gmc wrote: 1. ...find out the nationalities and background of the terrorists, find out about the regime in saudi arabia and decide for yourself whether it is a shining example of middle eastern democracy and freedom.
2. same thing. try researching sectarianism in the USA. Why so many different christian sects? You went to a catholic school, why? How many catholic presidents have their been and why not more? Research the origins of anti semitism and the christian connection. If you don't already know the gist of it all what planet are you on?
3. George Bush and tony Blair-well they worry me.
4. so what? jews were involved in banking all over the place, in fact it's one of the favourite points raised by anti semites that they were behind all the wars and financed both sides on a regular basis. I'm surprised at you mentioning it. Why do you think it significant?1. Oh, I know their nationalities, and I know what kind of regime it is. Where did I ever express or imply that it was democratic? I am not aware of the former (the terrorists) and latter (The royal house) supporting each other, my understanding was that they are opposed, but my mind is open on the matter. If you have evidence to the contrary, present it from reliable sources, not propaganda material.
The Shah of Iran was a ruthless dictator too, but under his leadership Iran was probably the most progressive and prosperous nation in the region. Now, in case you haven't noticed, it is not only a cesspool of Islamic lunacy, but it is working at fever pitch to develop nuclear capability, which it will NOT be allowed to achieve, and which may very well result in it becoming the target of the first nuclear strike since Nagasaki.
If the USA, the UK and Israel are given the choice between capitulating to Iranian terrorism or destroying Iran, I can promise you that Iran will be destroyed and then the other Islamic terrorist nations will be aksed, 'OK, who wants to be next?' It's a terrible thing to contemplate but what is the alternative? You live in the UK, gmc, do you really want more terrorist attacks in your country? More innocent Brits murdered in the Underground and in airplanes? How much are you willing to take before fighting back? Do you value your freedom, your way of life, or would you prefer to live under Islamic tyranny? If the latter, I will personally buy you a one-way ticket to Iran.
The raid on the Finsbury Park mosque was a good place to start, and the recent series of arrests were encouraging, but sooner rather the later the fight is going to have to be taken directly to the source of the terrorism.
3. George W. Bush will be gone in less than 2 1/2 years, Tony Blair probably much sooner. Islamic terrorism will continue until it is destroyed.
4. There wasn't really any particular point. You brought up the Rothschilds. What was YOUR point? I just added some interesting facts in American history. I have been dealing with banks all my life, I had my first savings account when I was a little kid. I don't remember ever seeing anyone in any of those banks who I thought looked particularly Jewish.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Pinky wrote: Jewish people are quite distinguishable from other people are they?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't they history of banking being talked about?
Most people have had experience of banks too ya know.It was just a little joke, your Pinkship.
Islamic terrorism, though, is DEAD serious.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't they history of banking being talked about?
Most people have had experience of banks too ya know.It was just a little joke, your Pinkship.
Islamic terrorism, though, is DEAD serious.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
It's all a matter of scale, Bronwen. It's a matter of bodycounts. Terrorism against the west is a pinprick - nothing that can be done in that direction will ever kill millions of people on their own soil. Terrorism sponsored by the west has been far more destructive of life; terror imposed by western states directly, using their own armed forces, has killed millions even if we just consider the last thirty years. The errors of militant muslims and the smug outrage of self-satisfied supporters of western "democracies" reminds me irresistably of the parable - "why do you notice the splinter in your brother's eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?"
Stop killing the natives first - value other lives as highly as you value your own. Then consider how to undo the damage that's led to and stoked up the militant response. The precondition for achieving either of those goals is to stop supporting the killers governing the Coalition of the Willing.
Stop killing the natives first - value other lives as highly as you value your own. Then consider how to undo the damage that's led to and stoked up the militant response. The precondition for achieving either of those goals is to stop supporting the killers governing the Coalition of the Willing.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Bronwen wrote: 1. Oh, I know their nationalities, and I know what kind of regime it is. Where did I ever express or imply that it was democratic? I am not aware of the former (the terrorists) and latter (The royal house) supporting each other, my understanding was that they are opposed, but my mind is open on the matter. If you have evidence to the contrary, present it from reliable sources, not propaganda material.
The Shah of Iran was a ruthless dictator too, but under his leadership Iran was probably the most progressive and prosperous nation in the region. Now, in case you haven't noticed, it is not only a cesspool of Islamic lunacy, but it is working at fever pitch to develop nuclear capability, which it will NOT be allowed to achieve, and which may very well result in it becoming the target of the first nuclear strike since Nagasaki.
If the USA, the UK and Israel are given the choice between capitulating to Iranian terrorism or destroying Iran, I can promise you that Iran will be destroyed and then the other Islamic terrorist nations will be aksed, 'OK, who wants to be next?' It's a terrible thing to contemplate but what is the alternative? You live in the UK, gmc, do you really want more terrorist attacks in your country? More innocent Brits murdered in the Underground and in airplanes? How much are you willing to take before fighting back? Do you value your freedom, your way of life, or would you prefer to live under Islamic tyranny? If the latter, I will personally buy you a one-way ticket to Iran.
The raid on the Finsbury Park mosque was a good place to start, and the recent series of arrests were encouraging, but sooner rather the later the fight is going to have to be taken directly to the source of the terrorism.
3. George W. Bush will be gone in less than 2 1/2 years, Tony Blair probably much sooner. Islamic terrorism will continue until it is destroyed.
4. There wasn't really any particular point. You brought up the Rothschilds. What was YOUR point? I just added some interesting facts in American history. I have been dealing with banks all my life, I had my first savings account when I was a little kid. I don't remember ever seeing anyone in any of those banks who I thought looked particularly Jewish.
Like I said, do your own research, clearly anything remotely objective you view as being propoganda.
The Shah of Iran was a ruthless dictator too, but under his leadership Iran was probably the most progressive and prosperous nation in the region. Now, in case you haven't noticed, it is not only a cesspool of Islamic lunacy, but it is working at fever pitch to develop nuclear capability, which it will NOT be allowed to achieve, and which may very well result in it becoming the target of the first nuclear strike since Nagasaki.
I suppose that's why he got overthrown by his own people. Maybe if the west hadn't helped prop up a repressive regime and encouiraged the shah to introduce democracy islamic extremists might not have been so attractive an alternative, perhaps if Iraq, encoraged by the west hadn't started a war against Iran moderates might have had more control by now as people get fed up with fundamentalism pretty quickly of left alone by outsiders. Who knows?
If the USA, the UK and Israel are given the choice between capitulating to Iranian terrorism or destroying Iran, I can promise you that Iran will be destroyed and then the other Islamic terrorist nations will be aksed, 'OK, who wants to be next?' It's a terrible thing to contemplate but what is the alternative? You live in the UK, gmc, do you really want more terrorist attacks in your country? More innocent Brits murdered in the Underground and in airplanes? How much are you willing to take before fighting back? Do you value your freedom, your way of life, or would you prefer to live under Islamic tyranny? If the latter, I will personally buy you a one-way ticket to Iran.
What iranian terrorism? So far islamic terrorists have been saudi, pakistani or british born. The only iranian terrorist were the ones that took over the iranian embassy in London in 1980.
We have a long history of terrorists attacks in particular by one supported and funded by many americans under the delusion that the IRA were freedom fighters. France spain and germany have also suffered terrorist attacks. This is hardly world war three and western democracy is not about to fall. I'm afraid we don't have the same kind of hysteria here that there seems to be in america. terroriust attacks annoy and make people angry they don't make us afraid to go out.
what you can't do is fight back by flattening where they come from, fight back yes but don't take actions that gain the terrorists more and more support. Getting hysterical and seeing enemies all over the place is silly.
I value my freedom very much which is why I object to new labour attempts to impose big brother type surveillance on us and try and get me to carry ID cards. The idea that measures like that will protect us is ludicrous as is the assumption that terrorists won't be able to fake ID or find ways to circumvent electrinic surveillance, you don't win any fight for freedom by giving away those very same rights and only a half wit would fall for it.
I happen to live in a country where the freedom from arbitrary arrest is fundamental so I am not prepared to give any govt the authority to chuck in jail anyone it doesn't like and they say is a threat to national security. Imagine what would happen the next time we have the likes of the miners strike or the picketing of petrol stations again and we have given a govt those kind of powers and are daft enough to trust politicians.
TB is a liar and a hypocrite, if he wants a crusade he can go himself. Islamic terrorists are a very real threat, Israel has just made them even more powerful by it's action in Lebanon.
The Shah of Iran was a ruthless dictator too, but under his leadership Iran was probably the most progressive and prosperous nation in the region. Now, in case you haven't noticed, it is not only a cesspool of Islamic lunacy, but it is working at fever pitch to develop nuclear capability, which it will NOT be allowed to achieve, and which may very well result in it becoming the target of the first nuclear strike since Nagasaki.
If the USA, the UK and Israel are given the choice between capitulating to Iranian terrorism or destroying Iran, I can promise you that Iran will be destroyed and then the other Islamic terrorist nations will be aksed, 'OK, who wants to be next?' It's a terrible thing to contemplate but what is the alternative? You live in the UK, gmc, do you really want more terrorist attacks in your country? More innocent Brits murdered in the Underground and in airplanes? How much are you willing to take before fighting back? Do you value your freedom, your way of life, or would you prefer to live under Islamic tyranny? If the latter, I will personally buy you a one-way ticket to Iran.
The raid on the Finsbury Park mosque was a good place to start, and the recent series of arrests were encouraging, but sooner rather the later the fight is going to have to be taken directly to the source of the terrorism.
3. George W. Bush will be gone in less than 2 1/2 years, Tony Blair probably much sooner. Islamic terrorism will continue until it is destroyed.
4. There wasn't really any particular point. You brought up the Rothschilds. What was YOUR point? I just added some interesting facts in American history. I have been dealing with banks all my life, I had my first savings account when I was a little kid. I don't remember ever seeing anyone in any of those banks who I thought looked particularly Jewish.
Like I said, do your own research, clearly anything remotely objective you view as being propoganda.
The Shah of Iran was a ruthless dictator too, but under his leadership Iran was probably the most progressive and prosperous nation in the region. Now, in case you haven't noticed, it is not only a cesspool of Islamic lunacy, but it is working at fever pitch to develop nuclear capability, which it will NOT be allowed to achieve, and which may very well result in it becoming the target of the first nuclear strike since Nagasaki.
I suppose that's why he got overthrown by his own people. Maybe if the west hadn't helped prop up a repressive regime and encouiraged the shah to introduce democracy islamic extremists might not have been so attractive an alternative, perhaps if Iraq, encoraged by the west hadn't started a war against Iran moderates might have had more control by now as people get fed up with fundamentalism pretty quickly of left alone by outsiders. Who knows?
If the USA, the UK and Israel are given the choice between capitulating to Iranian terrorism or destroying Iran, I can promise you that Iran will be destroyed and then the other Islamic terrorist nations will be aksed, 'OK, who wants to be next?' It's a terrible thing to contemplate but what is the alternative? You live in the UK, gmc, do you really want more terrorist attacks in your country? More innocent Brits murdered in the Underground and in airplanes? How much are you willing to take before fighting back? Do you value your freedom, your way of life, or would you prefer to live under Islamic tyranny? If the latter, I will personally buy you a one-way ticket to Iran.
What iranian terrorism? So far islamic terrorists have been saudi, pakistani or british born. The only iranian terrorist were the ones that took over the iranian embassy in London in 1980.
We have a long history of terrorists attacks in particular by one supported and funded by many americans under the delusion that the IRA were freedom fighters. France spain and germany have also suffered terrorist attacks. This is hardly world war three and western democracy is not about to fall. I'm afraid we don't have the same kind of hysteria here that there seems to be in america. terroriust attacks annoy and make people angry they don't make us afraid to go out.
what you can't do is fight back by flattening where they come from, fight back yes but don't take actions that gain the terrorists more and more support. Getting hysterical and seeing enemies all over the place is silly.
I value my freedom very much which is why I object to new labour attempts to impose big brother type surveillance on us and try and get me to carry ID cards. The idea that measures like that will protect us is ludicrous as is the assumption that terrorists won't be able to fake ID or find ways to circumvent electrinic surveillance, you don't win any fight for freedom by giving away those very same rights and only a half wit would fall for it.
I happen to live in a country where the freedom from arbitrary arrest is fundamental so I am not prepared to give any govt the authority to chuck in jail anyone it doesn't like and they say is a threat to national security. Imagine what would happen the next time we have the likes of the miners strike or the picketing of petrol stations again and we have given a govt those kind of powers and are daft enough to trust politicians.
TB is a liar and a hypocrite, if he wants a crusade he can go himself. Islamic terrorists are a very real threat, Israel has just made them even more powerful by it's action in Lebanon.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
I’m amazed at the press stories regarding the ‘civilians’ who have been killed and injured.
Of course there were some but in almost all cases these so called civilians were either terrorists or their active supporters, either actively assisting in very practical ways or acting as human shields.
What I and so many of the rest of us involved feel is absolute disgust at the worlds press and how the journalists were so intent on getting a story at all costs that the truth simply didn’t matter, just as long as they got their story on the page and their name at the end. Of course the press was full of pictures of where we had attacked,
That was where the news was. What wasn’t shown was the very localised areas compared to the parts of the cities were there had been no rockets being launched from.
Of course there were bridges destroyed and roads disrupted, these were the routes along which munitions were being moved, what was not shown was the minor roads that the people were able to pass along without difficulty. At least those who wanted to could and did.
Very little about how we targeted the rocket launchers either, nor how they were deliberately situated in urban areas. It obviously didn’t fit with the storyline that they WANTED to deliver, the one that people WANTED to believe.
No mention of the effect on my country, at the loss of life that we suffered and how it would have been so much worse if the anti-personnel rockets had hit the region from which we had evacuated so many of our non-combatants and civilians or where the few that remained spent so many hours in deep shelters. No news there. No pictures for the world to go “Oh how AWFUL†about.
