What part of they come from the same Semitic blood line
Posted By: sm on 2009-01-06
In Reply to: Well, let's have it then! I'm all ears! - Lu
do you not get? It does not MATTER who was there first, who staked claims or which Holy Book tell what people no one else belongs there. Israel only became a POLITICAL national entity in 1948 as a culmination of western interference that dates back to 1916 to 1919. This is a political/humanitarian problem. The rest of it is HISTORY. Get it?
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
This post part of which I have copied from the conservative board is over the line
Well, gotta tell ya all..I have tried to take the conservative posts and laugh about them..but, however, being a descendant of the Holocaust, having lost great-great family members and still having a beloved friend who was a survivor, with tattoos on her arms and memories to tell all...I TOTALLY STRIKE OUT AT THIS POST..CALLING ME A NAZI IS THE MOST WORSE THING ANYONE COULD CALL ME..AND IM AM MOST DEFINITELY GOING TO CONTACT THE MONITOR AND ADMINISTRATOR..THIS IS UNCALLED FOR..THIS ATTACK IS IGNORANT..These ignorant people throw around genocide and nazi and THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE HECK THEY ARE EVEN POSTING ABOUT..
**At least on these boards the two-initialed Nazi is allowed get away with her genocide of anything conservative, but that's not helping the post count on the board at all.**
Semitic language
The Semitic language is spoken in a variety of dialects spoken by nearly 200 million people. One branch is Hebrew, another is Arabic to name a few. Just because Barack's name means "blessing" does not mean anything.
Well sugar, it becomes anti-Semitic the minute
you use Hitler to illustrate your point. This "occupation" you speak if simply a myth created and perpetuated by the Palestinians. Aside from the history I posted below, allow me to post more on the subject of "occupation."
The Jewish perspective on Palestine was that with proper development there would be room for all. Many of the early settlers were Labor Zionists and they identified with the poor Arab fellahin. In 1920, David Ben Gurion (who would later declare the State of Israel and become its first Prime Minister) stated: "under no circumstances must we touch land belonging to fellahs or worked by them... Only if a fellah leaves his place of settlement should we offer to buy his land, at an appropriate price."
Thus the focus was on the purchase of uncultivated lands, often swamps or barren sand dunes, and with no tenants (e.g. the Hula valley, Tel Aviv).
In 1930, John Hope Simpson (chair of the Hope Simpson Commission) noted that Jews "paid high prices for land, and in addition they paid to certain occupants of those lands a considerable amount of money which they were not legally bound to pay." (P. 51, Hope Simpson report)
The next year, after Arab cries about being dispossessed from their land, Lewis French led a British effort to provide land to Arabs that had been displaced. Of the 3,000 applications received, 80% were determined to be invalid. Ultimately, only about 100 landless Arabs were offered alternative plots. (from French's Supplementary Report submitted to the Palestine Royal Commission.)
In 1936 the Peel Commission arrived on the scene. From its PRC report (p. 242): "much of the land now carrying orange groves were sand dunes or swamp and uncultivated when it was purchased.... there was at the time... little evidence that the owners possessed either the resources or training needed to develop the land."
The vast majority of Jewish owned lands had been uncultivated, often thought to be uncultivatable. Jews, who comprised roughly a third of the population, only held 11% of the land that was defined as "arable." The Peel Commission found that any land shortage was "due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population."
This increase far exceeded population increases in neighboring countries and, not surprisingly, took place in areas where development by Jews was at work. While Jewish immigration was regulated, restricted, and at times totally forbidden by the British, scores of thousands of Arabs crossed into Palestine from miles and miles of poorly patrolled land borders.
So this was the glorious country of Palestine that the Palestinians (most of them great, great grandchildren of those who live there now) talk about. Most of their ancestors were immigrants, brought to Palestine between WWI and II by the British at the request of the other Arab countries who promised them cheap oil if they helped. They did. In the meantime, Jews had started settling there and building up the land.
The myth that the area was thriving prior to Jewish development is false. It had its moments, but alternated between desert and malaria infested swamps. So much for the claim that the land had been held, or at least worked if not owned by a family, for "generations." Plots were changed "annually."
