64 replies to this topic

[Basra]

iSilurian, on 05 September 2011 - 12:55 AM, said:

You have not proposed any issues for me to address.  And can you please not be so rude with every one of your posts?

Stealing rain is possible, even wikipedia admits that: http://en.wikipedia....i/Cloud_seeding we can argue what HAARP can do but tons of scientists agree it has features that can be weaponized.  As for the political issues you raised you attempted to defend different imperialist US policies, I completely refuted you.  Let me again just raise one issue you claim the US is allegedly out to "eliminate al-Qaeda" (a group the US created) I simply stated why on earth then is the US and its Western imperialist allies like Britain employing (http://www.guardian....-worked-for-mi6), arming (http://www.telegraph...aeda-links.html), and dining (http://www.cbsnews.c...in6978200.shtml) confirmed "al-Qaeda" (aka al-CIA-duh) members till this very day?!

Edited by Basra, 05 September 2011 - 01:01 AM.

[iSilurian]

Basra, on 05 September 2011 - 01:00 AM, said:

Stealing rain is possible, even wikipedia admits that: http://en.wikipedia....i/Cloud_seeding we can argue what HAARP can do but tons of scientists agree it has features that can be weaponized.

This still is a farcry from the US stealing rain from Iran.  Youre going to need more.  And for the second part, the discussion is about stealing rain.  I have no clue why youre bringing up random stuff about

as for the second part, im not sure if youve read your own articles.

obviously fighters of the rebel Libyan force are going to have ties with al queda.

"Awlaki was invited as "...part of an informal outreach program" in which officials sought contact "...with leading members of the Muslim community," the official said. At that time, Awlaki was widely viewed as a "moderate" imam at a mosque in Northern Virginia. "

"US interrogators were convinced that he was simultaneously acting as an informer for British and Canadian intelligence." aka he was a rat/snitch

[Basra]

iSilurian, on 05 September 2011 - 01:08 AM, said:

This still is a farcry from the US stealing rain from Iran.  Youre going to need more.  And for the second part, the discussion is about stealing rain.  I have no clue why youre bringing up random stuff about

as for the second part, im not sure if youve read your own articles.

obviously fighters of the rebel Libyan force are going to have ties with al queda.

"Awlaki was invited as "...part of an informal outreach program" in which officials sought contact "...with leading members of the Muslim community," the official said. At that time, Awlaki was widely viewed as a "moderate" imam at a mosque in Northern Virginia. "

"US interrogators were convinced that he was simultaneously acting as an informer for British and Canadian intelligence." aka he was a rat/snitch

The US and NATO were using pawn terrorist rebels that if a common person in Amerikkka had funded the US regime would've thrown them in jail for providing financial support to "terrorism".  Also there are not just "some al-Qaeda" among the rebels their military commander Belhadj aka Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi is an "al-Qaeda" member that was once imprisoned by the Amerikkkans in Afghanistan/Pakistan (he is currently in charge of Tripoli with NATO support).  If the US actually "feared" so-called "al-Qaeda" they would've never opposed Gaddafi who has from long ago bent over backwards to try to support the imperialist US against "al-Qaeda" in fact it was Muammar Gaddafi who was the first person to try to issue an international arrest warrant for bin Laden, long before September 11, 2001 (that the US nixed at that time)!

The US government openly admits they knew Awlaki was an alleged "al-Qaeda" leader before 9/11 and they even claim they knew that he met with 9/11 "hijackers" and they themselves said they believed he was involved in the attack.  This was all before he dined at the Pentagon!

Also the guy was employed by the Western intelligence agencies you can try to wiggle out of it, but it doesn't make it any less true.

Edited by Basra, 05 September 2011 - 01:17 AM.

[iSilurian]

Basra, on 05 September 2011 - 01:15 AM, said:

The US and NATO were using pawn terrorist rebels that if a common person in Amerikkka had funded would've been thrown in jail for providing financial support to "terrorism".  

I wouldnt classify them all as terrorists.  There is a phrase, an enemy of my enemy is my friend.  It comes to mind.  Gaddafi was a bad man, everyone can agree.  Now, let us hope that this new govt in place in Libya will be legitimate in their workings.  Time will tell.

