JavaScript and Cookies are required to view this site. Please enable both in your browser settings.
First Person Shooter Executions - Section 7

First Person Shooter Executions 

Current Rating:

Unlimited Views No Ads No Algorithms Lifetime Account

Documenting Reality

Community Forum · Est. 2006

Join Now
Thread Tools
  #61  
12-20-2010, 03:30 PM
pankajsharma's Avatar
pankajsharma
Offline:
My Rank: STAFF SERGEANT
Poster Rank:790
Male
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 990
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
2/11 ssssss990
Re: First Person Shooter Executions

▼ PROMO FROM DOCUMENTING REALITY
We don't judge
Join Now
Hidden for upgraded members.
  #62  
12-20-2010, 10:07 PM
velvitt's Avatar
velvitt
Offline:
★ Legacy Member ★
Poster Rank:2670
Hedgehog
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 156
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
1/20 18/20
Today Posts
0/11 ssssss156
Re: First Person Shooter Executions

I'm waiting for them to come out with a crossbow video...
  #63  
12-20-2010, 10:27 PM
DanteAntonelli
Offline:
My Rank: FIRST LIEUTENANT
Poster Rank:238
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,940
 
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Quoted: 873 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss5940
Re: First Person Shooter Executions

Perspectives. No small thing: Right or wrong, their fellow Muslims viewed them as collaborators with an occupying foreign military. We'd do the same here.
you mean... "first person shooting" the collaborators???
  #64  
12-20-2010, 10:30 PM
DanteAntonelli
Offline:
My Rank: FIRST LIEUTENANT
Poster Rank:238
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,940
 
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Quoted: 873 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss5940
Re: First Person Shooter Executions

I'm waiting for them to come out with a crossbow video...
well, maybe that's too much to ask from them but adding a FATALITY!!! banner or "head shot" audio clip would've been a nice touch though
  #65  
12-20-2010, 10:45 PM
Towlie's Avatar
Towlie
Offline:
★ Legacy Member ★
Poster Rank:576
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,666
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1666
Re: First Person Shooter Executions

I'm wathing it over & over & over...
  #66  
12-21-2010, 12:29 PM
mart_knip's Avatar
mart_knip
Offline:
My Rank: SERGEANT
Poster Rank:1033
Male
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 661
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 ssssss661
Re: First Person Shooter Executions

arrrrghhh this song is killing me!
  #67  
12-24-2010, 03:48 PM
Roschenko's Avatar
Roschenko
Offline:
My Rank: LANCE CORPORAL
Poster Rank:1914
Male
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 264
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 ssssss264
Re: First Person Shooter Executions

the man on the right accepted fate i see
  #68  
12-24-2010, 04:04 PM
kaizen_usa's Avatar
kaizen_usa
Offline:
My Rank: STAFF SERGEANT
Poster Rank:757
Macho
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,061
 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1061
Re: First Person Shooter Executions

First of all Cuba is a Communist country and Communism is a recognised and acceptable form of political leadership. It's not one we (U.S.) believe in, but it is accepted by the U.N. These fanatics we are fighting in Iraq have no political affiliation. So that comparison of yours goes out the window. Second, we don't need to "steal" oil from other countries. We have many sources for imported oil as well as many domestic suppliers. If you do your homework you will see that Iraq has comparatively small crude oil reserves. So your idea that we are there only for oil is ridiculous. Yes, there are lots of other countries in this world that need help changing their political and social situations, and all they have to do is "ask" for our help. Can we help them all? No. Can we help some of them? Yes. Do we do it for profit? No. Do we sometimes profit anyway? Yes. Although most of the time we lose a great deal of money and soldiers when we help. Besides, the United States is one of the youngest countries in the world and we are the leading Super-Power. We must be doing something right. By the way, next year when we come to the aid of South Korea you people who think we only invade for oil are going to have to come up with a new bull-shit story. Maybe you'll say "we are only there for their rice".


