BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.

Subject: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Feb 07 - 11:29 PM

I guess thats the least that can be done since their homeland has been destroyed. Still, a total of approx. 7,500 is not many when 3.8 million have had to flee since the invasion.

"The United States has allowed only 463 Iraq refugees into the country since the war began in 2003, even though some 3.8 million have been uprooted."

I know that 1.5 million Kurds fled to Iran and Turkey because of Saddam but how many refugees were created when he was in power?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 17 Feb 07 - 09:47 AM

Why aren't they coming to Canada instead of the US? Canada is great and the people there are not mean spirited.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Barry Finn
Date: 17 Feb 07 - 01:20 PM

They didn't help Canada, they helped US. But you can buy your own Iraqis if you want TWO!
Barry

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 17 Feb 07 - 02:56 PM

"they helped US" Explain.

"you can buy your own Iraqis" Explain.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 18 Feb 07 - 01:01 AM

No explanations.

How many Mexicans "Flee" Mexico and enter illegaly into the US every day?

Was their homeland destroyed?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Feb 07 - 02:52 AM

Apples and Oranges, Dickey. Mexicans are not fleeing Mexico. They are seeking economic opportunity in a nation that happens to be next door. Fleeing and seeking are not the same thing.

btw - the majority of Iraqis have fled to Syria and Iran. Seems that Sweden also has its fair share.

C'mon, Dickey, admit it, you don't care about the Iraqi people. You want the U.S. in the Middle East to control the economy and protect Israel. If you really cared, you would give them shelter instead of driving them from their homes. Thats just plain mean-spirited, Dickey.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: autolycus
Date: 18 Feb 07 - 06:37 AM

Were the original Puritans,circa 1620, 'fleeing','seeking' or both?






       Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 18 Feb 07 - 01:42 PM

"they helped US" Explain.

"you can buy your own Iraqis" Explain.

I welcome all legal immigrants.

I think the pilgrims were fleeing persecution.

I think the Mexicans are fleeing poverty.

I think the Iraqis are fleeing secular violence.

My point is that people all over the world want to come to the US and if the US was so bad, why do they want to come here? Why not Canada which according to some, so much better, so much more peaceful and not mean spirited.

I think that Dianavan meanspiritedly makes simplified statements indicating that something is totally the fault of the US with out any details.

She repeadly defends mean spirited terrorist organizations like Hezbollah and mean spirited countries that do not give a damn about basic human rights like Iran.

There are lot of reasons for people fleeing Iraq. Does Iran have anything to do with this fleeing? al Qaeda?

How many fled because of Saddam? Has anybody tried to determine why they are fleeing? Where did the number come from?

All that is missing but no matter, slogans, banners, the bull horn and the angry clenched fist is still the preferred tool of the militant peace monger.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Feb 07 - 01:49 PM

People all over the world want to come to Canada too, Dickey. And they do, in great numbers. How come you didn't know that?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Feb 07 - 06:17 PM

For some reason Fox doesn't mention that. *G*

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:52 PM

How many LH?

If America is as bad as the peaceniks claim, why would anybody want to come here?

Still waiting for an expalanation of "they helped US" and

"you can buy your own Iraqis"

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 03:37 PM

"They helped us" It seems the Bush has decieded that more Irqais should be let into the country. At the same time there's a push to have those who were used by the US military to help, interpreters etc, in their efforts be allowed to emigrate here, many of course are wounded & mained being thy targets of attacks. That's it. In the past the US has used locals in their efforts in various wars, police actions & etc. I do think that once you've used someone in this manner you have the responsibility to make sure that they are not left to be hung out to dry once the country or area is abandoned if they're in fear of their lives because of their actions. This is something that should be offered up front & thought of before it becomes a part of the stock & trade of war & this should also be part of our costs in a planning stage. When asked for budget money add in the costs of buying Irqais, & their families & the costs to keep them here, healthy. That's all, you have your answer Dickey.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 03:46 PM

"Peaceniks"????? Gosh. What do you call black folks, Dickey, "spearchuckers"? You mean wanting peace is supposed to be a bad thing? ;-)

We have a steady flow of immigrants here, Dickey, from all the usual places: Asia, Latin America, Africa...wherever living standards and salaries are lower than they are in North America or western Europe. We allow as many in on an annual basis as the government deems would not seriously disrupt our society. But many more come in undercover and stay illegally for awhile, just like in the USA. If we had a common border with Mexico, we'd have a real problem....because unlike you Yanks, we have FREE universal health coverage! We are a considerably MORE desirable spot to emigrate to than you are. The reason they go to you first is simply this: you are the easiest and least expensive refuge to physically get to. It does not require purchasing a plane ticket for a Mexican to go to the USA.

Why they want to come to the USA and Canada is totally obvious. We've got a lot of land (specially Canada) with room still for expansion. We've got a First World standard of living. We're not experiencing a domestic war or a violent domestic military government and we're not experiencing massive poverty or starvation.

Why wouldn't they want to come here? They want to come to Holland, Germany, the UK, France, and numerous other places for much the same reasons. People will always emigrate where conditions seem more favorable, and where opportunities seem greater.

Your blind spot is that you seem to think that only applies to the USA. It doesn't.

You know, Americans seem to suffer from this problem: they imagine their nation to be the center of the known Universe. It's not. Neither is it necessarily the "best" place to be in every sense known to man.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 04:46 PM

" I do think that once you've used someone in this manner you have the responsibility to make sure that they are not left to be hung out to dry once the country or area is abandoned if they're in fear of their lives because of their actions."

This is absolutely true but I believe the U.S. should also help Syria and Iran provide($)for the large numbers of refugees who have had to flee as a result of the U.S. invasion in Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Barry Finn
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 12:07 AM

I paid my taxes & found out that a percentage of it was going to Hezbollah. I am going to ask the US AG to investigate & to return to me that which is mine, Ceasar can keep his share. As for the funny money, I saw Dick Gregory at the copy machine again & I've alerted Homeland Securties & Wall Street.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 12:11 AM

"Does Iran and Syria provide($)for the large numbers of refugees who have had to flee as a result of Hezbollah attacks from Lebanon?"

Had to flee where? From whom?

I was sure that it was Israel who bombed Lebanon. By your logic, it is Israel who should be helping any Lebanese who had to flee as a result of Israeli attacks.

How many have had to flee Lebanon (or Israel for that matter) in the last four years?

How many have had to flee Iraq in the last four years?

You are desperately grasping at straws and your logic and reason are failing you. Get over it.

The Iraqi refugee crisis is the largest since the Palestinians had to flee.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 12:25 AM

Guest - People go BOTH ways across that border seeking various alternatives in medical treatment for various reasons. There are also a lot of Canadians AND Americans who go to Mexico, the Caribbean or Europe for alternatives that they can't find in either the USA or Canada.

In other words, your point doesn't impress me, cos you don't really have one. I still have free medical care and you don't. ;-) Now go see if you can find a name, and some courage.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Barry Finn
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 12:28 AM

I sometime cross borders just for a breath of fresh air,,,,, but I don't fly,,,,,,,the birds do.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 09:38 AM

LH: What is the quality of that free medical care?

"I was sure that it was Israel who bombed Lebanon"

You are still struggling with the fact that Hizbollah, an Iranian force, attacked Israel and Israel retaliated.

Canada's Medical Nightmare - by Robert J. Cihak, M.D.

"the major candidates in Canada's recent national election both agreed the country's health care system is failing. They made the usual socialist diagnosis of "not enough money." None of the candidates mentioned government control as what ails the Canadian system."

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Bee
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 10:16 AM

Because, Dickey, that's political hyperbole. The Canadian health care system is not collapsing, and like everything else, it always needs more money and it always could be better. In fact wait times for a variety of procedures are significantly down.

Dickey, I am of an age where many of my age peers are needing serious care for heart problems, diabetes, cancers, etc. Guess what? They go to the doctor and they get care. I don't know anyone, myself, who's died waiting for health care, though I'm sure there are a few. Whatever flaws there are, it beats getting no care at all, as seems to be the case in the US. I'm not pulling that out of a hat, I have a good number of relatives stateside, and their health is often compromised because they cannot afford medical care or their insurance doesn't cover it.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 02:30 PM

"You are still struggling with the fact that Hizbollah, an Iranian force, attacked Israel and Israel retaliated." - Dickey

Since when is Hezbolah an "Iranian" force. Its my understanding that Iran has its own army and a very strong army from what I hear.

