Poignant and pertinant.

Was this speech ever publicised in mainstream media? It ought to be....although I could guess the reaction of the brainwashed rednecks....."Boooooo boooooo. Anti-American! Unpatriotic! Shut the hel_l up!"

Actually, what they would say is that he is naive.

Right or wrong, societies settle their differences by fighting wars and they always have. Some countries are protected by stronger allies and they mostly avoid war, but they still have to fight when the shit hits the fan. If you refuse to participate there is a very good chance that eventually you will be subjugated by someone who will. America did not start the tradition and they don't like it, but most Americans understand that sadly, it is the way of the world.

Actually, what they would say is that he is naive.

Right on cue as something someone trying to *sell* the war would say.

The rest would not say he is naive but that he is finally awake.

Let me try to explain it.

Some of the board meetings I attend, the focus is first and always about saving costs after the numbers have been presented.

Can we save money by having less people producing the same or more output.

Can we find people that can do the same job for lower costs.

A lot more is discussed but I won't bother you all with this, lot's of bla bla from highly educated people that think they know it all.

After an hour or so the discussion tends to go in the direction what to do with our (chemical) waste.

Some say let's find a way to incorporate this waste into something that is widely used.

Others say let's find way's and a place where we can dump this stuff without being prosecuted.

A good example is this DU stuff that is now poisoning many people. And the chemical waste that was dumped a while ago in Africa by my own country.

These are undeniable fact's.

The question is if the majority of people ever will wake up and decide enough is enough.

We can live in peace, after all we are all humans, right.

You work for a company that dumps it's chemical waste? I'm surprised you can take their money with a clear conscience.

UG, first of all there are plenty examples of these atrocities committed by big corporations.

Kohee, I might be there to understand and uncover their despicable actions, just like I did before to uncover women and under aged child trafficking from East Europe and Asia from a certain ring.

I have seen and experienced enough and can say these wars are started for reasons most people cannot imagine.

Take care all and have a nice weekend.

Might?? You don't know?

Assuming that is why you are there, does that mean you are investigative reporter or in law enforcement? Or something else? Have you published any of your findings anywhere? Or is just undercover work for some organization?

The rest would not say he is naive but that he is finally awake.

Unfortunately, dreaming would be a lot closer to the truth.

I am sorry Kohee, I can't tell you ore anybody here.

What I can do is give you a hint.

A company is having some problems getting rid of their chemical waste. They find another company that can turn this waste into some other use.

They use this waste and inject it to cheap wood. The cheap wood then turns out to be resistant to some fungus.

This wood is used mainly to build fences between households.

These fences reach down to ground water. The chemicals used are dissolved in H2O (ground water).

The Minister who approved all of this was fired when this came to light.

He is now the CEO of the company that did all of this.

I had the opportunity to meet him for a day and question him about some issues.

I feel so sorry for all of the soldiers/people that are engaged in these conflicts (of interest), and that die or get disabled as a result.

The real reasons of going into these wars remain covered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8501131.stm

I am sorry Kohee, I can't tell you ore anybody here.

What I can do is give you a hint.

A company is having some problems getting rid of their chemical waste. They find another company that can turn this waste into some other use.

They use this waste and inject it to cheap wood. The cheap wood then turns out to be resistant to some fungus.

This wood is used mainly to build fences between households.

These fences reach down to ground water. The chemicals used are dissolved in H2O (ground water).

The Minister who approved all of this was fired when this came to light.

He is now the CEO of the company that did all of this.

I had the opportunity to meet him for a day and question him about some issues.

I feel so sorry for all of the soldiers/people that are engaged in these conflicts (of interest), and that die or get disabled as a result.

The real reasons of going into these wars remain covered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8501131.stm

I love this paragraph in your link:

__________________________________________________

Mr Llwyd, who in 2004 launched a campaign to impeach the then prime minister for misleading Parliament over the war, said he could not be specific about what was in the memo, which he "believed" was American in origin.

__________________________________________________

Why does he "believe" it is American in origin? Did they spell rumour the American way?

He claims he "could not be specific" about the content. Does this mean he simply doesn't know what the contents of this mystery message are, or does it mean he might be violating the Official Secrets Act?

This one is a beauty.

This one is a beauty.

Grabbing straws....

I am sorry Kohee, I can't tell you ore anybody here.

What I can do is give you a hint.

A company is having some problems getting rid of their chemical waste. They find another company that can turn this waste into some other use.

They use this waste and inject it to cheap wood. The cheap wood then turns out to be resistant to some fungus.

This wood is used mainly to build fences between households.

These fences reach down to ground water. The chemicals used are dissolved in H2O (ground water).

The Minister who approved all of this was fired when this came to light.

He is now the CEO of the company that did all of this.

I had the opportunity to meet him for a day and question him about some issues.

I feel so sorry for all of the soldiers/people that are engaged in these conflicts (of interest), and that die or get disabled as a result.

The real reasons of going into these wars remain covered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8501131.stm

So fences made of wood that have been treated with chemicals are harming our soldiers? Sounds like WMDs!

