Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: svni; FormerLib; katnip; struwwelpeter; Agrarian; Destro; A. Pole; jb6; RusIvan; ...
I cannot help but either pity or despise those who support terrorists and try to blame the actions of terrorists on leaders.

You need to get a life. I have children who lived on the streets of Russia begging for food when they were very young.

I have a son who was airlifted almost dead from starvation.

I have another son who has had to take insulin shots at least 4 times daily since he was two years old. And more.

My children don't seek to blame anyone for their misfortunes, and they should make the likes of you drop to your knees in shame. May God forgive you for your scandal-provoking and histrionic lies against others.

28 posted on 10/23/2004 4:31:49 PM PDT by MarMema (Sharon is my hero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

To: MotorcycleNana

ping of complete disgust

29 posted on 10/23/2004 4:32:20 PM PDT by MarMema (Sharon is my hero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: MarMema
Please understand that I do not support terrorists. I have said many times that they are degenerates who must be killed as soon as possible.

But the Russian government is incompetent and criminal in their task of protecting the people. They play a game of terror and anti-terror, but this is not working.

I can't compare the events in the US with those in Moscow for the simple reason: there it was "bang" and all over, while with us two years ago it was 57 hours of waiting and possibilities to avert tragedy.

What bothers me are lies and liars.

The world exhaled in relief on the morning of October 26th, 2002, when the Russian government officially stated that it was ALL OVER WITHOUT CASUALTIES, that all the hostages were saved. A LIE. Everyone sent congratulatory telegrams to Moscow about the outstanding operation they carried out, but after a few hours interior minister Vasilev said there were some 67 casualties. AGAIN A LIE, that there were no children or foreigners among these. ANOTHER LIE. Finally this figure rose to 128 with sixty missing who were thought to be of the hostages those days.

Now when governments, including Mr. Bush, ask for clarification, or when the parliament demands to know what went on, Moscow showing how their actions were correct by bringing out these same telegrams which they got FOR LYING ABOUT NO CASUALTIES.

A simple question: Why did they use the gas? According to a witness to the storming of the building by fighters from "A" and "V" special forces, the terrorists weren't asleep but fired back. According to witnesses among the hostages, the woman-terrorists understood that it was a gas attack, and fell asleep slowly - for ten minutes. That means that there was time to shoot the hostages and set off the bombs, the gas didn't prevent anything.

Yes, however strong the gas was, it would only take a fraction of a second to press the button to set off a bomb. So why the secret here? Maybe the Chechyans really weren't going to kill almost a thousand innocent people?

Another question: why did they blast through a wall if there was so many explosives there? Any schoolkid knows that a detonation is the surest way to blow up all the explosives nearby (since the wall was glass, they could have just dismounted it). In addition, if there really were explosives there, there was never a statement for TV or the newspapers about how much TNT there was. And so, how much was there, and was there even any? And why, despite the danger of explosion, was the HQ located in the building at a distance of 10-15 meters from the theater? HQ officers weren't afraid of an explosion?

Let's say that the sleeping Chechnyan women were shot because everyone was afraid of an explosion. But why shoot those who weren't wearing explosive belts? Evidentally it was very important to shoot them. And why were they shot after the attack, already unarmed, and in handcuffs?

It was stated that the attack began because the 'terrorists began to execute hostages' or 'were getting ready to execute' them. Now its known that there were no executions, IT WAS A LIE to explain the use of force.

They maintain that there was no other way. But there really was, and everyone knew it - through negotiations. Anna Politkovskaya offered a way, but a political decision was made not to negotiate Because no one was going to talk about removing troops from Chechnya to end this 'short anti-terror operation' which has been going on for almost ten years.

All the Chechnyan attacks since Nord-Ost have been more effective and better planned, the bombs have been bigger, and the victims even greater. According to a London institute, in 2003 four thousand Russians have been killed in Chechnyna. Can anyone in Russia not consider this a serious loss of life?

Many accuse me of 'Stockholm syndrome' with regards to the Chechnyans. Judging from how you judge the actions of the Russian government, you have 'Moscow syndrome'. I could not save my family. Everything I am doing know is an attempt to save you and your families.

31 posted on 10/23/2004 4:54:53 PM PDT by svni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: MarMema; svni; FormerLib; katnip; struwwelpeter; Agrarian; Destro; A. Pole; jb6; RusIvan
For all the critics of that operation in the theater, I have but one query: How would you do it with an 80%+ survival rate in a situation where the hostages are in an enclosed building, the columns are mined to explode and demolish the buildings, suiciders with vests are spread out within the crowd and the 30 odd terrorists are armed to the teeth. Then entrances are mined too boot. Please, all the critics out there: how would you do it? And if you don't know then I have one simple request for the lot: STFU. Since the majority of the critics have never spent day one in uniform, have never had to make decisions on people's lives, have never faced such situations or pressures and have no knowledge of such things: STFU and go learn or stay STFUed.

As for those who have no brains or backbone and will now whine: negotiate, give in. Then you are clueless, no less then clueless, you are selfish and evil. Why? Because by giving in to evil, you commit evil, you condemn other innocents to the same fate that you had. Danegeld is great, for the Danes, sucks for those who now can't get rid of the Danes.

For the lefty Russian critics who think that the US is some saint who will always get its citizens out by making nice with the enemy because US citizen lives are more important then US foreign policy or the US as a whole, you are clueless. The US is not stupid enough to negotiate with terrorists, just like Russian, Britian (for now), Italy, etc. Spain negotiated, nay, Spain turned into a true whore and allowed itself to be raped by the islamics and yet last week another islamic cell was busted getting ready to remind Spain why it's a terrorist's biatch. Spain and France and all these other gutless peoples are like battered wives: the keep going back to their batterers thinking if they just give in, next time will be different: this is a sick pathology and enough people in Russia, the US, and other nations also have it (anything but face the hard choice of fighting for your survival): thankfully in nations such as Russia and the US, the adults are in charge.

61 posted on 10/24/2004 1:10:14 PM PDT by jb6 (Truth = Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson