"...I wrote the comment because I was being Angry and provocative. But it's interesting to see their reactions to such a statement, since they have never displayed such anger at Arabs who mass murder Iraqis, and since they have never sympathized with Iraqis who were murdered by Arab terrorists."--Mojo
Angry and provocative comments, even those in the comment sections of someone else's blog, could always come back to haunt you, especially when you have a public blog Mojo....
I suppose that is why you are writing about it here...?
What I find most interesting is how you choose to perceive those "some Arabs" comments Mojo....Which is similar to how you have chosen to perceive many of my comments which have largely been against the U.S. preemptive attack, invasion, and occupation of Iraq, and Israel's occupations and oppression of the Palestinians and other Arab neighbors....
since they have "never" displayed such anger at Arabs who mass murder Iraqis, and since they have "never" sympathized with Iraqis who were murdered by Arab terrorists."
"Never" Mojo? WTF!!! We have ONLY sympathized with innocent murdered Iraqis killed by the hounds of hell(both Arab and American) unleashed by this illegal war you STILL condone.(You can try to convince yourself that Molly and Yasmine don't care about Iraqi children murdered by AQ but you know that's not true and INSANE). Why don't YOU care about all the innocents your war has been responsible for killing? You still defend it and I have heard you say you are ready for Iran next, though you know there would be countless innocent victims there as well.(Hell, what do you care?) Who's the hypocrite here? Get some help ASAP warmonger!
Mojo, it would be easier to stomach your foul and disgusting comments if they were isolated incidents. However, I have seen you write on the Angry Arab that you wish the Israelis would nuke the Palestinians. Later, you apologized for those comments and said you were reacting in anger to Barbarie and Laila Anwer. It seems that you are prone to violent outbursts on message boards. I don't understand why you blog if it seems to make you so angry and depressed to read other people's comments. The internet should be used for recreation purposes but not if it is bringing you so much anger and hatred that can rot you from the in side. Maybe you should consider spending less time on the internet and find something more healthy and productive to do with your time instead of actively seeking out things that make you so angry that you publicly wish death on people.
Mojo didn't condemn the invasion,because no invasion would have meant more years of Saddam Hussein. And then Uday and Qusay. and who knows what after that. He HAS condemned the U.S. not backing the Shia uprising in '91. He HAS condemned Abu Ghraib,Blackwater,and numerous other incidents. Marion,you're on a crusade because you have relatives in Lebanon. Well,Mojo's family escaped Iraq because of Saddam. He's got every right to want what's best for his people and his country. People with your mindset have killed thousands of Iraqis. People with your mindset would have let Saddam kill millions more. Get off your high horse Marion.
Corruption blamed as cholera rips through Iraq
The scandal is a reflection of the the way Iraqi politics works. The ruling parties monopolise jobs and contracts. It is impossible to find work at any level in most ministries without a letter of commendation from one of the parties in the government. The enormous Iraqi government apparatus, employing some two million people, is a patronage machine. There are now more state officials than under Saddam, but it is unable to supply electricity, food rations and clean water, despite Iraq's $80bn in accumulated oil revenues......"
http://www.independent.co.uk/new...raq-
956701.html
"...Mojo's family escaped Iraq because of Saddam. He's got every right to want what's best for his people and his country."--Maury
Well Saddam is gone now Maury and Iraq is being occupied by the U.S. military, not to mention a bunch of Blackwater type contractors hired by the Pentagon, which Mojo has been supporting by supporting the occupation...So why isn't Mojo and his family taking advantage of what you claim he believes is best for his people and his country....?
Or is Mojo and his family waiting for the U.S. and its contractors to clear out the Wahabis, AlQaeda, the Baathists, Muqtada Sadr and his followers, Iranian influence and interference, and the list goes on, before he takes advantage of what is allegedly best for his people and his country?
"Well Saddam is gone now Maury"
And it wasn't Mahatma Gandhi that booted him out Marion. It was "the U.S. preemptive attack, invasion, and occupation of Iraq" that got rid of Saddam.