Regarding Canadian healthcare - Yes, it needs improvement, but in the last five years I have had knee surgery (laser), a slipped disc, a blood clot and broken ribs. I was always given excellent and timely care. In addition, I have been looking into assisted living for my mom who lives in the States. Looks like it will cost a minimum of $2500 a month. In Canada, its free.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: bobad
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 02:33 PM

"What is the quality of that free medical care?"

Look up the statistics on infant mortality and average life spans in the two countries.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 06:12 PM

"During the last two decades of this century (1980-1999), an average of 30,000 refugees were admitted to Canada annually, for an estimated total of about 0.6 million. Given this heavy intake of refugees, it is not surprising that in 1986 the United Nations awarded Canada the Nansen medal for its outstanding humanitarian tradition of settling refugees. It is worth noting that Canada is the first country to be so honoured by the United Nations."

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: bobad
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 06:31 PM

"Want a health tip? Move to Canada.

An impressive array of data shows that Canadians live longer, healthier lives than we do. What's more, they pay roughly half as much per capita as we do ($2,163 versus $4,887 in 2001) for the privilege."

Read it and weep oldguy Dickey, reprinted from the LA Times

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 06:35 PM

Stop being so mean spirited, Bobad.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: skipy
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 06:44 PM

Just one, just one, with a rucksack bomb will make a differance!
Skipy

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: bobad
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 06:45 PM

Yeah you're right Peace......So don't move to Canada Dickey.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 06:46 PM

Yeah. We had that already. Used to be mailboxes in Montreal.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 06:52 PM

Above post for Skipy

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 01:08 AM

Here's an idea. Let Dickey move to Canada, but if he gets sick don't force him to accept free medical treatment! Let him pay the full equivalent USA medical fees if he wants to (as a voluntary donation), just so he won't feel troubled by the thought that anything could possibly be better somewhere else besides the USA. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Barry Finn
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 01:26 AM

I just wrote a check to the pharmacy for $330.45 for our regular precriptions & that's not for a full month for my family. I have Blue Cross Blue Shield PPO from my wife's very large self insured employer. How do you think I feel about a national health plan? I just started medicade too. The plan tells me what are the prefered med's & what isn't & what's covered & what's not. What to do when my body & Dr tells me different? Finding a new country may be easier than finding a new plan!

Canada's health plan is failing? Wait till you really need health care here, "you ain't seen nothing yet, baby"!

I can say that I'm lucky to be alive though these costs are gonna be the death of me yet.

Barry, here in the US by the grace of God.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 01:36 AM

The funny thing is, I so seldom have had to resort to either drugs or conventional medical treatment over the years that it's hardly made a difference to me, financially speaking, whether or not my country provides free medicare. My father, however, was quite ill for the last 6 months of his life with liver disease, and required extensive hospitalization. In Canada, that ended up costing us virtually nothing (and they were extremely helpful and efficient in every respect, providing assistance at home as well as at the hospital). In the USA that same situation would have bankrupted this family....and my father would still be dead now anyway.

And there is the difference.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 01:41 AM

Barry, I don't know if its still legal or not but my mom used to get her prescriptions via the internet from Canada. What ever happened
to that? If its still happening, look into it. The price difference is amazing.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 01:50 AM

"Since when is Hezbolah an "Iranian" force"" Since It was created.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah_(Iran)

"Ansar-e-Hezbollah is a militant ultraconservative Islamist group in Iran. It revolves around the figure of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and his ideological thought. Mojtaba Bigdeli is a spokesman for the Iranian Hezbollah.

They wear civilian clothes, even though they are on government duty. They are said to attack peaceful demonstrators that aren't part of government-organized demonstrations.

They are called upon to put down riots before the police force are called to resolve the issue through traditional methods. Members of Ansar-e-Hezbollah, who typically dress in plain black clothes, are known for attacking protestors using bars, chains, and other such weapons from fast moving motorcycles. They often disappear or 'stand-down' when the normal police appear.

Currently this group is said to be seeking revenge on a group of Iranian students seen burning a picture of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his recent visit to Tehran's Amir Kabir university"

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 03:47 AM

Patrons or helpers of Hezbollah are not Hezbollah.

Neither are Ansar-e-Hezbollah the Iranian army. It may be true that they have a semi official function in Iran but they are not the government of Iran nor the army of Iran. From what I can gather, they function within Iran. Furthermore, it is Hezbollah in Lebanon that were defending the Lebanese from Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 10:07 AM

BULLSHIT!

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 10:08 AM

Hezbollah are a terrorist faction committed to creating war where and when they can. No war, no funding. Then the useless fuckers would have to get real jobs, and they aren't prepared to do that.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 02:07 PM

I agree with that, Peace, but to say that Hezbollah is an Iranian force is incorrect and misleading. Hezbollah is present in many middle-eastern countries but it is not the army of Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 02:52 PM

Hezbollah is supplied by Iran. It is not an arm of the Iranian military.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 04:25 PM

"Hezbollah was founded in 1982 in response to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, and subsumed members of the 1980s coalition of groups known as Islamic Jihad. It has close links to Iran and Syria."

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9155/

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 05:02 PM

Isreal was formed in 1948 because they got tired of 2000 years of pogroms.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 05:06 PM

Yes, and ...

this is thread drift

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 05:29 PM

Damned right it is. So tell me when you want to get back on track. I'll be right there.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 06:08 PM

Peace - If you read upthread, you will find that I was stating that since Syria and Iran are overflowing with Iraqi refugees, perhaps the U.S. should help with the costs.

Dickey was the one who claimed that Hezbollah was an Iranian force so Iran should be responsible for the number of refugees that have been created by Hezbollah.

I would also like to know the number of refugees created by Hezbollah as compared to the number of refugees created the the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

I think that its important to differentiate between Hezbollah and the Iranian army or Hezbollah and the Lebanese army.

Hezbollah is supplied by many countries but they are not the army of any particular nation unless you want to recognize the Nation of Islam. As far as I'm concerned, both Syria and Iran (and all other nations) should treat them as criminals but to go to war with another nation based on criminal activity is unwarranted.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 06:10 PM

Thank you. We agree.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 22 Feb 07 - 09:25 PM

They wear civilian clothes, even though they are on government duty. On duty for what government?


They are said to attack peaceful demonstrators that aren't part of government-organized demonstrations.

They are called upon to put down riots before the police force are called to resolve the issue through traditional methods.

Called upon by who?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 22 Feb 07 - 09:28 PM

by whom

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 22 Feb 07 - 09:39 PM

Called upon by whom?

Notice what it says on this guys uniform.

New York Times

"JERUSALEM, Aug. 6 â€" On Dec. 26, 2003, a powerful earthquake leveled most of Bam, in southeastern Iran, killing 35,000 people. Transport planes carrying aid poured in from everywhere, including Syria.

According to Israeli military intelligence, the planes returned to Syria carrying sophisticated weapons, including long-range Zelzal missiles, which the Syrians passed on to Hezbollah, the Shiite militia group in southern Lebanon that Iran created and sponsors...."

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Feb 07 - 12:52 AM

I notice that it says 'ARMY' in English. Soooo........?

The linked article is dated Dec. 6, 2003 and the source is Israeli. What did you think they would say?

I was actually surprised they gave Hezbollah so much credit.

In fact, it sounds like Israel depends on it armour whereas Hezbollah depends on its planning and organization.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 23 Feb 07 - 01:04 PM

So it's in English. Sooooooooo?

Is what the Israelis said true or false. You automatically claim whatever they say is false.

An Israeli said it therefore it is a lie?

Are you a racist?

Hezbollah depends on killing as many innocent people as they can and blaming it on someone else.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Feb 07 - 02:59 PM

I don't know if what the Israelis said was true or false. You must admit, however, that it cannot be considered an unbiased assessment.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 23 Feb 07 - 11:52 PM

Some of what they say might be biased and some may not. You assume all of it is biased.

How does Hezbollah get their weapons anyway? from Ebay via UPS or thru Syria from Iran?

Are you familiar with the Bekaa Valley?

"Syrian government provided terrorists with safe haven, allowed them to operate over a dozen terrorist training camps in the Syrian-controlled Bekaa Valley in Lebanon, and permited the Iranian government to re-supply these camps.

It is also widely believed that the Bekaa Valley in Syria-occupied Lebanon served as the epicenter for training the world's most dangerous terrorists. The Bekaa is a one-stop shop for terrorist training. Terrorists from every corner of the international community come together in training camps to learn how to conduct lethal operations. Terrorists learn how to transform themselves into suicide bombers. They also learn how to utilize various types of weapons, including long-range Katyusha rockets, high-explosive anti-tank mines and modern plastic explosives. The effects of this comprehensive training can be seen in such devastating acts as the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing. Other attacks that originated from the Bekaa Valley include the kidnapping and murder of former CIA Beirut station chief William Buckley in 1984.

