Genetic bombs soon to be made by Paul Wolfowitz!!!!

[NewGuy]

GNASHING OF TEETH

To grate or grind one's teeth together as an expression of hatred and scorn (Job. 16:9). Jesus used the phrase to portray the futility of the wicked who will be judged by God at the end of time (Mt 13:42,50).

GNASH (Heb. haraq). To grate the teeth; "He has gnashed at me with His teeth," and "gnash their teeth." Expressions denoting rage or sorrow (Job 16:9; Lam 2:16.)

Matthew 13:

41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

 

[Brenmc_lax]

Sorry about the delay. Here is the part that talks about it. "And advanced forms of biological warfare that can “target” specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool". That is part in the document that states that creating such a weapon could be used to help 'eliminate' potential political threats. You can find it on page 60 of the document named 'Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century' in the left hand column.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by NATO AIR
i'm not saying the guy is right... but.... wolfowitz is sort of out there.... he's definitely flaky

Based on what?

 

[MtnBiker]

Why is this thread in the Polictial Races forum?

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by Brenmc_lax
Sorry about the delay. Here is the part that talks about it. "And advanced forms of biological warfare that can “target” specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool". That is part in the document that states that creating such a weapon could be used to help 'eliminate' potential political threats. You can find it on page 60 of the document named 'Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century' in the left hand column.

I'm not feeling very kindly towards you this minute. I just plowed through 90 pages of pdf think tank paper. Wolfie's name is not here:

William Kristol is Chairman
Donald Kagan & Gary Schmitt are Project co-chairs
Thomas Donnelly is principal author

The paper is one analysis of what threats have been and are now threatening the US. What military weapons, forces, and programs have worked and have not. What should be planned for the future. What forces should look like in coming decades and why.

In other words, this could have come from Parameters. Nothing right or wrong about it. It's a group analysis, nothing more, nothing less.

As far as the above discussion, does anyone remember the Neutron bomb? Geez, I lost sleep about that one as a kid. Only killed people by sucking out the oxygen, left the buildings in tact. I never heard of it being used. Wonder why? Could it have been the 'brain child' of a think tank?

Why don't you read through something before throwing nonsense out in the arena? Oh, silly me, you have an agenda. Anti-semite perhaps? Joos Joos everywhere!

 

[NATO AIR]

all, i apologize i cannot find the article or the website where i read about wolfovitz's more "encentric" (sp?) behavior and qualities. the gist of the report was things that gen. zinni, colin powell and dick armitage had said about him, things that made them less than sure about his credibility. henceforth, i'll retract that comment due to lack of full proof.

of course i think the main one of all of course is his testimony that iraqis would cover us with roses upon liberation... but hey we all mess up. i don't hate him or harbor ill will upon him, but i do believe he and others at the pentagon have badly mismanaged the iraqi reconstruction from the beginning. there are some others though who harbor what seems to be an anti-semetic zeal against him, much like some on the right who harbor a similar one towards george soros.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by NATO AIR
all, i apologize i cannot find the article or the website where i read about wolfovitz's more "encentric" (sp?) behavior and qualities. the gist of the report was things that gen. zinni, colin powell and dick armitage had said about him, things that made them less than sure about his credibility. henceforth, i'll retract that comment due to lack of full proof.

of course i think the main one of all of course is his testimony that iraqis would cover us with roses upon liberation... but hey we all mess up. i don't hate him or harbor ill will upon him, but i do believe he and others at the pentagon have badly mismanaged the iraqi reconstruction from the beginning. there are some others though who harbor what seems to be an anti-semetic zeal against him, much like some on the right who harbor a similar one towards george soros.

The following on Soros is an indication of just how highly he values American values. For an individual to attempt to swing and election with his money is disgraceful. If it was a Republican that did this, there would be so many front page articles it wouldn't be funny.

He makes Al Gore look calm and rational, not an easy thing to do nowadays:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A24179-2003Nov10?language=printer

 

[NATO AIR]

the nazi thing is a little far.... but hey he experienced it, we didn't. i will give him a freebie on that one based on his being in the concentration camps... i won't lie, i have noticed among quite a few people this disturbing "you're with us or against us, there can be no debate, no dissent" and that is so un-american and anthema to our values it rots in open air.

he called them fascists, they call him communists... everyone's having a pissing match, shame on them but oh well.

all these oil barons and energy barons who support bush are no better than soros, they're just smart enough to keep their mouth shut most of the time with their feelings about democrats.

i despise them all for trying to buy the election, but the republicans and dems are equally guilty in this.

if i was a BC04 contributer i would be outraged they blew 80 MILLION dollars on a largely unsuccessful ad campaign against Kerry in May. that was a collasal failure. i'm sure the dems blow their contributers money in a similar fashion, just in a less spectactular manner perhaps.