Grabbing straws....

How so? You post a link that you claim to be, and I quote...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I feel so sorry for all of the soldiers/people that are engaged in these conflicts (of interest), and that die or get disabled as a result.

The real reasons of going into these wars remain covered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8501131.stm

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When I state your link says nothing, then I am "Grabbing straws"? If your link was supposed to address another subject, then perhaps you should have so stated.

Grabbing straws....

How so? You post a link that you claim to be, and I quote...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I feel so sorry for all of the soldiers/people that are engaged in these conflicts (of interest), and that die or get disabled as a result.

The real reasons of going into these wars remain covered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8501131.stm

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When I state your link says nothing, then I am "Grabbing straws"? If your link was supposed to address another subject, then perhaps you should have so stated.

Yes, you are grabbing at straws, not to mention naive, if you try to make out that the literal interpretation of normal diplomatic prevarication has significance.

Grabbing straws....

How so? You post a link that you claim to be, and I quote...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I feel so sorry for all of the soldiers/people that are engaged in these conflicts (of interest), and that die or get disabled as a result.

The real reasons of going into these wars remain covered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8501131.stm

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When I state your link says nothing, then I am "Grabbing straws"? If your link was supposed to address another subject, then perhaps you should have so stated.

Yes, you are grabbing at straws, not to mention naive, if you try to make out that the literal interpretation of normal diplomatic prevarication has significance.

Thank you for your input, Mr. Harcourt. When did you develop the ability to read AlexLah's mind?

Grabbing straws....

How so? You post a link that you claim to be, and I quote...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I feel so sorry for all of the soldiers/people that are engaged in these conflicts (of interest), and that die or get disabled as a result.

The real reasons of going into these wars remain covered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8501131.stm

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When I state your link says nothing, then I am "Grabbing straws"? If your link was supposed to address another subject, then perhaps you should have so stated.

Yes, you are grabbing at straws, not to mention naive, if you try to make out that the literal interpretation of normal diplomatic prevarication has significance.

Thank you for your input, Mr. Harcourt. When did you develop the ability to read AlexLah's mind?

I don't have to read his mind, just use very basic common sense to seperate which statements are addressed to a digression (toxic waste dumping) and which are directed towards the general discussion.

Once again, you show your inability to follow a discourse through it's convolutions. You should pipe down; you're embarrassing yourself.

How so? You post a link that you claim to be, and I quote...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I feel so sorry for all of the soldiers/people that are engaged in these conflicts (of interest), and that die or get disabled as a result.

The real reasons of going into these wars remain covered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8501131.stm

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When I state your link says nothing, then I am "Grabbing straws"? If your link was supposed to address another subject, then perhaps you should have so stated.

Yes, you are grabbing at straws, not to mention naive, if you try to make out that the literal interpretation of normal diplomatic prevarication has significance.

Thank you for your input, Mr. Harcourt. When did you develop the ability to read AlexLah's mind?

I don't have to read his mind, just use very basic common sense to seperate which statements are addressed to a digression (toxic waste dumping) and which are directed towards the general discussion.

Once again, you show your inability to follow a discourse through it's convolutions. You should pipe down; you're embarrassing yourself.

If you use "digression" and "general discussion", you will quickly learn his link has nothing to do with either.

His link refers to the war in Iraq, not Afghanistan. This thread is about Afghanistan.

I could find no reference to dumping toxic waste anywhere in his link.

His link refers to the war in Iraq, not Afghanistan. This thread is about Afghanistan.

I could find no reference to dumping toxic waste anywhere in his link.

Not that it would surprise me knowing the inclination towards napalm & white phosphorous, depleted uranium from shells

( wonder why they call it depleted?) etc...

If anything was used in Iraq you can be pretty sure it is used in Afghanistan....

By both the US Military Complex or their,,,ahem...hired guns...

By the way have you seen recent pics of all the deformed new born in Iraq & Afghanistan? Not pretty...

http://current.com/1fpbi4c

Another showing the new levels of cancer in Iraq...which will probably follow into Afghanistan

http://www.independent-bangladesh.com/2009...med-babies.html

But that aside & sticking to toxic waste....

Oh look this is funny...The Complex sue the hired guns in a round about way.....

Troops sue KBR over toxic waste in Iraq, Afghanistan

(AFP) – Nov 10, 2009

WASHINGTON — Dozens of US military personnel have filed 34 lawsuits against US defense contractor KBR for allegedly incinerating toxic waste and releasing it into the atmosphere in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Susan Burke, one of the lawyers bringing the suits, said they have been filed over the past year, 18 of them in recent days.

"All the cases are being put together before a federal judge in Greenbelt, Maryland," she told AFP Tuesday.

Each of the lawsuits represent several soldiers but were filed on behalf of at least 100,000 others who are alleged to suffer from health problems resulting from exposure to emissions released by the incineration of waste at military bases.

