Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Muslims

2007-04-23T07:47:47Z

Save Our Values: Adding information about Jihad, the Sixth Pillar of Islam

Those who believe in [[Islam]], which means "submission to Allah." The number of muslims is currently about 1.4 billion, making it the second largest religion in the world after Christianity. Most incidents of [[terrorism]] today are linked to Islam. They are generally motivated by the "sixth pillar of Islam," which endorses ''jihad'' or "holy war" as a way of serving their god.[http://www.islam-watch.org/SherKhan/SixPillars.htm]

Islamic propaganda promoting suicide bombing based on the sixth pillar is a fairly recent development, dating to the bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983.

Much earlier in history--in fact, from the very start of the religion--Muslims have been violently working to expand their religion. Muslims under [[Mohammed]] spread Islam by invading mush of Africa and later encroaching into Europe.

{{stub}}

[[Category:Religion]]

Materialism

2007-04-23T05:16:24Z

Save Our Values:

'''Materialism''' is an ontological position which holds, despite [[Answers in Genesis|evidence to the contrary]], that there is no immaterial or spiritual realm. Only things which are detectable in some form by the senses and sense experience- for instance [[fork]]s, [[matter]], [[radiation]], [[heat]], [[neutrinos]], [[mayonnaise]], [[galaxies]], and so forth. It assumed by the position of [[empiricism]], and therefore [[science]], and is contrasted with [[substance dualism]] and [[immaterialism]]. Arguments for materialism commonly employ [[ontological principles]] such as [[Occam's Razor]]- as an immaterial realm is wholly superfluous to materialists' understanding of the world, they have no reason to believe it exists.

[[Category: Philosophy]]

Materialism

2007-04-23T05:15:33Z

Save Our Values: Removing liberal bias

'''Materialism''' is an ontological position which holds, despite [[Answers in Genesis|evidence to the contrary]], that there is no immaterial or spiritual realm. Only things which are detectable in some form by the senses and sense experience- for instance [[fork]]s, [[matter]], [[radiation]], [[heat]], [[neutrinos]], [[mayonnaise]], [[galaxies]], and so forth. It assumed by the position of [[empiricism]], and therefore [[science]], and is contrasted with [[substance dualism]] and [[immaterialism]]. Arguments for materialism commonly employ [[ontological principles]] such as [[Occam's Razor]]- as an immaterial realm is wholly superfluous to our understanding of the world, we have no reason to believe it exists.

[[Category: Philosophy]]

Iraq

2007-04-18T13:59:19Z

Save Our Values: /* Oil for food scandal */ Reword--Comes dangerously close to suggesting that that may be AMERICA"S fault

The modern country of '''Iraq''' corresponds with the ancient region of Mesopotamia - known by many as the cradle of civilization - where the first cities and classical civilizations developed in the fertile region between the Rivers Tigris and Euphrates.

The first of these was the Sumerian civilization that arose in southern Mesopotamia around 4,500 BC. The Sumerians grew barley, chickpeas, lentils, millet, wheat, turnips, dates, onions, garlic, lettuce, leeks and mustard and raised cattle, sheep, goats, and pigs. The fertility of the flood plains they farmed and their extensive use of irrigation created surplus food which supported the populations of their cities and a system of government - which stored and distributed food and created a system of laws. In order to administer this the Sumerians developed the earliest known form of writing - cuneiform - much of which survives as they wrote on clay tablets which were dried in the sun and many of which have survived. The Sumerians worshiped many gods, violating the [[The Ten Commandments|First Commandment]]. They also built large mud brick pyramids known as ziggurats as temples.

In 2371 BC King Sargon of Akkad established the Assyrian dynasty which conquered the region covered by the modern countries of Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Syria and Israel. The Assyrian Empire collapsed with the fall of it's capital Nineveh (the modern Iraqi town of Mosul)in 612 BC and it was replaced by the Babylonian Empire - Babylon was one of the greatest cities of the ancient world and home to the legendary hanging gardens of Babylon built by King Nebuchadnezzar the second. Mesopotamian dominance of the region ended when the Persian king Cyrus the Great invaded in 539 BC. It remained part of the Persian Empire until Alexander the Greats conquest in 331 BC. It was ruled of the Hellenic descendants of Alexander's army - the Seleucids - until the Persians regained control in around 150 BC and made Mesopotamia part of the Parthian Empire - the only civilization to halt Roman expansionism.

In the 7th Century AD Mesopotamia was incorporated into the vast Muslim Arab empire that covered most of the middle east, north Africa and Spain. In the 8th century the capital of this empire was moved to Baghdad which at a time when Europe was in the dark ages became the greatest center for science and art since the time of the ancient Greeks. It was here that Astronomy and Algebra (both Arab words) were studied and advanced, and many familiar stories were first told like those of Sinbad the Sailor, Ali Baba and the forty thieves and the thousand and one Arabian nights. By the twelve century this great empire was in serious decline due to the crusades, breakaway Muslim states in north Africa, the Mongols in the east and from its own rebellious mercenary soldiers - the Mamalukes and the Turks. Following the assassination of the last caliph of Baghdad by the Mongols in 1258 there were nearly four centuries of conquest and chaos as Mesopotamia was invaded by Seleucids, Turks, Ottomans, Mongols (under Ghengis Khan), Turkoman, Tartars and Kurds.

In the 16th Century Mesopotamia, literally "Middle of two rivers" in Hebrew, became part of the [[Ottoman Empire]].

In the early 20th Century Arab nationalists including Iraqis began rebelling against their Turkish rulers. With the outbreak of the First World War they fought alongside the Allies against the Turks in the hope of gaining their independence. Many Iraqis supported Britain's invasion and occupation of Iraq in 1917 as it ended Turkish rule, however France and Britain would control the Arab lands and Iraq came under the British mandate. When Iraqi tribesmen rebelled against British rule, the rebellion was put down using aerial bombardment - the first time air power had been used in such a way. In 1932 Iraq was granted independence although Britain still exercised considerable control over the country and had retained Kuwait for its oil.

In the years following the second world war Iraq was allied to Britain, the United States and Turkey, and Britain continued to exert considerable influence over the country. In 1958 an "anti-imperialists" military coup overthrew and executed the British-installed royal family. The coup leader Abd al-Quassim banned all political parties and declared that Kuwait was part of Iraq. The Arab League then asked Britain to send troops to Kuwait to prevent an Iraqi invasion of a one of it's member states. The troop deployment prevented a war but al-Quassim responded by allying Iraq with the Soviet Union and communist China. Quassim used money taken from the western owned Iraq Petroleum Company to carry out economic reforms in Iraq. Western governments were becoming concerned Iraq could become the "new Cuba" and in 1963 they supported a pro-western coup that overthrew Quassim. Between 1963 and 1968 there was a period of political instability with several failed governments and attempted coups.

In 1968 the Ba-ath Party seized power in a coup lead by General Bakr. The Ba-ath Party believes in the creation of a single socialists pan-Arab state that would replace all existing Arab countries and in the cold war it was strongly aligned with the Soviet Union. In 1970 all foreign businesses including the Iraq Petroleum Company were seized and Iraq declared oil would be used as "a political weapon in the struggle against imperialism and Zionism". In 1979 Saddam Hussein replaced Bakr as president of Iraq. Saddam was a particularly brutal ruthless man, he attempted to assassinate Quassim in 1959, played a major role in the 1968 coup and under Bakr he had lead the much feared Ba'athist secret police. One of his first acts as President was to call a Ba'ath Party assembly were he declared his main political rivals to be traitors and spies, they were lead from the assembly one by one to be tried and executed.

==Oil for food scandal==

In 2003 Ba'athist party dictator Saddam Hussein, accused of hiding weapons of mass destruction, was removed from power by a US-led coalition of forces. Saddam had effectively stopped previous attempts at enforcement of UN resolutions by essentially bribing <ref>[http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/oilforfood/2004/0125almadalist.htm The Saddam Oil Bribes: The Complete al-Mada List], ''al-Mada'', January 25, 2004.</ref> several Seucrity Council members, namely the Russian Federation and France <ref>Duelfer Report, [http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/pdf/duelfer1_da.pdf Regime Finance and Procurement], Vol. 1, p. 55-56. </ref> through the corrupt [[Oil for food]] (OFF) program managed by UN General Secretary [[Kofi Anan]]'s son. <ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/29/oil.for.food.kojo.annan/index.html Annan 'disappointed' son didn't tell all], CNN, November 30, 2004.</ref>

The Duelfer Report found,
:Iraq pursued its related goals of ending UN sanctions and the UN OFF program by enlisting the help of three permanent UNSC members: Russia, France and China. ... Iraq’s economic “carrots” included offering companies from those countries lucrative oil, reconstruction, agricultural and commercial goods, and weapon systems contracts. ...Saddam’s Regime needed both Moscow’s political clout in the UN and its economic expertise and resources to sustain his Regime from the 1990s until [Operation Iraqi Freedom] (OIF) ... Iraq promised to economically reward Russia’s support by placing it at the head of the list for receiving UN contracts under the UN OFF program....throughout the 1990s, the [Peoples Republic of China] consistently advocated lifting Iraqi sanctions while privately advising Baghdad to strengthen cooperation with the UN.

