Democrat meets banned Muslim Brotherhood

[stephanie]

Hummmm...

By NADIA ABOU EL-MAGD, Associated Press Writer
7 minutes ago



CAIRO, Egypt - A top U.S. Democratic congressman met a leader of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's most powerful rival, the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood, U.S. officials and the Islamist group said Saturday.

ADVERTISEMENT

Visiting House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (news, bio, voting record) met with the head of the Muslim Brotherhood's parliamentary bloc, Mohammed Saad el-Katatni, twice on Thursday — once at the parliament building and then at the home of the U.S. ambassador to Egypt, said Brotherhood spokesman Hamdi Hassan.

U.S. Embassy spokesman John Berry would only confirm that Hoyer, who represents Maryland, met with el-Katatni at U.S. Ambassador Francis Ricciardone's home at a reception with other politicians and parliament members.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has refused in the past to meet with the Muslim Brotherhood, the country's largest opposition group.

But Berry said U.S. government policy does not bar meetings with Brotherhood members of parliament and Hoyer's talks with el-Katatni were not a change in U.S. policy toward the group.

"It's our diplomatic practice around the world to meet with parliamentarians, be they members of political parties or independents," Berry said.

Once notorious for assassinations and militant activity, the Brotherhood renounced violence in the 1970s. Though officially banned since 1954, it is tolerated by the government and in recent years, has focused on politics and social welfare.

The group got its biggest boost in 2005 when its members, who ran as independents, became the largest parliament opposition bloc, winning one-fifth of its 454 seats. But as the Brotherhood's popularity increased, so did government crackdowns on its supporters.

The State Department and the White House had no comment Saturday on Hoyer's meetings with the group.

Berry stressed that Hoyer met with el-Katatni in his capacity as an independent member of Egyptian parliament. He would not say what the two discussed.

Hassan said the two lawmakers discussed developments in the Middle East, the "Brotherhood's vision" and opposition movements in Egypt. He said the two met privately at the ambassador's home and with other members of Hoyer's bipartisan delegation and Egyptian lawmakers at the parliament building.

Hoyer's meeting came just a day after Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) drew sharp criticism from the Bush administration for meeting with Syrian President Bashar Assad in Damascus.

Pelosi and other Democrats argue the administration needs to engage Syria to resolve some of the most intractable problems in the Middle East, such as Iraq and the Israeli-Arab conflict. But the Bush administration rejects that approach, accusing Syria of exacerbating the troubles in neighboring Iraq and Lebanon.

Jon Alterman, a Mideast specialist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said Bush administration officials may have avoided meeting Muslim Brotherhood members because it could strain relations with the secular Egyptian government, one of the closest U.S. allies in the Arab world.

"The difficulty when it gets to Egypt is that the Brotherhood is not a legal group within Egypt and the U.S. government is wary of violating laws in countries in which it operates," he told The Associated Press on Saturday.

"The larger constraint on our willingness to meet the Brotherhood is the Egyptian government's unease with our government's meeting with the Brotherhood."

Hoyer, who also met with Mubarak during his visit, left Egypt on Friday. A telephone message left with his spokeswoman Saturday was not immediately returned. Calls to el-Katatni also went unanswered Saturday.

The Muslim Brotherhood's parliament bloc Web site said the meetings were not part of an effort to engage the United States.

"The Brotherhood not only has reservations on dialogue with the Americans but rejects the unfair American policy in the region," the Web site said.

The United States has put pressure on Mubarak regarding other opposition figures including Ayman Nour, a secular politician who was jailed after challenging Mubarak in the 2005 presidential elections. But Washington has remained silent on similar campaigns against the Brotherhood.

Washington has been pressing Mubarak for years to enact reforms as part of a Bush administration campaign to spread democracy in the Mideast.

Egypt has come under criticism from democracy activists over constitutional amendments Mubarak billed as a reform package that were passed in a referendum last month. The Egyptian government said the referendum passed by a landslide, but even the U.S. administration expressed skepticism about the official figures.

The Brotherhood and other opposition groups have decried the amendments as limiting freedoms, excluding the Brotherhood from becoming a legitimate political party and perpetuating Mubarak's grip on power.

Rice expressed concern in March that "all voices" were not being heard in the debate over the amendments.

"There's been a growing sense in Washington over 20 years that Islamic politics are here to stay, and the U.S. interest in promoting democracy around the world means we should be engaging with a growing number of actors," Alterman said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070407/ap_on_re_mi_ea/egypt_us_muslim_brotherhood

[loosecannon]

Hummmm...



OK, I will forgive the asininity of this thread premise since you obviously do not realize that the US and the British CREATED the Muslim brotherhood and have been supporting them from the 1940's until the present day.

In fact Bush is illegally supporting Muslim Brotherhood cells in Afghanistan this very day.

AND R Reagan called Muslim Brotherhood militiamen "patriots" "like our founding fathers".

Do a google of the word "Vanna", or "Banna" to get a clue.

I will help

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh

http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2005/07jul/nazisalqaeda.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood

[Yurt]

OK, I will forgive the asininity of this thread premise since you obviously do not realize that the US and the British CREATED the Muslim brotherhood and have been supporting them from the 1940's until the present day.

In fact Bush is illegally supporting Muslim Brotherhood cells in Afghanistan this very day.

AND R Reagan called Muslim Brotherhood militiamen "patriots" "like our founding fathers".

Do a google of the word "Vanna", or "Banna" to get a clue.

I will help

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh

http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2005/07jul/nazisalqaeda.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood


Your sources appear to disagree:

Here's how the story began. In the 1920's there was a young Egyptian named al Bana. And al Bana formed this nationalist group called the Muslim Brotherhood. Al Bana was a devout admirer of Adolph Hitler and wrote to him frequently. So persistent was he in his admiration of the new Nazi Party that in the 1930's, al Bana and the Muslim Brotherhood became a secret arm of Nazi Intelligence.

The Arab Nazis had much in common with the new Nazi doctrines. They hated Jews; they hated democracy; and they hated the Western culture. It became the official policy of the Third Reich to secretly develop the Muslim Brotherhood as the fifth Parliament, an army inside Egypt.


though the source appears highly sketchy anyways

[loosecannon]

Your sources appear to disagree:

Here's how the story began. In the 1920's there was a young Egyptian named al Bana. And al Bana formed this nationalist group called the Muslim Brotherhood. Al Bana was a devout admirer of Adolph Hitler and wrote to him frequently. So persistent was he in his admiration of the new Nazi Party that in the 1930's, al Bana and the Muslim Brotherhood became a secret arm of Nazi Intelligence.

