Israel- What is up with these folks?

[twowaybro]

Sorry 4 jumping off topic here but with all the madness being perpetrated by Israel as of late i just have 2 rant 4 a second. This government has taken idiocy, cruelty and hatred 2 a whole new level. They r constantly in violation of international law in their geo-strategic policies and this is only fostered and allowed 2 prevail with the help of us in the West( US and Britain). These people are dangerously close to igniting a spark that will usher in perilous times in that region and dare i say the world. Personally, i think that this current round of violence on Israels' part is aimed at provoking Iran into conflict and thereby giving them an excuse to take out Iran's nuclear facilities. This would b a geo-political mistake in my opinion and the West must apply pressure on the Israeli regime not 2 pursue this course of action. The consequences of such a move r 2 dire 2 even contemplate. Who has granted these people the right 2 determine the future of another sovereign state? How long will the powerful Israeli lobby hold US foreign policy hostage? As occupiers on stolen land one would think that reason would dictate 2 the Israeli regime that the only rational course of action 4 peace in this region is through negotiation and a back down of open hostility and continued occupation and oppression. The Palestinian people have a right 2 statehood and self-determination and as 2 who and how they will b governed. How long will the world stand by and watch this travesty of justice continue....hmmm??? 8) 8)

[twowaybro]

if not for israel this world would be a scary fuckin place...thank fuckin god theres someone with brains and balls moitoring the nasty fuckin people all around them...u know its politically correct to say all men and stuff are created equal, but theyre not, some people are fuckin animals

...spoken like a true racist idiot and warmonger. If this is the prevalent attitude of the average Israeli citizen(which i dont believe is the case as polls show) then no wonder there is continued violence in that region and resentment on the part of the average Palestinian towards Israel. 8) 8)

[suckseed]

Now wait a minute, j. Are you not willing to consider that these people's leaders have been described by some soldiers as basically being a middle eastern version of southern baptists here? Crotchety old fuckers frowning upon alcohol and dancing? Just hanging on to a very old religious/cultural way of thought/life because they have so much resistance to change? I firmly believe that anyone, anywhere in the world just basically wants to make a living and live their life. Yes religion can be fucked up nd breed the kind of shit you're talking about - but Not everyone over there is a bloodthirsty asshole. This society has been talked about for years as breeding a hotbed of US/western hatred through its system of terrorist schools. You take a piss-poor person and tell them with all the power of simultaneously religious and government offices and you tell 'em, "These Americans are getting rich off of YOUR oil and killing your people....your country and your God command you to fight!" Well shit, picture telling a bunch of good ole Southern boys the Russians are coming!
OF COURSE these folks are sucking it up. But we can't just kill them. It's not right, it's not necessary, and it's very very doubtful that, even removing these two huge reasons, we even could. Imagine what bombing the fuck out of a middle eastern country would start. Empires have fallen trying to fight everybody.
Look, we're all coming into contact with each other via various media more than has ever been possible. These cultures which have obviously violent ways of settling conflict are just behind the times. We have to be tough with them. That's all they respect. But we can't turn into mass-murderers, rapists, OR lose our constitutional freedoms over this shit. In a way, we're all rats in a cage. The cage isn't getting any bigger, but there's a fuck of a lot of rats. The fighting is over resources. Everything else is just propaganda.
Maybe I'm wrong. But to me the only long term hope is that we learn to live together, not in any Brady Bunch sense of world peace, but just fucking doing business, taking vacations, letting the world markets and immigration stabilize, races continue to intermarry until we're all kinda coffee-and-cream people, and we quit wasting all the money and people fighting over stupid shit. Either that kind of thing happens, or we're gonna see things get a whole lot worse. I get so fucking down thinking about sick hungry kids in piss poor neighborhoods and people suffering. Whatever it is,war, government, religion, people just not giving a shit, I fucking hate it.

[polarstar]

TwoWay, you are beyond ignorant.

Who are the Palestinians? Was there every a nation of Palestine?

NO!

It was a territory England seized from the Ottoman Turks after England won WWI. The Turks held it for almost 600 years prior to that. Before that, it was mostly in Crusader hands. Before that, a succession of nation-states like the Greeks, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Romans, etc. Before that, the Hebrews. Before that, a loose collection of tribes of biblical times: Moabites, Amorites, Hittites, etc.

Do you see "Palestinian" there?

NO! This was NEVER Palestinian land.

Who did Israel take the land from in 1967 (by winning a war the ARAB nations started)? They took the land from Jordan, Egypt, and Syria. Do you see "Palestine" on that list?

NO!

The "Palestinians" of today were Jordanians and Egyptians before they decided to call themselves "Palestinians". You want Israel to give more land back? You know, of course, that they did, when Egypt decided to make peace with them. They'll give it back, but to Jordan or Egypt.

The Arabs of the region were given a 2-state solution, in 1948. And you know what they did with it? They started a fucking war, determined to drive the Israelis into the sea.

They lost that war. They lost every other war they started. They are going to lose this one.

The Arabs of the region don't want peace or a 2-state solution. They won't stop until they have destroyed Israel. It's not out of concern for the "Palestinians". It's because they hate Jews and want the land.

Get a fucking grip!!!!

[suckseed]

What I was talking about was our relationship with Iraq or Muslims. I'm not qualified to make an intelligent guess at what's going on with Israel and Palestine. What's the situation there? Educate me. It's the same thing with India/Palestine. It's a fucking stupid religious thing that won't let go. What the fuck is it going to take to change things? Are the Palestinians violent to a person? Or is it just a minority?

[suckseed]

You tell us, Fabiane. What's the solution to the middle east crisis? And what's a cute little thing like you doing double anal?

[Quinn]

I figured it was only a matter of time until someone posted on this topic. That said, let's look at some facts:

1. Arab citizens of Israel, who makeup roughly 20 percent of its population, have more rights and greater representation (Arab Democratic Party, etc.) in the Jewish state than they do under any Arab regime. Note. I’m not talking about non-Israeli citizens in Gaza and the West Bank.

2. Israel is, and has long been, the only true democracy in the Middle East. Turkey has never been a true democracy in that the military steps in every time it sees something it doesn’t like. Iran is anything but a democracy because the Islamic Guardian Council must approve any candidate before they can for office. Not surprisingly, it tends to bar moderate and liberal candidates from running. Lebanon’s political process has always been controlled by Syria. Despite recent efforts by the Lebanese people to achieve greater political independence, Syrian intelligence agents – who are everywhere in Syria – still strongly influence the political process. Egypt, with its president for life, is a dictatorship with the only the thinnest veneer of democracy. Iraq is still a new democracy and not a functionally sovereign/independent entity despite claims to the contrary). The rest of the states not mentioned are all monarchies and dictatorships with extreme authoritarian tendencies. So there you have it, not one fucking democracy in the Middle East for decades, except the state of Israel.

3. There are more new books published each year in the tiny state of Israel than the rest of the Middle East combined. This shows you the cultural difference between what is produced in the region's only democracy and its ubiquitous authoritarian regimes.

4. Palestine means "Land of the Philistines." The Philistines were a colony of Mycenean Greeks who fought against the ancient Israelites. The Philistines are no longer there, the people of Israel still are (despite the occasional deportation). In fact, their presence in the region predates by a substantial time period both Islam and anything that could be considered a recognizable Arab culture – at least in the sense of the word "Arab" as we know it today.

5. As previously noted, today’s Palestinians are mostly Egyptians and Jordanians, not a culturally distinct people. Still, if you really want to look for a “Palestinian State,” you don’t need to look any further than Jordan, a state with a 70% Palestinian population

6. In the last ten or so years, Israel has gone to great lengths to make peace with its aggressive neighbors:

A. Under Ehud Barak, Arafat and the Palestinians were offered peace on the terms that they had long claimed would be necessary for a lasting peace with Israel. Despite this, Arafat refused peace. When asked by then President Clinton “how he could be so stupid,” Arafat is reported to have replied “I can’t; they’ll kill me.” He was referring to small hard line elements within his own party who wanted the conflict to continue indefinitely, not matter what terms were offered

B. Hezbollah had long claimed that the only reason for its existence was the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. It’s leadership had always stated that once Israel withdrew, it could disband. Under Ehud Barak, Israel withdrew from said territory. Not surprisingly, Hezbollah is still there, attacking Israel. Their new justification has been to claim that the Sheba Farms – territory that every nation on the planet, including the Lebanese government, and the UN agree belongs to Syria – rightfully belongs to Lebanon (a claim that Hezbollah only made after Israel withdrew from Lebanon). As such, according to Hezbollah, Israel is still occupying Lebanon. Fucking ridiculous.

C. Syria had long claimed that if Israel would return the Golan Heights, it would make peace with Israel. Once again, under Ehud Barak, Israel offered the return of the Golan Heights. The Syrians countered by stating that, not only did they want the return of all of their original land, but they also wanted new land that Syria had never owned. Not surprisingly, peace talks broke down.

In each of the three aforementioned instances, Israel agreed to meet longstanding and often stated Arab terms for peace, only to have new demands put in place or simply to have peace refused without any explanation at all. Given that the Arabs started the 48, 67, and 73 wars, why should this come as a surprise?

-Quinn

[Socal19842001]

I don't really find it necessary to state a political opinion when I'd be responding to someone who types the number "2" instead of "to."

[InHouston]

TwoWay, you are beyond ignorant.

Who are the Palestinians? Was there every a nation of Palestine?

NO!

It was a territory England seized from the Ottoman Turks after England won WWI. The Turks held it for almost 600 years prior to that. Before that, it was mostly in Crusader hands. Before that, a succession of nation-states like the Greeks, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Romans, etc. Before that, the Hebrews. Before that, a loose collection of tribes of biblical times: Moabites, Amorites, Hittites, etc.

Do you see "Palestinian" there?

NO! This was NEVER Palestinian land.

Who did Israel take the land from in 1967 (by winning a war the ARAB nations started)? They took the land from Jordan, Egypt, and Syria. Do you see "Palestine" on that list?

NO!

The "Palestinians" of today were Jordanians and Egyptians before they decided to call themselves "Palestinians". You want Israel to give more land back? You know, of course, that they did, when Egypt decided to make peace with them. They'll give it back, but to Jordan or Egypt.

The Arabs of the region were given a 2-state solution, in 1948. And you know what they did with it? They started a fucking war, determined to drive the Israelis into the sea.

They lost that war. They lost every other war they started. They are going to lose this one.

The Arabs of the region don't want peace or a 2-state solution. They won't stop until they have destroyed Israel. It's not out of concern for the "Palestinians". It's because they hate Jews and want the land.

Get a fucking grip!!!!

:claps Well said!

Israel didn't start this as you would have it TwoWayBro. Hezbollah has been sitting on the northern border of Israel with their rockets poised directly at Israeli cities for some time now. The Israeli's knew it because, unlike you, they're informed about the situation around them as a result of vigilant intelligence. Your ranting post clearly demonstrates that you have little understanding about the conflict in the region. Israel is completely surrounded by enemies. When one of them stages an attack from a neighboring country, you can bet Israel will respond harshly against that country if their government will not thwart the problem themselves. If militants in Canada lobbed rockets over the border into an American city, you can bet that America (any country) would respond back viciously to make it clear to the perpetrators that such actions will not go unpunished.

When you have Muslims against Jews, there is no “Roadmap to Peace”. There is only the “Roadmap to Damascus and Tehran”.

Get a clue TwoWayBro.

[blackandblue]

Goodness me! I would have to go a long way to read such rubbish! All the way to the 'Good ole USA'.

Let's see;

1.
"Arab citizens of Israel, who makeup roughly 20 percent of its population, have more rights and greater representation (Arab Democratic Party, etc.) in the Jewish state than they do under any Arab regime. Note. I’m not talking about non-Israeli citizens in Gaza and the West Bank."

What does this mean exactly?

Here's another take on the situation;
Founded in 1988 by Abdel Wahab Daroushe, a former Labor Party Knesset member, the Arab Democratic Party (ADP) won one seat in 1988 Knesset elections and 2 in the 1992 elections. Its platform focuses on achievement of full equality for Israeli Arabs and on full Israeli withdraw from the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, as well as the establishment of a Palestinian state. In 1996 and 1999, Daroushe agreed to participate in a joint electoral list with Islamic groups.


In other words, Israeli Arabs are not considered equal to Israeli Jews in Israel. It's written into their 'constitution'.

2.
Israel is, and has long been, the only true democracy in the Middle East.

If the Israeli Arabs are not considered equal, it is not a "True Democracy" Full stop.

3.
"There are more new books published each year in the tiny state of Israel than the rest of the Middle East combined. This shows you the cultural difference between what is produced in the region's only democracy and its ubiquitous authoritarian regimes."

It is entirely possible that if the Arab countries were not kept in a constant stae of turmoil by certain western countries in cahoots with 'Israel', they could use their resources elsewhere.
But Israel and the USA love to develop and sell weapons.

Read the latest? U.S. vetoes U.N. resolution against Israel
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-07-13-us-un-veto_x.htm

That must be close to the seventieth(that is correct, 70) time that the USA has vetoed a resolution against Israel.

Why do you think that could be? Is everyone but the USA and Israel wrong? No one could be so stupid as to believe that. Do you?

Yet, they are VERY keen to enforce UN resolutions against others.


I'm not USA bashing(in this case). Just hoping at least a few people will step back and ask themselves a few questions.


4.
"Palestine means "Land of the Philistines." The Philistines were a colony of Mycenean Greeks who fought against the ancient Israelites. The Philistines are no longer there, the people of Israel still are (despite the occasional deportation). In fact, their presence in the region predates by a substantial time period both Islam and anything that could be considered a recognizable Arab culture – at least in the sense of the word "Arab" as we know it today."

What has this got to do with anything?

You're conveniently forgetting to mention how the state of Israel was created by terrorism. Yes, Menachem Begin was a terrorist. Do a Google search if you don't believe me.
A Jewish minority was transformed into a Jewish majority. I don't know of too many people who would tolerate that situation.

5.
"As previously noted, today’s Palestinians are mostly Egyptians and Jordanians, not a culturally distinct people. Still, if you really want to look for a “Palestinian State,” you don’t need to look any further than Jordan, a state with a 70% Palestinian population"

If those figures are correct, could that be something to do with the fact that Jordan absorbed a substantial amount of the people fleeing from Israeli terrorism?

Again, look at the facts;
"Since the return of over 300,000 Palestinians from Kuwait in 1991, between 45% and 70% of all Jordanians are Palestinians from the West Bank. Although Palestinians suffer from discrimination and a large number still live in camps, Jordan has granted full citizenship to the Palestinian refugees and their descendents."
"About 3 million persons registered as Palestinian refugees and displaced persons reside in Jordan, most as citizens."

So what is Quinn's point?

6.
"6. In the last ten or so years, Israel has gone to great lengths to make peace with its aggressive neighbors:

A. Under Ehud Barak, Arafat and the Palestinians were offered peace on the terms that they had long claimed would be necessary for a lasting peace with Israel. Despite this, Arafat refused peace. When asked by then President Clinton “how he could be so stupid,” Arafat is reported to have replied “I can’t; they’ll kill me.” He was referring to small hard line elements within his own party who wanted the conflict to continue indefinitely, not matter what terms were offered"

This just pure cr*p.

An excerpt from Wikipedia;
"Clayton Swisher, who was present at the summit, rebuts the conventional wisdom about it in The Truth About Camp David (http://www.lewrockwell.com/wanniski/wanniski36.html). Swisher, a young scholar based in Washington, attempts to approach Camp David objectively and concludes that the Israelis and the Americans were at least as guilty as the Palestinians for the collapse. MJ Rosenberg of Israel Policy Forum, a pro-Israel think-tank in Washington, calls Swisher's book "the single best volume we are likely to have on the Camp David failure." Alternative points of view are offered in books by Dennis Ross and by President Clinton himself. Ross and Clinton, who were also both in attendance, place the blame largely on Arafat."

Full article here;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_David_2000_Summit

Also take a look at The Oslo Accords; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords

I think that I have made my point that Quinn's post is full of mis-information, commonly known as propaganda.

It's clearly unreasonable to expect others to research the subject extensively, but anyone who is so keen to perceive one side as evil, whilst the other blameless, can be deemed an extremist and his views safely ignored.

Now we've read Quinn's version of history, consider this version; http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html


Yes, I signed up just to reply to Quinn post. Personally, I found it disgusting.

[suckseed]

I have learned more about this situation in the past 24 hours than my entire life. Thank you guys. I'm ashamed of myself for not checking into this earlier. I guess I tend to be dismissive of long-standing cultural differences because I think fighting over them is stupid. But if what you guys are saying is true, then Israel has a legitimacy I've never understood. So, what is the thinking on, again, what percentage of the Arabs are hard-liners? And what are some sources you trust to get your information for those of us who'd like to be informed?

[blackandblue]

If you are serious suckseed, I can assure you that the one-sided rantings of some of the posters here are purely a 'comic book' or 'Fox News' version of history.

The Cactus48 link I have provided will give you a overview of the situation.

[gbert52]

I heartily agree with you Quinn, & you B&B, are the one buying into the propaganda. You can nitpick any of Quinns line items, but by & large, they are correct.
The israeli arabs do have more rights than arabs in any arab country,
Israel is way closer to a true democracy than any other arab country,
your garbage about all the arab countries being kept in a constant state of turmoil is just idiotic,
the state of Israel was not created by terrorism- please learn your history
Yes, Israel HAS gone to great lengths to try to secure peace and each & every time, the peace has been interrupted by the Arabs- it's their clear & stated goal to wipe Isreal off the face of the map

I'd also like to add that what is also clear is that the arab leaders in all arab countries are purposely fanning the fires of hatred of Israel. That way they can keep the man on the street uneducated, poor and completely under their control. They are succeeding quite well.

[blackandblue]

Dear gbert52

Just because you have repeated, 'parrot fashion' what Quinn had written, doesn't make it correct.

Rather than simply repeating inaccuracies, why not post the sources to your information, as I have done?

I can guarantee that you did not read any of the Cactus48 article that I posted.

Now why wouldn't you do so? Could it be that you think that you know everything about the conflict or is it that you are incapable of reading and analyzing new information.

Please, quote your sources.

As an aside, I know many people from the UAE are doing quite nicely thank you. They certainly are not treated as second class citizens as they are in Israel.

[suckseed]

well, I guess I'm the 'man in the street' here in the US. Fairly apolitical. Buying into the idea that 'to withdraw in disgust is not the same as apathy.' I voted Nader/Laduke a few years ago, and spent my youthful energy campaigning for environmental issues when I lived in Colorado. I don't identify myself with any political affiliation. I don't want to date Hilary or Ann Colter.
I'd like to ask those who've been active on this thread whether they feel they've come to their understanding of the situation reasonably open-minded to begin with.
If I have any communication skills, it's that I try to put things in plain terms, and see both sides of a situation.
B & B's points have taken the wind out my sails a bit about feeling like I understand. I'm going to actually research this on my own. I'll post here later with questions. Hopefully there are at least things that can be verified. Otherwise, if it's going to remain a matter of opinion like religious debates, I'm going back to playing my guitar.

[twowaybro]

Aight, i c that HA has a large pro-Israel following and thats cool...im more than comfortable being in the minority and on the side of right. And "right" in this instance is not being pro-palestinian but pro-truth. Most of the stated "facts" above r very much uninformed and full of half-truths. Nothing but the regirgitated party line sung in the West 2 legitimize a grave injustice and illegal occupation. The first thing that must b understood when viewing this issue is that this modern zionist "state" of Israel was thrust upon this region using a biblical myth and a need 4 a common homeland and an escape from oppression as it's justification. Wave upon wave of foreigners migrating there setting up camp with a profoundly different cultural/philosophical worldview. And from the very onset, looked at and treated the inhabitants they found there, be they "palestinians", jordanians, egyptians, arabs or whatever, with disdain and animosity. Originally they were offered the Congo as a homeland and i thank The Supreme Being 2 this day that this didnt happen. The Congo would have experienced yet another ruthless and brutal colonizer. When virtually the whole world(including the US) had imposed sanctions on the brutal South African Aparthied regime the Zionist government of Israel was one of the few who continued 2 do business and offer economic and military support 2 that government. So, we can readily deduce from that what would have happened had they accepted the offer of land in the Congo. When analyzing a problem one must try and resolve/understand its origin/genesis. Get 2 the root. Anything acquired through force and injustice must in essence tip the karmic scales 2 where one reaps the same force and injustice that one has sown. A simple law. Cause and effect. To look at one's responce 2 overt oppression in the face of overwhelming military and economic superiority and call it the action of "terrorists" and "animals" is seeing reality through clouded glasses. Power concedes nothing without a demand. And let us not 4get that ur "founding fathers" were once seen in the same light by their former colonizers. Bottom line....Israel from its illegal inception has violated international law and the human rights of those they encountered in that region. THEY set the stage 4 this continuing cycle of violence. And no, im not "anti-semitic"...i have lively debates with friends and co-workers of the Jewish faith all the time; however, there is a distinct difference between Judaism and the people of the Jewish faith and the Zionists who control the Israeli government and its geo-strategic policies. And those policies r about 2 open up a deadly and perilous can of worms 4 that region and the world. How sad and tragic this whole thing is 2 witness. At the end of the day as someone intimated above it is all about control of resources and the vast energy reserves of that region. And i still feel that this current violence is aimed at provoking Iran through attacking Hezbollah and threatening Syria and not about Israeli self defence. Believe me Hezbollah and the Palestinians in Gaza have nowhere near the capacity or capability of seriously threatening Israel as a nation. Thats a joke. No, they have their eyes on a much bigger perceived threat in Iran. So, yes, im in the minority here but this is how i c it and i believe justly so. And to J....3way?..hahaha...not hardly son, u and noone else has ripped nothing here. 8) 8)

[blackandblue]

Who would agree with my definition of an intelligent person as someone who accepts the possibility that he/she could be wrong?

Surely the people who think they have the definitive story are closer to the definition of fools?

I think there's a possibility that either someone has swallowed the clever propaganda, is stupidly racist or is just stupid, in order to believe the Israelis are simply victims of undeserved Arab hostility.

So please, instead of 'sound bites', read the Cactus48 article and then come back with comment.

At least then we can have an intelligent debate.

[gbert52]

Dear B&B,

Once again you're wrong. I did read a good chunk of the Cactus 48 article. Nothing particularly new here. As far as quoting my sources, I'm not going to spend umteen hours looking up sources for you. Documentation to argue any side you'd like is readily available. Just look at your documentation.
Might I suggest that the people you know from the UAE are part of the problem, not the solution. As a westerner, try walking down a street in Egypt. You'll have a following of beggars in no time.

[twowaybro]

Black and Blue,
Thanks 4 posting that Cactus48 link...but in this environment i doubt it will do much good. Most folks opinions r already made up and heavily influenced by the pro-israel corporate media.

[blackandblue]

Dear gbert52

Either you are a very busy person or that was a very poor attempt at a debate.

Allow me to quote you; "Nothing particularly new here"

May I suggest that history isn't supposed to be new?

The point was to read it, point out what you disagreed with and why you disagreed with it.
In addition, posting your sources would allow the reader to ascertain the likelyhood of bias.

It's interesting that you point out that there are sides.
In fact, I am only interested in the truth. Are you?

As to your other comments; What have beggars in Egypt got to do with the UAE? The word is 'Umpteen'.

[blackandblue]

That Rupert Murdoch is happy to support whoever agrees to support him.

[twowaybro]

J, keep talking my man. 4 the more u talk the more u expose 2 all here the racist and idiot that u r. And that u speak from emotion and not reason and intellect and accurate historical data. "All arabs and muslims are animals"....this is ur belief irregardless of the Israel argument. Just b honest. 8) 8)

[Quinn]

Goodness me! I would have to go a long way to read such rubbish! All the way to the 'Good ole USA'.
Interesting way to begin a debate. That said, allow me to respond to your selective, ahistorical interpretation of the facts.



Arab citizens of Israel, who makeup roughly 20 percent of its population, have more rights and greater representation (Arab Democratic Party, etc.) in the Jewish state than they do under any Arab regime. Note. I’m not talking about non-Israeli citizens in Gaza and the West Bank." What does this mean exactly?

Here's another take on the situation;
Founded in 1988 by Abdel Wahab Daroushe, a former Labor Party Knesset member, the Arab Democratic Party (ADP) won one seat in 1988 Knesset elections and 2 in the 1992 elections. Its platform focuses on achievement of full equality for Israeli Arabs and on full Israeli withdraw from the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, as well as the establishment of a Palestinian state. In 1996 and 1999, Daroushe agreed to participate in a joint electoral list with Islamic groups.

In other words, Israeli Arabs are not considered equal to Israeli Jews in Israel. It's written into their 'constitution'.

The Arab Democratic Party was used as a single example of the fact that Arabs have more rights in a Jewish state than they do in any of their own nations. Regarding this, Wikipedia states the following:

Israeli Arabs are full citizens of the State of Israel, with equal protection under the law, and full rights of due process. Unlike Jewish citizens, they cannot be drafted into the Israeli army, but they may serve voluntarily. There are currently nine Israeli Arabs sitting as members of the 17th Knesset out of a total of 120 seats, and there is one Arab judge, Justice Salim Jubran, sitting in the Supreme Court of Israel. Ariel Sharon's 2001 cabinet included one Israeli Arab minister, Salah Tarif, and in March 2005, Oscar Abu Razaq was appointed Director General of the Ministry of Interior. Arabic is one of Israel's official languages.



Israel is, and has long been, the only true democracy in the Middle East. If the Israeli Arabs are not considered equal, it is not a "True Democracy" Full stop.

First off, your inability to name a single Arab or Middle Eastern democracy, outside of Israel, is duly noted. Second, given that your previous point, upon which this point depends, has been proven a farce, I think we can just disregard this one as well.



There are more new books published each year in the tiny state of Israel than the rest of the Middle East combined. This shows you the cultural difference between what is produced in the region's only democracy and its ubiquitous authoritarian regimes." It is entirely possible that if the Arab countries were not kept in a constant stae of turmoil by certain western countries in cahoots with 'Israel', they could use their resources elsewhere.
But Israel and the USA love to develop and sell weapons.

This point is so ridiculously uninformed that, frankly, I’m not entirely sure how to respond. To being with, the US, to its own discredit, is responsible for shoring up the Gulf Monarchies, Turkey, and Egypt, to name but a few Middle Eastern states. While the US has acted to destabilize states like Lebanon (until recently a Syrian client state), Syria, and Iran, the US (and the West as a whole) has done far more to keep regimes intact and their economies functioning than it has ever done to cause the opposite. Otherwise, we would be threatening the oil upon which Japan and Europe are particularly dependent (much more so than the US).



Palestine means "Land of the Philistines." The Philistines were a colony of Mycenean Greeks who fought against the ancient Israelites. The Philistines are no longer there, the people of Israel still are (despite the occasional deportation). In fact, their presence in the region predates by a substantial time period both Islam and anything that could be considered a recognizable Arab culture – at least in the sense of the word "Arab" as we know it today. What has this got to do with anything?

You're conveniently forgetting to mention how the state of Israel was created by terrorism. Yes, Menachem Begin was a terrorist. Do a Google search if you don't believe me.
A Jewish minority was transformed into a Jewish majority. I don't know of too many people who would tolerate that situation.

What does this have to do with anything? The Arab world frequently claims that the Arabs have a historical right to that land and that the Israelis are simply invaders. As previously noted, the fact is that the people of Israel resided there long before there was ever such a thing as a Muslim or an Arab (in the modern sense of the word). Giving a minority population the right to settle a small parcel of land on which it has both a historical claim and presence is not unreasonable or without international precedent.

So far as early terrorist activities by Israel’s founders are concerned, the activities of the Haganah are well known and not a matter of dispute. They don’t get a pass for it. It is, however, important to note that the Haganah’s terrorist activities were overwhelmingly directed at the British military, not civilians.



