Sam Samson

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (R. Gerschwarzenge @ Oct. 01 2002,09:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mister Frag @ Oct. 01 2002,01:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Professor Hans Juergens believes men associate blondes with marriage and housekeeping but seek out brunettes for sex.<span id='postcolor'> In Italy this is completely opposite.<span id='postcolor'> well, always thought it is the other way round too. anyway. I'm married to a brown-eyed brunette.

it is noteworthy that most accomplishments mentioned here were made in societies that were FREE. incidentally the macedonian/greek city states were among the first to propagate an idea of civic freedom. actually alexander was as much a missionary of the greek way of life as he was a military man. what fed his ambition was the desire to spread his superior greek culture. look at what they produced: everything exronin already mentioned, as well as breakthroughs in medicine (hippocrates, galen), sports (olympics), warfare (well, alex), creating a lingua franca (koine-greek) for the world, much like english today, etc. too bad: when greece had become free it became fat and turned decadent. guess all great societies grew decadent before they fell. Â fat greek weddings... there was something else I wanted to say... what was it? *knock knock*

this thread is hilarious I found it also has a very high moderator density. I still maintain: italy rules. ferrari rules the formula 1. and russia derived a working economic system by emulating southern italian traditions. (starts with m****). also: don't overlook the first war on terror. it was waged by italians during their first days as a republic! well, at that time they were still romans, to be precise. back around 75 BC george w pompeius fought off the mediterranean pirates terrorizing the mediterranean peoples. he got the most far-reaching mandate anyone ever got under the republic, "to wage war by all means on all seas this side of the pillars of hercules (gibraltar)." actually his name was gnaeus pompeius. (so what.) he fought and killed their leaders. then he settled the ordinary pirates, the ones with lower leadership quotient, in an area called cilicia. they became pompeius' supporters in his later feuds with caesar. have I now introduced a political element into the discussion? (shame on me.) let's return to the REALLY important stuff: hey! football, soccer: italy employs some of the best players in the world: i.e. ronaldo, ... and champion league clubs like ac milano, etc. parties? the berlin love parade is nothing more than an old fashioned italian bacchanal. (bacchanals and saturnalia (christopher street parades) got banned by the senate though.) I had pasta today. (noodles to y'all from over there. did I tell you I'm in europe?)

of course I'd love to brainwash everybody here to think like me. but no, I'm not italian. (actually, I write this hunched over an american keyboard somewhere in europe. )

who might have tipped the cops off? could it be...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Satchel @ Sep. 26 2002,14:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I already thought the term "Axis of evil" sounds familar to me...Japan, Italy, Nazi Germany anyone? According to Bush´s statement the majority on this planet are branded terrorists, located everywhere, from the White House to the Kreml, as they do not support or question his cause.....after all it were the Allies making the forming of a strong constitutional state in Germany possible after the war, and we hold on to it till today, it´s a thing of national identity and morality. That´s why a "patriot act" restraining basic human rights would be unthinkable in Germany. May be one of the reasons why we are unmarketable for military and political adventures with uncertain outcome and questionable motivations.<span id='postcolor'> aah, yes. germany. You may not want to forget that it was the US which protected germany for more than 40 years, spreading a powerful military umbrella over it, as well as pumping billions of dollars into the economy via it's GIs. germany was able to use money which would ordinarily have been used for a viable military, (which nobody wants the germans to have), to grow itself one of the world's fattest welfare states. to this day it's military is chronically underfunded. it is cheap now to come and claim superior morality. this is one reason why the socialist chancellor's (or cabinet minister's) populist "bush is hitler" remarks and the statements against an engagement in iraq touch such a raw nerve in washington. the US fights the hitlers of this world while those claiming moral superiority today usually provided them at some time or other.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Sep. 26 2002,09:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (WhoCares @ Sep. 26 2002,10:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">however, I think that one of two former Iraqi generals, probably Najib al-Salhi or perhaps Fawzi al-Shamari, will take power after a short war. Both men live in Washington.<span id='postcolor'> This is very related: Working Group on "Transitional Justice in Iraq" Meets in Washington I don't think the US wants to hang around for a long time in either Afghanistan and even less so in Iraq. Furthermore, there's a hope that, in the case of Iraq, once the top henchmen and military elites are neutralized, there will be an overall sigh of relief similar to the "Hail to Dorothy - the Wicked Witch is dead", announced by the Wicked Witch's very own guards.<span id='postcolor'> bingo