The Arab Nazis had much in common with the new Nazi doctrines. They hated Jews; they hated democracy; and they hated the Western culture. It became the official policy of the Third Reich to secretly develop the Muslim Brotherhood as the fifth Parliament, an army inside Egypt.


though the source appears highly sketchy anyways


You better read them all Yurt.

The Muslim brohood was financed by Britain thru the 40's to repel the Israeli nationalist movement and then assumed by the Americans.

Osama Bin Laden was recruited thru the Muslim Brotherhood to fight for the Afghans and the US against the soviet Union in Afghanistan.

And Bush is illegally supporting Muslim Brotherhood gangs in Lebanon and Pakistan and Afghanistan.

There is so much linkage between terrorists like Saddam, Bin Laden, Iran, Carriles, and the US that the very pretense of the US being opposed to terrorism is less than a joke. The US has been a state sponsor of terrorists every year since 1950.

[loosecannon]

though the source appears highly sketchy anyways

Really? John Loftus is a former U.S. Deputy Attorney General?

Google "Vanna" and his name and watch it appear all over the web and then count any rebuttals. I doubt you can find one in that search.

[manu1959]

You better read them all Yurt.

The Muslim brohood was financed by Britain thru the 40's to repel the Israeli nationalist movement and then assumed by the Americans.

Osama Bin Laden was recruited thru the Muslim Brotherhood to fight for the Afghans and the US against the soviet Union in Afghanistan.

And Bush is illegally supporting Muslim Brotherhood gangs in Lebanon and Pakistan and Afghanistan.

There is so much linkage between terrorists like Saddam, Bin Laden, Iran, Carriles, and the US that the very pretense of the US being opposed to terrorism is less than a joke. The US has been a state sponsor of terrorists every year since 1950.

every year?.... please tell me not during the blow job years,,,,

[loosecannon]

every year?.... please tell me not during the blow job years,,,,

Even during the blow job years you spineless piece of Bush.

[manu1959]

Even during the blow job years you spineless piece of Bush.

you are not able to peg me are you....:fu:

[Yurt]

You better read them all Yurt.

The Muslim brohood was financed by Britain thru the 40's to repel the Israeli nationalist movement and then assumed by the Americans.

Osama Bin Laden was recruited thru the Muslim Brotherhood to fight for the Afghans and the US against the soviet Union in Afghanistan.

And Bush is illegally supporting Muslim Brotherhood gangs in Lebanon and Pakistan and Afghanistan.

There is so much linkage between terrorists like Saddam, Bin Laden, Iran, Carriles, and the US that the very pretense of the US being opposed to terrorism is less than a joke. The US has been a state sponsor of terrorists every year since 1950.

You are the one with the sources, the onous is on you to provide me where in the source it is. I was unable to find in your links anything to back up your statement. Wiki did not. The New Yorker did not.

If it is there, ok, but I did not see it. Since you make the claim and links, you provide the quote. Don't give us numerous links to long articles and expect the burden to shift to us, nice try.

[loosecannon]

You are the one with the sources, the onous is on you to provide me where in the source it is. I was unable to find in your links anything to back up your statement. Wiki did not. The New Yorker did not.

If it is there, ok, but I did not see it. Since you make the claim and links, you provide the quote. Don't give us numerous links to long articles and expect the burden to shift to us, nice try.

It is spelled "onus", you are welcome.

OK, great, no prob. I invited the delirious thread parent to do her own research, google "Vanna", I provided a very few links just to get her a clue.

The New Yorker article discusses Bush's illegal support for terrorist cells in Pakistan and Lebanon. Illegal by virtue of the funding being arranged to by pass Congressional oversight like the old Sandinista charades in the Reagan days.

The Deputy attorney General's article talks about the US support for the Muslim Brotherhood, Osama Bin Laden and the Mujahidin.

What else do you want links to? One at a time. This is really easy stuff to find.

http://www.navyseals.com/community/articles/article.cfm?id=4328

Speech by John Loftus, former U.S. Deputy Attorney General

Holocaust Remembrance Day
Yom Ha Shoah - 2004
Jewish Community News, August 2004


It always seems a little strange to have an Irish-Catholic talking about Yom Ha Shoah.

I had an unusual education in the Holocaust. When I was working for the Attorney General, I was assigned to do the classified research about the Holocaust, so I went underground to a little town called Suitland, Maryland, right outside Washington, D.C. and that's where the US Government buries its secrets - - literally.

There are twenty vaults underground and each vault is one acre in size. Anyone see the movie “Raiders of the Lost Ark”? The last scene of that movie is what the underground vaults are really like, only not as organized as they are in the movie. And in those underground vaults I discovered something horrible.

I learned that many of the Nazis that I had been assigned to prosecute were on the CIA payroll, but the CIA didn't know they were Nazis because the British Intelligence Service had lied to them. What the British Intelligence Service didn't know was that their liar was Kim Philby, the Soviet communist double agent -- a little scandal of the Cold War. But our State Department swept it all under the rug and allowed the Nazis to stay in America until I was stupid enough to go public with it.

What do you do when you want to go public with a story like this one? You call up “60 Minutes.” We had a great time. Mike Wallace gave me 30 minutes on his show. For a long time, it was the longest segment that 60 minutes ever did. When the episode about Nazis in America went on the air back in 1982, it caused a minor national uproar. Congress demanded hearings, Mike Wallace got the Emmy award, and my family got the death threats. It was a great trip.

Then a funny thing happened. Over the last 25 years, every retired spy in the U.S. and Canada and England all wanted me to be their lawyer, for free of course. So I had 500 clients, they paid me $1 apiece. So I am the worst paid lawyer in America, but among the better employed.

Let me give you an example. This year a friend of mine from the CIA, named Bob Baer wrote a very good book about Saudi Arabia and terrorism, it's called “Sleeping with the Devil.” I read the book and I got about a third of the way through and I stopped. Bob was writing how when he worked for the CIA how bad the files were.

He said, for example, the files for the Muslim Brotherhood were almost nothing. There were just a few newspaper clippings. I called Bob up and said, “Bob, that's wrong. The CIA has enormous files on the Muslim Brotherhood, volumes of them. I know because I read them a quarter of a century ago.” He said, “What do you mean?”

Here's how you can find all of the missing secrets about the Muslim Brotherhood -- and you can do this too. I said, “Bob, go to your computer and type in two words into the search part. Type the word “Vanna,” V-a-n-n-a. He said, “Yeah.” Type in “Nazi.” Bob typed the two words in, and out came 30 to 40 articles from around the world. He read them and called me back and said, “Oh my God, what have we done?”

What I'm doing today is doing what I'm doing now: I'm educating a new generation in the CIA that the Muslim Brotherhood was a fascist organization that was hired by Western Intelligence that evolved over time into what we today know as al Qaeda.