Basra, on 05 September 2011 - 01:15 AM, said:

If the US actually "feared" so-called "al-Qaeda" they would've never opposed Gaddafi who has from long ago bent over backwards to try to support the imperialist US against "al-Qaeda" in fact it was Muammar Gaddafi who was the first person to try to issue an international arrest warrant for bin Laden, long before September 11, 2001 (that the US nixed at that time)!

i dont think i ever said anything about the US fearing anyone.  Im actually quite certain i didnt.

Basra, on 05 September 2011 - 01:15 AM, said:

The US government openly admits they knew Awlaki was an alleged "al-Qaeda" leader before 9/11 and they even claim they knew that he met with 9/11 "hijackers" and they themselves said they believed he was involved in the attack.  This was all before he dined at the Pentagon!

Hes innocent until proven guilty.  Again, he was used, and ill quote from your own source.

"Awlaki was not a suspect and was not believed to be connected to the 9/11 attacks. Instead he was viewed as a valuable liaison to the Muslim community and a potential investigative source. As one official put it, "he was a much different guy back then.""

Your own source is in opposition of your statements.

Basra, on 05 September 2011 - 01:15 AM, said:

Also the guy was employed by the Western intelligence agencies you can try to wiggle out of it, but it doesn't make it any less true.

Im sure there are many islamic fundamentalists that are employed by western govts for information.  Thats basically common sense, they can be easy access to more valuable information.

Edited by iSilurian, 05 September 2011 - 01:28 AM.

[Ugly Jinn]

Zareen, on 06 June 2011 - 03:45 PM, said:

Can someone please tell me how you can steal rain clouds?

You can't.

I think Ahmadinejad should get into stand up comedy after his term is over, he is entertaining and has a great imagination.

[Basra]

iSilurian, on 05 September 2011 - 01:27 AM, said:

I wouldnt classify them all as terrorists.  There is a phrase, an enemy of my enemy is my friend.  It comes to mind.  Gaddafi was a bad man, everyone can agree.  Now, let us hope that this new govt in place in Libya will be legitimate in their workings.  Time will tell.



i dont think i ever said anything about the US fearing anyone.  Im actually quite certain i didnt.



Hes innocent until proven guilty.  Again, he was used, and ill quote from your own source.

"Awlaki was not a suspect and was not believed to be connected to the 9/11 attacks. Instead he was viewed as a valuable liaison to the Muslim community and a potential investigative source. As one official put it, "he was a much different guy back then.""

Your own source is in opposition of your statements.



Im sure there are many islamic fundamentalists that are employed by western govts for information.  Thats basically common sense.

Who cares what you would "classify them" as, if you were to lend any form of financial support to them you'd be going to jail for "financing terrorism"!  The Western imperialist media lies against Gaddafi (http://www.indymedia.../06/481209.html), Gaddafi has given Libya the highest quality in life of any African nation.  He was attacked because he threatened Western imperialist control of Africa especially the Gold Dinar currency he wanted to create, just like how the US got rid of their former buddy Saddam because he was going to sell Iraqi oil in Euros rather then US dollars.  http://rt.com/news/e...oil-gold-libya/



An article that savagely defeats and refutes all the mainstream media propaganda used to justify Libya's genocidal war and occupation of Libya.  http://www.counterpu...-against-libya/

By the way that new Libyan flag is actually the old monarchy flag of the fool and Western puppet King Idris I who oversaw a "masterful" 10% literacy rate in Libya!  But he did allow the US imperialists' to have a big US air force base in Libya called Wheelus Air Base formerly near Tripoli http://en.wikipedia....heelus_Air_Base

al-CIA-duh NATO rebels committing racist genocide against black Libya and sub-Saharan migrant workers, no "mercenaries" was a Western propaganda media lie: http://www.rnw.nl/af...eastern-libya-0

Again: http://www.indymedia.../06/481209.html

Quoting Dontella Rovera of Amnesty International; Quote- Rebels have repeatedly charged that mercenary troops from Central and West Africa have been used against them. The Amnesty investigation found there was no evidence for this. "Those shown to journalists as foreign mercenaries were later quietly released," says Ms Rovera. "Most were sub-Saharan migrants working in Libya without documents."

end quote.

The Western imperialists want to rape Libya's resources, imperialist Britain has openly said they will not be "left behind" as the Western imperialists pig line up at the looting troth.

