LGF

more options

  

Advertisement

Religion of Mass Murder

Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 11:40:58 am PDT

Palestinian Hamas followers dressed as suicide bombers march holding up the Quran, Islam's holy book, in the Palestinian refugee camp of Ain el-Hilweh.(AFP/Mahmud Al-Zayyat)
A Palestinian group dressed as Hamas suicide bombers strapped with fake explosives and carrying the holy Muslim book, the Quran, during a street demonstration at Ein el-Hilweh refugee camp near the southern port city of Sidon, Lebanon, Friday Aug. 22, 2003 to protest against Israeli air attacks on Hamas leader Ismail Abu Shanab in Gaza strip. Text on head band reads 'Al-Qassam Brigades'. (AP Photo/Mohammed Zaatari)
Hamas followers, dressed as suicide bombers and holding the Quran, burn Israeli and US flags during a protest against the assassination of senior Hamas leader Ismail Abu Shanaab.(AFP/Mahmoud Zayat)
Advertisement

326 comments

  • Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
  • Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.
  • Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, "First!"
  • Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.
  • Disagreement and debate are welcome, but insults and abuse are not, and may cause your account to be blocked.
  • REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.

Hide comments | Jump to bottom

1 Michael Glazer  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:42:47am

Hey ma look the KKK is back!

2 kayawanee  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:45:25am

One JDAM. Just one JDAM. Please....

3 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:46:11am

And the world has sympathy for these savages, something I will never understand. They should be killed now, before they have a chance to fulfill their dreams for "martyrdom" and take more Jewish lives with them. Bastards!

4 Richard the Lionheart  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:46:25am

It is now timeto take out Arafat and bull doze his compound flat!

5 Brian Jones  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:47:05am

Dang...back to the home-made flags. Guess their flag fund dried up.

6 scaramouche  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:47:17am

Do you think it would help if we called in the Ghostbusters?

On another note, how do they keep their sheets so clean in those refugee camps? I thought they didn't have access to running water and Tide.

7 HalfLife  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:48:09am

#1 Michael Glazer

EXACTLY. I wish - how I wish - they would carry one of these pictures on the front pages of the NYT, Washington Post, Philadelphia Inquirer, etc.

Could anyone fail to see the uncanny resemblance? Wouldn't they be shocked into finally seeing that the goals of the two groups are just the same?

8 The Ramblin' Wreck  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:48:59am

Shouldn't those robes be black or something?

David Duke should sue for copyright infringement!

9 d  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:50:05am

I like the bottom picture because you see that underneath the KKK sheets they're wearing blue jeans and tennis shoes. How western! And--dare we say it?--how American!

I wonder if their jeans are, ahem, the Levi Strauss brand?

10 lawhawk  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:50:06am

#1, i was just thinking they were the KKK reincarnate as well.

Why do these folks think that they have to cover their faces? Are they fearful of dying before they kill as many Israelis as possible? Nothing can stand in the way of that. They're so honorable and valiant that they must cover their faces.

Oh, and what does the US have to do with Israel's retaliation for the Jerusalem bus bombing? Nothing. I thought so. Their hatred of the West is plain and clearly visible to anyone who looks. Don't let your eyes fool you. They are the enemy of the West.

11 schroedinger's cat  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:51:03am

Damn, I was hoping to see their sheets catch on fire too.

12 ploome  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:54:49am

this reminds me of ritual war dance

they must work themselves into a frenzy
and symbolically blow up a cardboard bus or burn a paper flag

frh

13 Craig  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:55:01am

zulubaby-
Why can't we fullfill their dreams of martyrdom, just all at once? For every problem there is a (J)dam solution!

ROMM religion of mass murder
ROMP religion of mass psychosis
ROPMA religion of peace, my *ss
ROPM religion of pieceful martyrs
RORSP religion of really stupid people
ROHE religion of high explosives
ROFM religion of flat martyrs
ROLF religion of loser fat-heads

14 Buck  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:55:27am

I don't understand, all of this took place outdoors and the IDL could not free up even one helicopter gunship or one of those now famous 'tom cats'?

15 mr peanut  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:56:39am

#3 zulubaby

i will never understand it either but the world better wake up because today they are targeting jews, tomorrow it will be all non-muslims.

16 piglet  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 9:59:34am

Just drop 1000 ten pound balls of ice on them from
10,000 feet. say, "freak hail storm, act of god."

Sorta like Mr. Moose and his ping pong balls.

17 mickthemick  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:00:32am

Gosh, I thought only criminals and hard-core racist bigots covered their heads with sacks

(sarcasm off)

18 superfly  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:01:05am

I would love to knock just one of those Korans into that fire.

19 AG in Houston  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:01:18am

Zulubaby,

We're Jews.

Those people fight and kill Jews.

That is why they garner sympathy from the world.

20 Kat  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:01:24am

Whenever I see them burn the flag, I remember how I enjoyed burning a copy of the craporan, on the one year anniversary of 911. I cooked pork on the BBQ and the grease dripped on the terror manual as it burned.

21 Lucile  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:01:46am

Lee Harris (Tech Central Station) was right on the money with his analogy of the militant islamo-radicals as a modern day KKK.

So, what is it about this that liberals don't understand?

22 mwn  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:03:13am

KKK was the first thing that jump to mind here as well...

there has to be some sort of link between having whacked out, sociopathic, bigoted, racial and religious beliefs that makes one want to toss a white sheet over ones head and run around burning things...

We need to find a way to exploit this. Somehow get them to change from a white sheet to a thick plastic bag, a trashbag filled with badgers, or better yet white sheets dipped in gasoline!!!

23 Bill K.  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:04:09am

Israel would be perfectly justified launching a rocket strike on these clowns even though they're in the midst of a crowd.
The M.O. of the Islamic terrorist is to try use the civilized behavior of the countries they're attacking as a weapon against them. And no, we would not sink down to to the terrorist level.

24 selpaw  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:05:16am

I have said it before and I will say it again:

I blame Bush and the rest of the worthless so-called 'world leaders.' I blame this government for the unending litany of double-standards which have been shoved down Israel's throat.
What has this told the world as to the value of Jewish life?
When a precious tiny child is slaughtered and Israel is told to use restraint what message does this send?

When twisted evil launches the wholesale slaughter of innocent people and when that very evil and sick brutality buys
***STATEHOOD***
.....what does this tell you?

Hamas and the rest of those f*ing sub-human terrorists groups are what they are because of the PLO. The whole world knew they were not only given shelter/protection by the PLO but the breadth and depth of their purpose and their rise was because of the PLO. (PLO being fed directly from every terrorist country on this planet!)
Until the whole demented truth comes out I will continue to be angry with my elected leaders.

25 Zaide  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:07:22am

#21 Lucille
"So, what is it about this that liberals don't understand?"

Whatever gave you the idea they don't understand?

26 RC neo-Jew  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:07:29am

#3 zulubaby

And the world has sympathy for these savages, something I will never understand.

Mysterious, isn't it? And frightening. Murders and maimings of babies and children fail to move them, terrorists dressing up as KKK and behaving like savages are treated as normal and understandable.

What's wrong with the admirers and supporters of all this? Why can't they see that it is evil?

27 ORD neighbor  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:07:39am

I wonder how often one of their books written by a certain child molester slips and falls into that fire... And what they do then? With the number of KKK-wannabes and occupation manuals in these parts, coupled with how often these events happen, it is almost guaranteed to happen with some frequency. The curse of enquiring mind...

28 ploome  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:09:43am

15 mr peanut

I would not be surprised if the muslims hadnt killed many, many more Christians and Hindus etc than Jews

there are more Christians and Hindus..

and they are still killing Christians all over

see the web site of BarnabasFund

29 Phil Pell  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:09:50am

You know, when my Grandpa was growing up in Appalachia (yeah, I'm a Hillbilly Jew) he said that when the Klan would march through town, he'd know that they were nothing but low-class bumpkins by looking at their shoes... Check out the shoes in the last picture. Is that VELCRO on them tennis shoes?!

30 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:10:00am

The Klan with Green Headbands

funny how extremes meet, ain't it?

31 kayawanee  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:10:44am

Here is a link to the article that #10 (Lucile) just mentioned. It is definitely a must read.

After reading this link you will have ammunition to debate anyone who appologizes for the terrorists. If they ever mention that these groups have legitimate grievences, are under attack, and feel justified in what their doing, just ask them how we should treat KKK members who run lynch mobs and burn black churches down killing innocent African American, men, women, and children in the process.

Apologists For Terror

32 Colt  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:10:51am

So revealing that the darlings of the Islamic world are the most vicious and evil terrorists to walk the face of the earth.

33 selpaw  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:11:05am

zulubaby

And the world has sympathy for these savages, something I will never understand.


Yes, the world has sympathy for those sub-human zombie pigs. Face the facts, a dead Jew has no symbolism to the world except that there is another dead JEW.
If this were not true we would be living in quite a different world.

34 Villanova  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:11:32am

Get it out of your systems now you animals, a display like this next week will get you a bulls-eye on your foreheads.

(I hope)

35 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:11:39am

As an aside, ever notice how far apart the eye-holes are?

How can they have such high rates of fetal alcohol syndrome when the Q'ran forbids alcohol?

36 kayawanee  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:11:55am

Sorry, correction. It was #21 that posted that reference, not #10

37 Montaigne's Cat  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:12:13am

This is the Lee Harris article that begins with the KKK analogy and then elaborates up it. It is intellectually illuminating.

Confronting Terror Gangs and Their Apologists

38 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:13:45am

#1 Michael Glazer:

Any resemblence between these guys and the KKK is, of course, purely incedental.

#3 zulubaby:

And the world has sympathy for these savages, something I will never understand.

Sorry, but as much as I appreciate your posts here (and with all due respect) that's B.S.

IMHO, that amounts to giving up to the enemy (or Enemy; take your pick).

It also amounts to saying that what makes the news wires constitutes "the world," or the majority opinion thereof.

That may or may not be true. But whichever the case, you (all of us) have to understand the difference between the two. And try to do whatever we can to smash this meme into pieces.

Now...get on your feet, pick up your weapon, and take that hill! Got it? :)

39 JohninLondon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:15:02am

The BBC is of course giving the sense that the collapse of the truce is due to the assassination of the Hamas leader.

But meanwhile here's another direct challenge to the BBC mandatory licence fee, with a poll showing that 51% of Brits do not regard the mandatory licence fee as good value for money. I would guess that this percentage would increase if the BBC gets badly criticised by the Hutton enquiry. The BBC Chairman is in the dock next week, appearing after Tony Blair, who will be explaining why the BBC was so wrong over the Gilligan/Kelly affair.

[Link: media.guardian.co.uk...]

40 sambam  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:15:15am

Protest all you like guys ... but your next.

41 mickthemick  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:15:42am

#18 superfly

I would love to knock just one of those Korans into that fire.

Yup. I'd love to knock just one of those Palestinians into the fire. And if you, superfly, knock the Koran into the flames, then nobody can say we were inconsiderate because at least we gave the poor bugger something to read while he burned.

42 Doug  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:16:00am

#1

Hey ma look the KKK is back!

Do you suppose for one minute that the news media would treat their coverage of the KKK like they do Islamofascists? Do you think they could utter the phrase "the problem is a break down of communication, we need to understand their perspective" regrading the KKK?

AND

Keep burning those flags boys, that way, the heat seeking missles can find you...he he he.

43 zaza  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:17:19am

#21 Lucile: it fits perfectly in the ideology of the [I don't use the word "liberals" cos I'm used to it in a different, positive meaning - I'd say terrorist-apologist-scum] cos:

a - they're not white
b - they're oppressed!!!
c - they're oppressed by Israel

That's how apologising for the new KKK fits in.

44 Colt  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:18:02am

#38 someguy

I think ZB was right. The media is biased, yes, but look at the way 99.5% of the world votes in the UN.

Now...get on your feet, pick up your weapon, and take that hill! Got it? :)

:-)

45 Tman  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:23:20am

On topic, but for those of you who read the Wall Street Journal, today there is an incredible review of a Yassar Arafish biograhy by Barry and Judith Rubin. The WSJ pulls no punches in the review-

here is the link- (sorry for subscr only)

[Link: online.wsj.com...]


some excerpts-

"For more than four decades, since he founded Fatah in 1959 and then the Palestinian Liberation Organization in 1964, Yasir Arafat has enjoyed the flattering glare of the international spotlight. Whole generations of generals and peace envoys, a half-dozen U.S. presidents and entire Arab regimes have come and gone, but Mr. Arafat has kept himself in power -- even as he has failed his people and pursued policies that have added to their distress. Other Arab leaders have long since stopped trusting him, taking it for granted that he will not honor the agreements he has signed. Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak once referred to him, in the presence of Secretary of State Warren Christopher, as "a son of a dog." Mr. Arafat is one of the inventors of modern terrorism and continues to instigate it to this day.

Despite this, a multitude of admirers and apologists in the West -- and even in Israel itself -- have been taken in by his pose of moderation, at least until recently. As a result, he has visited nearly every royal palace and presidential residence in Europe and was a guest of honor at the White House several times. He has even won the Nobel Peace Prize.

How did this happen? As Middle East scholar Barry Rubin and his journalist wife, Judith Colp Rubin, show in their admirable, impressively documented "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" (Oxford, 354 pages, $27.50), he is one of the great con men of modern politics. Even those who know what a slippery character Mr. Arafat is may be surprised to learn from the Rubins' account just how deceitful he can be.

He claims to have been born in Jerusalem, for instance, but was in fact born in Cairo. He has told tales of single-handedly stopping an Israeli tank column in the 1948 war, though the evidence places him in Egypt at the time, far from the fighting. He has stated that he was an officer in the Egyptian army defending Port Said during the 1956 Suez war; the truth is that he was in Czechoslovakia, attending a Communist-sponsored student congress.

More broadly, he has alleged that there have been massacres of Palestinians where none have occurred. He has talked of PLO victories when it has suffered heavy losses. Some of his falsehoods in recent years have been utterly fantastic -- that there was never a Jewish temple in Jerusalem, that Ariel Sharon is planning to settle 500,000 Afghan Jews on the West Bank. But that hasn't stopped some journalists from taking them seriously."

No doubt.... Hope the BBC is paying attention.....

Tim

46 sambam  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:25:32am

I thought the PA said they were going to do something about this. Didnt I hear abuot some 24 hour deadline from Sharon? Is it time yet? To bring back an oldy but a goody FASTER PLEASE.

47 rusta  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:31:40am

KKK also flashed in my mind. Liberal media will only condemn judeo christian values and those who suscribe to them. Anything else they consider truth to be relative to that person's point of view.

ie. They would never consider the parellels between these murderers and KKK murders

Hell, they don't even understand they are supporting facists are facists them selves

Oh well birds of a feather flock together

48 Bob G.  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:35:45am

It's always interesting to channel surf and find out what's happening on [bigoted word] Planet.

KKK:

Krazy Klueless [bigoted word]s

49 Jack Murray  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:38:43am

So that's what Abe was up to in Israel, take a second look, don't you almost have to laugh at the last picture. I mean the guys holding his sheet so he can see how the BBQ is going. It reminds me of trick or treaters on Halloween trying to see where they're going. But the central question definately is why are they not on the cover of the NYT in mid-rally? Sidenote: I think I'd have the sheet over my head if I held the Quran so I don't blame them for hiding in shame. Now they're militants right? And what is the definition of an Israeli militant again? How are the two paralelled? Abe is right, the average American doesn't get both sides of the story.

50 longtime lurker  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:39:15am

The top photo isn't right--they're holding the Koran in their left hands--taboo! Is the picture flopped, or are they truly desecrating their book? Someone who reads Arabic could answer. Thanks.

51 park peeper  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:40:48am

I wonder if any suicidally-minded Israelis/ Westerners/ etc would, instead of slashing their wrists, be prepared to travel to Judea/ Samaria/ Gaza and blow themselves up for the anti-Jihad and take out a couple of Hamas/ PIJ/ insert-Islamic-terror-group-here terrorists. Just a thought.

52 EE  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:41:06am

These members of the Ku Klux Koran have bigotry and hatred similar to their KK Klan cousins, but they are more religiously crazed, and more rabidly, criminally, murderously psychotic.

53 niall  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:41:31am

According to the current CNN poll 78% recognize that the peace process is over. The other 22% evidently work at the State Department.

54 Minstrel  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:41:40am

Displays like this one and the media reaction to them are precisely why I am going into journalism. I want to shed light in the darkest corners, and to find and expose the rats before they can scurry into the sewers.

55 Ford Prefect  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:41:52am

Hey, this is a little off topic but I was just looking at the peoples republic of portland's idiot media site and ran across an interesting article about St Pancake. Just thought I'd pass it along.

St. Pancake on idiot media

Just when you think that she is dead and gone. The good thing is that the story is about something that is being gotten rid of that has her name attached to it.

56 CC Phil  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:42:34am

RE: Burning the Koran

I doubt that would upset them all that much. While working in the Magic Kingdon we used to have a burn box and among other items that went in there were any papers that had Allah written on them. Want to really piss them off? Hang it in the outhouse like they used to do the Sears Roebuck catalogue in the old days.

57 HULUGU  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:48:39am

surely these apostates should be punished for wearing [under their sheets] the clothing invented by the kufr jew levi strauss

58 CC Phil  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:53:24am

#57 HUGULU

Seeing as how these are “poor Palestinians”, those Levis may be the South East Asia knockoff: Live jeans.

59 justdanny  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:55:25am

#3 zulubaby

And the world has sympathy for these savages, something I will never understand.

I'm right beside you sister, I don't get it.

#38 someguy

It also amounts to saying that what makes the news wires constitutes "the world," or the majority opinion thereof.

From what I see, where I live, who I know, the majority of the world A. has this view B. doesnt care enough to develop a view for or against. The news wires are for the most part vile filth. But who besides the very few confronts their deception? certainly not the majority.

I also believe zulubabys statement is at the heart of why we all visit this site. We don't f______ get it.

60 Paladin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:55:25am

#54 Minstrel

Take it from an ex-journalist--you are in for a shock.

61 BC  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:55:53am

#54 Minstrel -

Well, best of luck to you. We need more (actually we need any) genuinely curious and clear-eyed journalists out there.

Unfortunately, after you write a few articles about events like the one illustrated here, don't be surprised if you suddenly find you're no longer allowed into refugee camps, or Area A (Palestinian-run) towns. And you're no longer granted interviews with Palestinian officials. And you start getting some unpleasant letters and voice mails. And your editors quietly relocate you to the Scandinavian Affairs desk.

62 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:56:30am

Colt #44:

Sounds like you understood me. I wasn't being disrespectful to zulubaby at all.

And I wouldn't tell anyone to "take that hill," unless I was prepared to do that myself.