Such groups as Al-Qaeda, Al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad) Hamas, Hezbollah, the Japanese Red Army, Abu Nidal's organization, Force-17, New People's Army (Phillipines), the IRA, Chechen Rebels, Fatah, the Red Brigade, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Medellin Drug Cartel were just some of the terrorist organizations who have received training in the Valley and continue to operate there.

Hezbollah, the Iranian backed Moslem fundamentalist militia, is the largest single militia in the Bekaa."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/world/lebanon/proxy-groups.htm

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 12:02 AM

What you say is true, Dickey, but don't forget one thing.

In the view of a lot of Muslims, the Israelis and Americans are terrorists. And they (Americans & Isrealis) have certainly demonstrated over and over again that they can kill a lot more people than the Muslim terrorists can, because they have a lot more firepower.

In my view they are all committing terrorism. What I mean is: the Muslim fighters are committing terrorism, the Israelis are committing terrorism, and the USA is committing terrorism.

But they all suffer from selective blindness. They only recognize terror AS terror when someone they don't agree with does it.

Typical human thinking...

Indians and whites saw it exactly that way in the frontier days, remember? It was always "the other guy" who was the "savage". It was always the other guy who killed innocent people.

The truth was, they both did.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 12:19 AM

You see...those people are in a war. It's a war that has been going on ever since 1948, and it has many, many chapters, and many factions are involved. They all arm themselves in whatever way they can and they attack in whatever way they think will work best.

They all regard their opponents as "terrorists". They all regard themselves as justified.

The main difference is this: the powerful (America and Israel) can attack with big air forces, navies, and modern mechanized armies...as well as by more covert and shadowy means. The weaker (the opponents of America and Israel) do not have that luxury. So they attack by what you would regard as "sneaky" means...

Well, that's always what the militarily much weaker side does in this kind of protracted conflict. They do it because to do otherwise would not work.

Example: The Irish came out and fought in the open in the rebellion in Dublin during the WWI years. It didn't work. The British Army crushed them. They then turned to what is called "terrorism" and attacked by stealth...wherever they felt it would hurt the most. That did work. They eventually got the British out of most of Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 06:20 PM

Dickey - Yes, I believe any assessment of Hezbollah by Israel is biased. By the same token, any assessment of Israel by Hezbollah is biased. Of course it is.

Your defensiveness clouds your thinking. Step back a bit and try to see the situation from the perspective of someone who really does not have a stake in it one way or another. You might be able to come up with an objective, unbiased opinion.

In fact, Dickey, thats what most of the world is doing. Most of the world does not give a rat's ass about Hezbollah or Israel. They don't really care who "wins". What is important to the objective viewer is that a peaceful solution is found for a hateful situation.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 01:47 AM

LH: So if all 3 parties are committing terror, it all cancels out and terror is not a factor. Stick with me now. So the determining factor is who is trying to do what to whom.

White man wants Indian lands=bad. Indian doesn't want to give up lands=reasonable. So white man was wrong. I agree. Indian was there first.

Israeli wants his own country and wants to be left alone. When attacked, Israelis fight back fiercely. Good or bad?

Muslim claims Israeli's land is really his and constantly attacks Israeli. Good or bad? Note that Muslim has at least 100 times more land than Israeli and the Israeli was there first.

I do agree that the Israelis should vacate those settlements in Palestinian territory or there will never be a chance for peace. Those settlement are wrong.

I have no love for Jews but I have even less for Muslim extremist who will attack other neighboring countries when the Jews are taken care of. I haven't been threatened by any Jews. I haven't heard any Jews talk about drinking blood or burning people in their fury or anything like that.

The American Government wants peace in the midddle east.

Now Dianavan can turn her bullhorn up to full blast, ball up her fist in anger and attack me with her anti Semitic, anti US, pro Muslim rhetoric.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 02:44 AM

Yes, I follow your reasoning, Dickey. The trouble is, things get very complicated as time goes by, and many innocent people end up suffering on both sides because of previous historical situations that they were not personally a part of.

Example: You are quite right that the Indians had the moral high ground when the whites arrived from Europe, because it was their (the Indians') land that was being invaded. Likewise, the Indians had the moral high ground as the whites moved westward into Indian lands. All well and good.

However...consider the plight of any number of ordinary white settlers in Virginia, let's say, (or anywhere along the frontier) a few generations after the first whites arrived, when a war party of Indians comes storming out of the woods and scalps and tortures their family members and burns their cabins down and commits the most hideous atrocities upon them. (Have you read some of the books about stuff like that? It was almost unbelievable what marauding Indians did to their captives....just as it was almost unbelievable what the whites sometimes also often did to Indian villages.)

Now...those white people who were being raided weren't recent immigrants from somewhere else. They were born on that land. Therefore, they naturally felt that that was their natural home...and it was, at that point. They were not Europeans any longer. They were not immigrants. They were North Americans. As such, they were just as outraged at being invaded and slaughtered as the Indians were...and for precisely the same reasons.

And in both cases they saw the "other guys" as inhuman monsters for attacking them in that fashion when all they were trying to do was live from one day to the next and feed their families.

You see how misunderstandings can arise, hatred can arise, and both sides feel totally justified and feel that the other is wrong?

Now move it to the Middle East. You have a situation there where BOTH sides think they were there first! The Jews say: "Well, we were there back in Biblical times." The Muslims say: "So were we! We've always been here."

They're both right about that. ;-) And they are both not listening with any real attention to what the other one is saying.

You go far enough back and they were BOTH from the same group of Semitic people in that part of the world in ancient times! So it's a family quarrel over an ancient split into two (actually three) religious paths. Jewish-Christian-Muslim. It's downright ridiculous...like the Protestants and Catholics in Ireland.

Now you said, "Muslim claims Israeli's land is really his and constantly attacks Israeli."   Ah! But there were Jews, Christians, AND Muslims all living in Palestine in reasonably good harmony for some considerable time before the modern state of Israel was formed in 1948. The war started AFTER European and other foreign Jews from elsewhere arrived, committed terrorist acts upon the British administration and the Muslim population in that region, and carved out a new country for themselves by force of arms. And yes, terrorist acts were committed then by both sides. No doubt about it.

But can you see that in 1948 it was the European Jews who were the equivalent of Spanish conquistadors or European colonists of North America...arriving on a foreign shore and claiming the land in the name of some grand vision they had...against the will of most of its locally existing inhabitants?

So as far as I'm concerned...in 1948 the Muslims had the moral high ground, because they were being invaded by a bunch of Europeans who happened to be Jews. ;-) The Muslims were the "Indians" in that scenario. Like the Indians they reacted to extreme violence with extreme violence of their own.

But hey...some time has gone by since then, and as usual the situation has grown far more complicated than it was in 1948. Any Jewish person born in Israel since 1948 is not a foreigner to that land. He's not an immigrant or an invader. He will feel a deep connection to the place and will defend it as his homeland...and so he should, in my opinion! Everyone's true home is the land he was born on.

So now you have a situation where both the Palestinians and the Israel-born Israelis have an equally valid claim to that land, as far as I'm concerned, to believing that that area is their homeland.

It is obviously necessary to compromise in order to settle something like that. Everybody has to get something, but nobody is going to get it all.

The compromise I would suggest is this:

1. Israel returns the occupied lands outside its 1948 borders, and agrees not to invade any neighbouring country or bomb any neighbouring country. They henceforth engage in only genuinely defensive military actions against an outside attack, not in offensive operations outside their own borders.

2. The Palestinians receive a homeland that is adequate to allow them to function reasonably well as a modern nation. I would suggest the west bank of Jordan and some areas around where Gaza is, but it would take some thought as to how to set it up so it could work. (and it would take some generosity...ha! ha!...from some of the Arab states in donating land)

3. The various Muslim militias agree not to attack Israel as long as conditions 1 and 2 are met.

4. The various Muslim nations agree the same...not to attack Israel as long as conditions 1 and 2 are met.

5. A narrow international buffer zone be established around Israel and manned by strong and well-armed U.N. forces to secure the Israeli AND the Arab borders from outside attack. If any attack is launched by any party (Israel included), then the U.N. members provide significant military response against it, and treat it as an outlaw.