:In early July 2001, the US and the UK withdrew their joint-proposal to revamp the UN existing sanctions Regime, called “Smart Sanctions,” because of Russian, Chinese, and French opposition. The US/UK proposal attempted to restructure two key elements of the existing sanctions Regime: illicit procurement of weapons and dual-use goods and illicit generation of revenue from Iraqi oil sales outside the UN’s OFF program. In contrast, the Russian draft resolution proposed to reduce the current percentage to the Compensation fund another 5 percent to 20 percent of total value of Iraqi oil exports – and increase the total amount in Iraq’s escrow account to $600 million to pay other expenses ... The UN estimated that each 5 percent reduction in payments to the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) added about $275 million in Iraq’s coffers per each UN OFF six month phase.

:French oil companies wanted to secure two large oil contracts; Russian companies not only wanted to secure (or lock in) oil contracts, but also sought other commercial contracts covering agricultural, electricity, machinery, food, and automobiles and trucks products...France competed with Russian agricultural products for Iraqi contracts....In May 2002, a representative from a French water purification company requested projects for his company in Iraq.

After two years in interrogation, Saddam was hanged by the new Iraqi regime. Iraq is currently plagued by terrorists who have reacted violently to Iraq's newfound freedom, and their efforts have destabilized the country enough that some consider Iraq to be headed towards civil war someday.

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Middle Eastern Countries]]
[[Category:Asian Countries]]
{{stub}}

Iraq

2007-04-18T13:55:04Z

Save Our Values: Wait, thats not the word for it

The modern country of '''Iraq''' corresponds with the ancient region of Mesopotamia - known by many as the cradle of civilization - where the first cities and classical civilizations developed in the fertile region between the Rivers Tigris and Euphrates.

The first of these was the Sumerian civilization that arose in southern Mesopotamia around 4,500 BC. The Sumerians grew barley, chickpeas, lentils, millet, wheat, turnips, dates, onions, garlic, lettuce, leeks and mustard and raised cattle, sheep, goats, and pigs. The fertility of the flood plains they farmed and their extensive use of irrigation created surplus food which supported the populations of their cities and a system of government - which stored and distributed food and created a system of laws. In order to administer this the Sumerians developed the earliest known form of writing - cuneiform - much of which survives as they wrote on clay tablets which were dried in the sun and many of which have survived. The Sumerians worshiped many gods, violating the [[The Ten Commandments|First Commandment]]. They also built large mud brick pyramids known as ziggurats as temples.

In 2371 BC King Sargon of Akkad established the Assyrian dynasty which conquered the region covered by the modern countries of Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Syria and Israel. The Assyrian Empire collapsed with the fall of it's capital Nineveh (the modern Iraqi town of Mosul)in 612 BC and it was replaced by the Babylonian Empire - Babylon was one of the greatest cities of the ancient world and home to the legendary hanging gardens of Babylon built by King Nebuchadnezzar the second. Mesopotamian dominance of the region ended when the Persian king Cyrus the Great invaded in 539 BC. It remained part of the Persian Empire until Alexander the Greats conquest in 331 BC. It was ruled of the Hellenic descendants of Alexander's army - the Seleucids - until the Persians regained control in around 150 BC and made Mesopotamia part of the Parthian Empire - the only civilization to halt Roman expansionism.

In the 7th Century AD Mesopotamia was incorporated into the vast Muslim Arab empire that covered most of the middle east, north Africa and Spain. In the 8th century the capital of this empire was moved to Baghdad which at a time when Europe was in the dark ages became the greatest center for science and art since the time of the ancient Greeks. It was here that Astronomy and Algebra (both Arab words) were studied and advanced, and many familiar stories were first told like those of Sinbad the Sailor, Ali Baba and the forty thieves and the thousand and one Arabian nights. By the twelve century this great empire was in serious decline due to the crusades, breakaway Muslim states in north Africa, the Mongols in the east and from its own rebellious mercenary soldiers - the Mamalukes and the Turks. Following the assassination of the last caliph of Baghdad by the Mongols in 1258 there were nearly four centuries of conquest and chaos as Mesopotamia was invaded by Seleucids, Turks, Ottomans, Mongols (under Ghengis Khan), Turkoman, Tartars and Kurds.

In the 16th Century Mesopotamia, literally "Middle of two rivers" in Hebrew, became part of the [[Ottoman Empire]].

In the early 20th Century Arab nationalists including Iraqis began rebelling against their Turkish rulers. With the outbreak of the First World War they fought alongside the Allies against the Turks in the hope of gaining their independence. Many Iraqis supported Britain's invasion and occupation of Iraq in 1917 as it ended Turkish rule, however France and Britain would control the Arab lands and Iraq came under the British mandate. When Iraqi tribesmen rebelled against British rule, the rebellion was put down using aerial bombardment - the first time air power had been used in such a way. In 1932 Iraq was granted independence although Britain still exercised considerable control over the country and had retained Kuwait for its oil.

In the years following the second world war Iraq was allied to Britain, the United States and Turkey, and Britain continued to exert considerable influence over the country. In 1958 an "anti-imperialists" military coup overthrew and executed the British-installed royal family. The coup leader Abd al-Quassim banned all political parties and declared that Kuwait was part of Iraq. The Arab League then asked Britain to send troops to Kuwait to prevent an Iraqi invasion of a one of it's member states. The troop deployment prevented a war but al-Quassim responded by allying Iraq with the Soviet Union and communist China. Quassim used money taken from the western owned Iraq Petroleum Company to carry out economic reforms in Iraq. Western governments were becoming concerned Iraq could become the "new Cuba" and in 1963 they supported a pro-western coup that overthrew Quassim. Between 1963 and 1968 there was a period of political instability with several failed governments and attempted coups.

In 1968 the Ba-ath Party seized power in a coup lead by General Bakr. The Ba-ath Party believes in the creation of a single socialists pan-Arab state that would replace all existing Arab countries and in the cold war it was strongly aligned with the Soviet Union. In 1970 all foreign businesses including the Iraq Petroleum Company were seized and Iraq declared oil would be used as "a political weapon in the struggle against imperialism and Zionism". In 1979 Saddam Hussein replaced Bakr as president of Iraq. Saddam was a particularly brutal ruthless man, he attempted to assassinate Quassim in 1959, played a major role in the 1968 coup and under Bakr he had lead the much feared Ba'athist secret police. One of his first acts as President was to call a Ba'ath Party assembly were he declared his main political rivals to be traitors and spies, they were lead from the assembly one by one to be tried and executed.

==Oil for food scandal==

In 2003 Ba'athist party dictator Saddam Hussein, accused of hiding weapons of mass destruction, was removed from power by a US-led coalition of forces. Saddam had effectively stopped previous attempts at enforcement of UN resolutions by essentially bribing <ref>[http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/oilforfood/2004/0125almadalist.htm The Saddam Oil Bribes: The Complete al-Mada List], ''al-Mada'', January 25, 2004.</ref> several Seucrity Council members, namely the Russian Federation and France <ref>Duelfer Report, [http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/pdf/duelfer1_da.pdf Regime Finance and Procurement], Vol. 1, p. 55-56. </ref> through the corrupt [[Oil for food]] (OFF) program managed by UN General Secretary [[Kofi Anan]]'s son. <ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/29/oil.for.food.kojo.annan/index.html Annan 'disappointed' son didn't tell all], CNN, November 30, 2004.</ref>

The Duelfer Report found,
:Iraq pursued its related goals of ending UN sanctions and the UN OFF program by enlisting the help of three permanent UNSC members: Russia, France and China. ... Iraq’s economic “carrots” included offering companies from those countries lucrative oil, reconstruction, agricultural and commercial goods, and weapon systems contracts. ...Saddam’s Regime needed both Moscow’s political clout in the UN and its economic expertise and resources to sustain his Regime from the 1990s until [Operation Iraqi Freedom] (OIF) ... Iraq promised to economically reward Russia’s support by placing it at the head of the list for receiving UN contracts under the UN OFF program....throughout the 1990s, the [Peoples Republic of China] consistently advocated lifting Iraqi sanctions while privately advising Baghdad to strengthen cooperation with the UN.

:In early July 2001, the US and the UK withdrew their joint-proposal to revamp the UN existing sanctions Regime, called “Smart Sanctions,” because of Russian, Chinese, and French opposition. The US/UK proposal attempted to restructure two key elements of the existing sanctions Regime: illicit procurement of weapons and dual-use goods and illicit generation of revenue from Iraqi oil sales outside the UN’s OFF program. In contrast, the Russian draft resolution proposed to reduce the current percentage to the Compensation fund another 5 percent to 20 percent of total value of Iraqi oil exports – and increase the total amount in Iraq’s escrow account to $600 million to pay other expenses ... The UN estimated that each 5 percent reduction in payments to the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) added about $275 million in Iraq’s coffers per each UN OFF six month phase.