That would be very unbecoming of a Chief Petty Officer in the United States Navy.

The U.N. votes as you say (no argument there).

But I will not believe that a body that appoints Libya as head of its Human Rights Commission speaks for the majority of men who by Common Sense (there's my Scots-Irish coming out again) understand what freedom and dignity really mean.

That's what I wanted to say. Does that make sense? :)

63 NC  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:59:14am

There really is a magical relationship between degenerates and white sheets, isn't there?

64 Doss  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:59:15am

These kids follow in a long line of Pali Kiddie Terrorists. The June 12, 1970 cover of Life Magazine shows that the more things change, the more they stay the same. I tried to find a larger, clearer image, but the life.com site, which has all of the covers just leads to dead ends. I couldn't find a good cover image anywhere else either.

65 EE  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:59:19am

#50 longtime lurker
Written on the headband is Al Shehada, the Muslim profession of faith: there is no god but Allah, Mohammed is his prophet.

You can google -- Shehada written --
to see what the Arabic writing looks like for the Shehada. Look at this website, and look at the framed Shehada, Type 1, that this e-retailer is selling
[Link: www.mashaallah.com...]
and it's exactly what is written on the splodeydope wannabe's headband. So the photo is not reversed.

And, as you point out, this fool is holding the holy Koran in his left hand, the same hand that any good Muslim uses to wipe his nether region, according to the Prophet.

So he is desecrating the Koran in two ways: one by equating it to toilet paper, by holding it in the wrong hand, according to the Prophet; the other by advocating suicide, which is strictly prohibited in Islam.

66 Wild Justice  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:01:10am

True Benevolence

Heart-rending article, that perfectly sums up why I'm proud to be a Jew.

[Link: www.nationalreview.com...]

67 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:02:09am

#59 justdanny:

I also believe zulubabys statement is at the heart of why we all visit this site. We don't f______ get it.

In fact, justdanny, the VERY FACT that this site exists

the VERY FACT that it attracts (and brings out the best in) people like you, zulubaby, Colt, Occasional Reader, Robert Crawford, et.al.)

the VERY FACT that so many of have had (and are having) such a tremendous, unmeasurable amount of influence on friends, family, and other blogs...

means that the "majority"; if not quite against such madness and hatred as depicted by these pictures, is fluid enough to be influence for the good!

So let us take courage and BE NOT AFRAID!

"I have come back at the turning of the tide." --Gandalf

68 Gordon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:02:35am

#50 Longtime Lurker; they obviously had just used some of the pages for toilet paper, which is why they are holding Korans in their left hand.

69 Wild Justice  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:03:39am

A quote from that article I mentioned above:

In a way, the volunteers of ZAKA and the Arab suicide bombers epitomize the true clash of cultures underway here in Israel and around the world. One culture produces people willing to wade into a crowd of children, look them in the eyes, and murder them; the other produces people willing to do whatever is necessary to protect human dignity, even in death.

It is true cruelty, contrasted with true benevolence.

70 Alex F  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:04:09am

OT, but did anyone see ELF - earth liberation front -- has torched several SUV and car dealerships in SoCal. I'm surprised to not see you comment on it, Charles, but eco-terrorism has obviously taken a page from the handbook of Hamas, IJ, etc.

The root cause of terrorism is its success, and we're seeing it spread.

71 Paladin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:04:25am

#68 Gordon

The highest and best use for the Koran!

72 Rube  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:04:26am

It really is so much easier than actually getting a job and building stuff, isn't it?

73 aaron's rantblog  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:06:31am

100,000 dhimmicidal maniacs were all together according to this Yahoo news piece.

Pity the ENTIRE party wasn't blown to hell.

74 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:07:38am

#70 Alex F

The root cause of terrorism is its success, and we're seeing it spread.

...which sort of suggests some obvious solution to the current problem.

75 Craig  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:08:14am

Attention! A sighting of the rare and elusive Moderate Muslim- courtesy of National Review Online;

[Link: www.newscientist.com...]

Maybe, just maybe he can spark the revolt in Iran. I can dream, can't I?

76 Studsup  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:09:01am

As unhappy as I am with Bush and Powell in this "Road Map" nonsense, the mainstream media's lies, distortions and biased reporting is on the whole more dangerous than anything Bush and Powell do at the moment. I will at least acknowledge that those men have real responsibility for negotiating a dense thicket of competing interests, objectives and the results that may follow.

The media? They have no such responsibility -- they can rabidly jew-bait and in the end have absolutely no accountabilty to anyone for anything. I despise the mainstream media because they have lied, selectively reported or not reported facts, and engaged in outrageous yellow-dog journalism for the express purpose of fueling Islamic rage against Israel and global sympathy for the terrorist murderers.

The latest global frenzy of Jew hating has been orchestrated by the media. The barbarians featured in this picture have been emboldened and encouraged to slaughter of Jews by the Media's tacit and sometimes explicit support for it.

If this were a KKK rally in Alabama, the LA Times would be demanding the imprisonment of Men in Sheets or worse and then would order up a new round of preference subsidies. The Jews and Christians just don't fall into a "protected class" as far as the Dems, liberals and mainstream media are concerned.

77 Studsup  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:12:24am

#70 Alex F,

"OT, but did anyone see ELF - earth liberation front -- has torched several SUV and car dealerships in SoCal. I'm surprised to not see you comment on it, Charles, but eco-terrorism has obviously taken a page from the handbook of Hamas, IJ, etc."

How dare you call it "terrorism"! It's environmental "activism". I sentence you to a Hillary Clinton Re-education Camp.

78 schaffman  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:13:23am

This is another one of those sets of pictures Charles posts that I think speaks volumes by themselves.

If these pictures were of Jew-haters from Alabama with bibles instead of korans, the U.S. press would be foaming. But radical, violent Jew-haters in the ME is alright by them. I guess folks at NPR et. al. think you just can't expect any better behavior out of those A-rabs.

79 Henry S.  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:14:21am

Take a close look at these photos. Print them and place them in an album or under glass. Someday, when Hamas, IJ, and the other death cultists have disappeared into oblivion and members of the RoP have been culled to about 750 million with the survivors having undergone a transformation to a reformed, neutered version of Islam, these photos will serve as a valuable reminder of the insanity that once took hold in a region at the intersection of Asia, Africa, and Europe.

80 Schaffman  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:14:41am

#76 beat me to the point.

81 Elizabeth  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:15:29am

I mean...what's the problem...the guy (shabib..shibab...shebab (mmm, lip-smacking good!) went to heaven, didn't he? Well...didn't he? And now he's got 72 virgins, doesn't he?.....well, doesn't he...? So why the commotion...?

82 David  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:17:09am

Captions state that they're dressed as suicide bombers. Does anybody think that someone dressed like a Klansman and waving a koran would get within 1 mile of a bus, checkpoint, etc? Maybe to AFP, since the bomber this week dressed as a Hasidic Jew, he wasn't a suicide bomber? Does that make him a "militant" instead of a terrorist?

83 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:20:05am

#70 Alex F; #74 Mr Pol:

Success is in the eye of the beholder, as VDH says:

The current choice of soft and largely civilian targets, while in the short-term horrific and depressing, is also instructive. The Baathist remnants and assorted terrorists who are now their allies have declared themselves not only enemies of the United States, but murderers of innocent Iraqis, Jordanians, and U.N. officials at large. They brag that they are driving infidels and Westerners of all stripes from sacred land. In fact, the current indiscriminate killing was a strategic mistake. It is a sign of desperation and can only unite the global community in its belief that terrorism, suicide murdering, and the agents of rogue regimes really do constitute a nexus of opposition to the forces of civilization — and must in return warrant universal resistance from the world at large.
It is the American way and the nature of our media culture to exaggerate setbacks and ignore successes. Thus even as our television screens seem to be overcome by panic and fear, high-ranking Baathists continue to be arrested in Iraq, terrorists find themselves stymied in achieving another 9/11, and the reconstruction of Iraq continues.

For the rest, read Phase Three?

84 Alex F  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:22:43am

83 someguy
I read VDH all the time, but I think he's a wee bit (mildly put) optimistic on this, especially as we are seeing the remaining terrorist organizations merge together and coordinate attacks (anyone who thinks otherwise needs a beating with the clue stick).

Time and time again, we have seen the Palestinians rewarded for their terrorism, ie. the "roadmap."

85 Scott Kiel  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:28:30am

When they tried to build a mosque in our town.

We burned them out.

86 EE  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:30:05am

#68 Gordon
You are funny!

That top photo, with the Koran being held in the a**-wipe hand (and the headband has the Shehada written correctly, not reversed), shows just how little the radical Islamists really know about Islam. And they hope to convert all Muslims to radical Islam, the death cult of splodeydope wannabes who treat their Korans like toilet paper.

87 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:30:21am

#84 Alex F:

You could be right; especially since he was so pessimistic about the outcome of the PC culture wars in the States in one of his articles a couple fo weeks ago.

OTOH, do you think these guys have the coordination, arms, tactics and courage to defeat U.S. troops?

Not a rhetorical question here--I'm open to both hard facts and SWAGs (having been the author of more of the latter than I can remember).

88 mickthemick  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:30:50am

#70 Alex

but eco-terrorism has obviously taken a page from the handbook of Hamas, IJ, etc.

When ELF starts blowing up the children of the car dealers themselves, there will be a comparison between ELF and their Muslim terrorist counterparts. So far, ELF hasn't intentionally killed anybody, to my knowledge.

I agree with you, though, that these people are psychos. If they have not already deliberately murdered somebody, it's only a matter of time before they do so for real.

89 Paul  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:30:59am

The KKK analogy is so apt. These thugs are just like the Klan: murderous, secretive and opressive to their own people. They are the people that David Duke, Abe Greenhouse and the ISM idolize.

90 Jetstorm  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:32:56am

And here I was, the ignorant Southern bumpkin that I am, thinking the Klan was dead.

No such luck. These guys are the Klan. No wait, they are much worse. Much worse than even the ugly, violent Klan of the South circa 1919, where you had the violent nasty ones who actually did the violence and a whole lot of people (I'm ashamed to say, probably 70%+ of all white Southerners) who agreed with and supported the Klan. I think that's what we have here. You have your radical, violent Muslims, about 2-15% of all of Islam, then another 60-80% who agree with and support them. But then it's a whole lot worse. This raw, seething hatred and bloodlust is exponentially worse than anything we've ever experienced on American soil.

Islam must be pacified. The same way we pacified two other violent warrior cultures in another huge war sixty years ago. Get my drift?

91 Alex F  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:35:18am

87 someguy

We, Americans, are the only people with the coordination, arms, tactics and courage to defeat U.S. troops. The Russians didn't, the Islamofascists don't (and for that matter, neither do the Chinese, though they are the closest to having it imo).

88 mickthemick

ELF and ALF -- animal liberation front -- are already responsible for the destruction of millions of dollars worth of and thousands of hours of time of medical research. While this obviously isnt the same as blowing up buses full of children, they are killing people as well, just differently.

92 Josh  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:35:41am

I just wish you guys were more loving of all citizens of the world. Albeit these men are hateful and misguided, statements such as "I'd love to knock their koran into the fire" are just sickening to me.

Maybe you have to be atheist to realize that picking sides is just plain stupid. I don't see how you can hate someone just because of how you were raised. Many people on this site are Jewish and they feel compelled to hate Muslims, and those Palestinians are obviously Muslim and they hate Jews. This is an endless cycle that will not end until we cast off religious affiliations and realize that we are all members of the human race. Try to love one another, it would please God.

I don't quite know how LGF works, but I have a feeling my post will get deleted.

93 rusta  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:37:39am

#90
These are not warriors or a warrior culture. True warrios are brave and true like most of our milatary personal

94 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:38:05am

#83 someguy

I have heard similar arguments so many times before...

I suggest you look at reality. Terrorism work. CT only works by adopting similar methods (see Unit 101). The West has proven again that it is unable to fight terrorism, and will instead surrender to it. This means the only way a population can stop its government from surrendering to terrorism is to resort to terrorism, and make it uglier.

Expect this to happen in the next few years.

95 Tman  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:39:41am

Hi Josh,


"This is an endless cycle that will not end until we cast off religious affiliations and realize that we are all members of the human race."


I suppose you expect these scumbags to reach the same conclusion?

When you return from your official moonbat fantasy tour, we have some reality checks for you. I suggest starting with Charle's page about Palestinian Child Abuse if you truly believe what you say.


Tim

96 Schmerel  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:40:30am

What is it about these guys that reminds me of the Ku Klux Klan? It's strange, but I just can't put my finger on it.

97 Wild Justice  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:42:14am

#92   Josh 

Josh, you're joshing, right?

98 Paladin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:42:41am

#92 Josh

You've got it all wrong. Jews only hate the Muslims that are trying to kill them. Muslims hate all Jews as a tenet of their so-called religion.

99 rusta  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:44:03am

#92
Josh, to determine good and evil you look at the the fruits born out of one's actions and if the fruits are evil than the actions are evil and the person do the actions has a cupability to bear or do you think there is no such thing as evil?

100 Sue P.  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:45:12am

Why assume those are fake suicide belts? If we can (correctly) interpret a shoulder mounted news camera to be a missile or RPG launcher and react accordingly, then the IDF should be able to (correctly) interpret anyone wearing "bombs" as a terrorist and act to eliminate the potential threat.

101 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:46:41am

someguy (87)

OTOH, do you think these guys have the coordination, arms, tactics and courage to defeat U.S. troops?

My non-expert, personal opinion is: NO. They are only effective against noncombatants/ civilians. Infants...

The question is, do we have the *will* to defeat the Islamofascists, not the capability.

I frequently read the most fatalistic and defeatist articles in the Jerusalem Post. That's why LGF is so important -- the attitude it inspires. I mean this attitude, from your post #38:

Now...get on your feet, pick up your weapon, and take that hill! Got it? :)


_________________________________

I'm open to both hard facts and SWAGs

What is a SWAG? Did I just write a SWAG?

102 ZBeeblebrox  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:47:09am

#66 Wild Justice -

Excellent article.

#92 Josh

Sure, it's easy to just say all religions are the same. I (almost) used to think so myself. Do you want to know the difference? And do you want to know why religious affiliation matters? Then take some more time to look at the pictures posted by Charles, then read the excellent article posted by Wild Justice:
True Benevolence

103 Annelid[deleted]  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:47:26am
104 John Gibbon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:47:45am

If only those were real dynamite belts....and they were just a wee bit closer to the fire... Of course then they would try to blame that accident on the Israelis.

Hey Josh, Hate begets Hate...these guys look pretty hateful and threatening. I'll hold nothing back from my criticism of them or their ideology.

105 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:49:31am

#88 mickthemick 8/22/2003 01:30PM PST

"So far, ELF hasn't intentionally killed anybody, to my knowledge."

Try looking up tree spiking. More than one guy I know of has lost an arm, and I've heard of a few deaths. That's pretty deliberate when you know an area is slated for cutting.


#92 Josh

An honest question (what it seems you're asking) won't get deleted, but it sure as hell will be debated.

Jews don't want to kill every last Pali, but they will if that's what it takes to stop the palis from killing every last Jew. There's a difference there, and if you're objective enough to look, you'll see it.

As for "give love a chance," how is "love gonna help when the other side simply wants your entire race driven into the sea?

The Q'ran is used by these miserable excuses for primate life to justify the killing of babies. It needs to go in the fire and a new interpretation written. The book itself counsels evil. Try reading a few verses sometime.

106 Wild Justice  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:51:05am

Josh,

Read this buddy. Read every word. And start thinking.

By LICIA CORBELLA

[Link: www.canadiangrassroots.ca...]

107 RC neo-Jew  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:53:20am

#38 someguy

It also amounts to saying that what makes the news wires constitutes "the world," or the majority opinion thereof.

Unortunately, most of the 'world' in which I move sympathises with these terrible people. And how many protests at atrocities against the Israelis do we hear from the larger 'world'?

You are right that we should do what we can, although when I think of all the letters I have written over the past few years, to the media, MP's, etc, and how little difference it seems to have made, I could do with a dose of your optimism.

108 Wild Justice  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:54:19am

#102   ZBeeblebrox

Thanks.


You guys all have a pleasant weekend.

(Josh, I know you'll be busy. You've got some studying to do, laddy.)

109 Paul  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:54:44am

#92 Josh,

I'm not Jewish and I'm not "compelled" to hate anyone.
However, I have to recognize virulent, irrational hatred when I'm confronted by it. As an American, I know these "martyrs" would gladly kill me given the opportunity (remember 9/11?). Singing "Kumbayah" isn't going to make thse fanatics change their minds or stop the "endless cycle".

110 quark2  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:55:45am

#68 Gordon 8/22/2003 01:02PM PST

#50 Longtime Lurker; they obviously had just used some of the pages for toilet paper, which is why they are holding Korans in their left hand.

Is this our 'Gordon'? *?)

#94 Mr Pol 8/22/2003 01:38PM PST


#83 someguy

I have heard similar arguments so many times before...

I suggest you look at reality. Terrorism work. CT only works by adopting similar methods (see Unit 101). The West has proven again that it is unable to fight terrorism, and will instead surrender to it. This means the only way a population can stop its government from surrendering to terrorism is to resort to terrorism, and make it uglier.

Expect this to happen in the next few years.

I agree, it will not be politics that pick up the battle it will be the citizens who are faced with it.

111 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:57:01am

#91 Alex F:

We, Americans, are the only people with the coordination, arms, tactics and courage to defeat U.S. troops. The Russians didn't, the Islamofascists don't (and for that matter, neither do the Chinese, though they are the closest to having it imo).

Sounds like you agree with both me and VDH, then.

#91 Alex F. and mickthemick:

Let's not forget that these people have also kept us from tapping into oil in our own territory that would make us less reliable on Middle Eastern oil. Actually, I've been wondering if they are really the ones who have had success in doing this, or if it hasn't been the House of Fraud.

#94 Mr Caton:

I suggest YOU look at reality. I hope it doesn't take another 9/11 to fully awaken us. But whether it does or not, it won't take any Unit 101 or any other spec ops group for AMERICANS to win a war against anybody. Got that?