Equality of rights all around, okay? Everyone gets treated with respect, and everyone has to act responsibly or pay the consequences.

Heh! And you know what? There's not a dog's chance in hell that that will ever happen. I'll tell you why. The Israelis and Arabs have no respect for one another. They BOTH think they can win, and they both intend to. They have no intention of meeting the other guy halfway. And the world in general (meaning the U.N. and all its members) is far too self-interested and too lacking in unity to take the sort of courageous stand I am suggesting above). Furthermore, the Israelis are too proud and too lacking in trust of the U.N. or anyone else out there to agree to anything that limits their free rein to attack whomever they wish when they want to.

So it won't happen.

Pretty sad situation. You cannot divide that dispute into "good guys" on one side and "bad guys" on the other, Dickey. You just can't. There are completely innocent ordinary people on BOTH sides who feel that they are honestly defending their homeland (cos they were BORN there) and resisting a heartless and criminal aggressor. And you know what????

They're both right about that!!!

Their failure of vision is this: they don't realize that the "other guy" is just the same as them. They see only their own pain.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 03:31 AM

LH: Suppose your were an Acadian and were driven out by some foreign power. You didn't feel right and were being prosecuted in your new land because people didn't want you there, You barely missed being sent to an extermination camp. See fiddler on the roof.

You returned to your ancestors home land and were attacked by the "real" owners of the land? suppose those owners were from the same ancestors as you but they suddenly adopted some new and improved religion and decided they were better than acadians?

Also keep in mind that the Muslims were Jews back in Biblical times and they suddenly declared themselves better than Jews.

My understanding is that there are still lots of Muslims, Christians and Jews living peacefully in Israel. It is the outsiders that stir the shit because they are put up to it by the likes of the late Arafat. Look at how much money that asshole raked off for himself while the Pallestinians suffered.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 12:42 PM

"My understanding is that there are still lots of Muslims, Christians and Jews living peacefully in Israel. It is the outsiders that stir the shit..."

This I agree with but I think you have to learn the difference between Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jews.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 01:31 PM

The "real owners" of any land are the people living on it at present who were born there, and grew up on that land as children, as far as I'm concerned. I don't buy the concept that descendants of an ancient people who lived on a land thousands of years ago can legitimately come from some other place entirely and claim that land and take it from people who grew up there in present times.

I consider that outrageous and unacceptable....and so did the Arabs when European Jews came into Palestine and carved out a new nation-state for themselves.

You have to ask how you would react if 50,000 Indians from Oklahoma came into your home state, Dickey, claimed it in the name of their ancestors, and starting a shooting war to take it for themselves and found a new Indian nation there.

You wouldn't like it. ;-) You'd fight them.

However, if they succeeded and actually won that war...and then you waited a generation or two....well, then I'd have to say that their kids who grew up there should have a say about the place...because it would be their natural home by then. You follow my reasoning? Everyone has a right to stay on the land he was born on. He doesn't have a right to invade the land someone else was born on and take it in the name of his ancestors.

"Live and let live" should be the credo of human society on this planet...not "survival of the strongest".

You are right that a lot of shit is stirred up by the outsiders who attack Israel. Absolutely. A lot of shit is also stirred up by Israel overreacting to such attacks with things like the 2 invasions of Lebanon...and by Israel occupying and settling Arab lands outside their 1948 borders.

I'm saying both sides are greatly at fault for their mutual provocation of each other.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 02:25 PM

At the risk of being called an idiot, I think the Ashkenazim are the lighter skinned narrower nosed, more aristocratic, european Jews while the Sephardim (from shepard I imagine) are the darker skinned farmer types.

No doubt that the lighter skin and narrower nose was from miximg Jewish blood with Caucasian blood.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 02:33 PM

Dickey - You're a racist, idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 02:35 PM

LH: If 50,000 indians came for my property, I would be in deep shit. But I could probably calm them down with a wagon load of fire water.

The Jews have a policy of seizing surrounding land as prevention from another attack. They gave back all Egyptian land in return for peace. They are at peace with Jordan and Egypt.

Israel manufactures clothing and sends it to Jordan where Muslim women do the finishing work and the goods are marked made in Israel. They live and let live. I think it is the Muslims who are not willing to live and let live.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 03:26 PM

Jeezus H. Christ! LOL! You DO love to rush in where angels fear to tread, don't you, Dickey? You made me laugh out loud that time with the comment about the 50,000 Indians and how you would deal with it...it was so totally unexpected.

You ought to start doing a talk radio show or something, cos I think you would get a whole lot of attention, and probably become famous (or infamous?) for some of these off the cuff politically insensitive remarks you make. ;-) Kind of a bit like Howard Stern, but not so vulgar.

Well, anyway, I will say this. I think you're a bit biased in favor of Israelis for some reason as opposed to Muslims, and you're not giving the Muslims an entirely fair assessment. I don't know why that is, but I guess it probably has to do with the TV stations and stuff you've been tuning into for the last few decades.

I agree that there are many Muslims who do not "live and let live", and yes, that is a very big problem. I think there are some Israelis who also suffer from that flaw, in that they have an attitude that they are totally superior to Muslims, a specially "chosen people" of God, and destined to dominate that region of the world.

Either way, it leads to trouble.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 04:59 PM

Well, it firewater is not PC, how about some beads and trinkets? Blankets and hatchets with a built in pipe?

I guess it is old fashioned to think that if someone threatens to kill you, it might affect your attitude toward them.

I haven't seen any speeches made by the Jews wanting to drink the blood of Muslims or to wipe Iran off of the map.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 05:31 PM

They're preaching to a different choir, so they use rhetoric that suits their audience.

Besides, we have a mass media in the west that searches through thousands and thousands of things that are said by thousands of Muslim spokesmen, barely mentions (if at all) the more reasonable things they say, but makes a major story out of anything really inflammatory they can find in those thousands of statements.

Why? To create a certain impression. That's how propaganda is done.

An important Iranian politician recently made a point of saying officially on the record that Iran has no intention of attacking Israel. You don't hear that being repeated much in our media, do you?

It wouldn't suit the unspoken agenda, which, in my opinion, is to get the American public so scared of Iran that they will support a pre-emptive strike on that country.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 06:17 PM

Where are the threats from Israel?

When Iranian trained supported and armed Hezbollah attacks Israel, Iran attacks Israel.

Ahmadinejad did not say "that Iran has no intention of attacking Israel"

Iran says it has no intention to attack Israel despite a call by its president to have it "wiped off the map".

Iran's foreign ministry said Tehran respected the UN charter and had never used or threatened to use force.

But it also rejected a UN Security Council statement condemning President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over his comments.

An Iranian TV channel broadcast the remark for the first time on Saturday, saying reaction to it was coordinated by Israel in a plot against Iran.

Mr Ahmadinejad made the controversial comments during a speech to students in Tehran on Wednesday.

They were seen by the outside world as a threat and the latest reaction from Iran is an effort to calm the outcry, says the BBC's Frances Harrison in Tehran."

Propaganda is bullshit like that wacko book you've been promoting.The man said he wants Israel wiped off of the map and I believe him.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 07:06 PM

There is a good article in Time Mag this week about why the Shia and the Sunni hate each other.

There is an online version here

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: pdq
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 07:22 PM

Dickey,

That article is a bit hard to read at that site. Here is the text:



Behind the Sunni-Shi'ite Divide

Thursday, Feb. 22, 2007 By BOBBY GHOSH / BAGHDAD

It has come to this: the hatred between Iraq's warring sects is now so toxic, it contaminates even the memory of a shining moment of goodwill. On Aug. 31, 2005, a stampede among Shi'ite pilgrims on a bridge over the Tigris River in Baghdad led to hundreds jumping into the water in panic. Several young men in Adhamiya, the Sunni neighborhood on the eastern bank, dived in to help. One of them, Othman al-Obeidi, 25, rescued six people before his limbs gave out from exhaustion and he himself drowned. Nearly 1,000 pilgrims died that afternoon, but community leaders in the Shi'ite district of Khadamiya, on the western bank, lauded the "martyrdom" of al-Obeidi and the bravery of his friends. Adhamiya residents, for their part, held up al-Obeidi's sacrifice as proof that Sunnis bore no ill will toward their Shi'ite neighbors across the river.