:French oil companies wanted to secure two large oil contracts; Russian companies not only wanted to secure (or lock in) oil contracts, but also sought other commercial contracts covering agricultural, electricity, machinery, food, and automobiles and trucks products...France competed with Russian agricultural products for Iraqi contracts....In May 2002, a representative from a French water purification company requested projects for his company in Iraq.

After two years in interrogation, Saddam was hanged by the new Iraqi regime. Iraq is currently plagued by terrorism and considered by some to be heading towards civil war.

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Middle Eastern Countries]]
[[Category:Asian Countries]]
{{stub}}

Iraq

2007-04-18T13:53:21Z

Save Our Values: Idolatry

The modern country of '''Iraq''' corresponds with the ancient region of Mesopotamia - known by many as the cradle of civilization - where the first cities and classical civilizations developed in the fertile region between the Rivers Tigris and Euphrates.

The first of these was the Sumerian civilization that arose in southern Mesopotamia around 4,500 BC. The Sumerians grew barley, chickpeas, lentils, millet, wheat, turnips, dates, onions, garlic, lettuce, leeks and mustard and raised cattle, sheep, goats, and pigs. The fertility of the flood plains they farmed and their extensive use of irrigation created surplus food which supported the populations of their cities and a system of government - which stored and distributed food and created a system of laws. In order to administer this the Sumerians developed the earliest known form of writing - cuneiform - much of which survives as they wrote on clay tablets which were dried in the sun and many of which have survived. The Sumerians committed idolatry, worshipping many gods. They also built large mud brick pyramids known as ziggurats as temples.

In 2371 BC King Sargon of Akkad established the Assyrian dynasty which conquered the region covered by the modern countries of Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Syria and Israel. The Assyrian Empire collapsed with the fall of it's capital Nineveh (the modern Iraqi town of Mosul)in 612 BC and it was replaced by the Babylonian Empire - Babylon was one of the greatest cities of the ancient world and home to the legendary hanging gardens of Babylon built by King Nebuchadnezzar the second. Mesopotamian dominance of the region ended when the Persian king Cyrus the Great invaded in 539 BC. It remained part of the Persian Empire until Alexander the Greats conquest in 331 BC. It was ruled of the Hellenic descendants of Alexander's army - the Seleucids - until the Persians regained control in around 150 BC and made Mesopotamia part of the Parthian Empire - the only civilization to halt Roman expansionism.

In the 7th Century AD Mesopotamia was incorporated into the vast Muslim Arab empire that covered most of the middle east, north Africa and Spain. In the 8th century the capital of this empire was moved to Baghdad which at a time when Europe was in the dark ages became the greatest center for science and art since the time of the ancient Greeks. It was here that Astronomy and Algebra (both Arab words) were studied and advanced, and many familiar stories were first told like those of Sinbad the Sailor, Ali Baba and the forty thieves and the thousand and one Arabian nights. By the twelve century this great empire was in serious decline due to the crusades, breakaway Muslim states in north Africa, the Mongols in the east and from its own rebellious mercenary soldiers - the Mamalukes and the Turks. Following the assassination of the last caliph of Baghdad by the Mongols in 1258 there were nearly four centuries of conquest and chaos as Mesopotamia was invaded by Seleucids, Turks, Ottomans, Mongols (under Ghengis Khan), Turkoman, Tartars and Kurds.

In the 16th Century Mesopotamia, literally "Middle of two rivers" in Hebrew, became part of the [[Ottoman Empire]].

In the early 20th Century Arab nationalists including Iraqis began rebelling against their Turkish rulers. With the outbreak of the First World War they fought alongside the Allies against the Turks in the hope of gaining their independence. Many Iraqis supported Britain's invasion and occupation of Iraq in 1917 as it ended Turkish rule, however France and Britain would control the Arab lands and Iraq came under the British mandate. When Iraqi tribesmen rebelled against British rule, the rebellion was put down using aerial bombardment - the first time air power had been used in such a way. In 1932 Iraq was granted independence although Britain still exercised considerable control over the country and had retained Kuwait for its oil.

In the years following the second world war Iraq was allied to Britain, the United States and Turkey, and Britain continued to exert considerable influence over the country. In 1958 an "anti-imperialists" military coup overthrew and executed the British-installed royal family. The coup leader Abd al-Quassim banned all political parties and declared that Kuwait was part of Iraq. The Arab League then asked Britain to send troops to Kuwait to prevent an Iraqi invasion of a one of it's member states. The troop deployment prevented a war but al-Quassim responded by allying Iraq with the Soviet Union and communist China. Quassim used money taken from the western owned Iraq Petroleum Company to carry out economic reforms in Iraq. Western governments were becoming concerned Iraq could become the "new Cuba" and in 1963 they supported a pro-western coup that overthrew Quassim. Between 1963 and 1968 there was a period of political instability with several failed governments and attempted coups.

In 1968 the Ba-ath Party seized power in a coup lead by General Bakr. The Ba-ath Party believes in the creation of a single socialists pan-Arab state that would replace all existing Arab countries and in the cold war it was strongly aligned with the Soviet Union. In 1970 all foreign businesses including the Iraq Petroleum Company were seized and Iraq declared oil would be used as "a political weapon in the struggle against imperialism and Zionism". In 1979 Saddam Hussein replaced Bakr as president of Iraq. Saddam was a particularly brutal ruthless man, he attempted to assassinate Quassim in 1959, played a major role in the 1968 coup and under Bakr he had lead the much feared Ba'athist secret police. One of his first acts as President was to call a Ba'ath Party assembly were he declared his main political rivals to be traitors and spies, they were lead from the assembly one by one to be tried and executed.

==Oil for food scandal==

In 2003 Ba'athist party dictator Saddam Hussein, accused of hiding weapons of mass destruction, was removed from power by a US-led coalition of forces. Saddam had effectively stopped previous attempts at enforcement of UN resolutions by essentially bribing <ref>[http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/oilforfood/2004/0125almadalist.htm The Saddam Oil Bribes: The Complete al-Mada List], ''al-Mada'', January 25, 2004.</ref> several Seucrity Council members, namely the Russian Federation and France <ref>Duelfer Report, [http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/pdf/duelfer1_da.pdf Regime Finance and Procurement], Vol. 1, p. 55-56. </ref> through the corrupt [[Oil for food]] (OFF) program managed by UN General Secretary [[Kofi Anan]]'s son. <ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/29/oil.for.food.kojo.annan/index.html Annan 'disappointed' son didn't tell all], CNN, November 30, 2004.</ref>

The Duelfer Report found,
:Iraq pursued its related goals of ending UN sanctions and the UN OFF program by enlisting the help of three permanent UNSC members: Russia, France and China. ... Iraq’s economic “carrots” included offering companies from those countries lucrative oil, reconstruction, agricultural and commercial goods, and weapon systems contracts. ...Saddam’s Regime needed both Moscow’s political clout in the UN and its economic expertise and resources to sustain his Regime from the 1990s until [Operation Iraqi Freedom] (OIF) ... Iraq promised to economically reward Russia’s support by placing it at the head of the list for receiving UN contracts under the UN OFF program....throughout the 1990s, the [Peoples Republic of China] consistently advocated lifting Iraqi sanctions while privately advising Baghdad to strengthen cooperation with the UN.

:In early July 2001, the US and the UK withdrew their joint-proposal to revamp the UN existing sanctions Regime, called “Smart Sanctions,” because of Russian, Chinese, and French opposition. The US/UK proposal attempted to restructure two key elements of the existing sanctions Regime: illicit procurement of weapons and dual-use goods and illicit generation of revenue from Iraqi oil sales outside the UN’s OFF program. In contrast, the Russian draft resolution proposed to reduce the current percentage to the Compensation fund another 5 percent to 20 percent of total value of Iraqi oil exports – and increase the total amount in Iraq’s escrow account to $600 million to pay other expenses ... The UN estimated that each 5 percent reduction in payments to the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) added about $275 million in Iraq’s coffers per each UN OFF six month phase.

:French oil companies wanted to secure two large oil contracts; Russian companies not only wanted to secure (or lock in) oil contracts, but also sought other commercial contracts covering agricultural, electricity, machinery, food, and automobiles and trucks products...France competed with Russian agricultural products for Iraqi contracts....In May 2002, a representative from a French water purification company requested projects for his company in Iraq.

After two years in interrogation, Saddam was hanged by the new Iraqi regime. Iraq is currently plagued by terrorism and considered by some to be heading towards civil war.

