You're one of these guys who try to throw in a disparaging comment about the terrorists every once in a while. It's very hard to tell in this medium of communication where your head's really at. It's clear that you're either an apologist for the terrorists or you're misguided. Your accusing me of being a 'neocon' indicates the former; the neocons on here hate my guts. There are a large number of what I consider to be inaccuracies and factual errors in this last post. I don't have the time to answer right now, but I will do so tomorrow.
I'll tell you where my head's at. You shouldn't put money and effort into something that doesn't give something back, because that's actual wealth wasted, forever. You simply don't do it unless it's absolutely necessary for your survival. Terrorism was never a major threat to the survival of the US; as your fellow assbags has pointed out, terrorism has killed slightly more than 12 thousand people, mostly non-Americans. In the big picture, that's piss in the ocean, it's less than americans kill americans in a couple of years, less than Americans dying form obesity in a freaking month. In 2006 more than 17 thousand Americans lost their lives due to drunk driving, and nobody has even considered forbidding liquor. Yet you pour your hearts out fighting this horrendously insignificant terrorism. The most sickening part is that everything the US has done to stop terrorism since your little war started, has lead to an exponential increase in the amount of terrorists world wide. That's not a simple mistake on your governments account, the world told you this was going to happen, but Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld didn't listen. And that's not even close to the worst part, the worst part is the fact that Bin Laden said that his plan for destroying America was to drag the US into the middle-east and keep you there until your financially bankrupt: "We are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah," bin Laden said in the transcript. He also said al Qaeda has found it "easy for us to provoke and bait this administration." http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/01/binladen.tape/ If it weren't for all the man hours, all the wasted lives and all the trillions of dollars that have been poured into your war on NOTHING, the financial crisis you've brought on the entire world might have been avoided. All those hundreds of thousands of men and woman, soldiers, agents, investigators, police, security, working their asses of for the sake of fighting nothing, instead of being productive, as they would have been if they weren't lied to. It's a shameful and disgusting waste. And the murderous bastard Bin Laden is winning. Whenever you have a weird situation like this, you need to figure out why it's done, you need to find out who wins. In this particular incident, Republicans in general, and neoconservatives in particular are the ones who takes out political capital. It is obviously then not a coincidence that these people are also the ones promoting terrorism the most. Nor is it a coincidence that these people have been running the war on terror for the last years. Actually I didn't call you a neocon, I said that stupid Americans are taking the neocon bait, indirectly calling you a stupid American. I don't know anything about you, but if I had to guess, I'd say your a proud Democrat, possibly son of Muslim immigrants who raised you in a largely Republican area. Your parents are not from an Arab country though, maybe Indonesia, Bosnia or so. You have always taken a great deal of pride in your Muslim faith, but lately you have been struggling very hard with your American identity and you might even have considered denouncing your faith, although you never actually came close to doing it. At some point, you found some all-American Muslim like senator Keith Ellison and you realized that you could embrace your Muslim faith and still be an ignorant American patriot. So now you run around denouncing terrorism (as if somebody actually supports these murderers), bending backwards in your attempt to achieve acceptance. This is what my very dear friend a_person is always trying to do, he calls everyone who doesn't eat his shit Islamofascists and babykillers so that they bend backwords and become his personal potty chair. And it actually works on people who lack integrity, it works on you. But that's based on a couple of posts. Like I said, I don't know anything about you. I'll be waiting.
Just read in ME news that rockets are falling in Nahariya. Palestinians are reaching all of Israel, from south to north. Are they trying to make a point by having their rockets fly over TelAviv, but fall in the further point (Naharyia)?
Just got in after a 5 hour drive and checked in here. I can't respond today but I promise I will. There's even more in the response you just made that needs to be corrected. I will say this, though. The analysis above couldn't be more wrong if you suggested I was a Kalahari Bushman who got swept into a Namibian river and rescued by a couple of Boston Irish tourists who brought me to the U.S. and educated me in a seminary. I mean that not one of the suggestions you made is even close. You're going to think this is just a gratuitous shot at you, but to be honest, the quality of that assessment kind of echoes the quality of the thinking that goes into your analysis of the MidEast situation.