"So why isn't Mojo and his family taking advantage of what you claim he believes is best for his people and his country....?"
Why aren't you living in your beloved Iran Marion? Why did you and your husband leave Hezbollahland? I don't know why his family hasn't moved back. I can tell you why my wifes family hasn't moved back to Cambodia. Life's BETTER in the United States.
"Why aren't you living in your beloved Iran Marion? Why did you and your husband leave Hezbollahland? I don't know why his family hasn't moved back. I can tell you why my wifes family hasn't moved back to Cambodia. Life's BETTER in the United States."--Maury
Presently, life may be better in the United States, but will it last when pro war and occupation, and free market with no regulations cheerleaders are destroying it from within and without....?
As you know Maury, I am not Iranian, I am American, but if my husband were offered a job in Iran, we would probably accept and go and live there for awhile...I have wanted to experience living in Iran so that I can see for myself how it is and to be able to compare it to living here in the U.S., to living in Lebanon, and to living in Saudi Arabia...
As I said before, my husband left Lebanon in 1982 to come and study here in the U.S. before there was even a Hezbollah resistance to Israeli invasions and occupations group formed. When I previously lived in Lebanon, my husband was back here living in the States working and finishing his final degree...
Our goal is to one day go and live in Lebanon so that we can spend more time around his family ...Lebanon is truly a beautiful country which reminds me of California in many ways...And I am hoping that all the Palestinian refugees who freely choose to will be justly allowed to return to their native lands so that I and my family can go freely, with a clear conscience, to visit Al Aqsa in Al Quds by way of the South Lebanese border....
"but will it last when pro war and occupation, and free market with no regulations cheerleaders are destroying it from within and without....?"
We've had a lot of wars in our short history Marion. And free markets with little regulation. Somehow we survived.
Wanting to move to Iran,and doing it are two different things. You'll have to learn to keep your mouth shut if you want to survive in Iran. You don't strike me as the kind of woman who can do that. An opinionated woman in Iran can expect to be tortured and raped in the gulag. For the well being of her soul,of course.
Censored content often includes information that relates to women's rights, freedom of speech, democracy, pornography, certain news sources, certain religious content, and many websites.
Censored media include essentially all capable of reaching an even marginal audience, including television, print media, radio, film, museum and gallery exhibits, and the Internet. Iranians attempting to access most informational databases and search engines are met with a page reading: "The requested page is forbidden."[1] Most forms of media are vetted for acceptability by the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance.
Reporters Without Borders ranks Iran's press situation as "Very serious", the worst ranking on their five-point scale.[2] Iran's Internet censorship policy is labeled "Pervasive" by the OpenNet Initiative's global Internet filtering map, also the worst ranking used.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Cen...sorship_in_Iran
You're gonna get tired of PressTV Marion. Do the even have a message board?
"You'll have to learn to keep your mouth shut if you want to survive in Iran. You don't strike me as the kind of woman who can do that.....You're gonna get tired of PressTV Marion. Do the even have a message board?"--Maury
You seem to forget Maury that I a Shia lived in Wahabi Saudi Arabia, which by comparison is much more restricted than Iran ...
By living in Iran, seeing it with my own eyes and experiencing it, I can decide for myself just how Iran really is as compared to your anti-Iran claims of how it is...
And I freely choose to watch Press TV and AlJazeera English channel on satellite tv here which compared to U.S. corporate owned medias is much more objective and in dept in their coverage of world news, so why would I get sick of it over there...?
I think I will be just fine if I ever get the opportunity to live there...
That was me in the last post...
The Great Game in the Caucasus:
Bad Moves by Uncle Sam
CONN HALLINAN
October 7, 2008
"The tale of what the Bush Administration is up to in the Caucasus is slowly filtering out, although the U.S. press has largely deep-sixed the story. The recent Georgia-Russia war was just one move in a chess game aimed at cornering the energy reserves of Central Asia, extending the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to Moscow’s vulnerable southern border, and ending Russia’s control of the Black Sea. Georgia was just a pawn—an expendable one at that— in a high stakes game.