I suspect that Olmert is finished by this. He spent too much time fretting about the worlds press and not enough time and effort simply getting on with the job. We need another Sharon. Maybe Netanyahu will re-emerge on the political scene. He or someone like him is what is needed and the sooner the better so that when this phoney cease fire is collapsed by attacks from the party of allah we can do what must be done and not be restrained by a man who simply hasn’t got the first hand knowledge needed to make the right decisions.
Then the cease fire, just as we were overcoming what were in actuality the Syrian army. Now the sell out is coming clear with the Lebanese refusing to disarm the fighters and the French predicting it will take a year before they get their troops in to act as a protection of us from further assaults.
We should have been simply left to finish the job. As it is once the rockets start to come over to us again, and they will, we will simply have to go back and do what we should have done this time, and we will.
I’m tired. More later plus some details about a few incidents that took place.
Of course there were some but in almost all cases these so called civilians were either terrorists or their active supporters, either actively assisting in very practical ways or acting as human shields.
What I and so many of the rest of us involved feel is absolute disgust at the worlds press and how the journalists were so intent on getting a story at all costs that the truth simply didn’t matter, just as long as they got their story on the page and their name at the end. Of course the press was full of pictures of where we had attacked,
That was where the news was. What wasn’t shown was the very localised areas compared to the parts of the cities were there had been no rockets being launched from.
Of course there were bridges destroyed and roads disrupted, these were the routes along which munitions were being moved, what was not shown was the minor roads that the people were able to pass along without difficulty. At least those who wanted to could and did.
Very little about how we targeted the rocket launchers either, nor how they were deliberately situated in urban areas. It obviously didn’t fit with the storyline that they WANTED to deliver, the one that people WANTED to believe.
No mention of the effect on my country, at the loss of life that we suffered and how it would have been so much worse if the anti-personnel rockets had hit the region from which we had evacuated so many of our non-combatants and civilians or where the few that remained spent so many hours in deep shelters. No news there. No pictures for the world to go “Oh how AWFUL†about.
I suspect that Olmert is finished by this. He spent too much time fretting about the worlds press and not enough time and effort simply getting on with the job. We need another Sharon. Maybe Netanyahu will re-emerge on the political scene. He or someone like him is what is needed and the sooner the better so that when this phoney cease fire is collapsed by attacks from the party of allah we can do what must be done and not be restrained by a man who simply hasn’t got the first hand knowledge needed to make the right decisions.
Then the cease fire, just as we were overcoming what were in actuality the Syrian army. Now the sell out is coming clear with the Lebanese refusing to disarm the fighters and the French predicting it will take a year before they get their troops in to act as a protection of us from further assaults.
We should have been simply left to finish the job. As it is once the rockets start to come over to us again, and they will, we will simply have to go back and do what we should have done this time, and we will.
I’m tired. More later plus some details about a few incidents that took place.
-
cherandbuster
- Posts: 8594
- Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 11:33 am
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Welcome back, Golem.
Glad to see that you're safe. :-6
Glad to see that you're safe. :-6
Live Life with
PASSION!:guitarist
PASSION!:guitarist
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
gmc, I had limited time this AM so I was unable to respond to all of your questions and will do so briefly now. You are a pretty good spokesman for your point of view, but short on documentation. 'Go look it up, if I said it it must be true', doesn't cut it.gmc wrote: 1. Why so many different christian sects?
2. You went to a catholic school, why?
3. How many catholic presidents have their been and why not more?
4. Research the origins of anti semitism and the christian connection. If you don't already know the gist of it all what planet are you on?
5. We have a long history of ter rorists attacks in particular by one supported and funded by many americans under the delusion that the IRA were freedom fighters. 1. I will gladly discuss that with you on the Christianity forum. It is clearly off the topic here.
2. Why not?
3. One who was a practicing Catholic, another who was baptized a Catholic but later became a nincompoop. Several vice-presidential candidates. Alfred E. Smith, who ran for president against Hoover in 1928, almost certainly lost because of his religious affiliation. I cannot see any modern candidate losing for that reason.
No Jewish presidents. One losing candidate who was half-Jewish by ancestry but Christian by faith. One losing Orthodox-Jewish vice-presidential candidate.
To my knowledge, no Mormons, no Jehovah's Witnesses, no Seventh-Day Adventists, no Scientologists (though John Travolta may run), no Holy Rollers. What is your point?
4. Well, I think we already covered that. I don't see the history of the Middle Ages, while interesting and important, as being very relevant to today's political situation.
5. Well, I think we've discussed that before too. You have that as part of your history because you are occupying six counties which don't belong to you. It's not a matter of freedom but of justice. Having said that, I don't condone IRA crimes and so neither does my Church.
2. You went to a catholic school, why?
3. How many catholic presidents have their been and why not more?
4. Research the origins of anti semitism and the christian connection. If you don't already know the gist of it all what planet are you on?
5. We have a long history of ter rorists attacks in particular by one supported and funded by many americans under the delusion that the IRA were freedom fighters. 1. I will gladly discuss that with you on the Christianity forum. It is clearly off the topic here.
2. Why not?
3. One who was a practicing Catholic, another who was baptized a Catholic but later became a nincompoop. Several vice-presidential candidates. Alfred E. Smith, who ran for president against Hoover in 1928, almost certainly lost because of his religious affiliation. I cannot see any modern candidate losing for that reason.
No Jewish presidents. One losing candidate who was half-Jewish by ancestry but Christian by faith. One losing Orthodox-Jewish vice-presidential candidate.
To my knowledge, no Mormons, no Jehovah's Witnesses, no Seventh-Day Adventists, no Scientologists (though John Travolta may run), no Holy Rollers. What is your point?
4. Well, I think we already covered that. I don't see the history of the Middle Ages, while interesting and important, as being very relevant to today's political situation.
5. Well, I think we've discussed that before too. You have that as part of your history because you are occupying six counties which don't belong to you. It's not a matter of freedom but of justice. Having said that, I don't condone IRA crimes and so neither does my Church.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
golem wrote: 1. Maybe Netanyahu will re-emerge on the political scene. He or someone like him is what is needed and the sooner the better so that when this phoney cease fire is collapsed by attacks from the party of allah we can do what must be done and not be restrained by a man who simply hasn’t got the first hand knowledge needed to make the right decisions.
2. We should have been simply left to finish the job. As it is once the rockets start to come over to us again, and they will, we will simply have to go back and do what we should have done this time, and we will.1. Bibi is mah man.
2. I sense that you will have the opportunity to do so soon.
2. We should have been simply left to finish the job. As it is once the rockets start to come over to us again, and they will, we will simply have to go back and do what we should have done this time, and we will.1. Bibi is mah man.
2. I sense that you will have the opportunity to do so soon.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
spot wrote: It's all a matter of scale, Bronwen. It's a matter of bodycounts.... Well, spot, that's very well stated but it lacks substance. How about listing some examples. The only nations I can think of right off hand that are probably blameless in modern times are Switzerland and Andorra. Or maybe you think they're part of the problem too. What is your answer to Islamic extremism? Surrender? Not gonna happen.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Bronwen wrote: gmc, I had limited time this AM so I was unable to respond to all of your questions and will do so briefly now. You are a pretty good spokesman for your point of view, but short on documentation. 'Go look it up, if I said it it must be true', doesn't cut it.1. I will gladly discuss that with you on the Christianity forum. It is clearly off the topic here.
2. Why not?
3. One who was a practicing Catholic, another who was baptized a Catholic but later became a nincompoop. Several vice-presidential candidates. Alfred E. Smith, who ran for president against Hoover in 1928, almost certainly lost because of his religious affiliation. I cannot see any modern candidate losing for that reason.
No Jewish presidents. One losing candidate who was half-Jewish by ancestry but Christian by faith. One losing Orthodox-Jewish vice-presidential candidate.
To my knowledge, no Mormons, no Jehovah's Witnesses, no Seventh-Day Adventists, no Scientologists (though John Travolta may run), no Holy Rollers. What is your point?
4. Well, I think we already covered that. I don't see the history of the Middle Ages, while interesting and important, as being very relevant to today's political situation.
5. Well, I think we've discussed that before too. You have that as part of your history because you are occupying six counties which don't belong to you. It's not a matter of freedom but of justice. Having said that, I don't condone IRA crimes and so neither does my Church.
1. yes off topic, I'm not that interested in discussing it. Quite frankly the differences in what each sect finds to fight about don't really interest me so long as they leave me alone.
2. My point was why did you-or your parents feel the need to keep you away from other religons. Separate faith schools IMO are divisive and encourage sectarianism. But that's also off topic.
Catholic/protestant, sunni/shia, jew/christian,muslim. All preach peace and tolerance and love for their fellow men but seem not to believe it works.
3. Anti catholic sentiment in the US. Religon used to be an issue for a candidate did it not.
4. If you think the past has no bearing on the way we live and think today then I am not going to waste time trying to educateyou. Maybe you should have gone to a secular school:sneaky:
5. Were it only so simple. It would be laughable if your ignorance was not shared by so many of your countrymen who thought O.K. to fund terrorists. I would try and explain but it is off topic and since you see past history as being irrelevant in modern society you wouldn't inderstand. Your church may not have condoned the IRA but they didn't excommunicate any of them either. Not being a catholic I'm not sure how much of a sanction it would have been anyway.
posted by golem
I’m amazed at the press stories regarding the ‘civilians’ who have been killed and injured.
Of course there were some but in almost all cases these so called civilians were either terrorists or their active supporters, either actively assisting in very practical ways or acting as human shields.
What I and so many of the rest of us involved feel is absolute disgust at the worlds press and how the journalists were so intent on getting a story at all costs that the truth simply didn’t matter, just as long as they got their story on the page and their name at the end. Of course the press was full of pictures of where we had attacked,
I'm glad you're okay golem. Don't know what press you read but we also see reports of the rocket attacks on haifa and places. Objective reporting means you have a duty to report all sides of a situation. otherwise it is just propoganda.
2. Why not?
3. One who was a practicing Catholic, another who was baptized a Catholic but later became a nincompoop. Several vice-presidential candidates. Alfred E. Smith, who ran for president against Hoover in 1928, almost certainly lost because of his religious affiliation. I cannot see any modern candidate losing for that reason.
No Jewish presidents. One losing candidate who was half-Jewish by ancestry but Christian by faith. One losing Orthodox-Jewish vice-presidential candidate.
To my knowledge, no Mormons, no Jehovah's Witnesses, no Seventh-Day Adventists, no Scientologists (though John Travolta may run), no Holy Rollers. What is your point?
4. Well, I think we already covered that. I don't see the history of the Middle Ages, while interesting and important, as being very relevant to today's political situation.
5. Well, I think we've discussed that before too. You have that as part of your history because you are occupying six counties which don't belong to you. It's not a matter of freedom but of justice. Having said that, I don't condone IRA crimes and so neither does my Church.
1. yes off topic, I'm not that interested in discussing it. Quite frankly the differences in what each sect finds to fight about don't really interest me so long as they leave me alone.
2. My point was why did you-or your parents feel the need to keep you away from other religons. Separate faith schools IMO are divisive and encourage sectarianism. But that's also off topic.
Catholic/protestant, sunni/shia, jew/christian,muslim. All preach peace and tolerance and love for their fellow men but seem not to believe it works.
3. Anti catholic sentiment in the US. Religon used to be an issue for a candidate did it not.
4. If you think the past has no bearing on the way we live and think today then I am not going to waste time trying to educateyou. Maybe you should have gone to a secular school:sneaky:
5. Were it only so simple. It would be laughable if your ignorance was not shared by so many of your countrymen who thought O.K. to fund terrorists. I would try and explain but it is off topic and since you see past history as being irrelevant in modern society you wouldn't inderstand. Your church may not have condoned the IRA but they didn't excommunicate any of them either. Not being a catholic I'm not sure how much of a sanction it would have been anyway.
posted by golem
I’m amazed at the press stories regarding the ‘civilians’ who have been killed and injured.
Of course there were some but in almost all cases these so called civilians were either terrorists or their active supporters, either actively assisting in very practical ways or acting as human shields.
What I and so many of the rest of us involved feel is absolute disgust at the worlds press and how the journalists were so intent on getting a story at all costs that the truth simply didn’t matter, just as long as they got their story on the page and their name at the end. Of course the press was full of pictures of where we had attacked,
I'm glad you're okay golem. Don't know what press you read but we also see reports of the rocket attacks on haifa and places. Objective reporting means you have a duty to report all sides of a situation. otherwise it is just propoganda.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
golem wrote: in almost all cases these so called civilians were either terrorists or their active supporters, either actively assisting in very practical ways or acting as human shields.Perhaps you could substantiate that assertion in some way? It goes entirely against logic that a terror-bomber from an F16 could differentiate civilians on that basis, and they're the people who killed most in the last few weeks. No rocket fire was sent into Israel from southern Beirut, for example - what "human shield" philosophy comes into play for the deaths there? No rocket fire was sent into Israel from inside any buildings anywhere, come to that - you can't fire rocket salvoes from inside buildings. Why are there any flattened buildings in the Lebanon at all?
As for changing prime ministers, I'd give the job back to Sharon and have done with it.
As for changing prime ministers, I'd give the job back to Sharon and have done with it.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Bronwen wrote: Well, spot, that's very well stated but it lacks substance. How about listing some examples. The only nations I can think of right off hand that are probably blameless in modern times are Switzerland and Andorra. Or maybe you think they're part of the problem too. What is your answer to Islamic extremism? Surrender? Not gonna happen.What on earth did I say that requires me to produce yet more "show me your sources"? That's a fool's game at the best of times but it seems rather irrelevant here.
The answer to Islamic extremism is to stop killing Muslims and to offer them the hand of friendship instead. Invading and humiliating a Middle Eastern country and killing millions of Muslims generates, unsurprisingly, a fanatical response. Remove the cause, stop applying the pressure, and the reaction will eventually simmer down. Extremism is a reasonable reaction to the shocking and unethical behavior of the Coalition of the Willing, and has "Islam" as its identifier because Islam has been an often-applied label to their target. Go home and the reactionary fighters will disband.
