Metal Reviews

what?

*sigh*



No-one remembers the classics.

It was goat and it was awesome. Death to the infidel horde, i.e, goats not jews!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=nYlZiWK2Iy8

So now Obama is worse than Hitler. Great response from that Senator guy.

Edit:

Jesus Fucking Christ Fox News! Watch the above clip, and then watch this:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ws1sTVxDkLk

Braindead cunts.

There's a reason we call it Faux News.

I hate Obama and he's an awful fraud of a president, but... worse than Hitler? No, that's definitely not the case. Definitely not.

If the plane crashed in your country and the guy went home to a hero's welcome where they were flying your flag would you be making that same comment? Fuck off.

He may not have carried out the attack but that shit is just a slap in the face.

So Switzerland has officially apologized to Libia for arresting Ghaddafi's son last year. Reason for arrest: He abused, beat, and imprisoned his housekeeper.


Suffice to say that I am very ashamed of my government right now.

The Lockerbie bombing was in retaliation for the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane, which had, might I point out, nothing but civilians on board.

Eye for an eye.

also, Gaddhafi's son looks like a James Bond villain. He probably has that 'growing up Gaddhafi' problem that a lot of the kids of great leaders have, what with the lack of restrictions on his early behavior.

also, why do you give a fuck that it crashed in your country? Did you have crops growing on the spot where it landed? Does it bother you in the slightest that the person who shot down the Iranian passenger plane was never even put in prison?

Yeah, because random violence is the best answer to random violence.

Lockerbie guy only served, what, 8 years? He certainly shouldn't have been sent home, considering what Ronnie Biggs had to go through.

You can bet that some things were said behind the scenes.

However, this incident was not important enough to re-open a rift between Libya and the West, given the progress Libya has made in recent years.

Libya is the most developed country in Africa and the closest actual nations that can challenge it in that respect are all in the Maghreb.

Say what you will about this 'convicted' Lockerbie bomber, but his 'conviction' was a ridiculous travesty of justice, and he probably had nothing to do with it in the first place; it certainly wouldn't be the first time the West settled for the easy conviction at the cost of actual justice.

Eye for an eye? Really? So it landing on a town was just or was it just a little whoopsie? Was it a Scottish, or even British attack that felled the Iranian plane? Hell, do you have a legit source for what you're saying? Fuck man, that crops comment was just piss poor and really makes me doubt your arguments if you can't differentiate houses from fields.

Sure, the loss of life from both attacks was sad but why in that case do you values the lives lost on the Iranian plane over those in the American one and the ground below? Neither was justified but like it or not someone had the blame pinned on the Lockerbie bombing. It's a damned shame that he dropped his appeal however.

Also, Scotland is a very small country in which families can be spread fairly wide. So fuck you.

the guy was probably not guilty and his conviction was typical of the habit of Western countries to lock onto so-dubbed 'masterminds' without considering the implications or likely suspects prior.

See also: Osama Bin Laden.

also, I do not feel that I need to give you a link that you can find with just a little googling on the subject; if you need my prompting to educate yourself, then you are uninterested in educating yourself. The point inherent is that it is unlikely that someone in Libya would perform such a bombing in retaliation for something done to Iran; the likely case is that it was carried out competently by some Revolutionary Guard dude who disappeared into Iran and they seized this fellow who worked for the Libyan intelligence service as a useable scapegoat.

I don't recall pinning the blame on him in the first place if you cared to look. And yea, not looking up one subject clearly means I have no interest in studying anything.

Bitching and being an arse on the internet aside, I'd really have liked to have seen him go through with his appeal. If he'd have been released while proven innocent the "government" in Scotland wouldn't have made a massive political blunder. Mind you, keeps the egg off of Downing Street's face I suppose...

There was absolutely no valid reason to send him back to Libya, though, someone really fucked up there. Considering what the Yanks do to the poor sods in Guantanamo, we're quite within our rights to keep someone actually convicted of a crime such as mass murder locked up for more than eight years, whatever the conspiracy theories are - and let's not forget, that's all that the opposing argument can come up with. I think he probably did it, and see no reason why he should get to go home when legitimate asylum seekers have to languish in prison camps over here. British government sucks.