While the White House and some in the European Union (EU) represent the recent war as one between an increasingly powerful Russia reasserting itself in its former=2 0empire versus a small, democratic nation trying to recover two of its former provinces, that story is fraying a bit. Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was recently condemned by the EU’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights for undemocratic practices, and a recent NATO analysis of the war supports the Russian charge that Tbilisi started the whole affair. The maneuvers that led to the war, however, have gone largely unreported....":
http://www.counterpunch.org/
hall...an10072008.html
Book refuting Jewish taboo on Israel’s bestseller list
Writer argues Zionist Jews created a national history by inventing the idea that their sect existed as people separate from their religion
Jonathan Cook
The National
October 07 2008
"No one is more surprised than Shlomo Sand that his latest academic work has spent 19 weeks on Israel’s bestseller list – and that success has come to the history professor despite his book challenging Israel’s biggest taboo.
Dr Sand argues that the idea of a Jewish nation – whose need for a safe haven was originally used to justify the founding of the state of Israel – is a myth invented little more than a century ago.
An expert on European history at Tel Aviv University, Dr Sand drew on extensive historical and archaeological research to support not only this claim but several more – all equally controversial.
In addition, he argues that the Jews were never exiled from the Holy Land, that most of today’s Jews have no historical connection to the land called Israel and that the only political solution to the country’s conflict with the Palestinians is to abolish the Jewish state....:
http://thenational.ae/article/20...REIGN/
279853798
Wonder what Marion would have to rant and rave about if it were not for Israel and the Jews?
"I have heard you say you are ready for Iran next"
I have never heard Mojo say this before.
Me neither.
Riyadh and Amman only? my list is longer
The lies of jarab: "However, I have seen you write on the Angry Arab that you wish the Israelis would nuke the Palestinians."
I've never said any such thing. That would be stupid, because the Palestinians live so close to the Israelis. That would be like New York City nuking Newark.
iraqi blowjob,
the nuking of Iran is ever near.
"Maybe you should consider spending less time on the internet and find something more healthy and productive to do with your time instead of actively seeking out things that make you so angry that you publicly wish death on people."
I only wish death on "people" who murder innocent Iraqis. I can understand why jarab would be angry with me for wishing such a thing.
"the nuking of Iran is ever near."
I don't think so, anonymous jarab.
"I have heard you say you are ready for Iran next"
Jarab are used to lying.
“Aren’t you concerned with such a growing concentration of wealth that if one of these huge institutions fails that it will have a horrendous impact on the national and global economy?” asked Representative Bernard Sanders, an independent from Vermont.
“No, I’m not,” Mr. Greenspan replied. “I believe that the general growth in large institutions have occurred in the context of an underlying structure of markets in which many of the larger risks are dramatically — I should say, fully — hedged.”
The House overwhelmingly passed the bill that kept derivatives clear of C.F.T.C. oversight. Senator Gramm attached a rider limiting the C.F.T.C.’s authority to an 11,000-page appropriations bill. The Senate passed it. President Clinton signed it into law.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/0...anted=4&_r=1&
em
It's interesting (but not surprising) how Marion, DJ and the jarab have tried to portray me here. They claim I support the occupation of Iraq, when actually I want US troops to leave as soon as Iraq is secure. I don't know where to begin, and maybe if I have the time this weekend I'll respond to everybody's comments, but for now I'd like to address this one by Marion:
"So why isn't Mojo and his family taking advantage of what you claim he believes is best for his people and his country....?
I have spent 31 years in America. I don't write or read Arabic very well. And I fear being kidnapped or murdered.