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Middle Eastern Countries]]
[[Category:Asian Countries]]
{{stub}}

Saudi Arabia

2007-04-18T09:07:02Z

Save Our Values:

[[Image:SaudiArabiaWorldMap.png|right||400px|thumb|Location of Saudi Arabia]]

'''Saudi Arabia''' is a country in the [[Middle East]] which is under [[Sharia]] law, the legal system put down after the death of [[Muhammad]], the founder of Islam. It was founded in 1902 by [[Abul Ibn Saudi]], a member of the royal House of Saudi.

Saudi Arabia is mostly a desert country, but it is rich in [[oil]] and date palms.
[[Image:Bcdf.jpg|right|Masjid Nabawi, Medina, Saudi Arabia|thumb|400px]]
==Noteable Saudi Arabians==
*[[Osama Bin Laden]]
*[[Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud]]: ranked 11th richest person in the world by USAToday in 2002.<ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/02/28/forbes.htm</ref>

[[Category:Asian Countries]]
[[Category:Middle Eastern Countries]]

Saudi Arabia

2007-04-18T09:06:44Z

Save Our Values:

[[Image:SaudiArabiaWorldMap.png|right||400px|thumb|Location of Saudi Arabia]]

'''Saudi Arabia''' is a country in the [[Middle East]] which is under [[Sharia]] law, the legal system put down after the death of [[Muhammed]], the founder of Islam. It was founded in 1902 by [[Abul Ibn Saudi]], a member of the royal House of Saudi.

Saudi Arabia is mostly a desert country, but it is rich in [[oil]] and date palms.
[[Image:Bcdf.jpg|right|Masjid Nabawi, Medina, Saudi Arabia|thumb|400px]]
==Noteable Saudi Arabians==
*[[Osama Bin Laden]]
*[[Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud]]: ranked 11th richest person in the world by USAToday in 2002.<ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/02/28/forbes.htm</ref>

[[Category:Asian Countries]]
[[Category:Middle Eastern Countries]]

Osama Bin Laden

2007-04-18T09:03:50Z

Save Our Values: Major rewrite plus a lot more information

[[Image:382px-AQ00100.jpg|right|thumb]]

Osama Bin Laden is a Saudi Arabian millionaire and the leader of [[al Qaeda]], a worldwide [[terrorist]] group responsible for [[September 11, 2001 attacks]] and some other terrorist attacks on Americans in the 1990s. He obtained his wealth by inheriting it from his father, Mohammed Awad bin Laden, who was a successful entrepreneur in the construction industry.

Osama Bin Laden was expelled from [[Saudi Arabia]] in 1992 after he criticized the Saudi government for permitting the United States to station troops there to liberate [[Kuwait]] from [[Saddam Hussein]]'s invasion.

Bin Laden lived in Sudan for most of the 1990's at the invitation of [[Hassan al-Turabi]], a powerful Sudanese political leader and terrorism supporter. He then returned to [[Afghanistan]], where he had fought against the Soviets in the 1980's. He was protected by the [[Taliban]] until the American liberation of [[Afghanistan]] following [[9/11]].

During the 1980s insurgency against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan the CIA helped to train and arm anti-Soviet Islamic militants. Bin Laden had his own source of funding, though, and would have shunned influence by America.

He remains at large to this day.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Bin Laden, Osama}}
[[Category:Military Commanders]]
[[Category:Terrorists]]

Osama Bin Laden

2007-04-18T08:49:26Z

Save Our Values: Removing ant-American misinformatino. Also: Al Qaeda "likely" responsible for 9/11? He's an entrepreneur? I think not.

[[Image:382px-AQ00100.jpg|right|thumb]]

Osama Bin Laden is a Saudi Arabian and the leader of [[al Qaeda]], a worldwide [[terrorist]] group responsible for [[September 11, 2001 attacks]] and some other terrorist attacks on Americans in the 1990s.

He was protected by the [[Taliban]] until the American invasion of [[Afghanistan]] after the [[9-11]] attacks drove him into hiding.

During the 1980s insurgency against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan the CIA helped to train and arm bin Laden's mujahideen [http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=22422].

He remains at large to this day.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Bin Laden, Osama}}
[[Category:Military Commanders]]
[[Category:Terrorists]]

Foucault's Pendulum

2007-04-18T08:45:45Z

Save Our Values:

Foucault's pendulum is a weight, usually a ball suspended by a wire that is attached at the ceiling with a joint that allows the weight to swing in any direction.

The motion of this pendulum proves that the earth is rotating underneath the pendulum. The angle of the rotation of the pendulum per hour remains fixed at any location and equals:

<math>15\sin q</math>

where q is the latitude of the observer.

The physicist Foucault demonstrated this in the church [[Le Pantheon]] in [[Paris]] in 1851.

==Other Uses==

Foucault's Pendulum is also the English name for an Italian novel by [[Umberto Eco]].

Conservapedia:Would the repeal of gun control laws make incidents like the shooting at Virginia Tech less likely to occur?

2007-04-18T08:44:01Z

Save Our Values: Reply, and removing duplicate statement

{{debate}}
I hope it's not too early to say this, but I'm worried that if it happened at my campus, the same thing would happen, and that it might even be worse, because there are signs '''everywhere''' saying that you can't have guns. Also, since even the police officers did not catch the shooter until two hours after he started, it's not a good enough argument to say, oh, the police can have them. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 15:18, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

: This debate will inevitably begin, so let's have it in a way that is respectful of the mourning.

: I agree with Dan: the police are not going to stop this soon enough. I'd like to see armed Resident Advisors myself.

: Was the gunman on drugs? Into [[hard-core pornography]]? Human beings do not ordinarily do these things unless under some evil influence. I hope the media report this honestly. Most people don't realize that high school shooters are usually on drugs, and Scott Peterson was into hard-core pornography.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:43, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

::Not all drugs cause problems; the worst crime committed by pot-heads is Twinkie theft. --[[User:TrueGrit|TrueGrit]] 12:38, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

'''NO'''
I would prefer to just outlaw guns or very strictly control them. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 15:20, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

That won't automatically make all guns cease to exist. This guy certainly got his hands on one. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 15:22, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:Well, here is some statistics to concider: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir_percap-crime-murders-firearms-per-capita What do people think, the countryes at top have lots of guns available and not much control over it, or they have strict guncontroll laws and few guns available? Think the answer is obvious, and so is the answer to question which would be the way to go if one wants to limit murders with firearms. There are of course lots of other reasons behind the amount of killings with guns than just the availability, allso guns arent the only way to kill people. Alltho the country i live in is quite low on this chart, its quite high on the murders done. But its only obvious that more controll there is on guns and less there is of them, less there will allso be killings with them. [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 15:44, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, let's ban all guns right now and see what happens. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 18:39, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:Actually, i would be willing to go that far. There are of course some legimit hobbyes that include firearms and total ban isnt likely, but i really like the current policy on my country. Here one can get firearms for hunting after doing a test for your hunting licence. If you want a gun for target practice, one practically needs to start from small caliber weapons like .22 and join a gun club. And offcourse one cant have any serious crimes on his police record. No licenses are given for weapons meant for selfprotection outside law enforcment and some other security related jobs. [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 19:31, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

::I doubt it. Honestly, it's important for the people to be armed, in the incident that they have to defend themselves, be it from other people or the state.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 21:48, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:::If you took a look at the statistics i provided, i think you would have noticed that the amount of guns there was amongst the general population certainly didnt make it less likely to get murdered by gunfire, if anything, it made it more propable. In my opinnion carrying a gun around for selfdefense is more likely to get you killed than to save your life, i even have personal experience on this subject. Allso, do you think it would matter in the least that people own 9mm pistols and stuff like that if everything changed so drasticly that United states would become and dictatorship? We dont live in the 1800:s anymore. You dont build up army out of civilians with civilian weaponry. Who controls the army controls the country. Only ones who use those easy to get weapons to "defend their country" are nutjobs who do it in times like these murdering people in their psychosis. [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 22:22, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::The notion is more theoretical than practical. Honestly, the principle is that the people should be able to create a militia if the need arises to do so. Removing the ability to own firearms would hamper their ability to do so. And honestly, it's about the fact that the populous of a nation is always stronger than it's government. A government with no people is a government not long for this world.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 23:12, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: "In my opinnion carrying a gun around for selfdefense is more likely to get you killed than to save your life". Where in the world is your evidence for this? This is entirely false and untrue. 95% of the time the mere presence of a firearm that is drawn on an intruder is enough to frighten them away. [[User:CPWebmaster|CPWebmaster]] 22:30, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: PS: Timppeli, your statistics [http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir_percap-crime-murders-firearms-per-capita here] are merely for murders with guns. What about the total crime rate of each of these countries, including non-gun crimes? [[User:CPWebmaster|CPWebmaster]] 22:33, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: You can change the crime statistics wanted from the dropbox in the upper right part of the page, for example here are murder statistics in general by countryes: [http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita] [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 23:14, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

'''No''' - Taking the micro view, I had a glance through the history of US spree killings I could remember, and not a single one of them was stopped by an armed civilian. The outcomes were divided among shooter escaped, shooter arrested by police, shooter shot and killed by police and shooter killed by self inflicted bullet wound, with the latter being by far the most common. While there is perhaps a certain logic in knowing that stores are guarded by armed men helps prevent robbery, but spree killings are a different crime entirely. The shooter generally has little concern for their own safety, and won't hesitate to shoot anyone who even looks like they threaten them.