If you need a picture, try THIS.
"No American will think it wrong of me if I proclaim that to have the United States at our side was to me the greatest joy. I could not foretell the course of events. I do not pretend to have measured accurately the martial might of Japan, but now at this very moment I knew the United States was in the war, up to the neck and in to the death. So we had won after all! Yes, after Dunkirk; after the fall of France; after the horrible episode of Oran; after the threat of invasion, when, apart from the Air and the Navy, we were an almost unarmed people; after the deadly struggle of the U-boat war -- the first Battle of the Atlantic, gained by a hand's breadth; after seventeen months of lonely fighting and nineteen months of my responsibility in dire stress, we had won the war. England would live; Britain would live; the Commonwealth of Nations and the Empire would live. How long the war would last or in what fashion it would end, no man could tell, nor did I at this moment care. Once again in our long Island history we should emerge, however mauled or mutiliated, safe and victorious. We should not be wiped out. Our history would not come to an end. We might not even have to die as individuals. Hitler's fate was sealed. Mussolini's fate was sealed. As for the Japanese, they would be ground to powder. All the rest was merely the proper application of overwhelming force. The British Empire, the Soviet Union, and now the United States, bound together with every scrap of their life and strength, were, according to my lights, twice or even thrice the force of their antagonists. No doubt it would take a long time. I expected terrible forfeits in the East; but all this would be merely a passing phase. United we could subdue everybody else in the world. Many disasters, immeasurable cost and tribulation lay ahead, but there was no more doubt about the end.

"Silly people -- and there were many, not only in enemy countries -- might discount the force of the United States. Some said they were soft, others that they would never be united. They would fool around at a distance. They would never come to grips. They would never stand blood-letting. Their democracy and system of recurrent elections would paralyze their war effort. They would be just a vague blur on the horizon to friend or foe. Now we should see the weakness of this numerous but remote, wealthy, and talkative people. But I had studied the American Civil War, fought out to the last desperate inch. American blood flowed in my veins. I thought of a remark which Edward Grey had made to me more than thirty years before -- that the United States is like "a gigantic boiler. Once the fire is lighted under it there is no limit to the power it can generate." Being saturated and satiated with emotion and sensation, I went to bed and slept the sleep of the saved and thankful." --Winston Churchill

112 Jetstorm  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:58:03am

Rusta re:#93

You are right, of course. Perhaps "violent, depraved, masochistic" culture would be a better choice of words. I just fired off the comment really quick though and didn't stop to consider that.

113 Josh  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:59:10am

What I'm trying to say is that it is all inconsequential. If you guys were Muslim instead of Jewish you would have a completely different viewpoint. If you were Muslim you might be sympathetic to those irrational and distorted beliefs held by the suicide bombers.

What I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't try to vilify people based on the way they were raised and their surroundings. The Qu'ran is not a hateful book, to desire to throw it in a fire is ignorant to say the least. Violence begets violence.

Instead of hating your Muslim neighbor try and forge an understanding with them.

Whatever, I know we'll never understand each other so this is all futile. I just know that the only way peace will ever be achieved is through understanding, information and dialect.

As Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind."

If you spew your vitriol and call the Islamic people "scumbags", you're only sinking to the level of those suicide bombers. Nevermind, I'm just repeating myself.

114 Chris J.  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 11:59:30am

#24 selpaw:

"I blame Bush and the rest of the worthless so-called 'world leaders.' I blame this government for the unending litany of double-standards which have been shoved down Israel's throat.
What has this told the world as to the value of Jewish life?"

I used to feel, and still do to a degree, this way. However, I've come to the conclusion that Israel must stand up for itself. Israel must defend itself just like any other country would. Israel needs to say enough is enough.

Until the Israelis take the elimination of these terrorists into their own hands, out of other nations' hands, it will be the same old BS. I keep waiting to hear on the news that the IDF has wiped out all the 'refugee' camps and has started to get very very serious about self defense.

115 EE  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:00:04pm

#92 josh
If someone comes to kill you, you had best kill him first. Love is not appropriate in that situation.

And you know that there is a radical Islamist movement, that like a malignancy lives within the body of the ummah, and seeks to claim its legitimacy from Islamic writings -- that threatens the free world. Islamic revival, the khalifa movement to establish a world wide caliphate, and to end the Dar al Harb and make the Dar al Islam cover the globe, is definitely threatening to the free world, and to all who don't agree with their goals.

And surrounding this radical Islamist movement there is a militant Islamist movement that supports the final goals of the radical Islamists but seeks to have a law-abiding public face.

So there are lots of dangerous folks out there. And love is not the appropriate emotion that will promote life.

116 HalfLife  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:01:17pm
I just wish you guys were more loving of all citizens of the world.

Including or especially the ones that want to kill us, our children, our parents, and every single person like us?

Albeit these men are hateful and misguided,

How about murderous and insane with hatred, with infants' blood on their hands?

statements such as "I'd love to knock their koran into the fire" are just sickening to me.

More or less sickening than statements like "Death to the Jews!" and "Israel should expect many suicide attacks"? Is expressing a wish to burn a Koran more or less sickening than actually burning American and Israeli flags? How about killing Israeli babies?

Maybe you have to be atheist to realize that picking sides is just plain stupid.

Maybe you have to be an atheist to be amoral enough not to pick sides in a battle between terrorist hatemongers and a peace-loving, free democracy. Or maybe you just have to be blind.

I don't see how you can hate someone just because of how you were raised.

How about because of how they were raised? To hate and kill innocent men, women, and children? To hate all Westerners and especially all Jews?

Many people on this site are Jewish and they feel compelled to hate Muslims,

Prove it. "Compelled" by what? Our being Jewish? Yeah, sure. Moral equivalency rears its ugly head - they hate us for being Jews, so we simply must hate them for being Muslim. And what about the Christians on the site, dude?

and those Palestinians are obviously Muslim and they hate Jews.

So you're saying being Muslim requires you to hate Jews? Funny, that's not what the media keeps telling us.

This is an endless cycle that will not end until we cast off religious affiliations and realize that we are all members of the human race.

You really think this conflict is about religious affiliation? Wrong. Some people would try to tell you it's about land ("It's all about the occupation!") - but most of us here know it's about a clash of cultures. Read something, guy. Or better yet, ask Osama!

Try to love one another, it would please God.

Ah, you're speaking for G-d now. As an atheist. How charming!

I don't quite know how LGF works, but I have a feeling my post will get deleted.

No, you don't know how LGF works. That's Nazimedia you're thinking of. Only abusive, foul, and utterly pointless comments get deleted. Watch and learn.

117 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:02:04pm

#101 Marianne:

Sorry! :( That's a Scientific Wild-Assed Guess. (Hope I didn't offend!)

#107 RC Neo-Jew:

I could do with a dose of your optimism.

I could do with a little more myself! But what else do we do; sink into despair?

I'm not saying I know what my own fate will be. Not at all. I will say that if I'm not there to hear the bell ending the 15th round, I want to go down swinging. For America and Israel both.

118 EE  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:04:33pm

#113 Josh
If you call a splodeydope, or someone who helps, aids, or abets him, or finances him, or makes the terrorism possible, a "scumbag", that is definitely not sinking to the same level as the terrorists and their supporters. To do that, you would have to respond to terrorism with equal terrorism. Words are not deeds.

119 TS  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:06:57pm

Religion of...

"Muslim leader in Trinidad charged with conspiracy to murder"
[Link: www.sun-sentinel.com...]

"At least one dead in attack on Yemeni mosque"
[Link: story.news.yahoo.com...]

"MP booed for telling Muslim women to unveil"
""If Catholics want to remove their headgear that's their business. But the veil is part of what makes Muslim women special, and France must accept that," said Souad, a young, veiled woman at the congress."
[Link: www.iol.co.za...]

"Pipes nomination will cause 'immeasurable damage,' say Muslims"
[Link: www.yellowtimes.org...]

"Unity through Muslim nationalism stressed"
"The reception was followed by the seminar on ' Lagging Behind of the Muslim World : Way of Protesting International Conspiracy'. Professor Dr. Abdur Rob of Geography and Environment Science Department of Dhaka university presented the key-note paper in the seminar presided over by the president of the association Abu Saleh Mamun."
"The key-note paper suggested unity among the Muslims through Muslim nationalism as the way to foil the international conspiracy."
[Link: independent-bangladesh.com...]
(read the rest of the news in bagladesh at the top, its atrocious)

"A leader of an Algerian Islamic militant group claimed responsibility on Friday for the kidnapping in the Sahara desert of 32 European tourists"
[Link: famulus.msnbc.com...]

"Muslims set to move festival from Tilford"
"Mr Khan, two fellow deputy amirs of the UK Ahmadi Association and Munir-Ud-Din Shams, another follower of the Islam faith who also sits on the parish council, heard about traffic jams heading all the way through Elstead to the A3, residents blocked in by traffic and Ahmadis defecating in public and swearing at villagers when told to adhere to traffic diversion routes."
[Link: www.farnham-herald-today.co.uk...]

120 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:10:56pm

Josh,

It's not so much that I want to argue with your philosophy of all-you-need-is-love. It's just that I wish you would go preach it to the Islamofascists.

WE are not blowing up buses, Josh. Those guys in the black masks/white hoods are. So talk to them. See if you can persuade any of them to change their minds.

And good luck.

121 Josh  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:11:17pm

I take offense to being called amoral, I definitely have a sense of morals and picking sides is not one of them. If anything I subscribe to a buddhist philosophy on life, so I do have a set of morals. Look, we're not going to convince each other of anything, and I don't know why I posted anything. I just get really sick when I come to this site from time to time and see you guys calling Islam a religion of hate. You're fighting fire with fire. Fighting hatred with hatred

I'm going to go now, I hope you all have wonderful lives, and I truly do love and care for you all. I might sound like a hippy, but sometimes loving everyone is the only way you can restore your faith in humanity. Peace.

122 Paladin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:11:27pm

Josh

I suppose if someone entered your home with a gun, you would try to sit down and reason with him? Tell him about how you love him and how it would please God if he abandonded all his aggression and embraced humanity?
Good luck, dude.

123 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:11:55pm

Josh (#92)

Many people on this site are Jewish and they feel compelled to hate Muslims...

You should be slapped for making a statement like that.

124 RC neo-Jew  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:15:16pm

#117 someguy

But what else do we do; sink into despair?

No. But I wish I could think of something more effective than what I've been doing so far.

125 rusta  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:17:10pm

Josh,
A rose by anyoyher name is still a rose and a murderer by anyother name is still a murderer
Thier actions (Islamofascits) speak for themselves

126 Wild Justice  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:18:21pm

Josh says,

Violence begets violence.

I guess that sounds deep to you, Josh, but I don't think you've really thought the issue through.

Please explain how to stop a man running at your wife and kids with a knife.

10 feet away, 9 feet, 8 feet ...

Think, think, Joshy!

7 feet, 6 feet ...

(Oh yeah, and do it non-violently, Josh.)

5 feet ... 4 feet ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

Congrats, Josh. Your baby son's throat is red. Your wife's vocal cords are no more.

And the murderer is now turning toward you ...

Have a good weekend.

127 Josh  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:18:44pm

Marianne, I truly would like to tell the Palestinians that blowing up buses is not a good way of life [understatement of the year]. But, all the muslims I encounter are peaceful and caring people, I don't have access to the extremist ones in the east. Hopefully one day I can attempt to preach peace to those extremists.

By the way, I have never been to Indymedia [I'm assuming that's what you mean by Nazimedia].

Bye.

128 Doss  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:19:25pm

#113 Josh

Violence begets violence.


Enough of the trite b.s. Did the US entering WWII beget more violence? No. It helped rid the world of Nazis. How had the Nazis gotten to be such a poweful force? By the appeasement of England and France, letting Hitler build his forces in violation of the Verailles Treaty. Your plan is pie-in-the-sky bullshit. Do you think that Hitler could have been rationalized with? He wasn't in need of a hug, he was in need of a bullet.

129 ploome  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:20:49pm

Josh

What I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't try to vilify people based on the way they were raised and their surroundings.

no Josh, you dont get it

we vilify these people because of that they espouse and how they behave

you sound very idealistic and profoundly ignorant

go to google

type ISLAM

and read for 2 weeks

then you may know what you are talking about

130 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:21:30pm

#111 someguy

You got the wrong person. Not that it matters, and it's actually cute...

Anyway, you still do not understand. Actually, you do not want to understand.

When a sizeable minority starts weeping, the U.S. administration will surrender. As usual. If only because that minority does vote.

Take Viet Nam as an example. Here is a war in which not one single battle was won by the VietCong. The VietCong did not win the war either. The U.S. just gave up.

You tell me this won't happen? Is that why no asset of any member of the Golden Chain has been frozen or seized? Is that why the Saudi Ambassador whose wife sent millions to the 9/11 terrorists has not been declared persona non grata?

Are you blind, or are you stupid?

131 TS  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:22:48pm

Josh The Qu'ran is not a hateful book, to desire to throw it in a fire is ignorant to say the least.

Yes the quran is a hateful book.
and Muhammed was the first violent jihadist, not to mention he was a pedophile! amongst other vile things.

132 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:22:55pm

#123 zulubaby:

You should be slapped for making a statement like that.

I'll lend you some torque for that if you need it. (Heh!)

#124 RC neo-Jew:

No. But I wish I could think of something more effective than what I've been doing so far.

Actually, I've had some limited success on one blog that was kind of waffling on the WoT. I noticed that after I started linking and quoting some of Charles' pieces there, the blogger suddenly started to post the same news stories (without crediting Charles, of course).

The hard cases seem impossible, I know. But with the cred of the mainstream press (NYT, BBC, CNN) swirling down the crapper, who knows what can happen.

That's the problem with this age in which we live: it seems as if the best or the worst (or both!) can happen--sometimes in the same day! But like I said before, if I have to go down, I'm going down swinging.

133 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:22:56pm

someguy (#38)

IMHO, that amounts to giving up to the enemy (or Enemy; take your pick).

I have no idea how you got to that, based on my post.

134 HalfLife  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:26:10pm

Josh, you are really starting to piss me off. Take this sentence for instance:

What I'm trying to say is that it is all inconsequential.

What is "inconsequential"? Jewish lives? Babies' lives? What?? It's all well and good for you to say

we shouldn't try to vilify people based on the way they were raised and their surroundings

- but what about vilifying people based on their actions? They kill children and babies, old men and women, any Jew they can get their hands on! And we're not supposed to have a problem with that? If you don't have a problem with that, you are one sick, immoral, fuck!

Then, this:

If you guys were Muslim instead of Jewish you would have a completely different viewpoint. If you were Muslim you might be sympathetic to those irrational and distorted beliefs held by the suicide bombers.

Yeah, maybe. So what? Those "irrational and distorted beliefs" are - as you yourself suggest - wrong. How does "understanding them" make the situation any better?

And this:

Violence begets violence.

Maybe - except when non-violence begets violence. If you fail to kill mass murderers, they will continue killing. If you fail to stop incitement to violence, the violence will continue. Witness the difference between the First and Second Intifidas. Witness the events leading up to 9/11.

Instead of hating your Muslim neighbor try and forge an understanding with them.

How can you "forge an understanding" with someone who wants only to kill you? An old Jew who went into Palestinian territories to help poor Arabs was brutally murdered not long ago. Two men who got lost and drove into Ramallah were lynched and disemboweled by a mob. What kind of "understanding" do you have in mind?

Whatever, I know we'll never understand each other so this is all futile.

If understanding between us is "futile" - and we're all well-meaning Westerners here - how can you possibly rely on reaching an understanding between the murderous death-cult members pictured above and the people they want to slaughter???

I just know that the only way peace will ever be achieved is through understanding, information and dialect.

You just go on "knowing" that. Sounds like a nice, comforting belief, Mr. Atheist. Too bad it ain't true. (P.S. The words "Oslo," "Camp David," or "Taba" mean anything to you?)

As Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind."

Now, that "eye for an eye" reference wouldn't be an antisemitic slap, would it? No, I'm sure it's not. But I will point out that sometimes you need to do more than take out an eye...

If you spew your vitriol and call the Islamic people "scumbags", you're only sinking to the level of those suicide bombers. Nevermind, I'm just repeating myself.

Well, as someone else already pointed out, "spewing vitriol" on a website is hardly on the same level as suicide bombing. Once again, I must conclude that you are morally tone-deaf. Tell you what - you want to be helpful? Fly out to Israel, go to Gaza and the West Bank and tell those nice, confused people to stop blowing up buses and cafes and hotels full of people. Then tell me that that's exactly the same as sitting here telling us how to curb our language and stop thinking "hateful" thoughts. Hm?

Meanwhile, you haven't answered any of the points anyone has made. You just keep crying, "Can't we all just get along?" Very touching.

135 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:26:36pm
Take Viet Nam as an example. Here is a war in which not one single battle was won by the VietCong. The VietCong did not win the war either. The U.S. just gave up.

No, let's take some other examples:

The American Revolution
The War of 1812
The War of 1848
The Civil War
The Korean War (OK, stalemate, but we didn't retreat)
WWI
WWII

Vietnam was an anomaly.

136 HULUGU  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:27:16pm

believe it or not....just saw a tape of these camel humpers in their kkkoran outfits on msnbc

137 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:29:12pm

#133 zulubaby:

I'm part of the world, and I don't have sympathy for those savages (as you expressed in #3). Neither do the vast majority of the people who post here.

All I wanted to say is DON'T GIVE UP and DON'T GIVE IN to people (and most of all the media) who try to convince you that they speak for the world. They sit in front of cameras. They wear tons of make-up. They read what comes up on the teleprompter. They. Don't. Think. YOU DO. (And you do it well, I might add.) Take your knowledge and spread it around as much as you can.

138 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:29:30pm

someguy (#132)

The way I feel after reading Josh's posts, I think I'd manage nicely on my own. I can't stand this touchy-feely crap that I must be more loving toward people who chant, on a daily basis, about bringing death to me and mine, and act on that in the most violent, vicious, cruel way. I don't feel compelled to hate anyone based on their beliefs. Leave me in peace, I'll leave you in peace.

139 HalfLife  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:30:51pm

Aargh! He took offense at being called "amoral." Thinks that not taking sides in a fight between murderers and their victims is perfectly moral. I may vomit.

Okay, okay. He must be about 12 years old... right? He'll grow up some day. Right??

140 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:31:29pm

#135 Marianne

In WWII, what happened to the Japanese ambassador after Pearl Harbor? Did he stay in the U.S. and have a direct line to the President, and spend the week-ends with him in his ranch?

What happened to the German ambassador after the Zimmerman telegram was published? Was he invited to the President ranch to play golf and have dinner?

141 Paul  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:31:53pm

#127 Josh
"I truly would like to tell the Palestinians that blowing up buses is not a good way of life."

And I'm sure if you had the opportunity to tell them they would immediately stop. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

142 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:32:25pm

Josh is surely gone, but not before leaving this steaming gem

"I don't have access to the extremist ones in the east."

Sure you do, Joshhy. Go over to SoundVision.com and talk all you want. They'll welcome you warmly as only true jihadis-to-be can.

143 Carl LaFong  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:32:57pm

I was speaking to a neighbor, and he mentioned that "Islam" translates to "love" and that he learned this from his daughter (going into 12th grade) & that she was taught this last year in history class (public school).