The answer to Islamic extremism is to stop killing Muslims and to offer them the hand of friendship instead. Invading and humiliating a Middle Eastern country and killing millions of Muslims generates, unsurprisingly, a fanatical response. Remove the cause, stop applying the pressure, and the reaction will eventually simmer down. Extremism is a reasonable reaction to the shocking and unethical behavior of the Coalition of the Willing, and has "Islam" as its identifier because Islam has been an often-applied label to their target. Go home and the reactionary fighters will disband.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
onsekiz wrote: lol, great cartoon
found his page
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/
try this one.
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/
found his page
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/
try this one.
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
spot wrote: 1. What on earth did I say that requires me to produce yet more "show me your sources"? That's a fool's game at the best of times but it seems rather irrelevant here.
2. The answer to Islamic extremism is to stop killing Muslims and to offer them the hand of friendship instead.
3. Invading and humiliating a Middle Eastern country and killing millions of Muslims generates, unsurprisingly, a fanatical response.
4. Remove the cause, stop applying the pressure, and the reaction will eventually simmer down. Extremism is a reasonable reaction to the shocking and unethical behavior of the Coalition of the Willing, and has "Islam" as its identifier because Islam has been an often-applied label to their target. Go home and the reactionary fighters will disband.1. You are not required to do or prove anything. Participation in this forum is, obviously, voluntary. However, if you wish your assertions to carry any weight you should be prepared to substantiate them.
Claiming that the terrorists are really the victims and the victims really the terrorists, as Israel's enemies have been doing for 60 years, doesn't cut it because the facts of the history of that region and that period don't support that. I am still waiting for ONE poster here to cite ONE act of oppression or hardship imposed by Israel on the so-called 'Palestinians', or for that matter other Arabs, that was not the direct result of, or in retaliation for, Arab atrocities against Israel.
2. Absolute horsecrap. You don't offer 'the hand of friendship' to lunatics who are out in the streets of Iran, beating themselves with whips like perverted idiots, and screaming, 'Death to Israel, Death to America'. Such human garbage has no interest in friendship, and, as I noted earlier on this very thread, anyone who makes such threats has absolutely no complaint if either of those nations kills him/her first. It's called 'self defense'.
3. All of the Axis nations were humiliated by the end of WWII and except for a tiny group of hardliners, most of whom fled halfway around the world, the 'humiliated' survivors were intelligent enough to realize that the whole affair was their fault entirely. That is what happens when a nation allows murderous thugs to take control of their government. I have no problem with making friends with the Muslims, but that will occur only AFTER the terrorists in their midst are destroyed. This SHOULD be done WITHIN Islam, just as the Germans should have stopped Hitler at Munich, but that is obviously not happening, so the nations who are being threatened will have to remove the threat themselves.
4. If you are too dense to see that the cause is the Islamic extremists, who teach that God rewards terrorists for acts of mass murder against innocent civilians, I guess we're at an impasse. That is certainly obvious to me. You can blather all you wish about the terrorists really being the victims and vice-versa, and providing no examples. Not convincing. Not even rational.
2. The answer to Islamic extremism is to stop killing Muslims and to offer them the hand of friendship instead.
3. Invading and humiliating a Middle Eastern country and killing millions of Muslims generates, unsurprisingly, a fanatical response.
4. Remove the cause, stop applying the pressure, and the reaction will eventually simmer down. Extremism is a reasonable reaction to the shocking and unethical behavior of the Coalition of the Willing, and has "Islam" as its identifier because Islam has been an often-applied label to their target. Go home and the reactionary fighters will disband.1. You are not required to do or prove anything. Participation in this forum is, obviously, voluntary. However, if you wish your assertions to carry any weight you should be prepared to substantiate them.
Claiming that the terrorists are really the victims and the victims really the terrorists, as Israel's enemies have been doing for 60 years, doesn't cut it because the facts of the history of that region and that period don't support that. I am still waiting for ONE poster here to cite ONE act of oppression or hardship imposed by Israel on the so-called 'Palestinians', or for that matter other Arabs, that was not the direct result of, or in retaliation for, Arab atrocities against Israel.
2. Absolute horsecrap. You don't offer 'the hand of friendship' to lunatics who are out in the streets of Iran, beating themselves with whips like perverted idiots, and screaming, 'Death to Israel, Death to America'. Such human garbage has no interest in friendship, and, as I noted earlier on this very thread, anyone who makes such threats has absolutely no complaint if either of those nations kills him/her first. It's called 'self defense'.
3. All of the Axis nations were humiliated by the end of WWII and except for a tiny group of hardliners, most of whom fled halfway around the world, the 'humiliated' survivors were intelligent enough to realize that the whole affair was their fault entirely. That is what happens when a nation allows murderous thugs to take control of their government. I have no problem with making friends with the Muslims, but that will occur only AFTER the terrorists in their midst are destroyed. This SHOULD be done WITHIN Islam, just as the Germans should have stopped Hitler at Munich, but that is obviously not happening, so the nations who are being threatened will have to remove the threat themselves.
4. If you are too dense to see that the cause is the Islamic extremists, who teach that God rewards terrorists for acts of mass murder against innocent civilians, I guess we're at an impasse. That is certainly obvious to me. You can blather all you wish about the terrorists really being the victims and vice-versa, and providing no examples. Not convincing. Not even rational.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
gmc wrote: 2. My point was why did you-or your parents feel the need to keep you away from other religons. Separate faith schools IMO are divisive and encourage sectarianism. But that's also off topic. not to believe it works.
3. Anti catholic sentiment in the US. Religon used to be an issue for a candidate did it not.
4. If you think the past has no bearing on the way we live and think today then I am not going to waste time trying to educateyou. Maybe you should have gone to a secular school.
5. Were it only so simple. It would be laughable if your ignorance was not shared by so many of your countrymen who thought O.K. to fund terrorists. I would try and explain but it is off topic and since you see past history as being irrelevant in modern society you wouldn't inderstand. Your church may not have condoned the IRA but they didn't excommunicate any of them either. Not being a catholic I'm not sure how much of a sanction it would have been anyway.2. It is off topic but that's OK. They didn't feel that need at all, and I would not have traded my Catholic education for a million bucks.
In every city-wide scholastic competition, such as for college scholarships, the two Catholic high schools (one for girls and one for boys) typically walked off with about half the honors, leaving the seven or eight public high schools to share the other half. I won two such scholarships myself. Maybe in your neck of the woods the secular schools are better and the parochial schools worse. I doubt it though.
My family happened to be the only Catholic family on our block with kids our age. (And by the way, my Dad was a Welsh-American Congregationalist, hence the name Bronwen, which is my real middle name.) There were many other Catholics, but all of their kids were grown up and gone, so all of my neighborhood friends were Protestant or Jewish. No Muslims, and the topic of religion was rarely mentioned, it was a matter of mutual respect. If anyone ever had any mistaken ideas about Catholicism, I would straighten them out, and I still do that occasionally, including on these forums. As another poster here recently said, I probably know more about Catholicism than the pope. He flatters me, though there is a slim possibility that he may not have been completely serious.
3. I suppose one could say that these are more enlightened times, which is probably in some ways true and in other ways less so.
4. ALL of history is important. I just don't think that the specific items you dredged up are of particular relevance to the topic of the thread. As for the secular school, see the second parapraph of 2.
5. I am unconvinced that 'many' Americans thought that was OK. If they did, they share the guilt of the terrorists, just as the terrorist-supporters in the Arab countries - and for that matter just as those who support the terrorist Orangemen. How many of THEM have been excommunicated? Didn't we have this discussion once before?
3. Anti catholic sentiment in the US. Religon used to be an issue for a candidate did it not.
4. If you think the past has no bearing on the way we live and think today then I am not going to waste time trying to educateyou. Maybe you should have gone to a secular school.
5. Were it only so simple. It would be laughable if your ignorance was not shared by so many of your countrymen who thought O.K. to fund terrorists. I would try and explain but it is off topic and since you see past history as being irrelevant in modern society you wouldn't inderstand. Your church may not have condoned the IRA but they didn't excommunicate any of them either. Not being a catholic I'm not sure how much of a sanction it would have been anyway.2. It is off topic but that's OK. They didn't feel that need at all, and I would not have traded my Catholic education for a million bucks.
In every city-wide scholastic competition, such as for college scholarships, the two Catholic high schools (one for girls and one for boys) typically walked off with about half the honors, leaving the seven or eight public high schools to share the other half. I won two such scholarships myself. Maybe in your neck of the woods the secular schools are better and the parochial schools worse. I doubt it though.
My family happened to be the only Catholic family on our block with kids our age. (And by the way, my Dad was a Welsh-American Congregationalist, hence the name Bronwen, which is my real middle name.) There were many other Catholics, but all of their kids were grown up and gone, so all of my neighborhood friends were Protestant or Jewish. No Muslims, and the topic of religion was rarely mentioned, it was a matter of mutual respect. If anyone ever had any mistaken ideas about Catholicism, I would straighten them out, and I still do that occasionally, including on these forums. As another poster here recently said, I probably know more about Catholicism than the pope. He flatters me, though there is a slim possibility that he may not have been completely serious.
3. I suppose one could say that these are more enlightened times, which is probably in some ways true and in other ways less so.
4. ALL of history is important. I just don't think that the specific items you dredged up are of particular relevance to the topic of the thread. As for the secular school, see the second parapraph of 2.
5. I am unconvinced that 'many' Americans thought that was OK. If they did, they share the guilt of the terrorists, just as the terrorist-supporters in the Arab countries - and for that matter just as those who support the terrorist Orangemen. How many of THEM have been excommunicated? Didn't we have this discussion once before?
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
spot wrote: Perhaps you could substantiate that assertion in some way? It goes entirely against logic that a terror-bomber from an F16 could differentiate civilians on that basis, and they're the people who killed most in the last few weeks.
"The UN humanitarian chief accused Hizbullah of "cowardly blending" among Lebanese civilians and causing the deaths of hundreds during two weeks of cross-border violence with Israel.
Jan Egeland spoke with reporters at the Larnaca airport in Cyprus late Monday after a visit to Lebanon on his mission to coordinate an international aid effort. On Sunday he had toured the rubble of Beirut's southern suburbs, a once-teeming Shi'ite district where Hizbullah had its headquarters.
http://tinyurl.com/e7h49
spot wrote: No rocket fire was sent into Israel from southern Beirut, for example - what "human shield" philosophy comes into play for the deaths there? No rocket fire was sent into Israel from inside any buildings anywhere, come to that - you can't fire rocket salvoes from inside buildings. Why are there any flattened buildings in the Lebanon at all?
.
No rockets from southern Beiruit? What planet are you on. Why were buildings flattened? Because that's weher the rockets and other munitions were being stored. We were able to have continious photographic real time coverage together with other technology that let us see to within 2 and at times even less metres where those rockets were being fired from and very often the people who were firing them as well as where they went.
"The UN humanitarian chief accused Hizbullah of "cowardly blending" among Lebanese civilians and causing the deaths of hundreds during two weeks of cross-border violence with Israel.
Jan Egeland spoke with reporters at the Larnaca airport in Cyprus late Monday after a visit to Lebanon on his mission to coordinate an international aid effort. On Sunday he had toured the rubble of Beirut's southern suburbs, a once-teeming Shi'ite district where Hizbullah had its headquarters.
http://tinyurl.com/e7h49
spot wrote: No rocket fire was sent into Israel from southern Beirut, for example - what "human shield" philosophy comes into play for the deaths there? No rocket fire was sent into Israel from inside any buildings anywhere, come to that - you can't fire rocket salvoes from inside buildings. Why are there any flattened buildings in the Lebanon at all?
.
No rockets from southern Beiruit? What planet are you on. Why were buildings flattened? Because that's weher the rockets and other munitions were being stored. We were able to have continious photographic real time coverage together with other technology that let us see to within 2 and at times even less metres where those rockets were being fired from and very often the people who were firing them as well as where they went.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
golem wrote: No rockets from southern Beiruit? What planet are you on. Why were buildings flattened? Because that's weher the rockets and other munitions were being stored. We were able to have continious photographic real time coverage together with other technology that let us see to within 2 and at times even less metres where those rockets were being fired from and very often the people who were firing them as well as where they went.One wonders why Israel wants a 20km "security zone" in Southern Lebanon, in that case. I thought it was to deny Hezbollah access to the groundspace from which Katyusha rockets could be launched into Israel.
Southern Beirut is... what? shall we call it 50km from the Israeli border? Sidon is 30km north of the border? The Katyusha has a range of 15-20km? Have a look at http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news ... id=2370098 for the details of the rockets involved and their respective ranges.
No rocket was fired from within a building. Nobody has ever offered proof of any of the flattened buildings having been used as an arms depot. Ten thousand buildings have been destroyed. Israel isn't targetting munitions, it's dealing out wholesale punishment to a civilian population. Irrespective of its targetting, its acts are grossly disproportionate to any triggering event.
Southern Beirut is... what? shall we call it 50km from the Israeli border? Sidon is 30km north of the border? The Katyusha has a range of 15-20km? Have a look at http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news ... id=2370098 for the details of the rockets involved and their respective ranges.
No rocket was fired from within a building. Nobody has ever offered proof of any of the flattened buildings having been used as an arms depot. Ten thousand buildings have been destroyed. Israel isn't targetting munitions, it's dealing out wholesale punishment to a civilian population. Irrespective of its targetting, its acts are grossly disproportionate to any triggering event.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Bronwen wrote: 1. You are not required to do or prove anything. Participation in this forum is, obviously, voluntary. However, if you wish your assertions to carry any weight you should be prepared to substantiate them.
Claiming that the terrorists are really the victims and the victims really the terrorists, as Israel's enemies have been doing for 60 years, doesn't cut it because the facts of the history of that region and that period don't support that. I am still waiting for ONE poster here to cite ONE act of oppression or hardship imposed by Israel on the so-called 'Palestinians', or for that matter other Arabs, that was not the direct result of, or in retaliation for, Arab atrocities against Israel.You're asking me to write a book, Bronwen, not to produce a fact. Direct retaliation is no excuse when it's a disproportionate response and Israel merely waits for a triggering event before unleashing it. Act A does not provoke the response of Act B if Act B has been prepared beforehand and merely waits on a convenient excuse. This tit-for-tat tying of atrocities has no relevance.