Eighteen months on, one of the men who jumped into the river to help the Shi'ites says al-Obeidi "wasted his life for those animals." Hamza Muslawi refuses to talk about how many he himself saved, saying it fills him with shame. "If I see a Shi'ite child about to drown in the Tigris now," says the carpenter, "I will not reach my hand out to save him." In Khadamiya, too, the narrative about Aug. 31 has changed. Karrar Hussein, 28, was crossing the bridge when the stampede began. Ask him about al-Obeidi, and his cheerful demeanor quickly turns sour. "That is a myth," hisses the cell-phone salesman. "That person never existed at all. He was invented by the Sunnis to make them look good." Rather than jumping in to help, he claims, the people of Adhamiya laughed and cheered as Shi'ites drowned.

The bridge connecting the two neighborhoods is now closed for security reasons--just as well, since the chasm between them is too wide for any man-made span. Mortars fired from the cemetery behind Abu Hanifa, a Sunni shrine in Adhamiya, have caused carnage in the bustling markets of the western bank. There are more mortars going in the opposite direction; on a recent afternoon, the sound of an explosion on the Sunni side of the river is greeted with cheers by worshippers at a Shi'ite shrine in Khadamiya.

Those cheers are just one sign of how much venom has seeped into Sunni-Shi'ite relations in the year since their simmering conflict was brought to a boil by the bombing of Samarra's golden-domed shrine. The bloodlust is no longer limited to extremists on both sides. Hatred has gone mainstream, spreading first to victims of the violence and their families--the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who have lost loved ones, jobs, homes, occasionally entire neighborhoods--and then into the wider society. Now it permeates not only the rancorous political discourse of Baghdad's Green Zone but also ordinary conversations in homes and marketplaces, arousing a fury even in those who have no obvious, pressing grievance. Neither Muslawi nor Hussein has suffered personal loss, but they are relatively able to tap into the same loathing that motivates the Shi'ite militias and Sunni jihadis. "The air has become poisoned [by sectarianism], and we have all been breathing it," says Abbas Fadhil, a Baghdad physician. "And so now everybody is talking the same language, whether they are educated or illiterate, secular or religious, violent or not."

Worse, there are clear signs that Iraq's malice has an echo in other parts of the Middle East, exacerbating existing tensions between Sunnis and Shi'ites and reanimating long-dormant ones. In Lebanon, some Hizballah supporters seeking to topple the government in Beirut chant the name of radical Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, whose militia is blamed for thousands of Sunni deaths. In Sunni Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Egypt, sympathy for Sunnis in Iraq is spiked with the fear, notably in official circles, of a Shi'ite tide rising across the Middle East, instigated and underwritten by an ancient enemy of the Arabs: Iran.

For those who follow Iraq from afar, the daily stories of sectarian slaughter are perplexing. Why are the Shi'ites and Sunnis fighting? Why now? There are several explanations for the timing of the outbreak of hostilities, each tied to a particular interpretation of how events unfolded after the fall of Saddam Hussein: flawed American postwar policies, provocation by foreign jihadis, retaliation by militias like al-Sadr's Mahdi Army, the ineptitude of Iraqi politicians and, lately, Iranian interference. But the rage burning in people like Muslawi and Hussein has much deeper and older roots. It is the product of centuries of social, political and economic inequality, imposed by repression and prejudice and frequently reinforced by bloodshed. The hatred is not principally about religion. Sunnis and Shi'ites may disagree on some matters of dogma and some details of Islam's early history, but these differences are small--they agree on most of the important tenets of the faith, like the infallibility of the Koran, and they venerate the Prophet Muhammad. Despite the claims by some Arab commentators, there is no evidence that Iraq's Shi'ite extremists are trying to convert Sunnis, or vice versa. For Iraqi fighters on both sides, "their sect is nothing more than a uniform, a convenient way to tell friend from enemy," says Ghanim Hashem Kudhir, who teaches modern Islamic history at Baghdad's Mustansiriya University. "What binds them is not religion but common historical experience: Shi'ites see themselves as the oppressed, and they see Sunnis as the oppressors."

Sunnis and Shi'ites are fighting for a secular prize: political domination. The warring sects, says a U.S. official in Baghdad, "are simply communities ... striving to gain or regain power." Without an understanding of the roots of the rage that drives people like Muslawi and Hussein, any plan--American or Iraqi, military or political--to stabilize Iraq is doomed to failure. And that power struggle in Iraq, whether it draws neighboring countries into a wider sectarian conflict or forces a realignment of alliances, has the potential to radically alter the Middle East.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 08:47 PM

If you were to put that in ordinary script instead of italics and not in bold, pdq, it would be a hell of a lot easier to read...


Dickey, yes I KNOW you believe Ahmadinejad wants to wipe Israel off the map. I don't know if that's true or not. It may be. I'm sure he'd be delighted if Israel simply disappeared (for any reason), but I'm not at all sure that he intends to risk his own country's national survival by attempting to make that happen with a military attack.

He'd have to be insane. The Israelis have a hell of a lot of atomic bombs. Now, the USA propaganda mill ALWAYS characterizes foreign leaders whom they are planning to fight soon as being "insane", but that's mostly just the usual propaganda. It's designed to get Americans to support military action.

Ahmadinejad never made a statement saying that the nation of Iran intended to wipe Israel off the map by a military attack. He quoted an old statement by the Ayatollah Kohmeini expressing the expectation that Israel would one day be brought down (the implication: by Divine power, by destiny). That statement was an expression of the Ayatollah's faith in his idea of Allah (God). It was not a declaration that IRAN was going to be the force that made it happen. It was wishful thinking on the Ayatollah's part...just like the wishful thinking that the Americans and Israelis do ALL the time that the Islamic Revolution in Iran will fail and be swept off the page of history. They think it wishfully every day!

My expectation? Both the present Israeli system AND the present Iranian system AND the present USA system and all present systems will AlL be swept off the page of history eventually. After all, Rome is gone, aren't they? All powers have their day, and they have their ending.

By saying that, I am obviously not threatening to attack the USA, Iran, or Israel. I am simply making a philosophical sort of statement about the mortality of human systems of government.

The Ayatollah didn't like Israel. He was expressing the hope and faith that God will bring the Israeli system to an end. Don't the Israelis (the religious ones, that is) pray every day for Jehovah to bring Hezbollah and the Iranian Ayatollahs to an end? You tell me how that is any different.

It is inevitable, Dickey, that you and I will both see the info we already agree with as "factual" and the info we already disagree with as "false propaganda". That's how the human mind works. ;-)

I see no solution to this difference in opinion, but at least we're both getting lots of practice improving our typing skills, right?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: pdq
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 09:00 PM

Little Hawk,

There is a small coterie of rude pedants who follow people around and declare "that's copy and paste!", as if that diminishes the content. I post some articles in italics which, to me at least, shows that the item has been copied, in order to avoid these people.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 09:19 PM

LOL! Okay, I see... No problem.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 09:55 PM

PDQ make it bold like this <b>TEXT></b> or a different color like this <font color=blue>TEXT</font>

Or a different font like this <font face=arial>TEXT</font>

Or a different font like this <font size=+2>TEXT</font>

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 10:01 PM

I have an old fashioned tendancy to take things at face value. Somebody yelling he's lying always makes me suspicious of the yeller.

It they had any credibility they could state their case calmly and let people judge who is telling the truth.

Do you believe the holocaust never happened? That's what Ahmadinejad said.

You put your dick on the chopping block and trust him, not me.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: bobad
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 10:30 PM

LH, if you are looking for a new carreer may I suggest that there could be an opportunity available to you as a spokesman for the Ahmadinejad government in Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 11:14 PM

No thanks bobad. ;-) That would necessitate my believing in their Islamic revolution and its purposes, and I don't.

Yes, Dickey, I do believe the Holocaust happened. No doubt in my mind whatsoever.

Why is my disagreement with western interpretations of Ahmadinejad's speech being taken by you guys to mean that I agree with him about everything? I definitely do not.

Or must it be "all or nothing" for you when it comes to belief? For me, it is not all or nothing when it comes to politics and international situations...or indeed, most things. Every country, every administration is right about some things and wrong about others.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 11:34 PM

Yes I beleive administrations are wrong on something and right on others.

But I also believe there are people who should recieve no support at all, only opposition such as Amajama whatever, Chavez, Castro. To me they are enemys especially the ones that want you dead.

I suppose you would say Yeah, he wants me dead but there are other things I agree with him about so he is not all bad.

Like an old country guy I know once told me "When somebody says theys gonna kill ya, never take your eyes off him"

You have to decide who is friend and who is a foe. Who is a danger and who is not. Pretty basic rules of survival and the ones that don't follow them don't survive.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 11:44 PM

I follow your reasoning on that, Dickey. You have probably described just how Ahmadinejad feels about the Israelis, and how they feel about him.