144 HalfLife  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:34:22pm

Damn, waste all that time fisking a juvenile - and naturally it goes right over his head.

Oh well, Shabbat's coming soon...

Zulubaby, I'm with you. That kind of crap makes my teeth grind. "I just can't take sides! I'm too moral to take sides! I'm a Buddhist!" Yeah, right. Nihilistic, amoral scum.

145 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:35:36pm

#134 HalfLife

Deep breath, brother.

Remember, All beliefs are equally valid. WE can't condemn hamass, b/c Joshhy can't figure out who's right. Hell, everyone's right to themselves, so it's all pointless.

Another example of buddhism corrupted by nihilism.

Weak minds are the devil's playground.

146 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:36:20pm

Craig (75)

Attention! A sighting of the rare and elusive Moderate Muslim- courtesy of National Review Online;

Thanks for the link!
____________________________

someguy (117)

That's a Scientific Wild-Assed Guess.

So I did write a SWAG!
____________________________

Mr. Pol,

I want to add to my list: the French and Indian wars.

147 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:38:16pm

#143 Carl

That's what we get when public employees teach religion. Bad translation.

"Islam" of course means "submission" submission to the will of Allah.

Maybe yours is a good argument for teaching Islam in the public schools, though. THe teacher's union will inevitable corrupt the message into PC gobbledygook

148 HalfLife  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:38:34pm

#145 hobgoblin

[breathing slowly, in and out]

Thank you.

Weak minds are the devil's playground.

So true. Sad.

149 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:38:54pm

someguy (#137)

Please understand I am using "the world..." in a broad sense. I know better, I know that you know better.

150 Josh  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:38:57pm

Hateful people on this site. I really should stop refreshing, it's disheartening reading these comments. BTW, I'm nowhere near anti-semitic, I don't know how my eye for an eye quote could be interpreted as such. I'm leaving for good now. Say what you want I'm not going to be around to read it.

151 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:40:03pm

#130 Mr Pol:

Are you blind, or are you stupid?

Neither, last I checked. If you don't want to say you're Caton, fine. Then you're either channeling him, got his hand up your back or whatever.

Whoever your are, you're the stupid, blind one. You have no knowledge of American history whatsoever. If you did, you would realize that we "gave up" (as you say) because of the same meme that is trying to get us to give up now.

A meme that does not represent now (as it did not represent then) the majority of the American people. If you think it did, that's more proof that you don't know what you're talking about.

If you had any semblance of awareness, you might realize that having had some experience with that meme some 35 years ago, we can recognize it for what it is and have some idea of how to defeat it. Which is one of the great purposes that this site serves.

And let me restate, Caton (like, where did you get the SpecOps lingo from?) that we did not need Special Forces to win WWII (THANK YOU, MARIANNE!!). All we needed were a bunch of rawboned Scots-Irish (mostly) farm boys that learned how to shoot picking squirrels off of tree branches with .22 rifles.

When you manage to remove your head from its very warm and dark place long enough to learn something substantial about not only American history but AMERICANS, you might have something to say.

The Churchill passage I posted above from USS Clueless would be a nice start.

152 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:40:21pm

#146 Marianne

I want to add to my list: the French and Indian wars.

Ah? Why? Did the enemy ambassadors have a "special frienship" with the U.S. administration during that war?

153 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:41:01pm

Hopefuklly third time's a charm with Joshhy's departure...

154 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:45:07pm

Mr. Pol (152),

No, no, no. Our posts crossed in the mail. I'm still trying to find the article I want to refer you to. Don't go away yet.

155 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:45:35pm

#138 zulubaby:

I can't stand this touchy-feely crap that I must be more loving toward people who chant, on a daily basis, about bringing death to me and mine, and act on that in the most violent, vicious, cruel way. I

Me either; which is why I just ignore that shit altogether when I see it here. Whether it's coming from "Buddhist" Josh, or a "Franciscan," or whatever, it's all the same false moral equivalency crap.

About what I said earlier: I suppose I'm picking nits to fend off the sense of doom that threatens to swamp me at times. There's hope...I think. I hope.

156 lurking stew  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:46:21pm

151 someguy

I don't really want to wade into the Mr Pol/Caton debate (especially since for the most part I liked Caton's style & agreed him on the important points), but has anyone else noticed the huge rise in Mr. Pol's English language skills? When he first started posting a few weeks back, his english led me to believe he was Taiwanese or something like that. Now he's writes like it's a first language. A most interesting development...

157 Villanova  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:46:50pm

Ahhh to be young again...

Josh, go in peace my friend. Your heart is in the right place. But don't be afraid to choose sides or to recognize right from wrong. Unlike the Israelis these terrorists revel in death, and that is always and everywhere wrong. I'm not sure but I suspect Buddha would agree.

158 TS  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:47:40pm

Josh if you really want to know the truth about Islam please read this
[Link: f27.parsimony.net...]

159 HalfLife  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:48:34pm

hobgoblin,

I really don't get how he can think we're "hateful" - just because we hate suicide bombers and those who support them.

On the other hand, he says the Palestinians who support suicide bombers are "irrational" (not "hateful")... which leads me to believe that despite his "I don't take sides" bullshit, he actually favors them. They're only misguided; we (Jews - note he doesn't address Christians at all) are hate-filled.

He also failed to answer a single one of mine (or anyone else's) points. So maybe that's really what's bothering him - we made him hate us by challenging him, putting him on the spot, making him think.

Sigh.

160 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:49:35pm

Josh (#150)

I'm leaving for good now.

Stop threatening and leave already.

Okay, who has the stopwatch?

161 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:50:16pm

#155 someguy

"Whether it's coming from "Buddhist" Josh, or a "Franciscan," or whatever, it's all the same false moral equivalency crap."

Why does everyone remember the "turn the other cheek" passage but no one remembers the "if you have no sword, sell your cloak and arm yourself" line?

Jesus wasn't some mamby pamby and pleanty of Buddhists fought and dies for the control of the Japanese islands against the Chiristian daimyos.

No religion except jainism preaches total submission to the use of force.

162 HalfLife  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:51:59pm

#161 hobgoblin

Not even the "Friends"? (Quakers - bloody hypocrites who've been favoring the Pals since 1967... ptui.)

163 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:53:06pm

#156 lurking stew:

Yeah, I see what you're saying. But his English (like Caton's) isn't native--quite. And the braggadoccio, the "check your email" are telling signs.

I was tipped off to this identity switch by another LGFer via email, and like you, I waved it off at first. But the similarities are just too close. The line he left on a post a week or so ago about not letting Caton smoke in his house was the tipping point for me. Trying too hard to throw the dogs off of the scent.

164 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:56:26pm

#161 hobgoblin:

THANK YOU!!!

Anybody else remember Lepanto?

Anybody else remember that the King of Poland turned the Turks away from Vienna for the last time on September 11, 1683?

Thanks again, hobgoblin. You made my night! =)

165 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:56:52pm

someguy;

Caton and Mr Pol are two different people.

166 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:58:01pm

Mr. Pol,

I'm looking for, but can't find, an essay by Walter Russell Meade called The Jacksonian Tradition. Someone on this site provided a link to it recently. (Sorry I can't give credit where credit is due, I can't remember who!)

Better than reading an article -- travel through Middle America. Have you ever been to America? I can only imagine, in France, what impression you must have of the U.S.

I have a big problem with the Our Friends The Saudis, and GWB looking the other way while they attack us and our allies. I am also enraged that we stand by and do nothing, or even intervene and make things worse, while Israel suffers so terribly day in and day out.

But I've got to keep the faith that Americans have the will to fight. And that we can sustain casualties without retreating. No matter what's on the TV news.
____________________

I can't help asking this - I truly can't --

Can you drink water while Caton talks? :-) (Sorry for terrible sense of humor) Actually I think I can tell the difference between his style and yours. He's always got the little emoticons and you don't. ... I've spent waaaayyyy too much time on this site.

167 William  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 12:59:58pm
The BBC is of course giving the sense that the collapse of the truce is due to the assassination of the Hamas leader.

CNN didn't even bother to give a "sense" -- they came right out and stated the lie as fact:


[Hamas co-founder Abu Shanab] led Hamas through two intifadas and countless other battles. He was considered by some a moderate and was an architect of the most recent cease-fire, which ended with his death.

[Link: www.cnn.com...]

Read the rest of the article, if you can stomach endless lies and unanswered Hamas propaganda.  It's among the worst pieces of journalism I've seen in awhile.

The "truce" didn't end with Hamas bombings, it ended when Israel killed Hamas leaders who plan and execute terrorist attacks??  The dishonesty and bankruptcy of this logic is both pathetic and angering.

I'm waiting for CNN's Eason Jordan to write an article about how CNN must lie to maintain access to Arafat's domain, just like the article he wrote last year regarding how CNN lied for a decade to maintain access to Saddam's domain...
 

168 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:00:55pm

someguy (#163)

I was tipped off to this identity switch by another LGFer via email, and like you, I waved it off at first.

It's a conspiracy! Help!

169 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:00:56pm

#151 someguy

Neither, last I checked.

Check again. You got a false negative.

If you don't want to say you're Caton, fine. Then you're either channeling him, got his hand up your back or whatever.

Cute, again. This discussion is the one big disagreement between him and me, and the reason I think he's a blind optimist.

Whoever your are, you're the stupid, blind one. You have no knowledge of American history whatsoever. If you did, you would realize that we "gave up" (as you say) because of the same meme that is trying to get us to give up now.

So, by saying what happened in Viet Nam will happen again if the American people doesn't take the matters in its hands, I am not realizing what, exactly?

A meme that does not represent now (as it did not represent then) the majority of the American people. If you think it did, that's more proof that you don't know what you're talking about.

More proof not only you're blind, but you can't read. A sizeable minority is still a minority. Check again.

If you had any semblance of awareness, you might realize that having had some experience with that meme some 35 years ago, we can recognize it for what it is and have some idea of how to defeat it. Which is one of the great purposes that this site serves

I will believe that when the assets of one member of the Golden Chain are frozen or seized. I will believe that when the Saudi ambassador whose wife sent millions to the 9/11 terrorists is declared persona non grata. I will believe that when Colin Powell will be fired for equating disagreement on the road map with terrorism.

And let me restate, Caton (like, where did you get the SpecOps lingo from?) that we did not need Special Forces to win WWII (THANK YOU, MARIANNE!!). All we needed were a bunch of rawboned Scots-Irish (mostly) farm boys that learned how to shoot picking squirrels off of tree branches with .22 rifles.

You don't need to know, but I said that before. Mista'avarim unit. But you can keep believing there is only one S.F. unit in Israel and it only ever had one member. It's cute.

Keep comparing with WWII, it's very funny for anybody with any knowledge of history. Comparing a war, with massive strategical bombing, where on the European front American pilots shot Germans hanging from a 'chute with that new PC concept of zero-dead war and POWs gaining weight.... and forgetting that Germany was defeated by the Soviet Union, with mostly logistical support (much valued, and absolutely required) from the U.S.

Against Japan, on the Pacific Theater where the U.S. defeated Japan, strategic bombing, SpecOps, unrestricted submarine warfare and code breaking were the name of the game. Not "smart bomb" and "no collateral damage" and "we only want to free the civilians".

And when you manage to remove your head from its very warm and dark place long enough to learn something substantial about not only American history but AMERICANS, you might have something to say

Learn what? That the Golden Chain members are still V.I.P. in Houston, Texas, and Washington, D.C., after more than 3,000 Americans were killed by the terrorist organization they fund? You think Israel has gone soft and Sharon has lost his balls (and I mostly agree with that), but you don't see it happening in your own backyard.

The Churchill passage I posted above from USS Clueless would be a nice start.

60 years ago, back when the White Tent had another name, was 60 years ago. 60 years ago American kids were not taught that Islam Nazism meant "love".

170 Villanova  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:09:10pm

#166 Marianne

"The Jacksonian Tradition" was in Policy Review magazine, maybe two years ago(?) Not sure if you'll find it on line or not.

171 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:09:34pm

#166 Marianne

The Jacksonian tradition requires the people to take steps when their administration fails them. Today I don't see the work done, and I don't see the people taking steps.

And I spent 4 years in Wyoming as a ranch hand. There are Americans, and then there are Americans. Watch a Californian on a horse, or a New-Yorker, for that matter. It says it all.

Finally, no, I can't, I only drink alcohol and coffee.

172 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:13:58pm

someguy

I'm currently reading "The Monks of War: Military Religious Orders . . . " Great read. Amazing how the fighting monks were worth anywhere from 10 to 1000 of the muslim troops. That was some awesome armor, weaponry, and training. And fanaticism on the Christian part.

I highly recommend the book if you have any interest in medieval military religious orders.

[Link: www.amazon.com...]

173 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:15:14pm
174 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:15:37pm

Mr. Pol,

While we're on the subject of fighting or not fighting-- what happened to Israel's will to fight??

Israel's military is the rival of any on earth but they won't unleash it.

I'm not being critical. I'm trying to understand. Fifty-five years of war, with intervals of "peaceful" isolation, vilification, boycotts, I know. But more than 3,500 years of identity as a people before that.

When is Israel going to destroy those who attack her?

175 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:17:15pm

someguy (173)

Hey, look at that! Abracadabra! Thanks!

176 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:20:40pm

#171 Mr Pol:

I spent 4 years in Wyoming as a ranch hand.

And that qualifies you as an expert on Jacksonianism exactly how?

177 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:25:11pm

Marianne: You're welcome!

But I owe that to my main man Steve Den Beste. His whole Essential Library is key. Here's a link:

USS Clueless: The Essential Library

Happy reading.

178 Villanova  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:25:30pm

re #170 sorry The National Interest magazine! Terrific article.

179 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:29:31pm

#174 Marianne

While we're on the subject of fighting or not fighting-- what happened to Israel's will to fight??

First things first, never in history did all Israelis agree to fight. That's nothing new. There's always been a sizeable minority of leftish assholes. How else could Traitor&Appeaser-in-Chief Peres still be a MK? But luckily Israel has had a string of good leaders. Whenever Israel needed a leader, one automagically popped up, grabbed the gavel (not always democratically... see Moshe Dayan in 1967) and led.

Today, the majority would still rather die fighting than walk to the ovens. But even that majority has been corrupted by decades of leftish, PC propaganda. That includes me, or AG in Houston: we both know the fastest and cheapest way to stop the conflict is to use terrorism against the Arabs, but we just aren't able to do it.

In addition, today there's no real leaders left. The "historical leaders" are way too old to have the guts for the hard decisions required. They are more interested in staying in power than in doing the right thing. The new, carefully groomed, generation of leaders are totally deluded with PC bullshit (see Barak for an example). Only when the majority starts demanding action, and threatens to kick out the current government, some action is taken.

When is Israel going to destroy those who attack her?

Never. The most we can hope for is squashing them for a couple or three generations.

180 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:30:59pm

#176 someguy

The only thing it means is that I don't need to tour the Mid-West to have an idea of what Americans are.

181 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:33:44pm

RE: books and Jacksonianism

Went to the Jackson homestead in Tennessee last year and got a book about the battle of New Orleans.

Great book as well. Basically that was the battle that ended the Revolutionary War, even though decades later. The Revolution never saw a decisive win over the Brits, so the War of 1812 was the "real" war for the redcoats. Gen. Andy kicked their asses while severely undermanned and underequipped.

Read the book

[Link: www.amazon.com...]

182 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:34:29pm

# 169 Mr Pol:

Comparing a war, with massive strategical bombing, where on the European front American pilots shot Germans hanging from a 'chute with that new PC concept of zero-dead war and POWs gaining weight.... and forgetting that Germany was defeated by the Soviet Union, with mostly logistical support (much valued, and absolutely required) from the U.S.

Lots and lots of effing Russians at Omaha, Gold, Juno, Utah and Sword, eh?

Lots and lots more at the Battle of the Bulge, right?

Lots and LOTS more Russians fighting bloody yard by bloody yard up the Italian peninsula against...a JV soccer team, right? (Or did you forget that WWII in Europe was a three-front, vice two-front war?)

See, I can pick and choose random facts about a complex histroical event to prove my point as well, Mr Pol. It's not that hard, is it?

183 Camel Prophet  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:36:09pm

I believe that the korans (AKA: Mohammed's fabrications, motivated by booty and fame) that the brats are holding are of World Muslim League (Wahabi) issue. At least they look like the one that the saud' entity's diplomatic staff give me about 15 years ago.

Ban the unholy koran? New viewers will find this link interesting:

[Link: www.bharatvani.org...]

184 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:39:37pm

#182 someguy

Europe, June 1944. 12 German divisions in the West. 130 German divisions on the Eastern front.

'nuff said.

185 Gordon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:41:31pm

#75 Craig: Interesting article, despite your sarcastic intro. A key statement:

"Abdolkarim Soroush, one of Iran's best-known intellectuals, argues that science cannot progress under totalitarian regimes."

Which is why Islam is not the threat many see it on this site, even if it were a monolithic radical front (which it isn't). Islamic states are failures; its terrorists are successful at their deadly missions only through devilish initiative and use of relatively primitive tools of destruction. They may be suicide bombers, but they will never be effective conveyers of nuclear devices. And for that, we can thank Islam.

186 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:43:34pm

#182 someguy

OK, changed my mind, not enough said.

WWII was fought against two enemies in two different theaters. The U.S. won decisively in one theater, with limited assistance from their allies, and noticeably without one ally, that was at peace with the enemy in that theater.

On the other theater, the U.S. offered massive material assistance, and was involved in the fight, but was not the main player.

I know it's difficult to admit... but the U.S. are not and were not all-powerful.

187 Gordon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:44:09pm

#79 Henry: The equivalent would be pictures of inquisition victims being burned at the stake in massive Spanish auto da fe's of the 16th century. Islam is about 500 years behind the times compared to Christianity and Islam. And I don't think the world is going to give them 500 years to grow up; they're going to have to do it a lot faster, or your 1/2 dead figure may be unfortunately prophetic.

188 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:44:19pm

completely O/T

dammit

amazon has a anna kornikova picture up that can't be accessed. It's a horrible tease.

189 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:44:36pm

#180 Mr Pol:

Which means you don't know.

#184

Europe, June 1944. 12 German divisions in the West. 130 German divisions on the Eastern front.

Mr Historian: Since you know enough about Americans, you probably know that there's a retired American Senator and one-time Presidential candidate who was almost blown to bits by that JV soccer team that the Germans left on the Italian Peninsula.

more than 'nuff said.

190 Ernie G  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:45:42pm

Oh, Josh! Some people leave without saying goodbye, and some say goodbye and say goodbye and never leave.

191 eyehatehippies  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:46:33pm

Joshes among us:
Kufr, Dhimmi, Non PR rewrite Jihad, honor killing, islamic women's "rights," harem, the life of mohammed... as a kafir, educate yourself on the terms. Toss your love and gain your reason.