As previously noted, today’s Palestinians are mostly Egyptians and Jordanians, not a culturally distinct people. Still, if you really want to look for a “Palestinian State,” you don’t need to look any further than Jordan, a state with a 70% Palestinian population" If those figures are correct, could that be something to do with the fact that Jordan absorbed a substantial amount of the people fleeing from Israeli terrorism?

Again, look at the facts;
"Since the return of over 300,000 Palestinians from Kuwait in 1991, between 45% and 70% of all Jordanians are Palestinians from the West Bank. Although Palestinians suffer from discrimination and a large number still live in camps, Jordan has granted full citizenship to the Palestinian refugees and their descendents."
"About 3 million persons registered as Palestinian refugees and displaced persons reside in Jordan, most as citizens."

So what is Quinn's point? .

So far as the accuracy of the figure is concerned, the most reliable number is 70%. I can cite many supporting sources, but for now let’s stick to just one:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A05E2DA163FF936A25757C0A9619582 60.

As for my point, once again, you seem slow on the uptake. The widely held Arab view that the Palestinians don’t have a homeland is false. If you don’t believe me, why not listen to the late King Hussein:

"Palestine and Jordan were both (by then) under British Mandate, but as my grandfather pointed out in his memoirs, they were hardly separate countries. Transjordan being to the east of the River Jordan, it formed in a sense, the interior of Palestine."
-King Hussein, writing in his Memoirs



In the last ten or so years, Israel has gone to great lengths to make peace with its aggressive neighbors:

A. Under Ehud Barak, Arafat and the Palestinians were offered peace on the terms that they had long claimed would be necessary for a lasting peace with Israel. Despite this, Arafat refused peace. When asked by then President Clinton “how he could be so stupid,” Arafat is reported to have replied “I can’t; they’ll kill me.” He was referring to small hard line elements within his own party who wanted the conflict to continue indefinitely, not matter what terms were offered". This just pure cr*p.

An excerpt from Wikipedia;
"Clayton Swisher, who was present at the summit, rebuts the conventional wisdom about it in The Truth About Camp David (http://www.lewrockwell.com/wanniski/wanniski36.html). Swisher, a young scholar based in Washington, attempts to approach Camp David objectively and concludes that the Israelis and the Americans were at least as guilty as the Palestinians for the collapse. MJ Rosenberg of Israel Policy Forum, a pro-Israel think-tank in Washington, calls Swisher's book "the single best volume we are likely to have on the Camp David failure." Alternative points of view are offered in books by Dennis Ross and by President Clinton himself. Ross and Clinton, who were also both in attendance, place the blame largely on Arafat." .

To begin with, the fact that you didn’t even attempt to refute the other two widely accepted points is quite telling. So far as your rebuttal to point A is concerned, the fact that you chose to use such poorly supported data – in the face of overwhelming proof to the contrary – reveals your own degree of bias. By any measure, the concessions offered by Israel were tremendous. The incentives offered by the Clinton Administration to induce Arafat to sign were similarly generous. What did Arafat offer? Nothing! His continued demand for “the right of return” would have meant the destruction of Israel. Everyone, including many Arabs, saw it as little more than a ploy to scuttle the talks. Even Nabil Amir, a former minister with the Palestinian Authority blames Arafat for the failure of the talks. Trust me, you really don't want to get into any debate that would require you to defend the criminal ineptitude of Arafat's leaderhip; you will loose – badly.


Yes, I signed up just to reply to Quinn post. Personally, I found it disgusting.

So far as any degree of disgust on your part is concerned, I suggest you reserve it for consideration of your own biased and uninformed point of view. Oh, and just so you know, no one is stating that Israel is completely blameless or that it, as a state, has not committed transgressions of its own (allowing the Sabra and Shatila massacres, etc.). Still, given a choice between a vibrant democracy and a sea of authoritarian (and often fundamentalist) regimes, there is no choice. If you don’t agree, try spending some time in the Middle East, particularly in the Arab states.

-Quinn

P.S. My apologies to everyone for such an incredibly long post, but there just wasn't any more succinct way to make my point.

[chefmike]

obviously im speaking emotionally and trying to make a point...yes, ur right there are some decent, cultured and civil muslims, but by and large theyre overshadowed by the majority of muslims who wouldnt shed a tear if another 6 million were killed...bottom line u have a billion muslims and a few million jews, now take the education level, inventions, arts, everything that these 2 cultures have contributed through out history, it would be a joke to compare them...there is a reason for that no? u cant blame the state of israel for the laughable comparison...its very simple...on one side u have people hell bent on educating their children, promoting justice throughout the world, being a vibrant and cultured people, while the other side is just a fuckin mess..theres no nice way to say it..be honest...u cant blame jews for all the worlds problems..its been done through out history...theres a reason why mlk jr walked to the podium with rabbis accompanying him and not sheiks, theres a reason why every philanthropic organization in the world has jews on its board..why the aclu, regardless of what u think of them, is littered with jews, cmon now..i feel retarded arguing the point...u must be such a rabid anti semite to not see who is right and who is wrong in the middle east...be honest, are u late on ur rent and ur jewish landlord is evicting u? it really seems like it...does it kill u that my grandparents had their entire families wiped out half a century ago, survived, struggled, my dad came to this country with 200 bucks in his pocket yet i went through law school and all my brother and sisters own busineses and million dollar homes...does it kill u???? we didnt get any special dispensation or privilages in this country...nothing..we sturggled, faced discrimination and fought through it and made it...stop blaming people for the problems of the world...look inward...islam is a hatefilled unprogressive backwards system of living that keeps its populace in the dark...how the fuck u expect a civilization to flourish if the women are in beekeeper suits and the whole moral fabric of society is still in the dark ages...cmon...just be fuckin honest, u dont like jews...not many people do...sometimes i dont...but be fuckin honest...israel is half a century old and leading the world in many technology areas and like i said tel aviv is something unrivaled in the middle east with all the fuckin oil, money and people to put it to shame...but theres a reason wh yisraelis drive mercedes, go to the nicest lounges in the world and are a striving people while the billion arabs around them fuck camels...yeah, they do it cause israel is occumpying land....before 1948 they were all in labs, discovring cures for cancer and just living it up..hell u should see how gorgeous the area was before the jews showed up...haha...u fool

Brilliant post, J...while I can understand why, and how great the need is for the law that you once mentioned that you currently practice...I bet that you would make one hell of a defense attorney...or prosecutor for that matter...

EDIT- I think that it's a given that the neocon chickenhawks in the whitehouse will use this as a smokescreen/justification for the fiasco in Iraq...when they should have been focusing on Iran and N Korea, not to mention China...

[blackandblue]

Thanks for your reply, Quinn.

Dear, oh dear, J is not covering himself in glory is he? What an embarrassment.

Anyway, back to the debate.

"Israeli Arabs are full citizens of the State of Israel, with equal protection under the law, and full rights of due process."

That might be the 'official' policy.

Please read this; http://www.globalpolicy.org/nations/citizen/2003/0108israeliarab.htm


Why do I need to name an Arab democracy? Does it justify Israeli actions?


"Otherwise, we would be threatening the oil upon which Japan and Europe are particularly dependent (much more so than the US)."

Clearly you are joking. See how you'd suffer if you had to pay European prices.
The US is happy with anyone who supports it's policies and will do anything to sabotage those that do not.

"So far as early terrorist activities by Israel’s founders are concerned, the activities of the Haganah are well known and not a matter of dispute. They don’t get a pass for it. It is, however, important to note that the Haganah’s terrorist activities were overwhelmingly directed at the British military, not civilians. "




The bombing of the King David Hotel in Palestine on July 22, 1946, which killed 91 persons (mostly civilians) was an Irgun operation in which the Haganah participated.


I'm not quite sure why you are banging on about a Palestinian homeland.
My point is that the population is swelled by millions of refugees. Those refugees have been given Jordanian citizenship. so they are Jordanians. What is your point?


"ineptitude of Arafat's leaderhip; you will loose – badly. " What?

Anyway, I didn't address the other two points because I felt that I had already made my point.

I can take a look at them now if you like.


C.
"Syria had long claimed that if Israel would return the Golan Heights, it would make peace with Israel. Once again, under Ehud Barak, Israel offered the return of the Golan Heights. The Syrians countered by stating that, not only did they want the return of all of their original land, but they also wanted new land that Syria had never owned. Not surprisingly, peace talks broke down."


That's not quite the case. Israel wanted to offer most of the Golan Heights, Syria wanted Israel to draw back to the 1967 borders.(Remember that this is land illegally occupied by Israel)


How would you feel if Canada grabbed the state of Washington and then offered you half of it back on condition that you shut up about it?

You'd capitulate quietly would you?


B.

I don't know that much about Hizbollah, but it's good that the Israelis don't have it all their own way.

They would like everyone to stay quiet while they commit illegality after illegality.

I'm happy that you mention that Israel is not blameless.

Maybe you can make a point of mentioning the large number of UN Security Council resolutions against Israel?

The illegal occupation of land contrary to the terms of the Laws of war, such as the Fourth Geneva Convention?

Either way, I do appreciate your attempts at having a debate. More so than the ridiculous rantings of J and his ilk.

[blackandblue]

J

Obviously, the ability to read isn't one of your strong points.

The first line of Quinn's post reads; "Interesting way to begin a debate. That said, allow me to respond to your selective, ahistorical interpretation of the facts."


Please refrain from aligning yourself with Quinn. At least he attempts to put together a cogent argument.

We may disagree, but he appears to believe in what he writes and at least takes the time and trouble to post clearly and link to sources, at least on occasion.

Your post reminds me of a chimpanzee who has been taught to write.

Resident Ballbuster? More like Resident Idiot.

[blackandblue]

No, it's because what is considered intelligent for a Chimpanzee, isn't considered intelligent for humans.

You appear to have the intelligence of a Chimpanzee.

Chimpanzees, at least, have the redeeming feature of appearing cute and likeable.


If you like anything like the personality you project.....

[blackandblue]

Anyway...time to move on. Only joined as I couldn't let what was written go unchallenged.
Anyone who's interested in in the subject, can check out the cactus48 link that I posted earlier.

So far no one has challenged the articles on partiality or accuracy.
So, it may be a good place to start.

[Quinn]

Israeli Arabs are full citizens of the State of Israel, with equal protection under the law, and full rights of due process. That might be the 'official' policy.

First, you state that “Israeli Arabs are not considered equal to Israeli Jews in Israel. It's written into their 'constitution.’” Now that this has been exposed for the complete falsehood that it is, you want to fall back upon some argument about a theorized unofficial policy – for which you provide scant evidence. Even the article you posted a link to is weak in that its author is complaining that Arab political freedoms are being curtailed because they can’t dispute the essentially democratic and Jewish nature of the state of Israel. So what, they should be allowed to set up an Arab Islamic theocracy in the state of Israel? It’s a ridiculous argument to cover for the fact that your last one so utterly failed.

Once again, my original point stands: Arab citizens of Israel . . . have more rights and greater representation in the Jewish state than they do under any Arab regime.



Otherwise, we would be threatening the oil upon which Japan and Europe are particularly dependent (much more so than the US)."
Clearly you are joking. See how you'd suffer if you had to pay European prices.
The US is happy with anyone who supports it's policies and will do anything to sabotage those that do not.

Fact: Europe and Japan depend upon the Middle East for their oil to a much greater degree than the US (Only 10% of US oil comes from the Persian Gulf, versus 30% of European oil and 80-90% of Japanese oil). This is why the Europeans (particularly the French and British) and Japanese have worked with the US to shore up so many Middle Eastern regimes. Oh, and for what it’s worth, Europeans pay higher prices for their gas because of taxes imposed by their respective governments.



So far as early terrorist activities by Israel’s founders are concerned, the activities of the Haganah are well known and not a matter of dispute. They don’t get a pass for it. It is, however, important to note that the Haganah’s terrorist activities were overwhelmingly directed at the British military, not civilians. "
The bombing of the King David Hotel in Palestine on July 22, 1946, which killed 91 persons (mostly civilians) was an Irgun operation in which the Haganah participated.

Once again, neither condoned nor disputed. What also remains undisputed is the fact that the vast majority of the Haganah’s activities were directed against the British military, not civilians. This incident is widely regarded as an exception, not the rule. This stands into direct contrast to a group like Hamas.


I'm not quite sure why you are banging on about a Palestinian homeland. My point is that the population is swelled by millions of refugees. Those refugees have been given Jordanian citizenship. so they are Jordanians. What is your point?

My point was clearly explained and was then elaborated upon based on a question you posed. If you still don’t get it, perhaps some sort of diagram involving the use of stick figures is in order.



Syria had long claimed that if Israel would return the Golan Heights, it would make peace with Israel. Once again, under Ehud Barak, Israel offered the return of the Golan Heights. The Syrians countered by stating that, not only did they want the return of all of their original land, but they also wanted new land that Syria had never owned. Not surprisingly, peace talks broke down."That's not quite the case. Israel wanted to offer most of the Golan Heights, Syria wanted Israel to draw back to the 1967 borders.(Remember that this is land illegally occupied by Israel)

The adjective “most” is correct. However, nobody regards Israel’s request for an early warning station to be posted on Mount Hermon as unreasonable, particularly given Syria’s history of launching surprise attacks from that geographic locale. Israel’s request for a security zone around the Lake of Tiberias (150 meters wide) was, given Syria’s history of intentionally disrupting the lake’s flow into Israel, similarly reasonable. Over time (remember these negotiations took place during the existence of several different administrations), Syria has asked for a number of concessions, some reasonable, some unreasonable. My favorite was when Syrian negotiators took the position that the borders should be drawn according to the farthest point that Syria’s artillery was able to reach. Hey, what’s a twelve to twenty mile wide swath of territory between friends.

Regarding the legality of Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights, it’s a mixed bag. Israeli settlements there are clearly illegal. Israel’s occupation of Syrian land is, in the absence of a peace treaty, legal. Any outright annexation, not backed up by a multilateral treaty, would be illegal.


I don't know that much about Hizbollah, but it's good that the Israelis don't have it all their own way.

They would like everyone to stay quiet while they commit illegality after illegality.

Take time to read about Hezbollah and its conflict with Israel. You will find that Hezbollah has less justification for its continued aggression against Israel than any Arab faction. These days, Hezbollah is little more than a proxy army for Iran and Syria, both of whom are incapable of challenging Israel directly in a conventional military conflict.

So far as any discussion of legal matters is concerned, I can find just as many violations of international law on the part of the Arabs as you can by Israel – if not more.

In the end, J is quite right, this hasn’t been a debate. You’ve failed to adequately support the majority of your own points, let alone effectively challenged my own. Then again, given the weakness that any moderately objective analysis of the facts lends to the Arab position, this is understandable. For now, I am done as well, feeling quite comfortable that the weakness of your arguments has substantially reinforced the validity of my original points.

-Quinn

[twowaybro]

Wow folks, isnt it just hilarious how when anyone dares question the motives and/or policies of the Israeli government that they r automatically labeled as Arab/Muslim sympathizers and haters of people of the Jewish faith. Wow J...get a grip. That's some real psychologically f'd up stuff. And yes, while European Jews were persucuted at the hands of other Europeans and were victims of a terrible holocaust they r not the only ones in history 2 suffer a great calamity. African people, during the Middle Passage alone, saw millions of their ilk kidnapped/sold, killed, molested, raped and made 2 suffer all manner of brutal injustices over a much longer period of time. Denied the right 2 have families, to read, write and become educated. To pursue the "American Dream". And yet we press on and overcome. So spare me the pity party. Yes, the people of the Jewish faith have made great strides in the liberal arts and sciences and have contributed all manner of good things 2 world civilization but they r not the only ones nor the first. People of the Muslim faith, the Bhudist faith, the Hindu faith, the Christian faith, indigenous beliefs, pagans, agnostics and athiests all have contributed 2 the evolution/advancement of the human family in one way or another over the course of history. And most have also committed atrocities. Study world history more closely my man and dont get so carried away with emotions that u have 2 resort 2 name calling and negative characterizations. If u r indeed a lawyer then u should understand the rules of proper discourse.


As previously noted, the fact is that the people of Israel resided there long before there was ever such a thing as a Muslim or an Arab (in the modern sense of the word). Giving a minority population the right to settle a small parcel of land on which it has both a historical claim and presence is not unreasonable or without international precedent.

Quinn, the historical Hebrew Israelites who "settled"(this is debatable) in what was then called Canaan and the European Jews who currently argue a historical claim r not one and the same. Their argument is not based on archeological, anthropological or historic data but more so on socio-religious documents. Biblical myths. If u can seperate urself from the Judeo-Christian frame of mind 4 just a second and study an accurate and unbiased history of the region then this u would c. Actually, both Jews and Arabs r relatively newcomers to that land. But i'll leave that alone as it is not really that germain to the current situation at hand. How is invading unannounced a sovereign nation in pursuit of a "rogue" segment of that nation's society and not openly declaring war with said nation within the rules of international law? How can this been seen in any other light than outright agression? There r clear procedures for declaring war against any nation that threatens the national security of another. Why wasnt this done? Is this Israels' version of the "art of preemption"? If the Cuban government were 2 hurl bombs n2 Miami in pursuit of Cuban exiles harboured here who continually violate Cuban airspace and threaten its society, how would this been seen by the U.S. and the world? Would it not b seen as an illegal and overt act of agression and a threat 2 our national security? The UN security council would immediately order the Cubans 2 cease and desist and probably look 2 impose sanctions. Anyone not wearing blinders can clearly c there is a double standard at play here. The world is doing the people of Lebanon a grave injustice by not putting all the pressure needed on Israel 2 cease and desist this invasion or legally go through the proper channels and declare war.

[blackandblue]

Dear Quinn

Clearly you missed the irony of the statement, "It's written into their 'constitution.’”.

Israel doesn't have a constitution. It has instead a number of 'Basic Laws'.

Maybe you'd like to read some of them....

Israel - Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation 1994

Adopted on: 9 March 1994 }
{ ICL Document Status: 9 March 1994 }

Section 1 Basic principles
Basic human rights in Israel are based on the recognition of the value of the human being, and the sanctity of his life and his freedom, and these will be respected in the spirit of the principles of the Declaration of Independence of the State of Israel (5718-1948).

Section 2 Purpose
The purpose of this Basic Law is to uphold the freedom of occupation, in order to anchor the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state in a Basic Law.

Section 3 Freedom of occupation
Every Israel national or resident has the right to engage in any occupation, profession or trade.

Section 4 Violation of freedom
There shall be no violation of the freedom of occupation except by a law that accords with the values of the State of Israel, enacted for a proper purpose and to an extent no greater than required, or by such a law enacted with explicit authorization therein.

Section 5 Application
All governmental authorities are bound to respect the freedom of occupation of all Israel nationals and residents.

Section 6 Stability
This Basic Law cannot be varied, suspended or made subject to conditions by emergency regulations.

Section 7 Entrenchment
This Basic Law shall not be varied except by a Basic Law passed by a majority of the members of the Knesset.

Section 8 Validity of exceptional laws
The provisions of any law which are inconsistent with the freedom of occupation shall remain in effect, even if it does not conform with Section 4, if it is included in a law adopted by a majority of the Knesset with the explicit comment that it is valid despite the provisions of this Basic Law; such a law shall remain in effect for four years from the date of its commencement, unless an earlier date is fixed.

Section 9 Repeal
The Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation (5752 - 1992) is hereby repealed.

Section 10 Provisional measure
The provisions of any enactment in force prior to the commencement of this Basic Law or the Basic Law repealed in Section 9, [which are inconsistent with its provisions] shall remain in effect no longer than two years from the date of commencement of this Basic Law, unless repealed sooner; however, such provisions shall be construed in the spirit of the provisions of this Basic Law.

I'll alow you to draw your own conclusions.

What's this? "Even the article you posted a link to is weak in that its author is complaining that Arab political freedoms are being curtailed because they can’t dispute the essentially democratic and Jewish nature of the state of Israel."

You have a habit of ignoring salient points whilst clinging on to irrelevant ones.

The question was asked, "How can a state that defines itself as essentially Jewish also characterize itself as a democracy when it has a sizable non-Jewish minority?"

It's weak in your eyes because you wish it to be so.


Next;

Though the US may not receive the majority of it's oil supply from the Middle East, it depends on security of supply. If there was no cheap oil coming from the Middle East, we would all be scrambling over smaller resources. Maybe then we would all see the true face of America.

"This is why the Europeans (particularly the French and British) and Japanese have worked with the US to shore up so many Middle Eastern regimes."

No argument from me there. In doing so, have created a veritable Hornet's nest.

Israel has a policy of misinformation. I know, for instance, that when a bus load of soldiers is blown up in Israel, it is immediately reported as a bus load of civilians.
Even if the true report comes out later, the damage has already been done.
I've been to Israel. I've sat in restaurant where boys in civilian clothes sit talking to their girlfriends, with rifles hanging from their shoulders.

So, who are the civilians and who are the soldiers.

Israel tried to con us by telling us the Arabs target children, whilst they didn't.
Well we saw that was a lie, after Ariel Sharon inflamed the Arabs in the year 2000.
We know that they discourage reporters and film crews in the refugee camps, so that they can routinely murder, detain and torture at will.
We know that they have targeted and murdered English peace activist Tom Hurndall. We know that they targeted and murdered a British Journalist, James Miller. We know that they target and murder Palestinian journalists.
We know that they show complete disregard for any lives but their own.

They shelled families enjoying their time on a beach. Is that not terror. Murdered them. Hardly a murmur from them. But look at what happens when a soldier is merely snatched. They create all out war.

They like to portray themselves as victims. I know that is not true.

(Be aware that I use the term Israelis in a general way)


Next;

I'm still not quite sure why you are banging on about a Palestinian homeland.

Is that your justification for the Israeli incursion onto someone else's land?


I don't remember posing any questions about a Palestinian homeland.

Maybe you'd like to pinpoint that for me.


I know that you would like to regard this as a debate won.

But consider this, I have begun from a point of refuting your statements.

This in itself seeks only to restore balance, but doesn't go far enough in explaining quite why and how this situation has arisen.


That is why I posted the article on Cactus48. So that people can read and decide for themselves, what they believe is true.

No point in banging on about whether Israel is a democracy or not, when it doesn't address the central issues.
Does being a democracy prevent a country from murdering tens of thousands of innocent people?
We know that it doesn't, so we don't need to waste time discussing these things.

Now, why don't we debate on the Cactus 48 article?

[Quinn]

Blackandblue,

Good natured ribbing aside, I do appreciate both the manner of your presentation and your efforts to support your conclusions, particularly given the weighty nature of the topic at hand. In all seriousness, I would be delighted to continue our debate on Monday (possibly even tomorrow) as this is the first weekend that I am taking any time off in nearly a month. Until then, have a good weekend.

-Quinn

[shemalejunky]

Funny how blackandblue skirts the issue of trying to name an Arab democracy.

Quinn, you nailed it in your first post! Thanks for stating the facts and thanks to all for being an island in the sea of internet anti-Semitism.

Obviously blackand blue will just be that in the face putting forward his lame and baseless arguments when the facts have already been stated. Almost like talking to Aedan!

[suckseed]

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=9724

[blahblahblah]

http://dl.zvuki.ru/2/2644/56/1.ra

[yosi]

just fyi 8)

[chefmike]

Actually...It occurred to me that one of our resident scholars has the big picture all figured out...

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=8302&start=0

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=9436&start=0

[castabyss]

twowaybro,

you can't complain like this,


Wow folks, isnt it just hilarious how when anyone dares question the motives and/or policies of the Israeli government that they r automatically labeled as Arab/Muslim sympathizers and haters of people of the Jewish faith.

and then refer to HA as mostly a "pro-Israel lobby". I don't think there's any lobby here except for more hot TS's. If we're that politicized, I think we should take an official stand in the next elections. The US needs a thrid party to break things up; maybe HA is up to the job!!!!!!

CA

[ezed]

CAPTAIN! CAPTAIN! THINGS ARE GETTING HOT IN THIS REGION! NO ONE THERE IS INTERESTED IN WHAT THE FUCK THE OTHER HAS TO SAY. THEY'RE ALL A BUNCH OF FANATICS WITH NO OUTSIDE INTERESTS FOR THEIR OWN ENTERTAINMENT! IT'S A RELIGIOUS THING OR SOMETHING, IT'S LIKE THE WORLD'S GONE RETARDED AND IT'S ESCALATING! IF NORMAL PEOPLE DON'T STEP UP THE WHOLE THING'S GOING TO BLOOWWW!

[dav1313]

Everyone seems to miss the big underlying issue in the palestinian isreali conflict. It's unemployment. This goes for pretty much the entire islam v west conflict. the economies in arab countries are shit, unemployment runs over 25 percent and up to 70 percent . Young males are prone to violence and attracted to extreme groups when they are otherwise unoccupied., just look at germany in the 1930's. the arabs have no jobs, no prospect of a job or future and so they are understandably angry. the hard line clerics give them a purpose and something to look foward to, (paradise). people who have jobs arent throwing rocks or burning american flags.

[dav1313]

Everyone seems to miss the big underlying issue in the palestinian isreali conflict. It's unemployment. This goes for pretty much the entire islam v west conflict. the economies in arab countries are shit, unemployment runs over 25 percent and up to 70 percent . Young males are prone to violence and attracted to extreme groups when they are otherwise unoccupied., just look at germany in the 1930's. the arabs have no jobs, no prospect of a job or future and so they are understandably angry. the hard line clerics give them a purpose and something to look foward to, (paradise). people who have jobs arent throwing rocks or burning american flags.

[dav1313]

sorry about the double post. if you have charter internet then you will understand.

[twowaybro]

Castabyss,
If u r going 2 quote me please do so correctly. I never said that HA has a pro-Israel "lobby"....here's what i said:


Aight, i c that HA has a large pro-Israel following and thats cool

It should b quite apparent from the majority of posts on this topic that most who responded r n favor of Israel's policies in that region. That doesnt mean that HA has a "lobby" but just a large number of folks who support Israel's geo-politics. So lets set that straight. Furthermore, as one who does not agree with nor support their geo-political agenda, it's rather obvious that this is construed by some to mean that i and others who share this view r in some way "anti-semitic" and a hater of the Jewish people which is so far from the truth. If i disagree with the foreign policy agenda of the current US administration(which i do) does this make me anti-American...not hardly. Just one who sees the world in a different light based on my experiences and my understanding of what is right, just, moral and lawful. No individual, community or nation is beyond being called 2 task when their actions merit it. I'll leave it at that.

[blackandblue]

Funny how blackandblue skirts the issue of trying to name an Arab democracy.

Quinn, you nailed it in your first post! Thanks for stating the facts and thanks to all for being an island in the sea of internet anti-Semitism.

Obviously blackand blue will just be that in the face putting forward his lame and baseless arguments when the facts have already been stated. Almost like talking to Aedan!

Goodness me! How does that explain my Jewish girlfriend then?

I don't want to trail everything that Quinn had posted, as it had digressed from the spirit of the original post.

suckseed wanted to know 'what was up with the Israelis'

So I attempted to post some background to the current happenings, via the Cactus48 link.

Whether or not Israel is a true democracy or not, has nothing to do with the 'troubles'.

It's simply ignorant to look at the current happenings ,without having some knowledge of it's history.


What is has shown me is that the Pro-Israel/USA lobby on this board, with the exception of Quinn, appears to have a rudimentary education.

Which is somewhat gratifying.

[blackandblue]

Everyone seems to miss the big underlying issue in the palestinian isreali conflict. It's unemployment. This goes for pretty much the entire islam v west conflict. the economies in arab countries are shit, unemployment runs over 25 percent and up to 70 percent . Young males are prone to violence and attracted to extreme groups when they are otherwise unoccupied., just look at germany in the 1930's. the arabs have no jobs, no prospect of a job or future and so they are understandably angry. the hard line clerics give them a purpose and something to look foward to, (paradise). people who have jobs arent throwing rocks or burning american flags.

This is just rubbish.