Allright kid, for the first time i'm gonna take me time and will seriously respond to your bull-shit you studied and leaked to my presence.
Here is the first fact; (read twice)

Published on Thursday, March 17, 2005 by CommonDreams.org
Secret U.S. Plans For Iraq's Oil
by Greg Palast

The Bush administration made plans for war and for Iraq's oil before the 9/11 attacks sparking a policy battle between neo-cons and Big Oil, BBC's Newsnight has revealed.
Two years ago when President George Bush announced US, British and Allied forces would begin to bomb Baghdad - protestors claimed the US had a secret plan for Iraq's oil once Saddam had been conquered.

In fact there were two conflicting plans, setting off a hidden policy war between neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, on one side, versus a combination of "Big Oil" executives and US State Department "pragmatists."

"Big Oil" appears to have won. The latest plan, obtained by Newsnight from the US State Department was, we learned, drafted with the help of American oil industry consultants.

Insiders told Newsnight that planning began "within weeks" of Bush's first taking office in 2001, long before the September 11th attack on the US.

An Iraqi-born oil industry consultant Falah Aljibury says he took part in the secret meetings in California, Washington and the Middle East. He described a State Department plan for a forced coup d'etat.

Mr. Aljibury himself told Newsnight that he interviewed potential successors to Saddam Hussein on behalf of the Bush administration.

Secret sell-off plan

The industry-favored plan was pushed aside by yet another secret plan, drafted just before the invasion in 2003, which called for the sell-off of all of Iraq's oil fields. The new plan, crafted by neo-conservatives intent on using Iraq's oil to destroy the Opec cartel through massive increases in production above Opec quotas.

The sell-off was given the green light in a secret meeting in London headed by Ahmed Chalabi shortly after the US entered Baghdad, according to Robert Ebel. Mr. Ebel, a former Energy and CIA oil analyst, now a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, flew to the London meeting, he told Newsnight, at the request of the State Department.

Mr Aljibury, once Ronald Reagan's "back-channel" to Saddam, claims that plans to sell off Iraq's oil, pushed by the US-installed Governing Council in 2003, helped instigate the insurgency and attacks on US and British occupying forces.

"Insurgents used this, saying, 'Look, you're losing your country, your losing your resources to a bunch of wealthy billionaires who want to take you over and make your life miserable," said Mr Aljibury from his home near San Francisco.

"We saw an increase in the bombing of oil facilities, pipelines, built on the premise that privatization is coming."

Privatization blocked by industry

Philip Carroll, the former CEO of Shell Oil USA who took control of Iraq's oil production for the US Government a month after the invasion, stalled the sell-off scheme.

Mr Carroll told us he made it clear to Paul Bremer, the US occupation chief who arrived in Iraq in May 2003, that: "There was to be no privatization of Iraqi oil resources or facilities while I was involved."

The chosen successor to Mr Carroll, a Conoco Oil executive, ordered up a new plan for a state oil company preferred by the industry.

Ari Cohen, of the neo-conservative Heritage Foundation, told Newsnight that an opportunity had been missed to privatize Iraq's oil fields. He advocated the plan as a means to help the US defeat Opec, and said America should have gone ahead with what he called a "no-brainer" decision.

Mr Carroll hit back, telling Newsnight, "I would agree with that statement. To privatize would be a no-brainer. It would only be thought about by someone with no brain."

New plans, obtained from the State Department by Newsnight and Harper's Magazine under the US Freedom of Information Act, called for creation of a state-owned oil company favored by the US oil industry. It was completed in January 2004, Harper's discovered, under the guidance of Amy Jaffe of the James Baker Institute in Texas. Former US Secretary of State Baker is now an attorney. His law firm, Baker Botts, is representing ExxonMobil and the Saudi Arabian government.

View segments of Iraq oil plans at: www.GregPalast.com/opeconthemarch.html

Questioned by Newsnight, Ms Jaffe said the oil industry prefers state control of Iraq's oil over a sell-off because it fears a repeat of Russia's energy privatization. In the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, US oil companies were barred from bidding for the reserves.