192 Gordon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:46:34pm

#85 Scott Kiel: are you a radical Islamist? Because if you did what you say, you sure are acting like one.

We're not fighting radical Islam so that people like you can continue to wallow in your bigotry.

193 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:49:56pm

#189 someguy

Which means you don't know.

Heh. You proud expert on the Jacksonian, frontier tradition, how much time did you spent on the frontier?

Lemme guess: you live in Frisco?

194 Gordon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:50:40pm

#98 Paladini

There are plenty of people on this site (I don't know if they are all Jews or not, I suspect many are not) who do hate all Muslims. Am I right, Mr. Pol? Are you out there Kat? Ploome?

195 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:51:33pm

#189 someguy

You also know that at least one major French actor joined the U.S. Marines and fought in Guadalcanal... which means a lot about today's French military might, huh?

196 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:53:10pm

#192 Gordon

"We're not fighting radical Islam "

Nice to see you've joined the cause Gordo

197 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:54:05pm

#186 Mr Pol:

On the other theater, the U.S. offered massive material assistance, and was involved in the fight, but was not the main player.

Well then, let me take my hat off to a man who knows more than Winston Churchill! Prime Minister Pol to the rescue!

From your #179:

But even that majority has been corrupted by decades of leftish, PC propaganda. That includes me, or AG in Houston: we both know the fastest and cheapest way to stop the conflict is to use terrorism against the Arabs, but we just aren't able to do it.

Sadly (and all of our other exchanges aside, I say this with both sympathy and not a little fear), this is not only true of Israel. It is true of the rest of the West as well.

You may have already read this, but here's a link (once again, from the inimitable Steven Den Beste) to a seminal article by John Fonte on Transnational Progressivism Sounded like a weird concept to me when I first heard of it, but if one essay has been key for my understanding of the current situation THIS IS IT.

Happy reading!

198 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:54:22pm

#194 Gordon

You are just being your usual genocidal self, Gordon.

I see Islam as the death cult it is. I see a number of its followers are bent on killing. I am willing to kill those followers before they kill or maim me or mine. I don't need to hate in order to kill, Gordon. Hate is for wimps.

199 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:54:46pm

Mr. Pol (179)

we both know the fastest and cheapest way to stop the conflict is to use terrorism against the Arabs, but we just aren't able to do it.

I think it would be ENOUGH to just fight to win, instead of fighting to survive another day.

Fighting to win is not the same as engaging in terrorism. You, AG in Houston, someguy, many others on this site -- all know this better than I do. You've all served in the military, I have not. So stop with the nonsense, please, about "we must resort to terrorism or else we might as well surrender." :-) Just fight to win, that's all.

And, after you win, this time I suggest, don't cede back to your enemies all the territory you've taken! Like the Sinai Peninsula. After you win it back, keep it, it's yours.

I've got to leave. [Unlike Josh, I won't say that three times]

Take care everyone.

200 Gordon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:55:09pm

#105 Hobgoblin: If the Koran needs to go into the fire, then so does the Old Testament. Read some choice passages from Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy (three of the five books of the Torah, the centerpiece of the Old Testament). They appear to have inspired some of the more hateful passages of the Torah and tenets of Sharia law.

But Judaism and Christianity sensibly ignore the nonsense in their Holy Book and emphasize the passages and stories which are read to us in churches and synagogues every Saturday and Sunday. The problem is that Islamic Radicals don't do this. Blame them, not their Book.

201 eyehatehippies  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:55:53pm

Josh: Good people make bad muslims.

Read God's Will that charles posted earlier today.

202 Gordon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:56:16pm

#110 quark2: Yes

203 Gordon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 1:57:59pm

#111 Someguy: I noticed in referring to Mr. Pol in #94 you called him "Mr. Caton." Are Mr. Pol and Caton one and the same?

204 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:00:05pm

#197 someguy

Churchill acknowledged that without the material help from the U.S., the Soviet Union would not have been able to defeat Germany. He also said in his memories that when he heard Hitler had attacked Russia, he knew that Germany had lost the war.

Oh, and I read that text a few weeks ago. Den Beste's virtual library is very nice indeed.

205 Bert Wolff  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:00:24pm

An article from today's Washington Post, entitled Palestinians Vow Revenge Against Israel for Killing of Militant Leader, describes some of the current seething in Gaza:

In a massive outpouring of grief and rage, tens of thousands of Palestinians marched in a 3 1/2-hour, eight-mile funeral procession through the streets of Gaza City today to mourn the killing of a Palestinian militant leader and vow swift and bloody retaliation against Israel for his death.
Black-hooded militants in green and brown camouflage military fatigues fired staccato bursts from Kalashnikov assault rifles into the air while emotional activists screamed nonstop slogans praising the death of Ismail Abu Shanab -- a political leader of the Islamic Resistance Movement, or Hamas -- as the ultimate sacrifice and promising to avenge it.
"We are coming to you Tel Aviv -- soon!" one man hollered through four-foot high stacks of speakers tied to the top of a van.
"With your body, you opened the door for suicide bombers to target Israel!" screamed another. . . .
"We love martyrdom and we seek martyrdom," Abdel Aziz Rantisi, a senior Hamas leader who survived an Israeli rocket attack on his car in June, told the crowd in a rare public appearance. "Revenge! Revenge!" they responded....
Palestinian police, who according to senior security officials in the Palestinian Authority are under orders to seize any weapons displayed publicly, looked on sheepishly as columns of militants paraded by, frequently firing into the air.
206 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:00:26pm

#193, #195 Mr Pol:

And you live where? Let me guess: You were baptized and raised PCA, right? Or Baptist? Or in one of the Churches that teaches Premillenial, Pre-tribulational or Dispensational eschatology? If you've read Mead's article, the core of Jacksonianism is found in those places, not simply from roping and riding. (Why do I bother?)

I don't know, nor do I give a flying sack of dog poop, what French actor fought anywhere. I DO care that one of my cousins (whom I actually knew and talked to) earned a Bronze Star fighting with the Marines at Bouganville.

How many of your relatives were there, Mr Pol?

207 Wild Justice  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:00:36pm

#134   HalfLife 

Simply brilliant.

208 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:03:09pm

#199 Marianne

You don't get it. Fighting to win means totally crushing the Muslim populations. Think Germany or Japan in WWII. Today no country can defeat its enemy in such a way, thanks to the leftish assholes. So the only way remaining is?

209 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:04:36pm

#200 Gordon

but this is always trotted out as proof of how "peaceful" islam could be if they just ignored the book.

I'm not going to rip into you Gordon, but rather posit this for your reflection. The OT refers to internal rules for the governance of the Chosen People. Divorced from the NT, the OT is harsh, but inwardly directed.

The Q'ran is not. It is an expansionist, outward-looking book of violence toward unbelievers. The OT cites many examples of God wiping out heathens that were in the Israelites' way. But it does not command generally that Jews kill or convert all heathens they find. THe Q'ran does. That to me is a significant difference, and may explain why Islam just cant get into the modern age.

I'm all for Islamic Reformation, whether by theology or JDAM, I don't rightly care.

210 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:05:27pm

#203 Gordon
scroll up

211 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:05:46pm

#206 someguy

Bouganville? None. They were busy elsewhere.

...and now can we stop congratulating ourselves about what other people did 60 years ago? Today, what is being done?

212 Gordon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:08:54pm

Never mind #203; I see the alleged dual identity has already been thoroughly discussed.

213 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:08:59pm

#203 Gordon:

Like I said earlier, I had some intel that they are one and the same. But zulubaby said earlier that they aren't. Since she's no BSer (tells the truth always), I'll have to check my sources and methods more closely.

Still...they sound an awful lot alike.

214 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:12:56pm

#213 someguy

Like, he's family and a close friend? Yep, that's true. I guess most of your close friends have opinions similar to yours. And when writing in a foreign language, style is in the eye of the reader.

215 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:14:05pm

#211 Mr Pol:

...and now can we stop congratulating ourselves about what other people did 60 years ago? Today, what is being done?

Yes we can. And should. And I apologize for my part in bringing it to that point.

I'm glad you read Fonte's article. Was it a revelation for you as it was for me?

Also, did you see the VDH article in NRO today? If I understand it correctly, he seems to follow a track similar to yours; that our limited warfare approach has begotten some of the problems which face our troops now.

What do you think?

216 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:19:34pm

#215 someguy

I think what I said to reaganite in one of my first posts here... Start here if you are interested in my views (and how they differ from Caton's opinions :-).

The real fight is in the West hearts and minds. It's a fight against PC crap, against "transnational progressivism", and it's one fight we are losing.

217 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:20:21pm

the someguy/Mr.Pol fight has ended.

They have gone down to the river and sang kumbyah together; let the hudna begin! Thank you Josh!

218 hobgoblin  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:21:49pm

sorry.

i'll stop

have a good weekend, all

219 Q  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:22:11pm

Mr. Pol (#198):

Hate is for wimps.

I beg to disagree. We hate the things that are hateful -- as mainstream Islam undoubtedly is. This is one of the things making us human.

220 Michael Glazer  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:22:22pm

Josh,

You are no hippie.

A Hippie takes the side of good and can detect goodness easily.

You on the other hand say you cannot take sides

nor can you detect goodness or evil for that matter.

You are void of reason and quite clearly and percetible differnece between evil and good --- hippies are sentsitive to this basic stuff which you appear to be robotic in your sensory perceptions.

You are not a "Human Becoming" you are rather a "Human Lacking."

I will guess you are not really a buddhist but think you are.

You are far from being a hippie -- please do not use that term ever again enough of you young fools have ruined that word already for the real good hippies who care for beauty, love, good and life.

I will also guess you are quite young

Just study in greater depth and the truth you will find if you are honest.

I will assume all your thoughts are second information gleaned from a couple of highschool / college late night converstations.

Open a book do some personal first hand research, talk to real people who are affected and learn truth truly if you do honestly seek it outside of you cozy suburban zone.

At this point you come off as a second rate young amateur who clearly knows the lingo but none of the truth behind any of it -- superficial in other words.

221 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:24:31pm

#217 hobgoblin

I am taking offense at your use of the word hudna when talking about people having a discussion.

222 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:28:47pm

#216 Mr Pol:

The real fight is in the West hearts and minds. It's a fight against PC crap, against "transnational progressivism", and it's one fight we are losing.

See, that's the thing, Mr Pol. As I began posting (preaching?) earlier, if we take that attitude we have indeed lost. If the precious gifts we have (inalienable rights, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness) are worth defending, then by God, LET'S DEFEND THEM!

Isn't there anything we can do? I have contributed to David Horowitz' campaign to fight the PC-tranzi meme on the campus' of America's colleges and universites. I have signed e-petitions for (among other causes) Daniel Pipes' appointment.

Maybe each act seems like a drop of water. But enough drops over a long enough period of time wear away stone.

Let's don't just stand there. Let's DO something!

223 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:29:56pm

#219 Q

I beg to disagree. We hate the things that are hateful -- as mainstream Islam undoubtedly is. This is one of the things making us human.

I see your point. But I think you're wrong. We fight the things that are hateful and dangerous. Most people then require anger to switch into search-and-destroy mode. Very few require hate. Hate is only required to fuel anger when it cannot be fueled by a real danger.

I think you are confusing hate with anger, especially when anger is mixed with frustration.

224 Michael Glazer  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:31:17pm

someguy,

September 21 (see israpundit.com)

There are planned worldwide city events to support Israel

Standing up for righteousness in public is a good first step to becoming positive and active to display to the world you are DOING something -- it also makes you feel good.

225 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:32:39pm

hobgoblin:

I second Mr Pol's #221, and add that bringing Josh into the picture for any reason is the height of bad taste.

What next--will you eat your salad with the dinner fork??

(I would prefer to attribute this truce/understanding to your calming influence, hobgoblin. But as you wish!)

:D

226 Gordon  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:35:30pm

#211: Mr. Pol: When I took your link and saw the name I at first thought of Abraham Polonsky, the left-wing film director blacklisted for being a Communist during the McCarthy era. Obviously, two different people...

227 HalfLife  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:36:59pm

#207 Wild Justice

Thanks! All that work for nothing, though... Sigh.

BTW, I've been meaning to tell you - I like your nick.

228 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:39:40pm

#222 someguy

There's not a lot to do. Spread the truth. Talk to everybody you know and show them the facts, again and again, until they, too, stop being PC. Talk dirty to shock them back to reality: ask them if their daughters will enjoy their burqas. Be strong, too, because when shocking someone back to reality, the first reaction you'll get is denial, but then you'll face anger...

Write to your representatives, presenting the facts, again, so that they are aware of them. Most will keep ignoring reality until enough people have written and they are afraid of not being reelected, though.

That's what I'm doing. Doesn't seem to work, or at least, doesn't seem to work well enough. But it allows to gain some time, and hope someone else will come with a solution. I haven't found one yet.

229 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:40:31pm

#224 Michael Glazer:

Thanks for the tip. Unfortunately, since I'm AD military, my freedom to participate in such things (as much as I'd like to) is severly restricted.

But if there's one going on in Rome or Naples, I will be there with my thoughts and prayers.

230 someguy  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:44:41pm

#228 Mr Pol:

Now THAT'S the spirit! =)

In fact, as I said earlier (here? I post on too many threads on too many blogs to remember!), I have made some inroads in some blogs.

And face-to-face, you're exactly right about the reactions; although the most common one I get is a sort of eyes-glazed-over look like someone emerging from hypnosis.

Sound familiar?

231 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:50:59pm

#230 someguy

Oh, yes... that's a common reaction, too. As well as the "la la la can't hear you" mantra with fingers stuck in their ears :-)

232 Frank IBC  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 2:57:26pm

#92 Josh said:

Maybe you have to be atheist to realize that picking sides is just plain stupid.

Usually it's only fundies that say that morality is impossible with atheism. But now we have an atheist saying just that, and with seeming pride, too.

233 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:02:12pm

HalfLife:

Agreeing with Wild Justice on your post #134. Thank you, it made me feel better :-)

234 Frank IBC  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:03:35pm

I am so sick of people who are too lazy or cowardly to figure out what their values are, let alone be willing to risk their lives to defend such values.

And they have the gall to turn around and proclaim their "non-judgementalism" a VIRTUE.

Makes me wanna puke.

235 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:08:50pm

Gordon (#194)

There are plenty of people on this site (I don't know if they are all Jews or not, I suspect many are not) who do hate all Muslims.

I'm curious...what does that have to do with "hating all Muslims?" Interesting that you wrote that, Gordon. I wonder why?

236 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:10:24pm

Frank IBC (#234)

Spot on, and I couldn't agree with you more. Take a stand or get out of the way.

237 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:14:21pm

#234 Frank IBC

Go a step further, if you please. Refusing to consider mass-murder as inacceptable behavior that cannot be explained or excused away is not "non-judgemental". Those people are clearly siding with evil.

238 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:15:08pm

someguy (#213)

Thank you :-)

239 Frank IBC  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:18:39pm

Ayn Rand...

{s sinister jarring chord on organ}

....would have a thing or two to say to Josh and his assumption that atheism precludes values.

240 Frank IBC  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:20:38pm

#237 Mr. Pol -

That's why I put the word in quotes.

241 HalfLife  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:20:59pm

#233 zulubaby

Oh, good. Then it wasn't a waste of breath. ;-)

242 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:25:28pm

#235 zulubaby

Why do you wonder? It's not the first time Gordon parrots anti-semitic propaganda. Jews hate, Jews are terrorists, Jews are obsessed with blood... the usual crap. I still don't know how much of that is Judenhass and how much is sheer idiocy, though.

243 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:26:59pm

#240 Frank IBC

Ah. Sorry. I overreacted, I guess.

244 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:30:35pm

Mr Pol (#242)

We'll see if he responds to my question...

245 Frank IBC  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:32:40pm

#153 Hobgoblin -

Hopefuklly

Is that a typo, or a delightful neologism which expresses your profoundly ambivalent feelings toward this person? :)

246 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:41:14pm

#156 lurking stew

has anyone else noticed the huge rise in Mr. Pol's English language skills? When he first started posting a few weeks back, his english led me to believe he was Taiwanese or something like that. Now he's writes like it's a first language.

I missed that comment of yours... but thank you. I think I should thank this site for it. My English is coming back. There's nothing like practice.

247 Frank IBC  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:47:05pm

#150 Josh wrote:

Hateful people on this site.

Oh that is so judgemental!

I'm going to contact whom ever is in charge of your Pseudo-Buddhist-cum-Neo-Nihilist-cum-Paleo-Morally lazyidiotjackass religion and have you excommunicated.

248 piglet  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 3:50:57pm
Maybe you have to be atheist to realize that picking sides is just plain stupid.

I'd rather be a hammer than a nail, yes I would...

249 Andjam  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 4:10:06pm

The KKK came to mind for me too.

250 EE  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 4:40:13pm

OT but not all of the Muslim religious leaders publicly spout radical Islamist sh*t.
Here's one, the Mufti of Hebron, who shows a moderate face by publicly denouncing terrorism. Seems somewhat surprising to me, considering that the Saudi/Wahhabis seem to have almost a choke-hold on the religious professionals of Islam. [Link: www.jpost.com...]

251 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 4:43:15pm

#250 EE

The last splodeydope was one of his imams.

Annex Hebron, bulldoze all mosques and kick out all Arabs.

252 Siren  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 4:49:12pm

I've only recently begun to try to understand this entire ...conflict? war?

(yes, I know. I am a horrible human for taking so long...*frown*)

Let me state that I am on the side of Israel, 100%.

I still have questions though, that would help my understanding, if anyone is willing to answer them.

Things like, how did the whole conflict start? And how are the suicide bombers able to get into Israel? It has a much smaller border than America, and therefore more easily patrolled. Why not just close up the entire border and not let anyone in (for the moment anyways), like we did after 9/11? If the Pali(s)...(I don't know how to spell it) get angry, tell them to blame themselves for not being able to co exist peacefully.

I am not trying to start a debate here. I'm just asking honest questions about things that I don't fully understand. If this is not the place to ask, I welcome anyone to email me. :)

I truly want to understand.

253 EE  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 5:02:34pm

#252 Siren
The anti-terrorist fence, which has been 1/4 completed, is an attempt to keep terrorists from having easy access to those they are trying to murder.

254 EE  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 5:07:50pm

#252 Siren
You will find answers to many of your questions in the link that Charles has on this page, in the right sidebar, near the top, Myths & Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict.

255 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 5:08:57pm

HalfLife (#241)

Not wasted at all :-)

256 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 5:09:02pm

#252 Siren

The border is very, very long. I suspect the border between Israel "proper" and the disputed territories is as long or even longer than the border between the U.S. and Mexico.