The US regime and Pentagon themselves said they knew Awlaki met with the alleged "hijackers" it was not some case were they didn't "know who he was", he is a CIA lackey.

"al-Qaeda" was created and is still employed by the West.

Ugly Jinn, on 05 September 2011 - 01:32 AM, said:

You can't.

I think Ahmadinejad should get into stand up comedy after his term is over, he is entertaining and has a great imagination.

You imperialist supporters that deny cloud seeding and HAARP are real and adore the Western mainstream media are the true comedians.  Again Saddam (the former US puppet) did have nuclear weapons that he was about to launch at Amerikkka and there are magic indestructible paper passports!

Edited by Basra, 05 September 2011 - 01:39 AM.

[iSilurian]

Basra, on 05 September 2011 - 01:34 AM, said:

Who cares what you would "classify them" as, if you were to lend any form of financial support to them you'd be going to jail for "financing terrorism"!  The Western imperialist media lies against Gaddafi (http://www.indymedia.../06/481209.html), Gaddafi has given Libya the highest quality in life of any African nation.  He was attacked because he threatened Western imperialist control of Africa especially the Gold Dinar currency he wanted to create,

objection, speculation.  You cant class all of the rebels as terrorists, you dont have evidence for that.  I would say that most of them probably do have good intentions for the well being of their homeland.

Basra, on 05 September 2011 - 01:34 AM, said:

The US regime and Pentagon themselves said they knew Awlaki met with the alleged "hijackers" it was not some case were they didn't "know who he was", he is a CIA lackey.

Anyone can meet with anyone in this world.  The prior point still stands.  Your own source refutes you.

Basra, on 05 September 2011 - 01:34 AM, said:

"al-Qaeda" was created and is still employed by the West.

thats subjective,  Realistically there probably isnt anyone on the planet that isnt funded by the west in some way or another.

Alright, now that this silly conversation is about over, im going to move onto something a bit more productive.  Its been interesting as usual basra.

oh yea, and thank God people in this forum are smart enough to realize that the whole concept of the US stealing Irans rain is nonsense.  The US is currently having a massive drought worst than most in history.  Not only that, but obviously there is no credible evidence for this, just speculation and ideas put forth by random people for the sake of entertainment.

Edited by iSilurian, 05 September 2011 - 01:48 AM.

[Ali H Syed]

iSilurian, on 04 September 2011 - 05:32 PM, said:

The countries with the more technological funds?  Wars are not deliberately fought to target the innocent.  It happens.


on the contrary, wars are not fought for legitimate reasons, aka iraq, therefore any civillian death thas has ever come from that war, should be accounted for and classified as a crime


Yes and no.  No country picks a fight for no apparent reason.  You can name any war the US has fought, odds are justification can be made. Whether its taking down Saddam Hussein, or taking down the taliban and al queda, someone has to do it.  However, whether or not bombing them was the best way to take them out is subjective.


what was the reason for iraq? no wmd were found? they called saddam a tyrant ect etc, but who funded and backed him to attack iran? justification for 90% of the US wars cannot be made. simple, name 1 that can be justified. taking down the taliban and al queda, we coud discuss for every on this issue, so many sources reveal that they are saudi or US made tools of distraction, they have been armed by the US, and the US is fighting them..?



Who is killing the Iraqi people? Last time i checked, the Iraqis were fighting along side the US. Things are not as black and white as youre making them sound.


Last time i checked the news, incidents of torture are occuring daily, have you not seen the countless videos and stories of US soliders killing civilians for fun? its all over the news, the famous incident where the sick twisted soldier fired upon those group of unarmed men, and he was enjoying it. justify that.


Again, you must ask yourself, whos doing the fighting and for what reason.  Its well known that the taliban is statistically responsible for more innocent casualties than the US.  Many Iraqis are fighting on the side of the US and vice versa.  Much of the current combat in Iraq is in fact against Iraqi troops, and just so you know, it is not the US troops fighting the Iraqi troops.


i didnt say there were fighting iraqi troops, but once again i can easily say who is responsible for the creation of the taliban and its funding? all leading back to US, so therefore they are to blame for these deaths. and another thing, lets just say if the taliban hadnt ever targetted civilians in the name of their sick ideology, would the US still have a reason to war against them?

ps i still havnt learnt to quote each section my apologies.

Edited by Ali H Syed, 05 September 2011 - 07:40 AM.

