9,972 Forum Posts by "bumcheekcity"
At 3/26/03 07:36 PM, Commander-K25 wrote: Are you saying that the crowd and/or orchestra doesn't deserve the same rights to free speech that he does?
of course it deserves the same rights in the same country, but as it was using those rights it was defying another person of his, so they should have let him finish of his own accord and then played.
At 3/26/03 03:24 PM, Kazuo_Kiriyama wrote: Send those pics to "bumcheekcity" too. American troops are murderers my ass!
they are. well, technically, not all of them. those who have shot an iraqui (or anyone else for that matter) are murderers. some can be quite nice. i know a few soldiors. most are pretty cool, but some are complete shits who love blood.
you've just shown me two pics of two groovy americn troops who help these children. did you find the pics of those men shooting those kids fathers in the night? thought not
so thats 200-300 innocent people dead. and fo nothing, yet
are there any left-wing, liberal americans
yes people, you heard it here first - crack legalised in some states of america
in the brits awards here, almost every single band/artist up for an award made either a sniping comment towards bush, a rude comment, a sarcastic comment or a quip about the war. Michael Moore got what he wanted. everyone is talking about his speech. i wouldn't even have cared about the oscars if he didn't do that. i cant stand awards ceremonies.
and while we're there, in the 'Land of the Free' he was drowned out by the orchestra. tut tut tut.
At 3/25/03 05:23 PM, NSS-SEPP wrote: I really hate it when people call US or allied soldiers murderers.
they are just doing their job. Yes there may be some who go nuts and kill cause they like it, but most are just following commands.
It would be correcter to call the iraqis murderers. when they invaded kuwait 12 years ago. they treated the kuwaiti civilians worse than animals. killing and raping women and taking what they pleased.
And the Iraqis invaded kuwait they didnt have a UNO resolution either, or did they?
just following commands? ok then, when you go out this morning to go to work or school, if your boss or headmaster gives you an AK-47 and says 'shootthat mman down the street with the grey jumper, would you do it?
1) the man did nothing to you.
2) the man did nothing to your boss.
3) if you do it off your own back, you are a murderer.
4) if you do it whilse getting paid for it, you are a hitman.
5) if the money comes from the government, you are a soldior.
also, in the second paragraph, you make two points and clear up what you mean by 'iraquis' in the frst line. iraquis in general? the soldiors? the government? and in the las sentence you put you have just said we (America, Britain and Iraq) are as bad as each other.
At 3/25/03 01:23 PM, ChiBangin101 wrote: 1) Between President Bush and Saddam Hussein...
Hussein is the bad guy.
Define 'bad' if you please.
2) If you have faith in the United Nations to do the
right thing, keep this in mind: They have Libya
heading the committee on human rights and Iraq
heading the global disarmament committee. Do your
own math here.
Get this... they also have AMERICA on the Security Council!!! *In Hysterics* With a VETO!!! *Rolling on floor laughing*
3) If you use Google search and type in "French
military victories," your reply will be:
"Did you mean French military defeats?"
Yer, they're right. This is pathetic.
4) If your only anti-war slogan is "No War For Oil,"
sue your school district for allowing you to
slip through the cracks and robbing you of the
education you deserve.
I dont wuite understand this one. Maybe someone can enlighten me?
5) Saddam and Bin Laden will not seek United Nations
approval before they try to kill us.
Neither did America.
6) Despite common belief, Martin Sheen is not the
president. He only plays one on TV.
Thats not really a point now, is it?
7) Even if you are anti-war, you are still an
"infidel" and Bin Laden wants you dead, too.
We are talking abou Iraq. Back to the subject, please.
9) We are trying to liberate them. He is trying to
kill us.
We are trying to kill him, and he wasn't trying to kill us, really, was he? The nearest place he could hit as Cyprus, thousandsa of miles from the USA.
10) Whether you are for military action or against it,
our young men and women overseas are fighting for
us to defend our right to speak out. We all
need to support them without reservation.
Why? they are people wh kill for a living? i have to support murderers now?
At 3/25/03 03:42 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: This whole "War on Terrorism" and "Pre-Emptive War" IS terrorism.
What, exactly, did Bin Ladin do to us?
An unprovoked attack based on social beliefs.
What are we trying to do to Iraq/etc?
An unprovoked attack
(they haven't attacked us)
based on social beliefs.
(we think that they are "evil")
i agree with you totally there, but i must correct you on one point. bin laden's attack wasn't militarily provoked, but they did provoke him by treating the palestinians like shit.
bin laden and the americans used to be allies (as were the taliban) but then they split because the americans started others like shit, namely the palestinians as i have said.
soooooooooo... yes he was provokes, and if you look into it youwould probably have done the same thing if you were in his shoes.