Here's how the story began. In the 1920's there was a young Egyptian named al Bana. And al Bana formed this nationalist group called the Muslim Brotherhood. Al Bana was a devout admirer of Adolph Hitler and wrote to him frequently. So persistent was he in his admiration of the new Nazi Party that in the 1930's, al Bana and the Muslim Brotherhood became a secret arm of Nazi Intelligence.

The Arab Nazis had much in common with the new Nazi doctrines. They hated Jews; they hated democracy; and they hated the Western culture. It became the official policy of the Third Reich to secretly develop the Muslim Brotherhood as the fifth Parliament, an army inside Egypt.

When war broke out, the Muslim Brotherhood promised in writing that they would rise up and help General Rommell and make sure that no English or American soldier was left alive in Cairo or Alexandria.

The Muslim Brotherhood began to expand in scope and influence during World War II. They even had a Palestinian section headed by the grand Mufti of Jerusalem, one of the great bigots of all time. Here, too, was a man - - The grand Mufti of Jerusalem was the Muslim Brotherhood representative for Palestine. These were undoubtedly Arab Nazis. The Grand Mufti, for example, went to Germany during the war and helped recruit an international SS division of Arab Nazis. They based it in Croatia and called it the “Handjar” Muslim Division, but it was to become the core of Hitler's new army of Arab fascists that would conquer the Arab peninsula from then on to Africa -- grand dreams.

At the end of World War II, the Muslim Brotherhood was wanted for war crimes. Their German intelligence handlers were captured in Cairo. The whole net was rolled up by the British Secret Service. Then a horrible thing happened.

Instead of prosecuting the Nazis - - the Muslim Brotherhood - - the British government hired them. They brought all the fugitive Nazi war criminals of Arab and Muslim descent into Egypt, and for three years they were trained on a special mission. The British Secret Service wanted to use the fascists of the Muslim Brotherhood to strike down the infant state of Israel in 1948. Only a few people in the Mossad know this, but many of the members of the Arab Armies and terrorist groups that tried to strangle the infant State of Israel were the Arab Nazis of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Britain was not alone. The French Intelligence service cooperated by releasing the Grand Mufti and smuggling him to Egypt, so all of the Arab Nazis came together. So, from 1945 to 1948, the British Secret Service protected every Arab Nazi they could, but they failed to quash the State of Israel.

What the British did then, they sold the Arab Nazis to the predecessor of what became the CIA. It may sound stupid; it may sound evil, but it did happen. The idea was that we were going to use the Arab Nazis in the Middle East as a counterweight to the Arab communists. Just as the Soviet Union was funding Arab communists, we would fund the Arab Nazis to fight against. And lots of secret classes took place. We kept the Muslim Brotherhood on our payroll.

But the Egyptians became nervous. Nasser ordered all of the Muslim Brotherhood out of Egypt or be imprisoned, and we would execute them all. During the 1950's, the CIA evacuated the Nazis of the Muslim Brotherhood to Saudi Arabia. Now when they arrived in Saudi Arabia, some of the leading lights of the Muslim Brotherhood like Azzam, became the teachers in the Madrasas, the religious schools. And there they combined the doctrines of Nazism with this weird Islamic cult, Wahhabiism.

Everyone thinks that Islam is this fanatical religion, but it is not. They think that Islam -- the Saudi version of Islam - -is typical, but it's not. The Wahhabi cult was condemned as a heresy more than 60 times by the Muslim nations. But when the Saudis got wealthy, they bought a lot of silence. This is a very harsh cult. The Wahhabiism was only practiced by two nations, the Taliban and Saudi Arabia. That's how extreme it is. It really has nothing to do with Islam. Islam is a very peaceful and tolerant religion. It has always had good relationships with the Jews for the first thousand years of its existence.

For the Saudis, there was a ruler in charge of Saudi Arabia, and they were the new home of the Muslim Brotherhood, and fascism and extremism were mingled in these schools. And there was a young student who paid attention - - and Azzam's student was named Osama Bin Ladin. Osama Bin Ladin was taught by the Nazis of the Muslim Brotherhood who had emigrated to Saudi Arabia.

In 1979 the CIA decided to take the Arab Nazis out of cold storage. The Russians had invaded Afghanistan, so we told the Saudis that we would fund them if they would bring all of the Arab Nazis together and ship them off to Afghanistan to fight the Russians. We had to rename them. We couldn't call them the Muslim Brotherhood because that was too sensitive a name. Its Nazi cast was too known. So we called them the Maktab al Khidimat il Mujahideen, the MAK.

And the CIA lied to Congress and said they didn't know who was on the payroll in Afghanistan, except the Saudis. But it was not true. A small section CIA knew perfectly well that we had once again hired the Arab Nazis and that we were using them to fight our secret wars.

Azzam and his assistant, Osama Bin Ladin, rose to some prominence from 1979 to '89, and they won the war. They drove the Russians out of Afghanistan. Our CIA said, “We won, let's go home!” and we left this army of Arab fascists in the field of Afghanistan.

Saudis didn't want to come back. Saudis started paying bribes to Osama Bin Ladin and his followers to stay out of Saudi Arabia. Now the MAK split in half. Azzam was mysteriously assassinated apparently by Osama Bin Ladin himself. The radical group -- the most radical of the merge of the Arab fascists and religious extremists -- Osama called that al Qaeda. But to this day there are branches of the Muslim Brotherhood all through al Qaeda.

Osama Bin Ladin's second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, came from the Egyptian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, the results of a Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

There are many flavors and branches, but they are all Muslim Brotherhoods. There is one in Israel. The organization you know as “Hammas” is actually a secret chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood. When Israel assassinated Sheik Yassin a month ago, the Muslim Brotherhood published his obituary in a Cairo newspaper in Arabic and revealed that he was actually the secret leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza.

So the Muslim Brotherhood became this poison that spread throughout the Middle East and on 9/11, it began to spread around the world.

I know this sounds like some sort of a sick fantasy, but go to your computer and type in the words “Vanna,” V-a-n-n-a and the word “Nazi,” N-a-z-i, and you will see all of the articles come up. Those are all the pieces of information that the CIA was trying to hide from its employees. It did not want them to know the awful past. So, in 1984, when I was exposing European Nazis on the CIA payroll, at the same time they were trying to hide from Congress the fact that they had Arab Nazis back on the payroll to fight the Russians -- a stupid and corrupt program.

So, when Bob Baer studied his files, he was just stunned. A whole generation: the current CIA people know nothing about this. And believe me, the current generation CIA are good and decent Americans and I like them a lot. They're trying to do a good job, but part of their problem is their files have been shredded. All of these secrets have to come out.