[iSilurian]

I guess ill have to seperate our texts .

Ali H Syed, on 05 September 2011 - 07:39 AM, said:

on the contrary, wars are not fought for legitimate reasons, aka iraq, therefore any civillian death thas has ever come from that war, should be accounted for and classified as a crime

Ill have to disagree with you on that one.  Some wars i think you could argue are illegitimate, however most wars, you could make a fair point in support of their purpose.

Ali H Syed, on 05 September 2011 - 07:39 AM, said:

what was the reason for iraq? no wmd were found? they called saddam a tyrant ect etc, but who funded and backed him to attack iran? justification for 90% of the US wars cannot be made. simple, name 1 that can be justified. taking down the taliban and al queda, we coud discuss for every on this issue, so many sources reveal that they are saudi or US made tools of distraction, they have been armed by the US, and the US is fighting them..?

Well, the man did have chemical weapons, there is no doubt about that.  About Iran, thats kind of a seperate issue, but Iran did overthrow the shah and did take americans hostage.  Granted Khamanei being anti west, not surprisingly would do that, but obviously its going to get on the US's bad side.  The shah and saddam hussein were anti communist.  During the cold war in which russia was running around stomping other nations into the ground, the US very much supported anti communist regimes.  So the question is, who do you fear more?  the Soviets in the 70s? or Saddam?  the Soviets? or the Shah?  Later in history Saddam invaded kuwait and shot scuds into Saudi.  Both Kuwait and Saudi being allies of the US puts Saddam on the bad list.  Saddam was willing to take all the power for himself, even at the expense of obstructing and destroying the allies of the US.

And, in my personal opinion, the "war on terror" does bring to light the issues of extremism in certain areas.  Al Queda, as im sure you agree, deliberately harms the innocent, which normally realistically wouldnt be a problem, but the issue is they target the west as well.

Ali H Syed, on 05 September 2011 - 07:39 AM, said:

"Last time i checked the news, incidents of torture are occuring daily, have you not seen the countless videos and stories of US soliders killing civilians for fun? its all over the news, the famous incident where the sick twisted soldier fired upon those group of unarmed men, and he was enjoying it. justify that."

Lets look for the latest Iraqi bombing.  Lets see who is responsible.

http://www.nytimes.c...=bombing&st=cse

perhaps you have a more recent one.

"BAGHDAD — A suicide bomber mounted a devastating attack in one of the largest Sunni mosques in Baghdad on Sunday, killing at least 28 people, including a member of Parliament, and wounding dozens more, according to security officials. "

This is not the US, this is an anti govt religious nut, who no offense, but could very well be a shia considering the location of the attack.  The person has killed a member of the Iraqi Parliament.  And so you see, this is the current state of Iraq, and this is what is currently going on.  This occurred just last week.

Ali H Syed, on 05 September 2011 - 07:39 AM, said:

i didnt say there were fighting iraqi troops, but once again i can easily say who is responsible for the creation of the taliban and its funding? all leading back to US, so therefore they are to blame for these deaths. and another thing, lets just say if the taliban hadnt ever targetted civilians in the name of their sick ideology, would the US still have a reason to war against them?

Ah ok, thats good then that you recognize that there is fighting going on beyond what the US is doing.  Who is responsible for the creation of the taliban?

Well, lets see.  The soviets had implanted a socialist anti islamic government in place.  Thats like killing two birds with one stone.  Theyre anti Islamic, which is why the majority of afghans were against their govt and the same reason there were so many homeland rebellions at the time.  And like wise, their government was communist and supported Soviet expansionism.  If the soviets ultimately won, of course afghanistan itself would have ultimtely been conquered.  The mujahideen were the liberation force, so its fairly easy to see why the US supported their cause.

ultimately though, the taliban are the people of afghanistan, fighting for their own freedoms.  The US did not create them, they create themselves and they simply receive support from the US.  The US cant simply "create" anything in that part of the world, not without the support of the people themselves.  Hopefully in time they will cool down.

Edited by iSilurian, 05 September 2011 - 10:42 AM.

[Ali H Syed]

iSilurian, on 05 September 2011 - 10:33 AM, said:

I guess ill have to seperate our texts .



Ill have to disagree with you on that one.  Some wars i think you could argue are illegitimate, however most wars, you could make a fair point in support of their purpose.