I'm coming more and more toward the opinion that US opinion-forming requires an untouchable scapegoat, which has no redeeming quality, that it's OK to hate. It used to be communism. Now it's Islam. It's a lousy way to run a country.
Claiming that the terrorists are really the victims and the victims really the terrorists, as Israel's enemies have been doing for 60 years, doesn't cut it because the facts of the history of that region and that period don't support that. I am still waiting for ONE poster here to cite ONE act of oppression or hardship imposed by Israel on the so-called 'Palestinians', or for that matter other Arabs, that was not the direct result of, or in retaliation for, Arab atrocities against Israel.You're asking me to write a book, Bronwen, not to produce a fact. Direct retaliation is no excuse when it's a disproportionate response and Israel merely waits for a triggering event before unleashing it. Act A does not provoke the response of Act B if Act B has been prepared beforehand and merely waits on a convenient excuse. This tit-for-tat tying of atrocities has no relevance.
I'm coming more and more toward the opinion that US opinion-forming requires an untouchable scapegoat, which has no redeeming quality, that it's OK to hate. It used to be communism. Now it's Islam. It's a lousy way to run a country.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Bronwen, you are saying....? That Israel has never acted in a repugnant way towards the Arabs in Palestine and area?
Here's a starting point. I won't list the obvious, just follow the link and explain how you maintain that Israel is shiny and sparkly clean. These are UN resolutions and we all know how hard that is to agree upon. UN resolutions including ones that the US vetoed can be found
here
Your claim that facts haven't been shown is just pure denial on your behalf. There have been many specific facts brought up in this thread and dismissed by claims that the poster was supporting terrorism or anti-semitic. The facts, unchallenged, still remain. Insulting the poster, as half this thread has been spent doing, does nothing to erase the facts. Denying that facts have been posted does also not erase them from existence.
Here's a starting point. I won't list the obvious, just follow the link and explain how you maintain that Israel is shiny and sparkly clean. These are UN resolutions and we all know how hard that is to agree upon. UN resolutions including ones that the US vetoed can be found
here
Your claim that facts haven't been shown is just pure denial on your behalf. There have been many specific facts brought up in this thread and dismissed by claims that the poster was supporting terrorism or anti-semitic. The facts, unchallenged, still remain. Insulting the poster, as half this thread has been spent doing, does nothing to erase the facts. Denying that facts have been posted does also not erase them from existence.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
spot wrote: One wonders why Israel wants a 20km "security zone" in Southern Lebanon, in that case. I thought it was to deny Hezbollah access to the groundspace from which Katyusha rockets could be launched into Israel.
Southern Beirut is... what? shall we call it 50km from the Israeli border? Sidon is 30km north of the border? The Katyusha has a range of 15-20km? Have a look at http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news ... id=2370098 for the details of the rockets involved and their respective ranges.
No rocket was fired from within a building. Nobody has ever offered proof of any of the flattened buildings having been used as an arms depot. Ten thousand buildings have been destroyed. Israel isn't targetting munitions, it's dealing out wholesale punishment to a civilian population. Irrespective of its targetting, its acts are grossly disproportionate to any triggering event.-
The rockets from Southern Beirut were being fired at our troops. The proof of the storage or munitions in buildings is absolute. Maybe we should have used disproportionate force, we've been blamed for so doing even though we did not.
Next time we will. Count on it.
Southern Beirut is... what? shall we call it 50km from the Israeli border? Sidon is 30km north of the border? The Katyusha has a range of 15-20km? Have a look at http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news ... id=2370098 for the details of the rockets involved and their respective ranges.
No rocket was fired from within a building. Nobody has ever offered proof of any of the flattened buildings having been used as an arms depot. Ten thousand buildings have been destroyed. Israel isn't targetting munitions, it's dealing out wholesale punishment to a civilian population. Irrespective of its targetting, its acts are grossly disproportionate to any triggering event.-
The rockets from Southern Beirut were being fired at our troops. The proof of the storage or munitions in buildings is absolute. Maybe we should have used disproportionate force, we've been blamed for so doing even though we did not.
Next time we will. Count on it.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Scrat wrote: . Israel has to change its attitude in order to survive. Period.
.
If we once change our attitude as you put it we will fall in a matter of days if not hours.
THAT is the reality of life. We face a foe who will only negottiate on our destruction. We face a foe to whom concession is failure and survival is success. You can't use Western logic or Western thinking and especially not Western values when facing what WE face, and that you all will very soon be facing yourselves.
WE are the place at which Islam crashes against the Western world, Remember what was said, the arabs don't hate the West because of us, they hate us because of the West.
You WILL see.
.
If we once change our attitude as you put it we will fall in a matter of days if not hours.
THAT is the reality of life. We face a foe who will only negottiate on our destruction. We face a foe to whom concession is failure and survival is success. You can't use Western logic or Western thinking and especially not Western values when facing what WE face, and that you all will very soon be facing yourselves.
WE are the place at which Islam crashes against the Western world, Remember what was said, the arabs don't hate the West because of us, they hate us because of the West.
You WILL see.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Arab/Islam thing is kind of confusing. I say Arabs because I don't want to feed the theory that the West is in a war against Islam. I think it is a problem similar to trying to destroy Hezbollah. They don't have their own country, the travel around and are harder to find. The "evil" ones that the "Coalition of the Willing" :yh_giggle are trying to destroy are also a bit of an abstract entity. The "axis of evil" as a term is an intellectual dud. It is supposed to mean Iranians, North Koreans and Iraqis. But it apparently means Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas and all the other mobile groups who don't have a country that can be targeted.
The second part about policies and attempted mediation...why not try?
My first thoughts are:
Palestine. Look at an atlas. Ignore that you are not likely on it. Now, can you honestly tell me that Israel does not exist? Like it or not, they are there.
Israel. You should be proud of your country like anyone else. Remember that there was someone else there. Say you're sorry. Thank them for their sacrifice.
To me, this would be a good starting place.
The second part about policies and attempted mediation...why not try?
My first thoughts are:
Palestine. Look at an atlas. Ignore that you are not likely on it. Now, can you honestly tell me that Israel does not exist? Like it or not, they are there.
Israel. You should be proud of your country like anyone else. Remember that there was someone else there. Say you're sorry. Thank them for their sacrifice.
To me, this would be a good starting place.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
golem wrote: If we once change our attitude as you put it we will fall in a matter of days if not hours.
THAT is the reality of life. We face a foe who will only negottiate on our destruction. We face a foe to whom concession is failure and survival is success. You can't use Western logic or Western thinking and especially not Western values when facing what WE face, and that you all will very soon be facing yourselves.
WE are the place at which Islam crashes against the Western world, Remember what was said, the arabs don't hate the West because of us, they hate us because of the West.
You WILL see.
You use the same kind of language as the islamic fundamentalists, the demented no surrender arguement of sectarianism everywhere. If you just destroy each other it wouldn't matter and nobody would care. If it wasn't for oil nobody would care. perhaps if the US withdrew all support you would make peace with each other out of necessity as you fight each other to complete exhaustion. That's what it took in europe before we could live in peace with each other, total all out war and millions dead. Maybe all mankind needs to relearn over and over again. Although you do have nuclear weapons so if it came down to it you could use them to wipe syria and Iran off the map.
We have to use western thinking and western values in what we do. To do otherwise is to let terrorists win and lose the supposed war. Why should we change? More importantly we need to see that kind of arguement for what it is and not listen to the ravings of religious fanatics of any kind. If you don't like liberal democracy then change your system of government and have a theocracy instead.
THAT is the reality of life. We face a foe who will only negottiate on our destruction. We face a foe to whom concession is failure and survival is success. You can't use Western logic or Western thinking and especially not Western values when facing what WE face, and that you all will very soon be facing yourselves.
WE are the place at which Islam crashes against the Western world, Remember what was said, the arabs don't hate the West because of us, they hate us because of the West.
You WILL see.
You use the same kind of language as the islamic fundamentalists, the demented no surrender arguement of sectarianism everywhere. If you just destroy each other it wouldn't matter and nobody would care. If it wasn't for oil nobody would care. perhaps if the US withdrew all support you would make peace with each other out of necessity as you fight each other to complete exhaustion. That's what it took in europe before we could live in peace with each other, total all out war and millions dead. Maybe all mankind needs to relearn over and over again. Although you do have nuclear weapons so if it came down to it you could use them to wipe syria and Iran off the map.
We have to use western thinking and western values in what we do. To do otherwise is to let terrorists win and lose the supposed war. Why should we change? More importantly we need to see that kind of arguement for what it is and not listen to the ravings of religious fanatics of any kind. If you don't like liberal democracy then change your system of government and have a theocracy instead.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
koan wrote: Bronwen, you are saying....? That Israel has never acted in a repugnant way towards the Arabs in Palestine and area?Answer your own question. Did I say that? Maybe you should go back and read it again; in fact, I'll save you the trouble:Bronwen wrote: I am still waiting for ONE poster here to cite ONE act of oppression or hardship imposed by Israel on the so-called 'Palestinians', or for that matter other Arabs, that was not the direct result of, or in retaliation for, Arab atrocities against Israel....and a couple of screens earlier...Bronwen wrote: Israel has never inflicted any sort of violence or hardship on its neighbors, be it occupation, military strikes, or otherwise, that was not the result of, or in answer to, Islamic terrorism against Israel originating in the country involved.. It's not a chicken-or-egg situation as the apologists for the jackals attempt to portray it. First comes the terrorism, then the Israeli response. ...and also...Bronwen wrote: F'rinstance, you don't want your home bulldozed? I don't blame you, neither would I. So, in that case, you don't use it for terrorist activities, you don't consort with terrorists, you don't support terrorists. That's pretty elementary. War is ALWAYS repugnant. I HOPE that we agree on that (or perhaps you consider suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism against Israeli citizens NOT to be repugnant), so how about addressing my challenge instead of claiming that I said something different? Hmmm?
Regarding the UN resolutions, what do you think the purpose of the veto is? Of course Israel's enemies are going to introduce resolutions against it. Are you suggesting that Israel should be obliged to comply with vetoed resolutions? With resolutions that, vetoed or not, prevent it from defending itself against the terrorists who have sworn to destroy it from the day of its foundation?
Can you name any country, anywhere in the world, which Israel has vowed to destroy, by whatever means possible, to wipe off the face of the earth? I can't.
Can you name any country, anywhere in the world, which lives in peace with Israel and enjoys full, friendly diplomatic relations with Israel? I can. Nearly every democratic country on earth, plus many others that are basically peace-loving while perhaps less democratic, including its neighbors Egypt and Jordan.
Regarding the UN resolutions, what do you think the purpose of the veto is? Of course Israel's enemies are going to introduce resolutions against it. Are you suggesting that Israel should be obliged to comply with vetoed resolutions? With resolutions that, vetoed or not, prevent it from defending itself against the terrorists who have sworn to destroy it from the day of its foundation?
Can you name any country, anywhere in the world, which Israel has vowed to destroy, by whatever means possible, to wipe off the face of the earth? I can't.
Can you name any country, anywhere in the world, which lives in peace with Israel and enjoys full, friendly diplomatic relations with Israel? I can. Nearly every democratic country on earth, plus many others that are basically peace-loving while perhaps less democratic, including its neighbors Egypt and Jordan.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
posted by bronwen
Quote:
Originally Posted by koan
Bronwen, you are saying....? That Israel has never acted in a repugnant way towards the Arabs in Palestine and area?
Answer your own question. Did I say that? Maybe you should go back and read it again; in fact, I'll save you the trouble:
Maybe this might help-although no doubt you will view it as propoganda But I do suggest you at least read it.
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/media/sides.html
How about israeli attacks on US ships? Or do you think these guys are dupes?
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/ ... dings.html
Findings of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Israeli Attack on the USS Liberty, the Recall of Military Rescue Support Aircraft while the Ship was Under Attack, and the Subsequent Cover-up by the United States Government
CAPITOL HILL, WASHINGTON, D.C.
OCTOBER 22, 2003
ADMIRAL THOMAS H. MOORER, UNITED STATES NAVY, (RET.)
Former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
Chairman, Liberty Alliance
GENERAL RAYMOND G. DAVIS, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS, (MOH)*
Former Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps
Vice Chairman, Liberty Alliance
REAR ADMIRAL MERLIN STARING, UNITED STATES NAVY, (RET.)
Former Judge Advocate General of the Navy
Director, Liberty Alliance
AMBASSADOR JAMES AKINS, (RET.)
Former United States Ambassador to Saudi Arabia
Director, Liberty Alliance
That on June 8, 1967, after eight hours of aerial surveillance, Israel launched a two-hour air and naval attack against the USS Liberty, the world’s most sophisticated intelligence ship, inflicting 34 dead and 172 wounded American servicemen (a casualty rate of seventy percent, in a crew of 294);
#
That the Israeli air attack lasted approximately 25 minutes, during which time unmarked Israeli aircraft dropped napalm canisters on the Liberty’s bridge, and fired 30mm cannons and rockets into our ship, causing 821 holes, more than 100 of which were rocket-size; survivors estimate 30 or more sorties were flown over the ship by a minimum of 12 attacking Israeli planes which were jamming all five American emergency radio channels;
Quote:
Originally Posted by koan
Bronwen, you are saying....? That Israel has never acted in a repugnant way towards the Arabs in Palestine and area?
Answer your own question. Did I say that? Maybe you should go back and read it again; in fact, I'll save you the trouble:
Maybe this might help-although no doubt you will view it as propoganda But I do suggest you at least read it.
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/media/sides.html
How about israeli attacks on US ships? Or do you think these guys are dupes?