There was no Islam versus West conflict until it was invented by the West.
To call this post idiotic would be an insult to idiots.
Stick to what you're good at and forget about intelligent debate.

[Quinn]

Actually...It occurred to me that one of our resident scholars has the big picture all figured out...

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=8302&start=0

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=9436&start=0

LMAO.... You do realize that said scholar is my favorite poster. To stand against such overpowering clarity of thought and logic is to be but a grain of sand before the oncoming tide. Seriously though, if it's possible to herniate one's self through laughter, that is the guy who will make me do it.

-Quinn

[chefmike]

obviously im speaking emotionally and trying to make a point...yes, ur right there are some decent, cultured and civil muslims, but by and large theyre overshadowed by the majority of muslims who wouldnt shed a tear if another 6 million were killed...bottom line u have a billion muslims and a few million jews, now take the education level, inventions, arts, everything that these 2 cultures have contributed through out history, it would be a joke to compare them...there is a reason for that no? u cant blame the state of israel for the laughable comparison...its very simple...on one side u have people hell bent on educating their children, promoting justice throughout the world, being a vibrant and cultured people, while the other side is just a fuckin mess..theres no nice way to say it..be honest...u cant blame jews for all the worlds problems..its been done through out history...theres a reason why mlk jr walked to the podium with rabbis accompanying him and not sheiks, theres a reason why every philanthropic organization in the world has jews on its board..why the aclu, regardless of what u think of them, is littered with jews, cmon now..i feel retarded arguing the point...u must be such a rabid anti semite to not see who is right and who is wrong in the middle east...be honest, are u late on ur rent and ur jewish landlord is evicting u? it really seems like it...does it kill u that my grandparents had their entire families wiped out half a century ago, survived, struggled, my dad came to this country with 200 bucks in his pocket yet i went through law school and all my brother and sisters own busineses and million dollar homes...does it kill u???? we didnt get any special dispensation or privilages in this country...nothing..we sturggled, faced discrimination and fought through it and made it...stop blaming people for the problems of the world...look inward...islam is a hatefilled unprogressive backwards system of living that keeps its populace in the dark...how the fuck u expect a civilization to flourish if the women are in beekeeper suits and the whole moral fabric of society is still in the dark ages...cmon...just be fuckin honest, u dont like jews...not many people do...sometimes i dont...but be fuckin honest...israel is half a century old and leading the world in many technology areas and like i said tel aviv is something unrivaled in the middle east with all the fuckin oil, money and people to put it to shame...but theres a reason wh yisraelis drive mercedes, go to the nicest lounges in the world and are a striving people while the billion arabs around them fuck camels...yeah, they do it cause israel is occumpying land....before 1948 they were all in labs, discovring cures for cancer and just living it up..hell u should see how gorgeous the area was before the jews showed up...haha...u fool

Brilliant post, J...while I can understand why, and how great the need is for the law that you once mentioned that you currently practice...I bet that you would make one hell of a defense attorney...or prosecutor for that matter...

EDIT- I think that it's a given that the neocon chickenhawks in the whitehouse will use this as a smokescreen/justification for the fiasco in Iraq...when they should have been focusing on Iran and N Korea, not to mention China...

I still find it hard to believe that this post by J was deleted because a certain someone deemed it racist, as was his thread regarding the deletion..I think it's more a matter of a certain person/or person's sour grapes regarding things said in an obviously tongue-in-cheek thread on this forum in the past... :wink:

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=7349&start=0

[Quinn]

obviously im speaking emotionally and trying to make a point...yes, ur right there are some decent, cultured and civil muslims, but by and large theyre overshadowed by the majority of muslims who wouldnt shed a tear if another 6 million were killed...bottom line u have a billion muslims and a few million jews, now take the education level, inventions, arts, everything that these 2 cultures have contributed through out history, it would be a joke to compare them...there is a reason for that no? u cant blame the state of israel for the laughable comparison...its very simple...on one side u have people hell bent on educating their children, promoting justice throughout the world, being a vibrant and cultured people, while the other side is just a fuckin mess..theres no nice way to say it..be honest...u cant blame jews for all the worlds problems..its been done through out history...theres a reason why mlk jr walked to the podium with rabbis accompanying him and not sheiks, theres a reason why every philanthropic organization in the world has jews on its board..why the aclu, regardless of what u think of them, is littered with jews, cmon now..i feel retarded arguing the point...u must be such a rabid anti semite to not see who is right and who is wrong in the middle east...be honest, are u late on ur rent and ur jewish landlord is evicting u? it really seems like it...does it kill u that my grandparents had their entire families wiped out half a century ago, survived, struggled, my dad came to this country with 200 bucks in his pocket yet i went through law school and all my brother and sisters own busineses and million dollar homes...does it kill u???? we didnt get any special dispensation or privilages in this country...nothing..we sturggled, faced discrimination and fought through it and made it...stop blaming people for the problems of the world...look inward...islam is a hatefilled unprogressive backwards system of living that keeps its populace in the dark...how the fuck u expect a civilization to flourish if the women are in beekeeper suits and the whole moral fabric of society is still in the dark ages...cmon...just be fuckin honest, u dont like jews...not many people do...sometimes i dont...but be fuckin honest...israel is half a century old and leading the world in many technology areas and like i said tel aviv is something unrivaled in the middle east with all the fuckin oil, money and people to put it to shame...but theres a reason wh yisraelis drive mercedes, go to the nicest lounges in the world and are a striving people while the billion arabs around them fuck camels...yeah, they do it cause israel is occumpying land....before 1948 they were all in labs, discovring cures for cancer and just living it up..hell u should see how gorgeous the area was before the jews showed up...haha...u fool

Wow, I can't believe the above post was deleted either.

-Quinn

[chefmike]

Yes, but the origins of the vendetta against J began here...

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=7349&start=0

I've been accused of everything on this board from Marxism to Stalinism...but not all of us commies :roll: endorse political correctness...it's fucking bullshit...plain and fucking simple...

[dav1313]

There was no Islam versus West conflict until it was invented by the West.
To call this post idiotic would be an insult to idiots.
Stick to what you're good at and forget about intelligent debate.[/quote]

im sorry obviously calling someone an idiot or a sub idiot is much more intelligent debate.you seem to know it all you should go to lebabnon and sort it out mate. you can probably get a hotel room really cheap in bierut.

[Quinn]

Clearly you missed the irony of the statement, "It's written into their 'constitution.’”

Israel doesn't have a constitution. It has instead a number of 'Basic Laws'.

The point wasn’t missed at all. You attempted to imply that Israeli Arabs weren’t equal to Israeli Jews by legal definition – a point that was soundly disproven. Following that, you fell back upon a poorly supported argument about a theorized unofficial policy. It’s all perfectly clear.

Regarding Israel’s lack of a written constitution or its particular relevance to the discussion at hand, I’m a bit confused. Its use of what is usually defined as an unwritten constitution is identical to other democratic states like The United Kingdom and New Zealand – who also lack a single, formally codified document upon which to base their laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_constitutions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




What's this? "Even the article you posted a link to is weak in that its author is complaining that Arab political freedoms are being curtailed because they can’t dispute the essentially democratic and Jewish nature of the state of Israel."
You have a habit of ignoring salient points whilst clinging on to irrelevant ones.

The question was asked, "How can a state that defines itself as essentially Jewish also characterize itself as a democracy when it has a sizable non-Jewish minority?"

It's weak in your eyes because you wish it to be so.
So far as “ignoring salient points whilst clinging on to irrelevant ones” is concerned, you are projecting. Your argument is weak because you have been singularly unable to support it, let alone refute my initial point. Here, let me prove it again:

Israeli Arabs are full citizens of the State of Israel, with equal protection under the law, and full rights of due process. Unlike Jewish citizens, they cannot be drafted into the Israeli army, but they may serve voluntarily. There are currently nine Israeli Arabs sitting as members of the 17th Knesset out of a total of 120 seats, and there is one Arab judge, Justice Salim Jubran, sitting in the Supreme Court of Israel. Ariel Sharon's 2001 cabinet included one Israeli Arab minister, Salah Tarif, and in March 2005, Oscar Abu Razaq was appointed Director General of the Ministry of Interior. Arabic is one of Israel's official languages

Once again, this firmly proves my assertion that “Arab citizens of Israel . . . have more rights and greater representation in the Jewish state than they do under any Arab regime.” It also, reaffirms the democratic nature of Israel, which handily disproves your point, yet again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




"This is why the Europeans (particularly the French and British) and Japanese have worked with the US to shore up so many Middle Eastern regimes."
No argument from me there. In doing so, have created a veritable Hornet's nest.
So, you’ve changed your original position then:


It is entirely possible that if the Arab countries were not kept in a constant stae of turmoil by certain western countries in cahoots with 'Israel', they could use their resources elsewhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Israel has a policy of misinformation. I know, for instance, that when a bus load of soldiers is blown up in Israel, it is immediately reported as a bus load of civilians.
Even if the true report comes out later, the damage has already been done.
I've been to Israel. I've sat in restaurant where boys in civilian clothes sit talking to their girlfriends, with rifles hanging from their shoulders.

So, who are the civilians and who are the soldiers.
So far as misinformation and civilian casualties are concerned, the record is clear – and it doesn’t favor the Arab cause. Interesting examples include decisions by Hamas to intentionally choose heavily trafficked civilian areas as sites from which to launch rocket and mortar attacks, meaning that an inevitable Israeli response will risk higher civilian casualties (which are used as tools to garner support). During the Intifada, the PLO used to employ a similar trick. It involved organizing children to go out and throw stones at Israeli vehicles. Not surprisingly, that would be followed by snipers firing upon Israeli troops from buildings directly behind the children – the idea being to encourage Israeli soldiers to fire into the crowd. We could discuss the fact that Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine have used child suicide bombers (and that comes from the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, not Israel).

In a conflict involving “militias” and large numbers of reserves (in Israel’s case), the line between civilians and combatants can get blurry. Mistakes will occur, no matter what the intention of the respective combatants. However, the intentional targeting of civilian concentrations by groups like Fatah – and Hamas in particular – are well documented by sources other than the Israeli government. There can be no reasonable doubt as to the intentional nature of this campaign.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Israel tried to con us by telling us the Arabs target children, whilst they didn't.
Remember when I mentioned your “selective, ahistorical interpretation of the facts”? Well, you’ve just demonstrated it in a serious way. Here are just a few incidents, which have been corroborated by sources outside of the Israeli government:

March 5, 2003
A Palestinian suicide bomber strikes on a bus en route to Haifa University.
17 murdered, most of them teenagers. 53 injured.

Nov. 21, 2002
A Palestinian suicide bomber detonates on a commuter bus during morning rush hour in Jerusalem.
11 murdered, many of them schoolchildren. More than 50 injured.

June 18-19, 2002
A Palestinian suicide bomber strikes on a rush-hour bus in Jerusalem, carrying many children on their way to school.
19 murdered. 74 injured - 6 seriously.

June 1, 2001 - The attack comes days after Prime Minister Ariel Sharon announced a unilateral Israeli cease-fire.
A Palestinian suicide bomber attacks a Tel Aviv beachside disco filled with teenaged immigrants from the former Soviet Union.
21 murdered. More than 100 injured.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I don't remember posing any questions about a Palestinian homeland.

Maybe you'd like to pinpoint that for me.
Sure. Here you go:



As previously noted, today’s Palestinians are mostly Egyptians and Jordanians, not a culturally distinct people. Still, if you really want to look for a “Palestinian State,” you don’t need to look any further than Jordan, a state with a 70% Palestinian population" If those figures are correct, could that be something to do with the fact that Jordan absorbed a substantial amount of the people fleeing from Israeli terrorism?

Again, look at the facts;
"Since the return of over 300,000 Palestinians from Kuwait in 1991, between 45% and 70% of all Jordanians are Palestinians from the West Bank. Although Palestinians suffer from discrimination and a large number still live in camps, Jordan has granted full citizenship to the Palestinian refugees and their descendents."
"About 3 million persons registered as Palestinian refugees and displaced persons reside in Jordan, most as citizens."

So what is Quinn's point?
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't you ask a question in response to my original point. I mean, seriously, you even used a “question” mark.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[I know that you would like to regard this as a debate won.

But consider this, I have begun from a point of refuting your statements.
A) You have failed to disprove or even compromise so much as one of my original points;
B) Your points, which were made in an attempt to undermine my own, have, in turn, been handily disproven (you’ve actually managed to contradict yourself).

As such, by even the most forgiving of standards – you have clearly lost. With all due respect, you and I are done.

-Quinn

[interestedParty]

Maybe you'd like to read some of them....

Israel - Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation 1994

Adopted on: 9 March 1994 }
{ ICL Document Status: 9 March 1994 }

Section 1 Basic principles
Basic human rights in Israel are based on the recognition of the value of the human being, and the sanctity of his life and his freedom, and these will be respected in the spirit of the principles of the Declaration of Independence of the State of Israel (5718-1948).

Section 2 Purpose
The purpose of this Basic Law is to uphold the freedom of occupation, in order to anchor the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state in a Basic Law.

Section 3 Freedom of occupation
Every Israel national or resident has the right to engage in any occupation, profession or trade.

Section 4 Violation of freedom
There shall be no violation of the freedom of occupation except by a law that accords with the values of the State of Israel, enacted for a proper purpose and to an extent no greater than required, or by such a law enacted with explicit authorization therein.

Section 5 Application
All governmental authorities are bound to respect the freedom of occupation of all Israel nationals and residents.

Section 6 Stability
This Basic Law cannot be varied, suspended or made subject to conditions by emergency regulations.

Section 7 Entrenchment
This Basic Law shall not be varied except by a Basic Law passed by a majority of the members of the Knesset.

Section 8 Validity of exceptional laws
The provisions of any law which are inconsistent with the freedom of occupation shall remain in effect, even if it does not conform with Section 4, if it is included in a law adopted by a majority of the Knesset with the explicit comment that it is valid despite the provisions of this Basic Law; such a law shall remain in effect for four years from the date of its commencement, unless an earlier date is fixed.

Section 9 Repeal
The Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation (5752 - 1992) is hereby repealed.

Section 10 Provisional measure
The provisions of any enactment in force prior to the commencement of this Basic Law or the Basic Law repealed in Section 9, [which are inconsistent with its provisions] shall remain in effect no longer than two years from the date of commencement of this Basic Law, unless repealed sooner; however, such provisions shall be construed in the spirit of the provisions of this Basic Law.

I'll alow you to draw your own conclusions.



First of all, I am confused by this citation, as it doesn't seem to jive with the rest of your argument. In fact, it completely NEGATES your argument, which is, as I understand, that Israeli-Arabs are treated as second-class citizens (a sort of Middle Eastern version of "Jim Crow," similar to the way other countries in the Middle East treat their female citizens). I can only assume that you think that Section Nine is meant to repeal Sections One through Eight; well, I'm sorry to inform that you are mistaken.

Section Nine only repeals the previous version (i.e., the 1992 version) of the "Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation." Section Nine does NOT refer to ANY part of the 1994 version of the aforementioned document.

I mean no offense; it is an easy mistake to make, given the structure of the document. However, before you make such wide ranging statements, you would be well advised to actually RESEARCH the subject in question, not just cut-and-paste information without having made sure that you actually UNDERSTAND what it contains.

[ezed]

Everyone seems to miss the big underlying issue in the palestinian isreali conflict. It's unemployment. This goes for pretty much the entire islam v west conflict. the economies in arab countries are shit, unemployment runs over 25 percent and up to 70 percent . Young males are prone to violence and attracted to extreme groups when they are otherwise unoccupied., just look at germany in the 1930's. the arabs have no jobs, no prospect of a job or future and so they are understandably angry. the hard line clerics give them a purpose and something to look foward to, (paradise). people who have jobs arent throwing rocks or burning american flags.

And these retards blame the WEST and Israel? Those fucking clerics and Princes own the majority of the world's oil reserves. Why the fuck are they unemployed, because the rulers of their countries are greedy beyond belief. Stop looking to the west and Israel to vent your frustration and take a hard look at your fellow arabs, who have kept you in check since the beginning of time. The rulers of your countries are far more richer than most western magnates. Screw paridise, it's a fairy tale. Use the fucking brains God/Allah gave you! Stop throwing rocks at people who could give two shits about you and focus on your brethern who have their foot on your head and are pissing in your ear. :banghead

[twowaybro]

The following links provide a pretty accurate analysis of this current crisis that unfortunately looks 2 b spiraling n2 a much wider conflict that i believe is Israel's real intent as i intimated in my original post. 8) 8)

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/printer_997.shtml

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ww3/israel_attacks_lebanon_psyop.htm

[interestedParty]

The following links provide a pretty accurate analysis of this current crisis that unfortunately looks 2 b spiraling n2 a much wider conflict that i believe is Israel's real intent as i intimated in my original post. 8) 8)

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/printer_997.shtml

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ww3/israel_attacks_lebanon_psyop.htmtwowaybro, I see that one of the sources that you cite claims that 9/11 was perpetrated by the US government—a claim that I feel is just as ludricrous and insulting as saying that the Holocaust never happened...or do you believe that too? Facts don't seem to be very important to you when it comes to forming your opinions. You disgust me.

[interestedParty]

The thing about a conspiracy theory is that it can neither be confirmed nor denied. Thus, it requires no proof. In fact, that very same lack of evidence can be — and sometimes is — profferred up as evidence(e.g., "There isn't any evidence because it was covered up"). With this pretzel logic, the most fantastical and absurd theories can be defended with the simple phrase: "That's what they want you to think."

[GroobySteven]

I still find it hard to believe that this post by J was deleted because a certain someone deemed it racist, as was his thread regarding the deletion..I think it's more a matter of a certain person/or person's sour grapes regarding things said in an obviously tongue-in-cheek thread on this forum in the past... :wink:

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=7349&start=0

If you're referring to me, Chef you can fuck right off. I've told you I'm more than willing to stand up for myself and those jokes and labels that he put should have been deleted. I've seen black jokes deleted from this forum for exactly the same reason and if you're going to have a standard than have the standard for all.
I don't need to shit stir and bring things up from months ago back into it - I refrained from commenting when J made his big re-entrance as it's nothing to do with me and I had no reason to comment on his posts, until he once again had to open his elitest mouth and start spouting off against one group in a vain attempt at humour.
I've stated it before, that this forum needs moderating and needs to have some standards to abide by otherwise it becomes a free for all.

seanchai

[MacShreach]

The United Kingdom and New Zealand – who also lack a single, formally codified document upon which to base their laws.


-Quinn

Incorrect. The United Kingdom does have a constitution-- it is the Treaty of Union of 1707, which created the entity and defined the parameters under which its laws would be, and are, framed. This error is commonly made because England does not have a constitution (for that matter neither does Scotland.) But the UK does.

[MacShreach]

Yes, but the origins of the vendetta against J began here...

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=7349&start=0



In which thread we find this telling little gem:



(PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 10:10 pm)
You're obviously a racist just like myself and Quinn.

Get away.

Whichever mod zapped J's poisonous racist diatribe gets a huge vote of thanks from me. Furthermore it is a very unusual forum where contributors are allowed to start threads deliberately attacking the mods. Zapping his "Why was my hate post zapped" thread too was quite right. Plenty of boards would have simply slung him out for his cheek, end of story.

I see a lot of protest from a few loudmouths bitching about a mod that has decided to flex some muscles. Well, I just want that mod to know this is one loudmouth that agrees with him or her. I didn't ask for it, I don't have the power to do it, but it's way past time.

[specialk]

Yes, but the origins of the vendetta against J began here...

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=7349&start=0



In which thread we find this telling little gem:



(PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 10:10 pm)
You're obviously a racist just like myself and Quinn.

Get away.

Whichever mod zapped J's poisionous racist diatribe gets a huge vote of thanks from me. Furthermore it is a very unusual forum where contributors are allowed to start threads deliberately attacking the mods. Zapping his "Why was my hate post zapped" thread too was quite right. Plenty of boards would have simply slung him out for his cheek, end of story.

I see a lot of protest from a few loudmouths bitching about a mod that has decided to flex some muscles. Well, I just want that mod to know this is one loudmouth that agrees with him or her. I didn't ask for it, I don't have the power to do it, but it's way past time.



Total agreement here!

[Quinn]

The United Kingdom and New Zealand – who also lack a single, formally codified document upon which to base their laws.


-Quinn

Incorrect. The United Kingdom does have a constitution-- it is the Treaty of Union of 1707, which created the entity and defined the parameters under which its laws would be, and are, framed. This error is commonly made because England does not have a constitution (for that matter neither does Scotland.) But the UK does.


The point I was attempting to make was that the UK (among others) lacks a single, formally codified document upon which to base it's laws. Unless Parliament lacks an understanding of the UK's legal framework, which I doubt, my point stands uncorrected:

The Constitution of the United Kingdom is an area of uncodified law, consisting of both written and unwritten sources. There is no technical difference between ordinary statutes and law considered "constitutional law". Therefore the Parliament of the United Kingdom can perform "constitutional reform" simply by passing Acts of Parliament and thus has the power to change or abolish any written or unwritten element of the constitution. The constitution is based on the concept of all sovereignty ultimately belonging to Parliament (Parliamentary sovereignty), so the concept of entrenchment cannot exist. The lack of a central written constitutional document explaining the fundamental principles of the state and relationship between its institutions and between the people leads some constitutionalists to regard the United Kingdom as having "no (formal) constitution". The phrase "unwritten constitution" is sometimes used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom

Since wikipedia gets a lot of things wrong (an average of four facts per topic), I checked a few other sites:

There is no written constitution. The constitutional law of the UK is regarded as consisting of statute law on the one hand and case law on the other, whereby judicial precedent is applied in the courts by judges interpreting statute law. A third element consists of constitutional conventions which do not have statutory authority but nevertheless have binding force. Much of the relationship between the Sovereign and Parliament is conventional rather than statutory.

http://www.llrx.com/features/uk2.htm#UK%20Legal%20System

Perhaps something from Paliament's (specifically the House of Lords) Select Committee on Constitution would serve as a good source:

The essential characteristics of the United Kingdom's constitutional arrangements require some elucidation, partly because in the absence of a formal written constitution there are difficulties in clearly defining the powers of the executive and the role of the legislature and judiciary.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200203/ldselect/ldconst/168/16809.htm

As originally stated, the UK does not have a formal written constitution.

-Quinn

[twowaybro]

interestedParty,
Sorry u feel so disgusted, but it is summertime and the roses r n full bloom...grab some and savor the scent, it may help pick u up. As i've said in some of my previous posts on this board, i do believe there was government complicity in the WTC attack of 9-11 and there is plenty of evidence that has been ignored and glossed over that lends support to this view. I stand firm n this informed opinion. Go 2 a library and pick up a copy of "Crossing the Rubicon - The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil" by Michael Ruppert. It's one of the most well written and researched books out there on the subject. But thats another topic from the current one so i want digress. The link that u cited was posted primarily 4 the Toronto Star article(which has been repaced by an analysis) that ties the current Israeli aggression with a probable attack on Iran and not 4 the Alex Jones audio commentary though it is quite interesting. So stay on topic my friend and like i suggested 2 another here, dont get so emotional. It clouds one's judgement and ability 2 reason. 8) 8)

[MacShreach]

snip the usual verbiage
As originally stated, the UK does not have a formal written constitution.

-Quinn

Read this. Deal with facts, not fiction, for once.

The treaty (act) of the Union of two Kingdoms, Scotland and England of 1706. The declaration to parliament

THE TREATY or Act of the Union

Act Ratifying and Approving the

Treaty of Union of the Two Kingdoms

of Scotland and England.



The Estates of Parliament considering that Articles of Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England were agreed on 22nd July, 1706 by the Commissioners nominated on behalf of this Kingdom, under Her Majesties Great Seal of Scotland bearing date the 27th of February last past, in pursuance of the fourth Act of the third Session of this Parliament and the Commissioners nominated on behalf of the Kingdom of England under Her Majesties Great Seal of England bearing date at Westminster the tenth day of April last past in pursuance of an Act of Parliament made in England the third year of Her Majesties Reign to treat of and concerning an Union of the said Kingdoms Which Articles were in all humility presented to Her Majesty upon the twenty third of the said Month of July and were Recommended to this Parliament by Her Majesties Royal Letter of the date the 31st July, 1706

And that the said Estates of Parliament have agreed to and approven of the saids Articles of Union with some Additions and Explanations as is contained in the Articles hereafter insert And sicklyke Her Majesty with advice and consent of the Estates of Parliament Resolving to Establish the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Government within this Kingdom has past in this Session of Parliament an Act entituled Act for secureing of the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Government which by the Tenor thereof is appointed to be insert in any Act ratifying the Treaty and expressly declared to be a fundamentall and essentiall Condition of the said Treaty or Union in all time coming.

Therefore Her Majesty with advice and consent of the Estates of Parliament in fortification of the Approbation of the Articles as above mentioned And for their further and better Establishment of the same upon full and mature deliberation upon the forsaids Articles of Union and Act of Parliament Doth Ratifie Approve and Confirm the same with the

Additions and Explanations contained in the saids Articles in manner and under the provision aftermentioned whereof the Tenor follows.

Article 1

I. That the Two Kingdoms of Scotland and England, shall upon the 1st May next ensuing the date hereof, and forever after, be United into One Kingdom by the Name of GREAT BRITAIN: And that the Ensigns Armorial of the said United Kingdom be such as Her Majesty shall think fit, and used in all Flags, Banners, Standards and Ensigns both at Sea and Land.

Article 2

II. That the Succession to the Monarchy of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and of the Dominions thereunto belonging after Her Most Sacred Majesty, and in default of Issue of Her Majesty be, remain and continue to the Most Excellent Princess Sophia Electoress and Dutchess Dowager of Hanover, and the Heirs of Her body, being Protestants, upon whom the Crown of England is settled by an Act of Parliament made in England in the twelth year of the Reign of His late Majesty King William the Third entituled An Act for the further Limitation of the Crown and better securing the Rights and Liberties of the Subject:

And that all Papists and persons marrying Papists, shall be excluded from and forever incapable to inherit possess or enjoy the Imperial Crown of Great Britain, and the Dominions thereunto belonging or any part thereof; And in every such case the Crown and Government shall from time to time descend to, and be enjoyed by such person being a Protestant as should have inherited and enjoyed the same, in case such Papists or person marrying a Papist was naturally dead, according to the provision for the Descent of the Crown of England, made by another Act of Parliament in England in the first year of the Reign of their late Majesties King William and Queen Mary entituled an Act declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject, and settling the Succession of the Crown.

Article 3

III. That the United Kingdom of Great Britain be Represented by one and the same Parliament, to be stiled the Parliament of Great Britain.

Article 4

IV. That the Subjects of the United Kingdom of Great Britain shall from and after the Union have full Freedom and Intercourse of Trade and Navigation to and from any port or place within the said United Kingdom and the Dominions and Plantations thereunto belonging. And that there be a Communication of all other Rights, Privileges and Advantages which do or may belong to the Subjects of either Kingdom except where it is otherwayes expressly agreed in these Articles.

Article 5

V. That all ships or vessels belonging to Her Majesties Subjects of Scotland at the time of Ratifying the Treaty of Union of the Two Kingdoms in the Parliament of Scotland though forreign built be deemed and pass as ships of the build of Great Britain; the Owner or where there are more Owners, one or more of the Owners within Twelve Months after the first of May next making oath that at the time of Ratifying the Treaty of Union in the Parliament of Scotland, the same did in haill or in part belong to him or them, or to some other Subject of Subjects of Scotland, to be particularly named with the place of their respective abodes, and that the same doth then at the time of the said Deposition wholly belong to him or them, and that no forreigner directly or indirectly hath any share part or interest therein, Which Oath shall be made before the chief Officer or Officers of the Customs in the Port next to the abode of the said Owner or Owners;

And the said Officer or Officers shall be Impowered to administer the said Oath, And the Oath being so administred shall be attested by the Officer or Officers who administred the

same And being Registred by the said Officer or Officers, shall be delivered to the Master of the ship for security of her Navigation and a Duplicate thereof shall be transmitted by the said Officer or Officers to the Chief Officer or Officers of the Customs in the port of Edinburgh, to be there Entered in a Register and from thence to be sent to the port of London to be there Entered in the General Register of all Trading ships belonging to Great Britain.