Well, the man did have chemical weapons, there is no doubt about that.  About Iran, thats kind of a seperate issue, but Iran did overthrow the shah and did take americans hostage.  Granted Khamanei being anti west, not surprisingly would do that, but obviously its going to get on the US's bad side.  The shah and saddam hussein were anti communist.  During the cold war in which russia was running around stomping other nations into the ground, the US very much supported anti communist regimes.  So the question is, who do you fear more?  the Soviets in the 70s? or Saddam?  the Soviets? or the Shah?  Later in history Saddam invaded kuwait and shot scuds into Saudi.  Both Kuwait and Saudi being allies of the US puts Saddam on the bad list.  Saddam was willing to take all the power for himself, even at the expense of obstructing and destroying the allies of the US.

And, in my personal opinion, the "war on terror" does bring to light the issues of extremism in certain areas.  Al Queda, as im sure you agree, deliberately harms the innocent, which normally realistically wouldnt be a problem, but the issue is they target the west as well.




Lets look for the latest Iraqi bombing.  Lets see who is responsible.

http://www.nytimes.c...=bombing&st=cse

perhaps you have a more recent one.

"BAGHDAD — A suicide bomber mounted a devastating attack in one of the largest Sunni mosques in Baghdad on Sunday, killing at least 28 people, including a member of Parliament, and wounding dozens more, according to security officials. "

This is not the US, this is an anti govt religious nut, who no offense, but could very well be a shia considering the location of the attack.  The person has killed a member of the Iraqi Parliament.  And so you see, this is the current state of Iraq, and this is what is currently going on.  This occurred just last week.




Ah ok, thats good then that you recognize that there is fighting going on beyond what the US is doing.  Who is responsible for the creation of the taliban?

Well, lets see.  The soviets had implanted a socialist anti islamic government in place.  Thats like killing two birds with one stone.  Theyre anti Islamic, which is why the majority of afghans were against their govt and the same reason there were so many homeland rebellions at the time.  And like wise, their government was communist and supported Soviet expansionism.  If the soviets ultimately won, of course afghanistan itself would have ultimtely been conquered.  The mujahideen were the liberation force, so its fairly easy to see why the US supported their cause.

ultimately though, the taliban are the people of afghanistan, fighting for their own freedoms.  The US did not create them, they create themselves and they simply receive support from the US.  The US cant simply "create" anything in that part of the world, not without the support of the people themselves.  Hopefully in time they will cool down.

My apologies, yes some wars can be seen as legitimate, but the majority I believe have, other motives, and is fair to assume that they can be condemned with ease, and seen to be for hidden motives, and not the for the reasons that are publicly made. On the chemical weapons part, I personally havnt don’t much research on that, but still there’s accusations that the funding, or technology, was once again linking back to the US, im not saying the US did in basic terms give him those chemical weapons, but there are plenty of sources on the internet which suggest this, http://www.counterpu...emical-weapons/
Personally I have not done much research on this my self so I cannot make a judgment.

On the famous hostage scenario, well two stories from both sides, once again I havnt done much research, I cannot judge. And yes ofcourse the war of terror, even though I am fully against their so called war, will admit openly that terrorism is a problem, and I condemn it in every shape or form, as the iyatullahs who I follow do, the terrorist roots come from the wahabi ideology, ie. Saudis. That is known, but yes there is a problem, however I personally believe that this so called “problem” was manufactured.  the concept the taliban and al queda follow can be created though wouldnt you agree? yes al queda targetting innocent people and innocent people in america, is sick and should be condemned by the world!

That may be the latest bombings, but please lets refrain from that, as I can bring up to many tragic incidents where these have ripped through iraq/iran/Pakistan, and it pains me to remember them, here are just a handpicked few, you will notice that mainly shias are targeted, every year, when the month of muharram comes, there will always be multiple attacks on innocent lives, and always on shias in this month especially.
Relating to these attacks, just today or yesterday in fact, several mosques wer burnt in the west bank I believe, no condemnation what soever, it is of topic but once again, where condemnation is needed there is none from any one in the west.

http://www.timesonli...icle6549362.ece
http://www.dailytime..._3-9-2011_pg1_7
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8432409.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk...e-east-12440175
http://www.guardian....l-shia-pilgrims

haha the day I learn to separate the quotes will be a good one !

Edited by Ali H Syed, 05 September 2011 - 11:07 AM.

[iSilurian]

Ali H Syed, on 05 September 2011 - 11:04 AM, said:

but the majority I believe have, other motives
was once again linking back to the US, im not saying the US did in basic terms give him those chemical weapons, but there are plenty of sources on the internet which suggest this, http://www.counterpu...emical-weapons/

Yes, well you know how it is.  The US gives cash to just about everyone, but rarely ever is it spent in a way predicted by anyone but the reciever.  About your first statement though, i believe that, the reasons for war are often more simple than people make them out to be.  Everyone is always saying "oh the iraq war is over oil", and yet the US govt has yet to get any oil.  Meanwhile, its fairly easy to recognize that Saddam was an enemy of the US, and he had plans which would harm the US, and so it is no surprise that he was whiped out.  The same goes for afghanistan.  Countries act to protect their interests, if everyone just maintains peace, there will be no need for the police to show up at their door.

  Also, just an interesting point, China is actually in Afghanistan as well, theyre there mining out a trillion dollars worth of ore.  Oddly enough nobody goes around saying that China is a bad guy.  and unlike the US, Chinas mining companies are controlled by its govt, and thus its govt is benefitting from not only the oil of Iraq but also the minerals of afghanistan.

But thats kind of a side track.

Ali H Syed, on 05 September 2011 - 11:04 AM, said:

the terrorist roots come from the wahabi ideology, ie. Saudis. That is known, but yes there is a problem, however I personally believe that this so called “problem” was manufactured.  the concept the taliban and al queda follow can be created though wouldnt you agree?

Well, Islamic fundamentalism and muslims who want liberty in the east are beyond the control of the US.  Countries can always support different causes, but in the particular case of the afghan civil war, the rebels were large in number.  Basically what im saying is, i wouldnt "pass the buck" or the blame on the US.  Atleast not completely.  People can be manipulated in some ways, however, the US even in the 70s were never popular amongst fundamentalist muslims (atleast not their western ideology), so i think its fair to say that the taliban is primarily a product of the Afghans themselves.  Even many soldiers of the afghan army defected to the side of the rebels, they do it by their own free will.

Ali H Syed, on 05 September 2011 - 11:04 AM, said:

That may be the latest bombings, but please lets refrain from that, as I can bring up to many tragic incidents where these have ripped through iraq/iran/Pakistan, and it pains me to remember them, here are just a handpicked few, you will notice that mainly shias are targeted, every year, when the month of muharram comes, there will always be multiple attacks on innocent lives, and always on shias in this month especially.
Relating to these attacks, just today or yesterday in fact, several mosques wer burnt in the west bank I believe, no condemnation what soever, it is of topic but once again, where condemnation is needed there is none from any one in the west.

Yes, there is no doubt that shias are being attacked as well.  Basically im just pointing out that, the current state of Iraq isnt black and white.  I personally dont consider the US to be the main issue here.  And realistically what does the US want?  It wants a stable, wealthy ally.  The wealthier and stable the ally, the greater the number of benefits that ally can provide.  The US wants the current Iraq to prosper, and with that said, rather than asking why the US is doing the fighting, we should ask, why are people fighting to halt this prosperity? And why are there people fighting to destroy the Iraqi govt?  There are 2 sides to every coin.

[Philip]

the people who kill, steal, lie, have no moral backbone .. that people actually believe a word they say .. especially when they ALMOST managed to make the word "conspiracy" a word that the whole world frowns upon as if it didn't exist! it is so ridiculous .. they even admit that they conspire all the freaking time! they are not ashamed of all the declassified cia docs that blatantly show how those #!!*()#*@()* !! consciously inject corruption and spread lies just to suit their own worldly and satanic ends. Satan is doomed!!! whoever wants to join him is free to do so ..

let them conspire!! Allah is the best of planners .. and as promised .. they did not and wont succeed ..

May Allah bring peace truth harmony and just balance on dunya soon. very soon in sha Allah ..

