Panorama 2003 - The War Party

fkface

Excellent interviews with war mongers / pro-zionists and their plans to over throw 7 countries in the middle east.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Cdhtxg8yE4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBva0kjlEzs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AgyYtn7aOc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGfTNwqHPdM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeOUgExFySg

General Clark discussing who US would attack after 9/11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yB17j0a-R34

It's no coincidence the so-called "war party" who've probably never fought a war in their lives were responsible for drafting the legislation required to suppress opponents of those against the so-called "war on terror" and drag the US into perpetual war with the Islamic world.

I would like to ask the Zionists on this forum, will it be worth destroying the planet for some ****ty lunatic ideology?

Let's ask Zionist Madeline Albright if it's worth killing 500k children in Iraq

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4PgpbQfxgo

It would appear there's nothing these crazy cnts won't do to pursue their goals.

fkface

Illustrates the stupidity of American Foreign Policy with regard to Syria.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3J0URG9xoGg

Brzezinski sets this Zionist monkey straight... informing him that an attack on Syria would be disastrous to the US in the short term and a disaster for Israel over the long term, something these war mongering Zionist imbeciles can't comprehend.

Unless these lunatics are willing to obliterate every individual in the middle east, who can see their stupid dream working out? they're losers, complete losers.

Meanwhile, we observe that Hillary Clinton apologies for being a war monger to the Pakistan military in exchange for transport route and dollars into Heroin ridden Afghanistan.

In return, the US will back off on Syria temporarily for a couple of months so Russia can find a way to replace the current regime.

Instead of the $100 million per month, the US can now have an "honorable exit" from Afghanistan which they've completely ruined over the last 11 years.

So, what have the US accomplished in Afghanistan?

Absolutely nothing!

In fact, the Taleban are still in charge and are on the US payroll, as usual!

Pablo Sanchez

Is there any source for your claim of 500,000 child deaths in Iraq?

studiorat

A 10 year old recording of the BBC's Panorama program. Slow day is it?

fkface

What difference does it make how old the video is? You didn't even watch it, why bother commenting?

Lame.

It clearly shows a bunch of insane people talking about each country they would like to see regime change in and strangely enough, most of that has come true but of course there's no correlation between the stupid assholes in this documentary and current events.

fkface

Pablo Sanchez wrote: »

Is there any source for your claim of 500,000 child deaths in Iraq?

Unicef: 500,000 children (including sanctions, collateral effects of war). "[As of 1999] [c]hildren under 5 years of age are dying at more than twice the rate they were ten years ago."

Due to sanctions and effects of US bombing the country back into the stone age.

studiorat

Pablo Sanchez wrote: »

Is there any source for your claim of 500,000 child deaths in Iraq?

Not strictly. The Wikipedia entry ****face uses is misleading.

The figure is an estimation of how many children may not have died if the infant mortality rates had continued in the direction they had in the 1980's. (down!). It doesn't mean that 500,000 were killed!

Carol Bellamy was the director of UNICEF

Ms. Bellamy noted that if the substantial reduction in child mortality throughout Iraq during the 1980s had continued through the 1990s, there would have been half a million fewer deaths of children under-five in the country as a whole during the eight year period 1991 to 1998.

under-5 mortality more than doubled from 56 deaths per 1000 live births (1984-1989) to 131 deaths per 1000 live births (1994-1999). Likewise infant mortality -- defined as the death of children in their first year -- increased from 47 per 1000 live births to 108 per 1000 live births within the same time frame.

Other sources differ and suggest that the IMR in Iraq has in fact stayed the same since the 1980's. This of course could be construed as a doubling in the numbers if one takes into account that most countries IMR has continued to drop by nearly half in the same time frame.

To give you an idea Irelands IMR is between 4 and 5 deaths per 1000.
Sierra Leon, Chad, Congo, Angola and Liberia are all in the region of 120 and above. Nigeria and Rwanda has around 108, Morocco, Mongolia, Nepal (poor countries with relative peace) are in around 47 or so. Bolivia, Papua New Guinea and South Africa would be around the same as Iraq in the 1980's. Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan are about 50 per thousand.
Palestine is around 24 per thousand and Libya and Syria are around 17 per thousand.

Interestingly Syria and Iraq had very similar rates until the 1980's when Iraq's IMR leveled out and Syrias continued to drop.

Afghanistan has nearly always had the highest going from nearly 300 per 1000 in the 1950's to just around 140 per 1000 today.

Bellamy also pointed out the security council's statement on the matter.

"Even if not all suffering in Iraq can be imputed to external factors, especially sanctions, the Iraqi people would not be undergoing such deprivations in the absence of the prolonged measures imposed by the Security Council and the effects of war."