So, of course, my clients in the intelligence community said, “Well, what are you doing?” They gave me an example. They said, “Here's how the Saudis finance these groups. The Saudis have established a group of charities on a street in Virginia. It's 555 Grove St., Herndon, Virginia.” So I said, “OK the Saudis are terrorists, so what?” These charities fund Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaeda. The Saudis are getting tax deductions for terrorism. They have set up front groups so all the terrorists groups in the U.S. and the front groups get the Saudi money as a charitable donation.

I said, “You're kidding me.” Nope. And they told me that right near where I lived in Tampa, Florida was one of the leading terrorists in the world. There were these two professors at the University of South Florida. One had just left -- and he was now in Syria -- and he was the world head of Islamic Jihad. His number two, the head of Islamic Jihad in the Western Hemisphere, was Dr. Sami al-Arian, who is still employed as a professor at the University of South Florida. You've got to be kidding. This can't be true.

Yes, these guys are raising money all across America and shipping it to Syria to go down to Palestine, the Palestinian areas, and hire suicide bombers to kill Jews. They sent me the videotapes. There was Professor al-Arian on stage and one of his friends gets up and says, “Now, who will give me $500 to kill a Jew? There are people standing by in Jerusalem who will go out in the street and stab a Jew with a knife, but we need $500.” And he said, “All of this money will go to the Islamic committee for Palestine.” And that is the front group in the United States for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

So I had all my friends in the FBI and CIA send in these files. I said, “Why haven't you prosecuted this guy? You've known about him since 1989.” “We'd love to. We've tried to prosecute him but we were told we couldn't touch him because he gets all of his money from the Saudis, and we are all under orders not to do anything to embarrass the Saudi government.”

I said, “I don't mind embarrassing them.” You know what I did? I donated money to the charity that was the terrorist fund, because under Florida law, that gave me the right to sue the charity to find out where my money was going. It was hilarious.

In early March, 2002, I drafted a long lawsuit exposing Professor Sami al-Arian, naming all the crimes he'd committed, all the bombings in Israel, the fundraising in America with terrorism. I mentioned how his money got to him from the Saudis and how the Saudis had convinced our government not to prosecute him for political reasons. Because of my high-level security clearances, everything I write is sort of classified material and has to be sent back to the government before publication, for censorship. So I sent my long lawsuit complaint to the CIA, and they loved it. They said, “Oh, great. We don't like the Saudis either. Go sue them.”

Three days later two FBI Agents showed up at my door, saying, “You know, there are only 21 people in the U.S. government that knew some of this information, and now you're 22. How did you find out?” I said, “I'm sorry, I can't tell you, attorney-client privilege.” That's why my clients pay me $1.00 each.

The day before I went to file the lawsuit, I got a frantic phone call from the United States Department of Justice. They said, “John, please don't file the lawsuit tomorrow. We really are going to raid these Saudi charities. We're going to close them down. Just give us more time.” “Oh yeah, you're going to raid them. That's what you told me in January - - and again in February, and now it's March. You want more time? I'll give you until 4:00 o'clock tomorrow. I'm filing my complaint at 10:00 a.m., so that at 4:00 p.m., I'm going to release the address of the Saudi charities. Back tomorrow. I filed my lawsuit at 10:00 o'clock, and told the press I was going to hold something back for a little bit.

At 10:15, the U.S. Government launched Operation Greenquest, a massive raid on all the Saudi charities in homes and businesses, and in one hour we shut down the entire Saudi money-laundering network in America.

From March 20, 2002 to the present, the government has found more and more evidence seized in those archives on that single raid that day. The evidence was so compelling that Professor al-Arian is no longer giving his speeches. He is now in federal prison awaiting trial. His accomplice, Hammoudeh, has also been indicted. Some 32 different people have been indicted in the United States as a direct result of these efforts.

But not the Saudis -- not the Saudis.

A month after I filed my lawsuit against al-Arian, I did it: I caused some trouble. I invited some 40 of the top trial lawyers in America to come down to St. Petersburg, Florida. Boy, did I have a deal for them. I wanted them to put up millions of dollars of their own money -- I'm poor, I had no money to give them -- but I wanted to do something for America.

These are lawyers like Ron Motley that had won billions of dollars in their lawsuits against the tobacco industry and the asbestos industry. I said, “What I want you to do is look at the evidence I've collected. It's the same Saudi banks and charities that funded Sami al-Arian that also funded al Qaeda.” I said, “I want you to bring a class action in Federal Court in Washington on behalf of everyone who died on Sept. 11th. I'm going to work for free and collect all the evidence, introduce you to the experts, provide all the exhibits and documents . . . and we have to do this for America.”

The lawyers studied all the documents I collected, and on August 15, 2002, they filed the largest class-action lawsuit in American history in the Federal District Court in Washington D.C., asking for one trillion dollars damages against the Saudis. The lawsuit said essentially that all these Saudi banks had one thing in common. They were bribing Osama bin Ladin 300 million dollars a year to stay out of Saudi Arabia and go blow up someone else.

Well, on 9/11, we found out we were someone else, and the Saudis had to pay for their negligence. So that lawsuit is coming along very well.

And more and more people in the CIA and FBI are sort of using me as a back channel to get our information. So, believe it or not, they've actually given me my own TV show now on Sunday mornings on FOX TV nationwide. I'm on at 11:20 eastern standard time. And ABC Radio has given me a national radio program, but I'm on at 10:30 at night and it's past your bedtime.

What I've become in my old age is a teacher. Twenty-five years ago I was a lot younger, a lot thinner, but now every day I get 500 to 1,000 e-mails from honest men and women around the world from the intelligence community.

And we have to end the evil in this world. We have to recognize that al Qaeda simply didn't spring up on its own. The evil route was Nazism. The al Qaeda Doctrine is the same as the Arab Nazis held. They hated Jews, they hate democracy, and they hate Westerners for Western culture. Al Qaeda is nothing more than the religious expression of Arab Fascism. We allowed this branch of the Nazi trunk to survive, to flourish, and it has come back to haunt us.

We must do a better job. Look at these children. They are our legacy. If we are to keep our children safe, we must teach them the lessons of the past. Every generation should know what these candles mean. Not only that one of the greatest tragedies in the history of the world really happened, but the evil that caused it -- Nazism -- survived because we didn't fight hard enough. We didn't finish the job.

But we must tell our children that in every generation the men and women of America have stood side by side with our Jewish, Christian, and Moslem brothers. We have risen up together against hatred. America is united now.

We will win the war on terror, and we will finish the job that these soldiers and survivors started more than a half-century ago. We must set the standard that to teach a child to hate is the worst form of child abuse. We must work together to end racism in our children's lifetime. We must teach our children to remember the Holocaust and be proud, so proud of those who survived and inspired us with their courage. In their name, in their honor, let us go forward and fight together. NEVER AGAIN

[Yurt]

It is spelled "onus", you are welcome.