Kellogg Brown and Root and its former parent company Halliburton, which at one time was led by former vice president Dick Cheney, had a government contract to destroy waste at US bases and camps in Iraq and Afghanistan.

One lawsuit filed in federal court in Nashville, Tennessee charged that they "ignored their contractual obligations and burned vast quantities of unsorted waste in enormous open air burn pits with no safety controls."

"This misconduct began in 2003 and continues unabated to date," it alleges.

"Every type of waste imaginable was and is burned on these pits, including trucks, tires, lithium battery, Styrofoam, paper, rubber, petroleum-oil-lubricant products, metals, hydraulic fluids, munitions boxes, medical waste, biohazard materials (including human corpses), medical supplies (including those used during smallpox inoculations), paints, solvents, asbestos insulation, items containing pesticides, polyvinyl chloride pipes, animal carcasses, dangerous chemicals and hundreds of thousands of plastic water bottles," the lawsuit claims.

In a statement posted on its website, KBR said the company posted lists compiled by the US Army of items that could not be disposed of in burn pits.

"If KBR observes a waste generator delivering a prohibited item, its practice is to refuse or remove such items," the company said.

Thanks for your input all, yes including Chuck and Kohee.

The reason why I brought up this example of cooperate corruption is to show that these leaders have no feelings about human and environmental suffering caused by their actions.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/8259765.stm

The same is for these wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They do not care how many people will be killed, as long as they reach their objectives.

The war in Iraq was about regime change, not about WMD. as told and sold to the sheeps.

These wars where not approved by the UN.

The invasion of Afghanistan was based on the saying that these people were trained there.

They were trained in the US learning to fly an airplane, as they want us to believe.

The same old broken records are repeating the same old nonsense one more time.

Burp.

Congratulations. Compared to your other posts, that was pretty deep.

The same old broken records are repeating the same old nonsense one more time.

I know what you mean......Seem like Vietnam was only yesterday

Exactly. Most of the protests against the Vietnam War were fueled by un-enlightened self-interest - and had little to do with any grand beliefs or intentions. If there was no military draft, the anti-war movement would have been minuscule

.

Much like some of our more pretentious Thai Visa posters, in general, the Vietnam protesters were full of noble rhetoric with very little thought or sincerity behind it.

Exactly. Most of the protests against the Vietnam War were fueled by un-enlightened self-interest - and had little to do with any grand beliefs or intentions. If there was no military draft, the anti-war movement would have been minuscule

Still waiting for that one post......

Yet even with your track record I find it hard to believe your not just looking for a reaction when you post such drivel.

Only one who is deaf,dumb& blind can at this point in history look back & say Vietnam was the good fight & well worth the lives spent. If you truly can say that & believe it.....Well nothing more to be said.

I didn't say anything about the Vietnam War being good or right. I said that the anti-war protests were just a fashion at the time and mostly spurred on by people that did not want to be drafted - into any war. They had very little to do with concerns about rights or wrongs or helping the Vietnamese people.

You might notice that there are very few major protests about Iraq and Afganastan and there is also no draft.

I didn't say anything about the Vietnam War being good or right. I said that the anti-war protests were just a fashion at the time and mostly spurred on by people that did not want to be drafted - into any war. They had very little to do with concerns about rights or wrongs or helping the Vietnamese people.

You might notice that there are very few major protests about Iraq and Afganastan and there is also no draft.

Yeah, but the flavour of the day has changed....you're right to an extent about faddish movements.

Iraq and Afghanistan have an element that Viet Nam did not......the spin doctors had 9/11 and "patriotism" to throw into the mix.

The fact that there are few major protests is probably as a result of the "patriotism" drive of said spin doctors.

These wars where not approved by the UN.

Personally, I don't care what the UN approves of or doesn't. We should kick them out of New York. Switzerland is more or less neutral, let them deal with the UN.

These wars where not approved by the UN.

Personally, I don't care what the UN approves of or doesn't. We should kick them out of New York. Switzerland is more or less neutral, let them deal with the UN.

The UN could work well for everyone IF there was not an imbalance of power by the members that hold the power of veto.

It is the power of veto of certain nations that makes a mockery of the UN.

The UN could work well for everyone IF there was not an imbalance of power by the members that hold the power of veto.

It is the power of veto of certain nations that makes a mockery of the UN.

The same holds true of the IMF

The US holds 17% of the total vote at the IMF

The G7 which the US is part of & made up of 7 of the largest industrialized countries totals only 45%

The United States has always been the only country able to block a super majority on its own.

These wars where not approved by the UN.

Personally, I don't care what the UN approves of or doesn't. We should kick them out of New York. Switzerland is more or less neutral, let them deal with the UN.

The UN could work well for everyone IF there was not an imbalance of power by the members that hold the power of veto.

It is the power of veto of certain nations that makes a mockery of the UN.

I'm not crazy about having a bureaucrats from 3rd world nations being the leaders either (Kofi).

I think we need an international organization that doesn't allow every dictatorship into it. Membership losing value when everybody is allowed to join without conditions.