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Sep. 26 2002,13:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Duke_of_Ray and a few others here are Christian Zionists who believe that the lords second coming must be preceded by the Jews repopulating biblical Israel. mumble, mumble... Now let's see... Â Who do we all know who is willing to break international laws and see huge numbers of people suffer for the sake of achieving his religious and spiritual goals? (Hint: Â His initials are OBL.) Â <span id='postcolor'> da duke is related to Osama? bernadotte: get a grip. you don't know the first thing about biblical christianity. or the distinct difference between christianity and any other religion, particularly islam. Jesus never killed anybody. ole mohammed spent his last two years doing nothing but that. and his followers did it for a successive 100 years after that. the only time they really got knocked around was in france by charles martel, daddy of charlemagne. they in turn got attacked (for a change) during the crusades. and they still whine about those. also for your info: Jesus himself talked about his second coming in Matthew 24; Luke 21 and Mark 13. in Luke 21, 29-32 he talks about a blossoming fig tree. if you would know anything about biblical metaphors you would know that this refers to Israel. the re-creation of Israel is one of the signs of his coming (no matter how big the territory, really.) happened in 1948. the other biblical sign is, that the city of Jerusalem will not be in gentile hands anymore, but back under israeli jurisdiction. this came about during the 6 day war, 1967. for the first time in roughly 2500 years Jerusalem is back under jewish control. I quote Luke 21, 24, for your convenience, so you don't have to go buy yourself a bible: "...and they (the jews) will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the gentiles until the times of the gentiles are fulfilled." maybe those times are about up?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (WhoCares @ Sep. 25 2002,09:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Sep. 25 2002,05:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">5.Aftermath. Who will take care of Iraq after Hussein is captured? We don't have viable candidate.<span id='postcolor'> This is the key to the whole US politic today. They show a lot of action and activity, but they offer no solutions.<span id='postcolor'> well now. like paratrooper said, they have tons of folks in london ready to take charge. however, I think that one of two former Iraqi generals, probably Najib al-Salhi or perhaps Fawzi al-Shamari, will take power after a short war. Both men live in Washington. Bush has a plan, yet undisclosed. he even agreed to nation-building, a change from his pre-911 stance. and after 1798 (france) and 1914 (GB), why shouldn't the US try to reshape the area for the better? because those people can do it all by themselves? yeah, right, kuweiti.

question for you guys with more time than me: in the 1948 war, (started by the arabs with the goal to quickly destroy Israel), Jordan conquered the "west bank" and simply incorporated the territory into its borders. Jordan didn't make it available for a palestinian state. that was never an option. refugees were kept in camps. why? why did Jordan not create a palestinian homeland in nearly 20 years? and why was Israel's '67 conquest and subsequent incorporation of the territory an unforgivable sin and Jordan's annexation in '48 acceptable? sounds like a double standard to me. I maintain, so far unrefuted: the longterm arab goal was, is and will always be the destruction of Israel, even without the palestinian issue. ...and the reason why there is no widely circulated palestinian press for westerners is that their stuff is so outrageous it is unpresentable to western minds. in the west even the most self-immunized smart alecks and dingbats are still somewhat able to discern biased propaganda, and be it only because they have been exposed to other reading material. also: I refuse to even compare Israel with Iraq, one being a bloody dictatorship, the other the only democracy in the entire region. it is nutty to do so, though worthy of bernadotte to try. actually I think it is wicked, wrongheaded and ill-spirited. you may not like Sharon, but he will be voted out one of these days and somebody else will get a chance. arafat or saddam will never surrender, unless being forced by an iron fist. (doesn't have to be W's.) a new leadership brings out new characteristics in a people. I'm not entirely without hope for the palestinians. let them send arafat into exile on st. helena. let somebody new have a chance to make a difference.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Sep. 23 2002,23:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 23 2002,19:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">*falls over laughing* ... Watch out Germany, Â Uncle Sam has his eyes on you...<span id='postcolor'> Actually, Uncle Sam had his eyes on it for the last 55 years. Germany, maybe after Japan, is the biggest success story of US foreign policy. Germany grew itself one of the most elaborate welfare states in the world while the US provided an expensive shield, costs the Germans didn't have to shoulder. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Sep. 23 2002,19:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> He only did that because an official in Shroder's government compared George Bush's tactics to Hitler. Somehow I think it's a fair trade<span id='postcolor'> Yeah, Tex, because you know diddlysquat about Bush and even less about Hitler.

I discovered north america too! I still do. Many people do every day. (Okay, I admit: this is my corniest joke ever)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Sep. 23 2002,16:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Sam: At least what I say doesn't consist of random ramblings, rants, and selective history...<span id='postcolor'> well, what does it consist of, einstein?

In stead of using the alarm in the effects dropdown menu use the playsound "alarm" command in the onAct-line. If one siren sound is not enough make a little scriptlet to repeat it a few times.

I really don't think there's anything wrong with the army or military service. As long as I get to pick the generals...