OK, great, no prob. I invited the delirious thread parent to do her own research, google "Vanna", I provided a very few links just to get her a clue.

The New Yorker article discusses Bush's illegal support for terrorist cells in Pakistan and Lebanon. Ilegal by virtue of the funding being arranged to by pass Congressional oversight like the old Sandanista charades in the Reagan days.

The Deputy attorney General's article talks about the US support for the Musliom Brotherhood, Osama Bin Laden and the Mujajidin.

What else do you want links to? One at a time. This is really easy stuff to find.

Nobody likes you do they?

You are real hothead, why don't you take a deep breath, cool down, and just respond to posts instead of getting visibly agitated. I mean, if you have to jump on someone for a typo, sheesh, you need a life there buddy.

And no, your links do not back up your statement about the brotherhood. Nice try.

[Gunny]

you are not able to peg me are you....:fu:


Nah ... anyone that doesn't agree with his bullshit, extremist views is one of "them.":tinfoil:

[Yurt]

You said:


OK, I will forgive the asininity of this thread premise since you obviously do not realize that the US and the British CREATED the Muslim brotherhood


You navyseals link says the nazis created them.

[loosecannon]

Nobody likes you do they?

You are real hothead, why don't you take a deep breath, cool down, and just respond to posts instead of getting visibly agitated. I mean, if you have to jump on someone for a typo, sheesh, you need a life there buddy.

And no, your links do not back up your statement about the brotherhood. Nice try.


I wasn't even the slightest bit agitated, you guess wrong.

I didn't say that the links did back up all of the claims I made about the "brotherhood"

I asked YOU to specify what exact claims you wanted verified and sed, "sure, this is easy stuff to find".

So what exactly do you want to learn? One item at a time.

PS, stop being so hopelessly dramatic over your imagined impact on people.
Nobody really gets worked up over you.

[loosecannon]

You said:




You navyseals link says the nazis created them.

Technically true. But they would have died an unnoticed death if the Brits had not revived them to resist Israel and the Americans had not assumed them as our agents to overthrow Iran, Iraq and the Russians in Afghanistan. And the US is still supporting them and working with them, even tho they are terrorist orgs.

Next question?

[Dilloduck]

Technically true. But they would have died an unnoticed death if the Brits had not revived them to resist Israel and the Americans had not assumed them as our agents to overthrow Iran, Iraq and the Russians in Afghanistan. And the US is still supporting them and working with them, even tho they are terrorist orgs.

Next question?

Why?

[loosecannon]

Why?


Why? Because nobody was talking to a Duck.

When?

[Dilloduck]

Why? Because nobody was talking to a Duck.

When?

You just don't feel like answering why the US is still supporting the Muslim Brotherhood? It was the "next question" that you asked for.

[Yurt]

Technically true. But they would have died an unnoticed death if the Brits had not revived them to resist Israel and the Americans had not assumed them as our agents to overthrow Iran, Iraq and the Russians in Afghanistan. And the US is still supporting them and working with them, even tho they are terrorist orgs.

Next question?

At least you admit you were wrong.

[loosecannon]

You just don't feel like answering why the US is still supporting the Muslim Brotherhood? It was the "next question" that you asked for.


No Duck, you didn't phrase a whole question. So why is the Bush administration still supporting the Muslim Brotherhood?

You should probably direct that question to Bush and Miss thread parent.

[loosecannon]

At least you admit you were wrong.

No I was technically wrong but essentially right. (the very definition of a paradox: an apparent contradiction that in fact belies an essential truth)

The US and the Brits have owned the Muslim Brotherhood for 50 years.

So what crime evolves when a dem talks to them?

Anything else you want links for Yurt or are you just looking for some points for being close but no cigar?

[Dilloduck]

No I was technically wrong but essentially right. (the very definition of a paradox: an apparent contradiction that in fact belies an essential truth)

The US and the Brits have owned the Muslim Brotherhood for 50 years.

So what crime evolves when a dem talks to them?

Anything else you want links for Yurt or are you just looking for some points for being close but no cigar?

If what you say is true, than numerous Republican and Democrat administrations have supported the Muslim Brotherhood for 50 years which hardy makes Bush a sole player in this cabal. Which faction(s) of our government have managed to "handle" under Carter, Clinton and LBJ ?
It would seem as though our current president is the only one who had the courage to stand up against the Arab,Nazi, Islamo facists.

[loosecannon]

than numerous Republican and Democrat administrations have supported the Muslim Brotherhood for 50 years which hardy makes Bush a sole player in this cabal.

But Bush 43 and Reagan have used the Muslim brotherhood most extensively.





It would seem as though our current president is the only one who had the courage to stand up against the Arab,Nazi, Islamo facists.

Hardly. For the duration of the Iraq war our enemies in Iraq were AQ and Iraqi insurgents who were attacking our troops. Since the midterm Bush changed strategy.

Now Bush is supporting the Sunni in Iraq, the ones who have killed 90% of our soldiers (according to Pentagon and State dept) and the same sunni whose extremists spawned the Caliphate and AQ. In fact the AQ cells in Iraq have been operating with Sunni Iraqi support until just the last weeks or months.

Bush is supporting the very same insurgents who have killed 90% of our fallen troops in Iraq.

[Gunny]

But Bush 43 and Reagan have used the Muslim brotherhood most extensively.





Hardly. For the duration of the Iraq war our enemies in Iraq were AQ and Iraqi insurgents who were attacking our troops. Since the midterm Bush changed strategy.

Now Bush is supporting the Sunni in Iraq, the ones who have killed 90% of our soldiers (according to Pentagon and State dept) and the same sunni whose extremists spawned the Caliphate and AQ. In fact the AQ cells in Iraq have been operating with Sunni Iraqi support until just the last weeks or months.

Bush is supporting the very same insurgents who have killed 90% of our fallen troops in Iraq.

:link:

[loosecannon]

:link:


already posted Gunny.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh

[Gunny]

already posted Gunny.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh

Thank you. Didn't see it.

[Gunny]

After further review ... I find the whole thing ludicrous. The shia hate us, and the sunni's hate us. Screw supporting either side. The only ones that don't hate us, in fact have supported us. and stand the best chance to form a semi-normal, secular government are the Kurds. We've dealt to them from the bottom of the deck since Day One.

[loosecannon]

Thank you. Didn't see it.

really? Well it is 15 pages long but even the first few paragraphs begin to make the case.

What is it exactly that you do not see?

[Gunny]

really? Well it is 15 pages long but even the first few paragraphs begin to make the case.

What is it exactly that you do not see?

I didn't see the link.;)

[Dilloduck]

But Bush 43 and Reagan have used the Muslim brotherhood most extensively.