Article 6

VI. That all parts of the United Kingdom for ever from and after the Union shall have the same Allowances, Encouragements and Drawbacks, and be under the same Prohibitions, Restrictions and Regulations of Trade and lyable to the same Customs and Duties on Import and Export. And that the Allowances Encouragements and Drawbacks Prohibitions Restrictions and Regulations of Trade and the Customs and Duties on Import and Export settled in England when the Union commences shall from and after the Union take place throughout the whole United Kingdom, excepting and reserving the Duties upon Export and Import of such particular Commodities from which any persons the Subjects of either Kingdom are specially Liberated and Exempted by their private Rights which after the Union are to remain safe and entire to them in all respects as before the same.

And that from and after the Union no Scots Cattle carried into England shall be lyable to any other Duties either on the publick or private Accounts than these Duties to which the Cattle of England are or shall be lyable within the said Kindgom. And seeing by the Laws of England there are Rewards granted upon the Exportation of certain kinds of Grain wherein Oats grinded or ungrinded are not expressed, that from and after the Union when Oats shall be sold at 15 shillings Sterling per quarter of the Oat-meal exported in the terms of the Law whereby and so long as Rewards are granted for Exportation of other Grains. And that the Bear of Scotland have the same Rewards as Barley.

And in respect the Importation of Victual into Scotland from any place beyond Sea would prove a Discouragement to Tillage, Therefore that the Prohibition as now in force by the Law of Scotland against Importation of Victual from Ireland or any other place beyond Sea into Scotland, do after the Union remain in the same force as now it is until more proper and effectuall ways be provided by the Parliament of Great Britain for discouraging the Importation of the said Victual from beyond Sea.

Article 7

VII. That all parts of the United Kingdom be for ever from and after the Union lyable to the same Excises upon all Exciseable Liquors excepting only that the 34 Gallons English Barrel of Beer or Ale amounting to 12 Gallons Scots present measure sold in Scotland by the Brewer at 9/6d Sterling excluding all Duties and Retailed including Duties and the Retailer's profit at 2d the Scots pint or eight part of the Scots Gallon, be not after the Union lyable on account of the present Excise upon Exciseable Liquors in England, to any higher Imposition than 2s Sterling upon the forsaid 34 Gallons English barrel, being 12 gallons the present Scots measure And that the Excise settled in England on all other Liquors when the Union commences take place throughout the whole United Kingdom.

Article 8

VIII. That from and after the Union all forreign Salt which shall be Imported into Scotland shall be charged at the Importation there with the same Duties as the like Salt is now charged with being Imported into England and to be levied and secured in the same manner. But in regard the Duties of great quantities of forreign Salt Imported may be very heavie on the Merchants Importers; That therefor all forreign Salt imported into Scotland shall be Cellared and Locked up under the custody of the Merchant Importer and the Officers imployed for levying the Duties upon Salt And that the Merchant may have what quantities thereof his occasion may require not under a Weigh or fourtie Bushells at a time; Giving security for the duty of what quantity he receives payable in six Months. But Scotland shall for the space of seven Years from the said Union be Exempted from paying in Scotland for Salt made there the Dutie or Excise now payable for Salt made in England:

But from the Expiration of the said seven years shall be subject and lyable to the same Duties for Salt make in Scotland, as shall be then payable for Salt made in England, to be levied and secured in the same manner and with proportional Drawbacks and Allowances as in England, with this exception that Scotland shall after the said seven years remain exempted from the Duty of 2s 4d a Bushell on home Salt Imposed by ane Act made in England in the Ninth and Tenth of King William the Third of England And if the Parliament of Great Britain

shall at or before the expiring of the said seven years substitute any other fund in place of the said 2s 4d of Excise on the bushel of Home Salt, Scotland shall after the said seven years, bear a proportion of the said Fund, and have an Equivalent in the Terms of this Treaty, And that during the said seven years there shall be payed in England for all Salt made in Scotland and imported from thence into England the same duties upon the Importation as shall be payable for Salt made in England and levied and secured in the same manner as the Duties on forreign Salt are to be levied and secured in England.

And that after the said seven years how long the said Duty of 2s 4d a Bushel upon Salt is continued in England the said 2s 4d a Bushel shall be payable for all Salt made in Scotland and imported into England, to be levied and secured in the same manner And that during the continuance of the Duty of 2s 4d a Bushel upon Salt made in England no Salt whatsoever be brought from Scotland to England by Land in any manner under the penalty of forfeiting the Salt and the Cattle and Carriages made use of in bringing the same and paying 20s for every Bushel of such Salt, and proportionably for a greater or lesser quantity, for which the Carrier as well as the Owner shall be lyable jointly and severally, And the persons bringing or carrying the same, to be imprisoned by any one Justice of the Peace, by the space of six months without Bail, and until the penalty by payed:

And for Establishing an equality Trade That all Fleshes exported from Scotland to England and put on Board in Scotland to be Exported to parts beyond the Seas and provisions for ships in Scotland and for forreign voyages may be salted with Scots Salt paying the same Dutie for what Salt is so employed as the like quantity of such Salt pays in England and under the same penalties forfeitures and provisions for preventing of frauds as are mentioned in the Laws of England And that from and after the Union the Laws and Acts of Parliament in Scotland for Pineing Curing and Packing of Herrings White Fish and Salmond for Exportation with Forreign Salt only without any mixture of British or Irish Salt and for preventing of frauds in Curing and Packing of Fish be continued in force in Scotland subject to such alterations as shall be made by the Parliament of Great Britain.

And that all Fish exported from Scotland to parts beyond the Seas which shall be Cured with Forreign Salt only and without mixture of British or Irish Salt, shall have the same Eases Premiums and Drawbacks as are or shall be allowed to such persons as Export the like Fish from England: And that for Encouragement of the Herring Fishing there shall be allowed and payed to the Subjects Inhabitants of Great Britain during the present allowances for other Fishes 10s 5d Sterling for every Barrel of White Herrings which shall be exported from Scotland; And that there shall be allowed 5s Sterling for every Barrel of Beef of Pork salted with Forreign Salt without mixture of British or Irish Salt and Exported for sale from Scotland to parts beyond Sea alterable by the Parliament of Great Britain.

And if any matters of fraud relating to the said Duties on Salt shall hereafter appear which are not sufficiently provided against by this Article the same shall be subject to such further provisions as shall be thought fit by the Parliament of Great Britain.

Article 9

IX. That whenever the sum of œ1,997,763 8s 4d (and one) half penny shall be Enacted by the Parliament of Great Britain to be raised in that part of the United Kingdom now called England, on Land and other things usually charged in Acts of Parliament there for granting an aid to the Crown by a Land Tax; that part of the United Kingdom now called Scotland shall be charged by the same Act with a further sum of œ48,000 free of all Charges, as the Quota of Scotland to such Tax, and so proportionably for any greater or lesser sum raised in England by any Tax on Land and other things usually charged, together with the Land And that such Quota for Scotland in the cases aforesaid, be raised and collected in the same manner as the Cess now is in Scotland, but subject to such Regulations in the manner of Collecting, as shall be made by the Parliament of Great Britain.

Articles 10-13

X. That during the continuance of the respective Duties on Stampt paper, Vellom and Parchment, by the severall Acts now in force in England, Scotland shall not be charged with the same respective Duties.

XI. That during the continuance of the Duties payable in England on Windows and Lights which determines on 1st August 1710 Scotland shall not be charged with the same Duties.

XII. That during the continuance of the Duties payable in England on Coals, Culm and Cinders, which determines 30th September 1710 Scotland shall not be charged therewith for Coals Culm and Cinders consumed there but shall be charged with the same Duties as in England for all Coals, Culm and Cinders not consumed in Scotland.

XIII. That during the continuance of the Duty payable in England on Malt, which determines 24th June 1707, Scotland shall not be charged with that Duty.

Article 14

XIV. That the Kingdom of Scotland be not Charged with any other Duties laid on by the Parliament of England before the Union except these consented to in this Treaty, in regard it is agreed, That all necessary Provision shall be made by the Parliament of Scotland for the publick Charge and Service of that Kingdom for the year 1707: Provided nevertheless That if the Parliament of England shall think fit to lay any further Impositions by way of Customs, or such Excises, with which by virtue of this Treaty, Scotland is to be charged equally with England, in such case Scotland shall be lyable to the same Customs and Excises, and have an Equivalent to be settled by the Parliament of Great Britain;

With this further provision That any Malt to be made and consumed in that part of the United Kingdom now called Scotland shall not be charged with any Imposition upon Malt during this present War

And seeing it cannot be supposed that the Parliament of Great Britain will ever lay any sorts of Burthens upon the United Kingdom, but what they shall find necessity at that time for the Preservation and Good of the whole, and with due regard to the Circumstances and Abilities of every part of the United Kingdom Therefore it is agreed That there be no further Exemption insisted upon for any part of the United Kingdom, but that the consideration of any Exemption beyond that already agreed on in this Treaty, shall be left to the

determination of the Parliament of Great Britain.

Article 15

XV. Whereas by the Terms of this Treaty the Subjects of Scotland for preserving an Equality of Trade throughout the United Kingdom, will be lyable to severall Customs and Excises now payable in England, which will be applicable towards payment of the Debts of England, contracted before the Union;

It is agreed, That Scotland shall have an Equivalent for what the Subjects thereof shall be so charged towards payment of the said Debts of England, in all particulars whatsoever, in manner following viz.

That before the Union of the said Kingdoms, the sum of œ398,085 10s be granted to Her Majesty by the Parliament of England for the uses aftermentioned, being the Equivalent to be answered to Scotland for such parts of the saids Customs and Excises upon all Exciseable Liquors, with which that Kingdom is to be charged upon the Union, as will be applicable to the payment of the said Debts of England, according to the proportions which the present Customs in Scotland, being œ30,000 per annum : And which the present Excises on Excisable Liquors in Scotland, do bear to the Customs in England, computed at œ1,341,559 per annum :

And which the present Excises on Excisable Liquors in Scotland, being œ33,500 per annum, do bear to the Excises and Excisable Liquors in England, computed at œ947,602 per annum; Which sum of œ398,085 10s, shall be due and payable from the time of the Union:

And in regard That after the Union Scotland becoming lyable to the same Customs and Duties payable on Import and Export, and to the same Excises on all Exciseable Liquors

as in England as well as upon that account as upon the account of the Increase of Trade and People (which will be the happy consequence of the Union)* the said Revenues will much improve beyond the before mentioned annual values thereof, of which no present Estimate can be made, Yet nevertheless for the reasons aforesaid there ought to be a proportionable Equivalent answered to Scotland It is agreed That after the Union there shall be an Accompt kept of the said Duties arising in Scotland, to the end it may appear, what ought to be answered to Scotland, as an Equivalent for such proportion of the said encrease as shall be applicable to the payment of Debts of England.

And for the further and more effectuall answering the severall ends hereafter mentioned It is agreed that from and after the Union, the whole Encrease of the Revenues of Customs, and Duties on Import and Export, and Excise upon Exciseable Liquors in Scotland over and above the annual produce of the said respective Duties, as above stated, shall go and be applied, for the term of seven years, to the uses hereafter mentioned; And that upon the said account, there shall be answered to Scotland annually from the end of seven years after the Union, an Equivalent in proportion to such part of the said Increase as shall be applicable to the Debts of England, And generally that an Equivalent shall be answered to

And as for the uses to which the said sum of œ398,085 10s to be granted as aforesaid and all other monies, which are to be answered or allowed to Scotland as said is are to be applied It is agreed That in the first place out of the foresaid sum what consideration shall be found necessary to be had for any Losses which privat persons may sustain by reducing the Coin of Scotland to the Standard and Value of the Coin of England may be made good In the next place That the Capital Stock or fund of the African and Indian Company of Scotland advanced together with the interest for the said Capital Stock after the rate of 5% per annum from the respective times of the payment thereof shall be payed; Upon payment of which Capital Stock and Interest It is agreed The said Company be dissolved and cease And also that from the time of passing the Act of Parliament in England for raising the said sum of œ398,085 10s the said Company shall neither Trade nor Grant Licence to Trade Providing that if the said Stock and Interest shall not be payed in twelve months after the Commencement of the Union That then the said Company may from thence forward Trade or give Licence to Trade until the said hail Capital Stock and Interest shall be payed:

And as to the Overplus of the said sum of œ398,085 10s after payment of what consideration shall be had for losses in repairing the Coin and paying the said Capital Stock and Interest, and also the hail increase of the said Revenues of Customs Duties and Excises above the present value which shall arise in Scotland during the said term of seven years together with the Equivalent which shall become due upon the Improvement thereof in Scotland after the said term and also as to all other sums which according to the agreements aforesaid may become payable to Scotland by way of Equivalent for what that Kingdom shall hereafter become Scotland for such parts of the English Debts as Scotland may hereafter become lyable to pay by reason of the Union, other than such for which appropriations have been made by Parliament in England of the Customs, or other duties on Export and Import Excises on all Exciseable Liquors, in respect of which Debts, Equivalents are herein before

provided.

Article 16

XVI. That from and after the Union the Coin shall be of the same standard and value, throughout the United Kingdom, as now in England, And a Mint shall be continued in Scotland under the same Rules as the Mint in England And the present Officers of the Mint continued subject to such Regulations and Alterations as Her Majesty Her Heirs or Successors, or the Parliament of Great Britain shall think fit.

Article 17

XVII. That from and after the Union the same Weights and Measures shall be used throughout the United Kingdom as are now Established in England; And Standards of Weights and Measures shall be kept by those Burroughs in Scotland, to whom the keeping the Standards of Weights and Measures now in use there does of speciall Right belong; All which Standards shall be sent down to such respective Burroughs from the Standards kept in the Exchequer at Westminster, subject nevertheless to such Regulations as the Parliament of Great Britain shall think fit.

Article 18

XVIII. That the Laws concerning Regulation of Trade, Customs, and such Excises, to which Scotland is by virtue of this Treaty to be liable, be the same in Scotland, from and after the Union as in England; and that all other Laws, in use within the Kingdom of Scotland do after

the Union, and notwithstanding thereof, remain in the same force as before (except such as are contrary to or inconsistent with this Treaty) but alterable by the Parliament of Great Britain, With this difference betwixt the Laws concerning publick right Policy, and Civil Government, and those which concern private right and the Laws which concern publick right Policy and Civil Government may be made the same throughout the whole United Kingdom; but that no alteration be made in Laws which concern private Right, except for the evident utility of the subjects within Scotland.

Article 19

XIX. That the Court of Session or Colledge of Justice, do after the Union and notwithstanding thereof, remain in all time coming within Scotland as it is now constituted by the Laws of that Kingdom, and with the same Authority and Priviledges as before the Union; subject nevertheless to such Regulations for the better Administration of Justice as shall be made by the Parliament of Great Britain; And that hereafter none shall be named by Her Majesty or Her Royal Successors to be Ordinary Lords of Session but such who have served in the Colledge of Justice as Advocats or Principal Clerks of Session for the space of five years, or as Writers to the Signet for the space of ten years With this provision That no Writer to the Signet be capable to be admitted a Lord of the Session unless he undergo a private and publick Tryal on the Civil Law before the Faculty of Advocats and be found by them qualified for the said Office two years before he be named to be a Lord of the Session, yet so as the Qualifications made or to be made for capacitating persons to be named Ordinary Lords of Session may be altered by the Parliament of Great Britain.

And that the Court of Justiciary do also after the Union, and notwithstanding thereof remain in all time coming within Scotland, as it is now constituted by the Laws of that Kingdom, and with the same Authority and Priviledges as before the Union; subject nevertheless to such Regulations as shall be made by the Parliament of Great Britain, and without prejudice of other Rights of Justiciary:

And that all Admiralty Jurisdictions be under the Lord High Admirall or Commissioners for the Admiralty of Great Britain for the time being; And that the Court of Admiralty now Established in Scotland be continued, And that all Reviews, Reductions or Suspensions of the Sentences in Maritime Cases competent to the Jurisdiction of that Court remain the the same manner after the Union as now in Scotland, until the Parliament of Great Britain shall make such Regulations and Alterations, as shall be judged expedient for the whole United Kingdom, so as there be alwayes continued in Scotland a Court of Admiralty such as in England, for determination of all Maritime Cases relating to private Rights in Scotland competent to the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty Court; subject nevertheless to such Regulations and Alterations as shall be thought proper to be made by the Parliament of Great Britain; And that the Heritable Rights of Admiralty and Vice-Admiralties in Scotland be reserved to the respective Proprietors as Rights of Property, subject nevertheless, as to the manner of Exercising such Heritable Rights to such Regualtions and Alterations as shall be thought proper to be made by the Parliament of Great Britain;

And that all other Courts now in being within the Kingdom of Scotland do remain, but subject to Alterations by the Parliament of Great Britain; And that all Inferior Courts within the said Limits do remain subordinate, as they are now to the Supream Courts of Justice within the same in all time coming;

And that no Causes in Scotland be cognoscible by the Courts of Chancery, Queens-Bench, Common-Pleas, or any other Court in Westminster-hall; And that the said Courts, or any other of the like nature after the Union, shall have no power to Cognosce, Review or Alter the Acts or Sentences of the Judicatures within Scotland, or stop the Execution of the same;

And that there be a Court of Exchequer in Scotland after the Union, for deciding Questions concerning the Revenues of Customs and Excises there, having the same power and authority in such cases, as the Court of Exchequer has in England And that the said Court of Exchequer in Scotland have power of passing Signatures, Gifts Tutories, and in other things as the Court of Exchequer in Scotland hath; And that the Court of Exchequer that now is in Scotland do remain, until a New Court of Exchequer be settled by the Parliament of Great Britain in Scotland after the Union;

And that after the Union the Queens Majesty and Her Royal Successors, may Continue a Privy Council in Scotland, for preserving of public Peace and Order, until the Parliament of Great Britain shall think fit to alter it or establish any other effectual method for that end.

Article 20

XX. That all heritable Offices, Superiorities, heritable Jurisdictions, Offices for life, and Jurisdictions for life, be reserved to the Owners thereof, as Rights of Property, in the same manner as they are now enjoyed by the Laws of Scotland, notwithstanding of this Treaty.

Article 21

XXI. That the Rights and Privileges of the Royall Burroughs in Scotland as they now are, Do Remain entire after the Union, and notwithstanding thereof.

Article 22

XXII. That by virtue of this Treaty, Of the Peers of Scotland at the time of the Union 16 shall be the number to Sit and Vote in the House of Lords, and 45 the number of the Representatives of Scotland in the House of Commons of the Parliament of Great Britain; And that when Her Majesty Her Heirs or Successors, shall Declare Her or their pleasure for holding the first or any subsequent Parliament of Great Britain until the Parliament of Great Britain shall make further provision therein, A Writ do issue under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom, Directed to the Privy Council of Scotland, Commanding them to Cause 16 Peers, who are to sit in the House of Lords to be Summoned to Parliament and 45 Members to be Elected to sit in the House of Commons of the Parliament of Great Britain according to the Agreement in the Treaty, in such manner as by a subsequent Act of this present Session of the Parliament of Scotland shall be settled; Which Act is hereby Declared to be as valid as if it were a part of and ingrossed in this Treaty:

And that the Names of the Persons so Summoned and Elected, shall be Returned by the Privy Council of Scotland into the Court from whence the said Writ did issue. And that if her Majesty, on or before the 1st day of May next, on which day the Union is to take place shall Declare under the Great Seal of England, That it is expedient, that the Lords of Parliament of England, and Commons of the present Parliament of England should be the Members of the respective Houses of the first Parliament of Great Britain for and on the part of England, then the said Lords of Parliament of England, and Commons of the present Parliament of England, shall be the members of the respective Houses of the first Parliament of Great Britain, for and on the part of England:

And Her Majesty may by Her Royal Proclamation under the Great Seal of Great Britain, appoint the said first Parliament of Great Britain to Meet at such time and place as Her Majesty shall think fit; which time shall not be less than 50 days after the date of such Proclamation; And the time and place of the Meeting of such Parliament being so appointed, a Writ shall be immediately issued under the Great Seal of Great Britain, directed to the Privy Council of Scotland, for the summoning the 16 Peers, and for Electing forty five Members, by whom Scotland is to be Represented in the Parliament of Great Britain:

And the Lords of Parliament of England, and the 16 Peers of Scotland, such 16 Peers being Summoned and Returned in the manner agreed by this Treaty; and the Members of the House of Commons of the said Parliament of England and the 45 Members for Scotland, such 45 Members being Elected and Returned in the manner agreed in this Treaty shall assemble and meet respectively in their respective houses of the Parliament of Great Britain, at such time and place as shall be so appointed by Her Majesty, and shall be the Two houses of the first Parliament of Great Britain, And that Parliament may Continue for such time only as the present Parliament of England might have Continued, if the Union of the Two Kingdoms had not been made, unless sooner Dissolved by Her Majesty;

And that every one of the Lords of Parliament of Great Britain, and every member of the House of Commons of the Parliament of Great Britain in the first and all succeeding Parliaments of Great Britain until the Parliament of Great Britain shall otherwayes Direct, shall take the respective Oaths, appointed to be taken in stead of the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, by an Act of Parliament made in England in the first year of the Reign of the late King William and Queen Mary entituled An Act for the abrogating of the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, and appointing other Oaths, and Make Subscribe and audibly Repeat the Declaration mentioned in an Act of Parliament made in England in the 30th year of the Reign of King Charles the Second entituled An Act for the more effectual preserving the Kings Person and Government by Disabling Papists from sitting in either House of Parliament, and shall take and subscribe the Oath mentioned in An Act of Parliament made in England, in the first year of Her Majesties Reign entituled An Act to Declare the Alterations in the Oath appointed to be taken by the Act Entituled An Act for the further security of His Majesties Person, and the Succession of the Crown in the Protestant Line, and for Extinguishing the Hopes of the pretended Prince of Wales, and all other pretenders and their open and secret Abettors, and for Declaring the Association to be determined, at such time, and in such manner as the Members of both Houses of Parliament of England are by the said respective Acts, directed to take, make and subscribe the same upon the penalties and disabilities in the said respective Acts contained.

And it is Declared and Agreed That these words This Realm, the Crown of this Realm, and the Queen of this Realm, mentioned in the Oaths and Declaration contained in the aforsaid Acts, which were intended to signify the Crown and Realm of England, shall be understood of the Crown and Realm of Great Britain, And that in that sense, the said Oaths and Declaration be taken and subscribed by the members of both Houses of the Parliament of Great Britain.

Article 23

XXIII. That the foresaid 16 Peers of Scotland, mentioned in the last preceding Article, to sit in the House of Lords of the Parliament of Great Britain shall have all Priviledges of Parliament which the Peers of England now have, and which They or any Peers of Great Britain shall have after the Union, and particularly the Right of sitting upon the tryals of Peers: And in case of the tryal of any Peer in time of Adjournment or Prorogation of Parliament, the said 16 Peers shall be summoned in the same manner, and have the same powers and priviledges at such tryal, as any other Peers of Great Britain; And that in case any tryals of Peers shall hereafter happen when there is no Parliament in being, the 16 Peers of Scotland who sate in the last preceeding Parliament, shall be summoned in the same manner and have the same powers and privileges at such tryals as any other Peers of Great Britain;

And that all Peers of Scotland, and their successors to their Honours and Dignities, shall from and after the Union be Peers of Great Britain, and have Rank and Precedency next and

immediately after the Peers of the like orders and degrees in England at the time of the Union, and before all Peers of Great Britain of the like orders and degrees, who may be Created after the Union, and shall be tryed as Peers of Great Britain, and shall Enjoy all Privileges of Peers, as fully as the Peers of England do now, or as they, or any other Peers of Great Britain may hereafter Enjoy the same except the Right and Privilege of sitting in the House of Lords and the Privileges depending thereon, and particularly the Right of sitting upon the tryals of Peers.

Article 24

XXIV. That from and after the Union, there be One Great Seal for the United Kingdom of Great Britain, which shall be different from the Great Seal now used in either Kingdom; And that the Quartering the Arms and the Rank and Precedency of the Lyon King of Arms of the Kingdom of Scotland as may best suit the Union be left to Her Majesty: And that in the mean time the Great Seal of England be used as the Great Seal of the United Kingdom, and that the Great Seal of the United Kingdom be used for Sealing Writs to Elect and Summon the Parliament of Great Britain and for sealing all Treaties with Forreign Princes and States, and all publick Acts Instruments and Orders of State which Concern the whole United Kingdom, and in all other matters relating to England, as the Great Seal of England is now used, and that a Seal in Scotland after the Union be alwayes kept and made use of in all things relating to private Rights or Grants, which have usually passed the Great Seal of Scotland, and which only concern Offices, Grants, Commissions, and private Rights within the Kingdom, And that until such Seal shall be appointed by Her Majesty the present Great Seal of Scotland shall be used for such purposes;

And that the Privy Seal, Signet, Casset, Signet of the Justiciary Court, Quarter Seal, and Seals of Courts now used in Scotland be Continued, but that the said Seals be altered and adapted to the state of the Union as Her Majesty shall think fit; And the said Seals, and all of them, and the Keepers of them, shall be subject to Regulations as the Parliament of Great Britain shall hereafter make:

And that the Crown, Scepter and Sword of State, the Records of Parliament, and all other Records, Rolls and Registers whatsoever, both publick and private generall and particular, and Warrands thereof Continue to be keeped as they are within that part of the United Kingdom now called Scotland, and that they shall so remain in all time coming

notwithstanding of the Union.

Article 25

XXV. That all Laws and Statutes in either Kingdom so far as they are contrary to, or inconsistent with the Terms of these Articles, or any of them, shall from and after the Union cease and become void, and shall be so declared to be by the respective Parliaments of the said Kingdoms.

[Quinn]

snip the usual verbiage
As originally stated, the UK does not have a formal written constitution.

-Quinn

Read this. Deal with facts, not fiction, for once.

LMFAO....... Your command of the facts is about as impressive as a fat kid’s command of proper dieting techniques. So as to avoid yet more confusion on your part, I’ll make this as simple as possible:

Your own fucking Parliament says that you don’t have a formal written constitution, genius.

Deal with that, for once.

-Quinn

[Quinn]

Let’s go one step further in adding to the simplicity with which we dispel the farcical notion that the UK has a single, formal written constitution:

Sources stating that the UK has a formal written constitution:
1. MacShreach

Just a few of the sources stating that the UK has no formal written constitution:

1. The United Kingdom’s Parliament:
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200203/ldselect/ldconst/168/16809.htm
2. Lord Woolf, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales:
http://www.dca.gov.uk/judicial/speeches/lcj030304.htm
3. The UK Department of Constitutional Affairs:
http://www.gnn.gov.uk/environment/detail.asp?ReleaseID=213134&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=True
4. An article published as an update to “A Guide to the UK Legal System:”
http://www.llrx.com/features/uk2.htm#UK%20Legal%20System
5. Politics.co.uk:
http://www.politics.co.uk/issuebrief/domestic-policy/constitution/written-constitution/written-constitution-$366652.htm
6. Eurolegal.org:
http://www.eurolegal.org/britpages/ukconstset.htm
7. The World Bank Institute:
http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:vBb57bzL53oJ:siteresources.worldban k.org/WBI/Resources/
8. The Russian Federation’s English Language website for the G8 Summit:
http://en.g8russia.ru/g8/members/greatbritain/index-print.html
9. The French Ambassador to the United States:
http://www.ambafrance-us.org/news/statmnts/2004/levitte_florida032204.asp
10. Cornell Law School:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/Legal_systems
11. CIA Factbook:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/uk.html
12. The Centre for Citizenship:
http://www.centreforcitizenship.org/facts.html
13. The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies:
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/research_topics/research_topics_show.htm?doc_id=290848
14. Wikipedia.org:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom
15. Reference.com:
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Constitution
16. Constitution.org:
http://www.constitution.org/cons/natlcons.htm
17. About.com:
http://experts.about.com/e/c/co/Constitution.htm
18. Directgov:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/Gtgl1/GuideToGovernment/Parliament/ParliamentArticles/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4003244&chk=y0Mvxb
19. The BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/talking_politics/88593.stm
20. The British Embassy:
http://www.uknow.or.jp/be_e/s_topics/100faqs/qa08.htm

I could go on listing sources, but I’m sure even you get it at this point. So, do you still want to discuss this topic? Probably not. It’s ok. I’m sure a lot of people don’t know whether or not their own government has a formal written constitution :roll: It could happen to anyone.