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/ ... dings.html
Findings of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Israeli Attack on the USS Liberty, the Recall of Military Rescue Support Aircraft while the Ship was Under Attack, and the Subsequent Cover-up by the United States Government
CAPITOL HILL, WASHINGTON, D.C.
OCTOBER 22, 2003
ADMIRAL THOMAS H. MOORER, UNITED STATES NAVY, (RET.)
Former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
Chairman, Liberty Alliance
GENERAL RAYMOND G. DAVIS, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS, (MOH)*
Former Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps
Vice Chairman, Liberty Alliance
REAR ADMIRAL MERLIN STARING, UNITED STATES NAVY, (RET.)
Former Judge Advocate General of the Navy
Director, Liberty Alliance
AMBASSADOR JAMES AKINS, (RET.)
Former United States Ambassador to Saudi Arabia
Director, Liberty Alliance
That on June 8, 1967, after eight hours of aerial surveillance, Israel launched a two-hour air and naval attack against the USS Liberty, the world’s most sophisticated intelligence ship, inflicting 34 dead and 172 wounded American servicemen (a casualty rate of seventy percent, in a crew of 294);
#
That the Israeli air attack lasted approximately 25 minutes, during which time unmarked Israeli aircraft dropped napalm canisters on the Liberty’s bridge, and fired 30mm cannons and rockets into our ship, causing 821 holes, more than 100 of which were rocket-size; survivors estimate 30 or more sorties were flown over the ship by a minimum of 12 attacking Israeli planes which were jamming all five American emergency radio channels;
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
gmc wrote: 1. Maybe this might help-although no doubt you will view it as propoganda
2. How about israeli attacks on US ships? Or do you think these guys are dupes?1. No doubt. One need look no further than the title - 'If Americans Knew'. Most Americans whose IQ's are bigger than their shoe sizes DO know. So do most Brits. That's why these countries and others all over the world support Israel and oppose the terrorists. They understand the difference between terrorism and self-defense. Making ridiculous charges with no substantiation on a propaganda website simply establishes the accusers as liars.
No mention on the site of Israel's 60 years of attempts to live in peace with its neighbors and to actively aid the so-called 'Palestinians' in establishing their own state in peaceful co-existence with Israel.
2. Yup, the Liberty affair was an enormous blunder. No question about it, and similar blunders occur in nearly all wars. Anyone wishing to know about it should consult reliable sources, not propaganda mills.
Islamic terrorism is no blunder, it is DEADLY intentional and part of a terrorist agenda that threatens the entire world, not just Israel. Brits need only look at the recent terrorist activity by their own Islamic criminals.
2. How about israeli attacks on US ships? Or do you think these guys are dupes?1. No doubt. One need look no further than the title - 'If Americans Knew'. Most Americans whose IQ's are bigger than their shoe sizes DO know. So do most Brits. That's why these countries and others all over the world support Israel and oppose the terrorists. They understand the difference between terrorism and self-defense. Making ridiculous charges with no substantiation on a propaganda website simply establishes the accusers as liars.
No mention on the site of Israel's 60 years of attempts to live in peace with its neighbors and to actively aid the so-called 'Palestinians' in establishing their own state in peaceful co-existence with Israel.
2. Yup, the Liberty affair was an enormous blunder. No question about it, and similar blunders occur in nearly all wars. Anyone wishing to know about it should consult reliable sources, not propaganda mills.
Islamic terrorism is no blunder, it is DEADLY intentional and part of a terrorist agenda that threatens the entire world, not just Israel. Brits need only look at the recent terrorist activity by their own Islamic criminals.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Bronwen wrote:
I am still waiting for ONE poster here to cite ONE act of oppression or hardship imposed by Israel on the so-called 'Palestinians', or for that matter other Arabs, that was not the direct result of, or in retaliation for, Arab atrocities against Israel.
Apart from the obvoius question as to how, in a tit-for-tat situation of the scale and standing of the middle east conflict you determine what is in retaliation for what, and the obvoius example of the hardship imposed by the injustice of the allocation of "building permits" with the consequential demolition of Palestinian homes I offer you :-
The Lavon affair ("Esek Habish" - the shameful affair) was one of the most bizarre chapters in Israeli history. In 1954, the Israeli secret service set up a spy ring in Egypt, with the purpose of blowing up US and British targets. The operation was code-named "Susanah." The terrorist hits were to be blamed on the regime of Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser, with the purpose of alienating the US and Britain from Egypt and Nasser and somehow preventing Egyptian nationalization of the Suez canal. The ring was discovered. Strict censorship ensured that that the Israeli public officially knew little or nothing of the affair for many years. Names were not mentioned, the affair was called "Esek Bish" - the affair of shame, and key protagonists were referred to as "X" and "the third man." Unofficially and through leaks, most people knew at least the outlines of the affair.
Certainly not retaliation for any act by the Arabs.
I am still waiting for ONE poster here to cite ONE act of oppression or hardship imposed by Israel on the so-called 'Palestinians', or for that matter other Arabs, that was not the direct result of, or in retaliation for, Arab atrocities against Israel.
Apart from the obvoius question as to how, in a tit-for-tat situation of the scale and standing of the middle east conflict you determine what is in retaliation for what, and the obvoius example of the hardship imposed by the injustice of the allocation of "building permits" with the consequential demolition of Palestinian homes I offer you :-
The Lavon affair ("Esek Habish" - the shameful affair) was one of the most bizarre chapters in Israeli history. In 1954, the Israeli secret service set up a spy ring in Egypt, with the purpose of blowing up US and British targets. The operation was code-named "Susanah." The terrorist hits were to be blamed on the regime of Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser, with the purpose of alienating the US and Britain from Egypt and Nasser and somehow preventing Egyptian nationalization of the Suez canal. The ring was discovered. Strict censorship ensured that that the Israeli public officially knew little or nothing of the affair for many years. Names were not mentioned, the affair was called "Esek Bish" - the affair of shame, and key protagonists were referred to as "X" and "the third man." Unofficially and through leaks, most people knew at least the outlines of the affair.
Certainly not retaliation for any act by the Arabs.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Bronwen wrote: 1. No doubt. One need look no further than the title - 'If Americans Knew'. Most Americans whose IQ's are bigger than their shoe sizes DO know. So do most Brits. That's why these countries and others all over the world support Israel and oppose the terrorists. They understand the difference between terrorism and self-defense. Making ridiculous charges with no substantiation on a propaganda website simply establishes the accusers as liars.
No mention on the site of Israel's 60 years of attempts to live in peace with its neighbors and to actively aid the so-called 'Palestinians' in establishing their own state in peaceful co-existence with Israel.
2. Yup, the Liberty affair was an enormous blunder. No question about it, and similar blunders occur in nearly all wars. Anyone wishing to know about it should consult reliable sources, not propaganda mills.
Islamic terrorism is no blunder, it is DEADLY intentional and part of a terrorist agenda that threatens the entire world, not just Israel. Brits need only look at the recent terrorist activity by their own Islamic criminals.
I'll say this for you. No one will ever accuse you of having an open mind or being ready to change your opinion no matter what the evidence. All the "charges" on the site are cross referenced and you can do what any semi intelligent person should do and check out the sources yourself.
As to the liberty, some blunder, if you choose to belief high ranking US navy officers are liars and it didn't happen that's up to you. At the very least you should call for them to be porosecuted for perpetrating such an outrageous lie so soon after 911 as well and when israel is in such dire straits.
Come to that how about those who sat on the senate commitee looking at the reasons behind 911. They had the unmitigated temerity to suggest that maybe US foreign policy in supporting the mujahadeen in afghanistan wasn't such a bright idea and overall policy genarally needed reconsideration. Have you read senate committee report? Just curious to know if you see that as propoganda
How about this site?
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/przion1.htm
or if you want a simpler summary
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protoc ... rs_of_Zion
Bible believers so they must be truthful mustn't they?
Apparently a lot of muslims are now convined this is true and look at the actions of Israel and the US as the proof that there is truth to it all. Perhaps the islamic fundamentaist extremists that want to convert us all and the fundamentalist christians that have designs the same way and that old favourite bogey man the catholic church could all get together and have a good old war about it.
Despite all believing there is one god and one god alone they don't think they have anything in common but should destroy the unbelievers. No doubt as an unbeliever I don't understand enough to make sense of it all. Which is a relief cos if it makes sense you're part of the insanity.
posted by bronwen
Islamic terrorism is no blunder, it is DEADLY intentional and part of a terrorist agenda that threatens the entire world, not just Israel. Brits need only look at the recent terrorist activity by their own Islamic criminals.
That's right criminals just like osama and his mates. You go after them and don't get diverted by invading countries that had no connection or let politicians persuade you that you need to give up liberty in order to defeat them.
Seems that some of the roadside bombs appearing in afhanistan and Iraq are the same in design as those used by the IRA, seems freedom fighters the world over share techniques.
No mention on the site of Israel's 60 years of attempts to live in peace with its neighbors and to actively aid the so-called 'Palestinians' in establishing their own state in peaceful co-existence with Israel.
2. Yup, the Liberty affair was an enormous blunder. No question about it, and similar blunders occur in nearly all wars. Anyone wishing to know about it should consult reliable sources, not propaganda mills.
Islamic terrorism is no blunder, it is DEADLY intentional and part of a terrorist agenda that threatens the entire world, not just Israel. Brits need only look at the recent terrorist activity by their own Islamic criminals.
I'll say this for you. No one will ever accuse you of having an open mind or being ready to change your opinion no matter what the evidence. All the "charges" on the site are cross referenced and you can do what any semi intelligent person should do and check out the sources yourself.
As to the liberty, some blunder, if you choose to belief high ranking US navy officers are liars and it didn't happen that's up to you. At the very least you should call for them to be porosecuted for perpetrating such an outrageous lie so soon after 911 as well and when israel is in such dire straits.
Come to that how about those who sat on the senate commitee looking at the reasons behind 911. They had the unmitigated temerity to suggest that maybe US foreign policy in supporting the mujahadeen in afghanistan wasn't such a bright idea and overall policy genarally needed reconsideration. Have you read senate committee report? Just curious to know if you see that as propoganda
How about this site?
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/przion1.htm
or if you want a simpler summary
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protoc ... rs_of_Zion
Bible believers so they must be truthful mustn't they?
Apparently a lot of muslims are now convined this is true and look at the actions of Israel and the US as the proof that there is truth to it all. Perhaps the islamic fundamentaist extremists that want to convert us all and the fundamentalist christians that have designs the same way and that old favourite bogey man the catholic church could all get together and have a good old war about it.
Despite all believing there is one god and one god alone they don't think they have anything in common but should destroy the unbelievers. No doubt as an unbeliever I don't understand enough to make sense of it all. Which is a relief cos if it makes sense you're part of the insanity.
posted by bronwen
Islamic terrorism is no blunder, it is DEADLY intentional and part of a terrorist agenda that threatens the entire world, not just Israel. Brits need only look at the recent terrorist activity by their own Islamic criminals.
That's right criminals just like osama and his mates. You go after them and don't get diverted by invading countries that had no connection or let politicians persuade you that you need to give up liberty in order to defeat them.
Seems that some of the roadside bombs appearing in afhanistan and Iraq are the same in design as those used by the IRA, seems freedom fighters the world over share techniques.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
gmc wrote: 1. I'll say this for you. No one will ever accuse you of having an open mind or being ready to change your opinion no matter what the evidence. All the "charges" on the site are cross referenced and you can do what any semi intelligent person should do and check out the sources yourself.
2. As to the liberty, some blunder, if you choose to belief high ranking US navy officers are liars and it didn't happen that's up to you. At the very least you should call for them to be porosecuted for perpetrating such an outrageous lie so soon after 911 as well and when israel is in such dire straits.
3. Come to that how about those who sat on the senate commitee looking at the reasons behind 911. They had the unmitigated temerity to suggest that maybe US foreign policy in supporting the mujahadeen in afghanistan wasn't such a bright idea and overall policy genarally needed reconsideration. Have you read senate committee report? Just curious to know if you see that as propoganda
4. How about this site?
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/przion1.htm
or if you want a simpler summary
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protoc ... rs_of_Zion
Bible believers so they must be truthful mustn't they?
5. Apparently a lot of muslims are now convined this is true and look at the actions of Israel and the US as the proof that there is truth to it all. Perhaps the islamic fundamentaist extremists that want to convert us all and the fundamentalist christians that have designs the same way and that old favourite bogey man the catholic church could all get together and have a good old war about it.
6. Despite all believing there is one god and one god alone they don't think they have anything in common but should destroy the unbelievers. No doubt as an unbeliever I don't understand enough to make sense of it all. Which is a relief cos if it makes sense you're part of the insanity.
7. That's right criminals just like osama and his mates. You go after them and don't get diverted by invading countries that had no connection or let politicians persuade you that you need to give up liberty in order to defeat them.
8. Seems that some of the roadside bo mbs appearing in afhanistan and Iraq are the same in design as those used by the IRA, seems freedom fighters the world over share techniques.gmc, you have reached the 'ranting and raving' point, at which it's probably best to end the discussion. If you can calm down and continue rationally, I'll respond in kind.
Let me briefly address a few of your blatherings:
1. If you will look at the cross-references you will see that many of them are to this outfit's own publications. So? Others are to other anti-Semitic sites and publications. To believe this crap you have to adopt the mindset that the entire mainstream media is a vast conspiracy to keep the 'truth' (that Jews are the devil incarnate and their enemies, the suici de bom bers, mass mur drerers and lunatic Islamic clerics, are God's chosen people) from the world. I'm not ready to make such a ridiculous assumption. Who has the closed mind here? The mainstream media may not all be completely unbiased, nor are they supposed to be. Nevertheless, they strive to report the truth, not fictitious slander.
Now, having said that, I have no doubt that many of the statistics quoted on the site are probably more-or-less correct. That Israel has destroyed more 'Palestinian' residences than Palestinians have destroyed Israeli residences I do not doubt. That is because the Israelis do not use their homes as shields for terr orists. Israeli families do not harbor ter rorists. Israeli soldiers do not hide behind women and children. Israelis are not sniveling cowards like their Islamic neighbors.