 

[Annie]

posted by Natoairi won't lie, i have noticed among quite a few people this disturbing "you're with us or against us, there can be no debate, no dissent" and that is so un-american and anthema to our values it rots in open air.

Funny thing is, while often complained about by the left, they are the ones that practice such, from my observations.

all these oil barons and energy barons who support bush are no better than soros, they're just smart enough to keep their mouth shut most of the time with their feelings about democrats.

I've yet to see one give over $5M a year before the election. Did you know that the Republicans get the vast bulk of their contributions in donations of less than $200?

i despise them all for trying to buy the election, but the republicans and dems are equally guilty in this.

See above.

if i was a BC04 contributer i would be outraged they blew 80 MILLION dollars on a largely unsuccessful ad campaign against Kerry in May. that was a collasal failure. i'm sure the dems blow their contributers money in a similar fashion, just in a less spectactular manner perhaps.

Considering Iraq in March, it was a stupendous success. How much have you studied politics?

 

[NATO AIR]

well respectfully, from my observations, i have seen it from those on the right

we have different observations which is all good
perhaps some on the left do it as well

i am familiar with that 200 dollar factoid. however, look at the vast numbers of industry and corporate figures who give to the BC04 and BC00 campaigns. I am not anti-business but I have seen where business (unregulated is just as bad as overregulated) has screwed the American people over and over again, and its supporters in high office (usually of my party, the GOP) stood by and let it happen. hell enron engineered the cali power crisis (and yes gray davis is an idiot but he shouldn't share the majority of the blame for that). that is good though the GOP has a 200 dollar base like that.

i do know quite a bit about politics, and i know this: kerry's disapproval rating has not risen very highly, and his campaign hasn't been scuttled or even weakened in the slightest by that 80 million dollar campaign. hell the voters that matter (the 20% swing voters) haven't made up their minds yet, and that was the whole intent of that debacle, to get swing voters's minds made up about kerry right now in may/june. it was a staggering failure for the bush admin, no matter of the news in other quarters. they set out to stagger kerry's campaign from the beginning, and he's stronger than ever. as i said, if i contributed more than my 100 dollars to BC04, i'd be outraged. but hey, i hate TV ads anyway.

 

[Annie]

Natoair, you are a good spinmeister.

 

[NATO AIR]

ha-ha, isn't everyone?

honestly though, i truly have seen it from both sides, but especially the right.

we had a fight onboard last year. it was during the 9/11 ceremonies (remember the beautiful blue lights with the moon, my god what a picture to cherish!) 2 shipmates were watching the coverage. bush came to speak on TV and 1 shipmate made a spiteful comment about him. the other shipmate told him he needed to shut up and get with the program, we're at war and you can't criticize the president. a few minutes later, the news program showed interviews with 9/11 families. a woman whose son died in the towers said she was ashamed with mr. bush becoming a war monger, trying to go after iraq with no real evidence. the "get with the program" shipmate called her an unamerican bitch. a fight ensued (the other guy is from NYC) and "get with the program" boy was eating out of a straw for a week, while the NYC guy spent 45 days in the brig. both sides were wrong, but free speech and free thought (especially in private with someone else) should be allowed and encouraged. you should debate with facts and observations, not name calling.

both sides are making the atmosphere poisonious with this sort of rhetoric. after all, wasn't it thomas jefferson who said "dissent is the highest form of patriotism?" i'd rather listen to a dissenter and possibly learn something about the other side i can use in the future than listen to parrots and bullies all day.

 

[NATO AIR]

BUT I AM SURE IT DOES HAPPEN ON THE LEFT, forgive me for my uncertainity earlier, that's wrong.

 

[Annie]

posted by Natoairhonestly though, i truly have seen it from both sides, but especially the right.

Oh I trust your heartfelt honesty, I do! You may be surprised, your constantly bringing up your seeing both side, is not only disingenuous, but also tiresome. Whatever name you post under, it's obvious where you are going, which is fine.

Instead of trying to act balanced, which you are failing at btw, stake your position and back it up. Game playing over.