At 3/25/03 02:35 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: The first part of the post had all the relevance. We treat terrorists at Guantanamo Bay better than they would be treated anywhere else, except that they spend a bit of their day chained to the floor. Rightfully so. If I were in charge of punishment, they'd be without certain anatomical parts right now. We don't rape and behead our criminals. Hell, we were even alright to the Asians we interned during WWII.
why? one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. do a bit of research on the net, and pretend that you're bin laden. you could find enough evidence of war-crimes and bastardry (?) that America has committed to the Palestinians and Bin Ladens people that you would (i promise you) want to do something MUCH worse to America
hey, leave him alone, just cos he can argue most of us into the ground
as a very clever bloke once said "I may not agree with what he has said, but I will defend his right to say it."
even if i dont agree with it. which i dont, virtually any of the time
At 3/25/03 03:22 AM, jimsween wrote: did you not read my post, they gave the footage to the news staions, the news staions were the ones that got the footage of the iraqi prisoners. and if your talking about gauntanimo bay, they are not POW because they are not the afgani militia they are a terrorist group.
i was talking about guantanamo bay and technically, yes you're correct, they aren't Prisoners of War. But ehy are Prisoners and we are fighting a war (against terrorism) use your common sense. and tehnically, i can piss in your drink.
doing things technically doesn't always work
At 3/24/03 08:13 PM, LedZep77 wrote: How can u put rules in war???!! tat doesnt make any sense!
no, it wouldn't work without rules. these aren't petty rules, they are humanitarian rights rules. they state obvious things like you must not torture, humiliate or do anything out of order to them. (like put them in cages - 6:00 news on the BBC) otherwise, no soldior would wsant to fight if he knew he would be tortured mercilessly when he was captured.
At 3/24/03 07:03 PM, NJDeadzone wrote: geez i guess you didn't see the tape of the Iraqis shooting into the brush because they thought a crashed pilot was hiding in there...humiliation worse than death? get your priorities straight!
shooting a brush? i'll admit i haven't seen all the videos, but i think you mean bush, so ill accept that. what do you mean humiliation worse than death? and i believe my priorities are fine as they are, thankyou.
At 3/24/03 05:33 PM, Dig_the_Man wrote: I have read the news stroy you have presented, but have yet to see the videos. Just remember that people not belonging to a nation's military are not soldiers and therefore are not covered by the Geneva Convention. So you should review those videos carefully to see that the men captured are military targets (ie soldiers). Otherwise, U.S. soldiers do not have to follow that Geneva Convention.
like in Guantanamo Bay? fair or what? but anyway, i did review the videos carefully when the news came on this morning and they said they were soldiors. and do they really not hav to follow international law because someone doesn't belont to the military?
At 3/24/03 05:31 PM, jimsween wrote: Of course we saw it but here there is a thing called freedom of the press, they can show whatever they have and since they people being captured werent yet captured they arent officially off limits yet. With the Iraqi's however they submitted the video's to the news stations the reporters didn't.
there is in Britain (freedom of the press) but in America, they ranked 17th in the world. not good for the land of the free. and yes, i do agree that the Iraqui news will be dictated more than anyone elses now, but the fact remains that we are just as bad as them
At 3/24/03 02:23 PM, jimsween wrote: Why is it that celebrities think that just because they are famous means that thier opinion matters more. They need to be held to a higher standard, celebrities have a drastic effect on what people think so if they are going to say something they should have a clearly though out view supported with evidence. And dont give me a bunch of freedom of speech crap...
Convention of Human Rights : Everyone has the right to freedom of speech.
Hohoho. No, seriously, they probably domt think thta their views mean more, they know they can get their opinions across. If you could speak for 30 seconds on anything you liked politics-wise, dont you think you might try to make your views come across?
alright, i'll review my comment and add backup and evidence.
i have seen, just 2 minuitesa ago, a piece of news showing Iraqui prisoners being tied up at the hands and feet and being made to kneel while soldiors pointed a gun at groups of them.
this was on the news at ten on british TV. thats all my evidence. i'm suprised you haven't seen the videos in the States. news is censored too much there.
anyway, this procedure DIRECTLY defies the Geneva Convention on Human Rights.
Article 13 from the Geneva Convention
PoWs must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.
Public curiocity and they put pictures of them on TV. Case closed.
If you have time, have a look at this debate i found by a journalist of the Independant.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=390501
How DARE the Bush Administration say that the Iraquis are violating Human Rights Agreements on POW's when they violate the EXACT same agreements in EXACTLY the same way - by humiliating the prisioners of war and showing them on television.
I knew Bush was a hypocrite, but I never knew he was this obvious.
At 3/24/03 04:31 AM, House_Of_Leaves wrote: Okay, so. Here's the thing.
America's like...the boxer that doesn't hit below the belt.
Please. The Americans defied the Geneva Convention by parading the Iraqui POW's around in shackels. The Bush Administration are hypocrites. In your next election please vote Gore.
If we're there, we'd better win.
Yer. Yer right, i'm against but now that we're in, we've got to kill Saddam.
it takes quite a brave man to do that. did you hear all the people booing him?
At 3/23/03 03:04 PM, TheShrike wrote: Estimated cost of this war is actually around 80 billion dollars. And that includes post-war rebuilding.
80 BILLION DOLLARS??? thats enough to make sure half the poor countries in Africa have water for years
At 3/23/03 01:11 PM, Taors wrote: Can the Al-Jazeera video be found online?
probably. look on kazaa or morpheus
just do a search for iraq on videos, it may also be on the news again soon
against. haven't you got an idea from looking at other peoples posts? surely you must have some idea
most countries are like that - government supports the war, people don't. it makes you wonder what they aren't telling us
At 3/22/03 06:49 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: Some people want to hear about something other than the war for ten minutes.
they'd only reply if they wanted to talk about it. i quite like talking about it.
im against the war. i think its about oil and i don't believe George Bush cares what happens to the Iraqui people. on the funny side, hes dug himself into a huge hole. he can't get out of it now.
she may just not know what is to be done, she doesn't have to have careful diplomatic plans drawn out.
not really, cos with most rap artists they have their songs written for them
albert einstein - dropped out of school. was dislexic. teachers called him an idiot.
einstein had a gift, just like those people do. einstein had brains, they have good singing voices or acting careers