Jaffe said "There is no question that an American oil company ... would not be enthusiastic about a plan that would privatize all the assets with Iraq companies and they (US companies) might be left out of the transaction."

In addition, Ms. Jaffe says US oil companies are not warm to any plan that would undermine Opec, "They [oil companies] have to worry about the price of oil."

"I'm not sure that if I'm the chair of an American company, and you put me on a lie detector test, I would say high oil prices are bad for me or my company."

The former Shell oil boss agrees. In Houston, he told Newsnight, "Many neo-conservatives are people who have certain ideological beliefs about markets, about democracy, about this that and the other. International oil companies without exception are very pragmatic commercial organizations. They don't have a theology."

(So me dear would you like some rice?
  #69  
12-26-2010, 03:22 AM
BiscuitBumper's Avatar
BiscuitBumper
Offline:
My Rank: GUNNERY SERGEANT
Poster Rank:609
Female
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,493
 
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1493
Re: First Person Shooter Executions



Allright kid, for the first time i'm gonna take me time and will seriously respond to your bull-shit you studied and leaked to my presence.
Here is the first fact; (read twice)

Published on Thursday, March 17, 2005 by CommonDreams.org
Secret U.S. Plans For Iraq's Oil
by Greg Palast

The Bush administration made plans for war and for Iraq's oil before the 9/11 attacks sparking a policy battle between neo-cons and Big Oil, BBC's Newsnight has revealed.
Two years ago when President George Bush announced US, British and Allied forces would begin to bomb Baghdad - protestors claimed the US had a secret plan for Iraq's oil once Saddam had been conquered.

In fact there were two conflicting plans, setting off a hidden policy war between neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, on one side, versus a combination of "Big Oil" executives and US State Department "pragmatists."

"Big Oil" appears to have won. The latest plan, obtained by Newsnight from the US State Department was, we learned, drafted with the help of American oil industry consultants.

Insiders told Newsnight that planning began "within weeks" of Bush's first taking office in 2001, long before the September 11th attack on the US.

An Iraqi-born oil industry consultant Falah Aljibury says he took part in the secret meetings in California, Washington and the Middle East. He described a State Department plan for a forced coup d'etat.

Mr. Aljibury himself told Newsnight that he interviewed potential successors to Saddam Hussein on behalf of the Bush administration.

Secret sell-off plan

The industry-favored plan was pushed aside by yet another secret plan, drafted just before the invasion in 2003, which called for the sell-off of all of Iraq's oil fields. The new plan, crafted by neo-conservatives intent on using Iraq's oil to destroy the Opec cartel through massive increases in production above Opec quotas.

The sell-off was given the green light in a secret meeting in London headed by Ahmed Chalabi shortly after the US entered Baghdad, according to Robert Ebel. Mr. Ebel, a former Energy and CIA oil analyst, now a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, flew to the London meeting, he told Newsnight, at the request of the State Department.

Mr Aljibury, once Ronald Reagan's "back-channel" to Saddam, claims that plans to sell off Iraq's oil, pushed by the US-installed Governing Council in 2003, helped instigate the insurgency and attacks on US and British occupying forces.

"Insurgents used this, saying, 'Look, you're losing your country, your losing your resources to a bunch of wealthy billionaires who want to take you over and make your life miserable," said Mr Aljibury from his home near San Francisco.

"We saw an increase in the bombing of oil facilities, pipelines, built on the premise that privatization is coming."

Privatization blocked by industry

Philip Carroll, the former CEO of Shell Oil USA who took control of Iraq's oil production for the US Government a month after the invasion, stalled the sell-off scheme.

Mr Carroll told us he made it clear to Paul Bremer, the US occupation chief who arrived in Iraq in May 2003, that: "There was to be no privatization of Iraqi oil resources or facilities while I was involved."

The chosen successor to Mr Carroll, a Conoco Oil executive, ordered up a new plan for a state oil company preferred by the industry.