Eye for an eye?
Than the bastard should have been put on a slab.

Eye for an eye?
Than, I assume that you are 100% in support of the Afgahanistan invasion, since Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11, right?

Given that the one witness against him was clearly coached when one checks his earlier and later statements and there was no other non-circumstantial evidence, I would say that in no way was the State's case proven and in no way is the State in the right to keep him locked up. Call it a 'conspiracy theory' all you want, but if you look at the facts of the case that was brought against this man, you will see that he was probably convicted due to some form of xenophobia.

and what's this shit about 'considering what the yanks do?' Do you think that's a watermark that the British government should be striving for, to emulate the American government? Or do you think that as long as America's doing those unspeakable things, all the other Western governments should join in on the fun?



I have no doubt that this man did not do it, and as such, he should not have been put on any slabs.



I was unaware that the use of violence against states to punish non-state actors based in no particular country was a fundamentally sound and sensible strategy!

For that matter, what to you justifies the State monopolization of force against other States? 9/11 was a drop of water in the sea of violence that the United States has funded and enabled over the past sixty-plus years. A man strikes another man again and again and again and again until he is broken and hemorrhaging and purple-blue with bruises; then when another man strikes the first man and gives him a slight bruise on the cheekbone, it is condemned and the third man is labeled an international pariah for daring to upset the established status quo.

Now, do not get me wrong; I do not support the loose coalition of institutions defined by the CIA as Al-Qaeda, or their goals and the goals of their sister organizations' to establish a global Salafi Sunni caliphate. But the manner in which the US has conducted itself in the global arena since its establishment as a superpower is a manner that invites defiant action. If I, or you, or any of us are to condemn 9/11 as a despicable act, then we must as well condemn the actions of the United States in installing dozens of militaristic dictatorships that have stolen millions of lives over the past sixty-plus years, in engaging in unwarranted military action against various weaker states for the crime of not subjugating themselves to the will of the United States, in it and the Western Worlds' casual embrace of economic policies that continue to starve people to death every day.

We must condemn all these acts as despicable as well, all these fundamentally grotesque acts spit onto the face of humanity by the United States and the global order of Western countries, and if you weigh the civilian deaths caused by these actions against the civilians killed on 9/11, then you will find the scale supremely weighted in one direction.

If he is not guilty, then obviously he should be freed; but if he was even a small player, he should have been put to death. He was released on grounds of "compassion", not as the result of an appeal. He was greeted as a hero in Libya. If he is guilty, that is a travesty of justice; those people aboard that plane had nothing to do with whatever his motives were, and probably had never even heard about them.
I have no doubt that the CIA is so dirty that they make the KGB look like Boy Scouts, but at what point do you feel that civilians that have nothing to do with governmental affairs should be targets? Don't tell me "we are all accomplices" because you know as well as I do that the government is untouchable by the civilian population.
So, since it (9/11) was a non-state entity that attacked a civilian target, would it be more acceptable if civilian mobs armed with shotguns, baseball bats etc took their "pound of flesh" out of the local Afghan / Saudi / muslim populace after it was discovered that the perpetrators were Saudi and tied to the Afgahnistan Taliban?
Eye for an eye.

What are your thoughts on Timothy McVeigh?

given that he isn't guilty and couldn't possibly be guilty, then this entire section is moot.



Of course I am aware of that. The individuals who have actual influence in governmental affairs are few and far between and there were probably very few, if any of them in the Twin Towers that day. My point was that the government of this country has been acting in such a way that invites armed response for a very long time, and to redouble the act in the face of armed response makes absolutely no sense, and continues to invite such armed response.

My point was that the things America has done are far worse than anything Al-Qaeda can lay claim to and the response from Al-Qaeda, while hardly morally justifiable in light of the civilians that were killed by it, is hardly unexpected when you consider American policy in the Middle East and towards Arabs.



Amusingly enough that would have killed far less people than the War On Terror has thus far and probably would have inspired ultimately less radical Salafi/Twelver fundamentalists around the world to start/ramp up the insurgencies.



libertarian wacko who took it upon himself to kill a few fingernails of the state.