Hardly. For the duration of the Iraq war our enemies in Iraq were AQ and Iraqi insurgents who were attacking our troops. Since the midterm Bush changed strategy.

Now Bush is supporting the Sunni in Iraq, the ones who have killed 90% of our soldiers (according to Pentagon and State dept) and the same sunni whose extremists spawned the Caliphate and AQ. In fact the AQ cells in Iraq have been operating with Sunni Iraqi support until just the last weeks or months.

Bush is supporting the very same insurgents who have killed 90% of our fallen troops in Iraq.

I didn't see any democrat administrations stomping all over the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact Carter is quite supportive of them. Assuming all is true regarding the history of the Arab , Nazi , Islamo-facists connection to United States foreign policy in the region, claiming that Bush somehow is the only guilty one of the bunch is pretty bizarre. Did any of the previous adminstrations do anything to take down these crazies?

[Gunny]

I didn't see any democrat administrations stomping al lover the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact Carter is quite supportive of them. Assuming all is true regarding the history of the Arab , Nazi , Islamo-facists connection to United States foreign policy in the region, claiming that Bush somehow is the only guilty one of the bunch is pretty bizarre. Did any of the previous adminstrations do anything to take down these crazies?

Of course not. Same as about half the stupid, baseless left-wingnut allegations made against Bush. Doesn't matter what was inherited with the beauracracy ... it's all Bush's fault.

Get your talking points straight 'dillo.:laugh2:

[loosecannon]

I didn't see any democrat administrations stomping all over the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact Carter is quite supportive of them. Assuming all is true regarding the history of the Arab , Nazi , Islamo-facists connection to United States foreign policy in the region, claiming that Bush somehow is the only guilty one of the bunch is pretty bizarre. Did any of the previous adminstrations do anything to take down these crazies?

Nobody claimed Bush was the only one "guilty" except you.

But Reagan openly supported Saddam and BinLaden, refering to Bin Laden as "a patriot like our founding fathers", and providing generous assistance to both.

Bush is now openly and generously supporting the Same perps who have been killing the US soldiers in Iraq. And Bush has been very supportive of the nation that was most responsible for 9/11.

Bush is the ally of our enemies. If you can adequately wrap that up with the word "guilt" go for it.

I can hardly find words to describe Bush's actions.

[Gunny]

Nobody claimed Bush was the only one "guilty" except you.

But Reagan openly supported Saddam and BinLaden, refering to Bin Laden as "a patriot like our founding fathers", and providing generous assistance to both.

Bush is now openly and generously supporting the Same perps who have been killing the US soldiers in Iraq. And Bush has been very supportive of the nation that was most responsible for 9/11.

Bush is the ally of our enemies. If you can adequately wrap that up with the word "guilt" go for it.

I can hardly find words to describe Bush's actions.

Horseshit. The United States has been friendly to Saudi Arabia for decades, regardless who is President and/or who controls Congress. Your trying to pin it solely on Bush is a bold-faced lie.

[Dilloduck]

Nobody claimed Bush was the only one "guilty" except you.

But Reagan openly supported Saddam and BinLaden, refering to Bin Laden as "a patriot like our founding fathers", and providing generous assistance to both.

Bush is now openly and generously supporting the Same perps who have been killing the US soldiers in Iraq. And Bush has been very supportive of the nation that was most responsible for 9/11.

Bush is the ally of our enemies. If you can adequately wrap that up with the word "guilt" go for it.

I can hardly find words to describe Bush's actions.

I don't get it. You say Reagan supported bin laden and Saddam yet Bush has one hiding in a hole somewhere and the other is in the grave with his two psycopathic sons. It doesn't sound like they had the same policy to me.

[loosecannon]

Horseshit. The United States has been friendly to Saudi Arabia for decades, regardless who is President and/or who controls Congress. Your trying to pin it solely on Bush is a bold-faced lie.


15 Saudi Arabians bombed the pentagon and the twin towers on Bush's watch.

They were monetarily supported by Saudi citizens while they were training inside the US.

And the Madrassas that teach the Anti American Wahabi brand of Islam, feed AQ it's recruits (including Bin Laden) are all actively in business inside saudi Arabia with the blessing of the house of Saud.

They became our enemy on 9/11.

But Bush would rather hold hands with our enemies than hold them accountable for their acts of war against us.

Meanwhile Bush is now supporting the sunnis who have killed 90% of the US soldiers killed in Iraq.

[Gunny]

15 Saudi Arabians bombed the pentagon and the twin towers on Bush's watch.

They were monetarily supported by Saudi citizens while they were training inside the US.

And the Madrassas that teach the Anti American Wahabi brand of Islam, feed AQ it's recruits (including Bin Laden) are all actively in business inside saudi Arabia with the blessing of the house of Saud.

They became our enemy on 9/11.

But Bush would rather hold hands with our enemies than hold them accountable for their acts of war against us.

Meanwhile Bush is now supporting the sunnis who have killed 90% of the US soldiers killed in Iraq.

And anyone with a brain KNOWS that 9/11 was being planned long before Bush's watch.

They were monetarily supported by a Saudi expatriate.

Al Qaeda, an Islamic terrorist organization became our enemy on 9/11. Only one nation did not denounce AQ and would not hand over bin Laden, and that nation got its ass kicked.

I'm well-aware wahabbism is taught by the Saudi's to combat shi'ism, and is anti-Western/anti-American. It's been around since WWII or so. Hardly something dreamed up because of President Bush.

Nothing you have stated supports your allegation. All were taking place before Bush, and all will continue to take place after Bush.

Next ......

[Dilloduck]

15 Saudi Arabians bombed the pentagon and the twin towers on Bush's watch.

They were monetarily supported by Saudi citizens while they were training inside the US.

And the Madrassas that teach the Anti American Wahabi brand of Islam, feed AQ it's recruits (including Bin Laden) are all actively in business inside saudi Arabia with the blessing of the house of Saud.

They became our enemy on 9/11.

But Bush would rather hold hands with our enemies than hold them accountable for their acts of war against us.

Meanwhile Bush is now supporting the sunnis who have killed 90% of the US soldiers killed in Iraq.


Re read Bin Ladens declaration of war against America in 1996 and get back with me.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html

[Yurt]

No I was technically wrong but essentially right. (the very definition of a paradox: an apparent contradiction that in fact belies an essential truth)

The US and the Brits have owned the Muslim Brotherhood for 50 years.

So what crime evolves when a dem talks to them?

Anything else you want links for Yurt or are you just looking for some points for being close but no cigar?

:lmao: :lmao: :

[loosecannon]

And anyone with a brain KNOWS that 9/11 was being planned long before Bush's watch.

They were monetarily supported by a Saudi expatriate.

