ceemac

Shake It Baby...
And You Thought It Was Iran
Over 70% of Americans would favor sending U.S. troops to Yemen to combat Al-Qaeda militants, a poll posted on the FOXNews.com website said.

Here


C
 

KKOB

Completely Chillaxed
And You Thought It Was Iran
The only problem with that is that 90% of those 20,000 Americans polled probably think that Yemen is just south of Mexico ! :lol:
 

Mushroom

Member
And You Thought It Was Iran
Probably the same people who believe in moon landings and 9/11 being a terrorist plot?
 
And You Thought It Was Iran
They already bombed the village of Mashad in Yemen last month killing more than 60, many of whom were civilians (read: women and children). Bombed. Such a small word, one we are so used to hearing. I don't know if any of us can imagine the sheer terror that rains from a clear sky like that.

And don't your just love Murdoch's Fox News. The only debate is whether the US can win in 3 simmultaneous 'theatres' of war (it is just a distraction, after all. It requires huge 'suspension of disbelief' to accept the idea that we have an enemy.)

With over 20,000 people taking part in the poll, 71% voted that “the problem is not going away,” and “troops need to be sent there to eliminate Al-Qaeda and the threat it poses to national security.”

Meanwhile, 23% voted against saying that “the U.S. military is already engaged in a costly war in Afghanistan,” and “sending soldiers to Yemen would jeopardize that mission.”

Ah, opinion polls ... as if they genuinely want to know what we think so they can adjust their foreign policy. Polls are either predictive (a way to report non-news - 'we didn't bomb Yemen today but want to remind you that they are your enemy') or, more commonly, just tests of whether the mind control is working.

And it is. At least among Fox viewers. I's rather get my news from Mad magazine.

Of course, I can accept that there are people in Yemen who think that a violent response to the illegal acts of the most powerful nation on earth is the way forward. And they do present a threat to us - the chances of being injured or killed in a terrorist attack are higher than choking on a checkenbone while being summultaneously struck by lighting on your birthday, so we should take it seriously. I, for one, will be travelling stark naked from now on - after all, if I've nothing to hide, who needs rights. My Government will look after me ...

I don't believe violence ever works. You can't solve a problem with the same mentality that created it. You can't put out a fire with gasoline. But big countries always have bullied small countries, and the story doesn't start with an attack on America or elsewhere. That's a reaction to events that Fox News will never tell you.

Even once respectable media is now compromised. Last time I was in the UK I picked up a Guardian that reported on the huge increase in deformed births in Fallujah, Iraq. These had all taken place since the use of depleted uranium weapons against the townspeople. But it's 'depleted', right?

The use of DU in munitions is controversial because of questions about potential long-term health effects. Normal functioning of the kidney, brain, liver, heart, and numerous other systems can be affected by uranium exposure, because in addition to being weakly radioactive, uranium is a toxic metal. It is weakly radioactive and remains so because of its long half-life. The aerosol produced during impact and combustion of depleted uranium munitions can potentially contaminate wide areas around the impact sites or can be inhaled by civilians and military personnel.During a three week period of conflict in 2003 Iraq, 1,000 to 2,000 tonnes of DU munitions were used, mostly in cities.

And the ever vigilant Guardian (guardian of the truth or the state version of history?) suggests that it's 'inconclusive' ... and that all the defects are probably due to ... erm ... poor nutrition or pollution.

Gotta give my son a bath.
 
And You Thought It Was Iran
And the ever vigilant Guardian (guardian of the truth or the state version of history?) suggests that it's 'inconclusive' ... and that all the defects are probably due to ... erm ... poor nutrition or pollution.


I remember that report and being sickened by what was being reported. The Guardian clearly highlighted depleted Uranium or other weapons as the most likely cause. The section of the report that you allude to was based on a quote from one of the doctors who was monitoring the situation:

"Other health officials are also starting to focus on possible reasons, chief among them potential chemical or radiation poisonings. Abnormal clusters of infant tumours have also been repeatedly cited in Basra and Najaf – areas that have in the past also been intense battle zones where modern munitions have been heavily used.

Falluja's frontline doctors are reluctant to draw a direct link with the fighting. They instead cite multiple factors that could be contributors.

"These include air pollution, radiation, chemicals, drug use during pregnancy, malnutrition, or the psychological status of the mother," said Dr Qais. "We simply don't have the answers yet."

This was a comment by a (rightly) cautious scientists/doctor not a comment by the Guardian.
 

Latest Posts

Top Bottom