Bernadotte, your last post to SirLoins was contrived. Shame on you. bn880 is his usual ranting self. (At least I'm entertaining in my rants.) KingBeast, you need to study up on the persona of Mr. Arafat. This guy is more sly and ruthless than the, pardon me, dimwits from the IRA ever were. Read why he was banned from Jordan in 1970. Read his legendary "I carry an olive branch in one hand and a gun in the other" speech from 1974 before the UN. He didn't change one bit. Find out about his tactics of throwing stones at daytime and sniper attacks at night. About his appeals in English for a cessation of terror and his Arabian appeals for martyrdom. The man is the despotic leader of his people. When his al Kuds newspaper wouldn't print a praise-article to him featuring him as Saladin, the chief editor was abducted and severely beaten by his henchmen. Arafat does not just terrorize Israel, but his own people. Let me throw in another idea, since the humanists among us are bent on arguing that we need to respect the culture and traditions or Araby. In most of the mid east they still use the rule of the jungle. The guy with the biggest gun rules down there. (Saddam first came to Baghdad with a gun in hand and at the head of a bunch of no-gooders). That is what those people respect. It is their culture. They don't care what we think. They have treated one another like that for millenia. The mid east is a far cry from your presumably tempered civic culture. (Have you ever been there? I mean in a country that was not subsidized by the US like Egypt and Israel?) Now, in following this time-honored mid eastern rule of winner takes all the following logic would apply: If a nation, (i.e. israel), conquers territory that territory then belongs to the victorious nation. That nation, (i.e. israel) would also have to learn to live with the fact that the enemy from whom the territory was taken would only wait for a chance to pounce. They have done that several times. (So far israel always won.) Violence and the rule of the fist: that is the fact of life in the mid east. (Ignore at your own risk.)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Aaron Kane I learned how most of the world feels about the US pretty much from these forums. It really opened my eyes.<span id='postcolor'> Yeah, and they say they are the conservatives of their nations. Can you image the liberals? My diagnosis is, we're dealing with the old class-superceding Cain/Abel syndrome. It starts out with a benign envy. You know: you got a little more power, more territory, more glory, progressive ideas, better business, more money, lower taxes, better women, ..., maybe did something for me sometime, ... Makes me feel just a little inferior on a subconscious level. Don't like it. That low level resentment over time develops into full fledged green jealousy, until sooner or later, sometimes after years of brooding, the hatred is so intense that something must be done. So they cuss out American posters, tourists, etc. At least in Europe they're not shooting (yet). (Remember Pearl in Pakistan?) If you'd analyze (beyond mere observation) you'll probably find that most of the really intense W-haters are from smaller, perhaps once great, countries. People from regional powers (bigger places) tend to argue a little more soberly. Guess they subconsciously understand responsibility better. In real life their opinion counts more. Also: I found that the general feeling of the (non-islamic) Third World is tremendously sympathetic towards the US after 911, nothing like Europe. It was for instance awesome to see how the people of India reacted to the terror attacks. Been there when it happened. But Europe? They'll be busy constructing their reincarnation of the old Soviet Union, (European Union), until they feel they're once again on par with the US. With their present ideas and mindsets however they never will be. Back to topic: The West, (yes, they will join the US in the end), will topple Saddam and a former Iraqi general, probably Najib al-Salhi or perhaps Fawzi al-Shamari, will take power. Both men live in Washington. The war will be short. Ever heard of Afghanistan? Â

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Sep. 20 2002,20:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Burl @ Sep. 20 2002,11:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">1.) Ok.. let me clarify... Â The Al Qaeda doesn't like: Americans American Lifestyle Any non-Islamic religion<span id='postcolor'> NO, NO AND NO! This is what you have been lead to believe. Take it from the mouth of Usama Bin Laden. Â Al-quada do not hate Americans, but their government and the poeple supporting it's international policies. Â They hate the American Government because it causes thousands of deaths and billions in losses to Muslim Middle Eastern countires, and because the American Government funds the ongoing fight in Israel, and supports Jews. Â American forces have not left the middle east alon in a long time.<span id='postcolor'> see? just what I was talking about.

no, warin. by now I feel like ignoring the prose. I figure that you guys don't like bush for the single and solitary reason that he's a right of center president. if clinton would be in his position you would all be sucking up to him (pardon the pun) it 's hard to conduct dialectic dialog when your opposite argues out of a gut full of passion without a lick o' sense.