As for the rest... go to the top of the page. Click on the "Myths & facts" link in the right column.

257 Siren  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 5:25:14pm

Thank you. :) I will go read it now. :)

258 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 5:25:22pm

Mr Pol:

I think your English is excellent. You don't sound a bit Taiwanese :-)

259 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 5:28:23pm

Mr. Pol,

You don't get it. Fighting to win means totally crushing the Muslim populations. Think Germany or Japan in WWII. Today no country can defeat its enemy in such a way, thanks to the leftish assholes. So the only way remaining is?

Maybe I don't get it, but then again maybe I do. :-)

I think in a war you've got to break the will of the enemy. I also think it's a dangerous myth that we're only fighting evil "regimes" and the "people" are all on our side. One look at the mobs in the streets, reveling in bloodshed, gives the lie to that.

When I say we need not resort to "terrorism" I mean I'm never going to approve bombing a bus full of children or a crowded marketplace.

But I've got no problem at all with crying havoc, no problem with Sherman's March to the Sea against the Jihadists. I'm not sure where exactly to draw the line but I am sure that America and Israel are in danger of being too restrained -- not in danger of being too brutal -- as it is now.

260 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 5:33:32pm

#259 Marianne

Would you support carpet bombing of the Gaza strip?

261 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 5:39:51pm

#259 Marianne

I'm tired, so I'm getting too cryptic... let me rephrase that.

Carpet bombing of the Gaza strip would break their will, but with casualties in the hundreds of thousands. On the other hand, blowing up those Hamas "funerals" would break their will, too, with casualties in the tens of thousands, at most. The second action is terrorism, and is also the cheapest way to break their will.

So... would you rather support carpet bombing of the Gaza strip?

262 Marianne  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 5:58:40pm

What are you talking about, carpet bomb the Gaza strip?? The entire place is just one big bomb FACTORY piled high with explosives ready to go off. All you need to do is drop ONE bomb and get the chain reaction started....

Look, I'm not a military expert, I can't make these decisions. What I CAN do is support those who do make the decisions -- give them wide latitude to exercise their judgment -- don't criticize them in hindsight. And I would in fact support a whole lot more killing of the enemy than we've seen so far.

I don't think America is like Europe, too bloodsoaked and shellshocked to fight anymore, willing to pay any price for "peace." Not yet, we aren't.

Since you're tired I won't bother you with any more questions/comments just now. You think you're tired, imagine my husband - he's got to hear this type of thing from me all the time :-)

263 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 6:01:10pm

#262 Marianne

I'm tired because it's 5 am and I still have work to do... not related to what you said.

264 Siren  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 6:33:13pm

*runs back from her reading to ask another question/make another comment*

So, if I'm getting this, on a purely basic level (which is how I think, sadly enough)... and I know I'm skipping over stuff....

But basically, the Arabs sold the seemingly desolate land to the Jews, for much more than they should have, and then settled elsewhere, but then, when the Jews were able to bring the land to life, the Arabs decided they had been "displaced" (or was the word "dispossessed") and wanted their land back? That's INSANE.

And something else, probably off topic... I may have seen it here, or somewhere else, can't remember... But I remember reading something about some people in other countries hating all Americans because of what our ancestors did to the "native americans". First of all, it happened hundreds of years ago! Those of us alive today can't be blamed for what our ancestors did. And secondly, I'm part native american myself (small part, but still)... If they are trying to sympathize with native americans, then I hope us "mixed breeds" pose quite a conundrum to their logic... haha! :D

Ok...I'll quit rambling now, and go back to reading the facts and myths... (btw, in all honesty, I hadn't even noticed that link there before...which is why I hadn't read it yet...)

265 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 6:48:46pm

#264 Siren

Those who scream they have been "dispossed" usually have no relationship whatsoever with the land. Most of the Turkish province was owned by absent owners living in Instambul and Ankara, and the very few people living on those lands were little more than serfs and didn't own the land nor the production of the land.

The land was mainly bought from those absent owners, who were very happy to get 10 to 20 times its value and were never heard of afterwards.

The Jews returning from the diaspora brought back with them modern agriculture techniques, and what was by Turkish standard of the time huge amounts of money. Then they set up modern industries, too... at which time Arabs from the neighboring provinces of Syria and Egypt (today Egypt, Syria and Lebanon) moved to the area to find well-paid work.

As a rule of thumb, the Arabs that were really from the area, land-owners or not, stayed in 1948 and are Israeli Arabs. Those that fled were new immigrants.

266 Siren  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 7:10:04pm

#265 Mr Pol

Thank you for clarifying. :)

Which is why I asked. Sometimes I feel like I am way over my head in trying to understand this all. But I'm trying anyways.

Add the fact that my boyfriend is from a predominately muslim/hindu background, and I'm from a Catholic background... (Although neither of us follows the religions we were raised with. We are..."agnostic", is the right word, I think.) ...and yeah... I have a pretty long and winding road (to understanding) ahead of me.

But I stand with Israel, of that I'm sure.

267 Egfrow  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 7:12:44pm

Boy Meets Boy.

Here is a nice picture of Arafat giving a loving sloppy moist man kiss. A kiss like no other can give.


DISCLAIMER: Hetero Sexual mails are not encourage to link click the link.

Sloppy Wet One!

268 Mr Pol  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 7:15:31pm

#266 Siren

The most important thing to understand is that Western civilization is perceived as an existentialist threat by Islamists. Why? Because their teenagers like Britney Spears, and dating in college, and choosing their own spouse, and all the other freedoms they see on TV, including NOT wearing a burqah with temperatures in excess of 120°F. Not only that, but it's pretty obvious that the West is more successful, too, because of those freedoms, not despite them.

That's the reason behind the brainwashing, the Jihad, the terrorism...

269 rebmiami  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 7:47:02pm

Cluster bomb these rallies. do it! Mask, robe, = heavy conventional ordnance, like a daisy cutter. Make the bastards hide in holes.

270 Alex F  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 7:52:30pm

I'm gone all day and Caton comes back? Am I missing something? Could someone please fill me in...I liked Caton and I don't think Pol is him, though to be honest it'd be good to see Caton back...

271 zulubaby  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 8:26:49pm

Every time I look at these 'photos I get angry again. I think I should stay away from this thread...

Bastards! Mass-murdering, psychotic, cold-blooded, insane, disgusting excuses for human life. Sick!

272 Geepers  Fri, Aug 22, 2003 10:38:45pm

zulubaby (#271),

Every time I look at these 'photos I get angry again. I think I should stay away from this thread...

Maybe you won't be alone in your anger.

Look at todays Washington Times lead story:

Israel vows to answer terror with death

A Palestinian group dressed as Hamas suicide bombers strapped with fake explosives and carrying the holy Muslim book, the Quran, burn American and Israeli flags during a street demonstration near the southern port city of Sidon, Lebanon.
273 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 12:30:35am

#261 Mr Pol: well why don't you posit a third in-between option then - carpet-bomb the funerals?

You're positing a choice from things that are not a given, except for you. Why should the terrorist option be cheaper? You're totally ignoring the *consequences*, and taking it for granted it will weaken the will of terrorist supporters. How so? When these people are proud to raise martyrs for the cause, giving them a real terrorist-style massacre to use in the propaganda war is exactly what they want. And aside from the propaganda war, do you think there'd be no retaliations, no escalation, and not just of a terrorist nature? or maybe you think even taking into consideration costs/benefits in that sense is *all* appeasement and leftist bullshit?

Have you thought that perhaps, the real matter of decision there is not predicated on strong/weak will of leaders, cojones or not, popularity or not, but precisely that factor of consequences ...? on both the enemy, and the side you want to defend?

Cos, to practical ends, the problem is not really that using terrorist tactics and/or carpet bombing against terrorists is an "immoral inhuman" etc. thing. Bombing is not terrorism, but it's a walk in the park either. The practical problem is : what would happen after that. That's the frame in which your "cheapest" needs to be put, not the mere total of casualties. Your idea an attack of that kind would weaken the enemy is entirely wishful thinking. It's not proven. It clashes against the nature of that terrorist ideology, which is suicidal in the first place.

Bombing in WWII was another matter. It's not "leftist assholes" that have made things different. It's the nature of the enemy that's changed, and the nature of the ideology supporting the enemy. It's quite different in practice. It's such a huge difference I don't know how it can be ignored.

Your entire point seems to be about how Israel/US/the west lacks balls, or is already lost and over with, and in the meantime, you totall forget the nature of Islamic terrorism, and what counts in matters of strategy. Maybe planting explosives in a funeral in Gaza would satisfy your need for ballsy things no one has the balls to do or even speak about cos they're all leftist PC-brainwashed wimps, but what clear and practical advantage would it bring in the fight against terrorism? You haven't explained that, if not by positing an effect that is definitely not guaranteed.

In fact, for a proof of opposite effect from the one you posit: look at Chechenya.

There are other effective things that could be tried, cutting the terrorist funds at the source, cutting the incitement, stopping the funding and preaching in the west, doing something about islamic immigration and the building of mosques funded by saudis and the creation of more and more islamic advocacy groups in the west too, etc. and those, yes, those are things being hampered in good part by the pc-mentality (and also by practicalities, in some respect), or economic factors, interests, pre-existing situations, corruption, you name it, take your pick. But as for precise strategies, and military action, the choices there may have less to do with mentalities and more with practical factors you chose not to even take into consideration. The fact you may not like to consider those factors are no rational reasons to ignore them.

Then again, why one should expect reasonable considerations from someone arguing the only salvation left for the human species was to plant habitats on Mars (on the thread you linked to with your entertaining views). Talk about "cheapest" solutions.

274 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 12:50:46am

#273 zaza

Carpet-bomb the funerals? You mean, going after peaceful crowds of mourning civilians? That's terrorism, you know. That's targeting civilians.

275 Carol Herman  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 12:51:40am

We won in Vietnam.

Plus, there are more Vietnamese in America who are happy to be here, than are in Vietnam, happy to be there.

The French lost in Vietnam. No one wants to be French. Here. There. Or, anywhere.

What didn't happen in Vietnam is the diplomatic clap trap that would have divided the country in half.

So, basically, we left Vietnam unable to be much of a resouce to China. Too bad we weren't as lucky with the lunatics in Korea.

276 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 12:55:56am

#270 Alex F

I'm gone all day and Caton comes back? Am I missing something? Could someone please fill me in...I liked Caton and I don't think Pol is him, though to be honest it'd be good to see Caton back...

Meaning you don't like me, and you'd rather see me gone.

I'm hurt.

277 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 1:17:27am

#273 zaza

OK, had my coffee, now let's go back to what I said. Five nice bullet points:

1/ Today terrorism is an accepted practice.

Witness how the whole world wants to reward the PLO with a state.

2/ In the context of the Israeli-Arab conflict, resorting to terrorism would allow Israel to win the war by breaking the will of the enemy populations.

History shows that when Arabs are scared shitless they are peaceful. A study of their culture shows their aggressiveness is fueled by the perceived weakness of their enemy. Arabs see mercy as weakness, ruthlessness as strength.

3/ Terrrorism is the cheapest way to destroy a population's will.

1 Tomahawk = 2 millions buck.
1 pound of C-4 + 2 pounds of Sarin = less than a hundred bucks.

4/ Between Judaism and literally decades of PC brainwashing, even the most ruthless right-wing elements of Israeli society refuse to resort to terrorism.

The absence of public outcry when Mr. Pass, whose daughter was murdered 2 years ago, was arrested and denied access to a lawyer for more than two weeks because he was suspected of wanting to organize "anti-palestinian" activities is proof of that.

5/ While that may be morally a good thing, in practice it means Israel keeps refusing to fight back using the most efficient weapon at its disposal, and that does it no service.


Reminder: terrorism = targeting of non-combatants.

Do you want to address any of this points, or should I answer to your ad hominen attacks?

278 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 1:18:56am

#274 Mr Pol: oh, I see, we're on to sarcasm now, but you know, I was only trying to follow your acute reasoning. Bombing funerals was your idea, remember?

I was only suggesting you add a third choice, cos there's not only carpet bombing, or terrorism, but also a cunning and still very ballsy mix of the two.

279 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 1:23:18am

#278 zaza

Yep. Before I have my coffee, I tend to be heavy on sarcasm. Thank G-d for Bialetti and Lavazza.

280 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 1:45:47am

And re: #277

1/ Israel itself has accepted to negotiate for a palestinian state, and not just now. So until Israel opposes that, it's kind of useless to blame it on "the world".

2/ instances that prove *your* own take on strenght/weakness? cos you have yet to prove using terrorism against Arabs would have that effect of scaring them shitless, rather than provoking more attacks, and not just from terrorists, but from countries that fund them. Not to mention the effect of making Islamists into the proud martyrs they so like to boast about being already.

They're not scared shitless by the prospect of blowing themselves up. You're positing a *rational* reaction from people who do not use a rational code of thinking. That's the main huge difference with WWII. The ideological level.

3/ ah, so now it's cheapest in the economic sense, not casualties. but again: would it be cheapest in terms of consequences?

4/

Between Judaism and literally decades of PC brainwashing, even the most ruthless right-wing elements of Israeli society refuse to resort to terrorism.

Oh, you don't obviously think it has to do with sanity, no? it's got to be brainwashing if people do NOT want to turn to the tactics of terrorists?

5/ you are choosing to shift this to the moral only level so you can dismiss all objections so easily, all the while not proving *practical* efficacy of tactics you advocate. You're reiterating it's the most efficient tactic. Not really proving why though.

Reminder: terrorism = targeting of non-combatants. 

Yes, I know that. I don't know why you felt the need to point that out.

Do you want to address any of this points, or should I answer to your ad hominen attacks?

Oh please. Look who's talking. Now criticising your arguments and not following your own self-justifying axioms of what is efficient and what is not, is an ad hominem attack? I don't know you, Mr Pol, and I haven't used any insults against you, something you for some reason feel free to do to others though without it being ad homimem attacks. I simply find your views unreasonable and unjustified, on a practical level, and I said why. That's my view. If you only want total consent to ideas such as approval of terrorist tactics, I don't know why you're on a discussion board at all.

Do you want to address the issue of effects, or just keep repeating how it would scare suicide-wannabes shitless?

281 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 1:54:46am

#279 Mr Pol: well I hope B & L make you understand my point more precisely. You don't have to get so defensive, if I find some of your views unreasonable and extreme I'll say so. Just because those views may be totally natural and logical to you, doesn't mean they should be to others, isn't that banally right?

You're not gonna tell me now that everyone that objects to using terrorism to fight terrorism, for practical even more than moral reasons, is a pc-brainwashed deluded blind or stupid leftist bullshitter, come on, tsk...

282 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 1:57:35am

#280 zaza

1/ Yep, Israel seems to have accepted defeat.

2/ When Sharon was in charge of pacifying the Gaza strip immediately after the 6-days war, he was absolutely ruthless. We didn't hear a peep from Gaza for decades. Other, earlier examples in Israel's history show that Arabs were terrified of Irgun, and didn't attack Jewish area with a strong Irgun presence. But the best example yet is the way the U.S. sent their Navy to squash the Barbareque pirates. They didn't exactly succeed, as piracy continued for a few decades, but no ship with a U.S. flag was attacked again.

3/ It's the cheapest way in human lifes, too.

About the consequences: you are joking, right? The current trend is the destruction of Israel, and the slaughter of all Jews in the Middle East. Exactly what consequences should we be afraid of?

4/ Refusing to use an internationally accepted weapon on "moral" grounds when fighting to the death is anything but sane.

5/ The whole argument is about PC-crap morality and how it has succeeded in influencing and brainwashing even the less PC members of our society.

6/ No ad hominems from you, huh? Please explain your last paragraph in #273.

Then again, why one should expect reasonable considerations from someone arguing the only salvation left for the human species was to plant habitats on Mars (on the thread you linked to with your entertaining views). Talk about "cheapest" solutions.

Do you really want me to answer that?

283 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 2:03:47am

#280 zaza

Ah, missed something... About your answer to my first point, does that mean you are aware that the world has accepted terrorism as a normal tacticts and so choose to blame it on Israel, or are you just brushing aside a fact that disturbs you?

If you don't see what I mean, please have a look at the situation in Corsica. Or maybe you can do a quick search and find me a UNSC or UNGA resolution that condemns terrorism against Israel.

284 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 2:31:43am

Mr Pol, starting from #283 - nope, doesn't mean anything of what you assume I was meaning it. I was simply following your own reasoning there. If you can't tolerate the fact Israel has always been negotiating with the Arabs for a pali state, and consider it defeat, please address complaints to the relevant government. I don't share your views and I'm not blaming Israel in any way here, it's you blaming it.

If you don't see what I mean, please have a look at the situation in Corsica. Or maybe you can do a quick search and find me a UNSC or UNGA resolution that condemns terrorism against Israel.

Did I deny the UN position in this? did I say the whole world is in favour of Israel and opposed to a pali state? nope. So please don't derail my point.

re: #282 - point 2/ ah, you're so mixing things again. Was that kind of ruthlessness the same you advocate? ie. specifically, was Sharon planting explosives in funerals and specifically targeting only non-combatants, ie. was he adopting terrorism?

I don't know why you keep misunderstanding me. I'm not attacking the idea of ruthless anti-terrorism retaliation. We're talking of your specific propositions on adopting terrorist tactics here.

3/ what consequences? you really think it cannot get worse? and I'm not talking of "being afraid". I'm talking of crude realities, so stop filtering everything through the lens of balls vs. wimpiness.

Honestly, Mr Pol, when you posit something like using terrorism and then are *amazed* when someone asks you what positive effects do you think that'll achieve, I've got to ask if its you the one who's kidding.

4-5/ once again (third time): consider the nude and crude *practical* factors, not moral. Too easy for you to dismiss this by putting it on the moral plane or worse, PC mentality. Now even realism has become PC crap for you. Says more about your arguments than about PC crap really.


6/ oh come on. Did you or did you not argue about settlements in space as a solution for the species? here, from the thread you suggested to start from to understand your views:

Today, there's no new world left. Before 1986, there was talk of using the shuttle reservoirs to create space habitats - habitats, not stations - and there was talk about further human exploration, and human settlement. That was a real hope for another new world, another sorting device leaving behind the irresponsible, the stupid, and the gutless ones.

Then Challenger blew up. End of story. For the last seventeen years, even the most optimistic nation on Earth has not invested one penny in creating ourselves a new world.

ie. views which I find highly entertaining, because of their being utterly absurd. That's what I said.

How on earth is that an "ad hominem", lol? Come on, I wouldn't think you were that hypersensitive to mere criticism.

But then I guess your saying a new 9/11 would be utterly deserved by Americans because of Bush's Saudi asskissing is not an attack, nah. You responding to mere criticism with "are you stupid, deluded or insane" is not ad hominem, nah.