Thus, while most people who don't know the history of Israel, think Jews stole the land, they are very much mistaken. It was purchased. Israeli land was developed into orange groves from swamps, from sand dunes into cities. And now, the Palestinians who hadn't the least interest in that land until the Jews developed it. wanted it. While the Israeli population increased slowly, the Arab population increased ten-fold both from immigration and very large families huddled into poor neighborhoods. Instead of building infrastructure, US aid was pocketed by Arafat and other Palestinian leaders to increase their bank accounts and to wage wars.
Arafat himself was no Palestinian. Like most Palestinians he was also an immigrant; an Egyptian. After the UN partitioned Palestine, and declared Israel a state, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt, armed to the teeth, declared war on Israel. Though Israel had few weapons, and no help from any other country, they won the 1948 War of Independence. The Arabs have waged 5 wars on Israel, and lost all of them. In addition there have been many multi-terrorist attacks. Though won in bloody battles, Israel was forced to return the West Bank, most of Jerusalem, the Sinai and other territories which they gained with their lives in wars that the Arabs started.
That's the story. Most of you know the rest. The Intifada, the suicide bombers, the constant attacks of Arabs on Israeli settlements, the canons from the Golan Heights, which, rained down on Jewish kibbutzes, (farms) and the theft of all the money supplied by the US to Palestine which enriched Arafat's pockets and is now in the hands of his young late wife and a Swiss bank. To blind the people as to what he was doing (stealing American money) Arafat ( a terrorist himself who in his younger days blew up Jewish children's school buses) encouraged Arab Palestinians to terrorize the Israelis. Arafat continued his terrorism from Jordan and Lebanon (two Arab countries), and was kicked out of both for causing anarchy and chaos. He returned to Palestine, and more terrorist groups formed and developed, most under his directive.
Palestinian groups that support and carry out acts of political violence include Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, - General Command, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Abu Nidal Organization, all of which are officially listed as terrorist organizations by the United States and the European Union. Until 1993, the PLO was also listed as a terrorist group, but in 1988 Arafat renounced violence. (duh) Didn't happen. The PLO Charter's full text of this infamous document negates Israel's right to exist and calls for its destruction through violence. Peace Watch has explained, the PLO's vote on April 24, 1996 did not satisfy its legal obligation to amend the charter.
Terrorism was picked up by other Arab countries. Now it goes on around the Arab world.
last line of Matthews piece cut off in error. 1 line sm
complained in a letter to his boss that Matthews had shown a pattern of sexism.
So you're saying that Israel is also anti-Semitic? Interesting.
Below is a Jewish editorial. One of the comments made by a reader of the editorial, also a Jew, was that Israel ITSELF felt the Gaza pull-out might help abate some level of terrorism. So, you're saying that Israel itself is anti-Semitic? Could you PLEASE stop with your lying and constant twisting of the truth?
Cindy Sheehan: Anti-Semite or Jewish Hero?
Cindy Sheehan is purported to have said that if Israel pulls out of Palestine it will contribute to a reduction in terror. That sounds like a pretty reasonable statement to me. If I hear another white, right-wing, Christian pundit speak for the Jewish community again and call Cindy Sheehan an anti-Semite for that statement, I think I am going to explode. The same goes for the Jewish pundits who are part of a radical minority of Jews in they way they come down on this issue. It is obscene and wrong to call her anti-Semitic, and all Jews in the country should pay close attention to and not forget the arguments that the GOP and its mouthpieces are trying to make on this occasion.
As a member of the Jewish community I can say that it is likely that the vast majority of Jews in this country (76% of whom voted for John Kerry) realize that the separation between George Bush and Cindy Sheehan on the Israel issue is minimal at best. Bush did better with Jews than his predecessors, but to come away in 2004 with just 24% of the Jewish vote, and then to try to play the “religion-card” in this circumstance leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. There is an underlying feeling of anti-Semitism emanating from the person playing the “religion-card”.
A small minority of Jews believe in a manner similar to Republicans and the George Bush administration. They believe that anything goes; the ends justifies the means; ethics is not important as long as you win; caring for the poor, sick, and helpless in the community take a back seat to capitalism, and it is better to get a tax cut during war than to shoulder a heavier weight to prepare our government (and its budget deficit) for our children. Most Jews do not subscribe to this philosophy.