I see no harm staying alert, but I will not attack unless I am attacked first.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Feb 07 - 12:13 AM

George w. is just trying to push the value of labor lower.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 12:33 PM

LH:

If you saw someone beating up on an old lady would you intervene?

There is a tipping point when you decide one way or the other about who is friend or foe. Who can be trusted or not trusted. I suppose there is a middle ground where you think they can be ignored but not considered as a friend or trusted.

However the point at which you decide they are an enemy or you decide if they can be trusted is very distinct to me.

Based on his public statements, I don't trust Ahmadinejad and I think he is an enemy of the free world which we enjoy so much. I wish Iran could be part of the free world.

I know you hate these comparisons but wouldn't you hate to live in Iran? I think it is reasonable to determine the malevolence or benevolence of a leader by considering how it would be to live under his rule.

Iran is stirring the shit in Iraq and Lebanon and you know it.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 01:04 PM

The U.S. and Britain are stirring the shit in Iraq and Lebanon and you know it, Dickey.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 01:10 PM

Dianavan is mean spiritedly stirring the shit in the US and Canada and she knows it.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 01:14 PM

I don't trust Ahmadinejad or the Mullahs in Iran either, Dickey. Neither do I trust Mr Bush or the Israelis. Neither do I trust the Syrians nor the Saudis nor the Turks or anybody else around there. If I were leading a country...any country...I would never attack another country unless they attacked first (and I mean a full scale military attack...not the covert supporting of some paramilitary group somewhere...the USA also makes a habit of supporting paramilitary groups all over the place, after all, and always has done so).

I have no wish to live in Iran, because it's not my home and it's not my culture. If I was an Iranian, I might feel differently about that. Who knows? It would depend on many factors.

I don't doubt that Iran is assisting Hezbollah. I also don't doubt that the USA is assisting various paramilitary groups who kill people for them in many places around the word. I do not regard that as justification for launching a war on either the USA or Iran.

I'm looking at the situation even-handedly. I don't attack another country EVER unless that country has already attacked me...and I mean directly and without question attacked me with its own professional armed forces.

If all countries in the world were to abide by that one simple rule "I will not attack you first", we wouldn't have any more wars between nation-states. And if you think about it, Dickey, those are the normal rules of human conduct in any decent, law-abiding society, aren't they?

We need official statements by both Israel and all its Muslim enemies to that effect: "From this day forward we swear that we will not attack you first." It would be a reasonable start to building some kind of constructive dialogue.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 01:21 PM

Has Dianavan seen this movie?

Not Without My Daughter (1991)

"In 1984, Betty Mahmoody's husband took his wife and daughter to meet his family in Iran. He swore they would be safe. They would be happy. They would be free to leave. It is the engaging true story of a woman who suffers abuse at the hands of her husband.
An American woman, trapped in Islamic Iran by her brutish husband, must find a way to escape with her daughter as well.
"Moody" is an Iranian doctor living in America with his American wife Betty and their child Mahtob. Wanting to see his homeland again, he convinces his wife to take a short holiday there with him and Mahtob. Betty is reluctant, as Iran is not a pleasant place, especially if you are American and female. Upon arrival in Iran, it appears that her worst fears are realized: Moody declares that they will be living there from now on. Betty is determined to escape from Iran, but taking her daughter with her presents a larger problem.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 05:06 PM

Do you think that is the experience of every woman in Iran?

Thats a pretty broad generalization but it makes a good movie.

Since this is about Iraq and about Iraqi refugees in particular, how does this movie relate to the title of the thread?

Will you be welcoming the Iraqi refugees into your home? Will you help them adjust to the American way of life? Will you teach them to speak English?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 09:33 PM

I can see Dianavan is not concerned about the fate of women in Iran. She is too busy bashing the US and Jews to see anything else.

Here's a good one for you to bitch about: No doubt you will ignore Canada's involvement and focus your mean spirited complaints on the US.

Canadian boy caught in Texas detention

The family's complicated journey began after the couple fled Iran and arrived in Toronto in January 1995. They lived here for 10 years while seeking asylum, giving birth to a son. But on Dec. 6, 2005, with all legal avenues exhausted, the parents were deported back to Iran.

The boy's father claimed he had been originally persecuted in Iran after he was discovered with novelist Salman Rushdie's book. Once they were sent back there from Canada, they were detained and tortured for three months while the boy lived with relatives. Once released from custody, they again fled, reaching Turkey with the help of relatives. They bought fake passports and eventually travelled to Guyana, the parents said.

On Feb. 4 they boarded a direct flight from Guyana to Toronto aboard Zoom Airlines, planning to seek refuge again in Canada. The boy's father said the plane was diverted to Puerto Rico after a passenger suffered a mid-flight heart attack.

Once they disembarked, U.S. officials discovered the family was travelling with the fake Greek passports. They were detained for five days, then flown to the T. Don Hutto Family Detention Center in Taylor, Tex., the boy's father said.

Immigration rights groups have condemned the detention facility since it opened last May and last Saturday, officials opened its doors to the media to try to deflect some of the criticism. The New York Times reported that the American Civil Liberties Union is studying conditions there as it considers filing a lawsuit contending that the laws protecting detained juveniles are being violated.

On Tuesday, the boy's father phoned the University of Texas's immigration clinic and spoke with Matthew Pizzo, a student worker there. Pizzo then called the Canadian consulate in Dallas, where an unnamed employee told him the consular officials would investigate the detainment.

When he didn't receive a return call, Pizzo said he called back late Wednesday and left a message. There's been no further word from Canadian officials and consulate spokesperson Henry Wells could not be reached for comment yesterday.

"The interesting issue here is they weren't even trying to get into the U.S.," said Francis Valdez, a supervising attorney at the university's immigration clinic. "They were just trying to get back to Canada."

The parents said they hoped to reapply for asylum in Canada armed with evidence of what happened to them in Iran after they were deported.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 10:33 PM

"Authorities at the Hutto detention centre have acknowledged holding 170 children there." Why blame Canada for this?

Canada did not grant them asylum the first time. They were trying to apply a second time but didn't reach Canada. If Canada intervenes, it will be on humanitarian grounds, not because they are in any way obligated.

What excuse does the U.S. have? They were detained and put in detention by the U.S., not Canada.

btw - I do care about the plight of Iranian women but the plight of this woman in one circumstance does not apply to most. Like I said, it makes a good movie.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 10:52 PM

In your usual mean spirited Modus Operandi you have ignored the fact that Canada deported this family with a Canadian born son to Iran.

As for these 170 Children in jail, are they there with their parents? Maybe they should be outside on their own. Isn't it the parent's responsibility that these kids are in prison.

Why does the US have to have an excuse to put someone in prison because they have fake papers? They have the obligation to detain people with fake papers or no papers.

Should the US deport them? If so where? They are citizens of Iran. Shouldn't they be sent there? Should the US grant them asylum when the great humanitarian Canada did not?

What excuse does Canada have? The kid is Canada's responsibility.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 10:56 PM

National governments, Dickey, whether they be yours or mine, don't give a rat's ass about what happens to one poor family from Iran...unless it generates way too much bad pubicity in the media! Then they move fast to cover their asses and minimize the damage.

Governments care about the big stuff. The bottom line. Their balance of trade. Their currency reserves. Don't you know that?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 11:24 PM

I didn't catch the fact that the boy was born in Canada. Still, does that give the parents automatic rights? I'm sure there are ways to provide foster care for the boy if they want that.

Just the same, Dickey, I think that Canada should step in. Whether or not they do, is another matter. It depends on whether or not immigration believes their story.

170 children in detention by the U.S.? You are comparing this to the plight of 1 Canadian boy? Why? To ignore the plight of 170 children while pointing the finger at Canada is mean-spirited if you ask me.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dianavan
Date: 28 Feb 07 - 10:58 AM

Your mean spirited about the 170 children in jail means what?

Why are they there? Who is responsible? What do the laws say about it?

Obviously you are not concerned about any details, whys or wherefores. You are only concerned with making mean spirited statements in an attempt to injure reputations.

Do you have any complaints about the plight of childern in Iran, the place where the boy was sent by the great humanitarian Canada:

Dissident tells of assaults and threats against children during 66 days in jail run by Iran's clerical regime

"A leading Iranian pro-democracy and women's activist, who was jailed on trumped-up charges last year, has revealed how the clerical regime cynically deploys systemic sexual violence against female dissidents in the name of Islam.