There is something wrong with a society where children must be searched in the schools to prevent them bringing blades and handguns, and armed security officers patrol the halls. I don't think this problem is likely to be fixed by increasing the availability of lethal weapons. Lets face it, spree killing is only possible where guns are readily accessible. You simply can't can't do this sort of thing with a knife or any other hand weapon. The fact that shootings like this occur on a regular basis perhaps should make you reconsider the policy of universal access to firearms. --[[User:Abrown|Abrown]] 06:33, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

I have to say I think that if there were MORE guns, things like this would happen LESS often. Imagine if, whenever somebody tried to pull something like this, he got gunned down after he fired his first shot. --[[User:Save Our Values|Save Our Values]] 04:44, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

== Pornography's Role!?==
This is a true national tragedy. I have to say, though, that I have yet to see porn lead to shooting violence, Andy.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 21:13, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

: The media rarely mention pornography's role, even when it is there (as it usually is). Don't you think it might have played a role in the sick massacre of the Amish children?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:25, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
::Alternately, the media could not mention it because there is no connection. Hmmm. Do you have a good citation on how porn leads to violence? Keep in mind the difference between causation and correlation...-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 21:27, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Yeah, I think some people on this site have problems distinguishing between causation and correlation. But honestly, I think it's better just to let people believe whatever makes them happiest. So long as they aren't hurting anyone, I don't really care what they do or think.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 21:46, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:: Except, quite obviously in light of today, people are being hurt. A civilized society tries to look at the underlying causes and address them. Drugs and pornography are the common denominator to many vicious crimes. You won't read about this, but ask someone knowledgeable in law enforcement.

Um, might the cause of gun violence be...GUNS? I know, I know, guns are only dangerous when used for their intended purpose. [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 23:58, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
:: How many people here knew that Scott Peterson was addicted on hardcore pornography? That was under-publicized.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:58, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Well, drugs are already a controlled substance, I'm not denying that they have an effect on the people. I think what I'm questioning is pornography's effect. I think porn might be a release for a more deep seated psychological issue. Sociopaths don't need a reason to kill. Thats what they do.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 23:16, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
::::nobody is born a sociopath.[[User:Jaques|Jaques]] 23:21, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::Sociopathy is a mental disorder. How can you not be born that way? It might be incited, but you're predisposed. I'm sure there's an environmental effect, but I think that your mind plays a part too.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 23:25, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
Andy, homespun wisdom - "ask someone knowledgeable..." - is no substitute for actual evidence. Also, again, you offered a correlation, not a causation. -'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 23:38, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Might the cause of gun violence be guns? I know, I know, guns are only dangerous when used for their intended purpose. [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 23:59, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
::What about car violence? [[User:Jaques|Jaques]] 00:00, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
:::when is the last time a gun committed a crime by itself?[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]] 00:01, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
::::When is the last time a nuclear warhead detonated itself? Hey, if you outlaw nukes, only outlaws will have nukes! [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 08:51, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:::The natural conclusion of the "this may have been caused by porn: argument goes like this:
:::#Many sociopaths like hardcore pornography.
:::#So, many sociopaths also like pizza.
:::#That's ridiculous, lots of people like pizza and they don't commit mass murder.
:::#Well, lots of people like hardcore pornography and ''they'' don't commit mass murder either.

WELL PUT

:::Drugs is another story, but the same reasoning applies. Do drugs turn someone into a sociopath? We have no evidence that they do, but they can surely cloud the judgement of someone enough that they might do such a thing. On the face of it, this does not seem like a killing spree set off by a drug addled brain. This took time and preparation. And guns and ammo. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 00:06, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
::::I think US should have stricter laws controlling time and preparation.[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]
::::I'll point out that a lot of those sociopaths probably watched Tom&Jerry cartoons when they were kids. And as is apparent to everyone, Tom&Jerry is excessively violent. I think someone should look into that. [[User:AKjeldsen|AKjeldsen]] 08:53, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Ted Bundy directly blamed hardcore pornography for his murder spree shortly before his execution. There's a difference between hardcore porn and regular porn. Nobody's arguing that everybody who reads ''Playboy'' is at risk of violence. By the way, I wrote a letter to the editor to my school newspaper putting forth my original argument above. If they print it I'll link to it. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 03:25, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::Again, Ted Bundy was a sociopath. Sociopaths kill without volition or reason. They cannot feel remorse or guilt for their actions. If you read stuff by Ted Bundy, you understand that the man never felt any remorse for the poor women he killed.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:31, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

I don't doubt that he was. I wonder if pornography can, in some cases, bring some of the primal urges out of said sociopaths. I don't honestly know. I'm only speculating. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 04:02, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:People are always looking for excuses for a murderer's actions, blaming movies, video games, and now porn (laughable on it's own). It's ridiculous, people are responsible for their own actions. If they're disturbed then sure they can't tell fake from reality, but come on, you can't blame any of the above items. You can't make something a scapegoat when 99.9% of the population is viewing this stuff and not going out on a killing spree.
:And, on the gun control topic, taking away the right to bear arms will only stop those who are law abiding citizens from having guns. Criminals will still manage to get them and use them. All taking them away would do is make it easier for the bad guys. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 08:45, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

I'm going to get in further trouble because I am in violation of the 90/10 rule, but please, can we give people time to grieve before this is discussed. Please. [[User:Sterile|Sterile]] 09:04, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:I know every time I watch some hardcore porn, I get this intense urging to go commit violent acts, don't y'all? :-p [[User:ColinR|ColinR]][[User_talk:ColinR|talk]] 16:27, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:: Perhaps you don't think Scott Peterson's murders were violent acts??? Law enforcements officers will tell you, if you care to ask, that pornography is what they find when they search criminals' homes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:07, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:::I do not think Scott Peterson was given a fair trial and was wrongfully incarcerated, given no proof of his guilt and only circumstantial evidence at best. I don't know whether he he's guilty or not; if he did commit murder, then yes, his acts were violent (as are most, if not all, murders). Regardless, I'm sure that searching many people's homes would result in finding pornography. It's hard to think that such a huge industry would only be supported by criminals. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]][[User_talk:ColinR|talk]] 17:12, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
::::That seems like an ad hoc ergo propter hoc argument. Do most people who look at porn perform criminal acts, or are most criminal acts comitted by people who also look at porn? Interesting. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 17:16, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: Most people period look at porn. If I were to give you 100 random american males of ages 18-40, I believe you'd struggle to select five of them that had never ever seen hardcore porn. --[[User:Abrown|Abrown]] 17:26, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

There's a difference between having seen it before and making a pattern of seeking out more and more extreme pornography. And even most people who do that aren't going to be violent. I'm not arguing that, either. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 17:28, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:Intresting, after reading some of the comments, i would like to make the claim that watching hardcore porn actually makes one more liable to become contributor in Conservapedia. Ill back my claim by stating that if we would search the hard drives of the contributors here, i bet we would find some porn in most cases. [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 17:51, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:: Do you think a search of the Virginia Tech killer's computer will likely turn up hardcore pornography? Do you think the college or police will tell the public if it does? My answers: yes to the first and probably no to the second. The mainstream media downplays or censors the connection of pornography with criminals, as it did in Scott Peterson's case. Less than 1% of the stories about Scott Peterson revealed that he was a porn addict.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:22, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
:: You people are foul for turning this tragedy into a political football. What in the hell is the matter with you? Seriously, you should be on meds. [[User:Godman|Godman]] 18:29, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Im quite sure that he had some hardcore porn on his posession, im allso quite sure it was because he was a young male without a girlfriend, and had nothing to do with him being psycopath killer. The claim i made before is just as valid as the connection between pornography and violent mass murders. [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 18:34, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::::Seriously, there's a difference between criminals being in possession of porn, and it causing their crime. Seriously, I would bet that ''most'' people who possess porn are ''not'' criminals. --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]])</code> 19:43, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::: Folks, this killer was a "loner" who likely spent his time on the computer, and on pornography sites. Day in and day out. Look at his hard drive, we can find out in an hour what this guy's daily pattern of information and recreation was. And I'll tell you the answer now: pornography day in and day out. Does that have an effect? You bet it does. It desensitized him, made him more withdrawn, and made him view others like objects rather than the people they are (were).