My father has been wanting to return to Iraq for many years, and he did in 2003 and 2005. During both trips he became disappointed by the political and security situation there. The terrorists have made life very difficult for Iraqis because they want to make it difficult for the Iraqi govt and the US military, who are both trying to secure Iraq and help Iraq become a prosperous democratic country. It amazes me that a self-proclaimed Shiite would prefer to see Iraq ruled by Saddam than see it free and democratic.
DJ, I wasn't referring to Molly or Yasmin when I wrote this post.
"It amazes me that a self-proclaimed Shiite would prefer to see Iraq ruled by Saddam than see it free and democratic."--Iraqi American
We don't disagree on who Saddam was Mojo, we just disagree on how he should have been taken out....
It amazes me that you think and propagate such stink about your fellow Shia American who doesn't agree with you concerning the U.S. preemptive attack, invasion, and occupation of Iraq Mojo.....
I, unlike you, prefer neither Saddam or the Neocon orchestrated occupation of Iraq. I, unlike you, believe that neither Saddam or the U.S. occupation has been good for the Iraqi people and their freedom...Nether has been in the collective interests of the Iraqi people....
Marion, it seems you spend a lot of time arguing that the US should not have overthrown Saddam's regime. What would you have done to remove Saddam? What were you doing to make the world aware of Saddam's crimes?
What was I doing, the question should be what was this country of ours doing to make the world aware of Saddam's crimes Mojo?
I can tell you this, they did not make the world aware of Saddam's crimes by placing sanctions on Iraq that were making the people who opposed Saddam suffer even more. And they did not make the world aware of Saddam's crimes by preemptively attacking, invading, and occupying Iraq which caused even more suffering for millions of Iraqis...
"I can tell you this, they did not make the world aware of Saddam's crimes by placing sanctions on Iraq that were making the people who opposed Saddam suffer even more." -Marion
Should we let a criminal out of jail to make people more aware of his crimes as he goes on a second crime spree?
I wish we had removed Saddam from power in 1991, Marion, instead of imposing sanctions while waiting for inspectors to search and destroy missiles and WMD. I also wish more was done to educate people like you about his crimes and the danger he posed. But he was a dictator, and dictators are very good at hiding their crimes from the world. He and his unilateral policies had killed millions of people, including Iraqis, Iranians, Kuwaitis, Israelis and Americans. And sanctions ended his ability to make war outside his boarders.
Clearly though, enough Americans were aware of some of Saddam's crimes. And sanctions prevented him from committing many new ones. Sanctions may have been the wrong strategy, but still clearly made life safer for millions of Kurds, Kuwaitis and Iranians who could depend on the U.S. to enforce the no fly zone.
"Should we let a criminal out of jail to make people more aware of his crimes as he goes on a second crime spree?"--K
No, you should punish only the criminal(s) and put only the criminal(s) behind bars and not the criminal(s) victims, so that the people will be aware of who the real criminal(s) are, otherwise you will be a criminal by committing a criminal act...
"Saudi woman crashes car after defying women-only driving ban"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...riving-
ban.html
"Palestinian Christians Face Persecution"
http://www.liveleak.com/view?
i=8...=848_1182386431
"Gaza Christians warned to submit to Islam"
http://www.liveleak.com/view?
i=d...=d93_1182388780
"No, you should punish only the criminal(s) and put only the criminal(s) behind bars and not the criminal(s) victims, so that the people will be aware of who the real criminal(s) are, otherwise you will be a criminal by committing a criminal act..." -Marion
Exactly. Sanctions punished all Iraqis and only offered fragile protection to those living in the "no fly zones".
But lifting sanctions with Saddam in power would have been like letting a serial killer out of jail. He would have waged war within months. He would have created and used more weapons of mass destruction, quite possibly a nuclear bomb. He would have continued to murder millions upon millions. Had he given WMD to al-Qaeda, which we now can see, are more than willing and able to form an alliance with Ba'athist, he could have catalyzed a rain of ruin, the likes of which the earth has never seen.