2. What on earth are you talking about? The Liberty incident occurred in 1967, if my memory is correct. I don't know of anyone ever having claimed it didn't happen. What is the connection with 9/11?
3. What is the relevance here? Many Americans, including myself, have serious disagreements with much of American foreign policy. That is why we have elections every couple of years. Bush won a second term because the voters saw him as strong and vigilant against terrrorism. One thing is for sure, though. No one who opposed Israel in favor of the terrrorists could be elected dog catcher in the USA - or anywhere else in the free world, with the possible exception of France.
4. How about it? You tell me. My Gawd, are you really that gullible? Did you even read the Wikipedia entry? Here's an excerpt:The Protocols of the (Learned) Elders of Zion, also The Protocols of the Sages of Zion or The Protocols of Zion is a text purporting to describe a plan to achieve global domi nation by Jews. Numerous independent investigations have repeatedly proven it to be a hoax; most notably, a series of articles printed in The Times of London in 1921 revealed that much of the material in the Protocols was plagiarized from earlier political satire that did not have an anti-Semitic theme.The original, written by a satirist named, I believe, Joly, involved a discussion bewteen two French politicians of different eras who met in hell and discussed various aspects of political power. It had absolutely nothing to do with Jews, nor was it, even in its original form, intended as anything but satirical humor, sort of akin to Swift's 'Modest Proposal' (that impoverished children should be ground up as food), which was also, incredibly, taken seriously by those of little intelligence, which leads us to...
5. I have no doubt that Muslims believe it's true. If they don't, they'd better keep their mouths shut or they'll probably be killed. Is that the type of society you want to see established in the UK?
6 & 7. Well, you have a right to be what you are. I'm a believer and I cannot believe in a God who rewards ter rorists for acts of mass murd er against civilians. I therefore conclude that radical Islam is not only a false religion but a menace to the world. That is why Iran MUST be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons. The date by which they are required to comply with the UN mandate is, in case you haven't noticed, now less than two weeks away. They have already said that they will not comply. My personal belief is that this is a fine opportunity, one might even say God-given, for the democratic nations of the World to destroy radical Islam utterly, and, while the cost in human suffering will be enormous, I really don't see any alternative but to surrender, which we are NOT going to do. If you wish to UK to do so, you are entitled to your belief, but I predict that you will be badly outnumbered.
8. Well, we've been here before too. I have no idea what sort of weapons the IRA uses or used. I thought that the IRA attacks had ended, and once again, you make no mention of Orange terrrorism. Who manufactured THEIR weapons? And, again repeating myself, the issue is not freedom but justice. The Irish people want the rest of their country back. Only a small number of extremists consider ter rorism a legitimate tactic. Note also that Israel has been trying to return its occupied territories for decades. In the case of Egypt and the Sinai they succeeded. To my knowledge, Britian has NEVER made any such effort with regard to the six occupied counties of Ulster. But I mention that only because you keep regurgitating it. Any attempt to compare that situation to Islamic global ter rorism is preposterous.
2. As to the liberty, some blunder, if you choose to belief high ranking US navy officers are liars and it didn't happen that's up to you. At the very least you should call for them to be porosecuted for perpetrating such an outrageous lie so soon after 911 as well and when israel is in such dire straits.
3. Come to that how about those who sat on the senate commitee looking at the reasons behind 911. They had the unmitigated temerity to suggest that maybe US foreign policy in supporting the mujahadeen in afghanistan wasn't such a bright idea and overall policy genarally needed reconsideration. Have you read senate committee report? Just curious to know if you see that as propoganda
4. How about this site?
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/przion1.htm
or if you want a simpler summary
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protoc ... rs_of_Zion
Bible believers so they must be truthful mustn't they?
5. Apparently a lot of muslims are now convined this is true and look at the actions of Israel and the US as the proof that there is truth to it all. Perhaps the islamic fundamentaist extremists that want to convert us all and the fundamentalist christians that have designs the same way and that old favourite bogey man the catholic church could all get together and have a good old war about it.
6. Despite all believing there is one god and one god alone they don't think they have anything in common but should destroy the unbelievers. No doubt as an unbeliever I don't understand enough to make sense of it all. Which is a relief cos if it makes sense you're part of the insanity.
7. That's right criminals just like osama and his mates. You go after them and don't get diverted by invading countries that had no connection or let politicians persuade you that you need to give up liberty in order to defeat them.
8. Seems that some of the roadside bo mbs appearing in afhanistan and Iraq are the same in design as those used by the IRA, seems freedom fighters the world over share techniques.gmc, you have reached the 'ranting and raving' point, at which it's probably best to end the discussion. If you can calm down and continue rationally, I'll respond in kind.
Let me briefly address a few of your blatherings:
1. If you will look at the cross-references you will see that many of them are to this outfit's own publications. So? Others are to other anti-Semitic sites and publications. To believe this crap you have to adopt the mindset that the entire mainstream media is a vast conspiracy to keep the 'truth' (that Jews are the devil incarnate and their enemies, the suici de bom bers, mass mur drerers and lunatic Islamic clerics, are God's chosen people) from the world. I'm not ready to make such a ridiculous assumption. Who has the closed mind here? The mainstream media may not all be completely unbiased, nor are they supposed to be. Nevertheless, they strive to report the truth, not fictitious slander.
Now, having said that, I have no doubt that many of the statistics quoted on the site are probably more-or-less correct. That Israel has destroyed more 'Palestinian' residences than Palestinians have destroyed Israeli residences I do not doubt. That is because the Israelis do not use their homes as shields for terr orists. Israeli families do not harbor ter rorists. Israeli soldiers do not hide behind women and children. Israelis are not sniveling cowards like their Islamic neighbors.
2. What on earth are you talking about? The Liberty incident occurred in 1967, if my memory is correct. I don't know of anyone ever having claimed it didn't happen. What is the connection with 9/11?
3. What is the relevance here? Many Americans, including myself, have serious disagreements with much of American foreign policy. That is why we have elections every couple of years. Bush won a second term because the voters saw him as strong and vigilant against terrrorism. One thing is for sure, though. No one who opposed Israel in favor of the terrrorists could be elected dog catcher in the USA - or anywhere else in the free world, with the possible exception of France.
4. How about it? You tell me. My Gawd, are you really that gullible? Did you even read the Wikipedia entry? Here's an excerpt:The Protocols of the (Learned) Elders of Zion, also The Protocols of the Sages of Zion or The Protocols of Zion is a text purporting to describe a plan to achieve global domi nation by Jews. Numerous independent investigations have repeatedly proven it to be a hoax; most notably, a series of articles printed in The Times of London in 1921 revealed that much of the material in the Protocols was plagiarized from earlier political satire that did not have an anti-Semitic theme.The original, written by a satirist named, I believe, Joly, involved a discussion bewteen two French politicians of different eras who met in hell and discussed various aspects of political power. It had absolutely nothing to do with Jews, nor was it, even in its original form, intended as anything but satirical humor, sort of akin to Swift's 'Modest Proposal' (that impoverished children should be ground up as food), which was also, incredibly, taken seriously by those of little intelligence, which leads us to...
5. I have no doubt that Muslims believe it's true. If they don't, they'd better keep their mouths shut or they'll probably be killed. Is that the type of society you want to see established in the UK?
6 & 7. Well, you have a right to be what you are. I'm a believer and I cannot believe in a God who rewards ter rorists for acts of mass murd er against civilians. I therefore conclude that radical Islam is not only a false religion but a menace to the world. That is why Iran MUST be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons. The date by which they are required to comply with the UN mandate is, in case you haven't noticed, now less than two weeks away. They have already said that they will not comply. My personal belief is that this is a fine opportunity, one might even say God-given, for the democratic nations of the World to destroy radical Islam utterly, and, while the cost in human suffering will be enormous, I really don't see any alternative but to surrender, which we are NOT going to do. If you wish to UK to do so, you are entitled to your belief, but I predict that you will be badly outnumbered.
8. Well, we've been here before too. I have no idea what sort of weapons the IRA uses or used. I thought that the IRA attacks had ended, and once again, you make no mention of Orange terrrorism. Who manufactured THEIR weapons? And, again repeating myself, the issue is not freedom but justice. The Irish people want the rest of their country back. Only a small number of extremists consider ter rorism a legitimate tactic. Note also that Israel has been trying to return its occupied territories for decades. In the case of Egypt and the Sinai they succeeded. To my knowledge, Britian has NEVER made any such effort with regard to the six occupied counties of Ulster. But I mention that only because you keep regurgitating it. Any attempt to compare that situation to Islamic global ter rorism is preposterous.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Bronwen wrote: gmc, you have reached the 'ranting and raving' point, at which it's probably best to end the discussion. If you can calm down and continue rationally, I'll respond in kind.
Let me briefly address a few of your blatherings:
1. If you will look at the cross-references you will see that many of them are to this outfit's own publications. So? Others are to other anti-Semitic sites and publications. To believe this crap you have to adopt the mindset that the entire mainstream media is a vast conspiracy to keep the 'truth' (that Jews are the devil incarnate and their enemies, the suici de bom bers, mass mur drerers and lunatic Islamic clerics, are God's chosen people) from the world. I'm not ready to make such a ridiculous assumption. Who has the closed mind here? The mainstream media may not all be completely unbiased, nor are they supposed to be. Nevertheless, they strive to report the truth, not fictitious slander.
Now, having said that, I have no doubt that many of the statistics quoted on the site are probably more-or-less correct. That Israel has destroyed more 'Palestinian' residences than Palestinians have destroyed Israeli residences I do not doubt. That is because the Israelis do not use their homes as shields for terr orists. Israeli families do not harbor ter rorists. Israeli soldiers do not hide behind women and children. Israelis are not sniveling cowards like their Islamic neighbors.
2. What on earth are you talking about? The Liberty incident occurred in 1967, if my memory is correct. I don't know of anyone ever having claimed it didn't happen. What is the connection with 9/11?
3. What is the relevance here? Many Americans, including myself, have serious disagreements with much of American foreign policy. That is why we have elections every couple of years. Bush won a second term because the voters saw him as strong and vigilant against terrrorism. One thing is for sure, though. No one who opposed Israel in favor of the terrrorists could be elected dog catcher in the USA - or anywhere else in the free world, with the possible exception of France.
4. How about it? You tell me. My Gawd, are you really that gullible? Did you even read the Wikipedia entry? Here's an excerpt:The original, written by a satirist named, I believe, Joly, involved a discussion bewteen two French politicians of different eras who met in hell and discussed various aspects of political power. It had absolutely nothing to do with Jews, nor was it, even in its original form, intended as anything but satirical humor, sort of akin to Swift's 'Modest Proposal' (that impoverished children should be ground up as food), which was also, incredibly, taken seriously by those of little intelligence, which leads us to...
5. I have no doubt that Muslims believe it's true. If they don't, they'd better keep their mouths shut or they'll probably be killed. Is that the type of society you want to see established in the UK?
6 & 7. Well, you have a right to be what you are. I'm a believer and I cannot believe in a God who rewards ter rorists for acts of mass murd er against civilians. I therefore conclude that radical Islam is not only a false religion but a menace to the world. That is why Iran MUST be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons. The date by which they are required to comply with the UN mandate is, in case you haven't noticed, now less than two weeks away. They have already said that they will not comply. My personal belief is that this is a fine opportunity, one might even say God-given, for the democratic nations of the World to destroy radical Islam utterly, and, while the cost in human suffering will be enormous, I really don't see any alternative but to surrender, which we are NOT going to do. If you wish to UK to do so, you are entitled to your belief, but I predict that you will be badly outnumbered.
8. Well, we've been here before too. I have no idea what sort of weapons the IRA uses or used. I thought that the IRA attacks had ended, and once again, you make no mention of Orange terrrorism. Who manufactured THEIR weapons? And, again repeating myself, the issue is not freedom but justice. The Irish people want the rest of their country back. Only a small number of extremists consider ter rorism a legitimate tactic. Note also that Israel has been trying to return its occupied territories for decades. In the case of Egypt and the Sinai they succeeded. To my knowledge, Britian has NEVER made any such effort with regard to the six occupied counties of Ulster. But I mention that only because you keep regurgitating it. Any attempt to compare that situation to Islamic global ter rorism is preposterous.
:yh_rotfl
Great stuff. If you can't counter a logical discussion accuse the other of ranting.
1) There are plenty other sources to confirm all the points raised if you care to look.
To believe this crap you have to adopt the mindset that the entire mainstream media is a vast conspiracy to keep the 'truth' (that Jews are the devil incarnate and their enemies, the suici de bom bers, mass mur drerers and lunatic Islamic clerics, are God's chosen people) from the world.
It's no sillier than believing conspiracy theories about global islamic terrorism on a path of world domination-correction it is no sillier than some of the things you have been coming out with. Take all your various rants substitute the word jew for islam and you sound exactly like any anti-semite, or racist or basically like any bigot anywhere in the world. If you were born in palestine no doubt you would be in there cheering on the suicide bombers giving thanks for their courage in sacrificing themselves.
You can't have it both ways, the mainstream media can't be striving to report the truth when it is supportive of Israel and biased when it points out that bombing women and children is not a good thing to do.
At least you agree the statistics are more or less correct.
2) the contention-made recently is that the attack on the liberty was not a blunder but a deliberate slaughter of american sailors covered up by the govt of the day. If true it is a very serious allegation made very recently You accused those claiming it of being liars and producing yet more anti israeli propoganda. Not being american I am not particularly bothered one way or the other it was something I had never heard before.
3) I asked of you considered the report to be propoganda seeing as it was fairly critical of US middle eastern policy as a contributory factor to the present situation in the middle east. If you don't want to answer fair enough. If you haven't read it you should, that is if you take an interest in politics.
Most people in the world don't oppose israel in favour of the terrorists.They appreciate israeli policy in palestine is a major factor in causing conflict in the middle east.
Support israel or support terrorists just doesn't work. It is not that black and white, this is not some good against evil holy crusade.