Yes, you're right. On everything. Is that better?

285 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 2:44:31am

#284 zaza

1/ You're evading. Again.

Do you agree that terrorism is now internationally-accepted tactics? If not, please explain why.

2/ Terrorism is targeting of civilians. See Unit 101 for an explanation of how Sharon used it.

And as far as I can see, you keep distorting what I said. Terrorism works, is internationally accepted, but we are being restrained by PC brainwashing from using it. Do you agree with this? If not, please explain why.

3/ Schconsequences my ass. No, IMO it cannot get worse. If you disagree, please explain how it could get worse.

4-5/ WHAT PRACTICAL FACTORS? WHAT CONSEQUENCES? You are sounding like an LLL right now. Unnamed "consequences" and "think of the children" bullshit aside, DO YOU HAVE A POINT?

6/ Yes, I said and still think the human species needs to spread in space. I also think that it would effectively be a new frontier, a new place where Jacksonian ideals would thrive and succeed. Do you disagree with that? If yes, explain why.

286 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 2:48:32am

One last note: I notice you kept ignoring the point about Chechenya.

Where the harshest retaliation ever against terrorists has been fully used, of the kind closer enough to terrorism rather than mere military retaliation, yet, it hasn't scared the terrorists, or their supporters, shitless at all. If anthing, it's only provided more martyrdom-celebrating material for the Islamonutters, and has drawn even more sympathy for Chechen rebels indiscriminately. Putin decided to let hostages be killed along with terrorists in the Moscow theatre, again, a near-terrorist-like tactic in one way, in order not to concede anything to Chechen Islamic terrorists. Yet, terrorist attacks in Russia have not decreased, neither has Islamicisation of the population of Chechenya and even other areas of the former Soviet Empire.

That's what I'm talking about, not moral considerations which is not my interest to discuss here.

That's the practical consequences I meant.

-- NB: it's still an incorrect parallel cos the retaliation in Chechenya was not the kind of terrorism you're advocating.

287 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 2:53:29am

#286 zaza

In Chechnya the retaliations, as you thoughtfully point out, were against terrorists, not against the whole civilian population. Collateral damage is indiscrimate killling, it is not terrorism.

So, again, what practical consequences are you talking about?

288 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 3:31:41am

Mr Pol: regarding Chechenya, I also said the retaliation was closer enough to terrorism etc, if you only want to pick out one part of the argument without getting the real point, where can this non-discussion lead to?

You're arguing for a balkanisation of conflict into terrorists-vs-terrorists, and asking ME to prove to you why it's insane and what unpleasant consequences it would have. You're truly on another planet, no wonder you wish to leave earth altogether.

Chechenya and Balkans. That's how worse it can get. Escalation of terrorism of the 9/11 kind. Nuclear retaliation. That's how worse it can get. Mutual total destruction, is that the end goal?


Re: Unit 101 - ok, now you tell me which version of events is true and which is the one you're referring to as deliberate use of terrorist tactics:

The unit had received explicit orders to maximize casualties

or
Had it been the Israeli intention to kill civilians, the defenseless villagers fleeing Qibya would have been prime targets – instead the IDF allowed them to leave unharmed.

?

And which one would prove that Israel effectively used terrorist tactics as anti-terrorist measure, and terrorist tactics of the same kind you advocate?

I'm not the one evading here. You want what, a confirmation that terrorism is effective, so you can pull out again your "logical" conclusion that then, anti-terrorism forces should use terrorism too, and expect that to be self-satisfying as an answer?

You're the one who keeps derailing here, and you can't even accept that someone would find your precise propositions regarding the necessity to adopt terrorist tactics as only effective anti-terrorist solution unjustifiable and unreasonable, without branding them as PC-brainwshed idiots. I can't waste any more time and have you put words or arguments in my mouth I didn't make, shouted in capitals. Who even spoke of "think of the children"? Do I have to repeat for the tenth time I have no interesting in arguging the "moral" point with you? I guess it's just too convenient to you to keep switching to that. You don't give replies, you just keep shifting the burden of explanation for patently absurd claims, such as the one of colonising space as a form of surival for the fittest of the species.

Bah?!

289 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 4:01:38am

#288 zaza

You said that in Chechnia the retaliation was "closer enough to terrorism", but do not explain how. You go on to agree that it's not a worthwhile parallel, because effectively the Russian army did NOT use terrorism. Interesting how you back-pedal now on the second part of your statement.

Bringing the Balkans in is a *good* example. Today's leaders in Bosnia are former leaders of terrorist groups. The UCK is a bunch of terrorists. The Serbs did not use the same tacticts until they had already lost the conflict against Bosnia, and never used them in Kosovo. Net result? Serbia has lost, the ethnic cleansing of Serbs inside historical Serbia itself has been internationally accepted and legitimized, and Serbia is about to lose another 30% of its territory (Kosovo) after a UN-sanctioned and UN-protected ethnic cleansing of Serbs.

The escalation of terrorism will happen unless terrorism is stopped. That includes nuclear terrorism. To stop terrorism, terrorist tactics are the cheapest effective weapon available. I notice you didn't give me any alternative. Find me a way to disarm North Korea that doesn't imply going nuclear. Find me a way to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons that doesn't imply going postal on their ass. Please.

Unit 101 used terrorist tactics to scare off civilians. The goal was not to kill civilians per se, the goal was to scare them off. If that means throwing a few grenades in a mosque, well, so be it. That's what I mean by using terrorist tactics. And that's what Unit 101 did.

Finally, you are, again, completely distorting what I said. I will repeat for the last time, in the hope you finally understand:

- Terrorist tactics are now internationally accepted.
- Terrorist tactics work.
- Terrorist tactics are effective, and cheap.
- We all find terrorist tactics morally unacceptable.
- The reason we find terrorist tactics morally unacceptable is decades of PC-crap brainwashing.

So let's now do that point by point. Answer that question, with a simple Yes or No:

Do you agree that terrorist tactics are now internationally accepted?

290 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 4:58:20am

Mr Pol.

Your question is disingenous. The point here is using terrorist tactics as anti-terrorism. It's you who raised it, it's you who should defend it. I'm not answering straw men, self-justifying axioms, and questions that you use to imply logical connection that are not there.

For the 1000th time: my point is not about morals here.

But, if you think the only reason terrorist tactics are considered unacceptable is PC bullshit, then I got nothing more to add in respect to that. You posit something so insane as using terrorism against terrorists, and then demand the proof of the counter-argument. How straightforward an answer is that? I asked you which version of facts between two links is true regarding 101, and you reply with something which I'm not sure what is supposed to mean. If they used tactics intended to scare off civilians rather than killing them, then I guess that's different from *terrorism*, which is about - by your kind reminder above - deliberately killing non-combatants. And did Unit 101 throw grenades in mosques? wasn't that what's his name, Goldstein who did that? and now what, would you argue he's been jailed only due to PC constraints?

As for alternatives. Right, as if I was ditching *all and any* response to terrorism just because I don't consider *terrorism* itself a valid response. Oh man, it's so twisted I don't know if you're pulling my leg or what. Look for paragraph 8 in post #273. But now, in your world, where only what you say is reasonable and undeniably right and not subject to the slightest challenge, the self-evident truth is that terrorism is the best tactic against terrorism, so all other possible routes are useless and too soft or delusional. Right. Ok! if you say so, Mr Kurtz!

On Chechenya. Yawn. This is getting so pedantic. I don't know how to rewrite it, maybe in Russian you'd understand it better? I did clearly explain in which sense I intented the parallel to be - while incorrect and imperfect cos its not what you mean as terrorist tactics - still more ruthless than any anti-terrorist retaliation ever used, and closer to terrorism than mere military retaliation. The Russian army did maximise civilian casualties there, and engaged in warfare that was a lot more brutal than anything the west has ever tried against terrorists. Except the effect didn't turn out to be what they intended - which in case you missed it, is the point here. Killing hostages along with terrorists is also something quite ruthless, and as I said, near-terrorist-like in some ways. That is not me back-pedalling. It's you being unwilling to fully read and understand the real point being made there.

On the Balkans. Serbs did use an even worse mix of harsh retaliation and near-terrorist like tactics than the Russians used in Chechenya. But while Putin has been supported by the west, Milosevic wasn't. For a lot of reasons besides terrorism itself. And that is all beside the point here. Which is, again, the efficacy of terrorist-like strategies. Like it or not, no matter who was right or wrong, who attacked who first, the escalation brought down the whole region, and the country that was defending itself against terrorism, because it all ended up with massacres on all sides. That's precisely the reason why adopting Serb+Russian x 1000 + terrorism tactics is absurd. You can argue til you're blue in the face that it's unfair, that it's not right, that why then do Islamist terrorists get away with it, but you're not gonna change things just cos you don't like them, you're not gonna get the effects you want just cos you say you'll get them.

You are effectively arguing for ten times worse that kind of outcome, which is not a solution. If you're so end-of-times doom-preaching despairing, ok, by all means, embrace terrorism if you think it's just a matter of moralist bullshit that prevents sane-thinking people from cheering at that idea. You're obviously ballsier than everyone else, and unfettered by such trivial, petty, inconsequential concerns such as "what then". Just don't expect it to be applauded, justified, or effective, just because you say so.

To you, colonising space and using terrorism as anti-terrorism are such self-evidently sane ideas you don't even think it necessary to explain or justify them, and instead just require others to say why they shouldn't be fine and dandy. Ok. I'm in the opposite planet, where they're self-evidently insane. And think what you like of that, but there's simply no communication possible here.

Too bad the idea for those settlements on space were abandoned, really, tsk...

291 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 5:26:08am

#290 zaza

I noticed that your point is not about moral. Your point seems to be about distorting what I said and engage in various ad hominem attacks.

Which is why I am going to take it point by point, in short, simple questions that do not allow you to stray away or distort what I say.

So. I say terrorism is now an internationally accepted practice. Do you agree or not?

292 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 5:47:16am

Mr Pol: leave it, really. I told you, I'm not interested in responding to setup questions to which you have already posited the undeniably true answer & logical outcome, the undeniably ultimate true solution to terrorism, ie. adoption of terrorist tactics, because "they work". Yep, "just do it". Why not?

You said in #289:

I will repeat for the last time, in the hope you finally understand:

- Terrorist tactics are now internationally accepted.
- Terrorist tactics work.
- Terrorist tactics are effective, and cheap.
- We all find terrorist tactics morally unacceptable.
- The reason we find terrorist tactics morally unacceptable is decades of PC-crap brainwashing.

Thats what you hold as self-evident truths. Why are you asking me if I agree to the first sentence? What do you want me to do, agree or disagree to them one by one? so as to get the point of no-return, is that the idea?

If you'd read my posts instead of screaming "attack!", you'd have gotten the answers already. You want me to reply to something which was not the thing I took issue with. You want me to be dragged into your reasoning, of which I don't share the slightest part or framework. That's not discussion. That's you wanting total consent, or else, you'll cry "vicious ad hominem!!!" because someone simply disagrees with you and finds your views absurd.

There's nothing for me to add or reply to here. Feel free to describe this as evasion, distortion, la-la, pc bullshit, just cos I'm not playing your game. I don't care about agreeing on anything. I just don't see how, when there's absolutely nothing I can possibly share in your very way of reasoning and arguing and phrasing, we can even discuss anything at all. I can live perfectly with that. Hope you can too.

293 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 5:52:22am

#292 zaza

Funny. You want me to defend my points, but without discussing. You keep bringing in totally different points, confusing everything and taking everything out of context, and I'm not supposed to discuss or reply or whatever.

Is that your normal debating methodology?

Let's go back, again, to what I said. First point: terrorism is now an internationally accepted tactics. Do you agree or not? Should I go into the 3,000 word post to explain that part, or is it obvious enough that I don't need to go into it?

294 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 6:11:53am

Mr Pol: what part of "I find your theory that terrorism is the only valid, effective and cheapest-in-all-senses solution to terrorism blatantly insane" was not clear?

You have not justified why you think so, so you want me to justify why not.

I've said all I could say already over and over on that. I disagree on *everything* you said here, and more than that, your very way of thinking. Your proposition to me is nowhere near reasonable, sane, or effective.

Now what else can I add, when I consider your whole reasoning here insane, and you consider mine stupid and dishonest? There's nothing to go on about, that's all.

295 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 6:18:18am

#294 zaza

First of all, where did I say that adopting terrorist tactics was the only valid answer? Don't put words in my mouth. It's dishonest.

What reasoning do you consider insane? You DON'T WANT to reason. You just want to hurl insults and avoid any discussion on the reasoning.

Finally, do you agree or disagree that terrorism is now an internationally accepted tactics?

296 Marianne  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 6:19:05am

Wow, this thread is still going strong. Before we can answer Mr. Pol's cross-examination questions listed in Post 289 -- and zaza is right, it's cross-examination, using "set up questions," not discussion -- he would have to explain just exactly what he means by "terrorist tactics." That is the phrase he used in every question, yet he never obtained agreement on a definition, an essential first step.

I interpreted Mr. Pol's vague hints one way, and tried to find where we could maybe agree. zaza interpreted his vague hints another way, and stated her principled disagreement. Isn't it time for you to just come out and say what you mean, Mr. Pol? Find your courage and just spit out the words. We can handle it.

Let me tell you this, I don't give a damn what is "internationally accepted." We decide these matters for ourselves, first as individuals, then as members of society. We Americans will never just blindly follow whatever everyone else is doing.

Mr. Pol, by asking us to agree that terrorism is "internationally accepted," as if that made it legitimate, you betray an utter ignorance of what America is all about -- notwithstanding the supposed four years as a ranch hand in Wyoming. We defy everyone to do what we think is right. We always have.

This is so well said that I find it very amusing [zaza, please excuse the cut-and-paste]:

[If you believe that] the self-evident truth is that terrorism is the best tactic against terrorism, so all other possible routes are useless and too soft or delusional [then my response is:]. Right. Ok! if you say so, Mr Kurtz!

Mr. Kurtz! [snicker, snort, chortle] If zaza is interpreting what Mr. Pol says correctly, then I agree. We Americans are not going into the heart of darkness with you Mr. Pol. We're not going to use American military power to turn the entire world into a killing field like the ones in the Congo, Rwanda, Cambodia.

But are we going to fight the Jihadists to win? YES.

297 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 6:34:50am

#296 Marianne

You have a point.

Terrorism is targeting of non-combatants. Terrorist tactics are systematic violations of the Geneva conventions and the Hague conventions.

Terrorist tactics cover:

1/ targeting and killing of civilians.
2/ collective punishment.
3/ destruction of purely civilian sites and infrastructures in the absence of military targets.
4/ sanctions against civilians "just because".
5/ annexation of land.

I don't think point 1 needs explanations.

Point 2 covers from the proposal I've heard many times of wiping out the whole town from which a suicide bomber comes, to imposing a fine to every person in a village because one inhabitant is a terrorist.

Point 3 covers the destruction of houses, hospitals, factories, schools, etc. without legal cause. Destroying the house of a suicide bomber is not part of it, nor closing a "school" that grooms terrorists. But a systematic campaign to destroy all mosques indiscriminately is part of what I mean.

Point 4 covers imprisonment, deportation, fines, etc. on civilians for no reason whatsoever.

Point 5 should not need explanations either.

Satisfied?

298 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 6:41:21am

#296 Marianne

Mr. Pol, by asking us to agree that terrorism is "internationally accepted," as if that made it legitimate, you betray an utter ignorance of what America is all about -- notwithstanding the supposed four years as a ranch hand in Wyoming. We defy everyone to do what we think is right. We always have

Let's start with the short explanation... If required I'll go into a longer version.

No country on Earth, and I mean none, has abstained from receiving well-known terrorists as if they were legitimate heads of state.

The U.N. has systematically closed its eyes on the use of terrorist tactics by a number of countries.

Despite Article 1 of the four 1948 Geneva Conventions, no party to the Conventions has ever been sanctioned for violating them.

Terrorism has been accepted de facto as a legitimate tactics by the lack of action of the international community, lack of action that is in direct breach from their obligations as signatories of a number of international treaties and conventions.

Is there something you disagree with or don't understand in these statements?

299 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 6:48:56am

#295 Mr Pol, sentence by sentence, read slowly cos I'm putting some mighty effort at patience here, while you're busy whining about being misinterpreted and insulted:

First of all, where did I say that adopting terrorist tactics was the only valid answer?

- you said it first in #94: the only way a population can stop its government from surrendering to terrorism is to resort to terrorism, and make it uglier.

- in #261: The second action is terrorism, and is also the cheapest way to break their will.

- in #179: we both know the fastest and cheapest way to stop the conflict is to use terrorism against the Arabs, but we just aren't able to do it.

in #277: In the context of the Israeli-Arab conflict, resorting to terrorism would allow Israel to win the war by breaking the will of the enemy populations. -- Terrrorism is the cheapest way to destroy a population's will. -- Between Judaism and literally decades of PC brainwashing, even the most ruthless right-wing elements of Israeli society refuse to resort to terrorism ...the most efficient weapon at its disposal.

in #285: Terrorism works, is internationally accepted, but we are being restrained by PC brainwashing from using it. Do you agree with this? If not, please explain why.

in #289: To stop terrorism, terrorist tactics are the cheapest effective weapon available. I notice you didn't give me any alternative.

etc.

So what exactly am I putting in your mouth that you didn't say?

Seriously?

And you want me to reply with "yes/no" to absurd claims which you now deny making?

What can I add? Really?
_______________

My favourite instance of Mr Pol's peculiar idea of what makes for valid argument, "reasoning" and "sanity" is this though, from #285:

Yes, I said and still think the human species needs to spread in space. I also think that it would effectively be a new frontier, a new place where Jacksonian ideals would thrive and succeed. Do you disagree with that? If yes, explain why.

...

300 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 6:53:55am

#299 zaza

#94 adresses a different problem. How does a population stop its own government from surrendering?

...but nicely put out of context. Thank you.

Oh, and if you think that spreading the species out of the planet is a lunatic idea, I'd like to know how you wish to address little things like the population growth.

301 Marianne  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 6:58:44am

1/ targeting and killing of civilians

Israel and American have more than enough non-civilians to kill, for now, don't you think?

Exhibit A: the masked suicide bombers and gunmen who pour into the streets in the so-called "funeral processions." Kill them all. They are not "mourning". They are marching.

Exhibit B: the "political leaders" of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc. Kill them all. The division between the "military arm" and the "political wing" is nothing but Jihadist doublespeak, they are all part of the same murderous terrorist gangs.

If and when Rumsfeld says, targeting combatants isn't going to enable us to win, we've got to target entire populations (like fire-bombing Dresden), I'll think it over. He hasn't said that yet. Neither has Mofaz.