Roya Tolouee, 40, was beaten up by Iranian intelligence agents and subjected to a horrific sexual assault when she refused to sign forced confessions. It was only when they threatened to burn her two children to death in front of her that she agreed to put her name to the documents.
        
Perhaps just as shocking as the physical abuse were the chilling words of the man who led the attack. "When I asked how he could do this to me, he said that he believed in only two things - Islam and the rule of the clerics," Miss Tolouee told The Sunday Telegraph last week in an interview in Washington after she fled Iran.

But I know of no religious morality that can justify what they did to me, or other women. For these people, religion is only a tool for dictatorship and abuse. It is a regime of prejudice against women, against other regimes, against other ethnic groups, against anybody who thinks differently from them."

Miss Tolouee's account of her ordeal confirms recent reports from opposition groups that Iranian intelligence officials use sexual abuse against female prisoners as an interrogation technique and even rape young women before execution so that they cannot reach heaven as virgins.

Few women from the Islamic world are willing to discuss such matters, even with each other, but Miss Tolouee said that the regime routinely committed sexual attacks against female detainees.

"When I wouldn't do what they wanted, they slapped me. But after the sixth night, the routine changed. I was left alone in a small dark room with two men. One was the assistant prosecutor and called himself Amiri. The other had a filthy mouth and said terrible things. They started slapping me again. For the rest of the night they did to me what no woman should ever experience. Amiri said, 'I'm going to hang you, but before I hang you, I will make an example of you so that no woman will dare to open her mouth here again'." He then sexually assaulted her.

When she asked Amiri how he could act like that, he told her that only Islam and clerical rule were important to him. The attack left her badly bruised and bleeding internally, but she refused to sign the papers they put before her. To her assailants' fury, she demanded to see a lawyer and cited international treaties on human rights.

The following night they did not sexually molest her again as she was still bleeding - and hence "unclean". Instead, they told her that they would kill her children by setting them on fire before her eyes."

Howcome she and her son are not in a US prison? She did it right and was granted asylum:

"But she still feared for her children's lives and decided to flee. She made it first to neighbouring Turkey with Nima and then her daughter Shima, 14, was smuggled out to join them.

Fearful of the reach of regime agents, who have killed exiled dissidents, an opposition group called the Alliance of Iranian Women helped them to reach the United States last month.

Miss Tolouee has been granted political asylum and intends to maintain her campaign against Teheran. She still has relatives in Iran - she does not want to go into details for reasons of security - but says that they have given her their blessing to speak out, despite the possible consequences."

Maybe Dianavan should focus on Iran due to the horrible way women and children are treated there but it seems she defends the actions of Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 28 Feb 07 - 11:41 AM

Oops that was me that did that last post not Dianavan. Sorry

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 28 Feb 07 - 02:04 PM

Dickey,

I have already said that I am concerned about the plight of Iranian women and I have already addressed your concerns about the child born in Canada.

Now its your turn to address the fact that the U.S. has 170 children and their parents in detention. Miss Toulee's sad story is a red herring designed to detract attention away from the actions of the U.S. and absolve them from any responsibility.

btw - Miss Toulee is Iranian and this thread is about Iraqi refugees.

Since you are so concerned, perhaps you should invite the poor Iraqis to move into your neighborhood or maybe you could sponsor a family to make their lives a little easier. Its the U.S., afterall, who has created this refugee crisis.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Feb 07 - 07:44 PM

The last thing the US needs is 7,000 more people.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 28 Feb 07 - 07:55 PM

"Here's a good one for you to bitch about: No doubt you will ignore Canada's involvement and focus your mean spirited complaints on the US.

Canadian boy caught in Texas detention"

I read the link. Canada was following its own immigration laws. They could use some overhaul. However, not all the laws are mean-spirited as you tend to say so frequently. The following is from January, 1997 (close to the time Dickey points out:

"Johann Dueck, 76, a retired mechanic, is accused of taking part in the killing of Jews and other civilians as a member of the Selidovka district police in German-occupied Ukraine from 1941 to 1943.

Helmut Oberlander, 72, is accused of having been a member of a commando unit that massacred hundreds of thousands of Jews in Ukraine and Crimea after the German army's advance into the southern Soviet Union in the summer and fall of 1941.

Erichs Tobiass, 84, is accused of participating in the execution of civilians in Latvia from 1941 to 1943 as a member of the Latvian security police, an SS auxiliary unit responsible for the deaths of 30,000 Latvian Jews"

How this trash got INTO Canada in the first place really bothers me. And Canada has had a history of ignoring shit like this. That is changing. Fast enough? Not IMO. BUT, Canada's involvement? It obeyed its laws. WHF is the US doing with Guantanamo and the Hutto Detention Centre (which I posted info about to Mudcat about two or three months ago, and few people seemed overly concerned)? I guess they have them to hold all the bad folks Canada deports, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 28 Feb 07 - 10:13 PM

The title says refugees. And I ask again, what are the circumstances surrounding these 170 children?

Do you care about details and circumstances? I suppose that question is a red herring in your view.

Perhaps the US is following it's own immigration laws like Canada.

"this refugee crisis" Who characterized it as a crisis? Was there any crisis over the woman refugee and her son who fled from Iran.

If you as concerned as you claim to be about human rights and refugees, you should be complaining about Iran where women get raped in jail and they threaten to burn their children.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 28 Feb 07 - 11:28 PM

Don't play stupid, Dickey. 3.8 million Iraqis have been uprooted by the U.S. invasion and you compare it to one Canadian born child and one Iranian family.

Your argument lacks credibility.

btw - What are these laws that the self-righteous U.S. of A. have that allow the detention 170 children and their parents? What kind of country outsources torture and extraordinary rendition? Whats your excuse for Guantanamo? Stick to the topic and stop trying to find a lame excuse by pointing your finger at the other guy.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 01 Mar 07 - 01:43 PM

A child born in the US is automatically a citizen and can't be deported.

How is it in the self righteous Canada?

How come Canada outsources it's torture? The family and the child were sent to Iran where they were tortured.

None of this is on your topic but you asked.

Your mean spirited opening post points the finger at the US.

You answered your own question, how many refugees were created when Saddam was in power? 1.5 million.

The following is on topic about refugees:

"First convoy of Iraqi refugees returns home from Ashrafi refugee camp in Iran; 69 Iraqis--third of them children--cross into Iraq and go to southern city of Basra; before fall of Saddam Hussein, there were 200,000 Iraqi refugees in Iran; most had fled after Shiite uprising in 1991; after Hussein was removed, American-led authorities delayed their official returns, concerned that flood of returning refugees could include people dedicated to fighting occupation forces; refugees' return is organized by office of United Nations high commissioner for refugees NYT

"More than 5,000 Iraqi refugees who have lived in refugee camp in Rafha, Saudi Arabia, for last 12 years yearn to return home; they are mostly Shiite Muslims who fled southern Iraq when Saddam Hussein crushed Shiite uprising after Persian Gulf war of 1991; hundreds of children under age of 13 have never seen country their parents call home; Rafha refugees are among 400,000 officially recognized Iraqi refugees across Arab world and in Europe and United States; hundreds of thousands more are living in exile; now many thousands are preparing to go home; their return has become focus of United Nations High Commission for Refugees and other international organizations; at Rafha, desire to leave runs almost as deep as fear of going home to houses and towns that were obliterated and to graveyards that hold their relatives; across camp, small spontaneous celebrations break out as Baghdad falls into American hands" NYT

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Mar 07 - 02:17 PM

"Rafha refugees are among 400,000 officially recognized Iraqi refugees across Arab world and in Europe and United States; hundreds of thousands more are living in exile;"

Are you trying to compare this to 3.8 million who have been uprooted by the U.S. invasion.

Even if you add 1.5 million Kurdish refugees to the 400,000 your point is lost. What are you trying to say?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 01 Mar 07 - 02:20 PM

Iraqi refugees hope for US strike

Iraqi exiles blame Saddam Hussein for most of their ills

The Central Cafe in downtown Amman is a typical Arab establishment where men meet to play backgammon, smoke a water pipe and talk politics. The difference is that the only topic of discussion here is Iraq.

Most of the customers at the cafe are Iraqi refugees, stuck in Amman, some already for years as they wait for an answer to their request for asylum from the UN's refugee body, the UNHCR.

If America helps us get rid of Saddam Hussein, then welcome and many thanks to America

Majed Abed Abbas

The plans for a US strike against Iraq may still be unclear and there have been warnings about the consequences such a strike would have for the stability of the region, but Iraqis at the Centraal are hoping it will happen... and soon. Majed Abed Abbas, a 35-year-old Iraqi Shia, fled his country two years ago. He said he was persecuted as a Shia by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's Sunni regime.

He also got in trouble after helping his brother-in-law flee to Denmark. He blames all his misery on Saddam Hussein.

"We have to save the Iraqis, they are oppressed and they are hungry," he said.

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein
Iraqi refugees would like to see a change of regime

"Iraqis don't care any more who rules them as long as it's not Saddam Hussein.

"If America helps us get rid of Saddam Hussein, then welcome and many thanks to America."

This is an unusual statement in a region where the US is viewed with suspicion, sometimes called the Great Satan and always criticised for its pro-Israel stance.

"We need outside help to topple the regime," Mr Abbas said.

"The Iraqi people are weakened, they are too worried about surviving and putting food on the table, they don't have the strength to rebel against this regime."

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Mar 07 - 02:39 PM

Yes, Dickey, thats true if you were Shia but what about the Sunnis?

And now that the Shias and Kurds have the power in Iraq, it is mostly Sunnis who are fleeing Iraq - 3.8 million of them.

btw - You still have not answered the question as to how many Iraqis were uprooted by Saddam.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 01 Mar 07 - 03:20 PM

What about the Sunnis? Maybe they shouldn't have blown up the Golden Mosque at Sammara.

These are refugees from Saddam's Iraq that you wondered about.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Mar 07 - 04:15 PM

You are making no sense, Dickey, and you aren't even attempting to answer the question or use any logic.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 02 Mar 07 - 12:26 AM

If you want to make sense ask a perticular question besides what about XXX?

"Yes, Dickey, thats true if you were Shia but what about the Sunnis"

What does that mean?

First the Sunnis were in power and not being persecuted under Saddam so there was no reason to "flee".

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 02 Mar 07 - 02:08 AM

Here's the question, Dickey, plain and simple just like the first post.

How many Iraqis were uprooted by Saddam?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 03 Mar 07 - 01:53 AM

Why is it my task to seek out information about a point you are trying to make?

Make your point yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 03 Mar 07 - 09:52 AM

displaced families are returning

Brigadier Qasim Ata, an authorized Baghdad Operation spokesman, told al-Sabah that for the 3rd day in a row dozens of displaced families are returning to their homes. 35 families returned in Madain, 7 in hay al-I'ilam and small numbers of families in various districts of Baghdad.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Mar 07 - 01:10 PM

Dickey -

First you say, "ask a perticular question."

Then you say, "Why is it my task to seek out information about a point you are trying to make?"

Telling me how many are returning to Iraq does not tell me how many were displaced by Saddam.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Dickey
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 02:21 AM

How many Iraqis were uprooted by Saddam? That's your point?


"Just look at Iraqi opposition in exile - drawn from among four millions fled Iraq since Saddam took power in 1979"

"http://www.mideastnews.com/iraq0703203.html

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 03:15 AM

Interesting link. I actually think some of what Adel Darwish is saying has some truth to it.

I would like to know, however, where he got his facts and figures about those who fled Saddam. He may have drawn them out of the hat for all I know. I didn't notice any footnotes.

Although his wtitten English is quite good, he needs to improve his grammar. How old do you think he is? How old are you, Dickey?

I hope, Dickey, that you paid close attention to this:

Copyright © Adel Darwish & Mideast News 2003. All rights reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means or used for any business purpose without the written consent of the publisher.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Dickey
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 04:19 PM

Now you have got me worried.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Dickey
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 01:45 AM

"The flight of its best and brightest professionals is nothing new in Iraq. Under Saddam Hussein, an estimated 4 million people fled into exile. After the fall of the Hussein regime, many emigres returned in the hopes that Iraq would become a center of learning, scientific research, and art in the Arab world. However, instability and violence have forced many professionals to flee the country, despite the government raising their salaries in an effort to keep them from leaving."
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/11/d0c40243-4975-49f8-9fe4-536f108b95a9.html

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 07:53 AM

Interesting - an estimated 4 million fled under Saddam and 3.8 million fled after the U.S. invasion.

I'd say Iraq definitely is experiencing a brain-drain (they are the only ones who can afford to get out) and the rest of us have a refugee crisis on our hands.

Seems to me that the U.S. should accept more Iraqi refugees. In fact, Britain, Australia and the U.S. should share the responsibility. If they can't accomodate them, they should at least help Syria and Iran with the financial responsibility. Instead the U.S. is proposing sanctions against Iran. It hardly seems fair.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Dickey
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 01:07 PM

"the U.S. is proposing sanctions against Iran" That was Carter.

Sanctions Against Iran Executive Order 12211.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and statutes of the United States, including Section 203 of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1702), Section 301 of Title 3 of the United States Code, Sections 1732 and 2656 of Title 22 of the United States Code, and Section 301 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1631), in order to take steps additional to those set forth in Executive Order No. 12170 of November 14, 1979, and Executive Order No. 12205 of April 7, 1980, to deal with the threat to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States referred to in those Orders, and the added unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States created by subsequent events in Iran and neighboring countries, including the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, with respect to which I hereby declare a national emergency, and to carry out the policy of the United States to deny the use of its resources to aid, encourage or give sanctuary to those persons involved in directing, supporting or participating in acts of international terrorism, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Make any payment, transfer of credit, or other transfer of funds or other property or interests therein, except for purposes of family remittances.

The following transactions are prohibited, notwithstanding any contracts entered into or licenses granted before the date of this Order:

Effective immediately, the direct or indirect import from Iran into the United States of Iranian goods or services, other than materials imported for news publication or news broadcast dissemination.

Effective immediately, any transactions with a foreign person or foreign entity by any citizen or permanent resident of the United States relating to that person's travel to Iran after the date of this Order."

---

Now The UN has sanctions against Iran.

What are these sanctions? Do any of them harm the Iranian people ot just their rogue nuclear program?

Resolution 1737 (December 23, 2006)
The Security Council unanimously imposed sanctions against Iran. The text, calling for steps required by the IAEA, bans trade with Iran of all items, materials, equipment, goods and technology which could contribute to Tehran's uranium enrichment program and contains a list of persons and entities, whose assets are subject to a freeze. It also established a new sanctions committee to monitor compliance of the resolution."


5+1 Group meets to discuss possible additional sanctions on Iran

"Representatives of the world's six major powers held a meeting here Tuesday morning to discuss a draft resolution imposing additional sanctions on Iran, with the media still speculating on what these sanctions would actually be.

Five permanent members of the UN Security Council -- China, Russia, Britain, France and the US -- plus Germany met in Britain's mission at the UN...
..Based on media speculation, the US and Britain are doing their utmost to pass a new draft resolution [at the UN] that would impose tougher sanctions on Iran than those imposed in UN Security Council Resolution 1737, passed in December.

These include a ban on the sale of nuclear and ballistic missile-related materials to Iran and a freeze on financial assets of Iranians involved in its nuclear programs as well as a ban on travel by these officials."

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Dickey
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 11:33 AM

"their homeland has been destroyed"

How much of their homeland has been destroyed?

How is it in Northern Iraq where the Sunnis did not touch off sectarian violence?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 12:32 PM

"How is it in Northern Iraq where the Sunnis did not touch off sectarian violence?"

As you know, that is Kurdish territory. They really do not see the civil war in Iraq as their problem although they will do whatever it takes to keep the U.S. on their side. They have their own agenda.

Do your homework and answer your own question.

Better yet, start another thread.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Dickey
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 11:20 PM

Dianavan: You say in typical inconclusive open ended style "their homeland has been destroyed"

Does this mean all of it or part of it? If it is a partial destruction, which parts?

You brought up homeland destruction in this thread so tell us how much of it is destroyed and if it is not too much work, what parties are doing this?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 02:49 AM

Dickey - You can't possibly be so stupid as to believe that Iraq has been untouched by the U.S. invasion. Why do you think people are leaving? Would you want to live there? Don't be such a complete idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: Dickey
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 04:03 PM

Dianavan:

Again, you need to clarify your statement. Was it touched or 100% destroyed or what?

No it has not been untouched.
No I wouldn't want to live there.
I will not be a complete idiot.

How come it is so difficult for you to answer questions?

Subject: RE: BS: 7000 refugees to arrive in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 04:18 PM

Dickey - If you know alphabetical order, you can look up the word 'destroyed' in the dictionary.

Yes, I believe that the U.S. invasion has destroyed Iraq. It will take years to re-build and even then, national treasures will never be recovered.