[Rothchild]

Basra, on 05 September 2011 - 01:00 AM, said:

Stealing rain is possible, even wikipedia admits that: http://en.wikipedia....i/Cloud_seeding we can argue what HAARP can do but tons of scientists agree it has features that can be weaponized.  As for the political issues you raised you attempted to defend different imperialist US policies, I completely refuted you.  Let me again just raise one issue you claim the US is allegedly out to "eliminate al-Qaeda" (a group the US created) I simply stated why on earth then is the US and its Western imperialist allies like Britain employing (http://www.guardian....-worked-for-mi6), arming (http://www.telegraph...aeda-links.html), and dining (http://www.cbsnews.c...in6978200.shtml) confirmed "al-Qaeda" (aka al-CIA-duh) members till this very day?!

Seeding clouds/rain and stealing them are two different things.

It seems like if you seed them over your own territory, the rain will fall on your land hence you get the water not your enemy.

The only practical way of stealing water is for the Arrogant countries ones to build giant fans to push the clouds into their areas and then seed them to get the water.  There was no mention in this article of any Iranians seeing giant fans lying about.

[Ali H Syed]

iSilurian, on 05 September 2011 - 11:42 AM, said:

Yes, well you know how it is.  The US gives cash to just about everyone, but rarely ever is it spent in a way predicted by anyone but the reciever.  About your first statement though, i believe that, the reasons for war are often more simple than people make them out to be.  Everyone is always saying "oh the iraq war is over oil", and yet the US govt has yet to get any oil.  Meanwhile, its fairly easy to recognize that Saddam was an enemy of the US, and he had plans which would harm the US, and so it is no surprise that he was whiped out.  The same goes for afghanistan.  Countries act to protect their interests, if everyone just maintains peace, there will be no need for the police to show up at their door.

  Also, just an interesting point, China is actually in Afghanistan as well, theyre there mining out a trillion dollars worth of ore.  Oddly enough nobody goes around saying that China is a bad guy.  and unlike the US, Chinas mining companies are controlled by its govt, and thus its govt is benefitting from not only the oil of Iraq but also the minerals of afghanistan.

But thats kind of a side track.



Well, Islamic fundamentalism and muslims who want liberty in the east are beyond the control of the US.  Countries can always support different causes, but in the particular case of the afghan civil war, the rebels were large in number.  Basically what im saying is, i wouldnt "pass the buck" or the blame on the US.  Atleast not completely.  People can be manipulated in some ways, however, the US even in the 70s were never popular amongst fundamentalist muslims (atleast not their western ideology), so i think its fair to say that the taliban is primarily a product of the Afghans themselves.  Even many soldiers of the afghan army defected to the side of the rebels, they do it by their own free will.



Yes, there is no doubt that shias are being attacked as well.  Basically im just pointing out that, the current state of Iraq isnt black and white.  I personally dont consider the US to be the main issue here.  And realistically what does the US want?  It wants a stable, wealthy ally.  The wealthier and stable the ally, the greater the number of benefits that ally can provide.  The US wants the current Iraq to prosper, and with that said, rather than asking why the US is doing the fighting, we should ask, why are people fighting to halt this prosperity? And why are there people fighting to destroy the Iraqi govt?  There are 2 sides to every coin.

yeh i hear you isul, and yeh china never seems to get mentioned at all in any of the iraqi issues! but yeh dont get me wrong, the world without saddam is a better place, theres no doubt in that! yeh the current situation is very complicated, inshallah it is sorted out soon we can only pray

[struggling_On]

JawzofDETH, on 02 September 2011 - 10:57 AM, said:

Because we don't want to accidently cause ecological disasters. And secondly, it's not Islamic to ruin a country's agricultural health even if they are our enemies. The Prophet didn't allow soldiers to destroy crops or kill livestock even in wartime. Plus we're doing the best we can with our maple and wood-glue, if your'e such a forward thinker, give us a solution big-boy! Was-Salaam

Really???? Do we have this kind of technology I wonder, we are already causing enough damage to this world, by spreading hatred not true knowledge, hence we talk about US, Israel and Europe. I think most of us deserve what is happening to us, we are responsible for every thing, we muslims are responsible not stopping them when it all started, what are u talking, do we really follow imam(a.s), to what extent we follow them (a.s) just by their names................. are we really practical muslims, if we were we should have been the world super power not them, yet we accuse them for everything brother we really need to admit our mistakes first. bring harmony in our selves then you can face them.

Can you tell me whom we are fighting with? the answer should be ourselves, the satan  inside us....... can u overtake it first, Then talk about outside enemies, we are our own enemies.....................