::: From our front page: "The killer "was a loner, and we're having difficulty finding information about him," school spokesman Larry Hincker said." What a joke that statement by the school is. Within 60 minutes they can find out everything they need to know from his hard drive. They should tell the world so we can learn from this tragedy and not just wait until it happens again.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:22, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
::::: Well said! --[[User:Save Our Values|Save Our Values]] 04:44, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
:::: His former roommates are conducting interviews. They say he was a loner who stalked women, and had an imaginary girlfriend. Weird.... And it's just a wee bit hypocritical to say that porn is bad and guns are good. Honestly, what purpose does an AK in civilian ownership serve? --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 20:23, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: Hoji said, "They say he was a loner who stalked women, and had an imaginary girlfriend." That's behavior of a porno addict, just as drunk driving is behavior of an alcoholic. Sure, it's the driving that causes the harm, but so does the alcohol. Let's not deny the effect of spending day and night on computer pornography. It's not good for him, and not good for his victims either.

:::: The analogy to guns does not hold, because guns help save more lives than are lost. It would have been helpful to have some armed teachers or faculty around to stop this killer.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:54, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Andy, would you say that Harry Potter caused the VT massacre too? For the love of... you're a lawyer. Go back to Torts. Andy, look at issues of attenuated causation, causation-in-fact, et al. I'll make articles for you to reference if you need them. But porn does not cause murder. What would (then-) Judge Cardozo say to Ms. Palsgraf?-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 20:42, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

: I guess Ames doesn't think alcohol causes any deaths either. Or drugs.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:54, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

You and I both know the difference, and it's sad to even have to suggest it. Alcohol & drugs cause loss of control. Pornography... does not.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 20:58, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:May I add, Andy, that if you ever have a lawsuit like that, make sure to tell me when. If you file in New York, I'll definitely come watch. It's also worth the NJ Transit ride if you file it in Jersey. I want to see this.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 21:02, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:: I'm not saying that litigation is the answer. At this point, I'm only asking for honest reporting of the news. Why won't the police tell us what was on the killer's hard drive????--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:58, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
I'm not asking for litigation either. I'm just saying, no-one would believe a causal link except push-button activists looking for a new "issue." Specifically, a judge wouldn't believe a link, nor would a jury. They don't report it because it's irrelevant! Do they report, "suspect had eaten an enchilada two days before - repeat, eaten an enchilada"? No, because it ''doesn't matter''!-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 21:59, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

==Is this a Joke?==
Are you really asking did porn have something to do with this? If someone--anyone--can give a good reason for owning a handgun, I'd love to hear it. You can't hunt with them, there's no target you need to shoot that you can't with a rifle, and basically you've provided a great means for a family member to kill themselves, or you. So why? Why not get rid of them? And yes, if we ban them tomorrow there will still be guns, but that is a "throw up the hands" answer to a problem. So many reactions to this question are speculative. "But what if...? But then...?" It's garbage. We know what happens by making guns more easy to obtain than a driver's license, now let's do something about it. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 11:07, 17 April 2007 (EDT) {{Userbox |border-c=#000 |border-s=1 |id-c=#fff |id-s=12 |id-fc=#000 |info-c=#cc0000 |info-s=8 |info-fc=#fff |id=[[Image:National Rifle Association logo.png|65px]] |info=This user wishes guns would be illegal.}} [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 11:08, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

I'll give you a good reason, it's called the second amendment, in case you havent herd of it. I'm 15 and I've herd of it. It says: "An organised malitia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed".

That means were allowed to have handguns you idiot!
--thebigjimmer

To thebigjimmer: Please refrain from calling people idiots because they don't share your opinnion. If you look at the discussion going on, its not about what the current law says on carrying guns, its about how should it be changed or should it stay as it is. [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 16:07, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

I've 'herd' of it. But being allowed to do something is not the same thing as needing to do something and private ownership is not the same thing as a 'malitia'. [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 16:01, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::Please don't call me an ''"idiot"'' while barraging me with language like "organised" instead of organized, "maltita" instead of militia, "havent" instead of haven't, "were" instead of we're and "herd" instead of heard. Now, as for the second amendment, I might also point out that this is an [[addendum]] to the [[constitution]] and thus can be changed. See the 18th amendment if you don't believe me. Further, my point is that if we can keep guns out of the hands of people who can't--say--use the language precisely, then we might all be a little safer. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 16:04, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
:::I dont think it is wise to debate changes to the Bill of Rights. Where would the changes end? [[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

:::I can appreciate that, but we live in a very different world than we did back then. The world of the pioneers was one in which people may only meet a few hundred folks in their lifetime. Today, we can easily meet thousands. Add to that the undeniably closer proximity to one another and you can start to see why having a lethal weapon in just anybody's hands is a bad idea. At least, it is to me. I think we shouldn't just ban them (although I'm fine with that) but if we were to be more responsible and take ownership of this problem we could do some real good. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 16:18, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
::::I understand what you are saying, but i have to say i disagree. also, what do you mean when you say "be more responsible and take ownership of this problem" how is this to be done?[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

:::I think we like to think more guns are the answer to increasing gun violence. By "taking ownership" (a poor phrase, I admit) I meant that we should first admit that unrestrained sales of handguns and weaponry is ill-advised at best and unconscionably reckless at worst. How many people have to die before we say as a people, I don't want to watch more people die? I mean, is there really a good reason to have handguns? I point this out because it seems the only thing they are created for is anti-personnel use. Is there one good thing you can do with a handgun you can't do with a rifle--except hide it? [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 16:32, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:Obviously no one wants handguns in the hands of people who will abuse them, but also i think obviously they are guarenteed under the Bill of Rights. Further restraints on sales will most likely not do any good, seeing that most ill-used handguns are either stolen of bought illegaly. And handguns are a great way to relieve stress.[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

::It's a worthy subject for debate, but I don't think it's as obvious as you think. I understand the opposing viewpoint, but there's a reasonable case to be made that the words "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, " are not ambiguous. At the time of writing the Bill of Rights, citizen-organized militias were a necessary part of a functioning national army. Even through the Civil War, whole companies would be comprised of the men of a town or neighborhood.

::We don't run our military that way anymore. There's no expectation that the men of, say, Valdosta, Georgia should contribute a company of men to the war in Iraq, and in fact they'd be prevented from trying to join the operations there if they did. A well-regulated militia" is no longer "necessary to the security of a free state."

::Fun question that doesn't directly relate: look at the war in Iraq. Which side is fielding a bunch of loosely-organized militias who have to secure their arms on the down-low, and do you believe that they are "secur[ing] a free state?"[[User:Aziraphale|Aziraphale]] 17:10, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:::true, but I and others[http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndfqu.html] still think that the ammendment was indeed created for the purpose of securing individual rights. [[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

:I appreciate that as well, but saying "a ban tomorrow does nothing today" does not solve the problem so much as foment it. IMO [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 17:05, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::I dont understand. could you rephrase? English is my second language!![[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

:::Okay mister, you don't need to insult my little brother's intelligence just because of a few typing errors. I can guarantee, that he is more intelligent than you. Most my family of 16 recieved 4.0', and scored in the thirties on thier ACT, and are currently getting their doctorate in one field or another. And asking him not to call you an idiot, and then insulting his intelligence is a little hypocritical. Now on the issue on hand guns, you can hunt with them (deer). Your problem is that you look at a gun as a weapon, when it really is a tool. There are more useful things that can be done with guns than harmful. A hammer is a tool, and people can kill each other with those. So why not ban them as well. You think that eliminating guns will stop killing. Well no matter what you do people are going to kill each other. They did before there were guns, and they still will once guns have disappeared. Its a fact of life. All in all you should get your facts straight before you go flaunting your opinions. Buying a gun is much harder than getting your drivers license, I Know. And in conclusion, loud mouthed hippy liberals (like you), who think that they have the answeres to all of lifes questions are really just a drag on the character of the country and the whole human race for that matter. {{unsigned|thebigjimmer}}

:::: We loud mouthed hippy liberals (like me), would like to point out, that while nerve gas might be nice tool to get rid of the bugs in ones house, it dosen't mean it should be available to all. How many people you think this mass murderer would have killed if he could have gotten nerve gass? how many did he now kill with his guns, and how many would he have killed with an hammer? Making guns harder to get dosen't mean one couldn't practice hunting or shooting, most of those who are in favour of stricter gun control laws don't want to ban guns all together. Quite many are even willing to let people have some guns for self-defence. But for example i do think that current large number of guns around and the easy availability are an risk for the safety of most. [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 19:25, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: Amen, Jimmer.