4) didn't say I believed it did I. You are quite ready to believe conspiracy theories about Islamists wanting to take over the world if you are gullible enough to worry about that you should not be surprised if islamists are gullible enough to believe this crap.
It's a feature of monotheistic religons that they try and stop other religious beliefs. Your own has a long and bloody history and had not been exactly friendly towards jews. Indeed you could claim it is the main cause of anti semitism in the west.
5) Well no of course not. I'm all in favour of free speech. I can't stand religious bigots of any sort and look forward to the repeal of the blasphemy laws. We're far too precious about offending religons. Sod the lot of them.
6 & 7 So it's a false religon because it believes in one god? Or are you arguing that there is more than one god? Once upon a time during the crusades if a christian killed a muslim he was guaranteed a place in heaven. Glad to see you are still prepared to pick up the sword of truth and nuke the unbeliever.
Always thought turn the other cheek was a christian thing to do. Mind you after all the fuss about homosexuality maybe not.
Democratic nations nowadays don't go to war unless attacked. Terrorists are not representative of their peoples and really they are not that frightening just annoying. You deal with them as you would any criminal and take steps to deny them support in their home ground, which you won't do by killing anybody that happens to be nearby. There are religious fanatics on all sides who seem to see this as the start of some kind of armageddon. A ludicrous belief that only the most gullible could fall for. The danger I think is if we let then get away with starting it.
God save us from the religious.
8) I make no mention of orange terrorism because like sinn fein the orange movement condemns terrorism. :sneaky: Joking aside I actually think the UDA are a sight more vicious but Sectarianism is a cancer in any society. I won't mention Northern Ireland again as clearly you know nothing at all about the history of it all and refighting five hundred year old religious wars have no place in modern society.
Nevr mind Iran, You should worry more about Pakistan. They already have nuclear weapons and are ripe for a fundamentalist regime to take over.
Let me briefly address a few of your blatherings:
1. If you will look at the cross-references you will see that many of them are to this outfit's own publications. So? Others are to other anti-Semitic sites and publications. To believe this crap you have to adopt the mindset that the entire mainstream media is a vast conspiracy to keep the 'truth' (that Jews are the devil incarnate and their enemies, the suici de bom bers, mass mur drerers and lunatic Islamic clerics, are God's chosen people) from the world. I'm not ready to make such a ridiculous assumption. Who has the closed mind here? The mainstream media may not all be completely unbiased, nor are they supposed to be. Nevertheless, they strive to report the truth, not fictitious slander.
Now, having said that, I have no doubt that many of the statistics quoted on the site are probably more-or-less correct. That Israel has destroyed more 'Palestinian' residences than Palestinians have destroyed Israeli residences I do not doubt. That is because the Israelis do not use their homes as shields for terr orists. Israeli families do not harbor ter rorists. Israeli soldiers do not hide behind women and children. Israelis are not sniveling cowards like their Islamic neighbors.
2. What on earth are you talking about? The Liberty incident occurred in 1967, if my memory is correct. I don't know of anyone ever having claimed it didn't happen. What is the connection with 9/11?
3. What is the relevance here? Many Americans, including myself, have serious disagreements with much of American foreign policy. That is why we have elections every couple of years. Bush won a second term because the voters saw him as strong and vigilant against terrrorism. One thing is for sure, though. No one who opposed Israel in favor of the terrrorists could be elected dog catcher in the USA - or anywhere else in the free world, with the possible exception of France.
4. How about it? You tell me. My Gawd, are you really that gullible? Did you even read the Wikipedia entry? Here's an excerpt:The original, written by a satirist named, I believe, Joly, involved a discussion bewteen two French politicians of different eras who met in hell and discussed various aspects of political power. It had absolutely nothing to do with Jews, nor was it, even in its original form, intended as anything but satirical humor, sort of akin to Swift's 'Modest Proposal' (that impoverished children should be ground up as food), which was also, incredibly, taken seriously by those of little intelligence, which leads us to...
5. I have no doubt that Muslims believe it's true. If they don't, they'd better keep their mouths shut or they'll probably be killed. Is that the type of society you want to see established in the UK?
6 & 7. Well, you have a right to be what you are. I'm a believer and I cannot believe in a God who rewards ter rorists for acts of mass murd er against civilians. I therefore conclude that radical Islam is not only a false religion but a menace to the world. That is why Iran MUST be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons. The date by which they are required to comply with the UN mandate is, in case you haven't noticed, now less than two weeks away. They have already said that they will not comply. My personal belief is that this is a fine opportunity, one might even say God-given, for the democratic nations of the World to destroy radical Islam utterly, and, while the cost in human suffering will be enormous, I really don't see any alternative but to surrender, which we are NOT going to do. If you wish to UK to do so, you are entitled to your belief, but I predict that you will be badly outnumbered.
8. Well, we've been here before too. I have no idea what sort of weapons the IRA uses or used. I thought that the IRA attacks had ended, and once again, you make no mention of Orange terrrorism. Who manufactured THEIR weapons? And, again repeating myself, the issue is not freedom but justice. The Irish people want the rest of their country back. Only a small number of extremists consider ter rorism a legitimate tactic. Note also that Israel has been trying to return its occupied territories for decades. In the case of Egypt and the Sinai they succeeded. To my knowledge, Britian has NEVER made any such effort with regard to the six occupied counties of Ulster. But I mention that only because you keep regurgitating it. Any attempt to compare that situation to Islamic global ter rorism is preposterous.
:yh_rotfl
Great stuff. If you can't counter a logical discussion accuse the other of ranting.
1) There are plenty other sources to confirm all the points raised if you care to look.
To believe this crap you have to adopt the mindset that the entire mainstream media is a vast conspiracy to keep the 'truth' (that Jews are the devil incarnate and their enemies, the suici de bom bers, mass mur drerers and lunatic Islamic clerics, are God's chosen people) from the world.
It's no sillier than believing conspiracy theories about global islamic terrorism on a path of world domination-correction it is no sillier than some of the things you have been coming out with. Take all your various rants substitute the word jew for islam and you sound exactly like any anti-semite, or racist or basically like any bigot anywhere in the world. If you were born in palestine no doubt you would be in there cheering on the suicide bombers giving thanks for their courage in sacrificing themselves.
You can't have it both ways, the mainstream media can't be striving to report the truth when it is supportive of Israel and biased when it points out that bombing women and children is not a good thing to do.
At least you agree the statistics are more or less correct.
2) the contention-made recently is that the attack on the liberty was not a blunder but a deliberate slaughter of american sailors covered up by the govt of the day. If true it is a very serious allegation made very recently You accused those claiming it of being liars and producing yet more anti israeli propoganda. Not being american I am not particularly bothered one way or the other it was something I had never heard before.
3) I asked of you considered the report to be propoganda seeing as it was fairly critical of US middle eastern policy as a contributory factor to the present situation in the middle east. If you don't want to answer fair enough. If you haven't read it you should, that is if you take an interest in politics.
Most people in the world don't oppose israel in favour of the terrorists.They appreciate israeli policy in palestine is a major factor in causing conflict in the middle east.
Support israel or support terrorists just doesn't work. It is not that black and white, this is not some good against evil holy crusade.
4) didn't say I believed it did I. You are quite ready to believe conspiracy theories about Islamists wanting to take over the world if you are gullible enough to worry about that you should not be surprised if islamists are gullible enough to believe this crap.
It's a feature of monotheistic religons that they try and stop other religious beliefs. Your own has a long and bloody history and had not been exactly friendly towards jews. Indeed you could claim it is the main cause of anti semitism in the west.
5) Well no of course not. I'm all in favour of free speech. I can't stand religious bigots of any sort and look forward to the repeal of the blasphemy laws. We're far too precious about offending religons. Sod the lot of them.
6 & 7 So it's a false religon because it believes in one god? Or are you arguing that there is more than one god? Once upon a time during the crusades if a christian killed a muslim he was guaranteed a place in heaven. Glad to see you are still prepared to pick up the sword of truth and nuke the unbeliever.
Always thought turn the other cheek was a christian thing to do. Mind you after all the fuss about homosexuality maybe not.
Democratic nations nowadays don't go to war unless attacked. Terrorists are not representative of their peoples and really they are not that frightening just annoying. You deal with them as you would any criminal and take steps to deny them support in their home ground, which you won't do by killing anybody that happens to be nearby. There are religious fanatics on all sides who seem to see this as the start of some kind of armageddon. A ludicrous belief that only the most gullible could fall for. The danger I think is if we let then get away with starting it.
God save us from the religious.
8) I make no mention of orange terrorism because like sinn fein the orange movement condemns terrorism. :sneaky: Joking aside I actually think the UDA are a sight more vicious but Sectarianism is a cancer in any society. I won't mention Northern Ireland again as clearly you know nothing at all about the history of it all and refighting five hundred year old religious wars have no place in modern society.
Nevr mind Iran, You should worry more about Pakistan. They already have nuclear weapons and are ripe for a fundamentalist regime to take over.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
gmc wrote: It's no sillier than believing conspiracy theories about global islamic terrorism on a path of world domination-correction it is no sillier than some of the things you have been coming out with. Take all your various rants substitute the word jew for islam and you sound exactly like any anti-semite, or racist or basically like any bigot anywhere in the world. If you were born in palestine no doubt you would be in there cheering on the suicide bombers giving thanks for their courage in sacrificing themselves.gmc, you are just repeating yourself here while addressing none of my points directly.
The Muslim creeps arrested in the Finsbury Park raid and others all over the world have stated their goal quite clearly as world domination, the imposition of Shariya law on everyone. They would, I'm sure, be quite proud to affirm such an agenda. Why don't you ask one of them? If you don't know any, I'm sure Scat or one of their other toadies would provide an introduction.
The Israelis wish only to live in their small homeland in peace, freedom, and security. If you are asserting that the roles are interchangable, you are out of your frigging mind!
If I had been born in Palestine I would also want to live in peace, freedom, and security, just like the Israelis, and like them, I would only be able to do that when the Islamic terrorists are eliminated. They are the 'Palestinian Problem'. Entirely.
Regarding the Liberty and American support for its governemnt's foreign policy, here is what I said:2. What on earth are you talking about? The Liberty incident occurred in 1967, if my memory is correct. I don't know of anyone ever having claimed it didn't happen. What is the connection with 9/11?
3. What is the relevance here? Many Americans, including myself, have serious disagreements with much of American foreign policy. That is why we have elections every couple of years. Bush won a second term because the voters saw him as strong and vigilant against terrrorism. I didn't say anyone was lying about the former, you say that a 'contention' has been made recently, a 'contention' by whom, Islamic terrorists, professional anti-Semites? Why am I not surprised or impressed?
Regarding the latter, well, you can read it for yourself. Our system is congressional and yours parliamentary - we both have the option of voting out those whom we don't feel are representing us. I'm not sure I see your problem here. Both governemnt are going to continue to oppose the threat of Islamic terrorism, as the UK has shown with the recent arrests. Don't you think terrorists should be arrested? I might add that the same problem exists here in Germany, though to a lesser extent at present. There were some terrorist arrests here in NRW recently. It's a worldwide problem - wherever people live in peace and freedom, the Islamic terrorists and going to keep trying to reduce those people to their own miserable level. Is that really how you wish to live?
The Muslim creeps arrested in the Finsbury Park raid and others all over the world have stated their goal quite clearly as world domination, the imposition of Shariya law on everyone. They would, I'm sure, be quite proud to affirm such an agenda. Why don't you ask one of them? If you don't know any, I'm sure Scat or one of their other toadies would provide an introduction.
The Israelis wish only to live in their small homeland in peace, freedom, and security. If you are asserting that the roles are interchangable, you are out of your frigging mind!
If I had been born in Palestine I would also want to live in peace, freedom, and security, just like the Israelis, and like them, I would only be able to do that when the Islamic terrorists are eliminated. They are the 'Palestinian Problem'. Entirely.
Regarding the Liberty and American support for its governemnt's foreign policy, here is what I said:2. What on earth are you talking about? The Liberty incident occurred in 1967, if my memory is correct. I don't know of anyone ever having claimed it didn't happen. What is the connection with 9/11?
3. What is the relevance here? Many Americans, including myself, have serious disagreements with much of American foreign policy. That is why we have elections every couple of years. Bush won a second term because the voters saw him as strong and vigilant against terrrorism. I didn't say anyone was lying about the former, you say that a 'contention' has been made recently, a 'contention' by whom, Islamic terrorists, professional anti-Semites? Why am I not surprised or impressed?
Regarding the latter, well, you can read it for yourself. Our system is congressional and yours parliamentary - we both have the option of voting out those whom we don't feel are representing us. I'm not sure I see your problem here. Both governemnt are going to continue to oppose the threat of Islamic terrorism, as the UK has shown with the recent arrests. Don't you think terrorists should be arrested? I might add that the same problem exists here in Germany, though to a lesser extent at present. There were some terrorist arrests here in NRW recently. It's a worldwide problem - wherever people live in peace and freedom, the Islamic terrorists and going to keep trying to reduce those people to their own miserable level. Is that really how you wish to live?
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
posted by bronwen
The Muslim creeps arrested in the Finsbury Park raid and others all over the world have stated their goal quite clearly as world domination, the imposition of Shariya law on everyone. They would, I'm sure, be quite proud to affirm such an agenda. Why don't you ask one of them? If you don't know any, I'm sure Scat or one of their other toadies would provide an introduction.
I have met muslims that want sharia law, some that are incredibly racist about the people in whose country they live just as I have met others that can't stand the nuttier elements amongst their population. All the ones arrested recently-where do you yhink the intelligence came from that led to their arrest?
I know catholics and protestents that lament the lack of religious belief and want their own views shoved down everybodies throats the banning of contraceptives to the ending of sex education in schools etc etc. Then there are the odd socialiist revolutionary that crawls out the woodwork every now and then except they just make people feel nostalgic for the good old days of the labour movement and then they get ignored again.