It's not relevant which country your parents came from or who you admired, if you want to respond to the assessment, you can explain how you're not a spineless apologist of neocon ignorance. That's the conclusion of my assessment and the only claim I stand by, the rest is guessing as said, could be anything. First of all, my assessment was insulting, which means you'd only admit it was true if you were honest towards yourself, which the epitome of my assessment say you're not. This means that if you did admit that I was right, I'd be wrong. Second, if you're saying that I lost any credibility because of my assessment, my answer is that I never had any to begin with. Neither do you, nor does anyone else. This is an internet debate, I give you argumentative reasoning and information and you make up your own damn mind; nothing else is relevant. Back to the topic of this thread: http://www.thejidf.org/ These opinion controlling script kiddies hacked a peaceful Norwegian Facebook group and deleted all its content: http://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/midtosten/artikkel.php?artid=539620 They're actually providing guides on how to control information on Youtube, Facebook, Wikipedia, Wordpress and even blogs and forums. And they equate all forms of criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism, so they basically distort information on the internet so that it favors anything Israel does. This is pure propaganda. http://www.thejidf.org/2008/02/problematic-youtube-channels-and-videos.html I've looked through allot of these videos, some of them are in fact anti-Semitic but allot of them has got nothing to do with Jews what so ever, some videos are simply shedding some light on the Palestinian situation. They're trying to prevent us from seeing these movies by flagging them in great numbers. Disturbing.
well basically after some hard thinking. and alot of thought and questions i have come to my conclusion :- the leaders of israel are gay bois. btw i have sum pretty good jew friends, so this isnt about the jews....its about a evil ''thing'' that exists at the top of all instituions...which even the US govt cant face or verbally attack... but anyways im gna send my butler to shit on the israeli parliment..or whatever political house there is. booya
Exactly. See these guys for instance and a good example: http://www.nkusa.org/ (Orthodox Jews against Zionism) Then we have the "not so nice guys" - Jewish Internet Defense Force - JDIF, who commit petty Internet crime and generally create a lot of confusion as part of their tactics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Internet_Defense_Force_(JIDF) The neocons say it best: We come with a strong point of view and people like point of view journalism. While all these hand-wringing Freedom Forum types talk about objectivity, the conservative media likes to rap the liberal media on the knuckles for not being objective. We've created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It's a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It's a great little racket. I'm glad we found it actually. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Weekly_Standard The magazine is owned by the "not so nice guy" Rupert Murdoch who also has the FOX News and O'Reilly to score some bucks. He doesn't give a rats ass about accountability and truthworhiness - just about the effect on people: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF9HpuZm6-g http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outfoxed http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6737097743434902428 (Outfoxed: Murdoch's war on journalism) You can see long time "The Weekly Standard" contributor Stephen J. Hayes on the CNN, CNNI program "The Situation Room" with Wolf Blitzer.
My apologies. I have realized that it's not worth my time to spend the 45 minutes it would take to compose a reasoned response to your posts, including taking the time to assemble the quotes etc. Your grammar and sentence construction shows that English is your second language. You should tell us all where you're from. I'm from Canada.
check out poster called " a person" all his/her posts on politics/religion only...very zionist...calling folks anti-semites when discussing israel atrocities. probably a spy who will blacklist you onto the zionist KKK.
I think you misunderstood me. My purpose was not to insult you, the assessment just came out insulting to you; I'm not being an ass just to be an ass. I strongly doubt you actually had anything to add though, judging from your complete lack of knowledge about Al Qaede, and your recommendation of a book that doesn't even support your false claims. But hey, if you've got anything, I'll review it with an open mind and respond respectfully. I've just gotten used to you people never having anything to add but insults to these debates. Are you going to accuse me of being an Arab as well now? 'a person' already tried this strategy, and I've responded "to you all" that I'm Scandinavian. Not immigrant.