:::: About the VT incident... one professor who was killed mercilessly at the hands of the gunman stood in the doorway of his classroom to protect his students from him. If that professor had a gun the outcome of this whole incident would have been a lot different. The professor would be a hero. Can't you guys see that this is the case? Arm the good-guys and disarm the bad-guys. The bad-guys will ALWAYS have guns. What can outlawing guns possibly do? Nothing. [[User:CPWebmaster|CPWebmaster]] 19:32, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
::::::And that professor was an Israeli.[[User:Jaques|Jaques]] 19:35, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: And if people would carry guns around in schools, how many you think would die every year in gun accidents, gang fights or by angry students? Besides, as horrible as these sensles massacres in schools are, they are still very small part of the whole picture. What could have saved the situation, would have been an armed guard at the campus. But that costs money, not sure how many shcool would be willing to pay for one. [[User:Timppeli|Timppeli]] 20:02, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: I do not think much of any people would die from gun accidents in schools. Gang fights? Gangs already have guns. Gangs would actually probably have a hard time surviving. Angry students? The angry students are the people who are doing these massacres. The guy who did this one was '''''very''''' angry about a lot of things. Also, about the armed guard thing... VT has an entire '''''armed''''' police department. Was that able to solve the problem? NO. Saying that law enforcement is the answer to these things is a complete joke. If you where cornered in a room by a guy in a black ski-mask pointing a gun at your head what would you do? Ask him to hold on while you call the cops? If this is what you're planning to do I would advise you not to, it's not going to work. The cost of arming faculty would be '''''much''''' less than paying for a police department. [[User:CPWebmaster|CPWebmaster]] 20:29, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Then what do you do with disgruntled faculty, CPWebmaster, who already have a gun then? Arm the students to check the faculty? Arm the janitors to keep them all in line?-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 20:44, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

: Take a state that has very loose gun-control, like Arizona. Is it becoming a problem keeping everyone in check? No. [[User:CPWebmaster|CPWebmaster]] 21:13, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Cite? Or alternately, take a country with very tight gun control laws. How's their per capita gun crime rate? Hint - it's wayyyy down.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 21:14, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

We could always give everyone their own nuclear weapon. That would lower the crime-rate for sure! ...aside from the occasional city wiped off the face of the Earth. --[[User:VVV|VVV]] 02:51, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

==Really==
It's not like everybody in university is packing heat. If you outlaw guns, somebody will still find a way. We had a big shooting here in Canada at École Polytechnique in Montreal back in the 80s that resulted in the death of a number of women. The gunman had a problem with feminists, and he decided to walk in and shoot a bunch of them. Despite our gun control laws, people still died from gun violence. It is however, not so widespread. --[[User:TrueGrit|TrueGrit]] 12:42, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::Montreal has had 3 school massacres, the École Polytechnique massacre in 1989, the Concordia University massacre in 1992, and the Dawson College shooting in 2006. [[User:Jaques|Jaques]] 12:47, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::: This is exactly what I'm talking about. What if the faculty, or even the students, of each of these schools carried guns around? The answer, no massacre. [[User:CPWebmaster|CPWebmaster]] 19:48, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::::I think you're countering one extreme (no guns) with another (guns for all). And neither one is desirable on a campus. I think the truth is this - two of these deaths were unavoidable; the two in the dorm. Had the university acted properly, the buildings would have been locked down. And we wouldn't be having this conversation.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 20:59, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: I'm not debating "guns for all." I'm merely stating a '''fact'''. If the students were armed there would have been no massacre. [[User:CPWebmaster|CPWebmaster]] 21:03, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
Maybe not today. But tomorrow, or the next day.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 21:05, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

I worry though, about temptations and human error. If people have guns, I think they become more inclined to use them. Now, that might apply to a small percent of people, but if you arm everyone, you're still dealing with a large group of people. As for prevention, what happens if in the fear of the shooting, the person trying to defend everyone accidentally misses with a shot and kills a fellow classmate or student. Now that person is a murderer.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 21:40, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

==Perspective==

The flag at my town hall was at half mast today (and it's not because most of our bridges washed out yesterday). 33 innocent people are dead. Talk radio is aflame with irrelevancies. And this page, linked from the front of conservapedia, is full of foolish and sometimes ignorant political diatribe. How about a week of silence and respect before the hacking of issues starts? Those poor people... [[User:Human|Human]] 21:23, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:Oh, and Mr. Schlafly Esq., I am disappointed in your choice of topics to "Participate in our discussion of this shooting". What happened to "help us mourn the unfortunate", not a political debate topic? I would expect, following that link, to leave feeling humbled at our vulnerability, generous of spirit, and full of remembrance for the victims. Not finding that here. [[User:Human|Human]] 21:23, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

==Questions on Front Page==

"Why wasn't he disciplined before this could happen? And why was he still in college at age 23?"

I dunno about the appropriateness of these questions. Of course hindsight is 20/20, but it makes us sound foolish to suggest '''discipline''' for writing violent plays. In retrospect, yeah, probably more look into those would have been better, but it just takes us back to the 20/20 hindsight argument. Also, you can't discipline someone for making dark creative writing. You can perhaps suggest counseling, but not discipline. Also, what does his being 23 have to do with anything? I have many good friends on my campus that are in their mid-late 20's. Heck, a good friend of mine just graduated last semester...at 27.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 00:27, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:Maybe he skipped a year or two? Got in late? Not everyone goes straight to college from highschool. --[[User:VVV|VVV]] 02:11, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

==Porn, Guns and Instant Politicization: Pure America==

A stat I've heard mentioned a million times today in support of gun ownership is "crime has fallen steadily in the past 15 years as gun ownership has increased." Ok, but porn availability and consumption has increased at a far greater rate than gun ownership over this same period. Mr. Schlafly, your argument is easily disproven. You shouldn't try to heap all of the sins of the world at the step of such violence. Wish well to those who have suffered and keep your politics in your pants for a few weeks.
--[[User:BillyC|BillyC]] 02:40, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

When tragedy strikes, you don't just sit and think "How sad. Hope it doesn't happen again". No. You look at what went wrong, and directly try to prevent it from ever happening again. Your comment about keeping one's politics in pants is disingenuous. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 02:40, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Ok, DanH. What I said is political I suppose, but I felt compelled to speak against ridiculous politicization. To speculate that porn drives people to kill is ridiculous. I had to reply by disproving what ASchlafly typed earlier.--[[User:BillyC|BillyC]] 02:45, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:In my limited experience, the main bad side effects of pornography are a distorted view of the opposite sex and spending too much time on the Internet, not murderous rampages. But, maybe Aschlafly knows something I don't, and ISN'T just using a terrible tragedy as an excuse to try to drive one of his pet [[scapegoats]] out of the village again. --[[User:VVV|VVV]] 02:49, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

This is quite insane. I guess ASchlafly has some arrestive power if he can turn the focus of this discussion to pornography. I've said all that I can. If what I have said makes no more sense than ASchlafly's connection between porn and murderous rampages, then I have failed (or maybe you didn't want to listen to begin with).--[[User:BillyC|BillyC]] 02:56, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Kangaroo

2007-04-18T08:24:28Z

Save Our Values: /* Origins */ Avoiding link redirects

[[Image:Kangaroo-bree.png|right|Eastern Grey Kangaroo (''Macropus giganteus'')]]

'''Kangaroos''' are the largest [[Marsupials]] alive today. They are now native to the continent of [[Australia]]. There are four sub-kinds in the kangaroo [[baramin]] -- the Western Grey Kangaroo, the Eastern Grey Kangaroo, the Red Kangaroo, and the Antilopine Kangaroo -- or at least sixty-nine [[species]] according to evolutionary views<ref name="kangbio">[http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/trade-use/wild-harvest/kangaroo/biology.html "Kangaroo Biology"], Australian Government</ref>, which include wallabies and tree-kangaroos.

==Description==

Kangaroos have large ears on top of their small heads, a long snout, and short arms with clawed fingers. Their legs are strong, powerful, and are made for leaping. Their feet have four toes at the end of elongated metatarsi that they rest on when standing. They also have a powerful, thick tail that is used as support when standing, a third-leg when walking slowly, and for counterbalance while leaping. Like all Marsupials, female kangaroos have a pouch on their stomachs in which they carry their young.

===Diet===

Kangaroos are [[herbivore]]s, eating grass, roots, and shrubs. They have a chambered stomach similar to [[sheep]] and [[cattle]]. They are able to regurgitate their food, chew it again as [[cud]], and then swallow it for digestion.

===Social Order===

Kangaroos travel in [[mob | mobs]] of about ten or more males and females. The leader of the mob, called a "boomer", is a male determined by age and size. The boomer has access to females in his mob for mating and will wander around the mob intimidating any other males who try to mate with his harem.

===Reproduction===

Female kangaroos usually only have one baby kangaroo (called a "joey") at a time. The newborn joey weighs as little as .03 ounces when first born, after which it crawls into its mothers pouch where it will nurse, grow, and develop. Red Kangaroo joeys will stay in their mothers pouch for about eight months and Grey Kangaroo joeys stay in there for about one year.

===Development of the Young in the Pouch===

Kangaroos have adapted to the varied conditions across Australia in many ways. One of the most unusual, is the way females of some species can delay the progress of pregnancy. In this way the female is ready to give birth to a replacement for the young in her pouch if it dies early, or within a week of when it permanently leaves the pouch. This ability to delay births means that there can be up to 12 months between a mating and the birth of the young one resulting from that mating (when the normal gestation period is less than 35 days). It also means that the species can best respond to periods of drought and plenty.