The only morally right thing to do was to invade and occupy Baghdad, remove Saddam Hussein by force, lift sanctions, prevent al-Qaeda and Iran from filling the power vacuum, and help the Iraqi people build a safe, prosperous and stable democracy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=9...feature=related
"No, you should punish only the criminal(s) and put only the criminal(s) behind bars and not the criminal(s) victims, so that the people will be aware of who the real criminal(s) are, otherwise you will be a criminal by committing a criminal act..."
Isn't this what Bush attempted in 2003? Bush hated Saddam . . . it was personal between the two men and their families. Bush wasn't initially interested in the rest of Iraq.
Iran had been trying to overthrow Saddam by backing the Iraqi resistance since the 1970s. America and Iran had been jointly trying to overthrow Saddam since 1991 by backing the same Iraqi resistance movements. Many other countries also tried to overthrow Saddam for a long time. Allawi admitted to taking help from 15 countries to fight Saddam.
All these efforts had ended in civil war, hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, and deep suffering for the Iraqi people.
Bush felt that by directly going after Saddam personally, that would solve the problem. You saw how that turned out.
"you should punish only the criminal(s) and put only the criminal(s) behind bars and not the criminal(s) victims"
How in the world can anyone do that except for God herself? {I like referring to God as a her 
} Marion, you talk in irrational conflicting statements that make no sense. How could you go only after the criminal without harming others? The Iraqi people had been trying with great tenacity to go after Saddam since 1975. It took them 28 years to succeed (finally in 2003.)
"How in the world can anyone do that except for God herself? {I like referring to God as a her)... "--anand
If you are a believer, you would believe that God can enable and work through the people to make such things happen anand...Although people being as imperfect as they are, do tend to screw up, some more than others, such as George Bush who screws up all of the time...
"Marion, you talk in irrational conflicting statements that make no sense."--anand
And I always thought that this description fits you anand...
"How could you go only after the criminal without harming others?"--anand
It is possible but of course it would take a lot of patience and steadfastness to find just the right person(s) to do the job...
"The Iraqi people had been trying with great tenacity to go after Saddam since 1975. It took them 28 years to succeed (finally in 2003."--anand
It was not the Iraqi people who ended up capturing Saddam and since Saddam was a paranoid dictator and not a superman, it certainly did not need a preemptive attack, invasion, and full scale war by the world's superpower to after him...But it did take a preemptive attack and a full scale war by the world's superpower to invade and occupy Iraq....
Jesus, Marion. Will you give it a rest?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n...h?
v=nQalRPQ8stI
A New York Mob of Multicultural Elitism
Mojo, that last post is a must-see.
This one is pretty good since it shows both sides supporters hollering at each other from across the street:
McCain Palin Rally - Obama Protesters vs. McCain Supporters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=L...feature=related
"It was not the Iraqi people who ended up capturing Saddam and since Saddam was a paranoid dictator and not a superman, it certainly did not need a preemptive attack, invasion, and full scale war by the world's superpower to after him...But it did take a preemptive attack and a full scale war by the world's superpower to invade and occupy Iraq...."
Marion, the Iraqi people tried very hard for 28 years to overthrow Saddam. Iran, America and many other countries tried very hard to help the Iraqi people overthrow Saddam. What could the Iraqi people have done differently to overthrow Saddam?
The Iraqi people did play an important role in overthrowing and capturing Saddam. The Baath were overthrown in most of Iraq before the coalition troops arrived. Most of the Iraqi Army refused to fight for Saddam and blessed the invasion of Iraq.
Saddam had to flee to near Tikrit because the rest of Iraq hated him. And even in Tikrit, many Tikritis turned on him and provided intelligence to the coalition and ISF on Saddam and his supporters. This intelligence, and the ISF, were critical to capturing Saddam. The team that actually captured Saddam included both American troops and ISF.
Marion, in any case, all of that is ancient history. What matters is what is happening today. How do you think the GoI and ISF are performing in the 11 PIC provinces? Do you agree or disagree with the planned schedule for transferring the remain Iraqi provinces to PIC.
Commenting by HaloScan