-Quinn

[willib]

here is an enlightening link http://www.frontpagemag.com/GoPostal/commentdetail.asp?ID=7445&commentID=85956 I am utterly shocked.

[chefmike]

Yes, but the origins of the vendetta against J began here...

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=7349&start=0



In which thread we find this telling little gem:



(PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 10:10 pm)
You're obviously a racist just like myself and Quinn.

Get away.

Whichever mod zapped J's poisonous racist diatribe gets a huge vote of thanks from me. Furthermore it is a very unusual forum where contributors are allowed to start threads deliberately attacking the mods. Zapping his "Why was my hate post zapped" thread too was quite right. Plenty of boards would have simply slung him out for his cheek, end of story.

I see a lot of protest from a few loudmouths bitching about a mod that has decided to flex some muscles. Well, I just want that mod to know this is one loudmouth that agrees with him or her. I didn't ask for it, I don't have the power to do it, but it's way past time.

The only thing telling about it is that you chose to ignore the sarcasm of the post in a lame attempt to support your grudge against J and myself, not to mention Arianna and others...this grudge dates back to your allegiance and defense of a certain nutjob from Baltimore...yeah, the one who brags about hanging out in the VIP section of her local Ruby Tuesdays :roll: ...we'll just call her (?) man-i-ca...
She was also fond of hysterically threatening to report people to the FBI, as you also did on this forum recently...

[interestedParty]

interestedParty,
Sorry u feel so disgusted, but it is summertime and the roses r n full bloom...grab some and savor the scent, it may help pick u up. As i've said in some of my previous posts on this board, i do believe there was government complicity in the WTC attack of 9-11 and there is plenty of evidence that has been ignored and glossed over that lends support to this view. I stand firm n this informed opinion. Go 2 a library and pick up a copy of "Crossing the Rubicon - The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil" by Michael Ruppert. It's one of the most well written and researched books out there on the subject. But thats another topic from the current one so i want digress. The link that u cited was posted primarily 4 the Toronto Star article(which has been repaced by an analysis) that ties the current Israeli aggression with a probable attack on Iran and not 4 the Alex Jones audio commentary though it is quite interesting. So stay on topic my friend and like i suggested 2 another here, dont get so emotional. It clouds one's judgement and ability 2 reason. 8) 8)

There are always multiple explanations for any one event, both large and small, and the realm of possibility is seemingly infinite. However, there is a difference between possibility and probability. I would like to refer you to a famous philosophical device known as Occam's Razor, which states (and I'm paraphrasing here) that the explanation which contains the fewest assumptions is the most likely to be true. I'll give you the link to the Wikipedia article on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occams_razor.

Just because a theory sounds like a good story, or appeals to your own particular bias against authority, doesn't make it any more probable than other theories.

One thing that makes this 'Inside Job' theory particularly absurd, is that an organization so efficient, so precise, so ruthless, and so capable as to be able to pull off such a feat as September 11, AND get away with it would, in my estimation, be more than up to the task of pacifying a country like Iraq. Why should this mighty edifice be so brilliant at the former, yet so inept at the latter?

[interestedParty]

The thing about a conspiracy theory is that it can neither be confirmed nor denied. Thus, it requires no proof. In fact, that very same lack of evidence can be — and sometimes is — profferred up as evidence(e.g., "There isn't any evidence because it was covered up"). With this pretzel logic, the most fantastical and absurd theories can be defended with the simple phrase: "That's what they want you to think."

twowaybro, didn't you read this post of mine? It is about you, you know. I think if you had actually read it, you'd of found it to be most enlightening.

[interestedParty]

Oh, one more thing: I'm not getting 'emotional,' when I say that you disgust me, it's because it's a fact. You nauseate me. I can't help it, I'm allergic to bullshit.

[interestedParty]

snip the usual verbiage
As originally stated, the UK does not have a formal written constitution.

-Quinn

Read this. Deal with facts, not fiction, for once.

LMFAO....... Your command of the facts is about as impressive as a fat kid’s command of proper dieting techniques. So as to avoid yet more confusion on your part, I’ll make this as simple as possible:

Your own fucking Parliament says that you don’t have a formal written constitution, genius.

Deal with that, for once.

-Quinn

LOL, put that idiot in his place, Quinn!

[chefmike]

The following links provide a pretty accurate analysis of this current crisis that unfortunately looks 2 b spiraling n2 a much wider conflict that i believe is Israel's real intent as i intimated in my original post. 8) 8)

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/printer_997.shtml

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ww3/israel_attacks_lebanon_psyop.htm

Sweet Fancy Moses...we have another nutjob quoting infowars.com...LMAO...I suspect that it's only a short time until we hear from anoter like-minded lad...yes...I am speaking of James Redford...aka Jamie "Kascynski" Michelle...I'm sure that you two will hit it off...

James claims to have met jesus face-to-face...have you met allah face-to-face? If so, maybe you two great minds can get them together and broker a peace treaty.... :roll:

[twowaybro]

One thing that makes this 'Inside Job' theory particularly absurd, is that an organization so efficient, so precise, so ruthless, and so capable as to be able to pull off such a feat as September 11, AND get away with it would, in my estimation, be more than up to the task of pacifying a country like Iraq. Why should this mighty edifice be so brilliant at the former, yet so inept at the latter?

The answer 2 ur question is readily obvious 2 anyone who is fluent in US geo-political/military history. The US has never been very good in guerilla/urban combat but has always done quite well in executing covert operations. A more proper question would b how could a ragtag, but well funded, group of Islamic "jihadist" totally circumvent the most technically advanced defense network(NORAD) in the modern world and get away with it. No way possible unless it's ALLOWED 2 happen. But i dont care 2 debate the veracity of the "official" 9-11 findings. I'm pretty much convinced that the government(and particularly Dick Cheney) is complicit in that event. And 4 all intents and purposes, that case is closed anyway and is unlikely 2 ever b re-opened. With no-one exept 4 a stooge ever being brought 2 trial and no-one in any key positions of authority on that day ever being seriously brought 2 task 4 supposedly "falling asleep at the wheel". The more pressing issue right now and one that should be debated is the current illegal Israeli operation in Lebanon that has caused the needless deaths of innocent civilians on both sides and is n danger of sparking a wider regional and dare i say global conflict. I have 2 say that it is not totally unexpected when one considers the ramifications of Peak Oil and the drive that the industrialized world is on 2 shore up and secure the largest remaining reliable sources of energy reserves. Most wars have pretty much always been about the control of resources. Israel is basically just setting up the stage 4 its "big brother" 2 continue it's mission 2 secure and shore up that region with Iran being the big prize.

[twowaybro]

p.s. I heard that Pepto Bismo works pretty well on nausea and it matches the color scheme of this board....so, have a sip and get a grip.

[interestedParty]

Let me reiterate:


There are always multiple explanations for any one event, both large and small, and the realm of possibility is seemingly infinite. However, there is a difference between possibility and probability. I would like to refer you to a famous philosophical device known as Occam's Razor, which states (and I'm paraphrasing here) that the explanation which contains the fewest assumptions is the most likely to be true. I'll give you the link to the Wikipedia article on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occams_razor.

Just because a theory sounds like a good story, or appeals to your own particular bias against authority, doesn't make it any more probable than other theories.

[interestedParty]

p.s. I heard that Pepto Bismo works pretty well on nausea and it matches the color scheme of this board....so, have a sip and get a grip.

How do you know Pepto-Bismo isn't some poison created by the military-industrial complex? Meant to create cancer and thereby provide the pharmaceutical industry with consumers for their latest batch of cancer drugs?

[interestedParty]

One thing that makes this 'Inside Job' theory particularly absurd, is that an organization so efficient, so precise, so ruthless, and so capable as to be able to pull off such a feat as September 11, AND get away with it would, in my estimation, be more than up to the task of pacifying a country like Iraq. Why should this mighty edifice be so brilliant at the former, yet so inept at the latter?

The answer 2 ur question is readily obvious 2 anyone who is fluent in US geo-political/military history. The US has never been very good in guerilla/urban combat but has always done quite well in executing covert operations. A more proper question would b how could a ragtag, but well funded, group of Islamic "jihadist" totally circumvent the most technically advanced defense network(NORAD) in the modern world and get away with it. No way possible unless it's ALLOWED 2 happen. But i dont care 2 debate the veracity of the "official" 9-11 findings. I'm pretty much convinced that the government(and particularly Dick Cheney) is complicit in that event. And 4 all intents and purposes, that case is closed anyway and is unlikely 2 ever b re-opened. With no-one exept 4 a stooge ever being brought 2 trial and no-one in any key positions of authority on that day ever being seriously brought 2 task 4 supposedly "falling asleep at the wheel". The more pressing issue right now and one that should be debated is the current illegal Israeli operation in Lebanon that has caused the needless deaths of innocent civilians on both sides and is n danger of sparking a wider regional and dare i say global conflict. I have 2 say that it is not totally unexpected when one considers the ramifications of Peak Oil and the drive that the industrialized world is on 2 shore up and secure the largest remaining reliable sources of energy reserves. Most wars have pretty much always been about the control of resources. Israel is basically just setting up the stage 4 its "big brother" 2 continue it's mission 2 secure and shore up that region with Iran being the big prize.

So it's true! Facts and empirical data don't have a place in your little paranoid universe!

You just contradicted yourself. If the US has never been good at combating guerillas, then wouldn't it be all the easier for said guerillas to perpetrate their own little covert operation? Besides, NORAD was designed to track incoming missiles, not divine the intentions of hijackers.

Let me put it to you this way. A small group of hijackers, each armed with what in prison might be called a 'shank,' overpower the flight attendants, and break into the cockpit of an airliner. They then announce that they're hijacking the plane. Now, it has been some time since the last such incident, so the passengers are scared shitless. It's very probable that air-traffic controllers were able to figure out that these planes had been hijacked; however, all hijackings in the past have followed a distinct pattern: hijackers commandeer the plane, take it to a neutral country, and make their demands. Apart from the ambitiousness of this hijacking (several planes at once), there isn't much to make people on the ground (or in the planes for that matter) suspect that this time around would be any different. For the people on the ground, military and civilian, the goal is to get the passengers off the planes and out of danger. When the first plane hits, confusion reigns. I don't know how familiar you are with psychology (actually, you might benefit from a good psychologist), but in such a situation, it is very likely that the initial reaction would be indecision. The dilemma is this: What do we do? If we shoot down the planes, the hostages will die. If we don't, more buildings will be destroyed. It doesn't matter that this dilemma is irrational, in a panic situation the initial reaction often is irrational. The fact is that this whole operation was very well planned; it was devised by a very shrewd hand. That person could've been Atta or one of the hijackers, or Osama bin Ladin, or Zawahiri. This is where you make your most serious error in judgement: you give the terrorists too little credit, and the US military too much credit. As you yourself said, the military isn't very good at fighting guerillas. This tactic of using jetliners as missiles never occured to the Pentagon. You seem to want to endow the military with almost godlike omnipotence. For some reason, it doesn't occur to you that the Pentagon could fuck up, but it did. For some reason you don't want to believe that a bunch of jihadists could be so clever, but they were.

So, with that said, I would like to know exactly how you judge the veracity of your data. In other words, when you read two contradictory 'facts' from different sources, how do you, personally, decide which is true and which is false? Bear in mind that these two 'facts' have nothing to do with your current delusional system, they're about some other, hypothetical event.

Enlighten me as to your thought processes.

[Quinn]

snip the usual verbiage
As originally stated, the UK does not have a formal written constitution.

-Quinn

Read this. Deal with facts, not fiction, for once.

Your command of the facts is about as impressive as a fat kid’s command of proper dieting techniques. So as to avoid yet more confusion on your part, I’ll make this as simple as possible:

Your own fucking Parliament says that you don’t have a formal written constitution, genius.

Deal with that, for once.

-Quinn

LOL, put that idiot in his place, Quinn!

LMAO... You know, we should be careful, Interestedparty. That factually challenged dullard has quite a reputation. If you don't believe me, you can just ask him:


Are we coming up to speed yet, whizz? BTW I advise you to watch the presumptious tone when addressing me, I have a reputation you maybe don't know about...............yet

What a sad, yet entertaining, little clown.

-Quinn

[chefmike]

LMAO... You know, we should be careful, Interestedparty. That factually challenged dullard has quite a reputation. If you don't believe me, you can just ask him:

MacShreach wrote:
Are we coming up to speed yet, whizz? BTW I advise you to watch the presumptious tone when addressing me, I have a reputation you maybe don't know about...............yet


What a sad, yet entertaining, little clown.

-Quinn


LMFAO...reputation? If you reside in a pasture you might have reason to be cautious about his "reputation"...

As his old friend and tormentor J once said...

"Why do Scottish men wear kilts? Because sheep can hear a zipper opening fifty feet away..."

[White_Male_Canada]

Bob Dylan


Well, the neighborhood bully, he's just one man,
His enemies say he's on their land.
They got him outnumbered about a million to one,
He got no place to escape to, no place to run.
He's the neighborhood bully.

The neighborhood bully just lives to survive,
He's criticized and condemned for being alive.
He's not supposed to fight back, he's supposed to have thick skin,
He's supposed to lay down and die when his door is kicked in.
He's the neighborhood bully.

The neighborhood bully been driven out of every land,
He's wandered the earth an exiled man.
Seen his family scattered, his people hounded and torn,
He's always on trial for just being born.
He's the neighborhood bully.

Well, he knocked out a lynch mob, he was criticized,
Old women condemned him, said he should apologize.
Then he destroyed a bomb factory, nobody was glad.
The bombs were meant for him.
He was supposed to feel bad.
He's the neighborhood bully.

Well, the chances are against it and the odds are slim
That he'll live by the rules that the world makes for him,
'Cause there's a noose at his neck and a gun at his back
And a license to kill him is given out to every maniac.
He's the neighborhood bully.

He got no allies to really speak of.
What he gets he must pay for, he don't get it out of love.
He buys obsolete weapons and he won't be denied
But no one sends flesh and blood to fight by his side.
He's the neighborhood bully.

Well, he's surrounded by pacifists who all want peace,
They pray for it nightly that the bloodshed must cease.
Now, they wouldn't hurt a fly.
To hurt one they would weep.
They lay and they wait for this bully to fall asleep.
He's the neighborhood bully.

Every empire that's enslaved him is gone,
Egypt and Rome, even the great Babylon.
He's made a garden of paradise in the desert sand,
In bed with nobody, under no one's command.
He's the neighborhood bully.

Now his holiest books have been trampled upon,
No contract he signed was worth what it was written on.
He took the crumbs of the world and he turned it into wealth,
Took sickness and disease and he turned it into health.

He's the neighborhood bully.
What's anybody indebted to him for?
Nothin', they say.
He just likes to cause war.
Pride and prejudice and superstition indeed,
They wait for this bully like a dog waits to feed.

He's the neighborhood bully.
What has he done to wear so many scars?
Does he change the course of rivers?
Does he pollute the moon and stars?
Neighborhood bully, standing on the hill,
Running out the clock, time standing still,
Neighborhood bully.

Source: Copyright © 1983 by Special Rider Music. All rights reserved. International copyright secured. Reprinted by permission.

[chefmike]

Q. why do scottish men fuck sheep at the edge of a cliff?

A. so the sheep push back...


yay, another reason to delete me...

Sweet Fancy Moses!!

The Yiddish Avenger has struck again!!

Is no one safe from this menace?

What's next? Matzoh balls in the public school lunchrooms?

Matzoh balls on your favorite trannies?

Lock up your children...it's a well known fact that those Jew bastards are fond of drinking their blood...

Newt Gingrich is right, this is indeed WW3...

[scorpion]

complicated situation. there have always been war in this part of the world and I think they never gonna stop.

[Jamie Michelle]

Sorry 4 jumping off topic here but with all the madness being perpetrated by Israel as of late i just have 2 rant 4 a second. This government has taken idiocy, cruelty and hatred 2 a whole new level. They r constantly in violation of international law in their geo-strategic policies and this is only fostered and allowed 2 prevail with the help of us in the West( US and Britain). These people are dangerously close to igniting a spark that will usher in perilous times in that region and dare i say the world. Personally, i think that this current round of violence on Israels' part is aimed at provoking Iran into conflict and thereby giving them an excuse to take out Iran's nuclear facilities. This would b a geo-political mistake in my opinion and the West must apply pressure on the Israeli regime not 2 pursue this course of action. The consequences of such a move r 2 dire 2 even contemplate. Who has granted these people the right 2 determine the future of another sovereign state? How long will the powerful Israeli lobby hold US foreign policy hostage? As occupiers on stolen land one would think that reason would dictate 2 the Israeli regime that the only rational course of action 4 peace in this region is through negotiation and a back down of open hostility and continued occupation and oppression. The Palestinian people have a right 2 statehood and self-determination and as 2 who and how they will b governed. How long will the world stand by and watch this travesty of justice continue....hmmm??? 8) 8)

Before, during and after the formation of the modern Israeli government from 1947-1948, Palestinians whose families had lived on the land for well over a thousand years had their land violently stolen from them to be handed over to European and Russian Jewish invaders. The notion that said European and Russian Jewish invaders had any right to the land which neither they nor any of their traceable family members had ever lived on is based upon fallacious religious doctrine.

But no matter, when it comes to stealing land, any pretext that manages to obfuscate the reality of the situation from enough people will do. In this regard, the land-theft from the ancient Palestinian natives was no different than any other in world history.

To be just, the Israeli government must be dismantled posthaste. Even in terms of most governments, it is a violently racist, brutal, and ethnic-cleansing occupying force. Although no government has any right to exist (because they are all simply the largest mafia on their respective block, i.e., criminal gangs writ large), all the more so is the Israeli government's existence illegitimate.

Any land taken from their rightful Palestinian owners via the use of aggression must be given back to the families of the victims.

If the Jewish would-be settlers want those lands, then they must voluntarily purchase them just as you or I (in the U.S.) would have to do if we saw a farm or house that we liked and desired to live there (of course, with the somewhat recent Supreme Court ruling on this matter, if you've got enough money to bribe your local government then you can just have them steal the land for you--nevertheless, my present comments pertain to just behavior). This manner of conduct is called being an upright, decent person, instead of an immoral brute who simply takes with force what he wants, murdering and rampaging in the process.

See also:

"50 years on, Lavon Affair still sparks public debate in Israel," Dan Baron, Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA), July 20, 2004:

http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?strwebhead=%26%238216%3BLavon% 20Affair%26%238217%3B%20still%20riles%20Israel

http://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/articles/2004/08/17/news/israel/zalavon0720.txt

PrisonPlanet.com News Archive: Israeli Roots of Hamas:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives_hamas.html

"Puppet On A String: Hamas Dances To Israel's Tune" by Paul Joseph Watson:

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/puppet_on_a_string.html

"9/11 and Anthrax: FRAMING ARABS," WhatReallyHappened.com:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/framingarabs.html

"Tracking the 19 Hijackers--What are they up to now?--At least 9 of them survived 9/11," WelfareState.com:

http://www.welfarestate.com/911/

http://web.archive.org/web/20021208013054/http://www.welfarestate.com/911/

http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:qMk1q6w9J4oJ:www.welfarestate.com/911/

"Extreme Right: Spark intifada to prevent expulsions," Efrat Weiss, Yedioth Ahronoth, June 14, 2006:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3263038,00.html

"Israeli agents accused of creating fake al-Qaeda cell," Sophie Claudet, Agence France-Presse (AFP), December 9, 2002:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/08/1038950271656.html

"The Phony (Mossad) Al Qaeda Cell in Palestine," WhatReallyHappened.com:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fakealqaeda.html

"Mossad Exposed in Phony 'Palestinian Al-Qaeda' Caper," Michele Steinberg and Hussein Askary, Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), Volume 29, Number 49, December 20, 2002:

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2002/2949idf_qaeda.html

"Nidal planned to oust Saddam," NewsInsight.net, August 28, 2002:

"The Palestinian terrorist, Abu Nidal, was working for the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, for the last four years and was plotting a coup against Iraqi president Saddam Hussain at the behest of Western powers, top diplomats said.":

http://www.prisonplanet.com/news_alert_hamas3.html

http://www.newsinsight.net/nati2.asp?recno=1293&ctg=World

http://web.archive.org/web/20021120032707/http://www.intellnet.org/news/2002/08/29/11285-1.html

"Hamas history tied to Israel," Richard Sale, UPI Terrorism Correspondent From the International Desk, United Press International (UPI), June 18, 2002:

http://web.archive.org/web/20020901031628/http://www.eto.home.att.net/hamas1.html

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=18062002-051845-8272r

"The Hamas-Likud Pairing," Editorial, Jerusalem Post, August 25, 1995:

http://www.io.com/~jewishwb/iris/archives/608.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/news_alert_hamas4.html

"Israeli Roots of Hamas are being exposed," Dean Andromidas, Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), Volume 29, Number 2, January 18, 2002:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/AND204A.html

"Sharon War Plan Exposed: Hamas Gang Is His Tool," Jeffrey Steinberg, Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), Volume 28, Number 27, July 20, 2001:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/STE204A.html

"Israel's Hamas," George Szamuely, The New York Press, Volume 15, Issue 17, April 2002:

http://www.nypress.com/15/17/taki/2.cfm

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/SZA204A.html

Israel's Sacred Terrorism: A Study Based on Moshe Sharett's Personal Diary and Other Documents by Livia Rokach, foreword by Noam Chomsky (AAUG Press; Third Edition: 1986), ISBN: 0-937694-70-3 (0937694703):

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/essays/rokach.html

---

And let us not forget that the largest terrorist act in Palestine was and remains the bombing of the King David Hotel on July 26, 1946 by Jews dressed as Arabs. 91 people were killed and around 45 people were injured. The attack was ordered by David Ben Gurion and directed by Menachem Begin, both of whom would later become Israeli Prime Ministers. For more on that, see:

"King David Hotel bombing," Wikipedia:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030228081251/http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel

"The Bombing Of The King David Hotel":

http://web.archive.org/web/20011019014555/http://www.iap.org/kingdavidhotel.htm

See also:

WhatReallyHappened.com News Articles Archive:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/May03articles.html

"5/18/03 Nine killed in double Jerusalem suicide bombing
http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2003%20News%20archives/May%202003%20News/18%20n/Nine%20killed%20in%20double%20Jerusalem%20suicide% 20bombing.htm Police Chief Shlomo Aharonishki said the first bomber was disguised as an Orthodox Jew and that a skullcap and prayer shawl were found on him. (Interesting that nobody ever suspects that bombers who look like Arabs might be in disguise, especially since the King David Hotel was blown up by Israelis dressed as Arabs, not to mention the infamous Lavon Affair. In any event, the timing makes it obvious that the bombings were intended to derail the peace process. Now, who wanted that to happen? That's your ultimate mastermind.)"

[Quinn]

Q: How do you disperse an angry Scottish mob?
A: Nae bother - just take up a collection.

-Quinn

[johnie]

I didn't really read the rest of the posts up there, but I thought I would mention that last year I cought a documentary about the drug problem in Tel-Aviv and they touched upon the TV / TS escort scene, I believe it was on HBO.

There were definately some cuties working there. Maybe the Lebonese are trying to kidnap the Israeli TS's for themselves, and I'm sure that pisses the Israeli's off.

[chefmike]

And as for James Kascynski Redford aka Jamie "don't you think I'm almost as cute as that Eddie guy from Pearl Jam" Michelle...

Let's take a look at some of his prior postings on the "final solution..."

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=7044&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=110

[Dino Velvet]

I didn't really read the rest of the posts up there, but I thought I would mention that last year I cought a documentary about the drug problem in Tel-Aviv and they touched upon the TV / TS escort scene, I believe it was on HBO.

I think I remember seeing that. Was the prostitute giving hummers in an alley that had piles of spent condoms in it? That's the only part I remember. HBO does the best hooker and druggie documentaries ever.

During this whole crisis in the Middle East, I remember just how awesome that Tom Hanks was on SNL when he played Uri Shurinson on Sabra Price Is Right.

Check this out.

[Shot: Sabra Price Is Right game show set]

Harvey: Live from 47th Street between Broadway and 6th Avenue-you can't miss it!-it's SABRA PRICE IS RIGHT! Alright so let's go with the game then. Here is the host, URI SHURINSON!

[Uri enters set]

Uri: Alright-alright-alright! Good-good-good! Yes-yes, welcome-welcome to Sabra Price Is Right! I am Uri! Okay so we show you beautiful merchandise; and you people, you guess price. So okay let's look at first merchandise!

[Shot: cheap-looking clock-radio]

Harvey: Alright is Summit clock-radio! Clock-radio from Summit! Is good!

Uri: Okay-okay now who can tell me the correct price for the clock-radio? [To Contestant #1] You!

Contestant #1: I'll guess $25.

Uri: What-what-what-what!? What you mean!? What you mean $25!?

Contestant #1: I don't know-

Uri: Is a Summit clock-radio! Is great merchandise!

Contestant #1: Okay-$35?

Uri: Oh, $35! I don't believe this! Alright-alright someone else! [Moves on to Contestant #2] You-you-you!

Contestant #2: I don't know.$40?

Uri: $40 for a clock-radio!!??

Contestant #2: Uh, it doesn't seem like-er-what's it worth, really?

Uri: What is it worth!? Over $200! I sell it for less, you see!

Contestant #2: Okay, $75.

Uri: Oh! This is an insult, an insult! [moves on to Contestant #3] Okay, you! You!

Contestant #3: So it's worth more than $75?

Uri: Yes-yes! At least $150!

Contestant #3: How about $80?

Uri: Alright-alright-alright $80. Is good, is good. [Takes Contestant #3 by the arm and drags him onstage.] Okay congratulations. [They are joined by two Stagehands, who bring on the clock-radio.] Nice clock-radio; and you give a check to my wife backstage.

Contestant #3: No, no, no-what check? I don't want to buy it!

Uri: What do you mean? You asked for a deal!

Contestant #3: No, no, no. This is a game show-!

[Uri and the Stagehands chatter in Hebrew, while Contestant #3 is escorted backstage.]

Uri: Okay Harvey we need a new contestant!

Harvey: Okay so Jennifer Hughes, come on let's go!

[Jennifer Hughes, AKA Contestant #4, emerges from the audience and takes what was Contestant #3's mark.]

Uri: Alright; come-on-come-on-come-on; go-go-go-go-go-go; alright-alright; so-so, welcome-welcome!

Contestant #4: Hi, I'm a teacher from Northport-!

Uri: [cutting her off] No-no-no-no-no-no-no-no; please, this we do not care about. Just look at the item and guess price, alright?

Harvey: Is satellite dish from Pinnacle!

[Shot: worn-out and rusted V-aerial]

Uri: Pinnacle satellite dish, beautiful, for TV! Who is guessing, huh? Who, you? Let's go, let's go!

Contestant #1: I don't think that looks like a satellite dish.

Uri: What-what-what you don't think?! Huh?!

Contestant #1: Don't they rotate?

Uri: Oh so now I have to explain how a satellite works?? Now come-on-come-on this is thousands of dollars! I don't have time! [moves on to Contestant #2] You-you-you!

Contestant #2: Well, thousands?

Uri: Yes-yes of course!

Contestant #2: It's just.. I never heard of the company Pinnacle.