Ari Cohen, of the neo-conservative Heritage Foundation, told Newsnight that an opportunity had been missed to privatize Iraq's oil fields. He advocated the plan as a means to help the US defeat Opec, and said America should have gone ahead with what he called a "no-brainer" decision.

Mr Carroll hit back, telling Newsnight, "I would agree with that statement. To privatize would be a no-brainer. It would only be thought about by someone with no brain."

New plans, obtained from the State Department by Newsnight and Harper's Magazine under the US Freedom of Information Act, called for creation of a state-owned oil company favored by the US oil industry. It was completed in January 2004, Harper's discovered, under the guidance of Amy Jaffe of the James Baker Institute in Texas. Former US Secretary of State Baker is now an attorney. His law firm, Baker Botts, is representing ExxonMobil and the Saudi Arabian government.

View segments of Iraq oil plans at: www.GregPalast.com/opeconthemarch.html

Questioned by Newsnight, Ms Jaffe said the oil industry prefers state control of Iraq's oil over a sell-off because it fears a repeat of Russia's energy privatization. In the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, US oil companies were barred from bidding for the reserves.

Jaffe said "There is no question that an American oil company ... would not be enthusiastic about a plan that would privatize all the assets with Iraq companies and they (US companies) might be left out of the transaction."

In addition, Ms. Jaffe says US oil companies are not warm to any plan that would undermine Opec, "They [oil companies] have to worry about the price of oil."

"I'm not sure that if I'm the chair of an American company, and you put me on a lie detector test, I would say high oil prices are bad for me or my company."

The former Shell oil boss agrees. In Houston, he told Newsnight, "Many neo-conservatives are people who have certain ideological beliefs about markets, about democracy, about this that and the other. International oil companies without exception are very pragmatic commercial organizations. They don't have a theology."

(So me dear would you like some rice?
All you posted was a lot of speculation and a few out of date facts. I read your post twice, as you suggested, and cannot really find anything in it up to date. The Bush admin. was one of the worst in U.S. history. That much is true. Plans may have even been made prior to 9/11 regarding Iraqi oil reserves. This has nothing to do with the fact that to date (12/10) over $1,127,810,574,003 has been spent by the U.S. alone on the war. (not to mention lives lost) Use your brain! Do you have any idea how long it would take to re-coup that amount of money importing or even selling off Iraqi oil? As far as Greg Palast is concerned, he's a pretty good investigative journalist when it comes to corporate malfeasance and voting discrepancies, but he has his own agenda and can't be fully trusted to always tell the truth. Richard Heinberg caught him lying and misrepresenting the facts regarding "Peak Oil". I'm glad you are stating your opinions and what you believe to be facts (which is why I'm not just saying you're full of shit), but your data is flawed and out of date. As far as "privatization" of Iraqi oil reserves goes all I can say is "ARE YOU KIDDING?" That one actually made me laugh! Is the United States perfect? No. But we are not the evil money grubbers that you and some others seem to think we are either. If you want me to respond to any more of your postings, please do your homework and post current data. Also you might want to skip the childish comments like "kid" and stop using dumb emoticons. It's hard to take someone seriously when they act that immature.
  #70  
12-26-2010, 04:04 AM
BiscuitBumper's Avatar
BiscuitBumper
Offline:
My Rank: GUNNERY SERGEANT
Poster Rank:609
Female
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,493
 
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1493
Re: First Person Shooter Executions

After posting my last response to "kaizen_usa", I went to his profile and read all of his posts on D.R. He has posted several comments expressing his hatred and intolerance for Jewish people, Black people, Gay and Lesbian people, Females in general, The U.S.A., And on and on. Everyone's intitled to their own opinion, but his are just hateful. He claims half of the vids posted are from Turkey (for some strange reason) and is constantly putting people down for misspelling even though he misspells words in almost all of his own post. I wish I would have checked all of this out before I responded to him. I highly encourage you to read all of his post before responding to him. He is obviously a Troll. I'm sure he will respond to this posting, but I will ignore him from now on.


Powered by vBulletin Copyright 2000-2010 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO