This wasn’t just an attack against Spain or Spanish interests. The blasts damaged a Jewish community center and old cemetery, the Belgian consulate, the Spanish restaurant and a hotel. The fact that the Belgian consulate alone was apparently targeted by no less than 3 car bombs, seems to suggest this has very little to do with the war in Iraq, in which Belgium’s role was quite the opposite from Spain’s support.

Besides, this isn’t Anzar fault, it is the terrorists’ fault, and we needn’t go looking for excuses for them to commit such attacks. Whatever disagreements there are over Spain’s policies, you cannot let terrorists dictate the policy your government chooses to undertake. It is sheer stupidity to begin evaluating each government decision against whatever fundamentalist it might irritate, you’ve lost before you’ve even begun.

Originally posted by Geforce
9 years ago 10 belgian blue berets were killed in combat in Congo.

I believe you mean the 10 killed in Rwanda, Geforce, following which the bulk of UN “peacekeeping” forces were pulled out, followed by the subsequent slaughter of nearly half a million people.

Originally posted by GarryB
The US takes the moral high ground and invades a country to save its people from a brutal dictator. Of course to invade it makes a mockery of an organisation called the UN and criticises that organisation as being without credibility.

As Rwanda showed, the UN is quite capable of making a mockery of itself. It’s not the US which makes the UN lack credibility, it is the UN which makes a mockery of the same values it claims to uphold, while doing nothing about them in practice.

Now you are suggesting that because the UN doesn’t do anything for the people of the Congo then it is the UNs fault?

Hold on, but isn’t the UN the one organization created for this exact purpose? However we dislike the situation, no nation on this planet is actually obliged to care about the Congo. What’s the point of the UN however, if it turns a blind eye as well?

Just because its attention is focused on the plight of the 20 million people in Iraq now that looting has become a sport and the US doesn’t have enough troops there to protect the innocent people they went to save… and the oil at the same time… so it has chosen to save the oil.

The civil war in Congo has been going on for years. One could actually trace back to the 1960s and Congo’s indepedence from Belgium. Where’s the UN been all this time?

Or is it because the US doesn’t care about poor Black people.

Unlike, let’s say, Europe for instance? And what has YOUR government, Garry, done about the situation in the Congo?

I don’t know why you bother, Sauron, they’re going to blame the US for this anyway.

Thanks Snapper. Visitng Petra is not out of the question, I’ve got relatives who’ve been there, but right now it would simply be too risky. Still, I’m very interested in Baalbek, from what I gather it’s got some of the most impressive Roman remains in the entire Middle East, and that’s saying quite a lot.

Originally posted by Snapper
At least the tourists won’t get ripped off with fake antiquities like they do around Palymra, Baalbek and Jerash then.

Snapper, please be so kind as to share your impression of Baalbek with us, I’ve heard it’s quite spectacular. Can’t hope to get myself there any time soon, got photos by any chance?

Arthur, regardless of the fact that I disagree with the above mentioned perspective, it is not this mere idea that I am objecting to. Let people believe what they will, that the US is indeed waging this war for Israel’s sake. But then let them say just that, instead of implying that Jews in high ranking positions in the American government are untrustworthy, hinting at hidden agendas and sinister manipulations. That is what’s wrong with the above nonesense.

Originally posted by Arthur

We’re only antisemitic if we think that part of the neoconservative clan behind Bush (you know, the Prez’ external brain) are supportive of Israel.

That’s bullcrap, Arthur, and you know it. You’re not antisemitic for pointing out “neoconservative clan behind Bush are supportive of Israel.”, you’re antisemitic if you imply that Jews in the high office of any government have sinister motives which come before and contradict their patriotism and their devotion to the country they serve, simply because they are Jews.
A new Arab judge is soon to be appointed to Israel’s Supreme Court. Imagine, Arthur, that I would claim the man has motives beyond the rule of law on his mind, serving the interests of one of our neighbouring Arabs state. Wouldn’t I be a bigot then?

Originally posted by ISIS
Well Skythe in your blind faith for the neocons being ‘gods gift to mankind’ you have just vindicated Michael Lind’s assertion that in attempting to question some of the actions conducted by pro Zionists entities i.e. neo cons one is automatically branded as an anti Semite or a member of the KKK!!

Oh please, don’t play so dumb. The above article does not question these people’s “actions”- it doubts their their very loyalty to the state which they have been serving for dozens of years, their very credibility. It is ugly slander, based not on their “actions” but on their political opinions, asserting that by being Zionist they are in effect serving a foreign government, and are doing something that is not in the interest of their state.

A time tested strategy employed by those who really do have something to hide! I see that you are firm believer in the right to free speech

I see, the fact that I objected to bigoted slander makes me an opponent of free speech. Fine, that’s me. Do tell me please what it is I have to hide, though, cause as far as I can see only one of us has not even bothered to tell us who is he is or the location he posts from.

Thats rich coming from a guy who wont even argue the merits of the above article and has resorted to diversionary tactics by implying the poster is anti semitic and hence a member of the KKK!!

Don’t you know me so well! The only divisionary tactic is by someone posting the above slander and then running for the cover of free speech, or whining of being prosecuted by the “brand of anti-semetism”. Didn’t you know, today’s antisemite LOVES that tactic – post hate, and then protest against “Jewish hysteria”. Sorry, not impressed.
Oh, and BTW, I never said the poster is anti-semitic and “hence a member of the KKK!!” , I said he shares some of their opinions. I really don’t like people puting words in my mouth.

Ironically the first few sentences in the above quote would be well suited to describe you. The fact that you have failed to disprove David Lind’s mere questioning of the controversial workings of (read: common crooks) people such as Perle really says much about the nature of your argument, if it exists at all!!!

Disproving a negative is impossible, as you very well know. But neither do I have to – the burden of proof is on the writer of the article, and he hasn’t done that, all he’s done is post wild, ugly accusations based solely on people’s opinions. Unlike the writer, or yourself ISIS, I would not be so arrogant as to claim to know what people think or what hidden interests they serve.

more at http://www.donaldsensing.com/2003_04_01_archive.html#200120181