Uri: So? Pinnacle is good company! Inside is same as Toshiba! TOSHIBA GUTS! Is same thing!

Contestant #2: Will it help me get channels?

Uri: It won't hurt you getting channels. It won't hurt-this is Pinnacle! Why should it? Now-now come on, come on! So make a bid, come on!

Contestant #2: Okay, $200.

Uri: No-no this is an insult; I quit this game show.

Contestant #2: $220?

Uri: Alright, price is right; very good, very good. [Taking Contestant #2's arm, Uri herds him onto the stage, where both Stagehands rejoin them.] Come on, come on; get up here; let's go, let's go. Nice satellite dish; and you give a check to my wife backstage.

Contestant #2: But I don't want to buy it!

Uri: It's already wrapped!

Stagehand #2: It's already on the truck!

Contestant #2: Yeah, well, I don't want to buy it!

Stagehand #1: It's wrapped and on the truck!

Uri: Look-look-look-look-look, you just go backstage and give a check to my wife okay? Alright Harvey next person!

[Contestant #2 continues to protest as both Stagehands, jabbering in Hebrew, escort him backstage.]

Harvey: Okay so Kevin Stubbs, come down let's go!

[Kevin Stubbs, AKA Contestant #5, emerges from the audience and takes what was Contestant #2's mark. Uri gazes at Contestant #5 suspiciously, while summoning Stagehand #1. Stagehand #1 comes over to stand at Uri's side.]

Uri: [to Stagehand #1, indicating Contestant #5] Watch him. [Stagehand #1 just stands there looking at Contestant #5] Well? Go-go-go now! Go now! [Stagehand #1 moves back from Uri's side and goes over to stand near Contestant #5.] Okay let's see next beautiful item!

[Stagehand #1 stands right by Contestant #5, just staring right at him.]

Contestant #5: What are you looking at?

Stagehand #1: Nothing; I'm just standing here that's all.

Uri: Come on come on, alright item please!

[Shot: rotary phone; the cord for its receiver has been ripped out]

Harvey: Is cordless telephone! No more cord for telephone!

Uri: [to Contestant #4] So you are very, very pretty so let's go out.

Contestant #4: Oh, uh.I-I'm really here more to-

Uri: What, you don't want to go out? Come on let's go! We'll go Disco!

[Both Stagehands walk up and begin adlibbing "Let's go disco! We'll go Disco!"]

Contestant #5: Uh, I got a guess-!

Contestant #1: My buzzer's not working.

Uri: What-what-what you mean your buzzer? What happened, what happened to your buzzer? What happened, you broke buzzer? Okay, now you pay for.

Contestant #1: Pay for it!?

Uri: Yes-yes! You-Broke-You-Buy, it's the rule!

Contestant #1: What am I going to do with a buzzer from a game show!!??

Uri: [demonstrating for her] Well why did you push so hard!? You push so hard!! Why did you push so hard!? You don't have to push so hard!! You just tap; see, you just tap; see, you tap. But you, you push; you break it, you break it! [Pulls her onstage by the arm] Okay come on; you go give a check to my wife backstage. That's a brand new buzzer!

Contestant #1: I thought this was supposed to be The Price Is Right!!

Uri: Is SABRA Price Is Right! Is same thing!

Contestant #1: What happened to Bob Barker!?

Uri: I am same person!! [Turns her around and sends her backstage] Alright-alright-alright new contestant Harvey!

Harvey: Alright so Eric Stegman! Come down let's go!

[Contestant #6, AKA Eric Stegman, emerges from the audience and takes what was Contestant #1's mark; he is carrying a cheap-looking CD player. A look of recognition crosses Uri's face.]

Uri: Now you look familiar.

Contestant #6: Yeah well, uh, I'm really just here to return something.

Uri: What-what-what you mean? What-what-what return!?

Contestant #6: Well, uh-I "won" this CD player. [shows it to Uri].

Uri: Yes-yes, beautiful, yes!

Contestant #6: Yeah, well it cost $500. Now I checked around, okay, and it retails at $216.

Uri: Oh, we are not retailers.

Contestant #6: Yeah, okay, yeah.and it doesn't work. Also, you said it had Sony guts.

Uri: No-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no-no. What I said was, is like Sony guts. That was what I said.

Contestant #6: No, sorry; no, no, no.

Uri: Well what is your point!? When did you drop it?

Contestant #6: No, no.I didn't drop it, okay? It's not even a CD player. It's a child's bank!

Uri: Well this is what I told you, that it's a display model. Yes!

Contestant #6: No, no, no, no, no, no; you didn't tell me; no, no, no, no, no, no.!

Uri: No-no-no-no-no-no-no-no, I did.Look-No, I did-I remember what I told you. I told you it was a child's bank, not real CD!

Contestant #6: No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, sorry!

Uri: I remember distinctly! Look-look-look-look, you are here to play the game. Harvey next item please!

[Shot: cheap-looking toaster-oven]

Harvey: Microwave from GE! Is General Electric! Very good!

Uri: [to Contestant #4] So when are we going to disco? Hm?

Contestant #4: Oh-uh, we-we're not going.

[Uri is joined by both Stagehands, who stand behind and to the side of Contestant #4.]

Uri: What do you mean? To disco!

Stagehand #1: Disco!

Uri: Good!

Stagehand #1: Good!

Uri: Disco!

Stagehand #2: Disco!

Uri: Good!

Stagehand #2: Good!

Uri: Disco!

Harvey: Disco!

Uri: Good!

Harvey: Good!

Uri: Disco!

Both Stagehands: Disco!

Uri: Good!

Both Stagehands: Good!

[They continue chanting and disco-dancing for several more seconds.]

Uri: Alright, alright; alright, alright-Microwave, very expensive! Who is guessing?

Contestant #5: Hey, uh, what happened to the cordless phone?

Uri: Alright look-look-look just take it okay? Just take it, take it; you win, you win. [He shoves the phone into Contestant #5's hands.] Yes okay go-go-go-go; out! [He rushes him from the buzzer toward Stagehand #1, who catches the Contestant by the shoulders.] Goodbye-goodbye-goodbye-goodbye!

Contestant #5: [to Stagehand #1] you don't have to touch me! [He is led off by the Stagehand.]

Uri: Alright Harvey next person!

Harvey: Kalid Abdul Adiz!

[Contestant #7, AKA Kalid Abdul Adiz, emerges from the audience and takes what was Contestant #5's mark; obviously, Uri knows this guy quite well indeed.]

Contestant #7: Alright!

Uri: What-what is this!? How can you get to play!!??

Contestant #7: I am in audience!

Uri: Alright okay look-Microwave?

Contestant #7: $20?

Uri: What you mean, $20!? This is microwave! You are crazy!! This is General Electric microwave!!

Contestant #7: No it is not! Impossible!

Uri: Oh I don't believe this! I don't want to play. [Both he and Contestant #7 throw their hands up in disgust.]

Contestant #7: I don't want to play!

Uri: I don't want to play!!

Contestant #7: I don't want to play!!!

Uri: Alright so let's disco! [He starts dancing.] Disco-disco! Good-good! Disco-disco good-good! [He is joined by Contestant #7, and by both Stagehands.]

Harvey: This has been Sabra Price Is Right! See you next time! Disco-disco-good-good!

[Uri, the Stagehands and Contestant #7 continue disco-dancing on the set.]

[Jamie Michelle]

right after u give ur apartment back to the native americans, theylle follow suit...


None of the lands of the country of ancient Israel were ever legitimate, since every part of them had originally been taken by a massive campaign of genocide against the original inhabitants.

Deuteronomy, chapters 7 and 20, and Joshua chapters 6, 8, 10, 11, 14, etc.: After wandering in the desert for 40 years, Yahweh ordered the Hebrews to invade the "promised land" and totally exterminate "the Hittite and the Amorite and the Canaanite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite" (Deuteronomy 20:17) leaving "nothing that breathes remain alive" (Deuteronomy 20:16). They were to fight and kill the soldiers of these groups, and then murder the defenseless elderly, women, youths, children, infants, and newborns. The book of Joshua records the progress of the genocide, city by city:

Joshua 8:24: City of Ai
Joshua 10:28: City of Makkedah
Joshua 10:29: City of Libnah
Joshua 10:31: City of Lachish
Joshua 10:33: City of Gezer: "... Joshua struck him and his people, until he left him none remaining."
Joshua 10:34,35: City of Elgon: "They took it on that day and struck it with the edge of the sword; all the people who were in it he utterly destroyed that day, according to all that he had done to Lachish."
Joshua 10:37: City of Hebron
Joshua 10:38: City of Debir
Judges 18:27: City of Laish: "Then they took what Micah had made, and his priest, and went on to Laish, against a peaceful and unsuspecting people. They attacked them with the sword and burned down their city."

Second of all, the Native Americans had not homesteaded most of the land in the U.S., so most of it was rightfully unowned.

Ultimately all just property titles can be traced back by way of voluntary transactions to the homesteading of unused resources; or (2) in the case in which such resources were expropriated from a just owner and the just owner or his heir(s) can no longer be identified or are deceased, where the first nonaggressor possesses the resource (which can then be considered another form of homesteading).



but i have to admit i started liking when u post ur cute theories on political issues, at least ur not disgusting me with ur sexual fantasies...ide rather hear roseanne barr discuss her love life with john goodman...

but back to the topic at hand;) hehe

Q. why do scottish bagpipe players walk while theyre playing?

A. theyre trying to get away from that fucking annoying sound!

[ilikeyasminlee]

Let Iran and Syria be dragged into this they are bank rolling the hasbakah anyways. If Israel doesnt put an end to this now wait five years when Iran has a nucleur weapon. Once Iran has their nucleuour weaopon they wont use it on Israel they will use it on us, the USA then we will be sitting in our living rooms five years from now saying to each other how could we let this happen. you know wht the answer will be " Its becuae their are idiots like twowaybro that wanted Israel to show restraint" Give me a fucking break Israel has met every compromise of the UN and the Arab countries. They don't want peace. Last time I checked Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, and with drew from Gaza earlier this year what else do you want them to do. you want them to sit their and take up their ass. Its tobad that twowaybro is discussing at topic she is so uneducated on. What would you want the USA to do if canada bombed chicago. Would you want them to show restarint

[Jamie Michelle]

Let Iran and Syria be dragged into this they are bank rolling the hasbakah anyways. If Israel doesnt put an end to this now wait five years when Iran has a nucleur weapon. Once Iran has their nucleuour weaopon they wont use it on Israel they will use it on us, the USA then we will be sitting in our living rooms five years from now saying to each other how could we let this happen. you know wht the answer will be " Its becuae their are idiots like twowaybro that wanted Israel to show restraint" Give me a fucking break Israel has met every compromise of the UN and the Arab countries. They don't want peace. Last time I checked Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, and with drew from Gaza earlier this year what else do you want them to do. you want them to sit their and take up their ass. Its tobad that twowaybro is discussing at topic she is so uneducated on. What would you want the USA to do if canada bombed chicago. Would you want them to show restarint

We can also surmise that country X is going to attack us in the future (Canada, England, etc.). Based upon your logic, this gives the U.S. government the claim to invade and take over any country on Earth.

Also based upon this logic, this gives any other country in the world the right to take over and invade the U.S. Nay, even more so, for as regards the U.S. we have a government which has a long history of invading countries that have never attacked the U.S. Whereas Iran is a peaceful country that hasn't attacked any country (having only responded to attacks on its border, such as with the U.S. government-funded Iraq war on Iran).

If the goal were really to make U.S. citizens safer, then the U.S. government should hand over all of its nuclear armaments to Iran immediately, as Iran has shown itself to be far, far more peaceful than the U.S. government.

Not to mention that Iran hasn't murdered some 3000 of its own people in staged Hegelian dialectical attacks, as with the U.S. government-staged 9/11 attacks.

[Jamie Michelle]

its so cute how u quote the bible as historical fact...hold on im gonna get some archie comics and find something cute to quote...

ur arguments are like the horns on a steer, a point here a point there but a lot of bull in between...

I assume you're talking to me.

The claims of a right by Jews to the land now called Israel is grounded in biblical history. I'm certainly not the one making that claim. Indeed, I'm arguing against it. I merely use the biblical accounts to demonstrate that such claims are on their own terms illegitimate.

[twowaybro]

So, with that said, I would like to know exactly how you judge the veracity of your data. In other words, when you read two contradictory 'facts' from different sources, how do you, personally, decide which is true and which is false? Bear in mind that these two 'facts' have nothing to do with your current delusional system, they're about some other, hypothetical event.

Enlighten me as to your thought processes.


interestedParty,

When said "facts" involve or seek 2 explain geo-political events, one's search 4 the truth of the matter should rely on meticulous research, historical precedent and the age old question of "Cui Bono". It also never hurts 2 apply the problem-reaction-solution formula. It's quite apparent 2 me that none of these were used by your person in attempting 2 accertain the "truth" of 9-11 and more pertinantly the current US-backed illegal Israeli military assault/invasion. Like i said previously, there is no need to debate 9-11 as the data is already out there 4 all who take the time 2 look.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/cgi-bin/MasterPFP.cgi?doc=http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/011805_simplify_case.shtml

As 4 the current crisis, the following report sums it up pretty nicely. 8) 8)

We're Being Set Up for Wider War in the Middle East

by Paul Craig Roberts
AntiWar.com
July 17, 2006
http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=9317

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

The old adage, "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me" does not apply to Americans, who have shown that they can be endlessly fooled.

Neoconservatives deceived Americans into an illegal attack and debilitating war in Iraq. American neoconservatives are closely allied with Israel's Likud Party. In the past, some neocons lost their security clearances because of "mishandling" of classified information. According to Insight magazine, "the Pentagon has banned security clearance to Americans with relatives in Israel. Government sources and attorneys said the Pentagon has sought and succeeded in removing security clearance from dozens of Americans, mostly Jews, who either lived, worked, or have relatives in Israel."

Despite questions of dual loyalties, neocons hold high positions in the Bush regime. Ten years ago these architects of American foreign and military policy spelled out how they would use deception to achieve "important Israeli strategic objectives" in the Middle East. First, they would focus "on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq." This would open the door for Israel to provoke attacks from Hezbollah. The attacks would let Israel gain American sympathy and permit Israel to seize the strategic initiative by "engaging Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon."

Today, this neoconservative plan is unfolding before our eyes. Israel has used the capture of two of its soldiers in Lebanon as an excuse for an all-out air and naval bombardment against Lebanese civilian targets. However, a number of commentators have pointed out that such a massive attack requires weeks if not months of preparation that could not be done overnight in response to the capture of the soldiers.

Regardless, in the first two days of the Israeli military attack on Lebanon more than a hundred civilians, including Canadians, have been killed by Israeli bombs (gifts from U.S. taxpayers). The Beirut International Airport has been repeatedly bombed, as have residential neighborhoods, roads, bridges, ports, and power stations.

Soldiers are a legitimate military target. Civilians, civilian neighborhoods, tourists, and international airports are not. Under the Nuremberg standard used to sentence Nazi war criminals to death, the Israeli government is clearly guilty of war crimes.

Meanwhile, the Israelis are committing identical war crimes in Gaza. Again Israel's excuse is the capture of an Israeli soldier. However, the distinguished Israeli professor Ran HaCohen said that the Israeli army "had been demanding a massive attack on Gaza long before the Israeli soldier was kidnapped."

By blocking UN Security Council action against Israel for its massacre of civilians in Gaza, the Bush regime has made itself complicit in these monstrous war crimes. Just as Germans who supported Hitler were deemed to be complicit in his war crimes, Americans who support Bush are complicit in Bush's war crimes.

Hezbollah is not the Lebanese government. It does not rule Lebanon. Hezbollah is the militia organization founded in 1982 in response to Israel's invasion of Lebanon. Hezbollah defeated the Israeli army and drove out the Israeli invaders six years ago.

According to the BBC, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said that the two Israeli soldiers "were captured to pressure Israel to release the thousands of Palestinian prisoners in its jails," especially the women and children.

The BBC also notes that although Hezbollah operates "from Lebanese territory and the militant group has two ministers in the Lebanese government, the central government is almost powerless to influence the militant group." (Note that the BBC applies the loaded word "militant" to Hezbollah but not to Israel.) Hezbollah, reports the BBC, "is also very popular in Lebanon and highly respected for its political activities, social services, and its military record against Israel."

The prime minister of Lebanon, who was installed with President Bush's approval when Syria, under Bush's pressure, recently withdrew its troops from Lebanon, has twice appealed to Bush to pressure Israel to stop its criminal attacks. Our great moral, democratic, Christian leader has twice rebuffed the appeal from the legal representative of the Lebanese people. Instead, Bush is willingly going along with the 1996 neocon script. Bush is laying the blame on Syria and Iran, exactly as the neocon script calls for him to do.

When Bush demands that Syria "stop Hezbollah attacks," he forgets that he was the one who forced Syria out of Lebanon (to enable Israel to attack Lebanon). If Americans were attentive, they would be ashamed to witness "their" president acting as an Israeli propagandist.

Fox "News," CNN, and the rest of the Bush propaganda ministry are echoing the lie that innocent Israel is under attack from the "terrorist states" of Syria and Iran through their surrogate, Hezbollah. Americans, who are sick of the Iraq occupation and want the troops home, are being fooled again and set up for wider war in the Middle East.

Evangelical "Christians" are part of the propaganda show. Three thousand of them, under the lead of the Rev. John C. Hagee, are heading to Washington for a "Washington/Israel summit" to demand, needlessly, that the neocon Bush regime show "stronger support for Israel."

It is difficult to see how Bush could show any stronger support without using the U.S. military to assist Israel in its attacks, which is, of course, what the "Christian" Rev. Hagee intends when he declares: "There's a new Hitler in the Middle East [he doesn't mean Bush or Olmert]. The only way he will be stopped will be by a preemptive military strike in Iran."

Present at Rev. Hagee's "Washington/Israel Summit" will be Israel's former Minister of Defense, Lt. Gen. Moshe Ya'alon, Israeli Ambassador Daniel Ayalon, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman, Republican Senators Sam Brownback and Rick Santorum, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, and Gary Bauer.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the most powerful lobby in Washington, expressed its thanks to Rev. Hagee for demonstrating "the depth and breadth of American support" for Israel. Recently, AIPAC has been under investigation as a suspected nest for Israeli spies.

David Brog, former chief of staff for Republican Sen. Arlen Specter, has gone to work for Rev. Hagee. Brog, who is Jewish, says he works for Hagee's evangelical enterprise because "we're bringing into a pro-Israel camp millions of Christians who love Israel and giving them a political voice. Israel's enemies are our enemies, and this group instinctively understands that." Brog goes on to say that Hagee's evangelicals understand that they are not supposed to talk about Jesus, only about saving Israel: "Christians who work with Jews in supporting Israel realize how sensitive we are in talking about Jesus. They realize it will interfere with what they are trying to do."

Gentle reader, is this an admission that evangelicals have set aside Jesus for war? Do these bloody-minded evangelicals really believe they will be wafted to Heaven for helping Israel involve the U.S. in more war? Have evangelicals forgotten that "an eye for an eye" is Old Testament? "Turn the other cheek" is New Testament.

On July 14, Reuters reported that alone among Christians, the "Vatican condemns Israel for attacks on Lebanon."

Whose delusion is the greatest – the evangelical "rapture" delusion, the neocon delusion about American power, or the Zionist delusion? The three together mean disaster for America, Israel, and the world.

One of the great evangelical/Zionist/neocon myths is that "tiny Israel" armed with 200 nuclear weapons is threatened by Muslim Middle Eastern countries. In actual fact, Egypt and Pakistan, which have the bulk of the Middle Eastern Muslim population, are ruled by American puppets. Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the oil emirates are totally dependent on U.S. protection and, thereby, are also under the American thumb. Iran is Persian, not Arab, and has no common borders with Israel. Hezbollah was created when Israel tried to seize Lebanon in 1982. Hamas is a Palestinian response to the atrocities Palestinians have suffered for a half century at Israel's hands.

Israel's land-stealing policy is the source of Middle Eastern instability. America is hated because American money and weapons are what enable Israel to steal Palestine from Palestinians.

As numerous Middle East experts have pointed out, what is decried as "Arab terrorism against Israel" is, in fact, the only tactic Muslims have for calling the world's attention to the plight of the Palestinians, about which Americans are generally ignorant.

It is absurd for Bush to condemn Syria for not behaving as an American puppet and for not fighting Israel's battles by taking on Hezbollah. Syria and Iran (and Iraq prior to the U.S. invasion) are the only Middle Eastern countries independent of American control. It is far beyond the boundaries of reason and morality to expect these two remaining independent countries to give up their independence in order to enable Israel to steal Palestine and southern Lebanon.

It is the refusal of Syria and Iran (and Saddam Hussein's Iraq) to stand with Israel against Palestine that has made them targets for American attack. Neocons have total control of U.S. foreign policy in the Bush regime, and they have morphed our strategic interests into Israel's.

As the neoconservative architects of Bush's wars revealed in 1996, their concern lies with Israeli strategic objectives.

[interestedParty]

its so cute how u quote the bible as historical fact...hold on im gonna get some archie comics and find something cute to quote...

ur arguments are like the horns on a steer, a point here a point there but a lot of bull in between...

LOL, it's funny 'cause it's true.

[interestedParty]

nterestedParty,

When said "facts" involve or seek 2 explain geo-political events, one's search 4 the truth of the matter should rely on meticulous research, historical precedent and the age old question of "Cui Bono". It also never hurts 2 apply the problem-reaction-solution formula. It's quite apparent 2 me that none of these were used by your person in attempting 2 accertain the "truth" of 9-11 and more pertinantly the current US-backed illegal Israeli military assault/invasion. Like i said previously, there is no need to debate 9-11 as the data is already out there 4 all who take the time 2 look.



You haven't answered my question, so I'll ask it again...



So, with that said, I would like to know exactly how you judge the veracity of your data. In other words, when you read two contradictory 'facts' from different sources, how do you, personally, decide which is true and which is false? Bear in mind that these two 'facts' have nothing to do with your current delusional system, they're about some other, hypothetical event.

[blahblahblah]

Let Iran and Syria be dragged into this they are bank rolling the hasbakah anyways. If Israel doesnt put an end to this now wait five years when Iran has a nucleur weapon. Once Iran has their nucleuour weaopon they wont use it on Israel they will use it on us, the USA then we will be sitting in our living rooms five years from now saying to each other how could we let this happen. you know wht the answer will be " Its becuae their are idiots like twowaybro that wanted Israel to show restraint" Give me a fucking break Israel has met every compromise of the UN and the Arab countries. They don't want peace. Last time I checked Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, and with drew from Gaza earlier this year what else do you want them to do. you want them to sit their and take up their ass. Its tobad that twowaybro is discussing at topic she is so uneducated on. What would you want the USA to do if canada bombed chicago. Would you want them to show restarint

Well, if USA could use it's nuclear weapon against Japan, wiping out 2 (two) large cities over there, killing a lot of innocent civilians, i dont see the reason why Iran should not also do it.. I mean, war is war, as USA claimed it when they bombed Japan. And, of course, the fact is that it's only USA that used nuclear weapon against some other nation, nobody else. Maybe Iran is much more civilised country, and will not use it's future nuclear weapon, maybe they only try to balance the things out in the Middle East? Maybe they try to stop Izrael's torture, their nation wide terrorism against arabs over there by being more powerfull on their military side? Who knows..

[interestedParty]

Oh, and you STILL have not addressed this argument...


The thing about a conspiracy theory is that it can neither be confirmed nor denied. Thus, it requires no proof. In fact, that very same lack of evidence can be — and sometimes is — profferred up as evidence(e.g., "There isn't any evidence because it was covered up"). With this pretzel logic, the most fantastical and absurd theories can be defended with the simple phrase: "That's what they want you to think."

...and this one...


There are always multiple explanations for any one event, both large and small, and the realm of possibility is seemingly infinite. However, there is a difference between possibility and probability. I would like to refer you to a famous philosophical device known as Occam's Razor, which states (and I'm paraphrasing here) that the explanation which contains the fewest assumptions is the most likely to be true. I'll give you the link to the Wikipedia article on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occams_razor

Just because a theory sounds like a good story, or appeals to your own particular bias against authority, doesn't make it any more probable than other theories.

[interestedParty]

Well, if USA could use it's nuclear weapon against Japan, wiping out 2 (two) large cities over there, killing a lot of innocent civilians...

And what about all those Chinese the Japanese massacred at Nanking? (ever heard about the 'Rape of Nanking?' Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_Nanking) All those Allied soldiers starved and worked to death? (Bataan death-march? Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataan_death_march; the Burma-Thai Railway, also known as the 'Death Railway?' Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Railway) And don't forget about those lovely medical experiments they performed on the Chinese and Allied soldiers (Unit 731 it was called; read all about it in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731......I love Wikipedia, don't you?).

Need I go on?

[interestedParty]

Maybe Iran is much more civilised country, and will not use it's future nuclear weapon, maybe they only try to balance the things out in the Middle East?


Somehow I doubt it....

[Quinn]

Maybe Iran is much more civilised country, and will not use it's future nuclear weapon, maybe they only try to balance the things out in the Middle East?


Somehow I doubt it....

Frankly, how could anyone not doubt it? Seriously, Iran is an Islamic theocracy.

-Quinn

[White_Male_Canada]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[White_Male_Canada]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[interestedParty]

Well, if USA could use it's nuclear weapon against Japan, wiping out 2 (two) large cities over there, killing a lot of innocent civilians...

And what about all those Chinese the Japanese massacred at Nanking? (ever heard about the 'Rape of Nanking?' Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_Nanking) All those Allied soldiers starved and worked to death? (Bataan death-march? Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataan_death_march; the Burma-Thai Railway, also known as the 'Death Railway?' Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Railway) And don't forget about those lovely medical experiments they performed on the Chinese and Allied soldiers (Unit 731 it was called; read all about it in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731......I love Wikipedia, don't you?).

Need I go on?

Hmm, I wonder why McManaman has not responded to my post?

[ilikeyasminlee]

Well, if USA could use it's nuclear weapon against Japan, wiping out 2 (two) large cities over there, killing a lot of innocent civilians...

And what about all those Chinese the Japanese massacred at Nanking? (ever heard about the 'Rape of Nanking?' Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_Nanking) All those Allied soldiers starved and worked to death? (Bataan death-march? Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataan_death_march; the Burma-Thai Railway, also known as the 'Death Railway?' Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Railway) And don't forget about those lovely medical experiments they performed on the Chinese and Allied soldiers (Unit 731 it was called; read all about it in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731......I love Wikipedia, don't you?).

Need I go on?

Hmm, I wonder why McManaman has not responded to my post?look up the word civilized you are siding with a country that doesnt believe the hollocaust ever existed sound real civilized to me

[ezed]

You know, as I read through these forums, I am amazed at the number of historical scholars drawn together in one place with a unifying theme...beautiful girls with dicks. Whether they're cumming, peeing, fucking, showing their butts or butts with dangling balls or just plain huge cocks. And these scholars come from all over the world!!!!!! These scholars engage in unending debates quote and linking massive amounts of reference data from "published scholars" who may be hanging out here as "Iwankit" or maybe on the "Pain & Disipline Forum" or the "The I love Animal Forum" or "MILF for Me Forum" etc etc....

Who were the writers of past history before computers. Did they drink heavily...after all the best stories comes from bars. Who will be the writers of the history of this point in time, fifty years from now for the children's capsulated history of the past five years in the world in whatever country the capsulated history is written and edited based on the censorship of the time and place.

Gentlemen and Ladies, I put forth the following theorum, hypotosis, vernacular, point of view, (whatever the correct fucking term is for you language and spelling junkies!):

All history and the good books tell us is that something happened. The writers and editors usually weren't there, (same today on the news) they hear eyewitness accounts (there's a fucking Leprehcan in an a tree in Louisianna) and they mold them with their editorial view point and create a story which they hope gains them acclaim. It's always been so!