We are by and large Democrats and we by and large share the values of Cindy Sheehan, and to tarnish her as an anti-Semite and associate her with the likes of racist-Republican David Duke, as some have done, is obscene. Some Jews in this small minority may speak out against Cindy Sheehan. While they are entitled to their opinions, they are not entitled to speak for the vast majority of Jews. The voices of this radical minority are much louder right now, and in fact this is a direct result of the Republican Party having a superior message machine and media infrastructure than the Democrats.
A brief history lesson might be instructive as to why the political party in America with a “religion problem” and a “race problem” is the Republican Party. Howard Dean called the Republican Party mainly a "white-Christian party". One can argue about whether he was tactful or not when he said it, but what he said was essentially true. One of the ONLY demographics Republicans win consistently is white, Christian men. Lucky for them it is a large demographic. Democrats, on the other hand, win with Latinos, blacks, immigrants, gays, and Jews (pretty much everyone else).
These voters are not stupid. They vote the way they do for reasons. Most Jews support Democrats for the very reason that there is no component of racism or religious persecution in that party. Moreover the Democrats by and large believe in peace, social justice, social tolerance, religious tolerance, minimum wages and standards that can improve the lives for the weakest among us, cheaper health care for the sick, dying, and mentally ill, and an education system that works in a manner that is equal for all, and without any external religions pushed on the students.
Most Jews support Cindy Sheehan because she is acting in a manner that is consistent with (and even required by) the bible. She is speaking out for peace in a non-violent manner, and almost shaming the President to finally devise a plan for Iraq. Anyone who would attack her for that is suspect at best. From a Christian perspective you should ask yourself “what would Jesus be doing?” Would he be protesting the war right now or flying a fighter jet to carpet-bomb Fallujah?
The "white-Christian" Republican Party is supported mainly by the “white-Christian” Southerners--the same descendants of former slaveholders, with an only partially changed mentality. Abraham Lincoln called himself a Republican, but everyone knows that the Republican Party of Lincoln is now the Democratic Party, and the descendants of the Democratic Party of the segregated-South, make up the current Republican base.
The anti-Semitic, anti-black Southerners, from Zell Miller, to David Duke, to Tony Perkins, to Trent Lott, to Jesse Helms, to Strom Thurmond, are all remnants of the racist past of the Democratic Party, who are now firmly implanted at the highest levels of the Republican Party. Some of these Republicans have even switched parties in our lifetime from Democrat to Republican, ala Strom Thurmond and David Duke, or switched this millenium ala Zell Miller, providing even further proof that if Abraham Lincoln were alive today he would be called a “liberal” by James Dobson and would be a key component of the Democratic Party.
This shift is not unnoticed to Jews, and apparently other minorities see it as well (88% of African-Americans voted for Kerry). The base of the segregated South is now the Republican base. The family-values, anti-gay, Christian prayer in school crowd, who are a danger to Jewish culture and an overt threat to the African-American descendants of the freed slaves, are the people that should be worried about the label of anti-Semite, not Cindy Sheehan.
Cindy Sheehan's statement on Israel, if she even made them at all, sounds exactly like Bush's public position. She wants Israel to leave Palestine and she thinks that will contribute to peace in the Middle East. Guess what, big shocker, SHE IS RIGHT. Israel pulling back will not be an end all to terror, nothing will, but certainly it will help. If Cindy Sheehan understands this fundamental concept, why doesn’t George Bush?
This post is also available at RAFC.org and
Whoa, Bessie. Can't be anti-Semitic and Pro-Palestinian
at the same time. Let us not defy logic here. Semitic peoples is an ethnologic reference based on a language group, and incluced both Arabs and Hebrews/Jewish people. This is a tired tactic dragged out in desperation in an attempt to discredit by implying someone is a bigoted Jew-hater. NOT.
The term Israeli based on nationality and the term Zionist is based the political movement that seeks to establish a national homeland (echoes of Hitler) in Palestine. It is not even accurate to state anti-Israel unless followed by a qualifier. The sentiment expressed on this forum is anti-Zionist, straight up, no more, no less, no doubt. It is not about hating a race of people, it's all about hating a set of ideas.