Al Qaeda, an Islamic terrorist organization became our enemy on 9/11. Only one nation did not denounce AQ and would not hand over bin Laden, and that nation got its ass kicked.

I'm well-aware wahabbism is taught by the Saudi's to combat shi'ism, and is anti-Western/anti-American. It's been around since WWII or so. Hardly something dreamed up because of President Bush.

Nothing you have stated supports your allegation. All were taking place before Bush, and all will continue to take place after Bush.

Next ......


That's actually pretty damned good, you have much more than a clue on this topic.

Unfortunately only Bush embroiled us in deep war. Only Bush allied us with the Sunnis awho are killing ourt troops. That in itself is NOT reconcilable.

[Dilloduck]

That's actually pretty damned good, you have much more than a clue on this topic.

Unfortunately only Bush embroiled us in deep war. Only Bush allied us with the Sunnis awho are killing ourt troops. That in itself is NOT reconcilable.

I'll bite.
Where is some evidence that Bush has openly allied only with the Sunnis against the Shia ? Might it be that most most moderate countries in the region are also terrified of an Iran backed Shia who may soon have a nuke.

[loosecannon]

I'll bite.
Where is some evidence that Bush has openly allied only with the Sunnis against the Shia ? Might it be that most most moderate countries in the region are also terrified of an Iran backed Shia who may soon have a nuke.

I have posted links to support the claim of Bush supporting the Sunnis who are killing our soldiers several times.

The Shia are concentrated in Iran and Iraq almost exclusively. 90% of Shia live in the crecent of oil rich lands between Saudi Arabaia and Iran.

The Shia were our allies until January of this year while the Sunni Iraqis were harboring AQ in Iraq and attacking and killing our troops.

Bush switched sides and decided to support the Sunnis and oppose the Shia in Iran/q.

But the Sunnis are still killing our soldiers.

[Gunny]

That's actually pretty damned good, you have much more than a clue on this topic.

Unfortunately only Bush embroiled us in deep war. Only Bush allied us with the Sunnis awho are killing ourt troops. That in itself is NOT reconcilable.

Bush hardly embroiled us in deep war. 9/11 was not of his choosing. Iraq was a festering sore since Feb 1991 and all the defied UN Resolutions that followed. He didn't dictate the circumstances. The hand was dealt when he sat up to the table.

Who's more dangerous to the US and/or our interests? Saudi Arabia, who at least on the surface plays nice with us? Or Iran who on the surface rattles its saber at us continuously?

Refine your argument. Yes wahabbism sucks. So do shi'ism. Who is the more iminent threat?

IMO, we shouldn't be backing ANY of the factions in Iraq. If we didn't need oil to run this nation, I'd be all for showing the entire Middle East the soles of my shoes. That however, is perfect world idealistic thinking, and not addressing the reality of the current geopolitical situation.

You want to rant about wahabbism? I'm with you. You want to rant about shi'ism. I'm with you. You want to rant about about the fact the Iraqis are doing little to secure their own country. I'm with you.

You want to concoct a bunch of far-fetched connections and twist the truth to make your point? I ain't with you. The truth is damning enough.

[loosecannon]

Bush hardly embroiled us in deep war. 9/11 was not of his choosing. Iraq was a festering sore since Feb 1991 and all the defied UN Resolutions that followed. He didn't dictate the circumstances. The hand was dealt when he sat up to the table.

Naw Bush chose this elective war before 9/11, he just used the excuse of 9/11 as a radically flimsy justification for a war he already wanted.

You know that. AQ wasn't in Iraq, and Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

But Saudi Arabia did


Who's more dangerous to the US and/or our interests? Saudi Arabia, who at least on the surface plays nice with us? Or Iran who on the surface rattles its saber at us continuously?

Saudi Arabia, they already financed attacks on our soil.

Iran has done exactly zero to harm the US since 1980.

In fact Iran offered to assist the US in capturing Bin Laden and the WH shunned them.


Refine your argument. Yes wahabbism sucks. So do shi'ism. Who is the more iminent threat?

Wahabism/salafists by a loooooooooooong shot. Not even a real comparison. The salfists are a genuine threat that is being greatly exaccerbated by our elective wars in the ME.

Whereas Iran and the Shia pose absolutely no harm to us at all outside Iran and Iraq.

IOW if we don't INVADE THEIR NATIONS, they are no threat to the US at all.


IMO, we shouldn't be backing ANY of the factions in Iraq. If we didn't need oil to run this nation, I'd be all for showing the entire Middle East the soles of my shoes. That however, is perfect world idealistic thinking, and not addressing the reality of the current geopolitical situation.

We don't need ME oil. Not by a long shot. We get the large majority of our oil from (this is the actual order)

>here in the US #1
#2 Canada
#3Mexico
#4Venezuela.

We only import a small portion from the ME. We import almost as much oil from Nigeria as from the ME.

The reasons why we want the ME oil is for PROFITS. And so we can control who gets it.

If we control that oil, we get defacto veto power over the sovereignt actions of every oil dependent nation on earth.


You want to rant about wahabbism? I'm with you. You want to rant about shi'ism. I'm with you. You want to rant about about the fact the Iraqis are doing little to secure their own country. I'm with you.



nix the shi ism and we have a lot to agree on.

[Kathianne]

Naw Bush chose this elective war before 9/11, he just used the excuse of 9/11 as a radically flimsy justification for a war he already wanted.

You know that. AQ wasn't in Iraq, and Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

But Saudi Arabia did



Saudi Arabia, they already financed attacks on our soil.

Iran has done exactly zero to harm the US since 1980.

In fact Iran offered to assist the US in capturing Bin Laden and the WH shunned them.



Wahabism/salafists by a loooooooooooong shot. Not even a real comparison. The salfists are a genuine threat that is being greatly exaccerbated by our elective wars in the ME.

Whereas Iran and the Shia pose absolutely no harm to us at all outside Iran and Iraq.

IOW if we don't INVADE THEIR NATIONS, they are no threat to the US at all. I don't think Israel would agree with you, whether or not we are in any of their nations. As for Shia/Sunni, Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia are all predominately Shia. The funding for the fundamentalist Wahabbism comes primarily from SA, though Iran is certainly encouraging such beliefs all over. It's Kohmmeni's rants writ large.



We don't need ME oil. Not by a long shot. We get the large majority of our oil from (this is the actual order)

>here in the US #1
#2 Canada
#3Mexico
#4Venezuela.

We only import a small portion from the ME. We import almost as much oil from Nigeria as from the ME.

The reasons why we want the ME oil is for PROFITS. And so we can control who gets it.

If we control that oil, we get defacto veto power over the sovereignt actions of every oil dependent nation on earth.



nix the shi ism and we have a lot to agree on.The problem though are our allies: Europe, Japan, Australia; they do need the oil. For that matter, so does China.