2/ collective punishment.

If Israel would just re-take what belongs to Israel -- Judea and Samaria -- and incorporate it into Israel proper -- you wouldn't be faced with this question. Enough with the curfews, the lockdowns, the bulldozing one house at a time. Just plain-ass drive the enemy out. Seize the land. KEEP IT, don't keep ceding it back. Then you will not have an enemy population to punish individually or collectively. You'll have a country with viable defensible borders and a loyal citizenry.

3/ destruction of purely civilian sites and infrastructures in the absence of military targets.

OK with me! It's part of driving the enemy out of your own country. It's also part of humiliating and disgracing the enemy so they know they are losing and they give up fighting. See index: "March to the Sea, Sherman's." General Sherman did not carry out mass executions of civilians, he just gave the cry of "Havoc!" Literally, the signal to begin the destruction, from Old French, from Old English, from Germanic, I believe. (Besides, the Jihadists often hide in mosques, schools, hospitals. Level them to the ground if you have to)

4/ sanctions against civilians "just because".

No, I believe in Due Process. Again, if you drive the enemy out of your land, you won't have Jihadists "within" to impose sanctions against. They'll all be dead or gone.

5/ annexation of land.

Yes, yes, yes, for love of Mike. Judea and Samaria should NEVER have been "held in trust" for the enemy. You won, it's yours, keep it. That's what we did with all of North America. Tragic but true, and in the end, less cruel than this perpetual no-win conflict.

Any more questions?

These are just my own personal opinions, I've said over and over, I have no military expertise.

Where's reaganite, where's Juliette? I talk too much myself, I'd like to know what they think. Where's someguy?

I've got to go, my husband wants the computer. Sorry to run before you can reply. Talk later maybe.

302 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 7:02:21am

Mr Pol: if terrorism has been appeased, does it mean the best alternative against it to redress that appeasement is terrorism itself?

You're back to arguing on something - how terrorism has been appeased - which was NOT the issue of contention here. Because you posit a logic - oh let's see, they gave terrorist leaders Kosovo, and they'll give terrorist leaders a "palestinian" state, so it means we'll get what we want if we become terrorist too AND/OR we'll crush the will of terrorists only by becoming terrorists - which has NOTHING to do with explaining how terrorism as a counter-terrorist measure could ever lead to anything but total mayhem and civil war and mutual destruction and 10,000 Groznys and 4,000 Srebrenicas.

Also, you forget the ideological origin of terrorism. The financial sources. And the nature of the suicidal mentality of the recent terrorism.

Let's posit Unit 101 did apply full terrorist tactics.

But terrorism back then was not even of the suicidal kind.

What would happen today, if you massacre aspiring victims of massacre, doh?

What kind of scaring-shitless effect will terrorism-as-counter-terrorism have on wannabe martyrs that worship a death cult? That's not a show of force and might, that's giving them the martyrdom armageddon they crave.

Surely you must see that, if you share the earthly, not martian, version of "reason" that is.

303 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 7:08:03am

#300 Mr Pol

oooh, my humblest apologies for putting 1 sentence out of 10 out of context.

So can we safely say, in a non-ad-hominem and non-insluting way, that in 9 cases out 10, you did say that which you later claimed you had not said, right? Thank you, so mighty generous of you to acknowledge that.

Oh, and if you think that spreading the species out of the planet is a lunatic idea, I'd like to know how you wish to address little things like the population growth.

Why, with terrorism, obviously! Even better, nukes. A big huge massacre, would be inarguably cheaper than both birth control and space settlements.

You're starting to convince me of the benefits of terrorism, you are.

304 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 7:14:32am

#301 Marianne

1/ Legally those crowds are "non-combatants". Bombing those funerals would effectively be targeting of non-combatants, and, as such, terrorism.

2/ Driving the population out of Gaza, Judea and Samara by force would be effectively a terrorist tactics.

3/ Still a terrorist tactics, and this time a direct violation of the Hague conventions.

4/ I believe in "due process", but I notice it doesn't work (liberation of known terrorists for example).

5/ Annexation of land in the particular context of the Israeli-Arab conflict is not against the law.

So in the end, out of 5 terrorist tactics, you support 4, while for moral reasons I only support 1 (the last one). Nice to know I'm the one advocating terrorism :-)

305 Marianne  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 7:17:00am

I guess I'm becoming just like Josh. One more post and then my husband *really is* taking over the computer.

Legally those crowds are "non-combatants".

Says who?? Under what law, Sharia??

306 Jesus Pussy Slap  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 7:23:09am

Ah, more nationalistic murder ballads from LGF.

I find it so incredibly disengenious that you wish murderous wrath onto these people, the same wrath you despise in them.

307 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 7:24:44am

#302 zaza

Let's see... terrorism has always been rewarded by the international community, and is the only kind of behavior with this particular track record. So of course, it's a bad tactic that doesn't work, you are saying?

NOT opposing terrorism has led to MORE terrorism. Opposing terrorism with non-violent means does not work. What is left? Military means, and terrorist tactics. Both have been proven to work and to stop terrorism. One is cheaper than the other. And for moral reasons I am opposed to the cheaper method. I blame this moral restraint on brainwashing.

Is there anything here you don't understand?

#303 zaza

The only sentence out of context is (by accident, I'm sure) the one on which your whole straw man, that I advocate terrorism as the only way to fight terrorism, is built.

Now, back to the point...

I posit that terrorism is now an internationally accepted tactic.

I went through a short explanation of what I mean by "accepted" in #298, and a description of what are terrorist tacticts in #297. Are there any more words you need me to define before you tell me if you agree or not with this point, Ms Clinton?

308 Marianne  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 7:25:44am
4/ I believe in "due process", but I notice it doesn't work (liberation of known terrorists for example).

I doubt you got THAT mistaken idea while working as a ranch hand in Wyoming. Releasing terrorists on a politically motivated whim is not due process but the antithesis of due process. It's arbitrary and capricious.

Signed,

Josh [/kidding]

309 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 7:29:12am

#305 Marianne

Israeli law, which has copied the definition from the 1948 Geneva conventions :-(

310 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 7:33:08am

#308 Marianne

The long version is, due process only works as long as there is no extra-legal pressure to release convincted prisoners. This includes kidnapping people to force the liberation, hudnas, U.S. pressure to "support Mazen" and other assorted bullshit. Decades of this kind of pressure have proven that due process against terrorists is a losing proposal.

311 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 8:06:00am

#307 Mr Pol: no, now I'm totally baffled, and no thanks, I'm not a "Ms", and I don't know what I said that could possibly be Clintonian, but thanks for the laugh there. So, if I understand what you're saying now, after saying all this (minus #94 which I'm not sure why was out of context and used by me as a straw man, but I believe you!!!, if you say so, I really really do):

- in #261: The second action is terrorism, and is also the cheapest way to break their will.

- in #179: we both know the fastest and cheapest way to stop the conflict is to use terrorism against the Arabs, but we just aren't able to do it.

in #277: In the context of the Israeli-Arab conflict, resorting to terrorism would allow Israel to win the war by breaking the will of the enemy populations. -- Terrrorism is the cheapest way to destroy a population's will. -- Between Judaism and literally decades of PC brainwashing, even the most ruthless right-wing elements of Israeli society refuse to resort to terrorism ...the most efficient weapon at its disposal.

in #285: Terrorism works, is internationally accepted, but we are being restrained by PC brainwashing from using it. Do you agree with this? If not, please explain why.

in #289: To stop terrorism, terrorist tactics are the cheapest effective weapon available. I notice you didn't give me any alternative.

ok, now, after saying ALL that, you're telling me that you're *not* really arguing terrorism is a solution? and that your lack of support is based on moral reasons and PC brainwashing, which you blame, and of which you consider yourself a victim too?

Can I say, baffling?

And secondly: what on earth is this discussion about then?

Thirdly: ......

....

....oh well, nevermind.

Are there any more words you need me to define before you tell me if you agree or not with this point

You know, that insistence reminds me of Gordon when he kept asking what I thought of Kosovo, or if I agreed with genocide, and like I said to him, I don't answer anyone's trap questions.

I don't care how you or the Geneva convention defines terrorism, we all know what it means, and to me its not moral grounds primarily that make me object to it.

In any case, all right, all right, answers (again, for the 800th time): no, no, no, no, and - short ad break - no. I don't agree to *anything* of what you say and the way you say it cos I don't share your ideas and definitions of anything; and no, I don't agree to any of those terrorist tactics, whoever defines them or accepts them or implements them in whichever ways.

Escalation of terrorism into a colossal orgy of reciprocal massacres is not my idea of solution to terrorism.

Just like space settlements is not my idea of solution to overpopulation.

But, that doesn't mean anything. You're obviously right on everything, oh Major Pol. Really, you are. I'll eagerly await until Israelis, Americans, the entire world follows your wise advice, then perhaps I'll be less baffled, or not. But it won't matter anyway.

Good luck!

..."take your protein pills and put your helmet on"...

312 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 8:22:24am

#311 zaza

You quote:

#179: we both know the fastest and cheapest way to stop the conflict is to use terrorism against the Arabs, but we just aren't able to do it.

then you quote from #277

Between Judaism and literally decades of PC brainwashing, even the most ruthless right-wing elements of Israeli society refuse to resort to terrorism.

and you have the gall to ask me what this discussion is about? I do have a three-letter answer, but it's sexist and un-PC. Maybe next time if you read what I wrote you wouldn't need tens of posts to understand?

Now of course, as you said, you don't care what I say. You are just interested in hurling insults, distorting what I say, putting words in my mouth, and overall making an ass of yourself, including by refusing to bring the whole discussion off line when I proposed it.

...worst case of PMS I ever saw...

313 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 8:55:22am

#312 Mr Pol: applauses, applauses. I'm not a female, by the way, so no PMS and no taking offence at insults on my part. What's your excuse instead?

You are totally unbelievable really. I did undersand and read what you argued there, Pol. I'm not twisting anything. I'm not saying you are advocating anything either. But you are eeling in and out of an argument that is all about how terrorism would crush terrorists, but somehow you're not approving it cos it's immoral, yet berating "the PC bullshit and moralism" that makes you not approve it, and then berate me for not taking any of that convoluted self-contradictory crap.

Unreal, really.

314 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 9:15:05am

ah - last thing, Mr Kurtz:

by refusing to bring the whole discussion off line when I proposed it.

Indeed, I refuse, cos I don't understand why really you should want to take it offline. If you start a discussion on a forum, you follow it on a forum. It's not like it's off topic, or about personal stuff. It's about terrorism and counter-terrorism.

You want to let your ideas unchallenged? don't post them. Simple. Not whine when your views are criticised, and ask to take it all offline please.

Oh, and the "what is this about then" is sarcasm, referred to your contradictory statements on what you said or didn't say. I understood your point quite well, don't worry. I explained why I think it's all insane, cos its not just morals restraining governments or people from adopting terrorism as counter-terrorism tactic, but sanity, which implies thinking of what adopting that strategy would lead to, disadvantages and advantages; whereas, the former you claim are not there, and the latter, you take for granted without explaining them, and meanwhile you keep ignoring the suicidal nature of the present Islamic terrorism, and the martyrdom cult of Islamic propaganda, which defeats your idea of "crushing the will". Instead of responding to those objections, you choose to modify your own position, go back to what was not the point of discussion, and then shift this to a personal flame war, which I'm not interested in.

So, in that sense, I gotta ask, what was the point?

I'd much rather you'd have gone for insults, and right away, cos then I wouldn't have wasted time trying to find a iota of reasonableness in your arguments. That's all.

315 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 9:20:19am

#314 zaza

Going for insults, indeed... Rich, coming from you.

Well, I see you have taken the position Conventbabe unwillingly vacated.

Have a nice life.

316 zaza  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 9:34:27am
Well, I see you have taken the position Conventbabe unwillingly vacated.

LOL... so true, so true. Thanks, and you too, Mr Pol, have a most wonderful life, and many other happy things.

317 zulubaby  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 12:14:28pm

zaza (#313)

I'm not a female, by the way, so no PMS and no taking offence at insults on my part.

What!? zaza, forgive me, but I thought you were a woman?

318 Marianne  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 3:33:08pm

Mr. Pol,

This conversation-by-Internet is very odd. I'm trying to pick up a conversation that ended hours ago. Hope you find this post, but if not, that's OK:

Re: Item 1 -- I'm not familiar with Israeli law, nor with the Geneva conventions. But I find it very hard to believe that masked gunmen, marching en masse in the street in a show of force, are legally protected from military attack. Are you quite sure of what you say?

Re: Item 2 - initially you identified this item as "collective punishment." (I've assumed that "collective punishment" denotes curfews, bulldozing of homes, etc). I said, there would not even be an issue of "collective punishment" if Israel simply drove the enemy out of Judea and Samaria. You replied:

Driving the population out of Gaza, Judea and Samara by force would be effectively a terrorist tactics.

Actually, I don't advocate driving out the "population," but rather, driving out the "enemy." There's a difference. -- Or if there is no difference, if every member of the "population" is armed and attacking you, then there is no "terrorism" involved in driving them out.

What I advocate is basically the same as your Item Number 5 - annex Judea and Samaria, and this time, keep it, it's yours. Don't cede political control with another Oslo Accords, don't allow Arafat to run his gangs of thugs from bases there, etc. That's all.

If I lived in Israel, I would support the Elon Plan. You don't think that's terrorism, do you?

I enjoyed the discussion. Hope I do not seem too bloodthirsty. (Where's Gordon?! He should be here to accuse me of genocidal hatred, or something like that, sooner or later)

319 Jubelum  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 8:53:26pm

I have long advocated, on the Netscape Terrorism Board, that self-identification & whacking is the best way to deal with Terrorists. Allowing this opportunity to pass is a great tragedy! Let us learn from it and improve our conduct in the future!!!
Shoot Sheik Ahmed Jassin in the balls. Thousands of demon spawn will march in his funeral procession. Bomb and strafe them!! Usher the maximum possible number into Hell. Follow suit with each of their funeral processions and every demonstration that will surely follow!!!

320 Mr Pol  Sat, Aug 23, 2003 9:03:11pm

#318 Marianne

Re: Item 1 -- I'm not familiar with Israeli law, nor with the Geneva conventions. But I find it very hard to believe that masked gunmen, marching en masse in the street in a show of force, are legally protected from military attack. Are you quite sure of what you say?

Yes, I am. That is the reason the IDF has not targeted those crowds.

Actually, I don't advocate driving out the "population," but rather, driving out the "enemy." There's a difference. -- Or if there is no difference, if every member of the "population" is armed and attacking you, then there is no "terrorism" involved in driving them out.

There is a small problem with that: how do you tell them apart? The answer is that only the Arabs themselves can, and they won't, because they are more scared of the terrorists than of Israel. So either we drive everybody out, or we allow everybody to stay.

If I lived in Israel, I would support the Elon Plan. You don't think that's terrorism, do you?

The 7-points Elon Plan is a nice utopia. Point #2 calls for the forcible removal of all terrorists and all weapons from Yesha. Great. See above...

321 Marianne  Sun, Aug 24, 2003 3:29:51am

Mr. Pol,

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my belated post. These specific questions about specific tactics are truly not for me to decide, but rather, they are for Israeli citizens to decide for themselves. In general, again, I really do not worry about Israel being too brutal, but about her being too restrained -- just as I worry about the U.S. doing far too little in the face of the worldwide Jihadist threat. But whatever Israel does, I will support her, for she is a sister democracy.

Thanks again and take care.

322 Invective Gravitas  Sun, Aug 24, 2003 5:33:03pm

LGF is the antithesis of patriotism. You are the bloodspring of rabid nationalism.

In 1776, you would have lynched our forefathers for wanting Liberty, away from the Crown.

You are the Crown kissers and the little thinkers.

You are a cancer destroying the United States. You are the evil that seeps from the ground. Your ilk loved McKinley. McCarthy. Wallace. And now you love Bush.

Your tiny lives fill this weblog with hatred, blood lust and religious flatulance.

But, while you will pass quietly like the dinosaurs before you, progressive ideals and a truth in humanity will persevere. Like Jefferson. FDR. Martin Luther King.

There is pity towards the sputtering bits of your weblog, but only for the peripheral lives that you disgust. Otherwise, just keep digging a hole : you'll soon see just how close to Hell you're standing.

323 Charles  Sun, Aug 24, 2003 5:58:58pm

Ah! Words of encouragement from a metafilter kiddie, posting from Texas! Music to my ears!

Love you too! Smooch.

324 zulubaby  Sun, Aug 24, 2003 9:25:00pm

LOL! Charles, that has to be your best post ever!

325 Arctan Talematros  Mon, Aug 25, 2003 11:44:55am

Here is an idea. Next sucide strike on Israel, the Israeli
government destroys the Dome of the Rock, and
takes the temple mount. Considering the islamic
symbolism inherent in that site, its destruction would
send quite a message to Hamas, and the like. I doubt
it would stop the attacks, but the destruction of the
mosques would curb the demogogues who encourage
the terror attacks. Simply look at Iraq. Where were the
weapons being made? The mosques. Any hinderace to
the sucide bombers is a huge benefit to Israel. The UN
would raise hell over it, but they aren't on Israel's side,
and I can't recall what they have ever done for the
nation. The real enemy of Israel is the whole Islamic culture. Especially in the Middle East, where it is practiced in its

326 Arctan Talematros  Mon, Aug 25, 2003 12:01:37pm

Continued From Above

pure form. (Yes, the Islam of the US is heavily bleached and refined.) A religion that mandates 'convert or die' is not a religion of peace. Not only in Israel, but also in Africa, where Islamics openly
hunt and slaughter Christians and Jews, with government approval. (that specifically being Sudan)
The only great islam of peace and achievement I have seen is the one that the text books speak of. Unfortunately, those are our American textbooks. Somewhat of a self defeating practice, isn't it?


This entry has been archived.
Comments are closed.

^ back to top ^

log in
Name:
Pass:

Register Forgot Your Password? My Account Re-send Confirmation (To log in, cookies must be enabled in your browser!)

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► LGF Hits

► Slideshows

► Resources

► Never Forget

► Statistics

► Tag Cloud

► Contact

You must have Javascript enabled to use the contact form.
Your email:

Subject:

Message:


Messages may be published in our weblog, unless you request otherwise.
Tech Note:
Using the Contact Form

► News/Opinion

Apple iTunes
More Partners

Compare Electricity Prices in your area. Texas Electricity is deregulated; you have the right to choose Texas Electric Rates from among many Texas Electric Companies.

We don't feel like satan.


Save $5 off $50 at Kmart with code KMART5OFF50
Limited Time Offer:  FREE $10 Online Gift Certificate with $100 Gift Card Purchase!