We really don't know shit from history. We know what happened. It comes down to us putting ourseleves mentally in the time and applying our limited knowledge of human nature and the physical facts of what happened. Then applying our own theories (which are worthless to everyone else) and boldly stating "THIS IS WHY........"

At which point everyone else picks up rocks and hurles the at us. BUT, BUT, MAYBE JUST MAYBE OUR THOUGHTS WILL STICK TO THE WALL, and Jamie will find them and post them as a link.

[ezed]

STOP THE FUCKING PRESSES, I JUST LOOKED AT MY POST COUNT!!!!!
I'M A FUCKING VETERAN POSTER!!!! Take that into consideration when you read my previous post. I demand respect!!!! And I love transexual girls, and I like to hear myself type. (and also hope I'm quoted by that bookworm Jaime, as a scholar).

[blahblahblah]

Well, if USA could use it's nuclear weapon against Japan, wiping out 2 (two) large cities over there, killing a lot of innocent civilians...

And what about all those Chinese the Japanese massacred at Nanking? (ever heard about the 'Rape of Nanking?' Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_Nanking) All those Allied soldiers starved and worked to death? (Bataan death-march? Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataan_death_march; the Burma-Thai Railway, also known as the 'Death Railway?' Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Railway) And don't forget about those lovely medical experiments they performed on the Chinese and Allied soldiers (Unit 731 it was called; read all about it in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731......I love Wikipedia, don't you?).

Need I go on?

Hmm, I wonder why McManaman has not responded to my post?look up the word civilized you are siding with a country that doesnt believe the hollocaust ever existed sound real civilized to me

Well, USA proved that it is not a civilized country. A civilized country would never perform a genocide against other people (Indians, Vietnamese, etc). Both USA and Germany did that, so we could easily classify those 2 countries into same dirty group. Iran didn't do it yet, so let's assume they are more civilised in regards to that. Why not? So, in other words you mean that because Japan committed war crimes against China, USA was justified to kill a lot of japaneese civilians with 2 nuclear bombs? Are you a total moron, a total idiot? Also, if you recall, europian christians performed that hollocaust against jews, not muslims and not iranians in particular. And it didn't really bother USA to begin with, first
when Japan bombed Perl fucking Harbour they got involved into war. And even then, they didn't worry that much about the tragedy of jewish people. That happend first after the war ended, and that happen only because USA had some intrests in that. Hehe, speaking about the irony....

[interestedParty]

Well, if USA could use it's nuclear weapon against Japan, wiping out 2 (two) large cities over there, killing a lot of innocent civilians...

And what about all those Chinese the Japanese massacred at Nanking? (ever heard about the 'Rape of Nanking?' Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_Nanking) All those Allied soldiers starved and worked to death? (Bataan death-march? Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataan_death_march; the Burma-Thai Railway, also known as the 'Death Railway?' Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Railway) And don't forget about those lovely medical experiments they performed on the Chinese and Allied soldiers (Unit 731 it was called; read all about it in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731......I love Wikipedia, don't you?).

Need I go on?

Hmm, I wonder why McManaman has not responded to my post?look up the word civilized you are siding with a country that doesnt believe the hollocaust ever existed sound real civilized to me

Well, USA proved that it is not a civilized country. A civilized country would never perform a genocide against other people (Indians, Vietnamese, etc). Both USA and Germany did that, so we could easily classify those 2 countries into same dirty group. Iran didn't do it yet, so let's assume they are more civilised in regards to that. Why not? So, in other words you mean that because Japan committed war crimes against China, USA was justified to kill a lot of japaneese civilians with 2 nuclear bombs? Are you a total moron, a total idiot? Also, if you recall, europian christians performed that hollocaust against jews, not muslims and not iranians in particular. And it didn't really bother USA to begin with, first
when Japan bombed Perl fucking Harbour they got involved into war. And even then, they didn't worry that much about the tragedy of jewish people. That happend first after the war ended, and that happen only because USA had some intrests in that. Hehe, speaking about the irony....

If you want to debate me about WWII that's fine......but I assure you, I'll win. WWII is a special area of study for me.

[interestedParty]

Oh yeah, McManaman, I would check your spelling the next time you post, if I were you. I'm not sure I really want to debate a person with less than a 9th grade reading level.

[ezed]

the horror....the horror......

[interestedParty]

And another thing, McManaman, although the treatment of the indians and vietnamese by the US Government were both shameful, they do not merit being called GENOCIDE. Genocide is the systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group. I don't condone either the Indian or Vietnam wars, but they don't qualify as genocide, and they don't even BEGIN to compare with the Holocaust (that's how you spell the word, you dumb fuck). In the Holocaust, approximately 6 million Jews, and 3 million Gypsies were systematically singled out, deported, gassed, and then incinerated in what can only be described as an 'assembly-line of death.' So don't lump the US with the Third Reich.

[blahblahblah]

And another thing, McManaman, although the treatment of the indians and vietnamese by the US Government were both shameful, they do not merit being called GENOCIDE. Genocide is the systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group. I don't condone either the Indian or Vietnam wars, but they don't qualify as genocide, and they don't even BEGIN to compare with the Holocaust (that's how you spell the word, you dumb fuck). In the Holocaust, approximately 6 million Jews, and 3 million Gypsies were systematically singled out, deported, gassed, and then incinerated in what can only be described as an 'assembly-line of death.' So don't lump the US with the Third Reich.

Wether that was the genocide or not - the best way to get answers to that question would be to ask indians and vietnamese. For instance: indians were both mass murdered, deported and put into ghettoes. What more has to happen so that we can class that as a genocide? Also, when you kill 1.1 million civilians then you commit a genocide, right? You never tortured gypsies nor jews, but what about the black people? So no, you are not like third reich, but you also have some uniquenesses that slightly resemble those of third reich. All i'm trying to say is that you are not that nice country as you claim it, you have to realise that. Am i talking to a 12-y old kid here?

[interestedParty]

And another thing, McManaman, although the treatment of the indians and vietnamese by the US Government were both shameful, they do not merit being called GENOCIDE. Genocide is the systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group. I don't condone either the Indian or Vietnam wars, but they don't qualify as genocide, and they don't even BEGIN to compare with the Holocaust (that's how you spell the word, you dumb fuck). In the Holocaust, approximately 6 million Jews, and 3 million Gypsies were systematically singled out, deported, gassed, and then incinerated in what can only be described as an 'assembly-line of death.' So don't lump the US with the Third Reich.

Wether that was the genocide or not - the best way to get answers to that question would be to ask indians and vietnamese. For instance: indians were both mass murdered, deported and put into ghettoes. What more has to happen so that we can class that as a genocide? Also, when you kill 1.1 million civilians then you commit a genocide, right? You never tortured gypsies nor jews, but what about the black people? So no, you are not like third reich, but you also have some uniquenesses that slightly resemble those of third reich. All i'm trying to say is that you are not that nice country as you claim it, you have to realise that. Am i talking to a 12-y old kid here?

So where are you from? Given time, I'm sure that, no matter what country you do come from, I can find some attrocities lurking around in your country's history. The crux of the matter is, every nation and every ethnic group in the history of humankind has committed heinous acts at some point in the past — do we hold everyone accountable for something their ancestors did? This argument started because I took offense at you calling MY COUNTRY uncivilized, genocidal, and morally reprehensible......what shall I say about your country? With all probability, there are events in your country's past that are just as reprehensible, if not more so. Just give me time, and I'll find them.

One more thing, I never claimed my country to be perfect.

[interestedParty]

Oh yeah, my country is NOTHING LIKE THE THIRD REICH. In fact, it is exactly the opposite. Even at its worst, most hypocritical, most cynical moment it is a Utopia compared to the Third Reich on its best day.

[blahblahblah]

And another thing, McManaman, although the treatment of the indians and vietnamese by the US Government were both shameful, they do not merit being called GENOCIDE. Genocide is the systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group. I don't condone either the Indian or Vietnam wars, but they don't qualify as genocide, and they don't even BEGIN to compare with the Holocaust (that's how you spell the word, you dumb fuck). In the Holocaust, approximately 6 million Jews, and 3 million Gypsies were systematically singled out, deported, gassed, and then incinerated in what can only be described as an 'assembly-line of death.' So don't lump the US with the Third Reich.

Wether that was the genocide or not - the best way to get answers to that question would be to ask indians and vietnamese. For instance: indians were both mass murdered, deported and put into ghettoes. What more has to happen so that we can class that as a genocide? Also, when you kill 1.1 million civilians then you commit a genocide, right? You never tortured gypsies nor jews, but what about the black people? So no, you are not like third reich, but you also have some uniquenesses that slightly resemble those of third reich. All i'm trying to say is that you are not that nice country as you claim it, you have to realise that. Am i talking to a 12-y old kid here?

So where are you from? Given time, I'm sure that, no matter what country you do come from, I can find some attrocities lurking around in your country's history. The crux of the matter is, every nation and every ethnic group in the history of humankind has committed heinous acts at some point in the past — do we hold everyone accountable for something their ancestors did? This argument started because I took offense at you calling MY COUNTRY uncivilized, genocidal, and morally reprehensible......what shall I say about your country? With all probability, there are events in your country's past that are just as reprehensible, if not more so. Just give me time, and I'll find them.

One more thing, I never claimed my country to be perfect.

My friend! With all respect: The most of the nations around the world have a dark side of their history, but USA, like it seems to me, is continously making mess around. If it's not Indians, then it is Vietnam, or South America, Middle East, etc..... That is something the most of the people in the world highly dislike. And i'm not insulting your nation. Your leaders, Mr. Village Idiot, Mrs. Condy and faces like that are doing it. That's sad. USA with the slogan"Remember the Alamo" is the USA i like to see. Not the USA with slogan "Remember the Guantanamo". And that's it, i will not discuss this topic any more.

[twowaybro]

Talking about training a new generation 2 hate...this is sick.

http://fromisraeltolebanon.info/

8) 8)

[Quinn]

Talking about training a new generation 2 hate...this is sick.

http://fromisraeltolebanon.info/

8) 8)

You are right; that is sick. However, so far as any consideration of moral equivalence goes in regard to "training a new generation to hate," there is nothing quite like actually training children to be suicide bombers and then using them as such – something that Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the PFLP have all done (and that's according to non-Israeli government sources like the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group).

-Quinn

[twowaybro]

Oh, its quite obvious that both sides exploit children but the Israeli side is rarely shown...u can bet that these photos will never b shown on/in any major American media. And thats unfortunate as this is the way that most people form their views. 8) 8)

[interestedParty]

And another thing, McManaman, although the treatment of the indians and vietnamese by the US Government were both shameful, they do not merit being called GENOCIDE. Genocide is the systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group. I don't condone either the Indian or Vietnam wars, but they don't qualify as genocide, and they don't even BEGIN to compare with the Holocaust (that's how you spell the word, you dumb fuck). In the Holocaust, approximately 6 million Jews, and 3 million Gypsies were systematically singled out, deported, gassed, and then incinerated in what can only be described as an 'assembly-line of death.' So don't lump the US with the Third Reich.

Wether that was the genocide or not - the best way to get answers to that question would be to ask indians and vietnamese. For instance: indians were both mass murdered, deported and put into ghettoes. What more has to happen so that we can class that as a genocide? Also, when you kill 1.1 million civilians then you commit a genocide, right? You never tortured gypsies nor jews, but what about the black people? So no, you are not like third reich, but you also have some uniquenesses that slightly resemble those of third reich. All i'm trying to say is that you are not that nice country as you claim it, you have to realise that. Am i talking to a 12-y old kid here?

So where are you from? Given time, I'm sure that, no matter what country you do come from, I can find some attrocities lurking around in your country's history. The crux of the matter is, every nation and every ethnic group in the history of humankind has committed heinous acts at some point in the past — do we hold everyone accountable for something their ancestors did? This argument started because I took offense at you calling MY COUNTRY uncivilized, genocidal, and morally reprehensible......what shall I say about your country? With all probability, there are events in your country's past that are just as reprehensible, if not more so. Just give me time, and I'll find them.

One more thing, I never claimed my country to be perfect.

My friend! With all respect: The most of the nations around the world have a dark side of their history, but USA, like it seems to me, is continously making mess around. If it's not Indians, then it is Vietnam, or South America, Middle East, etc..... That is something the most of the people in the world highly dislike. And i'm not insulting your nation. Your leaders, Mr. Village Idiot, Mrs. Condy and faces like that are doing it. That's sad. USA with the slogan"Remember the Alamo" is the USA i like to see. Not the USA with slogan "Remember the Guantanamo". And that's it, i will not discuss this topic any more.

You have demonstrated your ignorance quite well in your last post. First of all, in any democratically elected government, there will ALWAYS be a sizable percentage of the electorate that have voted AGAINST the incumbent (in this election 48% of the electorate, myself included, voted AGAINST Bush, and even then there are many in this country who believe that this percentage would have been higher if not for the unscrupulous actions of the GOP in Ohio and Florida). There are also many in this country, myself included, who loathe Bush and his brazen disregard for the Constitution, and there is growing movement, of which I, too, am a member, to have him impeached. So, to confuse the actions of this administration in particular with the will of the American people is an insult to every American.

[interestedParty]

You still haven't told me what country YOU are from, McManaman. Quid Pro Quo.

Reading some of the posts in this thread is like listening to an adolescent child argue with his parents about why he can't smoke pot.


Child: "Why can't I smoke weed? You smoked it before!."

Parent: "Because I don't want to see you make the same mistakes I did!"


Child: "Grandma told me one time you got high and got into a fight! So if you can do it, I should be able to, too. FAIR IS FAIR"

Parent: "I haven't gotten high in years! I was a stupid kid."





It's the same thing, except on this board we're dealing with what appears to be adults that never grew up.

The logic that Iran should be allowed to acquire WMD's because America has em and "Fair is fair", is just plain naive.

[interestedParty]

Reading some of the posts in this thread is like listening to an adolescent child argue with his parents about why he can't smoke pot.


Child: "Why can't I smoke weed? You smoked it before!."

Parent: "Because I don't want to see you make the same mistakes I did!"


Child: "Grandma told me one time you got high and got into a fight! So if you can do it, I should be able to, too. FAIR IS FAIR"

Parent: "I haven't gotten high in years! I was a stupid kid."





It's the same thing, except on this board we're dealing with what appears to be adults that never grew up.

The logic that Iran should be allowed to acquire WMD's because America has em and "Fair is fair", is just plain naive.

Well said. Although I wouldn't have used the marijuana analogy (I don't really think marijuana should be illegal).

[interestedParty]

And that's it, i will not discuss this topic any more.

Only a person who knows he has lost the argument declares that he "will not discuss this topic any more."

[interestedParty]

Oh, its quite obvious that both sides exploit children but the Israeli side is rarely shown...u can bet that these photos will never b shown on/in any major American media. And thats unfortunate as this is the way that most people form their views.

Moot point.

The fact that the second set of photos, the ones of the Palestinian children dressed up as suicide-bombers, are widely seen throughout the Palestinian and Arab world-community, and meet with approval from the militant factions thereof (at least that's what all the evidence I've seen tells me; if you have evidence that indicates the opposite to be true, then, by all means, show me) does said factions no credit.

[blahblahblah]

I'm bored today so i have to:



in this election 48% of the electorate, myself included, voted AGAINST Bush, and even then there are many in this country who believe that this percentage would have been higher if not for the unscrupulous actions of the GOP in Ohio and Florida.

This is interesting, isn't it? Indirectly, you also claim here that your country is a kind of uncivilized... Stealing or manipulating the votes is something that only belongs to uncivilized, non- or half-democratic countries, right?



So, to confuse the actions of this administration in particular with the will of the American people is an insult to every American.

Well, you elected that cowboy twice (two times), so that's something that must be the will of the people.. Or, maybe someone stole the votes 2 times? In such case, this becomes a kind of tradition.. Are you on the way to become god damned russia, or something?

[Jamie Michelle]

Talking about training a new generation 2 hate...this is sick.

http://fromisraeltolebanon.info/

8) 8)

You are right; that is sick. However, so far as any consideration of moral equivalence goes in regard to "training a new generation to hate," there is nothing quite like actually training children to be suicide bombers and then using them as such – something that Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the PFLP have all done (and that's according to non-Israeli government sources like the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group).

-Quinn

Most, if not all, of the so-called Arab "suicide bombers" in Palestine (i.e., so-called "Israel") are simply bombs that the Israeli government planted itself in order to claim a so-called "suicide attack" as a pretext for its continuing genocide against the native inhabitants.

If the notion of that should seem hard to believe, let us just consider what the Israeli government does to its "own" Jews--Jewish children, at that. There is the case of the 100,000-plus so-called "ringworm children," who were Sephardi children that, during the 1950s, the Israeli government irradiated with 35,000 times the maximum safe life-exposure dose of X-rays through their heads (i.e., all of them got this same dose). The U.S. government paid the Israeli government today's equivalent of 50 billion U.S. dollars to conduct these radiation experiments, even though the ill effects of massive doses of X-rays were well-known since the 1920s, and even though the actual radiation experiments only cost about a million dollars (in other words, the rest of the money was simply a payoff to the Israeli government by the U.S. government for it conducting these radiation tests). The Israeli government called them "ringworm children" as a pretext to massively irradiate their skulls, even though almost all of them were perfectly heathly. Many of the children died within a few days of the radiation exposer, with virtually all the rest being left with brain-damage and/or cancers. Most of the so-called "ringworm children" are now dead, having died early deaths from the lifelong complications that resulted from their massive irradiation.

See also:

"50 years on, Lavon Affair still sparks public debate in Israel," Dan Baron, Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA), July 20, 2004:

http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?strwebhead=%26%238216%3BLavon% 20Affair%26%238217%3B%20still%20riles%20Israel

http://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/articles/2004/08/17/news/israel/zalavon0720.txt

PrisonPlanet.com News Archive: Israeli Roots of Hamas:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives_hamas.html

"Puppet On A String: Hamas Dances To Israel's Tune" by Paul Joseph Watson:

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/puppet_on_a_string.html

"9/11 and Anthrax: FRAMING ARABS," WhatReallyHappened.com:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/framingarabs.html

"Tracking the 19 Hijackers--What are they up to now?--At least 9 of them survived 9/11," WelfareState.com:

http://www.welfarestate.com/911/

http://web.archive.org/web/20021208013054/http://www.welfarestate.com/911/

http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:qMk1q6w9J4oJ:www.welfarestate.com/911/

"Extreme Right: Spark intifada to prevent expulsions," Efrat Weiss, Yedioth Ahronoth, June 14, 2006:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3263038,00.html

"Israeli agents accused of creating fake al-Qaeda cell," Sophie Claudet, Agence France-Presse (AFP), December 9, 2002:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/08/1038950271656.html

"The Phony (Mossad) Al Qaeda Cell in Palestine," WhatReallyHappened.com:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fakealqaeda.html

"Mossad Exposed in Phony 'Palestinian Al-Qaeda' Caper," Michele Steinberg and Hussein Askary, Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), Volume 29, Number 49, December 20, 2002:

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2002/2949idf_qaeda.html

"Nidal planned to oust Saddam," NewsInsight.net, August 28, 2002:

"The Palestinian terrorist, Abu Nidal, was working for the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, for the last four years and was plotting a coup against Iraqi president Saddam Hussain at the behest of Western powers, top diplomats said.":

http://www.prisonplanet.com/news_alert_hamas3.html

http://www.newsinsight.net/nati2.asp?recno=1293&ctg=World

http://web.archive.org/web/20021120032707/http://www.intellnet.org/news/2002/08/29/11285-1.html

"Hamas history tied to Israel," Richard Sale, UPI Terrorism Correspondent From the International Desk, United Press International (UPI), June 18, 2002:

http://web.archive.org/web/20020901031628/http://www.eto.home.att.net/hamas1.html

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=18062002-051845-8272r

"The Hamas-Likud Pairing," Editorial, Jerusalem Post, August 25, 1995:

http://www.io.com/~jewishwb/iris/archives/608.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/news_alert_hamas4.html

"Israeli Roots of Hamas are being exposed," Dean Andromidas, Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), Volume 29, Number 2, January 18, 2002:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/AND204A.html

"Sharon War Plan Exposed: Hamas Gang Is His Tool," Jeffrey Steinberg, Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), Volume 28, Number 27, July 20, 2001:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/STE204A.html

"Israel's Hamas," George Szamuely, The New York Press, Volume 15, Issue 17, April 2002:

http://www.nypress.com/15/17/taki/2.cfm

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/SZA204A.html

Israel's Sacred Terrorism: A Study Based on Moshe Sharett's Personal Diary and Other Documents by Livia Rokach, foreword by Noam Chomsky (AAUG Press; Third Edition: 1986), ISBN: 0-937694-70-3 (0937694703):

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/essays/rokach.html

---

And let us not forget that the largest terrorist act in Palestine was and remains the bombing of the King David Hotel on July 26, 1946 by Jews dressed as Arabs. 91 people were killed and around 45 people were injured. The attack was ordered by David Ben Gurion and directed by Menachem Begin, both of whom would later become Israeli Prime Ministers. For more on that, see:

"King David Hotel bombing," Wikipedia:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030228081251/http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel

"The Bombing Of The King David Hotel":

http://web.archive.org/web/20011019014555/http://www.iap.org/kingdavidhotel.htm

See also:

WhatReallyHappened.com News Articles Archive:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/May03articles.html

"5/18/03 Nine killed in double Jerusalem suicide bombing
http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2003%20News%20archives/May%202003%20News/18%20n/Nine%20killed%20in%20double%20Jerusalem%20suicide% 20bombing.htm Police Chief Shlomo Aharonishki said the first bomber was disguised as an Orthodox Jew and that a skullcap and prayer shawl were found on him. (Interesting that nobody ever suspects that bombers who look like Arabs might be in disguise, especially since the King David Hotel was blown up by Israelis dressed as Arabs, not to mention the infamous Lavon Affair. In any event, the timing makes it obvious that the bombings were intended to derail the peace process. Now, who wanted that to happen? That's your ultimate mastermind.)"

[Jamie Michelle]

Concerning recent news on the bombing of the King David Hotel on July 26, 1946 by Jews dressed as Arabs, which to this day remains the largest terrorist act ever committed in Palestine (i.e. "Israel"), which was ordered by David Ben Gurion and directed by Menachem Begin, both of whom would later become Israeli Prime Ministers, see the below article:

http://images.thetimes.co.uk/TGD/picture/0,,322475,00.jpg

"British anger at terror celebration," Ned Parker and Stephen Farrell, Times (U.K.), July 20, 2006:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2277717,00.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-3-2277717-3,00.html

http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/king_david_2.pdf

http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/king_david_1.pdf

[interestedParty]

I'm bored today so i have to:



in this election 48% of the electorate, myself included, voted AGAINST Bush, and even then there are many in this country who believe that this percentage would have been higher if not for the unscrupulous actions of the GOP in Ohio and Florida.

This is interesting, isn't it? Indirectly, you also claim here that your country is a kind of uncivilized... Stealing or manipulating the votes is something that only belongs to uncivilized, non- or half-democratic countries, right?



So, to confuse the actions of this administration in particular with the will of the American people is an insult to every American.

Well, you elected that cowboy twice (two times), so that's something that must be the will of the people.. Or, maybe someone stole the votes 2 times? In such case, this becomes a kind of tradition.. Are you on the way to become god damned russia, or something?

You missed the entire point of my argument, which was this: we Americans do not think or act as a single unit, nor does any other nation or people. The root cause of all bigotries and racist philosophies is the belief that all members of a given people/ethnicity/nationality think and/or act as a single entity. By making such sweeping generalizations about Americans, you prove yourself to be nothing more than a common bigot.

And before you say a word about my post of Japanese WWII war-crimes, know that the I was referring to them in order to point out that the Japanese government was just as knee-deep in blood as the other nations in the war.

The decision to use two prototype nuclear bombs was, in the eyes of the historian, perhaps a poor one. But the other options facing Truman at that juncture were just as bad, and they were (in no particular order):

Conclude a peace with the then present Japanese government, which, even if it was agreed to, would most likely have left the principle warmongers in power, thus leaving the door open to further conflict. In fact, even after Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed, and it was apparent that the Emperor was getting ready to surrender, there was an attempted coup d'etat on the part of certain factions within the military government (here's the Wikipedia article on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan). To have chosen to pursue this course would have been tantamount to concluding a peace treaty with Germany and allowing Hitler and his henchmen to stay in power.

Invade Japan — a course of action that would've meant the death of several hundred thousand American soldiers, and many times that number of Japanese soldiers and civilians. All throughout the war in the Pacific, the Japanese military had shown a remarkable disregard for human life, as was shown not only by their savage treatment POW's (cf. my earlier post on Japanese war-crimes) but also in battle (e.g., the kamikaze attacks on the US fleet off Okinawa, the suicidal tactics its soldiers engaged in when it was clear that defeat was inevitable, convincing civilians that they should commit suicide rather than capitulate (this was done primarily through propaganda; cf. Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Okinawa), etc).
The plan for the invasion of Japan was codenamed "Operation Downfall' (Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall), and — as I said before — the casualties would've been horrendous. I quote the Wikipedia article:

In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April, the figures of 7.45 casualties/1000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities/1000 man-days were developed. This implied that a 90-day Olympic campaign would cost 456,000 casualties, including 109,000 dead or missing. If Coronet took another 90 days, the combined cost would be 1,200,000 casualties, with 267,000 fatalities.
'Olympic' was the codename for the invasion of Kyushu, and 'Coronet' was the codename for the invasion of Honshu. Part of the force to be used in Operation Downfall would've been soldiers redeployed from the European Theater, where they had just finished defeating the Third Reich and were expecting to be sent home.

Blockade Japan. This option is not usually brought up during these types of discussions (at least the ones I've heard), but I'm sure it must've crossed the minds of the military's higher-ups at the time. In this option, US and Allied fleets would have, I believe, created a blockade around Japan, in a massive attempt at seige warfare. A similar tactic had worked for Britain in the first World War, although, on its own, it hadn't been enough to defeat the Kaiserreich. In my opinion, if this strategy was pursued, the death-toll for the Japanese civilian population would've been even higher than it would've been for Operation Downfall — although it would have meant less casualties for the Allies. Hunger and disease would probably resulted in the deaths of millions, since any fishing-boats and traders would be commandeered or destroyed by the Allied fleet. This would've taken years to carry out, and would also have resulted in the partitioning of Japan after its surrender, since it's doubtless that the Soviet Union would have to have been enlisted for the plan to succeed. As a result, there would have been a North Japan and a South Japan — one Communist, and the other democratic — just as there is a North Korea and South Korea, and as there was once an East Germany and West Germany.


So, here's President Truman, faced with this stark decision, and suddenly he's told that this top-secret military project has perfected two totally new prototype bombs that are so powerful that they could destroy entire cities. He used them. Unfortunately, the strategy of destroying cities was used by all sides in WWII (although Germany was the first to attempt it, the Allies — through the direction of the British Air Marshal Harris(Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Harris#World_War_II), who was the impetus behind the strategy — used it to most devastating effect against Germany; when Japan became within the range of the B-29, General Curtis LeMay(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Lemay), ordered the fire-bombing of, among other industrial targets, Tokyo. This is one of the more shameful aspects of the American defeat of Japan).

There are some who say that the US government should have simply demonstrated the A-bomb on a deserted island and had a Japanese delegation witness it. It is possible that this might have worked, however, I doubt it. Given the tenacity of the Japanese militarists, and their power within the nation's government, the only way this would've worked would've been for the Emperor himself to be present as a witness; anyone else would have been sidelined or intimidated into giving the Emporer a whitewashed account of the test. In any event, Truman's political foes would have lambasted him for having treated Japan with kid-gloves after so many American soldiers had been killed; remember, no one except the scientists who created them truly understood the power of these weapons, and even they couldn't conceive of the horror that their use would unleash until after the fact. And to the military higher-ups, who knew as much about nuclear radiation as the general public — that is, absolutely nothing — these were nothing more than 'supersized' bombs.