[loosecannon]

I don't think Israel would agree with you

of course not, but they have 200 nukes and we are NOT Israel. Israel also has a very capable intell apparatus and military.




As for Shia/Sunni, Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia are all predominately Shia.

actually Shia are a small minority in SA. They do happen to live atop the oil fields in the south east of the country.


The funding for the fundamentalist Wahabbism comes primarily from SA, though Iran is certainly encouraging such beliefs all over.

You will have to clarify, cuz Iranian/Persian/Aryan/Shias have little in common with SA/Arab Sunnis.


Europe, Japan, Australia; they do need the oil. For that matter, so does China.

>we we didn't go to war to protect our allies oil

>the Iranians/whomever will always be happy to sell it

>our national security is limited to US, not to our allies

That allies thinking is what caused WWI and II. The cold war ended, unless you want another one, lets not get into pitted alliances again.

[Kathianne]

of course not, but they have 200 nukes and we are NOT Israel. Israel also has a very capable intell apparatus and military.





actually Shia are a small minority in SA. They do happen to live atop the oil fields in the south east of the country. Sorry, you are correct here, my mistake.




You will have to clarify, cuz Iranian/Persian/Aryan/Shias have little in common with SA/Arab Sunnis.
Granted there is not any love loss between SA and Iran, yet the Mullahs of Iran and the Wahabbists from SA are both looking for control of the masses through conservative Islam. Sharia law and Caliphate figure into both, though SA plays being our ally.



>we we didn't go to war to protect our allies oil

>the Iranians/whomever will always be happy to sell it

>our national security is limited to US, not to our allies

That allies thinking is what caused WWI and II. The cold war ended, unless you want another one, lets not get into pitted alliances again.All the above have been said, the first though I believe to be true. The second, dunno about, before all is said and done though, the oil production may be curtailed, greatly.

I understand well about WWI and II and alliances and in principle do not disagree, but we are heading for times that I believe are different than have gone before, at least for nearly 800 years or so. Alliances for the most part are outside the US grasp, though as our power falls, which seems to me inevitable, there are some that may be willing to join, when we fall to parity. Then again, never can guess what will happen when you are falling.

[loosecannon]

Sorry, you are correct here, my mistake. Granted there is not any love loss between SA and Iran, yet the Mullahs of Iran and the Wahabbists from SA are both looking for control of the masses through conservative Islam. Sharia law and Caliphate figure into both, though SA plays being our ally. All the above have been said, the first though I believe to be true. The second, dunno about, before all is said and done though, the oil production may be curtailed, greatly.

I understand well about WWI and II and alliances and in principle do not disagree, but we are heading for times that I believe are different than have gone before, at least for nearly 800 years or so. Alliances for the most part are outside the US grasp, though as our power falls, which seems to me inevitable, there are some that may be willing to join, when we fall to parity. Then again, never can guess what will happen when you are falling.

Only Sunnis were involved in the Caliphate.

The newest trend in government is the death of the nation state in favor of federations like the EU, North American Union (NAU) and ASEAN. The world is moving toward trading and strategic resource blocks.

A multipolar earth is what the Russians, East Indians, and Chinese call it. Chomsky just calls it the death of the nation state. He believes that the relatively new and unstable nation state model is the cause of modern wars.

[Kathianne]

Only Sunnis were involved in the Caliphate.

The newest trend in government is the death of the nation state in favor of federations like the EU, North American Union (NAU) and ASEAN. The world is moving toward trading and strategic resource blocks.

A multipolar earth is what the Russians, East Indians, and Chinese call it. Chomsky just calls it the death of the nation state. He believes that the relatively new and unstable nation state model is the cause of modern wars.

I think you are wrong about Caliphate:

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:EzeOCbizi-UJ:www.islamfortoday.com/shia.htm+caliphate+shia+sunni&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a

As for death of nation state, I agree that 'federations' have been on the rise, but in no case is their anything to indicate they are working out. In fact, I'd assume that both the federations as well as 'international organizations' will fade away, as the inherent problems are made clear to the 'citizens' and move beyond the elite.

They've been 'sold' but not all sales, especially of the political sort are ever final.

[loosecannon]

I think you are wrong about Caliphate:

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:EzeOCbizi-UJ:www.islamfortoday.com/shia.htm+caliphate+shia+sunni&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a

As for death of nation state, I agree that 'federations' have been on the rise, but in no case is their anything to indicate they are working out. In fact, I'd assume that both the federations as well as 'international organizations' will fade away, as the inherent problems are made clear to the 'citizens' and move beyond the elite.

They've been 'sold' but not all sales, especially of the political sort are ever final.

I could be wrong about the sunni and the caliphate, esp because of the way I phrased my comment. I have a Tunisian Arab freind who described the way in which the two sects seperated ways and his description was much more finite than the one in your link.

The Federations are just getting started. They are running into the predictable problems but at the core they are bound by a common currency and financial and governmental infrastructure. And they are functioning fine despite the lack of formalities.

The US was the first, and we seem more stable than I would like.

The North American Union is well underway.

I don't much care so much about whether the federations succeed. I do think the nation state is an invalid world standard esp when it runs into the counterpart which is non state alliances and orgs. Which have every degree the legitimacy of the artificially legitimized nation states.

We have only scratched the surface in experimenting with government types, economic systems and social contracts. There is no strong reason to cling to any of them yet.

Like you said the Federations will enshrine 3 or 4 class systems that will create dynamic instability.

[Kathianne]

I could be wrong about the sunni and the caliphate, esp because of the way I phrased my comment. I have a Tunisian Arab freind who described the way in which the two sects seperated ways and his description was much more finite than the one in your link.

The Federations are just getting started. They are running into the predictable problems but at the core they are bound by a common currency and financial and governmental infrastructure. And they are functioning fine despite the lack of formalities.

The US was the first, and we seem more stable than I would like.

The North American Union is well underway.

I don't much care so much about whether the federations succeed. I do think the nation state is an invalid world standard esp when it runs into the counterpart which is non state alliances and orgs. Which have every degree the legitimacy of the artificially legitimized nation states.

We have only scratched the surface in experimenting with government types, economic systems and social contracts. There is no strong reason to cling to any of them yet.

Like you said the Federations will enshrine 3 or 4 class systems that will create dynamic instability.I don't think I said the first part of this bolded statement. I've yet to see a federation working out, that was for anything other than defense.

The UN is failing, whether anyone wishes to admit it or not.

[loosecannon]

I don't think I said the first part of this bolded statement. I've yet to see a federation working out, that was for anything other than defense.

The UN is failing, whether anyone wishes to admit it or not.

The UN isn't a federation. It was never intended to be.

But I am pretty sure we are all indebted to the UN for preventing a nuclear war so far.