well, truth is saddam said he'll let inspectors in and the next day the general secretary of the arab league backpedaled and conveyed the message that this access is restricted to military sites. in the months before 911 the US services had fragments of info about a pending flea-attack (terror) on the US and did nothing. thousands died. now they have info just like that on iraq. the prez can't decide to do nothing and risk another attack. imagine hussein gets some religious fanatics to act as his dupes in delivering some of his botulinum into a water reservoir or anthrax into the air. he'll be a one term prez for sure then. and besides: iraq ignored some 16 UN resolutions for four years. yet after some saber rattling by W the dictator caved in like his army did 10 years ago. one word of bush was worth more than reams and reams of UN paper.

what is this? the hail hitler thread with a figleaf?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Sep. 19 2002,17:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">... A US congressional report on the 11 Sept attacks was released yesterday. Â It revealed that US law-enforcement and intelligence agencies had an enormous amount of info warning of the type and scale of the attack. Â Yet, with all their technology and combined (?) resources they could not prevent 19 foreign terrorists from converting 4 domestic passenger jetliners into missiles. ...<span id='postcolor'> the had fragments of info. this is precisely the reason why we should now move on iraq. p.s.: I won't bother replying to your silly fragmentation of my last post. sheeeshh, your voice was flipping. and about bn880's reply to avon's long list: did you see how looong the list was? nobody is as blind as the guy who doesn't want to see. with all the different patrols on guard in this thread posting here is an exercise in futility. we have dot's bias-patrol, always smelling bias + racism, forever bound to the modern newsroom culture, bn880's source-patrol, trusting only bbc. colkurtz's history-patrol, can't use history, just present day, paratrooper's political correctness-patrol, can't really side in with any party, except maybe the british government, religion-patrol, religion is a no-no in discussing the region, let's argue only along secular lines, denoir's theology-patrol: can't use the f-word, as in faith. we have creativity-patrol, can only say "realistic" things... we can do better than that. let's bar no holds. be creative in proposing a solution. (the terrorists are creative in killing! just saw a show about an israeli family who got bombed by pipebombs. the nuts and bolts in the charge (for increased damage) were treated with rat poison! surgeons operated 8 rat poisoned bolts out of the brain of a boy, now handicapped.)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Sep. 19 2002,17:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">... A US congressional report on the 11 Sept attacks was released yesterday. Â It revealed that US law-enforcement and intelligence agencies had an enormous amount of info warning of the type and scale of the attack. Â Yet, with all their technology and combined (?) resources they could not prevent 19 foreign terrorists from converting 4 domestic passenger jetliners into missiles. ...<span id='postcolor'> the had fragments of info. this is precisely the reason why we should now move on iraq. p.s.: I won't bother replying to your silly fragmentation of my last post. sheeeshh, your voice was flipping. and about bn880's reply to avon's long list: did you see how looong the list was? nobody is as blind as the guy who doesn't want to see. with all the different patrols on guard in this thread posting here is an exercise in futility. we have dot's bias-patrol, always smelling bias + racism, forever bound to the modern newsroom culture, bn880's source-patrol, trusting only bbc. colkurtz's history-patrol, can't use history, just present day, paratrooper's political correctness-patrol, can't really side in with any party, except maybe the british government, religion-patrol, religion is a no-no in discussing the region, let's argue only along secular lines, denoir's theology-patrol: can't use the f-word, as in faith. we have creativity-patrol, can only say "realistic" things... we can do better than that. let's bar no holds. be creative in proposing a solution. (the terrorists are creative in killing! just saw a show about an israeli family who got bombed by pipebombs. the nuts and bolts in the charge (for increased damage) were treated with rat poison! surgeons operated rat poisoned 8 bolts out of the brain of a boy, now handicapped.)

sweden being the only country in europe with voluntary one party government for more than 60 some years... (hit me if I'm wrong) about those "damnable" settlements in israel: 1. to build on, or occupy, the high ground is a time proven military strategy. would be foolish to do anything else. 2. don't they build just on land which they possess? as in "obtained by paying money for it?" (again: hit me if I'm wrong) and those armbreaking soldiers...: damnable. instead of doing that to this palestinian they should have made him pick up bodyparts after a terror attack.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 17 2002,21:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">0--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sam Samson @ Sep. 17 2002,210)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">By the way, I found this entertaining piece today. chesnoff is a respected news commentator, formerly with USNews & World Report. It's about homegrown criticism of the palestinian dictator. http://jewishworldreview.com/richard/chesnoff.html<span id='postcolor'> Arafat is an elected president. Also I wouldn't credit Jewsihworldnews.com with much objectivity.<span id='postcolor'> Mmmh, yes. It is always refreshing to see folks from the oldest democracy in europe to side in with elected leaders. How could I forget? Who was the candidate from the other party, you said? And about JWR's objectivity: just read the piece. It's short. Let da people judge for themselves. (I read pieces by www.ummah.org (pfffffff) somebody suggested.)