In the end, the usage of the two A-bombs can only be called the lesser of the three evils.

PS—Just so you know, the reason the Japanese decided to attack Pearl Harbor was most likely the oil embargo the US government placed on Japan for waging war in Manchuria; the Japanese military wanted to bring about a swift defeat of the US Pacific fleet, hoping that would convince the Rooselvelt administration to sue for peace (with terms that would allow the Japanese government to increase its sphere of influence in Asia). However, the roots of the conflict probably date back at least to the Russo-Japanese War, when it became clear to the US government that Japan was beginning to assert its claim to territorial expansion in the Pacific (and that it also was a military force to be reckoned with).

[yosi]

Most, if not all, of the so-called Arab "suicide bombers" in Palestine (i.e., so-called "Israel") are simply bombs that the Israeli government planted itself in order to claim a so-called "suicide attack" as a pretext for its continuing genocide against the native inhabitants.



this id a pure BULLSHIT , it will be the same like saying that the 9/11 was a U.S. government plan as an excuse to fihgt Bin Laden :evil:

[blahblahblah]

I'm bored today so i have to:



in this election 48% of the electorate, myself included, voted AGAINST Bush, and even then there are many in this country who believe that this percentage would have been higher if not for the unscrupulous actions of the GOP in Ohio and Florida.

This is interesting, isn't it? Indirectly, you also claim here that your country is a kind of uncivilized... Stealing or manipulating the votes is something that only belongs to uncivilized, non- or half-democratic countries, right?



So, to confuse the actions of this administration in particular with the will of the American people is an insult to every American.

Well, you elected that cowboy twice (two times), so that's something that must be the will of the people.. Or, maybe someone stole the votes 2 times? In such case, this becomes a kind of tradition.. Are you on the way to become god damned russia, or something?

You missed the entire point of my argument, which was this: we Americans do not think or act as a single unit, nor does any other nation or people. The root cause of all bigotries and racist philosophies is the belief that all members of a given people/ethnicity/nationality think and/or act as a single entity. By making such sweeping generalizations about Americans, you prove yourself to be nothing more than a common bigot.

And before you say a word about my post of Japanese WWII war-crimes, know that the I was referring to them in order to point out that the Japanese government was just as knee-deep in blood as the other nations in the war.

The decision to use two prototype nuclear bombs was, in the eyes of the historian, perhaps a poor one. But the other options facing Truman at that juncture were just as bad, and they were (in no particular order):

Conclude a peace with the then present Japanese government, which, even if it was agreed to, would most likely have left the principle warmongers in power, thus leaving the door open to further conflict. In fact, even after Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed, and it was apparent that the Emperor was getting ready to surrender, there was an attempted coup d'etat on the part of certain factions within the military government (here's the Wikipedia article on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan). To have chosen to pursue this course would have been tantamount to concluding a peace treaty with Germany and allowing Hitler and his henchmen to stay in power.

Invade Japan — a course of action that would've meant the death of several hundred thousand American soldiers, and many times that number of Japanese soldiers and civilians. All throughout the war in the Pacific, the Japanese military had shown a remarkable disregard for human life, as was shown not only by their savage treatment POW's (cf. my earlier post on Japanese war-crimes) but also in battle (e.g., the kamikaze attacks on the US fleet off Okinawa, the suicidal tactics its soldiers engaged in when it was clear that defeat was inevitable, convincing civilians that they should commit suicide rather than capitulate (this was done primarily through propaganda; cf. Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Okinawa), etc).
The plan for the invasion of Japan was codenamed "Operation Downfall' (Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall), and — as I said before — the casualties would've been horrendous. I quote the Wikipedia article:

In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April, the figures of 7.45 casualties/1000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities/1000 man-days were developed. This implied that a 90-day Olympic campaign would cost 456,000 casualties, including 109,000 dead or missing. If Coronet took another 90 days, the combined cost would be 1,200,000 casualties, with 267,000 fatalities.
'Olympic' was the codename for the invasion of Kyushu, and 'Coronet' was the codename for the invasion of Honshu. Part of the force to be used in Operation Downfall would've been soldiers redeployed from the European Theater, where they had just finished defeating the Third Reich and were expecting to be sent home.

Blockade Japan. This option is not usually brought up during these types of discussions (at least the ones I've heard), but I'm sure it must've crossed the minds of the military's higher-ups at the time. In this option, US and Allied fleets would have, I believe, created a blockade around Japan, in a massive attempt at seige warfare. A similar tactic had worked for Britain in the first World War, although, on its own, it hadn't been enough to defeat the Kaiserreich. In my opinion, if this strategy was pursued, the death-toll for the Japanese civilian population would've been even higher than it would've been for Operation Downfall — although it would have meant less casualties for the Allies. Hunger and disease would probably resulted in the deaths of millions, since any fishing-boats and traders would be commandeered or destroyed by the Allied fleet. This would've taken years to carry out, and would also have resulted in the partitioning of Japan after its surrender, since it's doubtless that the Soviet Union would have to have been enlisted for the plan to succeed. As a result, there would have been a North Japan and a South Japan — one Communist, and the other democratic — just as there is a North Korea and South Korea, and as there was once an East Germany and West Germany.


So, here's President Truman, faced with this stark decision, and suddenly he's told that this top-secret military project has perfected two totally new prototype bombs that are so powerful that they could destroy entire cities. He used them. Unfortunately, the strategy of destroying cities was used by all sides in WWII (although Germany was the first to attempt it, the Allies — through the direction of the British Air Marshal Harris(Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Harris#World_War_II), who was the impetus behind the strategy — used it to most devastating effect against Germany; when Japan became within the range of the B-29, General Curtis LeMay(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Lemay), ordered the fire-bombing of, among other industrial targets, Tokyo. This is one of the more shameful aspects of the American defeat of Japan).

There are some who say that the US government should have simply demonstrated the A-bomb on a deserted island and had a Japanese delegation witness it. It is possible that this might have worked, however, I doubt it. Given the tenacity of the Japanese militarists, and their power within the nation's government, the only way this would've worked would've been for the Emperor himself to be present as a witness; anyone else would have been sidelined or intimidated into giving the Emporer a whitewashed account of the test. In any event, Truman's political foes would have lambasted him for having treated Japan with kid-gloves after so many American soldiers had been killed; remember, no one except the scientists who created them truly understood the power of these weapons, and even they couldn't conceive of the horror that their use would unleash until after the fact. And to the military higher-ups, who knew as much about nuclear radiation as the general public — that is, absolutely nothing — these were nothing more than 'supersized' bombs.

In the end, the usage of the two A-bombs can only be called the lesser of the three evils.

PS—Just so you know, the reason the Japanese decided to attack Pearl Harbor was most likely the oil embargo the US government placed on Japan for waging war in Manchuria; the Japanese military wanted to bring about a swift defeat of the US Pacific fleet, hoping that would convince the Rooselvelt administration to sue for peace (with terms that would allow the Japanese government to increase its sphere of influence in Asia). However, the roots of the conflict probably date back at least to the Russo-Japanese War, when it became clear to the US government that Japan was beginning to assert its claim to territorial expansion in the Pacific (and that it also was a military force to be reckoned with).

:roll: OMG..

Well, i admire your patriotism.

[interestedParty]

:roll: OMG..

Well, i admire your patriotism.

My previous post was not an expression of patriotism, it was the truth.

PS—I can't help but remark on your ability for maintaining your ignorance.

[interestedParty]

You have also ignored this:


You missed the entire point of my argument, which was this: we Americans do not think or act as a single unit, nor does any other nation or people. The root cause of all bigotries and racist philosophies is the belief that all members of a given people/ethnicity/nationality think and/or act as a single entity. By making such sweeping generalizations about Americans, you prove yourself to be nothing more than a common bigot.

[ezed]

I love Israel! They will not be compromised by the PC shit that has draped the world. It's simple, you fuck with us, we will decimate you. To date, they really have not unleashed the dogs of war.They have really been firing warning shots considering what their capable of.

They are truly commited to fighting terrorism, especially when it effects the homeland. Considering their geographic location, and their neighbors, I think they have shown considerable restraint, knowing their capabilities.

And don't give me shit about how they took the Palestinian home land. They're there, they made something of themselves, advanced there society and are now protecting it.

Too bad the Arab and Muslim countries can't find a way to funnel a piece of their oil riches down to their peoples. Maybe there wouldn't be these problems with countries that had to work for what they got.

To Hamas, Hezzbolah, Taliban, Al Quida (and all the rest of you "think you're entiled to something without earning it") may you go to your grave and realize that the teaching of your fat ass teachers who are making THEIR lives easier on earth by making you their lap dogs who do their bidding were false. Think about the 79 virgins. They'll scream in pain when you fuck them and then ask when are you going to marry them and not fuck them again. And you will say, I'm truely in hell, and fuck the goats were better than this.

Non thinking assholes! :evil:

[blahblahblah]

:roll: OMG..

Well, i admire your patriotism.

My previous post was not an expression of patriotism, it was the truth.

PS—I can't help but remark on your ability for maintaining your ignorance.

I'm sorry, but yes - it was a pure act of patriotism. No matter how negative it is to bomb someone with 2 nuclear bombs you will always try to find out something positive in it, only because that was the country of your origin that did it. If, for some reasons, russians did that against Japan, you would probably condemn it along with me. Pure little Truman. How could he possibly (and not only him, but also all those scientists too) figure out that a bomb like that not only kills when it detonates, but also many years afterwards, and that kind of killing is even worse. Also, regarding the truth of your wikipedia: I'm pretty much convinced that
if for some reasons axes won the WWII your wikipedia would sound totally different. I mean, it's always the winner that writes the history, it's always the winner's truth that matters, right? For example:

THE KAMIKAZE LIE

It was certainly in the evil media's interest to make the war up,
and to make the "enemies" as ruthless and evil as possible. One
notorious example is the lie that Japanese aviators were actually
encouraged to destroy their valuable aircraft (and themselves) by
crashing them into the sides of US ships.

Dr. Rubert Faurr, a French professor of basket-weaving, has
quoted no less an authority than General Douglas MacArthur on his
reaction when he heard the first rumor about these supposed
suicide missions. "That's ridiculous!" MacArthur exclaimed.

Honest Japanese people will also admit how absurd this claim is.
The word "kamikaze" actually means "he who herds the sheep" in
certain Japanese dialects, according to Japan expert Mort
Clondyke. And Atoyot Adnoh, currently Japanese minister of
history in the Diet, has stated publically that "that whole
episode was really crazy."

Hehe, pretty funny joke, isn't it? When an idiot look at it, withouth much thinking he will accept those "facts" directly and start shouting out new facts he newly learned.

But besides that joke, do you believe in kamikaze? I somehow doubt..... It might be a part of the propaganda war. I have not been there, so i'm not sure..

I'm not that easily manipulated with the "facts" that you can find on some popular media pages, i tend to build my own opinion more carefully than you. Of course, much of the WWII historical events in your wikipedia are actually true but some of them could have been written by some "patriots" like you. You are not objective at all.

[blahblahblah]

You have also ignored this:


You missed the entire point of my argument, which was this: we Americans do not think or act as a single unit, nor does any other nation or people. The root cause of all bigotries and racist philosophies is the belief that all members of a given people/ethnicity/nationality think and/or act as a single entity. By making such sweeping generalizations about Americans, you prove yourself to be nothing more than a common bigot.

I'm not generalising, that's pure bullshit from your side. I'm not that stupid to not be able to figure out that all the individuals are different. I just described how your country sometimes acts as uncivilised in global. But of course, your endless hate against me will make you describe me as "dumb fuck", "retard" and "common bigot" and even something more than that.

By the way, it seems to me that you hate me a little bit extra.. Are there any other reasons for that, besides those political issues? Have we "met" before? "interestedParty" is pretty new signature here at HA, does it belong to someone i know?

[blahblahblah]

It's simple, you fuck with us, we will decimate you.

hitler stated something similar during WWII too..

By the way, they will not only decimate their enemies (which would be an entire arab world) but UN observers too, on their way to make some civilisation over there:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/25/mideast.main/index.html

[interestedParty]

I'm not generalising, that's pure bullshit from your side.

That's interesting statement, particularly in light of this statement:


Well, you elected that cowboy twice (two times)

I elected "that cowboy"? Wow, I never realized that I was responsible for Bush becoming President! Or maybe you were generalizing...


Also, regarding the truth of your wikipedia: I'm pretty much convinced that
if for some reasons axes won the WWII your wikipedia would sound totally different.

For one thing, if the Axis (please check your spelling before you submit your posts, otherwise you come across as even more of an ignoramus than you actually are) had won WWII, I would not be here, since my grandparents would've been sent to the gas-chambers.


I'm not that easily manipulated with the "facts" that you can find on some popular media pages, i tend to build my own opinion more carefully than you. Of course, much of the WWII historical events in your wikipedia are actually true but some of them could have been written by some "patriots" like you. You are not objective at all.

And just where do you get your 'facts'? Most of my knowledge of WWII pertains to the European Theater, more specifically the Third Reich — and before you ask, that knowledge was obtained mostly from five books: Hitler, by Joachim Fest; Speer, also by Fest; The Order of the Death's Head, by Heinz Höhne; Inside the Third Reich, by Albert Speer; and Nazi Germany, by Klaus Fischer — if you want to acquire knowledge about a country's history, it's best to read a history book by someone who's from that country — all those authors are from Germany, and, of course, all were affected by WWII. I trust the information I get from Wikipedia, because said information matches information I have gained from other, trusted, sources (including the sources I mentioned above); therefore, I have every reason to believe in the veracity of the facts about the war in the Pacific that I've found on that site.

You say that I'm not objective — I say that I'm as objective as a human being can be about such things. Doubting history just because it's written down in history books isn't being objective, it's being paranoid. Short of actually being present at a given event, or scouring the world for first-hand accounts (something that most people, myself included, don't have either the time, energy, or resources to do anyway) the only thing a student of history can do is to seek out knowledge from books that are attested to as being accurate (usually by consulting bibliographies, book reviews, and, in some instances, history professors).

[interestedParty]

PS—McManaman, you still haven't told me what country you're from.

[blahblahblah]

For one thing, if the Axis (please check your spelling before you submit your posts, otherwise you come across as even more of an ignoramus than you actually are) had won WWII, I would not be here, since my grandparents would've been sent to the gas-chambers.


Oh, i see.. You are jewish (hopefully not the ortodox one, those are real fanatics), that's why you are so fanaticaly involved in this thread. Now i can understand you calling me dumb fuck, etc.. and for all the shit directed to me for misspelling the words of axees and hollocowst..



And just where do you get your 'facts'? Most of my knowledge of WWII pertains to the European Theater, more specifically the Third Reich — and before you ask, that knowledge was obtained mostly from five books: Hitler, by Joachim Fest; Speer, also by Fest; The Order of the Death's Head, by Heinz Höhne; Inside the Third Reich, by Albert Speer; and Nazi Germany, by Klaus Fischer — if you want to acquire knowledge about a country's history, it's best to read a history book by someone who's from that country — all those authors are from Germany, and, of course, all were affected by WWII. I trust the information I get from Wikipedia, because said information matches information I have gained from other, trusted, sources (including the sources I mentioned above); therefore, I have every reason to believe in the veracity of the facts about the war in the Pacific that I've found on that site.

You say that I'm not objective — I say that I'm as objective as a human being can be about such things. Doubting history just because it's written down in history books isn't being objective, it's being paranoid. Short of actually being present at a given event, or scouring the world for first-hand accounts (something that most people, myself included, don't have either the time, energy, or resources to do anyway) the only thing a student of history can do is to seek out knowledge from books that are attested to as being accurate (usually by consulting bibliographies, book reviews, and, in some instances, history professors).

You know, the history is something that can be manipulated by anyone. That's why i do not like the history, i like to see the current facts around me, that's the best evidence of what's happening in the world, and that shows oss who is the bad guy and who is the victim. And look around you and tell me, who are bad guys today? But please, be objective!

[blahblahblah]

PS—McManaman, you still haven't told me what country you're from.

Iceland. Now tell me all the bad fact that your whackypedia has to offer against it.

[interestedParty]

For one thing, if the Axis (please check your spelling before you submit your posts, otherwise you come across as even more of an ignoramus than you actually are) had won WWII, I would not be here, since my grandparents would've been sent to the gas-chambers.


Oh, i see.. You are jewish (hopefully not the ortodox one, those are real fanatics), that's why you are so fanaticaly involved in this thread. Now i can understand you calling me dumb fuck, etc.. and for all the shit directed to me for misspelling the words of axees and hollocowst..



And just where do you get your 'facts'? Most of my knowledge of WWII pertains to the European Theater, more specifically the Third Reich — and before you ask, that knowledge was obtained mostly from five books: Hitler, by Joachim Fest; Speer, also by Fest; The Order of the Death's Head, by Heinz Höhne; Inside the Third Reich, by Albert Speer; and Nazi Germany, by Klaus Fischer — if you want to acquire knowledge about a country's history, it's best to read a history book by someone who's from that country — all those authors are from Germany, and, of course, all were affected by WWII. I trust the information I get from Wikipedia, because said information matches information I have gained from other, trusted, sources (including the sources I mentioned above); therefore, I have every reason to believe in the veracity of the facts about the war in the Pacific that I've found on that site.

You say that I'm not objective — I say that I'm as objective as a human being can be about such things. Doubting history just because it's written down in history books isn't being objective, it's being paranoid. Short of actually being present at a given event, or scouring the world for first-hand accounts (something that most people, myself included, don't have either the time, energy, or resources to do anyway) the only thing a student of history can do is to seek out knowledge from books that are attested to as being accurate (usually by consulting bibliographies, book reviews, and, in some instances, history professors).

You know, the history is something that can be manipulated by anyone. That's why i do not like the history, i like to see the current facts around me, that's the best evidence of what's happening in the world, and that shows oss who is the bad guy and who is the victim. And look around you and tell me, who are bad guys today? But please, be objective!

Following your logic, the news is just as vulnerable to manipulation as history. It's all about context: show a video of bomb going off and put whatever narration you want to it.

The ease of manipulation of news by the news-media — all news-media — is striking. For instance, interviews with prominent figures can be edited so that they are made to look however the journalist wants them to. Man-on-the-street interviews can be conducted in such a way as to make a certain segment of the population appear stupid and/or ignorant. Segments can be shot in order to make it appear that one side of a conflict is more to blame than the other, even if it is clear to everyone involved that both sides are equally to blame. The more removed a story is from the region to which it is being reported to, the easier it is to distort the facts. However, I don't assume that these methods are employed at all — I know that it's possible to do these things, but I also know that it's highly improbable that they actually are done (at least not on any program I would watch). I don't see the point in doubting every piece of information that's presented to me. Empiricism can only be stretched so far before its use starts to border on the absurd.

You are too dismissive of historical study. A good student of history should know when a source is to be given credit, and when it is to be taken with a grain of salt. A good historian tells his/her reader when an account is verifiable, and when it is dubious. The study of history is fraught with difficulty, but yields tangible rewards. It allows its students to see patterns in current events, and to see how pursuing a slightly different course might yield results that would benefit everyone.

In regards to the present Israeli incursion into Lebanon, let me make one thing clear: I do not believe it is the correct response to Hezbollah's rocket attacks on Israel. In the end, I believe it will create more terrorists than it will destroy.

[blahblahblah]

For one thing, if the Axis (please check your spelling before you submit your posts, otherwise you come across as even more of an ignoramus than you actually are) had won WWII, I would not be here, since my grandparents would've been sent to the gas-chambers.


Oh, i see.. You are jewish (hopefully not the ortodox one, those are real fanatics), that's why you are so fanaticaly involved in this thread. Now i can understand you calling me dumb fuck, etc.. and for all the shit directed to me for misspelling the words of axees and hollocowst..



And just where do you get your 'facts'? Most of my knowledge of WWII pertains to the European Theater, more specifically the Third Reich — and before you ask, that knowledge was obtained mostly from five books: Hitler, by Joachim Fest; Speer, also by Fest; The Order of the Death's Head, by Heinz Höhne; Inside the Third Reich, by Albert Speer; and Nazi Germany, by Klaus Fischer — if you want to acquire knowledge about a country's history, it's best to read a history book by someone who's from that country — all those authors are from Germany, and, of course, all were affected by WWII. I trust the information I get from Wikipedia, because said information matches information I have gained from other, trusted, sources (including the sources I mentioned above); therefore, I have every reason to believe in the veracity of the facts about the war in the Pacific that I've found on that site.

You say that I'm not objective — I say that I'm as objective as a human being can be about such things. Doubting history just because it's written down in history books isn't being objective, it's being paranoid. Short of actually being present at a given event, or scouring the world for first-hand accounts (something that most people, myself included, don't have either the time, energy, or resources to do anyway) the only thing a student of history can do is to seek out knowledge from books that are attested to as being accurate (usually by consulting bibliographies, book reviews, and, in some instances, history professors).

You know, the history is something that can be manipulated by anyone. That's why i do not like the history, i like to see the current facts around me, that's the best evidence of what's happening in the world, and that shows oss who is the bad guy and who is the victim. And look around you and tell me, who are bad guys today? But please, be objective!

Following your logic, the news is just as vulnerable to manipulation as history. It's all about context: show a video of bomb going off and put whatever narration you want to it.

The ease of manipulation of news by the news-media — all news-media — is striking. For instance, interviews with prominent figures can be edited so that they are made to look however the journalist wants them to. Man-on-the-street interviews can be conducted in such a way as to make a certain segment of the population appear stupid and/or ignorant. Segments can be shot in order to make it appear that one side of a conflict is more to blame than the other, even if it is clear to everyone involved that both sides are equally to blame. The more removed a story is from the region to which it is being reported to, the easier it is to distort the facts. However, I don't assume that these methods are employed at all — I know that it's possible to do these things, but I also know that it's highly improbable that they actually are done (at least not on any program I would watch). I don't see the point in doubting every piece of information that's presented to me. Empiricism can only be stretched so far before its use starts to border on the absurd.

You are too dismissive of historical study. A good student of history should know when a source is to be given credit, and when it is to be taken with a grain of salt. A good historian tells his/her reader when an account is verifiable, and when it is dubious. The study of history is fraught with difficulty, but yields tangible rewards. It allows its students to see patterns in current events, and to see how pursuing a slightly different course might yield results that would benefit everyone.

In regards to the present Israeli incursion into Lebanon, let me make one thing clear: I do not believe it is the correct response to Hezbollah's rocket attacks on Israel. In the end, I believe it will create more terrorists than it will destroy.

OK.

Izrael occupied Golan that belongs to Syria. They build settlements over there, so they are showing the arab world the clear picture of their interests, and that would be to expand and grab more territory. That's the fact that you can find on the maps around the world. Now it's Syria that is represented as a bad country ?!? No lies there. Now, according to the UN agreements, izrael should take significantly less territory from former Palestina, but they occupied a lot more, and now are building their settlements over there on the remaining palestinian territory also. They are expanding their living room by performing ethnic cleansing of arabs that lived there throught many centuries. That's also the fact. Now, Izrael committed a massacre in Sabra and Shatila (i think this is described in Wikipedia) (Wiki - i like that name) and that massacre accordint to some sources was led by Ariel Sharon. Instead of punishing that war crime bastard, Izrael puts him to be a prime minister - tell me about the humiliation of a nation (palestinians). And all that supported by USA. All that are pure facts that happened in modern time, not historical bullshit. I saw this, many other europeans did the same thing, and we are confused. Why? You tell me that. Many of oss see Hezbollah to be a kind of a logical resistance movement, partisans that are fighting against this kind of occupation. Are they really terrorists?

Talking about training a new generation 2 hate...this is sick.

http://fromisraeltolebanon.info/

8) 8)

You are right; that is sick. However, so far as any consideration of moral equivalence goes in regard to "training a new generation to hate," there is nothing quite like actually training children to be suicide bombers and then using them as such – something that Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the PFLP have all done (and that's according to non-Israeli government sources like the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group).

-Quinn

Most, if not all, of the so-called Arab "suicide bombers" in Palestine (i.e., so-called "Israel") are simply bombs that the Israeli government planted itself in order to claim a so-called "suicide attack" as a pretext for its continuing genocide against the native inhabitants.

So, you are willing to ignore the overwhelming body of evidence put forth by Palestinian organizations who say that the suicide bombers are their own people (Hamas, Fatah, PFLP, etc.), human rights groups, eye-witness accounts, and the Israeli government? No offense, but your position is so weak that it doesn't even merit a debate.

-Quinn

[ezed]

It's simple, you fuck with us, we will decimate you.

hitler stated something similar during WWII too..

By the way, they will not only decimate their enemies (which would be an entire arab world) but UN observers too, on their way to make some civilisation over there:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/25/mideast.main/index.html

You dope, hitler wanted to take countries, Israel just wants to keep their's.

regarding your second comment, the point is when they're attacked they lash out with the ferocity of a junkyard dog. Which is what I admire.

Don't portray my comments with those of hitler, he was an insecure house painter with a little dick who frightened others with no balls until he poked the wrong lions. If you want to compare me to a historical figure use Vlad Dracula. I would have those attack me impaled on the city streets with nice little signs saying, "LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE OR THIS WILL HAPPEN TO YOU! I DON'T WANT YOUR LAND, I DON'T WANT YOUR OPINIONS! GO FUCK YOURSELVES AND LEAVE ME ALONE! NO TRESSPASSING!

Ps.. I don't read fucking links, the articles are usually written by morons craving attention.

[blahblahblah]

It's simple, you fuck with us, we will decimate you.

hitler stated something similar during WWII too..

By the way, they will not only decimate their enemies (which would be an entire arab world) but UN observers too, on their way to make some civilisation over there:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/25/mideast.main/index.html

You dope, hitler wanted to take countries, Israel just wants to keep their's.

regarding your second comment, the point is when they're attacked they lash out with the ferocity of a junkyard dog. Which is what I admire.

Don't portray my comments with those of hitler, he was an insecure house painter with a little dick who frightened others with no balls until he poked the wrong lions. If you want to compare me to a historical figure use Vlad Dracula. I would have those attack me impaled on the city streets with nice little signs saying, "LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE OR THIS WILL HAPPEN TO YOU! I DON'T WANT YOUR LAND, I DON'T WANT YOUR OPINIONS! GO FUCK YOURSELVES AND LEAVE ME ALONE! NO TRESSPASSING!

Ps.. I don't read fucking links, the articles are usually written by morons craving attention.

Your comments are very infantile. As your auto-portrait on that avatar. Well i wont generalise and say that all americans sound as pathetic as you do in their posts, cause THAT would really be insult to a nation.

[ezed]

It's simple, you fuck with us, we will decimate you.

hitler stated something similar during WWII too..

By the way, they will not only decimate their enemies (which would be an entire arab world) but UN observers too, on their way to make some civilisation over there:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/25/mideast.main/index.html

You dope, hitler wanted to take countries, Israel just wants to keep their's.

regarding your second comment, the point is when they're attacked they lash out with the ferocity of a junkyard dog. Which is what I admire.

Don't portray my comments with those of hitler, he was an insecure house painter with a little dick who frightened others with no balls until he poked the wrong lions. If you want to compare me to a historical figure use Vlad Dracula. I would have those attack me impaled on the city streets with nice little signs saying, "LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE OR THIS WILL HAPPEN TO YOU! I DON'T WANT YOUR LAND, I DON'T WANT YOUR OPINIONS! GO FUCK YOURSELVES AND LEAVE ME ALONE! NO TRESSPASSING!

Ps.. I don't read fucking links, the articles are usually written by morons craving attention.

Your comments are very infantile. As your auto-portrait on that avatar. Well i wont generalise and say that all americans sound as pathetic as you do in their posts, cause THAT would really be insult to a nation.

You know you're right. But semi intellectual morons with no sense of humor sometimes cause me to lash out. That being said, I say blow me you fuckwad and generalize all you want, it seems every one does. Because yours and mine opinions don't mean shit in the scheme of things. The difference is ...you haven't realized that yet. You silly Goose!