I don't assume every catholic is a nutter any more than I assume that the more extreme muslim, baptist, jehovah's witness or whatever is representative of the whole religon. I also know muslim's catholics, hindus, free congregationalists that are really decent people and their religon is part of who they are not an obsession.
They're on the fringe and have got no chance of getting anywhere, quite frankly they are not that frightening and the attempts to stir up hysteria about the threat just don't go down very well in the UK.
posted by bronwen
I didn't say anyone was lying about the former, you say that a 'contention' has been made recently, a 'contention' by whom, Islamic terrorists, professional anti-Semites? Why am I not surprised or impressed?
If you had actually looked at the link you would not ask such a stupid question.
posted by bronwen
Regarding the latter, well, you can read it for yourself. Our system is congressional and yours parliamentary - we both have the option of voting out those whom we don't feel are representing us. I'm not sure I see your problem here. Both governemnt are going to continue to oppose the threat of Islamic terrorism, as the UK has shown with the recent arrests. Don't you think terrorists should be arrested? I might add that the same problem exists here in Germany, though to a lesser extent at present. There were some terrorist arrests here in NRW recently. It's a worldwide problem - wherever people live in peace and freedom, the Islamic terrorists and going to keep trying to reduce those people to their own miserable level. Is that really how you wish to live?
You kind of lost me there. What are you wittering about.
It's a worldwide problem - wherever people live in peace and freedom, the Islamic terrorists and going to keep trying to reduce those people to their own miserable level. Is that really how you wish to live?
All terrorism is a world wide problem. Not just the present islamic variety but even the kind you seem to rhink is justified. terrorist attacks inlicted on anyone anywhere and by goverments as well should be condemned by all.
The Muslim creeps arrested in the Finsbury Park raid and others all over the world have stated their goal quite clearly as world domination, the imposition of Shariya law on everyone. They would, I'm sure, be quite proud to affirm such an agenda. Why don't you ask one of them? If you don't know any, I'm sure Scat or one of their other toadies would provide an introduction.
I have met muslims that want sharia law, some that are incredibly racist about the people in whose country they live just as I have met others that can't stand the nuttier elements amongst their population. All the ones arrested recently-where do you yhink the intelligence came from that led to their arrest?
I know catholics and protestents that lament the lack of religious belief and want their own views shoved down everybodies throats the banning of contraceptives to the ending of sex education in schools etc etc. Then there are the odd socialiist revolutionary that crawls out the woodwork every now and then except they just make people feel nostalgic for the good old days of the labour movement and then they get ignored again.
I don't assume every catholic is a nutter any more than I assume that the more extreme muslim, baptist, jehovah's witness or whatever is representative of the whole religon. I also know muslim's catholics, hindus, free congregationalists that are really decent people and their religon is part of who they are not an obsession.
They're on the fringe and have got no chance of getting anywhere, quite frankly they are not that frightening and the attempts to stir up hysteria about the threat just don't go down very well in the UK.
posted by bronwen
I didn't say anyone was lying about the former, you say that a 'contention' has been made recently, a 'contention' by whom, Islamic terrorists, professional anti-Semites? Why am I not surprised or impressed?
If you had actually looked at the link you would not ask such a stupid question.
posted by bronwen
Regarding the latter, well, you can read it for yourself. Our system is congressional and yours parliamentary - we both have the option of voting out those whom we don't feel are representing us. I'm not sure I see your problem here. Both governemnt are going to continue to oppose the threat of Islamic terrorism, as the UK has shown with the recent arrests. Don't you think terrorists should be arrested? I might add that the same problem exists here in Germany, though to a lesser extent at present. There were some terrorist arrests here in NRW recently. It's a worldwide problem - wherever people live in peace and freedom, the Islamic terrorists and going to keep trying to reduce those people to their own miserable level. Is that really how you wish to live?
You kind of lost me there. What are you wittering about.
It's a worldwide problem - wherever people live in peace and freedom, the Islamic terrorists and going to keep trying to reduce those people to their own miserable level. Is that really how you wish to live?
All terrorism is a world wide problem. Not just the present islamic variety but even the kind you seem to rhink is justified. terrorist attacks inlicted on anyone anywhere and by goverments as well should be condemned by all.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
Bronwen wrote: 1. If you will look at the cross-references you will see that many of them are to this outfit's own publications. So? Others are to other anti-Semitic sites and publications. To believe this crap you have to adopt the mindset that the entire mainstream media is a vast conspiracy to keep the 'truth' (that Jews are the devil incarnate and their enemies, the suici de bom bers, mass mur drerers and lunatic Islamic clerics, are God's chosen people) from the world. I'm not ready to make such a ridiculous assumption. Who has the closed mind here? The mainstream media may not all be completely unbiased, nor are they supposed to be. Nevertheless, they strive to report the truth, not fictitious slander.Bronwen, you're just being silly.
To believe it, you don't need any of those attitudes.
Here's a creed I'd happily subscribe to, from your paragraph, and I can sign to it without hesitation or reservation: I don't believe that that Jews are the devil incarnate, I don't believe that any suicide bomber or mass murderer or lunatic Islamic cleric has God's favour. I believe that to assume such things are true would be ridiculous.
What possible reason do you have for thinking that anyone here thinks otherwise? You (like anastrophe before you) set up Aunt Sallys solely in order to deride them, but what you invent has no reasonable genesis among the rest of us. It's a shoddy approach to discussing the condition of the world, you'd make a lot more impact if you avoided it.
To believe it, you don't need any of those attitudes.
Here's a creed I'd happily subscribe to, from your paragraph, and I can sign to it without hesitation or reservation: I don't believe that that Jews are the devil incarnate, I don't believe that any suicide bomber or mass murderer or lunatic Islamic cleric has God's favour. I believe that to assume such things are true would be ridiculous.
What possible reason do you have for thinking that anyone here thinks otherwise? You (like anastrophe before you) set up Aunt Sallys solely in order to deride them, but what you invent has no reasonable genesis among the rest of us. It's a shoddy approach to discussing the condition of the world, you'd make a lot more impact if you avoided it.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
spot wrote: 1. Bronwen, you're just being silly.
2. I don't believe that any suicide bomber or mass murderer or lunatic Islamic cleric has God's favour. I believe that to assume such things are true would be ridiculous.
3. What possible reason do you have for thinking that anyone here thinks otherwise? You (like anastrophe before you) set up Aunt Sallys solely in order to deride them, but what you invent has no reasonable genesis among the rest of us. It's a shoddy approach to discussing the condition of the world, you'd make a lot more impact if you avoided it.1. There's nothing silly about the threat of Islamic terrorism. If you really think that no such threat exists, what planet have you been living on?
2 & 3. Then you need to tell that to all of the various i-mams and moo-lahs who instigate and encourage such things. Granted that the suicide bombers themselves are usually mentally defective in some way, either retarded or psychotic; nevertheless, I know of no case where such a person planned and executed such an attack alone, nor have I ever heard of a suicide bombing by a non-Muslim. Ridiculous? Their victims would disagree with you.
2. I don't believe that any suicide bomber or mass murderer or lunatic Islamic cleric has God's favour. I believe that to assume such things are true would be ridiculous.
3. What possible reason do you have for thinking that anyone here thinks otherwise? You (like anastrophe before you) set up Aunt Sallys solely in order to deride them, but what you invent has no reasonable genesis among the rest of us. It's a shoddy approach to discussing the condition of the world, you'd make a lot more impact if you avoided it.1. There's nothing silly about the threat of Islamic terrorism. If you really think that no such threat exists, what planet have you been living on?
2 & 3. Then you need to tell that to all of the various i-mams and moo-lahs who instigate and encourage such things. Granted that the suicide bombers themselves are usually mentally defective in some way, either retarded or psychotic; nevertheless, I know of no case where such a person planned and executed such an attack alone, nor have I ever heard of a suicide bombing by a non-Muslim. Ridiculous? Their victims would disagree with you.
500,000 Lebanese flee the carnage: Israelis killed in first firefight on the ground
gmc wrote: 1. I have met muslims that want sharia law, some that are incredibly racist about the people in whose country they live just as I have met others that can't stand the nuttier elements amongst their population. All the ones arrested recently-where do you yhink the intelligence came from that led to their arrest?
2. I know catholics and protestents that lament the lack of religious belief and want their own views shoved down everybodies throats the banning of contraceptives to the ending of sex education in schools etc etc.
3. I don't assume every catholic is a nutter any more than I assume that the more extreme muslim, baptist, jehovah's witness or whatever is representative of the whole religon.
4. I also know muslim's catholics, hindus, free congregationalists that are really decent people and their religon is part of who they are not an obsession.
5. They're on the fringe and have got no chance of getting anywhere, quite frankly they are not that frightening and the attempts to stir up hysteria about the threat just don't go down very well in the UK.
6. If you had actually looked at the link you would not ask such a stupid question.
7. All terrorism is a world wide problem. Not just the present islamic variety but even the kind you seem to rhink is justified. terrorist attacks inlicted on anyone anywhere and by goverments as well should be condemned by all.1. Well, now you are finally making some sense; however, as I stated earlier, I would be more convinced if I were to witness a big rally or demonstration by the 'good, peace-loving Muslims' carrying signs and banners saying 'STOP ISLAMIC TERROR'. So far I have seen no such thing. I have no doubt , though, that Muslim terrorists in the UK and elsewhere are being infiltrated by informers, and that many attacks have probably been averted thereby. The only permanent solution, though, is the complete destruction of the Islamic terrorist infrastructure.
2. I don't understand your point here. None of these other religions support terrorism. Never having been to Scotland I'm unfamiliar with any religious tensions that might exist there. In any case, if you wish to discuss that further, it belongs on a different forum.
3 & 4. I have been a Catholic all my life and have never encountered anyone I would describe as a 'Catholic extremist', nor could I even imagine what such a person would be like. Some Catholics, like some Protestants and some Jews, are more devout than others. Again, such discussions are on the wrong forum.
5. Who's on the fringe? You may have lost me. Islamic terrorists? They may well be 'on the fringe' but they are committing mass murder all over the world, and, as I keep pointing out, THE REST OF ISLAM IS NOT BEING HEARD TO COMPLAIN. Hello, anybody home in there?
6. I looked at it. It's on a blatantly anti-Semitic website. The factual history of the affair can easily be found elsewhere. See, gmc, one way you can tell the good guys from the bad guys is that the latter are outrageous liars. Hezbollah starts a war by invading Israel and killing and kidnapping Israelis, then they shout, 'Israel started this war!'. Israel pounds the living poo out of Hezbolllah for a month, the Hezbos proclaim, 'We were victorious' as half of their country lies in smoldering ruins. Some people actually believe such crapola, you and a couple of other posters here seem to be in that crowd. Good luck to you.
7. When did I ever say that I supported any form of terrorism? Defending one's self, one's family, and one's country from lunatics who have vowed to enslave them is not terrorism. President Truman ended WWII in TWO DAYS with nuclear weapons when it would have gone on indefinitely otherwise. The Islamic threat must be eliminated by ANY MEAN NECESSARY before they possess such weapons themselves. That's the bottom line, regardless of what Scat and the other defenders of Islamic terrorism claim.
2. I know catholics and protestents that lament the lack of religious belief and want their own views shoved down everybodies throats the banning of contraceptives to the ending of sex education in schools etc etc.
3. I don't assume every catholic is a nutter any more than I assume that the more extreme muslim, baptist, jehovah's witness or whatever is representative of the whole religon.
4. I also know muslim's catholics, hindus, free congregationalists that are really decent people and their religon is part of who they are not an obsession.
5. They're on the fringe and have got no chance of getting anywhere, quite frankly they are not that frightening and the attempts to stir up hysteria about the threat just don't go down very well in the UK.
6. If you had actually looked at the link you would not ask such a stupid question.
7. All terrorism is a world wide problem. Not just the present islamic variety but even the kind you seem to rhink is justified. terrorist attacks inlicted on anyone anywhere and by goverments as well should be condemned by all.1. Well, now you are finally making some sense; however, as I stated earlier, I would be more convinced if I were to witness a big rally or demonstration by the 'good, peace-loving Muslims' carrying signs and banners saying 'STOP ISLAMIC TERROR'. So far I have seen no such thing. I have no doubt , though, that Muslim terrorists in the UK and elsewhere are being infiltrated by informers, and that many attacks have probably been averted thereby. The only permanent solution, though, is the complete destruction of the Islamic terrorist infrastructure.
2. I don't understand your point here. None of these other religions support terrorism. Never having been to Scotland I'm unfamiliar with any religious tensions that might exist there. In any case, if you wish to discuss that further, it belongs on a different forum.
3 & 4. I have been a Catholic all my life and have never encountered anyone I would describe as a 'Catholic extremist', nor could I even imagine what such a person would be like. Some Catholics, like some Protestants and some Jews, are more devout than others. Again, such discussions are on the wrong forum.
5. Who's on the fringe? You may have lost me. Islamic terrorists? They may well be 'on the fringe' but they are committing mass murder all over the world, and, as I keep pointing out, THE REST OF ISLAM IS NOT BEING HEARD TO COMPLAIN. Hello, anybody home in there?
6. I looked at it. It's on a blatantly anti-Semitic website. The factual history of the affair can easily be found elsewhere. See, gmc, one way you can tell the good guys from the bad guys is that the latter are outrageous liars. Hezbollah starts a war by invading Israel and killing and kidnapping Israelis, then they shout, 'Israel started this war!'. Israel pounds the living poo out of Hezbolllah for a month, the Hezbos proclaim, 'We were victorious' as half of their country lies in smoldering ruins. Some people actually believe such crapola, you and a couple of other posters here seem to be in that crowd. Good luck to you.
7. When did I ever say that I supported any form of terrorism? Defending one's self, one's family, and one's country from lunatics who have vowed to enslave them is not terrorism. President Truman ended WWII in TWO DAYS with nuclear weapons when it would have gone on indefinitely otherwise. The Islamic threat must be eliminated by ANY MEAN NECESSARY before they possess such weapons themselves. That's the bottom line, regardless of what Scat and the other defenders of Islamic terrorism claim.