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 10/1/2012 4:07:09 PM
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/09/30/jakarta-film-protest.html?cmp=rss

After all this time, they are still going nutso on the streets over it? lol

5000 Muslims chanting "Allahu akbar" march on U.S. Embassy -- "Go to hell with your freedom of expression".

But wait, they are allowed to use "freedom of expression" against America but we aren't allowed to use freedom of expression against a person who lived a zillion years ago who is mentioned in a book.

haha, what a crazy ****ed up world we live in.
 robertaus
Joined: 1/26/2010
Msg: 44
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 10/1/2012 9:41:00 PM
So does "freedom of expression" include insulting someone's religion?.Insulting something that they may feel deeply about.Even if it is a person who lived a zillion years ago and is mentioned in a book?
 MrsNaamah
Joined: 11/8/2011
Msg: 45
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 10/2/2012 6:19:20 PM
Are the beliefs of the supposedly devout really such a house of cards that they are threatened by cartoons, skits, derogatory songs, questions, challenges, and criticisms? So much so that it shakes their foundations and requires moral indignation? let alone retribution and war? If your religion is worth killing for, please start with yourself.

Whatever your beliefs or religion, nobody else owes it to you to hold your religious beliefs as being in any way sacred. If your beliefs are sacred to you, it shouldn’t matter what anyone else thinks of them. If you truly have an unwavering belief in something then any opposing views would not be perceived as threatening nor inspire anger. Just because you believe something does not make it true, particularly in the absence of any verifiable evidence. If you believe things that can be proven to be untrue, nobody is prevented from pointing that out to you, or even laughing at your beliefs. You can choose to be offended by that, but nobody has to care in the slightest that you feel offended. If you allow your beliefs to cause you to behave in a way that harms others or otherwise breaks the law, then your beliefs are not an excuse. Your own religious sensitivities are your problem.

Religious beliefs are personal and do not ever have to be "fought for" because your beliefs can only ever be changed by you.
 Hilly02
Joined: 10/7/2011
Msg: 46
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 10/3/2012 2:10:27 AM

If your religion is worth killing for, please start with yourself.

I totally need this on a T-shirt! lol
 RorschachTM
Joined: 1/28/2012
Msg: 47
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 10/6/2012 2:53:26 PM
LOL what a laugh, seems like pookie and tie_me_up needs some reading comprehension classes.
I pointed the finger at US and its policy makers, at no point did I actually turn it into a personal attack against pookie as pookie and tie_me_up claims.

I guess that shows guilty conscience of some people.

Thanks for laughs.
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 48
view profile
History
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 10/7/2012 2:04:37 AM
Well at least in some places religious fanatics are making love not war.

Philipino MILFs enticed by catholic president... http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-19860907
 NotJoeWalsh
Joined: 4/15/2012
Msg: 49
view profile
History
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 10/7/2012 5:29:21 AM
Pookie, if you have, I'd like to know where you got the prescription, and how many of them pills you had to take to get there...

Just sayin...
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 3/30/2010
Msg: 50
At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:19:41 AM

I pointed the finger at US and its policy makers


Why are they or the whole USA in general should be bashed for what only a small group of people did in making that video?

That's where you totally fail
Show ALL Forums  > Australia  > At U.N., free speech divides West and Muslim nations