Species which have this unusual ability normally mate again soon after the female gives birth. The tiny newly born kangaroo (less than 25 mm long) moves unaided into its mother's pouch and attaches itself to one of four teats. During the early stages of pouch life the young is permanently attached to the teat, but as it matures and begins to grow hair it also develops the ability to release and reattach itself to the teat.

In the late stages of pouch life, once it has a thin covering of fur, the young one begins to explore the outside world for increasing lengths of time until eventually it is old enough to be excluded permanently from the pouch. Complete weaning may take a number of months more after the young has permanently left the pouch. If the mother gives birth during this time, the newborn young will attach itself to a different teat to that being used by the older young. It is remarkable that when this happens the mother produces two different kinds of milk for the two different-aged young<ref name="kangbio"/>.

==Origins==

Consistent with their view that the fossil record as a whole does not support the evolutionary position<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/fossils.asp "Fossils Questions and Answers"], Answers In Genesis</ref><ref>[http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/fsslrcrd.html Creation/Evolution Quotes: Fossil Record]</ref>, creationists state that there is a lack of transitional fossils showing an evolutionary origin of kangaroos:

<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
The Macropod family is alleged to have evolved from either the Phalangeridae (possums) or Burramyidae (pygmy-possums)...</blockquote>

<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
However, there are no fossils of animals which appear to be intermediate between possums and kangaroos. Wabularoo naughtoni, supposed ancestor of all the macropods, was clearly a kangaroo (it greatly resembles the potoroos which dwell in Victoria’s forests). If modern kangaroos really did come from it, all this shows is the same as we see happening today, namely that kangaroos come from kangaroos, "after their kind." <ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/755/ Kangaroos: God's amazing craftsmanship], by Rebecca Driver, ''Creation'' vol. 20 No.3.</ref> </blockquote>

According to the [[origins theory]] model used by [[creation science | creation scientists]], modern kangaroos are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern kangaroo baramin that were taken aboard [[Noah's Ark]] prior to the [[Great Flood]]. It has not yet been determined by [[baraminology | baraminologists]] whether kangaroos form a [[holobaramin]] with the [[wallaby]], [[tree-kangaroo]], [[wallaroo]], [[pademelon]] and [[quokka]], or if all these species are in fact [[Baraminology|apobaramin]]ic or [[Baraminology|polybaramin]]ic.

After the Flood, these kangaroos bred from the Ark passengers migrated to Australia. There is debate whether this migration happened over land<ref name="cab17">[http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter17.pdf "How did animals get from the Ark to places such as Australia"], Chapter 17 of ''The Creation Answers Book'', by Don Batten (Ed.)</ref> with lower sea levels during the post-flood [[ice age]], or before the supercontinent of [[Pangea]] broke apart<ref>[http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2808 "Pangea and the Flood"], Apologetics Press</ref>, or if they [[rafting (ecology) | rafted]] on mats of vegetation torn up by the receding flood waters.<ref name="cab17"/>
The idea that God simply generated kangaroos into existence there is considered by most creation researchers to be contra-Biblical.

Other views on kangaroo origins include the belief of some Australian [[aborigines]] that kangaroos were sung into existence by their ancestors during the "[[Dreamtime]]" <ref>[http://www.painsley.org.uk/RE/signposts/y8/1-1creationandenvironment/c-abor.htm "An Aborigine Creation Story"]</ref> and the evolutionary view that kangaroos and the other marsupials evolved from a common marsupial ancestor which lived hundreds of millions of years ago.<ref>[http://www.accessexcellence.org/AE/AEPC/WWC/1995/australia.html "Australian Mammals: Evolutionary Development as a Result of Geographic Isolation"]</ref>

== External Links ==
*[http://www.exzooberance.com/virtual%20zoo/they%20walk/kangaroo/kangaroo.htm Kangaroo facts]
*[http://www.christiananswers.net/kids/kangaroos.html Answers About Kangaroos]
*[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/migration.asp How did animals get from the Ark to places such as Australia?]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Marsupials]]

Stupa

2007-04-13T18:42:04Z

Save Our Values: pretty fancy-looking

A stupa is an ornate [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] dome-like stone structure in which the remains of monks were placed.

Stupa

2007-04-13T18:41:06Z

Save Our Values: wlink

A stupa is a [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] dome-like stone structure in which the remains of monks were placed.

Stupa

2007-04-13T18:39:34Z

Save Our Values: fixing up the sentence a little. But what does this have to do with being conservative?

A stupa is a Buddhist dome-like stone structure in which the remains of monks were placed.

Blue-collar workers

2007-04-13T18:03:19Z

Save Our Values:

Blue-collar workers are laborers who work in factories or other union-type jobs. Blue-collar workers often use their hands, get their clothes dirty during the job, and do not sit behind a desk. They are called "blue-collar" workers because of the sterotypical image of them wearing blue colored overalls or other work shirts, rather than a white shirt and tie.

They are the core of the Republican party, which supports traditional values and down-to-Earth workers.

{{stub}}

Saddam Hussein

2007-04-13T17:58:30Z

Save Our Values: president -> despot. Don't use Saddam's propaganda

[[Image:Sfgfhdgjh.jpg|right|thumb]]
'''Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti''', (''Arabic'' صدام حسين عبد المجيد التكريتي) (April 28, 1937 – December 30, 2006) was the [[Sunni]] despot of [[Iraq]] from July 16, 1979<ref>http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aasaddambio.htm</ref> to December 14, 2003<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3317429.stm</ref>.

As is often the case, national alignments can change rapidly. During the 1980s, during the [[Iran-Iraq War]], the [[United States of America|United States]] considered Saddam Hussein to be a friend and assisted him with loans <ref>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/</ref>. During the 1990s, however, after Iraq invaded and annexed Kuwait Hussein was considered one of America's greatest enemies.

He was one of the few modern leaders who used [[WMD]]s, specifically [[chemical weapon]]s, in war; and was the instigator of at least two wars: the [[Iran-Iraq War]] during the 1980s and Iraq's August, 1990, invasion of Kuwait.

In 2003 a "[[coalition of the willing]]" invaded Iraq to force a change of regime from Saddam's [[Ba'athist]] party to a constitutional liberal democracy. A further aim was to break the alliance between [[al Qaeda]] and Saddam Hussein, though this link has never been proven. <ref>[http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp]</ref>.

Captured by U.S. forces on December 13, 2003, Saddam was brought to trial under the Iraqi interim government set up by U.S.-led forces. On November 5 2006, he was convicted of charges related to the executions of 148 Iraqi Shi'ites suspected of planning an assassination attempt against him, and was sentenced to death by hanging. Saddam was executed on December 30, 2006. Interestingly, the name "Saddam" means "one who confronts".{{fact}}

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Heads of state]]

Saddam Hussein

2007-04-13T17:55:35Z

Save Our Values: Not just "TIES"!

[[Image:Sfgfhdgjh.jpg|right|thumb]]
'''Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti''', (''Arabic'' صدام حسين عبد المجيد التكريتي) (April 28, 1937 – December 30, 2006) was the [[Sunni]] president of [[Iraq]] from July 16, 1979<ref>http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aasaddambio.htm</ref> to December 14, 2003<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3317429.stm</ref>.

As is often the case, national alignments can change rapidly. During the 1980s, during the [[Iran-Iraq War]], the [[United States of America|United States]] considered Saddam Hussein to be a friend and assisted him with loans <ref>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/</ref>. During the 1990s, however, after Iraq invaded and annexed Kuwait Hussein was considered one of America's greatest enemies.

He was one of the few modern leaders who used [[WMD]]s, specifically [[chemical weapon]]s, in war; and was the instigator of at least two wars: the [[Iran-Iraq War]] during the 1980s and Iraq's August, 1990, invasion of Kuwait.

In 2003 a coalition of the willing invaded Iraq and to force a change of regime from Saddam's [[Ba'athist]] party to a constitutional liberal democracy. A further aim was to break the alliance between [[al Qaeda]] and Saddam Hussein. <ref>[http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp]</ref>.

Captured by U.S. forces on December 13, 2003, Saddam was brought to trial under the Iraqi interim government set up by U.S.-led forces. On November 5 2006, he was convicted of charges related to the executions of 148 Iraqi Shi'ites suspected of planning an assassination attempt against him, and was sentenced to death by hanging. Saddam was executed on December 30, 2006. Interestingly, the name "Saddam" means "one who confronts".{{fact}}

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Heads of state]]

User:Save Our Values

2007-04-12T13:25:25Z

Save Our Values: Introducing myself :)

Hello. I'm a family man and, as you can see from my username, I'm concerned about our values, which are imperiled by the liberal elites ruling the media.