[Scientist]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...sts/index.html

That's funny, I didn't think the U.S. had jurisdiction over the Persian Gulf....at least not officially.

[dtriska]

That would be Operation Apollo, a multinational force's attempts at securing allied and civilian ships in the region by guarding against suspicious ships. Involved are the US, UK, France, Italy, and Canada. It also intercepts merchants and does checks of cargo and whatnot to look for contraband and/or weapons. As far as whether or not it's legal, I don't know the particulars, but a similar operation was done when Iraq was still under sanctions. I think it currently is a branch of the war in Afghanistan. I'm not sure though.

[Spheric Harlot]

War on Terror, remember?

And since Afghanistan is the world's heroin producer #1 again, any heroin found is *kinda* related to at least the Taliban, and by extension, al Qaeda.

However, since they're not saying what the evidence is, we'll have to leave it at that. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one.

-s*

[swrate]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
War on Terror, remember?

And since Afghanistan is the world's heroin producer #1 again, any heroin found is *kinda* related to at least the Taliban, and by extension, al Qaeda.

However, since they're not saying what the evidence is, we'll have to leave it at that. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one.

-s*

The article does not state the origin of the drugs nor the area they were supposed to be delivered .
Maybe we will hear more about it later.

I wouldn't be surprised a small amount of the traffic goes to the troops. (If I had accidentally been parachuted in Iraq, I might be able to forget reality with the help of drugs)

[swrate]

Originally posted by swrate:
The article does not state the origin of the drugs nor the area they were supposed to be delivered .
Maybe we will hear more about it later.

I wouldn't be surprised a small amount of the traffic goes to the troops. (If I had accidentally been parachuted in Iraq, I might be able to forget reality with the help of drugs)

Yes, rambling...
I have been thinking about this since quite some time:
Is there a danger the Iraqis take a taste to drugs?
The same way the Indians took a taste to booze?
Opium, Hashish was part of their civilization a long time ago, but the majority of the population is Muslim and abstains.
It is a fact Islamic populations abuse less on drugs and alcohol.
Most tribes put under stress will tend to fall and I hope Iraqis don't lose their pride in this war.
(yes that's one thing US is good at, emerging)

[The Ayatollah]

as usual, we're clueless as to any point you're trying to make and are left less enlightened with each post you make.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by The Ayatollah:
as usual, we're clueless as to any point you're trying to make and are left less enlightened with each post you make.

Speak for yourself, Scott.

-s*

[theolein]

Originally posted by The Ayatollah:
as usual, we're clueless as to any point you're trying to make and are left less enlightened with each post you make.

Well, if it were a competition for the posts with the most childishly mindless content ever, you'd certainly be up there amongst the winners of the internet fishing expedition.

Edit to add: In fact, your post made me think of an interesting (it's a rainy day today) phenomenon that I've noticed here and on the net in general: Why is it that people who seem to have a problem understanding and using their own language, let alone any foreign one, are the ones that often seem to be the most virulently xenophobic of all posters? Is it that they project their linguistic inabilities onto others so as to compensate for their own linguistically challenged selves?

[Twilly Spree]

Originally posted by theolein:
Well, if it were a competition for the posts with the most childishly mindless content ever, you'd certainly be up there amongst the winners of the internet fishing expedition.

I reported that. See being nasty is never called for

[theolein]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
I reported that. See being nasty is never called for

That's ok with me. Defend those mentally incapable of doing it themselves, I say.

[swrate]

Originally posted by The Ayatollah:
as usual, we're clueless as to any point you're trying to make and are left less enlightened with each post you make.

I am glad not everyone is clueless.
Ty *S H and theolein.

I am not trying to make points, that's the point.
That farfetched idea came to me a few weeks ago, while I read that another Unit, called "Druggies", or "Dopies" were sent to Iraq, specially trained for the purpose.
I wondered why that contingent carried such a nick-name.
here's links, I didnt find the one I read
http://www.drudgereport.com/bufsol.htm
http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/10896.htm

Einverstanden?

[version]

Not to worry, I'm sure we'll be seeing the result of this op. on the streets soon, got to love the US Admin. Just hope the price will drop for ma dope. Anyway, we all know that one of the 'other' reasons for invading Afghanistan was for the poppy fields. Little known to many people here, but the Taliban were actaully trying to destroy all the fields in their country, but noooo, the US couldn't have such a lucrative money maker being destroyed, that they had to ensure they would remain in place.

Don't believe me? Have a look at the current rat eof poppy production in Afgan. it's higher than it ever was under the Taliban, the Taliban were always blamed, in western media, for actually growing the stuff, but like so many of CNN/FOX news reports, we never saw the follow-ups, that disproved this, os the contention raised by many Afgan. observers.

Another thing to note, is how the FBI poured billions of dollars worth of drugs on to the streets of America, nice one to keep the locals under control.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by version:
Another thing to note, is how the FBI poured billions of dollars worth of drugs on to the streets of America, nice one to keep the locals under control.

Only an idiot could believe that. Everyone knows that was the CIA.

[version]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Only an idiot could believe that. Everyone knows that was the CIA.

True, you got me there, give me a few hours to post just a fraction of the testaments, especially from CIA, that they were involved in the drug trade on the streets of the US> In fact, and I'm sure you've heard of the LAPD Police chief who is now trying to bring charges, and documents jsut how the Police were involved in distributing said drugs.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by version:
True, you got me there, give me a few hours to post just a fraction of the testaments, especially from CIA, that they were involved in the drug trade on the streets of the US.

I'll save you the time. Here it is.

[version]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
I'll save you the time. Here it is.

lol, nah, that's just xmas comedy fluff, fun for those moments on the toilet.

Thank you though, for saving me the trouble of searching, but I might be able to enlighten you later.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by version:
Don't believe me? Have a look at the current rat eof poppy production in Afgan. it's higher than it ever was under the Taliban, the Taliban were always blamed, in western media, for actually growing the stuff, but like so many of CNN/FOX news reports, we never saw the follow-ups, that disproved this, os the contention raised by many Afgan. observers.

If you ever watched any real news, instead of relying on the tin-foil hat set for you information, you would know that it has been reported many times in the main-stream western media that the Taliban was destroying the poppy fields and that since the fall of the Taliban, poppy production is back in full swing. IT would serve you well to at least be informed instead of making assumptions. Then you might gain at least an ounce of credibility.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
If you ever watched any real news, instead of relying on the tin-foil hat set for you information, you would know that it has been reported many times in the main-stream western media that the Taliban was destroying the poppy fields and that since the fall of the Taliban, poppy production is back in full swing. IT would serve you well to at least be informed instead of making assumptions. Then you might gain at least an ounce of credibility.

this post has been reported for abuse.

[ThinkInsane]

I'm not attacking him, per se, but I am attacking his credibility. What he stated is patently false, and as someone that works in news, I think you wold know this to be true. If the Powers that Be decide that this is abuse, I'll take my lumps, but I stand by what I said.

Regardless of the current line of thought around here, disagreeing with someone is not abuse.

[edit]

I just noticed the points that you highlighted as abuse. I'll defend my self on those two points. Have you noticed the links that version posts, to the most ribald conspiracy sites on the net? Yeah, I think they qualify as the 'tin-foil hat' set.

As for the ounce of credibility statement, read the other threads he has started, and see how much credibility people give him. I'm far from the only person that thinks this.

Version is a big boy. We've gone toe to toe before. We have had long conversations via PM. He knows how I feel, and I know how he feels. If he has a problem with it, he''ll pipe up on his own before long.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
I'm not attacking him, per se, but I am attacking his credibility. What he stated is patently false, and as someone that works in news, I think you wold know this to be true. If the Powers that Be decide that this is abuse, I'll take my lumps, but I stand by what I said.

Regardless of the current line of thought around here, disagreeing with someone is not abuse.

I see. even the bolded portions, the "tin foil hat" is not considered attacking a person?

well, this explains a lot and makes me realize why nothing happens when I get ganged up on around here...its a selective enforcement. You can call people insane or crazy, and that's not abuse, but if you say Zim is annoying, you get pointed emails in your PM box.

insane = ok. annoying = personal attack.

ok, got it.

[ThinkInsane]

While tin-foil hat is certainly condescending, I would not call it an attack. And I apologized all ready for infereing that the man is insane. I admitted it was out of line.

There is no selective enforcement, 90% of what is reported as a personal attack is nothing more than one person disagreeing with another. It's marginal at best.

I think that maybe some folks are taking this a little too seriously, but that's their prerogative. If you think what I said was that out of line, PM demonhood or the other admins and let them know. If they want to admonish me, I'm fine with that. If they want to make me a lowly member again and take away my lofty moderator status, so be it. I'll accept my fate.

What I will not do is agree with something I find absolutely distasteful, the spread of misinformation, just so I don't offend someone who has no problem calling people that don't believe the most far fetch and thoroughly debunked garbage a bunch of idiots.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
While tin-foil hat is certainly condescending, I would not call it an attack.

Would you consider it a non-attack to point out someone trying to derail a thread? Seems to me that's even less of an attack than a "tin foil hat" remark. the former, one is calling attention to behaviour rather than name-calling. The latter is name-calling. But if you consider that merely condescending........er....I'd have to disagree with you, I supposed.

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
And I apologized all ready for infereing that the man is insane. I admitted it was out of line.

yes, I see that you did, which was admirable. But I only saw that after I'd posted in this thread.

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
What I will not do is agree with something I find absolutely distasteful, the spread of misinformation, just so I don't offend someone who has no problem calling people that don't believe the most far fetch and thoroughly debunked garbage a bunch of idiots.

You don't have to agree with what someone says or speculates.
But your form of disagreement does not HAVE to be "condescension", does it? Can't it be just disagreement?

[spacefreak]

Geez, calm down. It's a mac-centric message board for crying out loud.

If someone wants to make fun of you, so be it. Make fun of them in return, ignore them, or argue that their derailment is a weak rebuttal. Or, if you prefer that every thread contain only serious debate, consider hanging out at another political forum where seriousness is the norm. You can still visit and join us hacks when you want.

Either way, getting emotional and complaining that people are derailing your threads, or that others are attacking you personally when they aren't (often they're just criticizing your argument or point-of-view) seems IMO to be quite selfish.

Me - I'd much rather see your "the neocons are conspiring to take over world" posts than the more recent "people are personally attacking me" posts.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Geez, calm down. It's a mac-centric message board for crying out loud.

If someone wants to make fun of you, so be it. Make fun of them in return, ignore them, or argue that their derailment is a weak rebuttal. Or, if you prefer that every thread contain only serious debate, consider hanging out at another political forum where seriousness is the norm. You can still visit and join us hacks when you want.

Either way, getting emotional and complaining that people are derailing your threads, or that others are attacking you personally when they aren't (often they're just criticizing your argument or point-of-view) seems IMO to be quite selfish.

Me - I'd much rather see your "the neocons are conspiring to take over world" posts than the more recent "people are personally attacking me" posts.

This from a man who grew up in a trailer park.



you mean, like that?