Whoa, Bessie. Can't be anti-Semitic and Pro-Palestinian
at the same time. Let us not defy logic here. Semitic peoples is an ethnologic reference based on a language group, and incluced both Arabs and Hebrews/Jewish people. This is a tired tactic dragged out in desperation in an attempt to discredit by implying someone is a bigoted Jew-hater. NOT.
The term Israeli based on nationality and the term Zionist is based the political movement that seeks to establish a national homeland (echoes of Hitler) in Palestine. It is not even accurate to state anti-Israel unless followed by a qualifier. The sentiment expressed on this forum is anti-Zionist, straight up, no more, no less, no doubt. It is not about hating a race of people, it's all about hating a set of ideas.
No more blood for oil.
I am so upset about our people dying in this civil war. I am so upset about conservatives questioning my patriotism. I am a soldier's daughter. I was in cold war Germany all of my childhood. I saw my father go to VN twice in his Class A uniform, to come into my room at 4 or 5 a.m. and say "daddy's got to go to work". I am so upset with all of this; I am more upset with conservatives questioning my patriotism, when I in fact bought it. Served it. Got spat upon. No more oil equals blood.
Here is something that should chill your blood...
News flash:
U.N. NUCLEAR WATCHDOG AGENCY FINDS UNEXPLAINED PLUTONIUM, ENRICHED URANIUM TRACES IN IRAN WASTE FACILITY (this is in all caps because it was a news blurb, I am not shouting, sorry)
and just this morning ahmadinejad was saying how he wanted Iranians to be the next wave of Al Qaeda leaders. Think you might want to concentrate a little more on terrorism NOW and a little less on George Bush????
No, but I have been "washed" in the blood of
Jesus. 
Actually, I answered your posts line by line
about not "allowing" you to have an opinion. Those are your words, not mine. This is a good example of how this discussion has escalated from a simple link to this utter squashed bug nonsense. Why are you not able to simply debate the original issue at hand...the Eric Holder appointment? Too much of an intellectual challenge when somebody presents a THIRD-PARTY alternative viewpoint? You are the one who mentioned losing sleep and I remarked that it was probably unnecessary since you were blowing something out of proportion....something you have been doing all afternoon. You takes things WAY too personally.
why are you saying obama's blood will be on my hands
his blood will be just as much on your hand's and gourdpainter's as mine. you don't even know who i am. how dare you blame me for anything when you don't even know me.
He doesn't have "slave blood"
But Michelle does. Get over it, already y'all!
This white guilt is also more than tiresome! I had nothing to do with it, and likely the vast majority on this board didn't, either!
Obama wants nothing to do with his HALF Caucasian blood. Now why is that?
And how about ditching the spelling police, oh, perfect ones?
brain "washed" in the blood
you are beyond reason. This is the nature of brainwashing.
Storing cord blood........sm
is just another way of making money. Cord blood donation should be made mandatory if the parents don't want to store it for their own child. As far as stem cell research, I just don't believe that using aborted fetuses should be allowed either.
Well, sure. Pretty soon blood screening
for nicotine, alcohol, drugs, THC and anything else ''unhealthy'' we consume that they can identify could be a healthcare rationing device. And why would they waste valuable healthcare resources on those of us with high cholesterol? Pretty clearly, we are refusing to eat healthily.
I saw a commercial about designing a ''smart planet'' and my flesh crawled. ''Soon, we will be able to tailor treatment to your genetic code''? Oh, super! Sounds so warm and fuzzy, doesn't it? But in reality, who wants a national genetic database storing information on who has the gene for breast cancer or other diseases they can now predict a predisposition for? Nice, if it's actually used to help us (what are the chances of that?) Really bad if they won't waste treatment on somebody they feel is already a goner anyhow.
Which is exactly why your leftist/lib basher blood boils...sm
To come over here and attempt to stir us up and run people off.
Glad to oblidge you, no shoe.
No idea....looked like maybe a broken blood vessel?
It DID look bad.
Yup, the Real Republican Party will rise again....new blood is definitely needed, that's for sure
only part saved was the ignorant part
You can read the whole article. This quote was saved to show what she said that was so stupid.
No dear, it's anti-Zionist, not anti-Semitic.
Horrific is as horrific does. This long term occupation has spanned 60 years. The Holocaust spanned 12. Thanks to your Zionist government, its historic anmesia and its barbaric practices, the Jewish people have lost their exclusive claim to pain and suffering at the hands of state-sponsored terrorism aimed at the genocidal annihilation of an entire population. Your Holocaust was based on religious affiliation and racial purification. The Palestinian Holocaust is based on the ethnic cleansing of a pathologic nationalism that has been out of control for 6 decades.
You cannot declare yourself in charge of defining any other person's beliefs based on your concepts of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism. I very painstakingly explained to you where I was coming from with that and how I make the distinction. It is the nationalistic fascist ideals that underpin the Zionist movement, not the Jewish people or their religious affiliation that are the targets of the hatred. In fact, they are also captive to their own Zionist leadership, but to a much lesser degree than the Palestinians.
The Holocaust is the only thing in recent history that can be used by comparison to describe the plight of the Palestinians. In fact, there is no parallel historical context that it can be placed in, other than perhaps the apartheid of South Africa. The most accurate description would be a combination of the two horrors.
Any way you slice it, you are trying to defend the indefensible and will never succeed in gaining any credibility, global tolerance of acceptance (except, of course from the US, who is using your country and your people for their own personal gains...better watch your backs) as long as you are the occupiers and the oppressors.
Don't you get it? SP 1st in line. JM=72.
nm
That is really out of line and
comparing Obama to Hitler? Talk about paranoid. There is nothing to suggest Obama is Marxist or Nazi. This is all hate and pot stirring rhetoric. Boy some people just operate on fear and are sour grapes that the majority of the people have spoken and Obama was chosen.
You really should come up with a better line.
No such thing as Bush juice. But I wouldn't expect less from someone on the kool-aid.
That's the only line you took from the speech...sm
But you think Bush who admits that he did drugs - obviously inhaled or sniffed, and was an alcoholic is a living testimony of credibility. Is there a double standard here?
Newsweek on-line
nm
Oh geez. The least you could do is get a new line...
you asked me that same question under a different moniker not long ago. At least get some new material. Geez! And as far as emailing you...not in this lifetime. I did that once...once burned, many time shy. You guys can get pretty hateful on this board, but a sailor could take lessons from you when you are uncensored...LOL Had enough of potty-mail all-tolerant liberals to last me a lifetime. And anybody knows you can have more than one email going to the same place. Geez. Get a new schtick. This one is oldddd.
The bottom line is....
from 1870 to the 1960's the majority of elected Democrats in Congress, with the help of a small minority of southern Republicans, effectively denied African Americans the right to vote for 90 years FOLLOWING the civil war. If you are saying that seeking their freedom and giving them the right to vote is a "liberal" movement, then it was the Republicans in majority, not the Democrats in majority, who were the "liberals" of that time.
In my mind, we are all tied up in semantics. The passion and commitment to something that to each of us is morally right is not liberal nor conservative. It is a human characteristic. None of us, I suppose, are truly liberal or truly conservative. It is a mixture. Some "liberals" agree with me that abortion is morally wrong and are against it for that reason, yet still consider themselves liberals. Some "conservatives" (such as Guiliani) do not agree on abortion and are pro choice, yet still call themselves conservative. I made a comment on the conservative board regarding the fires in California and was accused of sounding like a "bleeding heart liberal." So, in essence, over time people have identified certain characteristics and tried to put them in a liberal or a conservative box. And because we are human, and because we are different and have different ideas, we do not fit into boxes and ideas cross over. Hence, no true liberals or true conservatives....and that fact does not bother me at all, though it does bother some.
It is just that some of us love the labels more than others, I guess; the labels make them feel good, like they are affiliated with something noble...and what the labels mean to us individually, and some get very angry if someone questions the label.
I guess my prefrence is not to be labeled.
And that is what it is...a label, in the grand scheme of things. Because no one can really agree on what it means. Everyone puts their own personal spin on it. That is the nature of the human condition.
The last line of your post is....
So, the "God is telling me I need to fight for all unborn fetuses" is a religious issue and should be there. Tired of seeing line after line after line of religious opinions on the political board.
You also said this: If your trying to make an argument with the "I'm fighting for all the unborn fetus'" and God is telling you this, blah, blah, blah, that's all great but it should be on the "Faith" board.
I never said anything remotely like that. To suggest I did is not true. TO use your own words, I take offense to someone who makes judgments about me without knowing me. You can make judgments about me, but no way should I make any about you?
Generally when something is not true it is a lie. I did not directly call you a liar. However, I apologize for any inference if there was any. How's this? What you said is not true. I never said God told me to do anything. I never said religion was my motivator. You made assumptions about me and you don't know me.
It is not hard to read posts on abortion at all, in caps or not. Just don't click to open it.
You and the others have made your point ad nauseam about how tired you are of it. I am tired of being told what I can post and what I can't, just as tired as you are of seeing abortion threads. And none of the threads would be near as long as they are if "they" ( I won't include you since you say you are not one of them) didn't pile on and bash me. It would just beone lone post. And believe me, as tired as you are of seeing abortion posts I am tired of the endless bashing that goes with them.
Yes, I said if it chaps you so be it, and it obviously does. You are basically saying the same thing to me: stop the abortion posts or take them somewhere else, and if it chaps you, so be it. Okay for you, not okay for me.
And to use your words..enough has been said about it and it is getting old.
Get a new line. That prayer cop-out
nm
Look down the line...sure are a lot from YOU..with no point
other than to bash sam. Pot callin' the kettle wouldn't you say?
Disregard name line.
nm
The name line should read
continue with body of original post.
Bottom line
Obama is going to win, that's what counts.
He must do something right, if the majority wants Barrack Obama.
bottom line...
After the attack of 9/11 something HAD TO BE DONE.
What other options were there?
Doing nothing was sure not an option.
Why is it out of line to say things about
O, yet for years Bush has had some horrible things said about him, Palin was maligned, etc ( I know, I know, you're going to respond by saying the things about Bush and Palin are true..beat ya to it). We have this thing called Free Speech, a wonderful thing, the beauty of the United States. And please don't pull the "racist" card out either, it doesn't fly. This PC, touchy-feely, give peace a chance. can't we all just get along business is grating on the nerves.
That is really out line and distasteful
Very disrespectful to her as a person. I am not going to read your posts anymore because you dont write what I like.
I do not make as much as many per line
but I make a decent amount of money, especially to stay at home. I hear some people whining about how they cannot get more than 10 cpl and think that there might not be so much out sourcing if these folks might be willing to work for less. However, I might take a pay cut if I had to in order to keep my job. It would sure beat forcing my company under and having no pay at all.
Those one-line wonders are just too
are so direct and to the point. Most of us don't have time to write volumes here like some folks! Besides, the questions, or statements, are so simple-minded, it only takes one line to respond.
And then STAND IN LINE for your
You sound awful happy about old Barry. Another welfare millionare in the making, methinks.
That IS the bottom line...
That's the only reason it is being offshored. It has nothing to do with "free trade" and everything to do with corporate greed.
He can say whatever he wants about "line by line" but...sm
O can go through every budget bill, addendum, omnibus, whatever you want to call it line by line. However, until he gets the power of "line item veto, he can take out whatever he wants when he wants, he can veto all he wants until the cows come home. However,
the congress can, by a 2/3 majority, over ride his veto. And guess what??? Pork is still king and earmarks and lobbiests still reign supreme.
Line item veto power is goingto be harder to come by than a choice of a viable 3rd party. But that is JMO.
You obviously just read one line in
my post. I said it cannot be done correctly if it is rushed. They are trying to rush this because it is such a controversial thing. We cannot afford it right now without taxing people more. This is something that needs to be looked at very carefully with the kinks worked out before they go on passing it. Things that are rushed often have a lot of flaws.
The bottom line is....(sm)
Torture does not provide reliable confessions.
Torture has not and will not "save American lives." If it has done anything, it has put more lives at risk.
Waterboarding was used in WWII against US personell by the Japanese. We prosecuted those who used torture and executed them. Why? Because it was against the law. And what did the Japanese get for their efforts with torturing? False information and a bad reputation. What makes you think we'll get anything different from that?
The only thing torture is good for is revenge. That's not what this country is about, and its not what I'm about.
Sp be it, but your line of reasoning is skewed
What if a sex offender was running loose in your neighborhood. What if he had raped a child 10 years ago, went to jail with a slap on the wrist (like what happens these days), and got out in ten years. He shows up in your neighborhood, and you see him out on his porch everyday when the school bus arrives and leaves. Not only is he leering at the school kids he's making outrageous comments on a daily basis. Would you say, *Oh, he went to prison. He did his time. Hopefully, he's rehabilited. Yes, he's a little strange and outrageous, but so far, as far as we know, he's not touched a kid again so we need to leave him alone.*
Would you trust this guy? Especially if you then found out he has a *rape room* in his house? What if his sons were running around the neighborhood reeking havoc and doing the same things but in a more merciless way and you found out they were going to inherit his house when he died?
Well, this correlates very well with Saddam. Almost too closely in fact. Like many of you say here on a daily basis, the world is our neighborhood, and in many neighborhoods there are bullies, and they don't quit being bullies until you take them out. It's just the way the world works.
If they had pulled him from a picket line that would be different...sm
He was arrested for wearing a Veterans for Peace T-shirt.
I come from a long line of military. sm
And none of them feel that way. To each his own.
Bottom line, Taiga....
did Murtha or did Murtha not say "The surge is working?" Yes, he did. Why did CBS choose not to print all the disclaimers? You got me, I don't know. As to Murtha adding the disclaimers, he probably suddenly remembered he is going to have to talk to Pelosi come Monday. I don't blame him, I would be backpedaling too. lol.
Okay. This is exhausting. Bottom line...
I did not say Teddy you are a liar. Nor will I. Only you know for sure if you are lying. And you have said ad nauseam you don't care what I think or say, so why do keep protesting so much? Sigh.
What I believe or do not believe does not matter at this point to anyone but me. I vote we stop whipping this dead horse.
Then I expect you to be the first in line for the draft.
Everyone has the right to protect themselves, their beliefs, religion, and country, but it seems that yours takes precedence over everybody elses and you can't seem to bring yourself to that level of understanding.
I don't have a stomach to being lied to and I especially don't stomach flippant remarks about my beliefs, as I have a right to protect them. Hatred is formulated. It has been formulating for years. Love turns to hate. Jealousy turns to hate. Intolerance turns to hate. Just give the right stir, formula 101.
2006 NIE report findings stated the the occupation of Iraq is creating more Islamic radicalism.
"An opening section of the report, “Indicators of the Spread of the Global Jihadist Movement,” cites the Iraq war as a reason for the diffusion of jihad ideology. The report “says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse,” said one American intelligence official."
Who's wearing the blind fold? Two hates to do make peace or tolerance.
Go on line and read up on the black...
liberation theology, which is central to the teaching of his Trinity church, of which he has been a member for 20 years. Look at the "economic parity" part of it. If you think Hilary has socialist leanings...Barack is way to the left of her on that score. His little lets do a windfall profits tax on oil and take that money and redistribute it in $1000 energy rebates. That, my friend, is socialist to the hilt, redistribution of wealth, taking from those who legally made the money and giving it to those who did nothing to earn it. Extreme socialism. He is already calling for it and doesn't have the job yet.
And yes, I think that kind of thinking and action could destroy America as we know it. America is built on free enterprise, the freedom to be and do what you want to be, through hard work and dedication move up in the world and if you become rich, more power to you! We can't all become rich, but let me tell you, I don't blame the rich for being rich. I am responsible for my own destiny and I do not expect an oil company or Bill Gates or anyone else to share their wealth with me and I sure don't think the government should be taking from them and giving to me. That is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Also...look into what happened to the US economy when Carter issued a windfall profit tax on oil companies during his administration....BIG mistake. All that will do is discourage domestic production and drilling, and what happens then? INCREASED dependence on foreign oil and prices through the roof.
All Obama is doing is playing that old socialist trick of pandering to the have nots in the world who want to blame the "rich" for everything. By the way, Obama is by no means poor...why doesn't he divy out some of his bucks to the have nots? Put his money where his mouth is so to speak. You know why? Because it is a lot easier to give someone else's money away and keep yours...another typically elitist socialist ideal. We will keep all OUR money, we will just take some of THEIR money and dole it out to the have nots to keep the have nots beholden to us, thus insuring our control over them for the future.
No thanks.
|
